Put in my order for the base $39k model w/ FSD:
I keep seeing discussions of military/combat uses for the CT. I can't figure how one would "refuel" an electric vehicle in combat. One can't just roll a Supercharger to the front lines. How might that work?For reasonably high energy rounds you could put an energy absorption / catch layer on the inside; the stainless, even if it can't catch a round on its own, will surely deform it / send it spinning, unless you're talking very high energy rounds. Ceramic is ideal for this role, but as far as metals go, hardened 301 stainless is certainly up there.
If you really want to go for the military market ,the thick, angular stainless hull should make it very easy to attach external armour, even reactive armour, to it (there's also some non-explosive reactive armour varieties if needed, which can even go on the inside). Military market would want it jacked up and with a V-hull added, though.
The windows, while designed to be damage resistant, do not appear to be bulletproof glass. One would have to replace them with actual bulletproof glass.
The angular style is a result of them wanting to armour the vehicle, as you can't realistically stamp 3mm 301 stainless without rapidly destroying your tooling. No need to armour a semi.
Yes, the pickup approach saves on tooling, but it also comes with really big costs of their own. That thick stainless is expensive, in terms of raw material costs.
The solar panel. Now true it doesn't charge that much, but typical military actions are hurry up and wait. Also only the first push uses a lot of range. I see this replacing ambulances and such. You won't see this vehicle in the front lines.I keep seeing discussions of military/combat uses for the CT. I can't figure how one would "refuel" an electric vehicle in combat. One can't just roll a Supercharger to the front lines. How might that work?
That seems like a crazy percentage of rolling vs aero resistance.more mass (batteries as well as motors) and having one more always-on motor might get you there, but I think most of it will be the battery mass.
The y has been there since May (or March definitely an M month)Amazing hint Musk gave then with the Y on x.com.
Like an inside joke.
Anyone think Semi could be moved on to this new straight edged stainless steel manufacturing platform?
Semi customers will be even more focussed on cost of ownership and utility so the manufacturing cost savings from this new method could make even more sense than for Pickup.
It would also mean no need for a paint shop installed at GF1 and lower capex generally for Semi. It's also likely going to be a much more modular production line where capacity can be added incrementally.
I'm sure all Tesla's extensive Semi Powertrain testing over the past 3 years will still be relevant, and I think they can be confident in the durability of the stainless steel body without years of further prototype testing.
I think this depends on whether an exoskeleton can pull the 40 tons loads that is required of semi tractors. In particular the overlapping form of most trailers:
The attachment point "8" goes well below the trailer, and it might not be possible to avoid building a steel frame for the Semi Truck that transfers load from the rear axles to the attachment point - at which point you might as well make a lighter cabin of aluminum or composites, to save on mass.
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)
Elon has called this out as an option. Up to 15 miles of range a day.The roller cover looks slated as a solar panel. Again physics driven for decent sun exposure and no shading.
I keep seeing discussions of military/combat uses for the CT. I can't figure how one would "refuel" an electric vehicle in combat. One can't just roll a Supercharger to the front lines. How might that work?
Also what vehicle would it even replace in the military? Won't there be a huge weight penalty trying to make it IED resistant like a lot of military vehicles we see?I keep seeing discussions of military/combat uses for the CT. I can't figure how one would "refuel" an electric vehicle in combat. One can't just roll a Supercharger to the front lines. How might that work?
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).
I strongly, strongly disagree with this. They set out to achieve specific goals as cheaply as possible.
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). $5-10k unit depreciation saved, plus the difference in materials costs? Not a chance.
2) The stainless sheet here is likely in the ballpark of ~4-5x more expensive than the mix of mild steel, high tensile steel, ultra high tensile steel, and alumium found in typical Tesla vehicles. Thousands of dollars more expensive.
3) While Tesla has done what appears to be an admirable job at managing to streamline a vehicle despite creases, the streamlining is in spite of the disadvantages of the creases not because of it. The creases nonetheless hurt streamlining vs. a smooth vehicle (those A-pillars in particular). Notice how there were no boasts about Cd this time - Tesla always boasts about their Cd, even on Semi. Cd is probably coming in somewhere between that of a streamlined sedan (S, 3) and a conventional pickup. A worse CD means more batteries, which is a much more significant cost.
You optimize to your design constraints. Pickup design constraints are about capabilities and ruggedness. Ruggedness dictates armour. Armour dictates creasing rather than stamping. Armour weight also dictates using it as a loadbearing structure, because otherwise you double up on your weight. Low-weight resistance of torque and torsion in the back for maximum loadbearing capabilities dictates a braced cantilever structure, pairing with the aero-required tonneau taper.
Result: the Cybertruck. But it's a consequence of its premises.
Battery cost. Speed and ease of manufacturing. No paint. No skin that just there to cover the unibody frame. Probably more that I haven't thought of. But remember it's big, so not for those that are space constrained.How do you explain the unbelievable price? Battery cost decline alone?
Cybertruck compares VERY favorably to Model Y and is cheaper.
I am aware of that yeah. My opinion is as such in spite of this wording.
It just doesn't make any sense for Tesla to do this unless people pay the 7000$ today, but not for a 100$ refundable reservation. I could see a lower level manager having signed off on this wording without higher level approval. I'm skeptical for now until Elon personally confirms it on Twitter or during a conference call.
S&X are sharing platforms.
3&Y are sharing platforms.
Cybertruck will share platform with what? Van? Minibus? RV?
I believe the angular style is the result of them wanting to use folded stainless steel exoskeleton, which according to @Krugerrand requires almost no tooling, just a roll mill and laser cutters for the stainless steel panels. Very little welding is required, which all but eliminates three of the most capex intensive parts of a car manufacturing pipeline: the stamp lines, the body shop and the paint shop.
That is why the entry price of Cybertruck is so low, despite 3mm stainless steel: the stainless steel is utilized in a very mass efficient manner: it's both external skin/panels (which all cars need) and the frame, in one.
I.e. the "stainless steel exoskeleton" has in fact a triple role:
This triple role is what saves on mass and manufacturing costs - the downside is that the only realistic way to mass-manufacture such an exoskeleton is with angular shapes.
- external aerodynamic surface (not as good as a Model S but certainly better than traditional pickup truck cabs)
- external load bearing exoskeleton, replaces the frame
- external skin, replaces car chassis panels
The fourth role: bullet protection and probably unprecedented side crash and high density object intrusion protection factor (trees, poles, engines of other cars, etc.), is mostly just a happy side effect: make it much thinner and the exoskeleton would buckle, vibrate (noisily) and dent easily.
With all that in mind I agree with @ReflexFunds that they should take a good look at a stainless steel Semi Truck - especially as commercial fleet operators would pay a handsome premium for stainless steel vehicles.
+50% premium for stainless steel "never needs a repaint, never corrodes" commercial vehicles would be easily justified - like it is for stainless steel professional kitchenware which costs more like a +200% or +300% premium.
The counter-argument would be that the steel frame of semi tractors is incredibly strongly constructed, to pull up to 40 tons of loads, which might not be easily replaced by an exoskeleton design. Also, the Semi is much more battery pack and powertrain cost dominated, the price of the cab is much smaller than for pickup trucks or regular cars.
How do you explain the unbelievable price? Battery cost decline alone?
Cybertruck compares VERY favorably to Model Y and is cheaper.
Not that I think it's a deal.. uh... "breaker" either, but I think everybody watching was when Elen made much ado about it being unbreakable glass, complete with circus act, leading up to the gaffe....how many people were expecting a truck with unbreakable glass?
People are warming up to the Cybertruck. The market was pretty sour on Tesla Friday. But I am thinking that investors too will warn up to the Cybertruck and appreciate the opportunity it presents for Tesla. I'm expecting the stock price to start a gradual ascent on Monday.