Tesla is three years ahead of all its competitors

Discussion in 'Tesla' started by interestedinEV, Mar 27, 2019.

Tesla's anticipated market share of US market for new cars/trucks in 2023.

  1. Less than 10%

    2 vote(s)
    33.3%
  2. 10% or greater but less than 20%

    2 vote(s)
    33.3%
  3. 20% or greater but less than 30%

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. 30% or greater but less than 40%

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. 40% or greater but less than 50%

    1 vote(s)
    16.7%
  6. 50% or greater

    1 vote(s)
    16.7%
  1. interestedinEV

    interestedinEV Active Member

    https://www.zdnet.com/article/ark-invest-tesla-is-three-years-ahead-of-all-its-competitors/

    While some of this is hype from Elon and others, and one can quibble if it is 2 years or 3 years or even 4, this article makes a very good case why everyone else has their work cut out for them. From what it looks like, the old guard is making the typical old guard responses to the emerging threat.

    A statement often attributed to Darwin ( there are some questions if Darwin actually said it, but it is based on his works)

    It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is most adaptable to change.

    Which of today's manufacturers will adapt the fastest? Any guesses? However, the notion that Tesla will dominate and take over even 30% of the US market by say 2023 (about 5.5 million cars a year) is a big challenge. I am curious as to what others think of Tesla's growth in the next 5 years, so please participate in the poll and let us see what everyone thinks about where Tesla will be in 5 years.


    Tesla is three years ahead of all its competitors
    ARK Invest has estimated that Tesla is three years ahead of its electric vehicle (EV) production peers based on its battery production and efficiency capabilities, autonomous hardware and AI, and the massive amount of autonomous driving data.

    Interesting statistics


    [​IMG]
     
  2. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member Subscriber

    I live in Alabama that just passed an anti-EV road tax. Worse, I have blood-kin who are terrified of our BMW i3-REx.

    Bob Wilson
     
  3. interestedinEV

    interestedinEV Active Member

    I looked at the tax, it is 6 -c- per gallon tax on gas going up to 10 -c- in 2 years. An EV vehicle will pay $200 per year as an annual registration fee. So the EV user is saving on gas tax but paying a $200 fee. Based on my calculation, to break even, the user would have to purchase 3333 gallons in the first year and 2000 gallons in the third year, for the additional costs to equal $200. This translates into 70,000 to 100,000 driven miles in a year for most cars (between 21 to 30 mpg). Very few vehicles are driven that much. So it will cost an ICE users an additional amount of between $25 to $60 per year, (depending upon gas mileage and usage) but it will cost an EV user $200 more. Some equity!!!!!

    I could live with a $50 fee per year for example, as EV's use the same roads and the roads need to be maintained. So the registration ensures that EV users also pay for the road maintenance. However, $200 sounds punitive. Is this due to ICE interests getting back on EVs? Or is it that the legislators assumed that EV users are richer and can afford to pay more for the road repairs? If that is true, then it implies an acceptance of progressive taxes. Or God Forbid, was it that no one did the back of the napkin calculations that I did, and it was mere case of overlooking the obvious?
     
    DaleL likes this.
  4. 101101

    101101 Active Member

    Its a basket case red state run by in the pocket of fossil fuel interests righteous idiots- need to get the US Senate balanced on population. Look at the subsidies on gas already in the US, just to match EU prices that are still subsidized it would be at least $7.00 per gallon. Also Alabaman is 1.4% of the US population.

    According to Tony Seba the US car market will by 2025 drop in the number of vehicles produced annually be 10x-18x due to electric autonomy. Of course if the shill n chief is reelected that could slow a bit but I really don't think he's has managed to dodge Russia Gate at all- I think it got him- in a way that goes beyond what happened to O.J. Simpson- might not even make it through this term only digging hole deeper claiming its is a crime to suspect the kingly president one who lost the popular vote by the 4 largest margin in history against the weakest candidate in history and could win by EC selection and that only with the help of a foreign state, with 28 meetings with that state and 104 contacts and a hotel deal and election speeches supervised by that state and a concealed hotel deal in that state etc. Of course there will be claims that electric autonomy will hit the fossil fuel cost socializing insurance and pension industries and implode fossil fuel derivatives and it will hit jobs at the lousy ICE making Big 3 and it will hit fossil fuels directly and so self driving can't be allowed and can't be approved by the corrupt regulators. But nothing will stop it and ICE is already falling off the map.

    So lets suppose a 6.5-9x drop by 2023 scaled according to the range proposed by Tony Seba where Tony has walked back from the 18x high end down to a 10x reduction- so I averaged the high end of the scale to between a 10 & 18x reduction and for the low end just scaled the 10x expected reduction linearly for time. Now it won't be a linear drop off but presumably more exponential so we can't even use the 6.5x, so rather arbitrarily lets choose a 4x reduction of the 17.2 million or so cars the US manufactured in 2018, already down from 2017. So that would leave 4.3 million vehicles sold in the US in 2023. Tesla could have a 2 million vehicle capacity in the US by that time. Other makers that aren't Chinese will be in total shambles and Tesla will be preferable over anything that isn't Chinese and second place will be Honda and Toyota- if the stupid Trump tarifs are still in place Tesla will do even better. I think Ford and GM will have merged by that time and I see the same for Mercedes and BMW. A 50% share for Tesla isn't unforeseeable, but its influence with without question and undisputed, but a couple of million vehicles or 40 plus percent isn't unreasonable. What is about to happen to the US auto industry is one of the reason's Trump won't be reelected. He's actually now threatening the media telling them to censor his political opponents, and doesn't get that he can't slot his children into public offices and can't use the public office for personal gain and can't say racist things or promote racism, he's tried and convicted himself, so it looks like ICE aid is over.
     
  5. DaleL

    DaleL Active Member

    Tesla has two Gigafactories. A third is being built in China and a fourth is proposed for Europe. Given that Tesla has not made any money on an annual basis, the cost of future expansion has to come from more borrowing. That limits the amount of new debt that Tesla can take on and the rate at which Tesla can grow. That would change if Tesla partnered with either a cash rich company or another automotive company.

    Assuming Tesla continues business as in the past, Tesla is limited in its rate of growth. It took Tesla about 4 years to design and build each Gigafactory. At present, Model 3 production is somewhere between 5 to 8 thousand per week and is the vast majority of Tesla's production. By 2023, Tesla should have three Gigafactories and perhaps the fourth beginning production of cars. At best, Tesla will be able to produce twice the number of vehicles as today. Even if every single Tesla which is built is sold in the USA, the market share would be under 5%. [(8,000 x 52 x 2) / 17,200,000]

    As road use taxes are changed, go up, legislators will look at EVs paying their fair share. The Alabama proposed $200 per year registration seems very excessive. At 30 mpg an ICE powered vehicle that is driven 12,000 miles a year pays $72 a year now. That would go up with the 10 cent tax increase to $112 per year. I agree with interestedinEV that the Alabama legislators didn't do their calculations correctly.
     
  6. I question if Tesla is ahead. It depends how you measure it.....sales numbers of EVs......sales numbers in general...….build quality...…...performance.

    If the measure is based on EV sales numbers or performance I would agree. But Tesla need to improve their build quality. Don't get me wrong. I am a Tesla advocate. As long as a car interior is fairly neat, practical and comfortable I am happy. But many people buy an expensive car for the luxury and therefore expect a level of luxury far above the level offered in the Tesla. If the other manufacturers maintain their level of luxury into their EVs they will have an advantage over Tesla for a portion of the market.
     
  7. Pushmi-Pullyu

    Pushmi-Pullyu Well-Known Member

    Obviously just how far ahead of the competition Tesla is with its EV tech is somewhat subjective; there's no objective yardstick by which to measure that. Furthermore, we can't reasonably claim that Tesla is ahead of the competition on everything. Automotive teardown expert Sandy Munro just about falls all over himself praising Tesla's EV drivetrain tech and its electronics, but he's severely critical of the build quality of Tesla's car bodies.

    But overall, and with the caveat that I'm a strong Tesla fan and thus my opinion is somewhat biased... I think Tesla is more than 3 years ahead of its competition. I would have said 5 years ahead before I saw what Sandy Munro had to say about the Model 3. Based on that, I'd say perhaps 7 years ahead! ...altho Tesla still needs to work on the quality of its fit-and-finish.

    * * * * *

    Bjørn Nyland quite recently took delivery of a new Model 3, and his video was filled with a laundry list of minor fit-and-finish issues. But frankly, of all the the imperfections that Bjørn pointed out, only one seemed to me to be worthy of a visit to the service center. There was a small triangular window which did stick out rather farther than it ought to have, and I would have asked for that to be fixed. But Bjørn complained about what appeared to be variations in panel gaps which were no more than 0.5-1.0 mm. Does anyone really expect even a new car to have absolutely no variation in panel gaps all over the car? I don't think that's realistic. Look closely at a few randomly chosen cars in any shopping mall parking lot, and you'll see panel gap variations bigger than that. I think it's perfectly normal to see variations between 1-3 mm, and I don't understand why anyone would expect an auto maker to deliver a new car with panel gap variations of less than 1 mm, nor do I understand why anyone would expect an authorized service center to "correct" such very, very minor variations under warranty. If you want your car to have fit-and-finish that perfect... well, there are detailing shops you can take it to, and pay them for that level of perfection.

    But from many, many reports posted online, I guess a lot of car buyers do expect the service center to "correct" such minor flaws. So, as they say: YMMV -- Your Mileage May Vary.

     
  8. Pushmi-Pullyu

    Pushmi-Pullyu Well-Known Member

    As my Environmental Science professor in college said: It's not 'survival of the fittest', but rather 'survival of the breeders'. That is, those which survive long enough to breed are the ones which pass their genes along to the next generations. Those survivors may -- or may not! -- be the "fittest" in terms of being the strongest, the healthiest, the fastest, or having the most endurance.

    According to Wikipedia, altho the phrase "Survival of the fittest" did not originate with Darwin, he did adapt it and helped popularize it, even including the phrase in a later edition of his Origin of the Species. According to the Wikipedia article, Darwin found it a better way to express his idea of "Survival of the form that will leave the most copies of itself in successive generations."

    Personally, I think my college professor is correct: "Survival of the fittest" is not really how evolution works.

     
  9. Pushmi-Pullyu

    Pushmi-Pullyu Well-Known Member

    I think we should take care to note that "Gigafactory 2" is Tesla's factory in Buffalo, NY, which is making solar panels and solar roof tiles. It has nothing to do with manufacture of automobiles or battery cells. Personally, I think it was a mistake for Tesla to give that factory the "Gigafactory" label, because that just confuses discussions of Tesla's auto assembly plants.

    It think it would be more accurate and informative to say that Tesla has one operating auto assembly plant (in Fremont, CA), one under construction (Gigafactory 3, in Shanghai), and one very large factory (Gigafactory 1, near Reno, NV) where it has plans to* install automobile assembly lines later this year.

    *I say "has plans to" because it remains unclear whether or not Tesla has actually started installing automotive assembly line equipment there. For a recent report, see the Feb. 7 Electrek article "Tesla is setting up casting lines in Gigafactory 1 ahead of Model Y production".
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2019
    DaleL likes this.
  10. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member Subscriber

    As a Standard Range Plus Model 3 owner, I find it much higher interior quality than I've had in the past. Features include:
    • driver and passenger 12-way, powered seats
    • split HVAC so she can stay warm and me cool
    • traffic aware cruise control (i.e., dynamic cruise control)
    • auto-steer lane following anywhere
    • excellent satellite navigation map
    • huge trunk with hidden sub-basement
    • large frunk
    • lots of driver and passenger nooks
    • +280 hp, rear wheel drive
    • 5-star everything safety
    • on the road or at house service and repair
    • built-in dash cam
    • built-in sentry mode
    • built-in dog comfort mode
    • two front and two rear USB ports
    • sun visors that work
    • full function iPhone App
    Our Model 3 defines luxury for our family.

    Bob Wilson
     
  11. 101101

    101101 Active Member

    BMW's interior quality is lower than Tesla's and the fit and finish on the Model 3 is an issue for the past.
    I have a friend with a top 3 series she said it was junk inside and would never buy another. BMW is going the way Cadillac did in the 70s and Cadillac has never recovered. If Tesla interior quality were a problem Tesla wouldn't be dominating the Mercedes S Class and BMW 7 series globally now for the better part of a decade.

     
  12. interestedinEV

    interestedinEV Active Member

    Quality is unfortunately not a single dimensional concept or defined in just one way. There are several ways Quality is defined. There is the fitness for use view of quality. There is the conformance to requirements view of quality. There is a value for money view of quality (quality is value for price). In this view the quality expectations of a $30,000 car are a little different from that of a $50,000 car. Tesla has had problems with conformance to requirements point of view (sorry but door handles falling off is not conformance to specifications) but it does provide overall value (including esteem value) and that is why people are willing to overlook certain flaws in the design and manufacture of Tesla.

    Now as long as there is no real competition in this segment, Tesla will continue to be considered a superior product due to the overall value. Once there is real competition, then the product quality in manufacturer and construction will become more important. The Japanese (especially Toyota) used product quality as their weapon against the big 3. We need real competition in the $35K EV market, a car that can go head to head with Tesla Model 3, with many similar features and some features that are absent in Tesla. This will force Tesla to improve some of conformance to specifications aspect of quality. Unfortunately, no one seems to want to get into this space in a real big way. They want to get into the Tesla S space, into truck space that Tesla is not in etc. The dark horse to me is Hyundai, they could be the surprise player to take on Tesla.
     
  13. gooki

    gooki Active Member

    Hyundai will compete with Toyota. They aren’t a luxury brand.
     
  14. gooki

    gooki Active Member

    10 years ahead on software
    7 years ahead on electronics
    5 years ahead on charging
    3 years ahead on powertrain
    3 years ahead on battery
     
  15. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member Subscriber

    Nor do they appeal to many.

    Bob Wilson
     
  16. interestedinEV

    interestedinEV Active Member

    It all comes down to price at the end of the day. Yes Tesla has a luxury cachet associated with it, Hyundai does not. The question is who can meet the volumes that Tesla is now doing (about 15,000 cars per month) in EVs. Who can make Tesla sit up and take serious notice? GM is just making noises. FORD/FCA are missing in action, Toyota is not interested in this market, Nissan seems to be content with their niche, Honda is still exploratory, the European manufacturers seem to be a way off. There is no serious competition, but Hyundai has shown the ability to surprise. That is why I say they are dark horse, they can move very fast if they want to. We need more competition and I do not know where it will come from, my guess is as good as anyone else.
     
  17. Pushmi-Pullyu

    Pushmi-Pullyu Well-Known Member

    You think we'll see other BEVs that have a performance (in the broader sense, not specifically acceleration) and energy efficiency as good as Tesla's Model 3 powertrain and battery pack within 3 years?

    Well, I very seriously doubt that's gonna happen. From what Sandy Munro said about the new Model 3 motor, I don't see any other auto maker matching that for several years, if ever. Electrek claims an increase in motor efficiency from 93% to an astonishing 97%! But a caveat seems appropriate here; Electrek is rather biased in the pro-Tesla direction.

    And I don't know exactly what innovations are in the new battery pack which Tesla put into the Standard Range Model 3, but I suspect that's equally far in advance of any other auto maker's BEV.

    Just my opinions, of course.

     
  18. gooki

    gooki Active Member

    Hyundai with their partnerships are pretty much there already (note they scrafice acceleration to get the effencey).

    My opinion on Tesla's battery advantage is mostly around their pack assembly combined with the cell manufacturing. No one else is at the scale Tesla is, and I don't believe pouch pack assembly will scale as well.

    Samsung/LG have similar levels of cell chemistry advancement.
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2019
  19. gooki

    gooki Active Member

    For the next 3-5 years I can see Tesla continuing to own 50% of the EV market.

    This will be a real issue for legacy ICE as demand for ICE will eventually plummet, and if they don't have a competitive EV offering by then, there market will be 50% the size it is today.
     
  20. Pushmi-Pullyu

    Pushmi-Pullyu Well-Known Member

    I respectfully disagree. That's like saying the classic Volkswagen Beetle was as advanced as the Porsche 911 of that era because it had better gas mileage.

    The Ioniq Electric has even better energy efficiency than the Model 3, doesn't it? I think so. But Hyundai got that only by sacrificing a lot of power and performance for energy efficiency.

    Tesla has an advantage in battery pack architecture. George Bower (HVACman) has had articles published by InsideEVs on the subject. Tesla's Model 3 battery pack architecture represents a leap forward, and I think we'll soon see that in new battery packs for the Model S and Model X, too.

    Elon Musk has also indicated that the Standard Range Model 3 had an even newer pack architecture which he seemed to think would reduce costs significantly. We have yet to see any details about that.

    Re pouch cells: Yeah, I'm not at all convinced by those who say pouch cells are better because they're cheaper. Pouch cells aren't rigid, so have to be individually glued into a rigid frame before being installed into a battery pack. So that makes pack assembly more complex and requires more parts. By the time pack assembly is finished and costs are added up, is there really any advantage to pouch cells? Perhaps, but I haven't seen any independent evidence of that.

    Anyway, Tesla is obviously having much success at using cylindrical cells, and obviously has no intention of switching to anything else in the near future. Those who said that Tesla was foolish to use cylindrical cells and would eventually switch to pouch cells, have been pretty thoroughly proven wrong.

    Yup, I don't think Panasonic has any particular advantage in its chemistry over Samsung or LG Chem. But Tesla certainly has an advantage over other auto makers outside China, in that Tesla alone is in control of the volume of its own battery cell supply. The advantage of that is becoming ever more clear, as auto maker after auto maker fails to ramp up production of newer BEVs which are much in demand. The Ioniq Electric, the I-Pace, the e-Tron, and other BEVs could be made and sold in far, far higher numbers if the auto makers had an adequate supply of battery cells.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2019

Share This Page