Connect with us

News

Model 3 Delayed by Model X ‘Manufacturing’ Challenges?

Published

on

Tesla Motors Manufacturing Plant
Tesla Motors Manufacturing Plant

Musk didn’t describe the Model X production challenges but the “real” answer may be battery range for a large, Model X. (Photo Credit: Steve Jurvetson)

11/20 Update: Looks like the two issues surrounding the Model X, heavy falcon wing doors and lack of battery range, have some pointing to BMW’s carbon fiber material, according to ValueWalk.

Tesla Motors earnings conference call provided some revelatory bits of information from Elon Musk and company, with one particular interesting item: the front electric motor in the new all-wheel drive Model S 85D could be in some shape or form in the Model 3 sedan.

(**Of note, Musk mentioned that there will be no more Performance 85 Model S without all the wheel-drivetrain; aids Tesla Motors manufacturing efficiency.)

Musk “seemed to indicate” that this new front motor in the all-wheel drive could be the prototype for the 2017 Model 3, mass-market electric car. This was in response to one analyst’s question on whether the delay with the Model X launch will affect the release and R&D for the Model 3 electric car?

Musk says,”The development of the small motor for the the dual motor car (Model S 85D), and smaller drive unit, in a lot of ways, is a precursor for the Model 3. It represents a significant improvement in cost, in steady state power, a number of other factors. It’s basically—it’s like a second generation motor essentially, that’s a good pathfinder for Model 3 on the powertrain side.”

But what about the Model X? What exactly are the challenges?  Musk’s comment were pretty cryptic.

Musk says, “We could certainly—it would be quite easy for us to make one (Model X), a handful of production units that are saleable and don’t really move the needle. So, what really matters is at what point can we get to scale production of a really high quality car and that’s really in the third quarter. We also learned a lesson in manufacturing that you have issues that are sometimes one out of 100, but unless you make 100 of something, you don’t see it.”

Advertisement
-

A cautionary manufacturing approach is smart considering the very slow rollout of Model S sedans in 2012, but I’m not buying this “manufacturing” spin—though mainstream media has been.  The non-answer seems to point to what Green Car Reports’s John Voelcker mentioned in late October: battery pack range issues for a really heavy SUV/crossover.

Musk mentioned that the Model X version is close to a “Beta version,” and let’s hope this is true. They need this car to be a success and provide much needed revenue, a bridge vehicle to the Model 3.

Just today, long-time value investor, Ron Baron, CEO of Baron Funds, says, “All of us will likely be Tesla customers in 25 years.” His reasoning is Tesla’s laser-beam focus on electric cars and head start on electric vehicle manufacturing, agains the muddled strategies by bigger automakers, excluding BMW.

Baron says, “As a result, they are developing electric expertise so slowly that the lead Tesla has built up through its fast growing staff … may soon become insurmountable.” So, maybe this dual-drive technology for the Model X and Model S 85D will pay off.


 

As an aside, make sure you read the Motor Trend article, “2015 Tesla Model S P85D First Test,” describing their road test with the Model S all-wheel drive Model S 85D. Love these prose gems from the article:

Advertisement
-

 But scrambling to the same 60 mph time in the P85D bears no resemblance to that at all. With one transmission gear and no head-bobbing shifts, it’s instead a rail-gun rush down a quarter-mile of asphalt bowling lane. Nothing in the drivetrain reciprocates; every part spins. There’s no exhaust smell; the fuel is invisible. The torque impacts your body with the violence of facing the wrong way on the train tracks when the whistle blows. Within the first degree of its first revolution, 100 percent of the motors’ combined 687 lb-ft slams the sense out of you. A rising-pitch ghost siren augers into your ears as you’re not so much.


"Grant Gerke wears his Model S on his sleeve and has been writing about Tesla for the last five years on numerous media sites. He has a bias towards plug-in vehicles and also writes about manufacturing software for Automation World magazine in Chicago. Find him at Teslarati

Advertisement
Comments

News

Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.

Published

on

By

Starlink D2D direct to device vs Verizon, AT&T (Concept render by Grok)

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.

The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.

That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.

The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.

Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.

Advertisement
-

SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.

The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.

Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know

Published

on

Credit: KTVU

A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.

The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.

There were no injuries reported.

The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.

However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.

At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.

The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.

The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.

An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s ‘Emergency Drive Away’ function gets its first use in the real world

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.

A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.

“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”

Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.

Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.

Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:

  • You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
  • You must leave the area immediately.
  • Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
  • Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.

After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.

Continue Reading