Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
While I agree with your post, the VW Beetle was actually introduced in 1938 - i.e. in quite a different era...
No, the war interupted the rollout. No "people's cars" were delivered in accordance with the Deutsche Arbiter's savings plan. Volkswagenwerk Braunschweig was pressed into miliary manufacturing for the duration, and made beetle-like command and scout cars like the Kübelwagen and the Schwimmwagen. :D

schwimmwagen_europe_HD.jpg


It was a British Army Officer, Maj. Ivan Hurst, who resurrected the war ravaged and bombed out Wolfsburg factory in 1946, and restarted production this time finally of the promised people's car version, the "volkswagen".

Ironically, Ford Motors was offered an opportunity to by VW after the war, and turned it down thinking the company worthless. :eek:

/OT

Cheers!
 
...Btw., I think I managed to figure out why both windows shattered, and while I'd normally be reluctant to disagree with the expert opinion of a senior Tesla engineer in his field of expertise, I'm 99% confident that it wasn't microfractures. :cool:

If we carefully examine the video of the steel ball window test Franz performed:


Note how at the end of the video the door opens slightly: probably because the protective blanket got in between and maybe prevented the door from closing completely? Also, as noted by @lascavarian, window also drops slightly as if a door opening sequence got triggered.
...l.
This makes sense. I am not technically qualified but I do have direct user experiences with armored windows. I have owned two armored cars, both of which I hade converted after purchase. A relative also owned an auto armor I gotta business which gave me more insight into installation issues.

Further I have owned several pressurized aircraft and have had airborne failures due to stress cracks. Stress cracks tend to be installation problems that impede the normal stress absorption when presented with external force. Those tend towards straight line cracks from the mounting points. The infamous aircraft example was the infamous DeHaviland Comet, the first pressurized commercial jet. A few crashes later the square large windows yield to less stress-inducing types. I had a Cessna 421 that had a similar issue with windshields. When mine chose to fail it did so at altitude with the loudest crack I ever heard, a straight-line crack from the points of highest stress, improperly torqued mounting points.

I am confident that Tesla Glass is entirely new, very different and lighter than the tradition multi layer glass/absorbent plastic, multiple repeated layers for maximum shock absorption. Still, the mounting must allow for considerable flex. That is why commercial auto armoring produces non-functioning windows. Just as you mentioned in slightly different terms any armored window MUST allow for substantial movement when stressed, to absorb impact without failure.


Because the demonstration was of a prototype I suggest mounting and other impact-resistant techniques were the culprit. Coupled with the probable Bio-weapon Defense mode, the internal ability to absorb pressure differential would also be reduced. In that case the pressurized aircraft story is relevant because BWDM is created in large part through pressurizing the vehicle interior.

By now I wager the solutions are already being tested. After all they will apply to other Tesla vehicles too.
 
Yeah, 146K was 7 hrs ago. Its more like 170K reservations for Cybertruck by now. ;)
I believe the Cybertruck will be a success but I haven't seen a reminder that the X had lots of reservations and Tesla was unable to convert them to orders. Once the X was on the market the situation quickly went from lengthy wait to 'please order and you can have it in a few weeks.' And the refundable reservation fee was much higher than $100.
 
I was one of the first owners of the Model S in my area (one of the first 1000 or so to reserve one). In the first six months of driving it around, I could not get out of my car without everyone coming up asking me what I was driving. It was fun, but also a bit disorienting to be on display so much for the first time in my life.

Teenagers would literally shriek the first time they saw the interior.

The folks who are among the first to pull into a parking lot with the Cybertruck are going to get mobbed. Make sure you like that kind of attention before you pull it out of the garage.
Given how many people have sat in my car--not a problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jbcarioca
Does anyone have an idea, what are these reinforced concrete blocks found among the trees at the GF4 site?

#Gf4 Gigafactory4 on Twitter

BTW, previous comments here regarding the GF4 site seemed to assume that the site was also a forest during WW2.
While that could be the case, the pine plantation that is currently there is surely post-WW2.

Grünheide was surrounded by forests for a long time - there's a historic map from 1775 here:


"Forst" is the old German word for a commercial forest, and those grids are typical for logging approaches.

In WWII the Nazis created a "protective ring" around Berlin, full of ammunition storage sites - and according to one of the German articles I found one of the ammunition depots was near Grünheide. The town was surrendered to the Russian army without a fight, and the Russians, because the German ammunition had the wrong caliber, detonated the depot. This was done imperfectly and there's still a lot of ammunition in the ground in random places - just like in most parts of Brandenburg.

These are the concrete blocks:

upload_2019-11-24_13-26-58.png

These definitely look like WWII objects - either concrete anchor blocks for something tall such as a radio tower (the ground is sandy so you cannot just build on it), maybe tank barriers - or part of the foundations of an underground bunker system that got destroyed.

I strongly suspect that the GF4 site will get a careful mine-sweep before any serious construction activities begin.
 
Last edited:
Again now you can buy solar, power wall, and have a multi-day backup power resource with a Cybertruck. Question is, how hard would it be to connect the 240 V AC output into a power wall to charge up?
Unplug everything that runs off the Powerwall, Plug the 240 into a wall socket. Unless the Powerwall has capacitors or some other mechanism to stop reverse flow, you will be charging it. (errata: In Puerto Rico, people plugged generators into a wall socket to power their house)
 
I highly doubt that a 100$ reservation will actually lock in FSD at 7000$ price. It's not an order like the Model Y.

Maybe if FSD only costs 8k or 9k by then, or if they eventually separate a personal FSD license from a commercial FSD license it might work like this. But I cannot imagine that a 100$ reservation will lock in FSD price at 7000$ if it costs 20k, 30k, or more in a few years.
It says it will lock it down on the website when you place an order. Tesla is unlikely to go back on it's published word. Heck, I got the sunshades for no cost because at the time I ordered they had sunshades included--even though it took a couple of years before they were available.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Artful Dodger
This makes sense. I am not technically qualified but I do have direct user experiences with armored windows. I have owned two armored cars, both of which I hade converted after purchase. A relative also owned an auto armor I gotta business which gave me more insight into installation issues.

Further I have owned several pressurized aircraft and have had airborne failures due to stress cracks. Stress cracks tend to be installation problems that impede the normal stress absorption when presented with external force. Those tend towards straight line cracks from the mounting points. The infamous aircraft example was the infamous DeHaviland Comet, the first pressurized commercial jet. A few crashes later the square large windows yield to less stress-inducing types. I had a Cessna 421 that had a similar issue with windshields. When mine chose to fail it did so at altitude with the loudest crack I ever heard, a straight-line crack from the points of highest stress, improperly torqued mounting points.

I am confident that Tesla Glass is entirely new, very different and lighter than the tradition multi layer glass/absorbent plastic, multiple repeated layers for maximum shock absorption. Still, the mounting must allow for considerable flex. That is why commercial auto armoring produces non-functioning windows. Just as you mentioned in slightly different terms any armored window MUST allow for substantial movement when stressed, to absorb impact without failure.


Because the demonstration was of a prototype I suggest mounting and other impact-resistant techniques were the culprit. Coupled with the probable Bio-weapon Defense mode, the internal ability to absorb pressure differential would also be reduced. In that case the pressurized aircraft story is relevant because BWDM is created in large part through pressurizing the vehicle interior.

By now I wager the solutions are already being tested. After all they will apply to other Tesla vehicles too.

I think it was a great marketing tool to get the vehicle on the front of all media networks at no cost.
 
I really don't think they set out to build an armoured vehicle.

The two dominating optimization factors for the pickup market are "rugged/go-anywhere" and "payload capacity". Very, very different optimization factors from passenger cars (and the former vs. semi trucks).

They set out to re-design the car manufacturing process from the bottom up to save capex and COGs.

I strongly, strongly disagree with this. They set out to achieve specific goals as cheaply as possible.

I would roughly guess that the CyberTruck COGs savings are $5-10k from going with this new architecture over a traditional manufacturing process and materials.

1) That sounds way over-optimistic, many times over. Depreciation on a press and paint line is nowhere near that much - heck, depreciation on a whole vehicle line isn't that much -and you have to add in extra folding work to compensate, as well as deal with larger sheets. Model 3 total depreciation was reported by Deepak to be well under $2k per vehicle, and that's for all lines, and quite a while ago.

“Rod, we are very CapEx-efficient, overall. Let me just start from that point. And if we look at our depreciation costs on a per unit basis at steady run rate of 5,000 or so cars per week, we are in my mind well below most of our competitors – well below $2,000 per unit depreciation cost.”

For a "normal automaker", a press line for a high-volume vehicle costs a couple hundred million dollars, and tooling a couple hundred more, and a high-volume paint shop maybe $500M, but it can last for 2-3 decades or so. Call it a cool $1B. Tesla has gotten significantly more capital efficient than that of late, of course, but let's just stick with that. Now divide by many hundreds of thousands of vehicles per year over the depreciation period (Musk previously stated 700k/yr ultimate addressible market, but go ahead and assume less). $5-10k unit depreciation saved, plus the difference in materials costs? Not a chance.

2) The stainless sheet here is likely in the ballpark of ~4-5x more expensive than the mix of mild steel, high tensile steel, ultra high tensile steel, and alumium found in typical Tesla vehicles. Thousands of dollars more expensive.

3) While Tesla has done what appears to be an admirable job at managing to streamline a vehicle despite creases, the streamlining is in spite of the disadvantages of the creases not because of it. The creases nonetheless hurt streamlining vs. a smooth vehicle (those A-pillars in particular). Notice how there were no boasts about Cd this time - Tesla always boasts about their Cd, even on Semi. Cd is probably coming in somewhere between that of a streamlined sedan (S, 3) and a conventional pickup. A worse CD means more batteries, which is a much more significant cost.

You optimize to your design constraints. Pickup design constraints are about capabilities and ruggedness. Ruggedness dictates armour. Armour dictates creasing rather than stamping. Armour weight also dictates using it as a loadbearing structure, because otherwise you double up on your weight. Low-weight resistance of torque and torsion in the back for maximum loadbearing capabilities dictates a braced cantilever structure, pairing with the aero-required tonneau taper.

Result: the Cybertruck. But it's a consequence of its premises.
 
Last edited:
Yeah. Then imagine how this hypothetical Powerwall, complete with open WiFi and a preset/unchangable admin pwd has been shipping to customers for 3 yrs, but this wide-open back-door was somehow UNDETECTED by neighborhood 12 year olds, until discovered by white-hats on the weekend of the Cybertruck unveil.

Very revealing...

/S

As said, I don't know if it is true, do not have a PowerWall to verify :). I will be happy if you are right! Let's move on...
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: Artful Dodger
6.5ft bed too short? What's the percentage of pick up truck having 8ft bed?
The only figure I could quickly find was from a few years ago (2016 in Canada) mentioned one out of twenty sold had an eight foot bed. My guess is that the ratio of eight foot bed trucks is smaller now.
 
I believe the Cybertruck will be a success but I haven't seen a reminder that the X had lots of reservations and Tesla was unable to convert them to orders. Once the X was on the market the situation quickly went from lengthy wait to 'please order and you can have it in a few weeks.' And the refundable reservation fee was much higher than $100.

Hindsight also allows us to look at the the problems with the X. It prices itself out of affordability and the mass market. Which is why the Cybertruck gave everyone whiplash when the pricing and specs started to sink in. You could save up in your lifetime and buy a $40k Cybertruck. Not sure the same could be said for a Model X for a lot of people since the cheapest one starts at $85k.
 
I can only imagine what's being said in all the other boardrooms. "Should we at least research this shape and approach as well?" or "Whew, that won't touch our market...". (Lol, the google map data suggests otherwise.) And what about Naomi? (SNL humor.)

So now what right?

There are knowledgeable and insightful people in the industry who seemingly just can't manage to engage their brains when it comes to EVs' trajectory. It's hard to take that vital first step back from the life-long daily comfort zone.


...
Think about the marketing value of a Tesla Cybertruck variant getting into the
US Presidential State Car market...

The same thought passed through my mind, but I'd upgrade the President first.


Nor did they waste time 'perfecting' systems that were already suitable for purpose, or adaptable to purpose. They got on with it, building millions of Bugs and Buses, thereby becoming the world's largest maker of autos.

This is what Tesla will do now.

In essence the consequence of battery day.

Just a side note to your great post: between the bugs and buses and their current status as global number one, VW faced three existential crises, I think: the first led to their development of the original Golf [aka Rabbit], the other came in the 90s and meant a painful restructuring. And of course the entire Diesel fraud. I remember that Honda's Chief engineer at the time said he didn't understand how VW made their new Diesels work.

They were smart enough to invest early in China and follow through by growing with the market.



Tesla is a market maker and essential, serial problem solver, which we know includes stumbling and rectifying. Also big, angular thinking. :D
 
I just realised something. I own an off-grid house in Portugal, powered by solar panels and batteries. The CyberTruck with its 240V output could serve as a huge backup battery. I could just plug it into the Victron Inverter I have now. Of course, I would have to charge the CyberTruck first with extra solar panels, but once charged I could leave the charging cable in the car and plug the 240V output into my inverter...Vehicle to house solved for me...