Connect with us

News

Tesla Model 3 'rival' Volkswagen ID.3 is turning into a cautionary tale

(Credit: Volkswagen)

Published

on

There is a storm brewing in Volkswagen’s Wolfsburg plant, and it can very well make or break the career of CEO Herbert Diess, a strong proponent for the company’s transition to electric mobility. As problems continue to pile up for Volkswagen’s electric car program, the ID.3, a vehicle considered to be a rival to the Tesla Model 3, is starting to turn into a cautionary tale. 

An extensive report from German news outlet Manager Magazin provided an in-depth look at the current state of Volkswagen’s electric vehicle initiative. According to the esteemed magazine, experts and top managers from the automaker are now meeting every working day in a massive push to get the ID.3 ready for consumer deliveries. But despite their disciplined efforts, the affordable EV is proving stubborn, causing notable delays in its release. 

The Volkswagen ID.3 is an essential car for the German automaker, being a personal project for Diess, who has emerged as one of the most prominent voices in the auto industry pushing for electrification. More than a vehicle that can potentially beat the Tesla Model 3 in terms of pricing, the ID.3 is also the automaker’s key in avoiding €10 billion worth of emissions fines this year. Without the ID.3, the penalties cannot be avoided. Even with the vehicle on the market, VW would have to sell about 100,000 in 2020 to meet the company’s CO2 targets. 

Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Volkswagen CEO Herbert Diess exchange compliments at an award ceremony. (Credit: YouTube/AUTO BILD)

But the Volkswagen ID.3 ramp has been rife with issues. While the vehicles can be produced efficiently using the company’s extensive experience in car manufacturing, the ID.3’s software has proven troublesome. Simply put, the software of the vehicle does not work as it should, and VW experts have pointed the finger at the company’s haste in rolling out the all-electric car for production. Volkswagen experts have noted that the ID.3’s underlying architecture was developed too hastily, as the car’s system parts often don’t understand each other, resulting in errors. 

Thus, every day, those involved with the ID.3 project meet and try to solve the car’s underlying issues. Manager Magazin‘s sources note that Volkswagen is now operating at an almost military level in its efforts to fix the ID.3’s software issues, but still, hundreds of test drivers report new faults in the vehicle nearly every day. One of the magazine’s sources, who claimed to be present in these meetings, noted that up to 300 faults could be reported in one day. 

(Credit: John Foulkes/Twitter)

Amidst these issues, Volkswagen has adjusted the ID.3’s target from 100,000 in 2020 to just 80,000. Fortunately for the German automaker, it is a big company, and it includes carmakers such as Audi and Porsche, both of whom have already released their respective electric cars. But even these two companies’ EVs are not exactly rolling out smoothly either. The e-tron recently halted its production due to battery constraints from LG Chem, prompting Audi to lower the premium SUV’s forecast from 70,000 to 40,000 this year. The Porsche Taycan, despite excellent reviews from car enthusiasts, is also getting its deliveries in Germany delayed. 

Volkswagen CEO Herbert Diess has stated that the shift to electric mobility will be difficult, noting at a top management conference last month that the compliance with the limits for supplying, building, and selling battery electric vehicles was “perhaps the most difficult task Volkswagen has ever had to face.” Considering the ID.3 program’s progress so far, as well as reports that the Porsches and Piëchs, VW’s major owners, are growing restless, it appears that the company’s EV challenges may just be beginning. 

Advertisement
-->

Ultimately, the ID.3’s issues are an unfortunate roadblock to the EV movement as a whole. The vehicle, after all, is a mass-market car, and it has the potential to be the second coming of the ubiquitous Beetle. The company just has to get its software settled and refined first–something that a small carmaker from Silicon Valley seems to have predicted when it started developing its first vehicles less than two decades ago.

H/T to JPR007.

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2 – Full Review, the Good and the Bad

Published

on

Credit: Teslarati

Tesla rolled out Full Self-Driving version 14.2 yesterday to members of the Early Access Program (EAP). Expectations were high, and Tesla surely delivered.

With the rollout of Tesla FSD v14.2, there were major benchmarks for improvement from the v14.1 suite, which spanned across seven improvements. Our final experience with v14.1 was with v14.1.7, and to be honest, things were good, but it felt like there were a handful of regressions from previous iterations.

While there were improvements in brake stabbing and hesitation, we did experience a few small interventions related to navigation and just overall performance. It was nothing major; there were no critical takeovers that required any major publicity, as they were more or less subjective things that I was not particularly comfortable with. Other drivers might have been more relaxed.

With v14.2 hitting our cars yesterday, there were a handful of things we truly noticed in terms of improvement, most notably the lack of brake stabbing and hesitation, a major complaint with v14.1.x.

However, in a 62-minute drive that was fully recorded, there were a lot of positives, and only one true complaint, which was something we haven’t had issues with in the past.

The Good

Lack of Brake Stabbing and Hesitation

Perhaps the most notable and publicized issue with v14.1.x was the presence of brake stabbing and hesitation. Arriving at intersections was particularly nerve-racking on the previous version simply because of this. At four-way stops, the car would not be assertive enough to take its turn, especially when other vehicles at the same intersection would inch forward or start to move.

This was a major problem.

However, there were no instances of this yesterday on our lengthy drive. It was much more assertive when arriving at these types of scenarios, but was also more patient when FSD knew it was not the car’s turn to proceed.

This improvement was the most noticeable throughout the drive, along with fixes in overall smoothness.

Speed Profiles Seem to Be More Reasonable

There were a handful of FSD v14 users who felt as if the loss of a Max Speed setting was a negative. However, these complaints will, in our opinion, begin to subside, especially as things have seemed to be refined quite nicely with v14.2.

Freeway driving is where this is especially noticeable. If it’s traveling too slow, just switch to a faster profile. If it’s too fast, switch to a slower profile. However, the speeds seem to be much more defined with each Speed Profile, which is something that I really find to be a huge advantage. Previously, you could tell the difference in speeds, but not in driving styles. At times, Standard felt a lot like Hurry. Now, you can clearly tell the difference between the two.

It seems as if Tesla made a goal that drivers should be able to tell which Speed Profile is active if it was not shown on the screen. With v14.1.x, this was not necessarily something that could be done. With v14.2, if someone tested me on which Speed Profile was being used, I’m fairly certain I could pick each one.

Better Overall Operation

I felt, at times, especially with v14.1.7, there were some jerky movements. Nothing that was super alarming, but there were times when things just felt a little more finicky than others.

v14.2 feels much smoother overall, with really great decision-making, lane changes that feel second nature, and a great speed of travel. It was a very comfortable ride.

The Bad

Parking

It feels as if there was a slight regression in parking quality, as both times v14.2 pulled into parking spots, I would have felt compelled to adjust manually if I were staying at my destinations. For the sake of testing, at my first destination, I arrived, allowed the car to park, and then left. At the tail-end of testing, I walked inside the store that FSD v14.2 drove me to, so I had to adjust the parking manually.

This was pretty disappointing. Apart from parking at Superchargers, which is always flawless, parking performance is something that needs some attention. The release notes for v14.2. state that parking spot selection and parking quality will improve with future versions.

However, this was truly my only complaint about v14.2.

You can check out our full 62-minute ride-along below:

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly

The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas. 

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX/X

SpaceX has issued an initial statement about Starship Booster 18’s anomaly early Friday. The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas. 

SpaceX’s initial comment

As per SpaceX in a post on its official account on social media platform X, Booster 18 was undergoing gas system pressure tests when the anomaly happened. Despite the nature of the incident, the company emphasized that no propellant was loaded, no engines were installed, and personnel were kept at a safe distance from the booster, resulting in zero injuries.

“Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing that we were conducting in advance of structural proof testing. No propellant was on the vehicle, and engines were not yet installed. The teams need time to investigate before we are confident of the cause. No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing. The site remains clear and we are working plans to safely reenter the site,” SpaceX wrote in its post on X. 

Incident and aftermath

Livestream footage from LabPadre showed Booster 18’s lower half crumpling around the liquid oxygen tank area at approximately 4:04 a.m. CT. Subsequent images posted by on-site observers revealed extensive deformation across the booster’s lower structure. Needless to say, spaceflight observers have noted that Booster 18 would likely be a complete loss due to its anomaly.

Booster 18 had rolled out only a day earlier and was one of the first vehicles in the Starship V3 program. The V3 series incorporates structural reinforcements and reliability upgrades intended to prepare Starship for rapid-reuse testing and eventual tower-catch operations. Elon Musk has been optimistic about Starship V3, previously noting on X that the spacecraft might be able to complete initial missions to Mars.

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now

The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) received fresh support from Piper Sandler this week after analysts toured the Fremont Factory and tested the company’s latest Full Self-Driving software. The firm reaffirmed its $500 price target, stating that FSD V14 delivered a notably smooth robotaxi demonstration and may already perform at levels comparable to, if not better than, average human drivers. 

The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.

Analysts highlight autonomy progress

During more than 75 minutes of focused discussions, analysts reportedly focused on FSD v14’s updates. Piper Sandler’s team pointed to meaningful strides in perception, object handling, and overall ride smoothness during the robotaxi demo.

The visit also included discussions on updates to Tesla’s in-house chip initiatives, its Optimus program, and the growth of the company’s battery storage business. Analysts noted that Tesla continues refining cost structures and capital expenditure expectations, which are key elements in future margin recovery, as noted in a Yahoo Finance report. 

Analyst Alexander Potter noted that “we think FSD is a truly impressive product that is (probably) already better at driving than the average American.” This conclusion was strengthened by what he described as a “flawless robotaxi ride to the hotel.”

Advertisement
-->

Street targets diverge on TSLA

While Piper Sandler stands by its $500 target, it is not the highest estimate on the Street. Wedbush, for one, has a $600 per share price target for TSLA stock.

Other institutions have also weighed in on TSLA stock as of late. HSBC reiterated a Reduce rating with a $131 target, citing a gap between earnings fundamentals and the company’s market value. By contrast, TD Cowen maintained a Buy rating and a $509 target, pointing to strong autonomous driving demonstrations in Austin and the pace of software-driven improvements. 

Stifel analysts also lifted their price target for Tesla to $508 per share over the company’s ongoing robotaxi and FSD programs. 

Continue Reading