Everyone has to wait on the sidelines now. An analyst said so
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
humbaba
sleeping until $7000
Are you trying to make my point? All EVs combined is too small sample size to be meaningful. You can't actually say Tesla is higher (or lower) risk than another EV. The journalist ignores incident rates because it would ruin their false framing. (Probably never occurred to them as their intention was never to honestly compare).
I bring up ICE vehicles because it is relevant if are you talking about vehicles and fires. Let's say there was [enough] data, and let's say that Tesla vehicles were more fire hazard than other EVs. But since other EVs are produced in insignificant numbers, if the fire hazard of a Tesla was significantly less than that of an ICE vehicle it would still be an improvement. For it to be clearly worse the fire rate would have to be higher than ICE vehicles. It is relevant.
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
The numbers by @Prunesquallor assume a 50%/50% split of the credit benefits between FCA and Tesla, which I think is a good default to use.
While Tesla was under pressure in Q1 2019 when the deal closed, it closed well before the pooling deadline was due to eclipse, IIRC, which to me suggests that the terms were at least 'fair' to Tesla and they didn't wait until the last day for more favorable terms. Also, since Tesla didn't disclose any payments from FCA under this agreement so far, there might not have been any cash advance for closing the deal - which would increase the likelihood that the deal is fair to Tesla.
Arguably all this is pretty tenuous speculation only, with very little basis in cold hard facts.
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
As a point of terminology, can we agree that all Tesla motors run on AC (alternating current)? Maybe I'm missing something?
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
LEAF is produced in significant numbers and for just as long to compare fire rates. Bringing up ICE rates is like comparing land phones to cell phone rates of fire, they are irrelevant to the discussion.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
AC is often used as a shortcut for AC induction as opposed to PM permanent magnet.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
jhm
Well-Known Member
Advanced Summon in batch mode.
This is an anachronism. In "the early days", you had two main categories of motors - commutated PM motors, which you'd hook up to a DC power supply ("DC motors"), and induction motors, which you'd hook up to an AC power supply ("AC motors").
Nowadays, though, it's anachronistic. Every motor in every EV, regardless of the type, has DC power at the pack, and AC power in the coils, with the DC changed into AC in some specified waveform by the inverter, which nowadays are almost exclusively solid-state. You could try to impose some "DC" vs "AC" distinction depending on whether what you're calling the "motor" contains or doesn't contain the inverter, but it has no bearing on what technology is actually being used to create torque. The "DC vs. AC" terminology should no longer be used; people should refer to the specific motor technology at hand.
bhtooefr
Active Member
Also, Plaid is not confirmed to be 3x PM. AFAIK, it's just confirmed to be 3x motors.
I would be utterly unsurprised by 2x rear PM, 1x front induction. (Contrast to the Raven 1x front PM, 1x rear induction, and the Model 3's 1x rear PM and optional 1x front induction.)
I would be utterly unsurprised by 2x rear PM, 1x front induction. (Contrast to the Raven 1x front PM, 1x rear induction, and the Model 3's 1x rear PM and optional 1x front induction.)
Heck, for Tesla you can line the cars up end to end like in LA traffic and they will follow each other. Driver jumps in/out at the ship. No need for typical parking lot alignment. Or stream the cars to drivers who park them. One crew (un)loading the ship, one crew (un)parking the cars, straight line of flow between them.
Edit: syntax error, unexpected ')' found
Last edited:
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
My guess is 2 rear inductions for power, 1 front PM for efficiency. Use the 1 front for highway driving, 2 rear + 1 front for performance.
Indeed, on this day that weekly options will expire. MaxPain according to Opricot is $470, based on options open interest before the opening. But that is still skewed low by the huge number of puts at much lower strikes that are about to expire. A cursory survey this morning suggests that $480 is a more lucrative target for option writers with the capacity to manipulate the share price.
woodisgood
Optimustic Pessimist
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
I'll take that bet. Elon has said multiple times, most recently in Shanghai at the GF3 Delivery Event, that production is 100x more difficult than prototyping.It's an interesting theory - I really don't know. The simple fact is, we don't know what motor combination they plan to use. The current Model 3 / Raven design gets an efficiency bonus in cruising because you can fully deenergize an induction motor and it just freewheels (still wastes more energy than not having to spin the motor at all, but less than having to spin a PM). They'd lose that if the two rear motors were PM.
I'm not putting any wagers on what the exact motor combination for Plaid will be until it's publicly disclosed
There is no cost/benefit win in trying to created yet another motor when the SRPM motor first used in the Model 3, currently as the front motor in the Raven S/X, and soon to be used in Semi (also firmly known).
It will be the existing SRPM. Bet on it. 100x leverage sounds about right.
Cheers!
Nah, AC Induction overheats the rotor under continuous load. Roadster must be rear PMSR and S likely is too.
I'd think that, to avoid clogging their delivery pipeline, Tesla would be forced to build a mockup "ship deck" (or even use an idle Ro-Ro that's down for repairs), and drill loading and unloading until they're confident that they can get a net speed increase. Would tie up a lot of inventory.
I also agree that this is a pretty low priority item for them at this point. All the less important as they build more and more Gigafactories, and thus need to ship less. For now, it'd probably actually be a higher priority to put an extra-heavy training focus on self-driving between Fremont and Pier 80
Speaking from experience (almost a decade worked at a company that operates ROROs), it should be noted that there is far more involved with loading a vessel than simply driving cars on and parking them. There are important calculations made about when and where to park vehicles, which is dependent on other cargo loaded and the sequence of future loading/unloading destinations, and the loading process itself carefully manages weight distribution of the ship alongside ballast adjustments depending on location and tides.
Will be interesting to see what develops Pete. Personally, I very much hope Tesla let’s me continue to buy cars priced strictly for personal use as the product becomes even more attractive, including nailing FSD, over the years.
fwiw,
The amount of taxis/uber’s can be surprising. Take NYC, a city of roughly 10 million.
From wikipedia,
“The TLC oversees over 100,000 for-hire vehicles, including "black cars"; "livery cars"; commuter "dollar vans"; luxury limousines; and paratransit vehicles.[7][4] ... In 2015, there were 14,000 for-hire vehicles associated with one or more of four ride-sharing companies of the time: Juno, Lyft, Uber, and Via. By 2018, over 80,000 such vehicles were being driven for "ride-share"”
Taxicabs of New York City - Wikipedia
so roughly 180,000 cabs and uber/etc vehicles or 500 people per for-hire-ride vehicle. extrapolating to a global population of ~7.6 billion, that would mean 15 million vehicles in the fleet would do the trick based on contemporary NYC usage*. if* all the automakers combined are looking to supply a fleet of 15 million vehicles, Tesla will not be selling 20 million vehicles per year strictly for Robotaxis.
*of course extrapolating from NYC of 2020 ride-for-hire has huge variables that could swing both ways... for example, on the one hand NYC is on the high end of population density, and on the other Elon has talked about the Robotaxi being as cheap as bus fare (ie potentially, at least in some form, perhaps replacing mass transit). other massive variables... how are people going to feel about car ownership in various regions? how much of the works will be able to afford owning their own car? I don’t know.
to me, how the Tesla Network, and Robotaxis generally pan out is a massive array of potential outcomes. it’s definitely possible we end up with many times the Robotaxis and human driven cabs/uber-etcs, but, given the investment of time and money needed to build up to 20 million vehicle per year production, I don’t think even Elon would bet so big.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
