Anyone really believe Ford could make a Truck that could compete with Tesla's?

Discussion in 'General' started by 101101, Oct 5, 2018.

  1. 101101

    101101 Member

    The idea that Ford could make a truck that would be competitive with what Tesla will offer seems like its not even a remote possibility. Tesla is part of the solution Ford is part of the problem, Tesla is incalculably more valuable than Ford. To restore the value to Ford you need a time machine to take you back in time.

    Tesla has reached escape velocity. Its foregone that Tesla will have the best selling car in the US soon. The best selling car in the US will be an electric car quite possibly before the end of the year and it will be a Tesla.

    Recently an industry person took a reluctant look at Tesla and what he found shocked him.
    He estimated that Tesla was a full decade ahead of the other automakers. That's more than the gap between iPhone and Blackberry when the iPhone took RIM out.

    Tesla with its electrics is like Edison perfecting the electric light bulb. The idea has come into the consciousness and it can't be pushed out now.

    The reason the petrol industry hates Tesla and Musk is they both stand for liberation.
    Petrol is about rent seekers using their property through rent seeking to turn everyone else into property. Tesla puts an end to that theft, a theft that deprives people not only of their quality life and standard of living but the majority of what makes a life livable and for a result that is less than nothing.
     
  2. DaleL

    DaleL Member

    From AutoBlog: "2018 Ford F-150 and F-Series trucks on pace for record sales Ford's on pace to beat a 14-year-old record." How many? an estimated 941,100 units. Ford manufactures and sells a lot of other vehicles, 6.6 million in 2017.

    Tesla still has not built a $35,000 family car. Although an electric pickup with all wheel drive would be awesome, I'm not confident that Tesla will be either first or cost competitive. At some point Tesla will have to pay off some of its enormous debt.
     
    Cypress likes this.
  3. interestedinEV

    interestedinEV Active Member

    I normally do not try to get into discussions where I will be flamed, irrespective of what I say. However let me say this and leave it there. Reality is not one dimensional factor. Here there are a minimum of three dimensions that an affect eventual success: Capability, Intent (or strategy), Effort (or commitment)

    Does Ford have the capability? Yes and if they have gaps, they have ability to acquire the capability. As DaleL points out above, a company that makes 6.6 million cars here will have the engineering talent, the design/research & development facilities, the manufacturing wherewithal as well as the program management processes to do this. So there is no point in arguing if they can do it. The answer is they can.

    The better argument or question is "Will Ford commit the considerable effort and significant resources to developing a truck that will taken on Tesla?" I do not know the answer to that question, except that we have not publicly seen that commitment so far. So you may be right in your final conclusion but for the wrong reasons.
     
    Cypress likes this.
  4. gooki

    gooki Member

    No, because a Tesla is much more than just the electric drive.

    They are at least half a decade behind Tesla on the software side. I'm renting a 2018 Ford at the moment, and recently rented a Tesla Model S. Fords tech experience is terrible in comparison.

    Then we have the problem of building long range trucks. Ford simply will not have access to battery supply necessary to build compelling EV trucks for many years. And the just like the German's, their marketing team will insist on a non aerodynamic design to ensure brand integrity, which means even if they stuff a 120kw battery into it, it's range will still be sub 300 miles.

    Could Ford make an EV truck? Sure. Could they make a long range model? Yes, but in limited quantities (10,000 per year). Would it be competitive with a Tesla Truck? Highly unlikely.
     
  5. Pushmi-Pullyu

    Pushmi-Pullyu Well-Known Member

    There you go.

    Perhaps Ford can design a BEV pickup as compelling as Tesla could -- altho frankly I doubt it. But they don't have access to high volume battery supply.

    I certainly have no intention of flaming you, but I hope you don't object if I respectfully disagree upon occasion. If you ever feel as if I've stepped over the line -- and I have been known to get rather "sharp elbowed" at times with certain people -- then please do point this out.

    I think I can find room for debate on this point. You could say the same about GM and Volkswagen, insofar as having broad, deep engineering expertise and experience.

    And yet for its first BEV, GM went to an outside company, LG Chem/LG Electronics, to build the EV powertrain for its first BEV. The entire powertrain, from battery pack to electric motor.

    And yet Audi, which is a division of VW, produced as its first BEV the e-Tron, which has been criticized for very much looking like a first EV from a company, with a lot of remnants of gasmobile design in the car. Ditto for VW's e-Golf.

    VW says it's finally developing a line of BEVs from the ground up... but just announced a delay in putting the first of those into production.

    Look at what Sandy Munro said in his second "teardown" video of the Tesla Model 3. He talked about the amazing level of integration in how the car is put together physically. Likewise, various car reviewers have praised Tesla's cars -- not just the Model 3 -- for how well their controls and functions are integrated seamlessly into a gestalt. The expression "The whole is greater than the sum of its parts" fits Tesla perfectly.

    Other auto makers design their passenger vehicles one system at a time, and then put them together on the assembly line. Tesla designs their passenger vehicles with everything being the part of a whole, from structure to function to software controls.

    Legacy auto makers have had since 2012 (if not before) to come up with a car which can truly rival Tesla's cars. The best anyone has done, so far, has been the Jaguar I-Pace. And I'm not sure even that car deserves to be called a true Tesla rival. Close, yes. But whether or not it's a genuine first-tier BEV, like the Model S, X, or 3 -- that's a matter of opinion, and there's no consensus on that point.

     
  6. DaleL

    DaleL Member

    The specifications of the Jaguar I-Pace do make it a Tesla competitor. The Jaguar uses pouch type batteries similar to that which Tesla uses in fixed battery storage, not their cars. The battery can be charged from 0-80% in 40 minutes with a 100 kilowatt fast charger. The electric motors are more compact for the same power because they use rare earth permanent magnets. Jaguar is reported to have designed the motors in-house. The starting price for the Jaguar is $69,500. The starting "price" for the Tesla X is $79,500. Because of their cost, neither of these vehicles is for the masses.

    The fact that a niche luxury car company is going to market a competitor to a Tesla model indicates that the larger vehicle manufacturers can do the same, when it is profitable.
     
  7. interestedinEV

    interestedinEV Active Member

    May be my point is not coming through. We are confusing the impossible with the improbable.

    If and there is big IF, Ford decided to build their own battery factory and were willing to commit the resources for that, would the situation change? I know some Ford engineers and they are bright lot. I have confidence they could do it if they wanted to, but are they willing to do it.

    I agree with both @gooki and @Pushmi-Pullyu that is it unlikely to happen. My augment is that it is not the lack of technical talent or capability, it will not be the current shortage of batteries, it is the management's unwillingness to take the risk and commit the immense amount of resources needed. Catch up is always hard, but there are ways around it to short circuit the process. Ford could buy up a current manufacturer of EV technology. They could hire Talent for Tesla as Apple is apparently doing. For example, Google, Uber, Tesla were way ahead of GM in autonomous driving and the GM bought up Cruise, a Silicon Valley start up, that suddenly put GM in the game by giving them a serious jump start (pun intended). Are there technologies and companies that Ford can buy? Yes there are, there are companies that are already trying to design and develop such vehicles. It does not all have to be organic development.

    To me the question is will they? I agree with you all that is unlikely. I maintain that Tesla has a crushing debt burden and has not built up the second line of leadership around Elon. It is still a one man show. Hence there chinks in the armor that can be exploited. Elon is a visionary, but a group of dedicated individuals can give Tesla a run for their money.

    So here is where we are in agreement
    1. Tesla is far ahead of everyone else in the game
    2. Ford and others are constrained by their old ways of thinking and do not recognize the paradigm shift and think of EV's as an extension of ICE technology
    3. They do not have the talent, technology or the supply chain needed today to take on Tesla today.
    4. Hence it is improbable (unlikely as expressed) that Ford will catch up
    Here is where we may disagree from my position
    1. If management is willing to think out of the box they can build up their capabilities rapidly by
      1. Buying up companies with the technologies that they need to have
      2. Hiring talent from out side
      3. Committing needed resources
      4. And most of all putting the right leadership and management
    2. Ford does have some intrinsic strengths that can give them an edge if leveraged properly. Remember Ford was the company that decided to use Aluminum in their F-150's instead of steel. They did take a risk and it paid off.

    Ford bought in a CEO from outside in 2007 I believe and they managed to escape the 2008 crisis without going bankrupt. They need new leadership. I have zero confidence in the current leadership but things can change in a moment. So my point was that I agree with OP on his conclusions but not on his reasons.

    To reiterate, my money is not on Ford as the company that can take on Tesla, as they have not shown the commitment. The problem is they are making so much money on the pickups, that people would be reluctant to let go of a cash cow. Business history tells us that the best companies are those that are willing to move on from the technologies they created. A classic example is Microsoft. For decades they clung to the proprietary Windows and Office suites to make their money. Today, they are allowing other competitors to integrate with their technology (Alexa with Cortina etc) and bulk of their profits come from their cloud offerings rather then their operating system. IBM on the other hand does not seem to have made that shift.

    It may be Jaguar (yes the I-pace appears disappointing for now), but if Jaguar is willing to learn from their mistakes and continue to invest, then they have shot. The reason I am still bullish on Jaguar is their partnership with Google, Waymo is buying 20,000 I-paces over the next 3-4 years and fitting them with their autonomous driving technology, which Jaguar could license back. This will allow them to catch up or get ahead of Tesla in that area. The open question is if Tata's, the owner of Jaguar, has that appetite for a long drawn out fight. On the other hand, Jaguar has the most to loose if Tesla grows bigger as the natural targets for Tesla would be the smaller companies like Volvo, Jaguar and hence they have to act fast That is why Volvo wants to have an all BEV offering in 2022.


    @Pushmi-Pullyu we do agree on a lot and do disagree occasionally and but it is all in good spirit I have no problems with that and in fact welcome and encourage it, as that what discourse is about, the friendly exchange of ideas, so that consensus develops. On the other hand, there are discussions and posters that you are well aware off, where things get personal if one disagrees with them. I do not include you or @gooki as one of them. You do make yours points respectfully.
     
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2018
    bwilson4web likes this.
  8. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member Subscriber

    I think Tesla still has strong customer demand that release of the Model 3 is accelerating. For example, what I saw on Saturday at a 'Parade of Green Homes':
    [​IMG]
    Left to right:
    • Tesla Model 3 - in the two hours, the Tesla owner spent all but 15 minutes going over his car in depth.
    • 2014 BMW i3-REx - I spent barely 20 minutes introducing folks to the car; handed out 7-8 datasheets, and; sometimes felt like a curtesy versus real interest.
    • Ford C-Max - present, low interest.
    In effect, the Model 3 and other Tesla owners are the sales force and each vehicle, a local advertisement. Like Apple and the Macintosh, the owners became bullet proof to the honorable competition and the greatest advocates. This brings in the revenue stream needed to sustain and pay down debt.
    I have noticed that Elon is careful about who he brings in and easily lets them go. Sad to say, Steve Jobs was not so clever the first time. I've also observed he is OK with delegating to those who have earned his trust. For example: https://electrek.co/2018/09/07/tesla-management-changes-elon-musk-record-quarter-ignore-media/

    The most notable change is a promotion for long-time Tesla engineer is executive Jerome Guillen, who most recently has been leading the Tesla Semi program.

    He is now President of Automotive in charge of “all automotive operations and program management” and he will report directly to Elon.

    Bob Wilson
     
    interestedinEV likes this.
  9. interestedinEV

    interestedinEV Active Member

    No question that they have visionary leadership, no question that the have a cult like following of owners who are advocates for the product, no question that they have great technical talent, no question that they are far ahead of the competition. No question that they have some financial headwinds.

    What Tesla has not been tested yet is with real competition. Can their management deal with that? Elon has shown a tendency to shoot first and then ask questions, he is mercurial and not above letting his ego get in his way. Reports suggest that Elon threatened to quit Tesla if they compromised with SEC. He then hired Mark Cuban's lawyer and the Mark Cuban told Elon that he was better off compromising, it was not worth the battle. These may be attributes for a scrappy start up, not a leader on whose back there is a big target. If a manufacturer came out swinging with the right products, the right commitment, and the willingness to take Tesla head on, would Tesla prevail or will their dominance slip away? Lucid has a billion dollars to burn for example. Apple is supposedly developing a car and I cannot believe it is based on ICE technology. Wyamo has invested billions in self driving technology and can partner with someone, say Jagur to build a car from ground up. Even traditional manufacturers are getting into the game. GM may get religion and decide they need to buy their way into the market. The Chinese Government may decide to throw a few billion dollars to getting their manufacturers into the mix.

    One might argue that Tesla is too far ahead and cannot be caught. I would say that we do not know that yet. What I have learned in so many years is that the unexpected can and does happen. Is Tesla prepared for that? That is my concern that they are not.
     
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2018
  10. Pushmi-Pullyu

    Pushmi-Pullyu Well-Known Member

    You can't tell how enjoyable a car is to drive, nor how comfortable it is, nor how well the controls are laid out, by reading a specifications chart. This is doubly true for Tesla's cars, for which the whole is quite literally more than the sum of its parts, in multiple ways.

    Whether or not the I-Pace is a true competitor for Tesla cars will always be a matter of opinion and personal taste, not a matter of facts and evidence.

    Just because Jaguar chooses to compare its 5-seat hatchback (mis-labeled a "compact SUV" for marketing purposes) to the 7-seat Model X CUV, doesn't mean we EV enthusiasts have to stick to that same ridiculous comparison!

    It may make sense to compare the I-Pace to either the Model S or the Model 3. Comparing it to the Model X... not so much.

    I agree that none of these cars is "for the masses". I'll argue that even the base Model 3, at $35,000 is still price too high to be "a car for the masses".

    I predict that the first long-range, highway-capable, street legal (in first world countries), 4+ seat sub-$30k BEV won't come from Tesla. Tesla excels in many things, but low prices isn't one of those things.

     
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2018
  11. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member Subscriber

    Recent reports from Ron Barron and Bob Lutz suggests traditional car makers are going to have a hard time making the switch:
    • ICE cars are their current bread and butter - Ron points out diverting resources from future ICE to EV is a hard sell to management who is making a living with ICE vehicles.
    • Just raise the price of pickup trucks to pay for EVs - Lutz claims Tesla will fail because Musk doesn't have an ICE revenue stream to tax. But ICE stockholders appear to be as short sighted as the board of directors and management. The engineering team that made the Volt left GM pretty quickly.
    • Leaf - Nissan's most significant effort now looks like a 'one shot' wonder.
    • Killing the EV1 - what happened to a popular EV by a major car maker.
    Today, I see Korea and China being the EV developing nations mostly likely to compete with Tesla. Korea because GM outsourced everything important which effectively paid Korean R&D. China by government direction which has pretty much unlimited capital. As for the underfunded Lucid or the outsourced manufactured I-Pace, I have as much confidence in them as a VW announcement to product delivery.

    If nothing else, Tesla has shown it takes $10s of billions to build factories and staff. Lucid is starting off with 1/10th from the Saudi fund. I don't see the Tesla shorts investing in Lucid except as a pump-and-dump scheme ... what they are trying to do with Tesla. Add to that the Tesla competition has the problem of batteries and chargers.

    Outside of Tesla's Gigafactory, the rest are going to the same sources like L.G. Chem and driving up both battery demand (i.e., cost) and delays that they can not control. Add to that, the spotty, underfunded fast DC charging network, their customers are going to have a lot of complaints ... like mine with VW's Electrify America chargers in Manchester TN.

    Bob Wilson
     
    101101 and Pushmi-Pullyu like this.
  12. Pushmi-Pullyu

    Pushmi-Pullyu Well-Known Member

    Yes, exactly. Not just for Ford, but for all market leaders selling gasmobiles.

    This isn't unique to the automotive industry, by any means. Market leaders' unwillingness to embrace a new technology which disrupts the existing market is something seen in every disruptive tech revolution. It's why former market leader Eastman Kodak went bankrupt as the outcome of the digital camera revolution.

    I think this trend, and the reasons for it, are laid out pretty well in The Innovator's Dilemma.

    I think there is very much an opportunity for other EV startups -- quite likely multiple ones -- to take the "second mover advantage" and move up to rival or possibly even eclipse Tesla in the EV revolution. Second movers are also part of the history of disruptive tech revolutions, and early leaders with a disruptive tech aren't always around when the market settles out again. BlackBerry is a perfect example.

    Just like Apple with the iPhone, first eclipsing BlackBerry and then driving it to collapse*, it's possible that Chinese EV makers will enter the U.S. and European markets, and possibly drive Tesla into a minor player by undercutting their prices.

    Whether or not Tesla's debt burden is "crushing"... well, I'm not a "financial guy" so I won't say you're wrong. However, I note that the Usual Suspect known as "Nix", posting to IEVs news articles (sadly he's not seen here at the IEVs' Forum), says that Tesla's assets have grown faster than its debt, and Nix is very nearly always right in his claims.

    Of course, increasing assets are no proof that Tesla will survive long-term. But that does seem to be an indicator of financial health, and I think (barring unforeseen major disaster) there's no question Tesla will survive in the short term... by which I mean 5 years or less.

    *BlackBerry isn't completely gone, but it has shrunken to serving just a few niche markets; it's no longer a major player in the cell phone market.

     
    bwilson4web likes this.
  13. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member Subscriber

    Tesla needed the revenue from high-profit models to stay in business and pay tuition at the 'school of hard knocks.' If the China factories succeed, Tesla will be on the road to lower priced, EVs. I urge patience ... longer than a short imagination.

    Bob Wilson
     
    interestedinEV likes this.
  14. 101101

    101101 Member

    Maybe Kia will be first. But Tesla will have one and it may be the top seller.
     
  15. Pushmi-Pullyu

    Pushmi-Pullyu Well-Known Member

    I don't know if the reports about Elon's reaction to the SEC settlement offer are true, but certainly such reports do exist, and so far as I know are not mere FUD. All the points you made here are well made, and quite relevant to the debate.

    Just one billion dollars isn't enough to fund even a tiny startup auto maker, let alone a rival to Tesla. Now, if they can get $10 billion, then that might make them a serious player.

    There are many reports that Apple is or was developing an EV. I don't believe a single one of them. Apple isn't a heavy industry, and isn't likely to create a heavy industry division.

    I think what Apple's intent is (or at least was), is to build or adapt testing platforms for self-driving car software and hardware. Perhaps Apple wants to be the Intel of the self-driving automobile industry. Intel advertises "Intel inside" on computers; perhaps Apple wants "Apple inside" self-driving cars.

    I think there is a real potential market for Apple to develop an integrated suite of self-driving car hardware and software, from sensors to computers to user interfaces to actuators controlling the car's functions. That is something Apple could potentially sell to any and all auto makers, and it would be a far better fit to their business than trying to build entire automobiles.

    Waymo partnering with one single auto maker does not appear likely to me. As has been reported, what Waymo is likely to do is to license its autonomous driving tech to auto makers, once it's developed properly. I think Waymo has a real chance at this; they seem to be progressing much better than Tesla or any other individual auto maker is. Why would Waymo want to partner with one single existing auto maker, when they can license their tech to several... or even potentially all of them?

    If auto makers were smart, they'd develop a consortium to develop self-driving car tech. It will work much better if autonomous cars can communicate with each other using a similar communications protocol, and it will also make them safer if they all react to similar driving conditions in the same way. The latter will make their actions predictable to other autonomous cars, reducing uncertainty and therefore reducing the accident rate.

    The current situation, with each auto maker going it alone in developing autonomous driving systems, is in my opinion wasteful, stupid, and counter-productive. And yes, even as a strong Tesla fan, I think that includes Tesla. (Hopefully it's obvious that's only my personal opinion, which may not be shared by many.)

    I think it is extremely unlikely, perhaps impossible, that Tesla can be "caught" in the short term; let's say, 3-4 years or less. Long term, that's certainly possible. But we will almost certainly see it coming. Apple was able to develop its first-generation iPhone and spring it suddenly on the market as a surprise. But the iPhone is a product of light manufacturing, and Apple was able to use a relatively small team to develop the first-generation iPhone, and keep it a secret.

    Building cars is very different. It's hard to hide building an auto assembly plant (or refurbishing an abandoned one) and it's hard to hide hiring all the workers you need to mass produce even a single model of cars!

    * * * * *

    Look at what Japanese auto makers did in the late 1970s and early 1980s, entering the American automotive market. At first Japanese cars were cheap, low-quality cars which were laughed at, deservedly. (I should know; my first car was a 1977 Honda Civic CVCC. That wasn't quite the first generation, but it was close.) But those Japanese cars rapidly improved in quality, and it wasn't many years before nobody was laughing at them anymore.

    I expect the same from Chinese auto makers. Within a few years, I expect them to enter either the European or American auto market; quite possibly both. And just as with the earlier Japanese cars, likely they will be laughed at for their poor quality... at first. But within a few years, we can expect their quality to improve sharply, and then they'll be a real competitor.

    But that won't happen overnight. It won't be any iPhone-like surprise event; it will take years to happen.

     
  16. Pushmi-Pullyu

    Pushmi-Pullyu Well-Known Member

    I didn't at all mean to suggest that Tesla should be making cheap EVs. On the contrary, one only needs to look at the failures of, for example, the Th!nk City and the (made in China) CODA Sedan to see why trying to enter the BEV market at the bottom was not a workable business plan. In fact, I get rather irritated by seeing enthusiastic but not well informed EV fans advocating for Tesla to make $20,000 or even sub-$20,000 cars today... as if the only reason Tesla isn't doing that is because it never occurred to them to try and build inexpensive cars. :rolleyes:

    Tesla succeeded by entering the market at nearly the top end, and is gradually working its way down to less expensive cars. That was Martin Eberhard's brilliant inspiration for Tesla's business model, and Elon Musk has thus far admirably lead the company to fulfill Eberhard's vision. Whether or not Elon is the right person going forward from this point... that is another debate, another matter, and IMHO the answer is far less certain.

     
    bwilson4web likes this.
  17. interestedinEV

    interestedinEV Active Member

    @Pushmi-Pullyu
    let me respond briefly that things may not be that simplistic
    1. A billion dollars may not be enough in itself, but we have no idea how much the Saudis are willing to invest or what Lucids plans are. I would expect there are other well heeled entities who may be willing to invest. I am not saying Lucid is the rival, it could be someone who has a backer with deep pockets
    2. No one seems to know what Apple is doing but Tesla has acknowledged that Apple has been poaching its engineers and they have deep deep pockets
    3. Today you do not need to set up your assembly plant. A company like Magna will do it for you as they are doing it for I-Pace. If Apple decides to make cars, that might be the way to go.
    4. Google in their Android world, both licenses the O/S to anyone who wants it and sells its own branded product (Pixel), so I do not see it odd if they do both. Not as simple, but not outside the realm of possibility.
    5. The Chinese Government is pushing Chinese Manufacturers and even Alibaba seems to want to get into the fray. I would not underestimate them, especially if the Chinese Government decides they need to dominate. Given the current trade issues, they may want to reduce dependence on foreign luxury brands. If this sounds far fetched, the Chinese are already on their way to build a passenger airplane that will compete directly with Airbus and Boeing. Not a small feat.
    Again all this is all hypothetical discussion as to who will be Tesla's real competitor and how much of an impact they can make. I do not have a clue as to what will happen but I do want to point out the other side of the coin, be the devils advocate.

    @bwilson4web puts it well, we have to wait and see for a lot of things including how Tesla will mature, how competition will shape up and how environmental factors such as price of gas or trade wars will affect the EV market. It is a multi-criteria, multi-environment, multi-player game with constantly changing rules and requirements.

    My position all along has been that there are headwinds for Tesla but with some course correction, they can tap the tail winds. We just need to see that they will do it. And the board can begin by asking Elon to stop talking a little bit.


     
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2018
  18. interestedinEV

    interestedinEV Active Member

    This is a classic dilemma that companies that grow rapidly often face: you begin at the top and then find the top being squeezed as other see the margins and want a piece of the action. Then there are others who are at the bottom but want to work their way to the middle and eventually to the top. So what does a company do, protect the top at all costs, shore up the middle, fight for the bottom? Does the company focus on margins, on product innovation, on market share etc.? Does the company become a niche player or find a way to compete in all segments like some companies have branded products but also make off brand products for others.

    These are part of a company growing up and Tesla will have to make some hard decisions in a while on what they want to be or whom they want to cater to. I repeat that they do not have to make that decision today. The market is still growing rapidly so I agree that Tesla does not need to consider the low end competition for now and so a sub $20,000 car should not be on Tesla's mind today. Maybe never.
     
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2018
  19. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member Subscriber

    I appreciate that there are custom shops:
    I see Magna being best used for pre-production, demonstrator models. But eventually Jaguar needs their own assembly lines or we're really seeing a Magna I-Pace for a Jaguar that lost (or has no) ability to make their own EV cars.

    One of the lessons Tesla learned is to have design engineers co-located and spending time on the line. This improves their ability to design for manufacture. Distance reduces Jaguar engineers learning from the Magna line.

    To me, the Magna architecture reminds me of GM outsourcing their batteries and controllers to Korea. After a couple of years, Kia/Hyundai shows up with their in house designed EVs and GM's EV engineering are frozen out.

    Bob Wilson
     
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2018
  20. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member Subscriber

    If you have 35 minutes, very interesting:


    Bob Wilson
     

Share This Page