Tesla Continues to collapse.

[rrrr]

You guys are fucking great entertainment.Keep it up.

I give up.

 

[KENDOG689]

I give up.

Please don't its great info and love the banter!

 

[Mandelon]

http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/tesla/

 

[JayBreww]

Heard they just let go of %9 of their employees.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Danger Dave]

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-44511200

 

[pronstar]

The majority of my new company’s trucks are making money delivering Model 3’s from the factory to dealerships all across the country [emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[J.P.]

Tesla is the only company that loses gobs of money and the stock price goes up. The market is not rigged..

 

[thmterry]

http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.d...-manufacturing-sabotage-litigation-technology

Musk says Tesla hit with 'extensive' sabotage by employee

SAN FRANCISCO -- A disgruntled Tesla Inc. employee broke into the company’s manufacturing operating system and sent highly sensitive data to unknown third parties, according to an email Elon Musk sent to staff.

The worker, who had been denied a promotion, did “quite extensive and damaging sabotage” to Tesla’s operations, Musk wrote in the memo late Sunday, which was reported in full by CNBC. While a spokesman declined to comment, an employee who asked not to be identified confirmed he received the email.

Tesla is conducting an in-depth investigation into the matter, including whether the employee was acting alone, with others at the company or with any outside organizations, Musk wrote.

“As you know, there are a long list of organizations that want Tesla to die,” Musk said. He referenced Wall Street short sellers “who have already lost billions of dollars,” oil and gas companies that “don’t love” to see solar power and electric cars advancing, and automakers that produce gasoline and diesel vehicles. “If they’re willing to cheat so much about emissions, maybe they’re willing to cheat in other ways?” he said.

Musk’s email about sabotage comes as Tesla races to ramp up production of its mission critical Model 3 sedan to 5,000 cars a week. Last week, Musk announced that he was reorganizing the company and reducing Tesla’s workforce by 9 percent in a bid for profitability. More than 3,000 workers lost their jobs, and Tesla’s WARN notice filed with the state of California revealed that over 500 employees in Fremont and Palo Alto were dismissed.

‘Strange incident’

A day later, Musk invoked a late tech titan in urging workers to keep an eye out for any funny business after a fire briefly halted car output. In a “strange incident that was hard to explain,” Musk wrote that a small fire on a manufacturing line had stopped production for several hours.


IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
FCA sales advance 11% behind Jeep, retail
FCA's U.S. retail sales in May rose 10 percent to 167,785 and accounted for 78 percent of total volume. Fleet sales accounted for 22 percent of total sales, a slight uptick from 21 percent for May 2017.
Read more >

“Could just be a random event, but as Andy Grove said, ‘Only the paranoid survive,’” Musk wrote Monday, referring to the late chairman and CEO of Intel Corp. “Please be on the alert for anything that’s not in the best interests of our company.”

Tesla can ill afford manufacturing setbacks now. It’s racing to meet a target to build 5,000 Model 3 sedans a week by the end of this month, a goal Musk told shareholders on June 5 that the company was “quite likely” to achieve. The company’s forecasts for generating profit and cash in the third and fourth quarters of this year are based on this objective, and falling short would reignite concerns about whether the company may need to raise more capital.

Smoldering

A Tesla spokeswoman confirmed the authenticity of the Monday email, which CNBC reported first.

Smoldering in an air filter in the welding area of Tesla’s body line was extinguished in a matter of seconds, she said. Production has resumed and there were no injuries or significant equipment damage, she added.

Tesla shares climbed for a seventh straight day, adding 3.5 percent to $370.83 on Monday. More than $19 billion has been added to the automaker’s market capitalization in the past month, in part due to Musk’s confidence at the annual shareholders’ meeting that the Model 3 would meet production targets. In a tweet Sunday, Musk warned that those betting against the company "have about three weeks before their short position explodes."

Tesla is no stranger to concerns about sabotage. A former oil services executive named Todd Katz was sued by Tesla in 2016 impersonating Musk in an email to former Tesla CFO Jason Wheeler. In the lawsuit, Tesla said the email was part of an oil-industry effort to undermine the company’s push for energy-efficient transportation alternatives.






















“Could just be a random event, but as Andy Grove said, ‘Only the paranoid survive,’” Musk wrote Monday, referring to the late chairman and CEO of Intel Corp. “Please be on the alert for anything that’s not in the best interests of our company.”

Tesla can ill afford manufacturing setbacks now. It’s racing to meet a target to build 5,000 Model 3 sedans a week by the end of this month, a goal Musk told shareholders on June 5 that the company was “quite likely” to achieve. The company’s forecasts for generating profit and cash in the third and fourth quarters of this year are based on this objective, and falling short would reignite concerns about whether the company may need to raise more capital.

Smoldering

A Tesla spokeswoman confirmed the authenticity of the Monday email, which CNBC reported first.

Smoldering in an air filter in the welding area of Tesla’s body line was extinguished in a matter of seconds, she said. Production has resumed and there were no injuries or significant equipment damage, she added.

Tesla shares climbed for a seventh straight day, adding 3.5 percent to $370.83 on Monday. More than $19 billion has been added to the automaker’s market capitalization in the past month, in part due to Musk’s confidence at the annual shareholders’ meeting that the Model 3 would meet production targets. In a tweet Sunday, Musk warned that those betting against the company "have about three weeks before their short position explodes."

Tesla is no stranger to concerns about sabotage. A former oil services executive named Todd Katz was sued by Tesla in 2016 impersonating Musk in an email to former Tesla CFO Jason Wheeler. In the lawsuit, Tesla said the email was part of an oil-industry effort to undermine the company’s push for energy-efficient transportation alternatives.

 

[KENDOG689]

Ahhhhhhhhhh BULLSHIT.

 

[rrrr]

The conspiracy theory is being mooted to explain why the end of June arrived and they're still producing less than 1,200 Model 3s weekly instead of 5,000. They've fallen on their ass and can't get up.

Source: UD's favorite, Bloomberg. Just two weeks ago they had production at 3,300, with many weeks approaching that number. I don't know what changed, but June production numbers are radically different than they were a few days ago.


https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-tesla-tracker/

 

[sirbob]

Corporate espionage…

Next up, locust.

 

[SBMech]

Director Michael Morris' Tesla Model S catches fire in LA
Electric automaker investigating 'extraordinarily unusual occurrence'


Read more: http://autoweek.com/article/luxury/...s-tesla-model-s-catches-fire-la#ixzz5IsuZrk7P

Poof...another one goes up in flames...this one all by itself with no accident or impact.

 

[j21black]

This thread sucks without Uncle Dave's input. I really enjoy keeping up with it.

 

[Uncle Dave]

The conspiracy theory is being mooted to explain why the end of June arrived and they're still producing less than 1,200 Model 3s weekly instead of 5,000. They've fallen on their ass and can't get up.

Source: UD's favorite, Bloomberg. Just two weeks ago they had production at 3,300, with many weeks approaching that number. I don't know what changed, but June production numbers are radically different than they were a few days ago.


https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-tesla-tracker/

Are the big fonts in 508 supposed to be anything but fully annoying?

I wouldn't say "favorite" Id say the one I trust the most given the lack of anything more coherent supplied by the peanut gallery.

Yesterday it was at 3076 for the week.

If one reads further blooberg changed their model and retroactively applied and made changes.

Could be they blew it all along or somewhere I read they reset the line every week with the particular features.

A second assembly line for the dual motor model was completed last week - that should impact the numbers.

Well see in any case.


UD

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

My takeaway from the last 15 posts or so is to not get in, drive next to, or park next to a Model 3 that was built or will be built in Q2 and Q3 of 2018....

 

[Raffit78]

I thought the plant in China is supposed to be up and going already? I would assume the China plant should supply the missing weekly goal?

 

[Uncle Dave]

I thought the plant in China is supposed to be up and going already? I would assume the China plant should supply the missing weekly goal?

Dont know about that, would be interested to hear of anyone has any data.

- but did hear the new model 3 line for the dual motor bad mofos started up last week in Fremont.

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-performance-production-new-assembly-line-elon-musk/

So thats 2 lines going in the US.

 

[highvoltagehands]

Dont know about that, would be interested to hear of anyone has any data.

- but did hear the new model 3 line for the dual motor bad mofos started up last week in Fremont.

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-performance-production-new-assembly-line-elon-musk/

So thats 2 lines going in the US.

This sounds like positive news for Tesla and probably why I just heard of it. General News and Failure Fans won't post this kind of news, are kinda quiet. Wonder How many people knew Elon had this nice little surprise up his sleeve and was coming online ahead of schedule?

 

[DLow]

My takeaway from the last 15 posts or so is to not get in, drive next to, or park next to a Model 3 that was built or will be built in Q2 and Q3 of 2018....

Yeah, you don’t want to be anywhere near a Tesla or ay other EV or hybrid when it catches on fire either. It’s a huge problem. Those batteries produce a very large thermal reaction when they go poof, and have really, really bad products of combustion. They produced environmental and decontamination problems that we are only starting to identify. It’s another big issue that is being swept under the rug by Tesla as well as all of the other electric/hybrid mfgs. But, somehow EVs are better for the environment... uh no.

 

[Uncle Dave]

Totally agreed lithium run aways are nasty, but I donut see lots of evidence of them happening a lot in cars. Cell phones maybe.
Im not sure there is a grand conspiracy to sweep the issues of a lithium fire "under the rug".

Airlines, multiple semi companies, car and power companies, and almost every cell phone use them now so I would suspect its pretty well known.
We live in a world full of lithium batteries everywhere.

We've already talked about battery fires and the data I can find says you are 5 X less likely to have a fire in a battery based car than a gasoline car.

The amount of energy in terms of joules in the battery is only 10% of what a 20-ish gallon tank contains.

Deaths by battery fire alone are either rare or I can't find them.
Deaths with battery fires seem to be such that the passenger(s) were killed by the impact anyway - the battery fire was incidental

Outside of catastrophic accidents they don't seem to "just go poof" The rest of the battery fire alone incident I can find are-

running over an iron bar -pierced the pack- occupants had plenty of time and walked away
running over a tow hitch - pierced the pack- same thing - occupants walked away
mystery fire last week - occupant walked away
Some charging issue fires have happened.

Sounds like you may have some data to look at if so please put it up.

Im always ready to change my feeling on the subject based on data.

UD

 

[Uncle Dave]

This sounds like positive news for Tesla and probably why I just heard of it. General News and Failure Fans won't post this kind of news, are kinda quiet. Wonder How many people knew Elon had this nice little surprise up his sleeve and was coming online ahead of schedule?

There won't be much positive reported in this thread - this is a hater thread.

Also not circled back on was that Tesla was cleared in the recent fatality where the car hit the already collapsed barrier.

Guy had his hands off the wheel for some time - pretty dumb when in the left lane after an automated slow down due to traffic had already occurred.

UD

 

[SBMech]

There won't be much positive reported in this thread - this is a hater thread.

Also not circled back on was that Tesla was cleared in the recent fatality where the car hit the already collapsed barrier.

Guy had his hands off the wheel for some time - pretty dumb when in the left lane after an automated slow down due to traffic had already occurred.

UD

You could have posted up those items UD, no one has told you not to?

Not really a hater thread, I started this post just watching a new venture that affects MY industry directly, and how I do business.

I do not care for his business plan, or how he does business subsidized by tax payers money, but to give credit where due, he capitalized on loop holes that current manufacturers were using already. I also do not believe EV's are any safer or better for the environment than modern vehicles.

I like keeping tabs on how things are going with them, mostly from the standpoint of how they are still doing business while loosing money constantly and never showing a profit. It's interesting to me to see how far someone can take something they have built and convinced people to invest in it.

 

[Uncle Dave]

Why would I ?

Being a lone contrarian puts the burden on me to refute everything I see that isnt 3rd party data based.

There a ton of really smart guys on here that can make a compelling argument for tesla to success but no ones stepped up as it just isnt entertaining because it turns from discussion to personal attacks (like in the politics section when anyone disagrees)

This site simply cannot seem to diasgreee without being disagreeable and as such drives away lively debate to other forums.

Whats the point when we rehash closed subjects over and over ?

I get your point but when we talk about subsidy money there is no discussion about all this topic as a whole.

How would you rather spend subsidy money ? Enrichening other countries headquarters - or creating jobs and product in America?

There is a lot of mixing how much investor money vs subsidy money he gets. The money he loses is almost all investor money - they have a lot.
Anyone building giant plants that employ thousands gets subsidy money. LOTS of American jobs on the payroll here - no talk of that.

How much time does it take to be profitable in a brand new never accomplished before endeavor? Tesla started in 2010.

Since 2010 pretty much everyone here has said he could never do - exactly what he has done.

Its the lack of alternatives missing from this discussion that should be an eye opener.

Guys are quick to say what they don't like but rarely to never point out a better solution.

An EV car is only as clean as the grid powering it, we can all agree. If the grid is clean it can be pretty clean.

If its from my roof - its very clean.

UD

 

[Uncle Dave]

Oh and SB mech I thoroughly enjoy my conversations with you all over the forums.

I don't post at the OP alone in this situation but to the guys at large following the thread.

UD

 

[grumpy88]

Why would I ?

Being a lone contrarian puts the burden on me to refute everything I see that isnt 3rd party data based.

There a ton of really smart guys on here that can make a compelling argument for tesla to success but no ones stepped up as it just isnt entertaining because it turns from discussion to personal attacks (like in the politics section when anyone disagrees)

This site simply cannot seem to diasgreee without being disagreeable and as such drives away lively debate to other forums.

Whats the point when we rehash closed subjects over and over ?

I get your point but when we talk about subsidy money there is no discussion about all this topic as a whole.

How would you rather spend subsidy money ? Enrichening other countries headquarters - or creating jobs and product in America?

There is a lot of mixing how much investor money vs subsidy money he gets. The money he loses is almost all investor money - they have a lot.
Anyone building giant plants that employ thousands gets subsidy money. LOTS of American jobs on the payroll here - no talk of that.

How much time does it take to be profitable in a brand new never accomplished before endeavor? Tesla started in 2010.

Since 2010 pretty much everyone here has said he could never do - exactly what he has done.

Its the lack of alternatives missing from this discussion that should be an eye opener.

Guys are quick to say what they don't like but rarely to never point out a better solution.

An EV car is only as clean as the grid powering it, we can all agree. If the grid is clean it can be pretty clean.

If its from my roof - its very clean.

UD

Besides the power from the grid there is also the battery that is not exactly " green "

 

[SBMech]

Why would I ?

Being a lone contrarian puts the burden on me to refute everything I see that isnt 3rd party data based.

There a ton of really smart guys on here that can make a compelling argument for tesla to success but no ones stepped up as it just isnt entertaining because it turns from discussion to personal attacks (like in the politics section when anyone disagrees)

This site simply cannot seem to diasgreee without being disagreeable and as such drives away lively debate to other forums.

Whats the point when we rehash closed subjects over and over ?

I get your point but when we talk about subsidy money there is no discussion about all this topic as a whole.

How would you rather spend subsidy money ? Enrichening other countries headquarters - or creating jobs and product in America?

There is a lot of mixing how much investor money vs subsidy money he gets. The money he loses is almost all investor money - they have a lot.
Anyone building giant plants that employ thousands gets subsidy money. LOTS of American jobs on the payroll here - no talk of that.

How much time does it take to be profitable in a brand new never accomplished before endeavor? Tesla started in 2010.

Since 2010 pretty much everyone here has said he could never do - exactly what he has done.

Its the lack of alternatives missing from this discussion that should be an eye opener.

Guys are quick to say what they don't like but rarely to never point out a better solution.

An EV car is only as clean as the grid powering it, we can all agree. If the grid is clean it can be pretty clean.

If its from my roof - its very clean.

UD

Excellent points UD. I agree completely about the manf subsidy money to create American Jobs. I would much rather see it stay here.

Some small points of contention however on the power grid issues, by far we still use "dirty" electricity for the bulk of our needs, and as the EV Fleet grows, especially if his Semi is a success, we will put an even larger strain on our currently overtaxed grids.

"Today, solar energy provides five-tenths of 1 percent of the total energy consumed in the United States.[1] "

http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/topics/encyclopedia/solar/

We have a long ways to go for any real progress to be made as far as solar goes. Then there is the cost of the panels, and the materials and processes used in manf them, all pretty toxic.

https://www.chemservice.com/news/2015/02/learn-which-chemicals-make-solar-power-possible/

I do enjoy conversing with you as well UD, you force me to go "non bullshit mode"

 

[j21black]

Oh and SB mech I thoroughly enjoy my conversations with you all over the forums.

I don't post at the OP alone in this situation but to the guys at large following the thread.

UD

Thanks for the "Silent" Shout out!

 

[Uncle Dave]

Sure there is toxicity in creation but the cost of creating energy that solid state supply of energy vs. continual burn of fuel to get the same energy has a definite ROI that will only increase. The two compared over the life of the panel tilts way toward the panel- or the battery.

One offers a payback the other does not.

Well circle back to the all the guys here on RDP talking about what comes off their roofs.

Lets get to green in a second -Lets just say for now we dont give a shit about green.

Range and recharge is the issue - not performance and number of total moving parts.

Were pretty much LA to Havasu in one shot in the newest stuff. I almost always stop at least once anway for something on a trip.
In a one shot deal the discussion is over.
You charge at each side at you house and the vehicle doesn't see a charger anywhere else.

if you ever driven a battery powered car they are SUPERIOR in nearly every way imaginable under your right foot.

Ok back to green
Here is California's entire participation schedule.

What % green is a 100% gas car?

Based this schedule I can credibly claim that this vehicle is WAY greener than a 100% dino powered car. Sure its not 100% "green" but it is significantly greener even plugged into the wall - at least where I live.

If one compares this to a 100% oil burning car the lifetime greenness is hugely in favor of the electric car as it has some given percent of renewables in its daily diet vs a 0% sustainable device in terms of fuel burn.

Not every state is the same - lets say you have a choice between 100% coal based car or a 100% oil based car which do you chose?


UD

 

[Uncle Dave]

Thanks for the "Silent" Shout out!

This has deeper roots than that.

UD

 

[thmterry]

Are the big fonts in 508 supposed to be anything but fully annoying?

Sorry about that, it is the way it copied

 

[SBMech]

Sure there is toxicity in creation but the cost of creating energy that solid state supply of energy vs. continual burn of fuel to get the same energy has a definite ROI that will only increase. The two compared over the life of the panel tilts way toward the panel- or the battery.

One offers a payback the other does not.

Well circle back to the all the guys here on RDP talking about what comes off their roofs.

Lets get to green in a second -Lets just say for now we dont give a shit about green.

Range and recharge is the issue - not performance and number of total moving parts.

Were pretty much LA to Havasu in one shot in the newest stuff. I almost always stop at least once anway for something on a trip.
In a one shot deal the discussion is over.
You charge at each side at you house and the vehicle doesn't see a charger anywhere else.

if you ever driven a battery powered car they are SUPERIOR in nearly every way imaginable under your right foot.

Ok back to green
Here is California's entire participation schedule.

What % green is a 100% gas car?

Based this schedule I can credibly claim that this vehicle is WAY greener than a 100% dino powered car. Sure its not 100% "green" but it is significantly greener even plugged into the wall - at least where I live.

If one compares this to a 100% oil burning car the lifetime greenness is hugely in favor of the electric car as it has some given percent of renewables in its daily diet vs a 0% sustainable device in terms of fuel burn.

Not every state is the same - lets say you have a choice between 100% coal based car or a 100% oil based car which do you chose?


UD
View attachment 656808

That is interesting UD, that chart you showed shows CA made more solar energy in 2016 than was made in the entire country in 2015.....

"The Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates distributed solar capacity at 8,379 megawatts in 2015 and distributed solar generation as 12,141 million kilowatt hours. "
http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/topics/encyclopedia/solar/

Your chart says CA made 19,783 GWh in 2016, that's 7 million more than the entire US made in 2015. Do you really think we increased our solar energy production that much in a single year? Much less that CA used and made all of it? Yet they still imported some as well?

Or could it possibly be that someone is fudging numbers a bit?

About the other points you made about being "green" dino vehicles are still salvaged, much of their components get recycled or reused as used parts for many years.

Your EV still needs bearings, grease, brake pads, thousands of feet of electrical wire and windings, insulation of said wiring, rubber components for drive train mounting, suspension, oil inside the shocks etc...millions of semi conductors and printed circuit boards for the multiple control units and monitors ( that shit is toxic to make as wwll you know), the list is fairly large about how much "dino oil" is actually used in producing an EV.

They are not NEARLY as clean as the media, and fans of PC correct bullshit like "carbon foot print" SJW would love to claim.

Sustainable is a dirty word, so far we are not even close to using up all the oil on the planet, and our use only goes down each year.

Personally I believe that pulling "free" oil up out of the ground to refine is still cheaper to sustain than all the toxic waste made by producing an EV.

The EV fleet is very small comparatively to gasoline vehicles, it will be interesting to see how well they hold up in comparison to the longevity of gasoline vehicles, many that are 50+ years old still driving happily along with proper care and maintenance.

I have retired 3 Prius this year that were 7-9 years old, not worth replacing the main battery due to the sheer cost to the consumer. I am curious to see how Tesla vehicles hold up now that they are getting closer to that age.

 

[SBMech]

Just as a side note, my 91 toyota pickup with 455,000 miles on it gets 28 MPG and has not needed a single major component replaced, original cat etc on it.

They can build better gasoline vehicles, they did for a short time, but realized they were going to put themselves out of work....

The really do engineer vehicles with a lifespan in mind now IMO.

 

[rivermobster]

Just as a side note, my 91 toyota pickup with 455,000 miles on it gets 28 MPG and has not needed a single major component replaced, original cat etc on it.

They can build better gasoline vehicles, they did for a short time, but realized they were going to put themselves out of work....

The really do engineer vehicles with a lifespan in mind now IMO.

After working for Toyota/Lexus for years, along with a few other manufacturers thrown in for good measure...

I truly believe Toyota is the only company that does Not build cars with planned obsolescence in mind.

 

[riverroyal]

I’m not gonna read ever post. To much blah blah

If tax payers are fueling Tesla what did it cost me? $1? 5$? 100?
I’d pay 100 to have the thousands of Americans getting pay checks from Tesla. Why not. If it keeps the work here

 

[Uncle Dave]

Not my data Californias. last updated June 23 17. Perhaps it is off. Lets find a piece of data we can agree on.

I should have put up the source - here http://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/total_system_power.html

the data you posted was published in 2015 ? think I believe is countrywide and Im not certain what the data collection stopped.

"green" isnt just solar its wind as well biomass and other renewables.

I didnt talk bout salvage, both vehicles will get salvaged and recycled at life end.

Look at the chart that show solar uptick it shows till 2015 and extrapolate went to by now- the curve and trend is pretty clear.

Nobody ever said an electric car wouldnt need maintenance?!?!?? - only that is has less moving parts- and it does - by a lot.
Entropy and wear happen the less moving parts - the better regardless of the power source.

Nobody ever said they were any more green to build-maybe they are a little less green because of batteries - but every tank of fuel is much greener.

ON what planet is oil "free" ? You cannot mean that . Its one of it not the most heavily subsidized resources on planet earth.

The Arabs arent building 200 story skyscrapers artificial islands and ski resorts in the gobi desert off of free, and the entire 5th fleet carrier battle group stationed in the middle east has cost us trillions- solar and tesla subsidies a a fart in a windstorm comparatively.

Im not saying we can completely get off oil either not going to happen for a long time but we can start.

UD

 

[Uncle Dave]

After working for Toyota/Lexus for years, along with a few other manufacturers thrown in for good measure...

I truly believe Toyota is the only company that does Not build cars with planned obsolescence in mind.

My toyota product are phenomenal. I love my lexus.

UD

 

[Bobby V]

I’m not gonna read ever post. To much blah blah

If tax payers are fueling Tesla what did it cost me? $1? 5$? 100?
I’d pay 100 to have the thousands of Americans getting pay checks from Tesla. Why not. If it keeps the work here

Yep. My buddy is a pipefitter out of the Colton local. He and many others spent months working at the Tesla project in Reno. $$$$

 

[lbhsbz]

After working for Toyota/Lexus for years, along with a few other manufacturers thrown in for good measure...

I truly believe Toyota is the only company that does Not build cars with planned obsolescence in mind.

x3

 

[SBMech]

ON what planet is oil "free" ? You cannot mean that . Its one of it not the most heavily subsidized resources on planet earth.

It's free in the sense that if you own the property other than drilling it out and refining it, the basic material is free. Of course there is a cost for everything.

Every single component in an EV has to be manufactured, many parts of it are made from petroleum in the first place, and more toxic waste is produced from making them when compared to a gasoline vehicle as far as a component level. Those manufacturing facilities all use huge amounts of energy to create those parts, many are not clean either as most parts made outside of the USA are made in completely dirty energy countries. You have to factor in everything if you want the real comparison.

In the end, they are just as bad in almost every way compared to any other vehicle manufacturer IMO. The only difference is that they do not use carbon based fuel as a power supply....unless you consider that most of the power generated in the USA is still made using said carbon based power.

Where is the break even? I don't know...100k miles or more? And in the end they are just as bad for the environment when they have to be disposed of.

 

[pronstar]

Our 15,000 sf facility in Dallas was literally filled with Mode 3s earlier this week.

That car is a LOT smaller than I thought it would be.

They sill had the wrappers on them so didn’t really have the chance to see too much of them otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[pronstar]

After working for Toyota/Lexus for years, along with a few other manufacturers thrown in for good measure...

I truly believe Toyota is the only company that does Not build cars with planned obsolescence in mind.

That 1,000,000 mile tundra tear down sold me.

The engine tested to near-new specification.

I’ll be buying one in the next month or so.
Used, no need to buy new if they’re built THAT stout [emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[rcmike]

Getting these for the tow vehicle...

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

Our 15,000 sf facility in Dallas was literally filled with Mode 3s earlier this week.

That car is a LOT smaller than I thought it would be.

They sill had the wrappers on them so didn’t really have the chance to see too much of them otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

They are smaller than a 3 series BMW for sure.

 

[SBMech]

That 1,000,000 mile tundra tear down sold me.

The engine tested to near-new specification.

I’ll be buying one in the next month or so.
Used, no need to buy new if they’re built THAT stout [emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

What year?

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

What year?

2007

 

[SBMech]

2007

5.7? They are unreal. I have a few customers with them, best vehicle they ever bought to date for them.

 

[pronstar]

5.7? They are unreal. I have a few customers with them, best vehicle they ever bought to date for them.

I thought 5.7 but was the 4.7.
Both designs are shared with Lexus, and have proven to be bulletproof.

The only difference is the Lexus engines were cast and built in Japan, while the ones in the Tundra were cast and built in the US.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[DLow]

Totally agreed lithium run aways are nasty, but I donut see lots of evidence of them happening a lot in cars. Cell phones maybe.
Im not sure there is a grand conspiracy to sweep the issues of a lithium fire "under the rug".

Airlines, multiple semi companies, car and power companies, and almost every cell phone use them now so I would suspect its pretty well known.
We live in a world full of lithium batteries everywhere.

We've already talked about battery fires and the data I can find says you are 5 X less likely to have a fire in a battery based car than a gasoline car.

The amount of energy in terms of joules in the battery is only 10% of what a 20-ish gallon tank contains.

Deaths by battery fire alone are either rare or I can't find them.
Deaths with battery fires seem to be such that the passenger(s) were killed by the impact anyway - the battery fire was incidental

Outside of catastrophic accidents they don't seem to "just go poof" The rest of the battery fire alone incident I can find are-

running over an iron bar -pierced the pack- occupants had plenty of time and walked away
running over a tow hitch - pierced the pack- same thing - occupants walked away
mystery fire last week - occupant walked away
Some charging issue fires have happened.

Sounds like you may have some data to look at if so please put it up.

Im always ready to change my feeling on the subject based on data.

UD

What data would you like me to put up specifically? I wasn’t implying that they spontaneously combust... what I’m saying is that when the battery cells are damaged, they may ignite instantly, in 5 minutes, or in 5 hours.

 

[rrrr]

I wouldn't say "favorite" Id say the one I trust the most given the lack of anything more coherent supplied by the peanut gallery.

Yesterday it was at 3076 for the week.

If one reads further blooberg changed their model and retroactively applied and made changes.

Could be they blew it all along or somewhere I read they reset the line every week with the particular features.

UD

Bloomberg indicates was using corrupted data for the last few months and now it's been corrected.

According to them the changes will play out over time and reflect a smaller upset of the numbers. We shall see.

.

"People who have been watching our model closely week by week will notice what seems like an even more dramatic change: a 40 percent drop in this week's estimated weekly rate compared with what we were previously reporting. That's actually due to a much smaller change to our methodology than it first appears.

Tesla hasn't registered a new batch of VINs in an unusually long time. Using our previous methodology, the model would have eventually accounted for this delay with a retroactive downward correction. With our new model, such delays in registrations will be reflected in real time rather than retroactively. This change has negligible impact to our long-term estimates and is meant to make our estimates a bit more stable."

.

Regardless of the reason, your most trusted source now has production at 1,566 Model 3s per week, today, June 20, ten days before the second quarter ends and the 5,000 weekly production forecast bell tolls for Elon Musk.

His desperate claim of corporate sabotage a few days ago was the last refuge of the damned.

 

[Uncle Dave]

Bloombergs also basically says they'll revisit after the Q2 announce and update then.
There could be several reasons their count is off, including tesl not registering bulk numbers they go into the whys below the chart.

In light of no other ongoing counting source that shares its methodology - Ill still put bloomberg up as the one to look at.

If he hasn't done better than that he's in trouble.

On the "sabotage" - Im not so sure it all made up the guy has admitted what he did and they are going after him - so unless he's a mere fall guy something else is up with that.

Well see after the Q2 announce in a couple weeks wether he's pulling it off or running in circles.


UD