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

[Xd85]

They are definitely going to software limit these for a while as the main technical hurdle seemed to be heat dissipation. Not surprised they're being very careful initially.

I can see it now : Model Y recall due to slow charging speeds. Untrained customers testing experimental charging curve.

 

[elasalle]

Site Suspended - This site has stepped out for a bit

Estimates point to the Green Hills Software founder and CEO spending $3.8 million during the campaign period.
So what did Dan O’Dowd get after spending the most among his fellow candidates? A whopping 1.2% of the vote, or about 38,909 people

 

[willow_hiller]

Seems slower than the 2170s

Actually I think it's almost perfectly equivalent, given the C ratings.

82 kWh pack peaks at a C rate of 3.0, yielding a maximum charge of ~250 kW.

The Model Y AWD is estimated to have a 68 kWh pack. Peak of 200 kW / 68 kWh = C rate of 2.94.

Edit: And it's a bit blurry, but right when he plugs in you can see it peaks higher than 200 kW, somewhere around 227 kW. If it goes up to 227 kW, that's a C rate of 3.3.

 

[growler23]

Customer 4680 Model Y taken to the supercharger. At 10% SoC, it started charging at about 200 kw and began tapering early into the charge. It took him about 50 minutes to charge to 100%.

9 to 20 % 3 minutes
9 to 39% 6 minutes
9 to 50% 12 minutes
9 to 80% 34 minutes
9 to 90% 40 minutes
9 to 97% 50 minutes

This sort of thing is why I read this forum.
Picture. Data. Numbers. Context. Later, followups by people with appropriate knowledge to provide more meaning or predictions.

Thank you @brantse, and thank you moderators for tireless (tiresome?) efforts towards keeping us on track.

 

[82bert]

"Note that when recirculation is on in Teslas, the ambient CO2 concentration in the air spikes to extremely high levels. I used to get headaches on road trips but w/o recirc I do not," the commenter wrote.

"We will look into this and adjust," Musk said yesterday. "In general, I’d recommend against using recirc, as the range advantage is small."

Elon Musk Alarmed by Tesla Feature That Spikes CO2 Levels Inside Vehicle

Elon Musk tells customers not to use Tesla's recirculation mode because it spikes carbon dioxide levels in the car cabin.

futurism.com

Hmm... I think I'll prep for a wee bit of a dip.

It’s a shame elon even replied to this. These are not even close to truly dangerous levels. And the original comments about dropping to below 500 with windows down is quite dumb when ambient CO2 levels are in the 400s.

Furthermore, this is what every vehicle’s recirc does. Of course the CO2 will rise.

 

[ammulder]

Shanghai June Deliveries will be Huge

Keep in mind:
May Production was higher than Deliveries (33.5k vs 32.2k). Same for April with Production at 10.8k and Deliveries 1.5k
That's 10.6k undelivered vehicles. We will see deliveries exceed production for June as Tesla will focus on deliveries in and around Shanghai at month-end to ensure very few vehicles are in transit. If Tesla can produce 75k they may be able to deliver 85k.

Except they delivered more than they produced in Q1, and as a result inventory was very low going into Q2... I'll be thrilled if they can produce 75K from Shanghai in June, but I'm not counting on much over-delivering.

On a more positive note, it may be worth looking into Model X production. It's been a very painful ramp, but my early May delivery was a 338xxx VIN and someone with an early June delivery got a 346xxx VIN, so Model X production *might* finally be coming online for real. Plus there are apparently still X Plaid orders coming through and getting accelerated deliveries. Not that it will offset missing like 50+% of Shanghai production, but there will at least be that tailwind in the financials.

Rob Maurer was also speculating about recognizing some FSD deferred revenue along with this rollout to 100K FSD Beta testers... hard to count on but that could possibly be a nice bonus too.

 

[Blue horseshoe]

Shanghai June Deliveries will be Huge

Keep in mind:
May Production was higher than Deliveries (33.5k vs 32.2k). Same for April with Production at 10.8k and Deliveries 1.5k
That's 10.6k undelivered vehicles. We will see deliveries exceed production for June as Tesla will focus on deliveries in and around Shanghai at month-end to ensure very few vehicles are in transit. If Tesla can produce 75k they may be able to deliver 85k.

Reuters states they've seen an internal memo targeting 71k in production in June for Shanghai in this reuters article: https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/tes...er-than-musk-forecast-data-and-internal-memos

 

[SO16]

My guess is that they are being software limited at this point and still being conservative.
OTA update will increase charging rate as more and more data points are gathered and sent back to the mother ship.

Would be great if they are software limiting until the entire line gets switched to 4680 at all factories to prevent people from wanting to Osborne the product and wait.

Then once Tesla is producing all model Y’s and 3’s with 4680, crank up the charge rate.

 

[MP3Mike]

Rob Maurer was also speculating about recognizing some FSD deferred revenue along with this rollout to 100K FSD Beta testers... hard to count on but that could possibly be a nice bonus too.

I highly doubt it. They made it pretty clear that they won't recognize additional revenue until it is widely available in a region. (i.e. not an "early limited" release like it currently is that requires a opt-in, high safety score, and >100 miles of AP driving in the last month.)

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Elon dragged the whole market down on layoffgate day, let's see if TSLA can drag everyone up on a clearly otherwise red day.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Seems slower than the 2170s

Not when you adjust for Pack size. The Austin Model Y AWD comes in somewhere between the Fremont LR and SR+ (w/2170). Too bad that U-toob'r didn't measure the Pack capacity...

 

[MP3Mike]

Would be great if they are software limiting until the entire line gets switched to 4680 at all factories to prevent people from wanting to Osborne the product and wait.

Then once Tesla is producing all model Y’s and 3’s with 4680, crank up the charge rate.

But that won't happen, likely for years, if ever. They will continue to use the 2170 cells for a very long time, especially since they still think they will be cell limited next year. (Just like the Model S&X still use the 18650 cells even though the 2170s have been available for years.)

 

[The Accountant]

I highly doubt it. They made it pretty clear that they won't recognize additional revenue until it is widely available in a region. (i.e. not an "early limited" release like it currently is that requires a opt-in, high safety score, and >100 miles of AP driving in the last month.)

Back in April, it was revealed that Tesla had over 100k FSD beta testers. They've added a few since then and now add another 100k as communicated by Elon on June 5. So we may be at 220k or so. They can then add more before month end. At what point would this be considered "wide release"?
I am not baking it in yet for Q2 but I still consider it a possibility.

 

[Alchemist42]

But that won't happen, likely for years, if ever. They will continue to use the 2170 cells for a very long time, especially since they still think they will be cell limited next year. (Just like the Model S&X still use the 18650 cells even though the 2170s have been available for years.)

I sort of doubt that we will see big increases in charging speed with the 4680s. The battery day presentation made it clear that the focus for the form factor was price and scalability, not performance. The slide showing the charging speed showed a five time reduction of heat for the 4680s, however that was in comparison to 4680s without tabless design and not to 2170s. The resistance decrease of the tabless design was always supposed to make the favorable economies of larger cells possible without sacrificing charging speed, so they made the form factor as big as possible where a similar charge rate to conventional 2170s was achievable. I still believe that after more real-life testing a moderate increase in charging speed will be implemented (similar to the 55kWh LFP batteries), but you should not expect miracles.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Would be great if they are software limiting until the entire line gets switched to 4680 at all factories to prevent people from wanting to Osborne the product and wait.

Then once Tesla is producing all model Y’s and 3’s with 4680, crank up the charge rate.

Unlikely, IMO. It'd be trivial for Tesla to vary the thickness of the cathode material in each 4680 cell. With the cathode material being about ~1/3rd the total materials cost of the cell, why would Tesla give away free cathode now in order to do an OTA update later? The 'take-rate' is guaranteed to be <100%, so the upgraders overpay, the free-riders don't benefit, and it costs the Company more money.

All while cathode material is in short supply. You do know that Tesla is still building the footings for its Giga Texas cathode production plant? This is the whole reason to start Austin production with the 'AWD' version with a smaller back: to stretch the supply of batteries.

Software limiting fixes none of that.

 

[Artful Dodger]

They've added a few since then and now add another 100k as communicated by Elon on June 5.

I don't think this is the case, rather it was just Elon's rather awkward way of explaining that v10.12.2 was now going out in wide release to the EXISTING core of beta testers.

Certainly, there are some new testers being added to the beta program, but I don't think it's on the scale of and ADDITIONAL 100K participants.

 

[willow_hiller]

Software limiting fixes none of that.

Tesla does have a history of software limiting charge rates until they have more real-world data on how a pack configuration behaves in the real world.

My 2019 SR+ had the same chemistry and format as the LR Model 3s, but Tesla still limited the peak rate to 100 kW for about 6 months after release. And then after they were confident in the integrity of the pack at that lower rate, they bumped it up to 170 kW OTA.

 

[damonbrodie]

But that won't happen, likely for years, if ever. They will continue to use the 2170 cells for a very long time, especially since they still think they will be cell limited next year. (Just like the Model S&X still use the 18650 cells even though the 2170s have been available for years.)

I didn't believe you so I googled it. Indeed still using the 18650s in the S+X. I guess this is to maximize the value from the cell manufacturing lines? Don't want to "waste" the cell lines? I would think that during the refresh would have been the ideal time to change the pack to 2170s while they were retooling anyway. They didn't do that so they made a very deliberate decision to stick with the older cells.

It seems counter-intuitive to me, unless they are 2170 cell constrained.

 

[StealthP3D]

No free EV charging on government property without also dispensing free gasoline. It's only fair, LOL!

I'm not familiar with the proposal but it doesn't look hilarious to me. I doubt that they want to be giving out free gas - they just don't want to be paying for free charging. That's not a crazy idea given that we're 30T in debt, have 150T in unfunded liabilities with huge deficits and high inflation. EVs are way past the tipping point in adoption. Why offer more freebies when we are already supply limited?

The government offer many things without individual payment, none of them are "free". Are you against "free" parking downtown? How about "free" roads? How about "free" collection/recycling for used motor oil? I pay for that "free" charging whenever I register my EV's for another year, when I pay my property taxes, etc. However, this terrible bill makes it illegal for a non-profit to use city, county or state property to provide free charging services, even when those free services are paid for by a private entity (unless they also provide a free gas pump).

I don't see anything wrong with government providing a location for charging to encourage clean transportation, especially during the early adopter phase. Medicare and Medicaid already provide free subsidies to oil and gas interests by treating those diseases exacerbated by combustion exhaust like asthma, COPD and cancer (to name but a few). Why should local governments be forced to encourage unhealthy transport by requiring the installation of a gas pump just to comply with this silly law (if passed and enacted)? This is what makes this bill ridiculous!

This bill would prevent local governments from letting any private entity or non-profit provide free charging services in a public space unless they also install a gas pump on the same public space. This bill needs to be defeated, not passed into another ridiculous law!

 

[damonbrodie]

I don't think this is the case, rather it was just Elon's rather awkward way of explaining that v10.12.2 was now going out in wide release to the EXISTING core of beta testers.

Certainly, there are some new testers being added to the beta program, but I don't think it's on the scale of and ADDITIONAL 100K participants.

They are bringing in 93 and 91 safety score drivers now. Several youtubers are thinking that it is indeed 100K additional.