Great to see a post from you, rather than one about you!
In all seriousness... events like these put things in perspective: It's the health and well-being of folks, and the relationships they have with others, that really matter. Good news, @gene.
-
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
In all seriousness... events like these put things in perspective: It's the health and well-being of folks, and the relationships they have with others, that really matter. Good news, @gene.
No they’re correct./s My BEv and those of three others on my block, a Taycan just delivered this week for example. After all I must not live in Brazil.OMG, just chalked my address. It’s in Brazil./s. Those who glance at data and say no market might check helicopters:
There is a helipad just below my house in Rio busy every day.
The Capital of São Paulo has the largest fleet of helicopters in the world - BisAviation Group
Did you know that the giant capital of São Paulo is also the champion in helicopter fleet in the world? Read morebisaviation.com.br
.
Helicopters are not cars but helicopter owners have multiple cars and those SP operations are private. Police, military and government are additional.
These points are Brazil-specific but they are common world wide.
Just as Model S attracted many people who had never owned an expensive car, somyears earlier the Bentley Continental grew the >$100,000 car market by more than 100%.
Many people here, not just Troy, do not understand how a compelling product all by itself can transform markets that previously were thought to be tiny.
Examples: I name some but give no sources. Just search and discover the magic of compelling product:
Cessna Citation,
Apple Watch,
Lexus,
Robinson helicopter.
Three products, many more examples available.
The naysayers haven’t a clue what magic happens with compelling product. And price does play a role, just nit the one imagined…
The wealthy aren't buying a cheap Tesla. The subject at hand is south america absorbing the output of the new factory.
Tesla is lying about the target market to not Osborne the 3/Y. The 3 is already manufactured in surplus even with the $7500 tax credit.
No arguments with any of the above. For a while in $DAY_JOB, I worked as a reliability engineer on Big_Honking_Telecom_Gear, where the failure of any one (or several) components would not bring the system down. Something about ATC and people being able to call the Fire DepartmentFor safety critical systems like this, reliability is gained through redundancy of the components, cross connected such that multiple simultaneous failures are needed to cause the entire system to fail. For brakes, this means multiple sensors on the pedal, multiple controllers performing the logic in parallel, and multiple actuators on the brakes themselves. A similar architecture was used in the space shuttle for the flight control surfaces:
Compound actuation system design for an advanced space transportation reusable orbiter
The SL-12 is a reusable space orbiter which offers the capability to go beyond the notion of a second generation space shuttle, and is targeted to be in operation in the year 2020. SL-12 Orbiter utilizes gimballing of the main rocket engines for control during ascent and typical aerodynamic...medcraveonline.com
.But that kind of reliability has costs. For the safety-critical stuff, we used to run 1+1 protection where two pieces of hardware and associated software would run in parallel, ideally switching in zero time in case of fault (Yes, one can do this kind of thing: Forward Error Correction to the fore!), but sometimes with a standby/active scheme where the standby would have to boot and become active in order to regain operation. (That works OK in the control plane, but not so much with clocks..)
It's one thing if one is talking about One Extra Card per shelf that's the standby: But doing this properly, especially around the core, involves duplicating entire shelves, cabling, and custom ASICs left, right, and center, sometimes more than doubling the cost of the overall system. In one notable case we managed to do a (1/2)/(1/2)/(1/2) protection scheme, which sounds evil, but resulted in a total card count that was something like 3/2x, rather than a 1+1 that would have been a card count of 2x. And what with FEC would manage to do hitless switch and survive a bunch of cards going bad at once.
But there's costs involved. Yep, one does not want the telecom network to barf and die when a single transistor gives up the ghost; between the FCC and other national telecom regulators and the companies they regulate, the world has a fairly reliable telecom network. Users pay through the nose for this, but get the chance to call the fire department in an emergency. And, yes, losing that capability would means Dead Bodies on the ground. There's Reasons I wear an Order of the Engineer ring on my pinkie.
So, great: Fun, safety critical stuff with a (nearly) unlimited budget to build duplicated remote controls on the flight surfaces of the shuttle; multiple redundant power supplies, multiple duplicated wiring harnesses. Don't forget the triplicated flight control computers; triplicated because if one has two, and the outputs aren't the same, how does one figure out which has failed in real-time? With three, one gets a vote-of-three algorithm. And the hardware to support all that was built in. (If I remember right, there were actually different software companies doing the algorithms on all all three computers, the idea being that if a coding error took down one computer, it wouldn't take down all three!) All of that jazz was justified since losing a space shuttle on approach would be a Bad Thing. And, no question, NASA has the chops to make that all happen. The things that took down Space Shuttles had nothing to do with any of that. But, man, the cost of all that!
So.. now we're talking a consumer-grade vehicles that get built in the millions. Tesla (and other car companies) have a maniacal focus on costs. There are the NHTSA, the SAE, and other national agencies that do like the FCC and mandate reliability and safety numbers. And now we talk about brakes.
Current brake techology is, as far as I know, somewhat resistant to single points of failure. Lose a brake line, down on the bottom of the body where hoses hang out and small tubes are exposed to road hazards? One might lose two wheels worth of braking, but the other two still work. Lose the power assist? Awkward, but doable muscle power makes the brakes still work.
Electric brakes... First thought that crosses my mind is lack of electrical power. Blow the Pyro fuse? Well, one still has the 12V/48V battery. But, if one is powered off that battery, and the fuseable link to the battery blows, where's the power for the brakes? Duplicated batteries? Um. Cost is creeping up. Controller with diode-ORd battery supply? How worried are we that the dual-diode might blow? In my experience, electronics over a large enough population (like millions of cars) are going to end up with a $RANDOM part that shorts out, like, say, on the controller board. So, duplicated controllers. Duplicated supplies. Separate power supplies for the actuators, with separate power wires going everywhere? Or batteries on each wheel? You guys can see where this is going.
It's probably not that one needs a gold-plated solution: Being safer than the (probable single-point failure mode of a hydraulic system) is probably doable, but at what cost? If it costs more to put that electric system in a Tesla than to stick with the hydraulics, Tesla will stick with the hydraulics.
As I said in the beginning of this discussion: I'm not adverse to the idea of an electric braking system. Inventive engineers can come up with amazing stuff. But, believe you me, I sure want to see what it is they come up with. And, just because airplanes can pull it off.. it's a different operating environment. We'll see.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Wrapping stainless steel removes some of it's advantages and adds complexity and cost to the build process. I predict anything made of stainless steel from Tesla will not be wrapped. Aftermarket can handle those who wish to have a less durable finish applied to their vehicle.
2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
SMR reviews Morgan Stanley's report on Investor Day.
TLDW: Morgan Stanley's analysts get it, better than others who were "disappointed," and make clear unequivocal statements supporting the thesis that legacy OEMs are doomed and show how individual investors are piling into TSLA at a phenomenal pace.
TLDW: Morgan Stanley's analysts get it, better than others who were "disappointed," and make clear unequivocal statements supporting the thesis that legacy OEMs are doomed and show how individual investors are piling into TSLA at a phenomenal pace.
I'm sure there still some vacuum operated units as well, which is why Tesla was able to source a vacuum boosted power-assist unit they could drive with an electric vacuum pump.
My post was pointing out why @Tronguy may have addressed "losing power steering" as a brake-failure scenario.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Nope, I'm not that smart or obtuse: the word, "Steering" snuck in strictly by accident. I think I'm going to be apologizing forever on this
.Option A or B both be awesome coming from a minivan
Question, why is the 5-seater Y not an option if the 5-seater X is?
I can buy a new 3 and Y this week in Chicago. That not infinite demand. It's a nice balance between production and current demand.
But 20 million cars with 10 models. Apparently no problemo. South America can absorb 18 million.
The model 3 is a great car, especially at the after tax credit price. But Musk has done so much damage to his reputation in the last two years that many people in the EV target market are not going to buy a Tesla. Plus many people are bored with the old styling. Fortunately I'm sure Franz has many style updates and model variants that can be applied as volume growth stagnates.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
200-300 inventory cars for an entire country is nothing. You can't get a new LR Model 3 at all.
2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
Please, as has been asked of everyone who has made such a statement, show us the supporting fact-based evidence regarding how this "damage to his reputation" you go on about has impacted sales.
Regarding the "bored" people, as long as Tesla are selling cars as fast as they can produce them there is no substantiation to mimic the legacy sham of multi-branding a single design, or offering myriad versions of the same model with a facelift as if they are somehow different and the customer is missing out if they do not upgrade today. Much less, adopt this method of creating additional models to compete in the same space, just so some buyers can feel unique.
If they want to feel unique, they can buy someone else's EV, then get their Tesla after their experience shows them how being "special" may not have been the choice bringing the most value to their life.
Tesla vehicles are a paradigm shift in the ownership experience. Now, instead of having to replace a car that wears out in 100K miles, buyers will purchase a car that could reasonably last 1 million miles while requiring less maintenance. Imagine, a car that could be passed down through generations.
Tesla puts all the goodies into every car they make, then, they update every car they have sold to keep it as current as possible and do so without charging extra for the value this provides. For me, this trumps the reasoning of purchasing a car because it has slightly different styling changes from last year. (though, if Tesla can improve functionality and a by-product is a styling change, that is always good)
Last edited:
FSDtester#1
Craves Electrolytes
The X is bigger on the inside with more rear storage right?Option A or B both be awesome coming from a minivan
Question, why is the 5-seater Y not an option if the 5-seater X is?
Haven’t seen this posted.
Dr. Know It All, who is an actual PhD and a professor at (I forget where) a notable university and has a particular specialty in robotics and CGI says he’s staking his reputation on the fact that this is indeed real and more pertinently, it is (in his opinion) quite impressive and Tesla seems, to him, to be competitive (possible leader) in this space.
Dr. Know It All, who is an actual PhD and a professor at (I forget where) a notable university and has a particular specialty in robotics and CGI says he’s staking his reputation on the fact that this is indeed real and more pertinently, it is (in his opinion) quite impressive and Tesla seems, to him, to be competitive (possible leader) in this space.
Guys, the bears are right nobody in Latin America is going to by a Tesla Compact car.
They're going to buy the bulletproof Cybertruck.
They're going to buy the bulletproof Cybertruck.
Yeah, you really owe me an apology for bringing up the memory of working on a friend's Astro minivan that had hydro boost brakes and the amazing design flaw that if you turned the wheel all the way to the limit and pushed the brake you could/ would snap the pump shaft...Nope, I'm not that smart or obtuse: the word, "Steering" snuck in strictly by accident. I think I'm going to be apologizing forever on this
But I forgive you since you also took the time to write out my feelings on e-brakes and the difference between auto and aero operation abd maintenance domains.
GhostSkater
Member
I've been thinking about what the hell Tesla will do to make Cybertruck compatible with current Superchargers
When NACS specs was released, we saw that the higher voltage variant is different for better insulation and that the current design can do up to 500 V, we also saw that they tested continuously up to 900 A, those together give us 450 kW peak power, this is simply too low for the pack size Cybertruck will require, and would mean slow charging times, scaling for pack size, would mean around 50% slower peak charging power C rate wise, not acceptable specially considering towing
So Cybertruck will likely have a higher voltage pack to reach near MW charging power on Supercharger V4, maybe same 1000 V design the Semi has for parts sharing, they can use the same stator and inverters
But then the questions becomes, how does it charge in Supercharger V3? You can't restrict it to V4 only else the ownership experience will suck for a longtime until they get deployed
There is two options in the industry:
The second might be less complex with the two layer 4680 pack connection and wiring wise, you just connect both in parallel for charging in V3, which is actually the opposite of the Hummer EV, which is in parallel during use in a lower voltage system and during charging it's higher voltage (GM doing amazingly backwards decisions lol)
Another thing to consider is that Tesla really needs to deploy V4 fast with Cybertruck, V3 architecture works so well because all Tesla vehicles quickly drop in power during the charging session, but Cybertruck might be able to maintain a flat 250 kW to 60~70% with it's pack size, and in full Supercharger tht won't play well
In a 4 stall location, 2 Cybertrucks alone plugged will only get 175 kW for most of the charge session, it get's worse from there
When NACS specs was released, we saw that the higher voltage variant is different for better insulation and that the current design can do up to 500 V, we also saw that they tested continuously up to 900 A, those together give us 450 kW peak power, this is simply too low for the pack size Cybertruck will require, and would mean slow charging times, scaling for pack size, would mean around 50% slower peak charging power C rate wise, not acceptable specially considering towing
So Cybertruck will likely have a higher voltage pack to reach near MW charging power on Supercharger V4, maybe same 1000 V design the Semi has for parts sharing, they can use the same stator and inverters
But then the questions becomes, how does it charge in Supercharger V3? You can't restrict it to V4 only else the ownership experience will suck for a longtime until they get deployed
There is two options in the industry:
- Voltage booster: Taycan, eTron GT, Ioniq 5, EV6
- Split pack: Hummer EV
The second might be less complex with the two layer 4680 pack connection and wiring wise, you just connect both in parallel for charging in V3, which is actually the opposite of the Hummer EV, which is in parallel during use in a lower voltage system and during charging it's higher voltage (GM doing amazingly backwards decisions lol)
Another thing to consider is that Tesla really needs to deploy V4 fast with Cybertruck, V3 architecture works so well because all Tesla vehicles quickly drop in power during the charging session, but Cybertruck might be able to maintain a flat 250 kW to 60~70% with it's pack size, and in full Supercharger tht won't play well
In a 4 stall location, 2 Cybertrucks alone plugged will only get 175 kW for most of the charge session, it get's worse from there
It's crazy how the Tesla community went overboard with this especially when the master plan presentation talks about the next gen car being painted separately which reduces paint. In that context, Tom didn't say anything new because paint is expensive, hence why they are reducing paint usage. It is NOT a silver stainless car.
I watched a bit of his YouTube interview with the robotics expert and honestly wasn't that impressed. The Tesla Club Sweden poll is still about 2/3 in favor of CGI/animation. The background is the most fake looking aspect of the video to me. I'd be interested to hear Mr. Know it all's opinion if the bots could have been performing in front of a green screen.
NACS has a 1000 volt version. Assuming sufficient HV to Ground isolation, a Vx cabinet can stack AC to DC modules to double the output voltage.
Paired with a Megapack, the cabinet output is closer to 1 MW.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
