When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I agree that salespeople/dealers have long become obsolete and are only surviving due to franchise laws that they will fight to the death to keep but, salespeople or not, the ability to easily test drive a car without much commitment and hassle (buy then return) is still essential and will hurt Tesla if it doesn't figure out a way to facilitate it.
I forget the name of their ride share service, but a critical part of Tesla’s plan is allowing cars to go into autonomous ride share mode when the owner wants. Who knows how far they are from this, but that program alone would get anyone who was interested into a car.
And it may very welll be true that the future of mobility has nothing to do with ownership, well, at least in sufficiently population dense areas. So if the 2025 model is everyone owns a membership to a well populated autonomous-Tesla-on-demand service then you really really have no need for the ankle weight that is a dealer network.
TESLA IS NOT WITHOUT RISK!!!
But if you allow yourself to see the future as Elon does it all makes sense.
He he could be very wrong, but if he’s right he’s playing an extremely strong hand relative to his competition.
And it may very welll be true that the future of mobility has nothing to do with ownership, well, at least in sufficiently population dense areas. So if the 2025 model is everyone owns a membership to a well populated autonomous-Tesla-on-demand service then you really really have no need for the ankle weight that is a dealer network.
This is the most likely scenario for large urban areas but I see it more as a manufacturer-independent auto-pilot Uber rather than as a single-manufacturer provided service.
I would like to see a way to rent the Tesla Model you are interested in (even if it have to be speed limited) so one can try to one out for a day or two and see how it handles in your area.
Earl Colby Pottinger (Tesla, Bollinger, Rivian and other BEVs fan)
Turo has tons of Tesla's for rent by individuals. Tesla should partner with a company like that and offer discounts on one day Tesla rentals. Then if you order a Tesla they refund the rental fee.
You keep harping on the shape of the batteries when I don't think anyone here cares about the shape of the batteries. I don't think there is a 'Cylindrical Battery Religion' at Tesla. It's an implementation detail and with 10 years of cars on the road with cylindrical batteries you can't argue with their results. Given about a dozen or more dimensions the engineers are considering (cost, size, manufacturing, availability, performance, thermals, safety, packaging etc) I believe they made the best decision with the data they had at the time. If in the future these dimensions shift to favor a different battery shape then Tesla can choose to make a switch.
The cylindrical topic happened to be in the article which was about what Panasonic thinks of Tesla's future market share. I didn't mention it.
Originally Posted by doshc
Show us the NHTA safety alert or NHTA recall not anecdotes.
some highlights:
"words of former NHTSA Administrator Joan Claybrook: “Technical-service bulletins have been recall-avoidance devices — there’s no question about that.” "
"We won’t know whether this is in fact the case until NHTSA makes a statement about the situation, but another troubling detail indicates that Tesla may have consciously evaded a recall during and after the GM ignition scandal. A tweet by Tesla Motors CEO Elon Musk on January 14, 2014 states “The word ‘recall’ needs to be recalled.” "
"But the most troubling aspect of this affair is not the defect itself, or even Tesla’s possible use of a TSB instead of a recall. Defects happen to every automaker, and the line between a safety-related and non-safety-related defect can be subtle. The aspect of this story that demands explanation is not the crime, but the cover-up: why did Tesla demand an NDA from an owner in exchange for repairs to a defective vehicle? "
Additional notes: I had to replace all 4 rims on my BMW by now due to the potholes. I never broke a ball joint. Once I slid onto the curb sideways, worst kind of angle. Yet no broken ball joints.
Originally Posted by doshc
You're on some long pedantic rant on why the Model 3 is not actually the safest car on the road. I was not addressing that point. I was addressing the statement from the short seller that:
"The cars have proven to be the most dangerous luxury cars on the road."
And I responded to that. Maybe you didn't click on the link.
Originally Posted by doshc
So, let's see a show of hands of the number of folks here that bought a Tesla "just because Elon says it's the best"?
I can show some on the TMC. But will do just one, my favorite:
Thread: car hits a pole on the front at 19mph.
guy's comment "This was a serious accident, and had it happened in any other car, you would have suffered major injuries, and possibly death." https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/thre...4#post-3292704
Tell me this person doesn't believe in Elon. He joined a religion. Has faith for sure. This is magic by Elon Musk.
What the late adopters fail to appreciate is the magnitude of appeal for not ever going to a gas station again. We've never used a Supercharger except at the Tesla service center once or twice, just for fun. We "fill up" overnight in our garage. It's sooooo convenient and hard to communicate the satisfaction of doing it that way to people who haven't tried it.
This is exactly how I feel. I'm still in PHEV land, with my Pan4 E-Hybrid, but I've gone from filling up on gas weekly to filling up once every 5 weeks, when I'm not driving far from home. To me, that's priceless. It's only a net savings to me of $100/month (additional electricity cost vs. less gasoline cost), which is a drop compared to the cost of my car, but the avoidance of gas stations is something that I have come to appreciate more than I'd expected. Plug in when you get home, and unplug the next morning and drive off... Wonderful! PHEVs are a good bridge to all-electric, as has been stated elsewhere here at Rennlist by PHEV/BEV owners. I'm eagerly looking at what's coming down the pike in terms of non-Tesla BEVs.
In the modern age of ubiquitous internet information, the dealer sales person's most obvious value is if they can understand, navigate, explain and conquer the CXX options system. No, really.
My Porsche dealer has great sales people, but they are sometimes mystified by the Porsche ordering/specification system. They serve as safari guides to the wilds of a virtually impenetrable option ordering system. To CXX buyers, they are well worth their overhead contributions, provided they know what's up.
In a much simpler ordering environment, I fail to see the advantage. If the retail sales person's only value is de-mystification of ordering, then a few algorithmic refinements might completely automate the function.
I can specify and see a virtual reality example of any Porsche, Bentley, etc., and save an order sheet online already. When i go to the dealer, they have a more detailed version of the same website that lets them drill down into areas that I wish i was able to manipulate from my desktop, without requiring a visit to the dealer. Perhaps the old-line manufacturers are trying to hold back some info so that their dealers don't get upset when the customer merely cross-shops a given configuration without any input from the dealer?
There are plenty of reasons to try to automate as much of the sales process as the buying public seems to want. I want more than currently exists.
What I found refreshing in the Tesla stores was that the employees were salaried, not paid on commission. This is the biggest problem with standard dealerships, including Porsche, and it's one thing that makes people very uncomfortable about going to any traditional dealership. I don't want to be badgered to buy a car, and I don't want that feeling that the buyer and salesman both know the saleman desperately needs to sell to get his money to pay his bills. Several of the Porsche salesmen I've dealt with are very professional and non-badgering, but I've run into some that are a real pain, causing great discomfort. I think that Porsche needs not only to think about electrifying their vehicles, but also to rethink how they do sales and dealerships -- as, commendably, Volvo has done now with their Polestar brand (selling only online) as an experiment following on Tesla. The big issue is how to have service centers situated in many locations for owner convenience, with good techs and good access to parts (a problem Tesla is struggling with) if the physical showroom is eliminated; I think Tesla is making a mistake in removing showrooms. But not having employees who face customers having to worry about commissions is priceless.
Tesla started using cylindrical cells for a good reason - the battery industry was already producing them by the billions in standard sizes. So it made sense from a cost perspective.
I, along with hundreds of thousands of others, reserved a Model 3 sight unseen. When a friend/neighbor of mine finally got his, he let me test drive it. I was floored by how good it was. (He is a long-time Tesla employee and has a very early two-digit VIN car. Not one of the first 30, but close.)
And yeah - I don't miss the "let me check with my manager" game either. Not only that, but I believe that if Tesla had tried to market their products through traditional car dealers 10 years ago, they would have been out of business 9.5 years ago. To this day, many have no clue how to sell plug-in vehicles.
Acoste: Quoting anything by Joan Claybrook is not a good way to win an argument. She didn't even know how to drive. Yet the Carter Administration put her in charge of the NHTSA...
Supercharger V3 announced today with 250kw charging and Model 3 compatible along with pre-warm battery software update for vehicles to allow faster charging at current V2 stations. Lots of cool news here.
Nice!
my guess is that they use voltage limitation in the early charging stages instead of current limiting it.
Based on the little info they shared I make some wild guesses.
Info1: 75 miles in 5 minutes
Info2: 33% shorter charging time compared to prewarmed 120kW
So based on that info the green curve would be my guess. full speed up to 25% SoC. This way they may be able to keep the charge voltage at 4.2V and not affect battery life. The interesting part would be if the whole curve would raise (even beyond 50% SoC). That would mean the charge voltage is over 4.2V which in theory reduces the battery life.
Compare to the Audi:
150kW all the way up to 80% SoC
With the new Supercharger V3 the 10%-90% charge time is expected to be about the same for the Model 3 and the E-Tron.
This makes me thinking that the Taycan will reach the 350kW in the low SoC area as well.
With the new Supercharger V3 the 10%-90% charge time is expected to be about the same for the Model 3 and the E-Tron.
The issue with the shown E-Tron profile is it's harder on the batteries. So if they deploy that profile to production and not just a demonstration we will have to see what effect that has on the batteries after a few years.
This is, of course the same with pushing 250kw with the Tesla V3 superchargers. Your guesstimate battery charge vs. SOC looks about right and will be tweaked in software as degradation data comes into the Tesla fleet.
To the end user what ultimately matters is charge rate in added miles per hour. 250kw for the Model 3 peaks at a charge rate of 1000 EPA Rated miles/hour. The E-Tron of course is grossly less efficient so even with a charge profile curve thats harder on the batteries it may not reach that same level of added miles per hour.
my guess is that they use voltage limitation in the early charging stages instead of current limiting it.
.
By the way Lithium charge profiles is usually first constant-current not constant-voltage. Constant voltage is phased generally when the target voltage is reached. This is the most naive implementation but sets the fundamentals then Tesla takes other variables into account such as battery temperature, etc to tweak the curves.
The issue with the shown E-Tron profile is it's harder on the batteries. So if they deploy that profile to production and not just a demonstration we will have to see what effect that has on the batteries after a few years.
Will see. NMC batteries can handle higher charging rates due to the higher cobalt content. Also the charge speed can be increased by making thinner layers (which makes the battery somewhat bigger and more expensive).
By the way Lithium charge profiles is usually first constant-current not constant-voltage. Constant voltage is phased generally when the target voltage is reached. This is the most naive implementation but sets the fundamentals then Tesla takes other variables into account such as battery temperature, etc to tweak the curves.
I call the first section current limiting instead of constant current, because the current is limited to a constant value. And in the second half the voltage is limited. Makes more sense to me.
There is very little "constant current" section remained if any. This is why I said: "they use voltage limitation in the early charging stages instead of current limiting it."
Looks like Audi's 10-90% charge is equal or faster.
There is very little "constant current" section remained if any. This is why I said: "they use voltage limitation in the early charging stages instead of current limiting it."
It is absolutely constant-current (or current limiting as you say) for the majority of the charge profile. I don't want to go into the weeds into explaining it, you can do your own research and figure out why it's that case.
Originally Posted by acoste
Looks like Audi's 10-90% charge is equal or faster.
It really doesn't matter what they show in a demonstration, only in production and then only if they can get the data to show degradation. Additionally if that is the charge profile in production it certainly doesn't translate into as high Mile Per Hour charge rate (what the consumer actually cares about) due to the inefficiency of the vehicle and platform being much lower than Model 3.
It's possible Audi will use a lower impedance cell and that will help them maintain higher kWh charge rate. But using lower impedance cells also has its downsides.
In any case good for Audi for adding more viable EVs to the mix and pushing their own path, but I think you're stretching too hard to prove a point. A moot one given thousands of V2 supercharging stations in operation today. V3 deploying this year. And very few places to charge an Audi that fast here in the US.
03-05-2019 | 05:37 PM
