StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
True. Tesla has a long way to go to catch up to the more experienced manufacturers like BMW in that metric.
-
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
True. Tesla has a long way to go to catch up to the more experienced manufacturers like BMW in that metric.
As much as we don’t want to spread FUD, I found the official news informational.
Just to give you a taste of what kind of FUD Tesla need to fight in China, theses had been circulating in Chinese social media:
First screen shot claimed to be eye witness of the event, and claimed there was a baby in the car(where there was not), but poster did mention later the car hit curb and pole badly(which were cut out obviously).
Second screenshot ignored the impact and claimed Teslas “self-ignite” and “explode”.
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
Please don't twist my words around to say something different than what I actually said.
There is a difference between someone having a multi-day upgrade to Hardware 3.0 (stuff happens) and speculating that all older Model 3's have a more lengthy or difficult upgrade to Hardware 3 compared to newer Model 3's. And then re-posting that speculation as if it had merit. There is no basis for concluding that older Model 3's are problematic to upgrade (all Model 3's were designed to have easily swappable FSD hardware).
The fact that it took multiple days on one or more Model 3's has nothing to do with the age of the car. What causes "great harm" is repeatedly propagating speculation that has no basis in fact. Some people appear to do this more than others.
smorgasbord
Active Member
My 2017 Model 3 (one of the first 2K built) was upgraded late Dec/early Jan. Service advisor was surprised to see that was a bulletin since I didn't work for Tesla and she had seen that only for employee-owned cars at that time. I don't know how long it actually took to upgrade, because my car was waiting on more mundane parts to arrive, which took a few days. At any rate, our car was ready sooner than promised and apparently no major issues with completing the FSD upgrade.
Here's the corresponding section from my invoice:
Concern: Full Self-Driving Car Computer Retrofit (Model 3)
Performed Full Self-Driving Car computer retrofit by Bulletin. Updated firmware, performed coolant purged, back up and restore profile.
Correction: Full Self-Driving Car Computer Retrofit With Electrical Wiring Rework, Model 3
Parts Replaced or Added
Part Quantity
NUT,HF,M8x1.25,[10] G1409,LOCK(2007104-00-B) 4.0
TLA,CAR.COMP,NA,HW3.0,M3 -PROV Retrofit(1462554-R0-J) 1.0
BOLT,EHS,M6x19,[88],ZN,SMAT,ADH(1116594-00-B) 4.0
Pay Type: Customer Pre-Pay
We did have to re-add our phones as keys and my phone needed re-pairing for bluetooth. It also had a big map download to do, and the car had lost its wifi settings so I had to reconnect wifi at home as well.
I disagreed with @Chickenlittle as well. We are all going to see this news splattered on front pages of the media. It is better to have it openly discussed here where we would have a reasonably balanced and factually correct info.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
That's why we have to keep an eye and check as e get more samples.
But to say anyone who might speculate on this (because they are worried their own car upgrade might take a lot of time) is a short seller is itself baseless speculation.
Moving on.
Anyone who's upgraded operating systems on multiple computers knows that there's always "that one" that doesn't go well. It's no big deal in the grand scheme, but it's a royal pain when it happens.
Mike Smith
Active Member
I'm wondering why Tesla hasn't responded to the unintended acceleration allegation. They always responded immediately in the past. Now in every article the author says Tesla has not responded to requests for comment, and there has been no public statement. Interesting. I see three possibilities:
1) There really is an unintended acceleration problem. This seems impossible because all the reported cases are at low speed and they are all investigated by Tesla unless the owner doesn't let them - every time it was proven that the accelerator pedal was in fact pressed (proven with two independent sensors in the pedal). All of Toyota's issues were caused by the pedal getting stuck either in the floor mat or the pedal just getting stuck on its own. These all happened at high speed on the highway. These issues can't happen at low speed since the pedal isn't pressed down enough.
Total likelihood: 0%
2) Tesla's response is delayed out of pure laziness. This also doesn't seem possible. These reports damage the brand and they already know how to respond (and they have immediately every time in the past). The NHTSA petition doesn't prevent them from commenting.
Total likelihood 0%
3) Elon wants to wait until the earnings call to respond. This will give the shorts more time to dig themselves into a deeper hole, and will cause a more extreme burn in conjunction with other good news. He's already hinted he'll be laying out a long term plan on this call, we know deliveries were very good, a possible Model Y announcement, something something gaap profitability... there are many reasons he could know the stock will soar the next day. The shorts would be up in arms over this but there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. In fact it was a short seller who made the petition in the first place.
Total likelihood: 100% (this seem extreme, but what other possibility is there?)
1) There really is an unintended acceleration problem. This seems impossible because all the reported cases are at low speed and they are all investigated by Tesla unless the owner doesn't let them - every time it was proven that the accelerator pedal was in fact pressed (proven with two independent sensors in the pedal). All of Toyota's issues were caused by the pedal getting stuck either in the floor mat or the pedal just getting stuck on its own. These all happened at high speed on the highway. These issues can't happen at low speed since the pedal isn't pressed down enough.
Total likelihood: 0%
2) Tesla's response is delayed out of pure laziness. This also doesn't seem possible. These reports damage the brand and they already know how to respond (and they have immediately every time in the past). The NHTSA petition doesn't prevent them from commenting.
Total likelihood 0%
3) Elon wants to wait until the earnings call to respond. This will give the shorts more time to dig themselves into a deeper hole, and will cause a more extreme burn in conjunction with other good news. He's already hinted he'll be laying out a long term plan on this call, we know deliveries were very good, a possible Model Y announcement, something something gaap profitability... there are many reasons he could know the stock will soar the next day. The shorts would be up in arms over this but there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. In fact it was a short seller who made the petition in the first place.
Total likelihood: 100% (this seem extreme, but what other possibility is there?)
The issue here is that right now the "investigation" is investigating whether they should dismiss or proceed with the complaint. Until they proceed there is nothing for Tesla to reply to. Right now this is not an investigation of Tesla, it's an investigation of the complainant. It will likely not go any further IMHO.
THIS. Just my opinion... I think Elon wants the shorties to pile in, and then he's going to lay the wood on the ER call. Seems like someone taught him the art of setting bear traps. Not advice.
Hmmm, go to Yahoo finance Yahoo Finance - Stock Market Live, Quotes, Business & Finance News and type in "TL0.F" in the search box (again noting that that is a zero in the symbol), no google involved. Or put it in the portfolio tracker.
And they have the gall to call that "electrified" or a "light hybrid". Gah.
Edit: "mild hybrid" I think is the term BMW uses.
Last edited:
Great news! Let supercharge.info know!
The Eastern Europe expansion has been going quite apace as Tesla prepares to expand European sales eastward. Hungary is now fully covered, and Poland is mostly covered. I know they really want to get into EV-friendly Ukraine and Romania
How dare you forget Moldova
willow_hiller
Well-Known Member
Maybe we'll learn more about pack assembly at Battery/Drivetrain Investor Day?
Electrek - this morning: https://ww.electrek.co/2020/01/20/tesla-cybertruck-cheap-production-manufacturing-expert/
Excerpt:
Tesla Cybertruck could be “incredibly cheap” to bring to production, thanks to its novel body technology, according to a manufacturing expert.
Excerpt:
Tesla Cybertruck could be “incredibly cheap” to bring to production, thanks to its novel body technology, according to a manufacturing expert.
I actually disagree. I think we're seeing a more mature Tesla, which is showing respect to the NHTSA / avoiding antagonizing them, by not making public statements until the NHTSA has had a chance to examine the petition with the data that Tesla sends to them. On the informed belief that the petition will be dismissed shortly. Which Tesla can then trumpet.
Not sure why they didn’t say who it was, Sandy Munro.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
The structure of any EU/EEA carbon pooling agreement allows other manufacturers to join an existing pool. Thus, whether PSA and FCA have completed their merger in 2020 is not a restriction to adding them to the existing Tesla/FCA pooling agreement.
The only restriction is the max. number of ZEVs that Tesla is physically able to provide. Current estimates are that FCA alone requires about 170K Tesla sales to get the max. possible reduction in their carbon emission fines.
Can Tesla deliver 170K cars to Europe in 2020? Let's focus on Model 3, since sales of the larger S/X models has waned after the more Euro-friendly mid-sized Model 3 became available. 170K is about 3.4K per week, or about half of Tesla's total weekly Model 3 production. With US demand (and some high-end models going to China) that doesn't leave much spare production capacity.
However, it seems likely now that Model Y production is about to begin, hopefully ramping up to at least 3K/wk by mid year. Those will be exclusively N.American sales, which will likely allow more Model 3 production to be reallocated to Europe by mid-year.
Let's say its +3K/wk for 25 wks. That's about 75K additional Models 3 to Europe in 2020 for the purpose of carbon credits. The FCA/PSA pool would then have approx 250K cars available, which exceeds the needs of FCA alone, but would be fully utilized by in a larger Tesla/FCA/PSA pool.
Its part of the decision to make the Model Y as the first vehicle to be produced at GF4/Berlin. This keeps the Fremont Model 3 line running at full capacity until at least Summer 2022 which is the earliest we can expect GF4/phase 2 to begin local production of Model 3. Even then, Europe may well prefer a much smaller 'Model 2' as the 2nd product from GF4, and Fremont will continue to supply Models 3 to Europe, and high-end versions to China.
Of course, those extra 75K Models 3 each add approx 5K Euro to Tesla's pool credits, or an additional $415M USD in 2020. I think that's how Tesla will allocate vehicles upon the inauguration of Model Y production at Fremont.
Cheers!
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
