Connect with us

News

Why Sweden is primed to become home of Tesla’s European factory

Published

on

Could lightning strike twice for Tesla? It’s current factory was once used by NUMMI — a joint venture by Toyota and General Motors — to make cars in Fremont. Tesla was able to purchase it for pennies on the dollar. After years of extensive upgrades, it is now one of the most automated and efficient production facilities in the world.

Saab, on the other hand, used to manufacture world class automobiles at its factory in Trollhattan, Sweden. That factory is now owned by NEVS — an acronym for New Electric Vehicle Sweden. The principal owner of NEVS is National Modern Energy Holdings Ltd, a Beijing based company founded in 2004 by Kai Johan Jiang. NEVS has a contract with Panda New Energy Company to provided it with 150,000 electric versions of Saab’s last production midsize sedan, the 9-3 sedan.

Making 150,000 cars over 4 years is not enough to keep the factory fully operational — it’s capacity is far greater than that. All of which has several people in Sweden thinking it would be the perfect place for Tesla to locate its first European factory.

There are several factors that could make Trollhattan attractive to Tesla other than the fact that it has a large factory sitting practically idle. It has a large pool of workers who are familiar with building automobiles from the days when Saabs were manufactured there. It also is near Gothenburg, with its international railway hub and large ocean freight terminal.

Sveriges Radio P4 Väst says that a group of local stakeholders is working to attract Tesla to the area. According to reports, the group includes Business Sweden and automotive supplier FKG. Fredrik Sidahl, CEO of FKG, confirms that the group has been in contact with Tesla. Everyone involved is tight lipped when it comes to details, though.

Sidahl says the group is confident that it can revive the car industry in Sweden. “I think the possibilities are quite good because Sweden has a well developed infrastructure with suppliers and expertise in building great vehicles with high technical standards.”

Advertisement
-

A spokesperson for NEVS would not comment directly on the report but said in an e-mail to Radio P4 Väst that the company could be a valuable partner for other car manufacturers in terms of both production and development. “It’s part of our strategy to increase the capacity of our plant but we do not comment on the dialogue around this.”

Local automotive journalist Benny Christensen says, “It would be really fun if Sweden got the assignment. There are many people who think it is sad to see the car factory in Trollhattan idle. I think that whoever wins the [Tesla factory] will be those who put forth the best organized proposal based purely on economic and practical considerations. Everything from infrastructure to environmental and tax policies will undoubtedly be crucial,” he says.

Sweden is not alone in its attempt to lure Tesla. Finland’s Minister of Industry has indicated his country has its eye on the Tesla factory. There are interested parties in Germany, France, Spain, and Portugal as well. Tesla has let nothing slip about its intentions after Elon Musk’s whirlwind tour of the Continent last summer.

Is a mostly idle factory enough to seal the deal for Sweden? Even though cars were manufactured there up until 5 years ago, much of the tooling and equipment would likely need to be replaced. Elon Musk is intent on reinventing manufacturing — building the machine that builds the machine, as he calls it. It’s possible Tesla would prefer to construct its own facility utilizing all the efficiency strategies it can muster rather than spending money to reconfigure an existing space.

An announcement from Tesla about where its next factory will be is anticipated later this year, probably after production of the Model 3 gets started and begins running smoothly.

Hat tip: Leif Hansen

 

Advertisement
-

"I write about technology and the coming zero emissions revolution."

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

Tesla has a Cybercab problem nobody saw coming

Tesla’s Cybercab line now builds robotaxis faster than Tesla can deploy them, Lars Moravy says.

Published

on

By

Tesla’s Cybercab line in Texas can now build the two seat robotaxi faster than the company can put it into service, according to Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering. “We don’t run every day because the line can run so fast. It’s currently outpacing our deployments,” Moravy said in a new Cybercab deep dive from Munro Live. “So, it’s a bit of a race right now. Who’s going to go faster? Right now the manufacturing line’s ahead.”

Tesla’s official Robotaxi account shared a Cybercab analysis video on X on Monday, calling it a “Cybercab engineering deep dive.” Moravy’s comments go further than what he told analysts on the Q3 earnings call last week, when he said the Cybercab line’s listed capacity of more than 125,000 units a year undersells what it can actually run.

The tour shows where that speed comes from. Tesla’s unboxed process splits the Cybercab into front, rear, side and center modules that are built and tested on their own before they meet on a short final line. That final line has just 25 fully automated stations, which Tesla’s team estimated is a fifth to a tenth of what a Model Y needs. The full line is about 78% automated, the framing line is already at 100%, and the layout uses roughly 50% less floor space per vehicle. The stated goal is “100% automation in 10 second cycle time,” or one finished Cybercab every 10 seconds.

Tesla also deleted the paint shop. Only the side modules are coated, and the exterior panels get their color inside the molding machine. Engineers said the car is designed to run at least 500,000 miles, which matters for a vehicle that will spend most of its day carrying riders.

The battery got the same treatment. The Cybercab uses an 88S6P pack of 4680 cells in a steel enclosure, a first for Tesla, with each module potted separately so a single failed module can be swapped instead of the whole pack. Wireless battery management boards replace a wiring harness, and new contactors are fast enough to drop the pyro fuse entirely. Tesla’s battery director graded the pack an A minus, compared with a D for the Model Y structural pack and a B minus for Cybertruck. Up front, the drive unit runs an 11:1 gear ratio versus roughly 9:1 on most Teslas, since the Cybercab does not need a high top speed.

Advertisement
-

The deployment side is now the bottleneck Moravy described. Tesla had more than 50 Cybercabs working the Formula 1 weekend in Austin, and Texas records show 463 Cybercabs registered. Tesla said on its earnings call that Cybercab service will launch in Dallas next month, and Moravy said the company is aiming to get Cybercabs to customers by the end of 2026. Every unit built so far has gone into Tesla’s own fleet since the line moved into volume production in April.

Munro Live also asked when it could get a Cybercab to tear down. Tesla’s answer: “Not yet.”

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

How SpaceX Is raising Raptor’s sea-level thrust while holding engine mass steady

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX’s Raptor engine family has steadily increased sea-level thrust while simultaneously reducing mass, turning iterative engineering gains into substantially higher performance for the Super Heavy booster. CEO Elon Musk shed more light on how powerful Raptor 4 will be, and it’s pretty crazy.

Raptor 1 delivered 185 metric tons of thrust at roughly 2,080 kilograms, while Raptor 2 raised that to 230 tons while cutting mass to about 1,630 kilograms. SpaceX data for Raptor 3 lists a target of 280 tons at 1,525 kilograms (with further reductions in associated vehicle hardware), while operational flight ratings have been cited near 250 tons.

This morning, Elon Musk stated that Raptor 4 is expected to reach 300 tons of sea-level thrust at roughly the same mass as Raptor 3. Across these versions, thrust has risen by more than 60 percent from the first engines while engine mass has fallen, producing a sharp improvement in thrust-to-weight ratio. This is a true testament to how great SpaceX engineering has been:

With 33 engines on SuperHeavy, the jump from earlier versions to a 300-ton Raptor 4 would produce roughly 9,900 metric tons of total liftoff thrust, nearly three times the Saturn V’s approximately 3,400 metric tons from its five F-1 engines.

This is not just a larger number on a data sheet, either, as sea-level thrust is the force available the moment the vehicle leaves the pad. This is when it is heaviest and still deep in Earth’s gravity well and dense atmosphere.

Higher levels of sea-level thrust directly improves the initial thrust-to-weight ratio of the full stack. A higher ratio produces faster acceleration off the pad, which shortens the time the rocket has to spend fighting gravity, and gravity losses during the first minute or two of the flight are a major drain on total available delta-v. Every second shaved off of that early climb preserves more propellant energy for reaching orbital velocity or for carrying extra payload.

Because Super Heavy’s engine count is constrained by vehicle diameter and packing density, increasing thrust per engine is the most straightforward way to raise total liftoff performance without redesigning the booster structure or design.

The same-mass target for Raptor 4 is equally important. Holding engine mass roughly constant while raising thrust improves the engine’s own thrust-to-weight ratio and reduces the structural and propellant mass fraction that must be carried solely to support the engines.

Earlier Raptor iterations also simplified or eliminated extensive vehicle-side hardware such as heat shields. These gains compound: more force for less installed mass leaves additional capacity for propellant, payload, or operational margins such as engine-out capability.

For Starship’s architecture, the practical effects are large. Greater liftoff thrust supports heavier vehicles, larger propellant loads, and higher payloads to low Earth orbit, figures SpaceX has targeted in the 100-plus-ton reusable range. That capacity underpins orbital refueling, lunar missions, and eventual Mars cargo and crew flights.

Continued growth in sea-level thrust therefore tightens the gap between theoretical rocket performance and the high flight rates and reusability needed to make large-scale space transport practical.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Assisted Driving expands to tenth EU country

Published

on

Tesla has expanded its Tesla Assisted Driving (TAD) suite to its tenth European country, as Latvia joined a growing list of European Union member states authorizing the company’s advanced driver assistance technology.

Tesla Europe announced this morning that the system is now approved in Latvia, with a software rollout to begin soon.

The approval and rollout follow recognition of a provisional European type approval originally granted by the Netherlands’ RDW authority on April 10.

Latvia’s Road Traffic Safety Directorate (CSDD) evaluated the Dutch documentation, coordinated with the other national authorities, and reviewed updates from Tesla. These included tightened limits on speed offsets, automatic resets of any manual speed adjustments after each trip, and stronger driver monitoring.

In Europe, the feature is marketed as Tesla Assisted Driving after a recent rule change that labeled the name “Full Self-Driving” as misleading.

Tesla starts showing how FSD will change lives in Europe

The system remains an SAE Level 2 driver assistance tool, not unsupervised autonomy. It can control speed, steering, braking, lane changes, and intersections while following a navigation route. Drivers need not keep their hands on the wheel at all times, yet they must continuously monitor the road and be prepared to intervene immediately.

The sequence of EU recognitions began with the Netherlands in April and continued through Lithuania, Estonia, Denmark, Belgium, Slovenia, Czechia, Croatia, and Slovakia. Most have relied on mutual recognition of the single Dutch provisional approval rather than independent national testing.

These national clearances do not yet constitute bloc-wide authorization. An EU-wide decision requires a qualified majority in the Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles: at least 15 of 27 member states representing 65 percent of the EU population. Larger markets, like Germany, France, and Italy, remain under review, and a vote is expected this December.

However, for Latvian Tesla owners with compatible vehicles and software, the imminent rollout expands access to the supervised system while underscoring that attentive human oversight remains essential.

Continue Reading