Forums

Tesla killers hoping for old age death?

Tesla killers hoping for old age death?

Looks like the plan to kill Tesla is mostly still close their eyes and hope it just goes away despite their big talk.

GM and Ford’s EV production plans for the US have leaked, and they are a joke
http://www.teslarati.com/tesla-gm-ford-ev-production-plans-leaked/

Magic 8 Ball | 26 mars 2020

Did you know Pinocchio was a bad motivational speaker?

SamO | 26 mars 2020

ha ha ha great forum topic.

"According to detailed production plans from GM and Ford that were viewed by Reuters, the two biggest American automakers will be making 5 million petrol-powered SUVs and pickup trucks in 2026, and only 320,000 electric vehicles. That’s just about 5% of Ford and GM’s combined vehicle production in North America, and less than Tesla’s output in 2019 from its one factory in Fremont, CA. Putting it mildly, a production target of 320,000 electric vehicles in 2026 is a joke. "

This is what we've been saying for so long. The majors do not have the will nor expertise to pivot to EVs.

I'm truly sad for the workers who don't make policy and won't have a future in making cars.

bjrosen | 26 mars 2020

Maybe they are being realistic? How many will they sell if they are always several years behind Tesla? There is the old joke about being chased by a lion, one guy says I don't have to be faster than the lion I just have to be faster than you. Even if they have great EVs by 2026 if those EVs are only as good as what Tesla will have in 2024 they have a problem, the lion will eat one of them. Just compare the Mach-E to the Model Y, the Model Y is already shipping, the Mach-E is at the end of the year at best. To come close to the Model Y's range the Mach-E needs a battery that's almost 25% bigger, which all things being equal means it costs them 25% more. And all things aren't equal because Tesla's cost/KWh is almost certainly a lot less than Ford's. The Mach-E also only comes close to the Model Y's range with the lowest performance version. The Performance Model Y only takes a small hit over the AWD and that's due entirely to the 21" wheels, put normal wheels and tires on it and it has the same range as the AWD. The Mach-E GT has terrible range, it's nearly a third worse than the RWD Mach-E. Ford can't hope to sell nearly as many Mach-E's as Tesla will sell Model Ys. GM's Hummer will have to rely on appearance alone to compete with the Cybertruck. It will have 20% less range and probably be significantly more expensive. That forecast of only several hundred thousand EVs in 2026 might be wishful thinking, it could be less than that.

WW_spb | 26 mars 2020

Already posted it in other thread

TeslaTap.com | 26 mars 2020

If Tesla keeps growing at 50%/year, expect Tesla to be producing at least 2.5M cars in 2026, even with a downturn this year. Sad that the other carmakers combined can't do a tenth of that.

lbowroom | 26 mars 2020

They base their forecast on surveys of what customers want now. If Steve Jobs ran Apple that way, there would be no smart phone. People don’t have the vision to see what they will really like in the future

a2842265 | 27 mars 2020

who knows. More and more models are produced by different manufacturers

noleaf4me | 27 mars 2020

One of those two will likely be exiting the business around then.....

FISHEV | 27 mars 2020

"The recent collapse of oil prices - pointing toward cheap gas for the foreseeable future - and a dip in demand caused by the coronavirus may only serve to strengthen automakers’ commitment to the strategy."

Add to that the pandemic recession and EV's with $10-20k more vs. identical ICE vehicle and low cost of gasoline, likely to fall to $2/gal a better question will be how many will be able to afford an EV. GM and Tesla have both used up their allotted EV credits, Ford will with the Mach-E. But how many $60k Mach-E's are going to sold in the post Trump Pandemic US market? How many F-150 E vs. F-150 ICE with cheaper prices and cheaper operating costs?

“We’re trying to time this with the natural demand of consumers (so) we’re not forced to do artificial things and we don’t violate the laws of economics,” Hau Thai-Tang, Ford’s chief product development and purchasing officer, told Reuters."

He's right. Following consumer demand. Ford will have the expensive Mach-E and the expensive F-150E which will both be super EV's hitting the two top markets, CUV's and Pickups. But there won't be the consumer demand IN THE US.

What it will take and hopefully Biden and Democratic Congress coming in 10 months will address it and create the "artificial things" need to spur sales of EV's over ICE vehicles. A $15,000 rebate on EV's that can be applied immediately to the cost of the vehicle (which will also lower sales tax on the vehicle in many states) or as a 50%/50% cash back will make the EV-Mustang CUV and EV-F-150 competitive. Ford will have the production lines and supply chains in place and can respond to consumer demand.

The issue is really in the US which is not EV friendly due to GOP ideology which is seeing lowered emissions standards, attacks on the CARB states rules favoring EV's, taxes on EV's instead of credits vs. EU demand for all EV by 2050. Which is why 60% of the Mach-E production is going to EU and going there BEFORE the US market.

82bert | 27 mars 2020

I’m sure none of this comes as a surprise to anyone on here.

FISHEV | 27 mars 2020

"I’m sure none of this comes as a surprise to anyone on here."

If you mean US and US gong backwards on emissions, EV credits, CARB rules in the US in the era of the Trump Debacle, yes we see it. US policy has always put US car mfg at a disadvantage in competing in fuel efficiency.

Bighorn | 27 mars 2020

Having clean air to breathe and crystal clear vistas unlike any we’ve seen this century except briefly after 9/11 will have people redoubling their efforts to limit pollution through novel tele-schooling and working firmly established and entrenched. The reduced pollution deaths may well offset the CV deaths according to some epidemiologists.

andy.connor.e | 27 mars 2020

Their numbers are a joke. But i think what they are proposing is not a joke, and is all they can do.

By the time 2026 comes around, Tesla will be so competitive that they will probably be on Generation 5 of their vehicles since Model 3 is generation 3. They are innovating too fast. They will catch up, or perhaps they never will if they continue to innovate. Legacy auto is basically an assembly company, so we will see. But i can tell you, they are not going to win over the whole world by building the same thing forever. Putting a battery in their ICE cars is not what people want. Like phones and such, they want technology. Legacy autos are not technology companies. Thats where the competition's largest gap is.

yudansha™ | 27 mars 2020

Sounds like a good plan. However, it’s not possible to tele-school little kids, so parents have a tough time juggling between homeschooling them and working. Israel cancelled elementary tele-schooling and expects kids back at school in summer.

Bighorn | 27 mars 2020

Good point. It might make sense to inoculate the elementary school cohort and board them briefly during their period of infectivity.

JAD | 27 mars 2020

Gas/oil prices are plummeting now, so OPEC can put everyone out of business and have a monopoly in 2-3 years. Then they can raise prices a lot, but GM will be ready with a fleet of SUVs.... More short term planning.

FISHEV | 27 mars 2020

"The reduced pollution deaths may well offset the CV deaths according to some epidemiologists."

Crazy and frankly dangerous MAGA stuff.

FISHEV | 27 mars 2020

Another Tesla reveal.

Bighorn | 27 mars 2020
FISHEV | 27 mars 2020

"Didn’t know Stanford was Team Trump"

You quoted Forbes, "Capitalist Tool" is their own headline banner. Team "There is no virus" Trump? Very likely.

Bighorn | 27 mars 2020

Idiot

roger.klurfeld | 27 mars 2020

To me, watching the EV competition is fascinating. Unfortunately for GM and Ford, over the last 30 years they have become assembly companies and have ceded the engineering space to contractors. When this happens over a long period of time, the OEM loses the expertise even to understand the core technology. Tesla's model of vertical integration keeps that knowledge in house. This is the ultimate advantage Tesla has, and GM and Ford will ultimately die. Unless, of course, they radically change their business model. But management there has given no indication of awareness.

FISHEV | 27 mars 2020

"When this happens over a long period of time, the OEM loses the expertise even to understand the core technology."

Mach-E and frankly Bolt prove that wrong. There's really no big secrets to building EV's, more the need for a market. EU and China create one by requiring EV's while US does not so we have these issues for US car mfgs.

US government being behind in emissions and fuel efficiency, it has always put US car makers at a disadvantage having to deal with backward US market which is their base vs. advanced markets in Europe and Asia.

lbowroom | 27 mars 2020

I remember a time when cable companies were telling us that no one wanted HDTV. They had the surveys to prove it. The reason? They didn’t want to build out the bandwidth. Fish is a propaganda machine telling us what big oil wants the world to be, nothing else.

posinator | 27 mars 2020

like others have said bighorn is always right

this forum is way better if you autoflag and autoignore the idiot

ever play Red Dead Redemption? that was created by 100s of elite developers over 15-20 years (counting rdr1, midnight club, buggy boogie, heck let's go back to lawnmower man)

traditional auto manufacturers write terrible software, architecturally. tesla has code in the car, code that teaches the car, code that builds the car, code that teaches machines how to build the car, etc. the code manages the batteries, powertrain, brakes, satnav, entertainment and everything else and runs on their own chipsets and systems. tesla also has 100s of elite devs working hard and leaving everyone else in the dust

shitty software doomed toyota in court. vw cant ship evs because their code is so bad. i seriously doubt ford and gm write their own

elon has made tons of code open source, but there is this not-invented-here mentality in software development, and a general shortage of devs that can actually do things. elon might just license it all help other automakers to 'drive' his mission. if not, it's all over already

it's a rotary phone vs smartphone comparison. they both work, and its arguable which is better, but the first is in museums and the latter is in everyones hands

Joshan | 27 mars 2020

lbowroom | March 27, 2020
I remember a time when cable companies were telling us that no one wanted HDTV. They had the surveys to prove it. The reason? They didn’t want to build out the bandwidth. Fish is a propaganda machine telling us what big oil wants the world to be, nothing else.

Exactly and these companies will be AOL in 10 years. AOL owned the internet business in this country, but told us that everyone was satisfied with 56k and didn't need high speed.

ksrehman | 27 mars 2020

If Ford GM and Tesla are willing to build ventilators for the people I want them all to survive!

@FISHEV "there's no big secrets to building EVs" - that's what Nokia said when they tore down the first iPhone and examined each component. The magic was (mostly) in the software ...

Magic 8 Ball | 27 mars 2020

Dyson is beating everyone to the punch hopefully their vents won't suck.
Or maybe they are supposed to suck???

JAD | 27 mars 2020

M8B, my understanding is they usually just blow, the body still does the exhale... So they don't suck :)

FISHEV | 27 mars 2020

ksrehman | March 27, 2020 The magic was (mostly) in the software ...

That is exactly what Darren Palmer, the head of Ford Mach-E project said in an interview with Teslanomics Ben Sullins.

https://youtu.be/zhTomO4thbY?t=4

The production delay from the Trump Pandemic is giving them three more months to tweak it into shape. Ford engineers in MI are posting picks of all the Mach-E pre-prodution and prototypes in their garages, They drive them around and test as software engineers ride virtual shotgun.

JAD | 27 mars 2020

The Bolt isn't a bad car either and should be worth a lot in 30-40 years as Ford and GM are keeping them very rare limited production vehicles. That was the point of this thread, not yet another debate as to whether they are good vehicles. If they don't build a million of them and soon, it doesn't matter.

Having a cure for Covid-19 ready by 2030 isn't especially helpful.

FISHEV | 27 mars 2020

And Bolt is coming out with a new Model and more range on the old Model.

https://ww.electrek.co/2020/03/04/chevy-bolt-euv-announced-with-supercru...

https://ww.electrek.co/2019/08/22/chevy-bolt-ev-2020-range-increase/#

Lack Power seats and dynamic cruise were why I didn't buy a Bolt. The FWD makes it better choice than Model 3 RWD.

I could live with the 50kWh max charge rate, 200mph. I often find myself only one at Tesla SC and getting just 65kWh.

andy.connor.e | 27 mars 2020

Maybe next year they will sell 18k bolts instead of 16k

Earl and Nagin ... | 27 mars 2020

@ksrehman, posinator, and all of the other software aficionados,
You are only partially right and I'll describe how it happened and how it relates to the large automobile OEMs:
Having been in that Nokia -vs- Apple revolution,here's how I saw it go down.
Apple (as well as intel), for years had failed miserably to get into the wireless business. This is because all they understood (and still do) is moderately reliable software running on platform operating systems that operate on a 'best effort' basis. This software is extremely portable and lends itself to rich user interfaces and enables many developers to develop code which all works most of the time.
The core software that operates the network side of a cellular phone won't tolerate the unreliable performance or any latency or jitter in timing. Therefore, it requires a real-time operating system with strict priority, interoperability, and timing constraints. Such software is very expensive to build and very boring to run.
Apple and Intel acquired many different companies with the necessary real-time expertise to develop the technology but in the process of assimilation, killed the real-time development by forcing their incompatible development process upon the engineers.
Nokia, Motorola, and Ericsson and the rest of the initial cellular manufacturing companies had huge teams of engineers who had figured out how to do the real-time software (as well as its associated hardware that worked close to it). Their corporate culture and management couldn't tolerate the thought of 3rd parties selling software to run on their phones so they locked it all out for the most part.
Like the large automobile OEMs, however, these formerly vertically integrated cellphone designers/manufacturers were eventually overrun by financial managers who started outsourcing all of the design to 3rd party ODMs (Original Design Manufacturers) in Taiwan and China.
As a result, the engineers who how to develop the real-time software and hardware went to the chip manufacturers and embedded it all in chips (hardware). This enabled Apple, Google, and Handspring ( after the Palm was acquired and their finance folks shed the original engineering core team) to purchase chips that handled the real-time software and hardware and put their own platform environments on top of it.
This created the Smartphone which, obviously dominates today. It wasn't just software: It was a balanced blend of the right kinds of software at the right times, coupled with the right hardware.
The automobile OEMs are kind of like Nokia, Motorola, and Ericsson in that they've settled in their ways and have quit hiring expensive engineers to take risks on innovation.
Tesla, came up from the outside, vertically integrated with all of the necessary kinds of software, and is driving it all forward.
At some point Tesla is probably going to have to open up their platform software to 3rd parties to address the larger software market but in the mean time, being highly risky, I can see why they are holding it tight.
If Tesla gets overrun by risk-averse finance and business weanies and doesn't keep innovating but someone else does, it will be all over for them just as we've seen in the past with other industries.

lbowroom | 27 mars 2020

"The FWD makes it better choice than Model 3 RWD." for what application?

Is a FWD Camry better than a 3 series BMW?

WW_spb | 27 mars 2020

So funny, everything is some how better but Fish bought M3. Conclusion: Fish is an idiot.

M-A-B-MCMLXXX | 27 mars 2020

A FWD camry would be better than a RWD camry. Given the weight distribution of a M3, RWD is likely better on average than FWD would be.

RedShift | 27 mars 2020

RWD is superior when it comes to driving dynamics.

FWD is PERCEIVED to be better in recovery from a spin, thus marginally better suited in inclement weather driving for a layperson.

BMW’s ideal 50/50 static weight distribution coupled with RWD was the best setup for easily accessed (for around $30K) sporty driving.

Bighorn | 27 mars 2020

Oh I chased dividend yields at one point and got crucified. Not wanting to buy individual stocks particularly, short of a good buy and hold entry point.

Bighorn | 27 mars 2020

Sorry. Don’t mind me.

Bighorn | 27 mars 2020

FWD mostly matters in front engine cars. RWD Tesla greatly outperformed our FWD cars in the snow.

JAD | 27 mars 2020

FWD is the worst configuration. Its main advantage is cheap assembly as the entire drive train can be dropped into the hood as a unit. Virtually no nice car has ever been FWD. All luxury and sports cars are RWD or AWD. In an ICE car AWD has several pluses and minuses, but in an EV, AWD is the answer unless every penny counts.

FWD does put more weight on the drive wheels for slippery conditions, but again, AWD is even better. FWD is cheap and that is its only advantage.

FISHEV | 27 mars 2020

"FWD mostly matters in front engine cars. RWD Tesla greatly outperformed our FWD cars in the snow."

My 2010 Prius would smoke it's butt. Took on Subaru's with that thing. And of course, no actual evidence of your claim and physics against you. FWD is always better than RWD in the snow and ice.

https://imgur.com/FOz3aVj

But to this topic and Ford and GM, the winter tests on the Mach-E are impressive and all the journos's that take are suitably impressed. As @ColeAK and @Howard have noted from their experience the AWD Tesla is bit RWD biased and it cause them to downgrade from a Subaru or Quattro. A RWD with no AWD to kick is going to be worse.

https://youtu.be/BR3skBYp3v4?t=107

Bighorn | 27 mars 2020

Nobody’s going to argue with a Porsche driving instructor. Rephrase: No sane person...

FISHEV | 27 mars 2020

Bighorn | March 27, 2020 Nobody’s going to argue with a Porsche driving instructor.

I hear his wife tells him what's what.

WW_spb | 27 mars 2020

No one clicks on your utube links Fishball

Earl and Nagin ... | 27 mars 2020

@JAD,
I have to slightly disagree with your emphasis on "its only advantage": A cheap ICE car or pickup with FWD will generally perform better at slow speeds in heavy snow and ice than a cheap ICE car with RWD because of the weight as you point out. In college, I was thrilled when I was able to replace my hand-me-down RWD with an FWD and I could go straight up the steep hills in the winter instead of sideways, jockeying the parking brake to find a little traction the whole way up.
The reason I suspect that Tesla RWD cars do so well in heavy snow and ice is because their weight is so evenly distributed that there is plenty of traction at the rear wheels.
I've never driven a 'nice' ICE car in heavy snow or ice be they FWD or RWD so I can't speak about them.
I'm definitely not going to argue with you when there is reasonable traction available.

JAD | 27 mars 2020

@Earl, I agree, FWD can outperform RWD, but the best choice is AWD. FWD is ONLY the best choice for price, it isn't always the worst choice, RWD in snow is often the worst setup. Usually the best choice is AWD, especially with a EV.

TeslaTap.com | 27 mars 2020

There there is 60% of the country that never gets snow and has zero concern in the buying process. I can't see any value in a compromised FSD car that might work slightly better in the snow when I never drive in snow. So those make FSD are basically forcing poor handling for 60% of owners, and poor handling for all non-snow driving.

jordanrichard | 27 mars 2020

FISHEV, your admiration for the Bolt should be directed towards LG since part from the body, it’s all LG.

Also, lets not give too much love to GM or Ford for their stepping up to the plate to make ventilators. They aren’t building them, they are just lending their expertise in mass production and coordinating the sourcing and assembling. The head of Ford even admitted that when asked how many they can make.

Pages