-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
How many moving parts in a Model S
- Thread starter swisscottg
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Driving Dynamics Model S
SCW-Greg
Active Member
Yes, would be fun to know.
But not necessarily a factor of "X". Because you have 100 years of tested technology, where Tesla is so cutting edge, there isn't nearly as much of a track record to know actual lifespans of screens, motherboards, charging ports, inverters, etc.
But not necessarily a factor of "X". Because you have 100 years of tested technology, where Tesla is so cutting edge, there isn't nearly as much of a track record to know actual lifespans of screens, motherboards, charging ports, inverters, etc.
It seems to me to depend what level of detail we want to count. I like the idea of the most detailed level: I took a simple example (hah!) to start with...
When I think about the inside of a gearbox (having recently taken a break from IT for a few days to rebuild my 1933 Morgan gearbox which is a simple one by today's standards) I can either count the box as one moving part, or about 30 (at the level of anything rotating which can be separated and thus work loose or fail in it's own right).
a modern box with synchromesh or worse, an automatic, must of itself put an order of magnitude increase on that.
Do the same with engine and clutch(es) and we have a large step up again.
as Yggdrasill says, the unpowered rolling chassis seems similar except I would count all replaced switches as (unreliable) moving parts.
I wonder if anyone knows what the granular bill-of-materials is for a Tesla versus say a Lexus?
dhrivnak
Active Member
The Roadster has 17 moving parts. The engine only 1. The single speed gear reduction about 8. Then throw in the axles. Not much to break.
Thanks for the link. I did not see the power brake assist motor. The parking brake was listed as one motor, perhaps there is one motor for each parking caliper instead?
Still only about half the 100+ motor count for a 7-series or S-class.
GSP
I remember hearing that same number on some YouTube video about MS. I seem to remember the speaker was talking about power transmission at that point.
joeinslw
Member
joeinslw
I was watching a TV show on CNBC on day and the subject was Tesla Motors, the Expert said that a Tesla Model S has only 18 moving parts, and a regular gasoline engine (ICE) car has 2000, and he continued to say that is what truly makes an electric vehicle much more efficient and valuable in the long run than a gas car because of these cars don't need the service that a gasoline car needs.
Besides the superior long range the Tesla automobile has, and will improve as time and battery research continues to make the car improve, the absence of necessary dealer service will make an electric vehicle more reliable than a gasoline car because of fewer breakdowns, the expert concluded.
I thought about that and said if this is all true, and it must be because every time I take my car in for service it's at least two hours and two hundred bucks, then I thought, could this be the real reason why GM built their electric vehicles, leased them to their customers, recalled them and then when they were all returned, crushed them in 1999? Hum............I guess we'll never know, but I cam't help but wonder........!
One thing is for sure, this is the reason why we are all driving ICE cars and not electric.
I was watching a TV show on CNBC on day and the subject was Tesla Motors, the Expert said that a Tesla Model S has only 18 moving parts, and a regular gasoline engine (ICE) car has 2000, and he continued to say that is what truly makes an electric vehicle much more efficient and valuable in the long run than a gas car because of these cars don't need the service that a gasoline car needs.
Besides the superior long range the Tesla automobile has, and will improve as time and battery research continues to make the car improve, the absence of necessary dealer service will make an electric vehicle more reliable than a gasoline car because of fewer breakdowns, the expert concluded.
I thought about that and said if this is all true, and it must be because every time I take my car in for service it's at least two hours and two hundred bucks, then I thought, could this be the real reason why GM built their electric vehicles, leased them to their customers, recalled them and then when they were all returned, crushed them in 1999? Hum............I guess we'll never know, but I cam't help but wonder........!
One thing is for sure, this is the reason why we are all driving ICE cars and not electric.
I believe that is absolutely true. But not just the manufacturers/dealers, but third party garages and shops too. And parts distribution and sales. There's really a very large ecosystem around the ICE vehicle. The change must be gradual, but will come. (Oh did I mention big oil?)
-m
bluenation
Member
It has way more than 18 moving parts, moving part should count anything that moves and can break.
Unless the doors, frunk, trunk are welded and the windows can't open and mirrors are manual, no brakes, the wheel doesn't turn, etc. Only there you already have more than 25 moving parts, I'm not sure what the "expert" is counting, when we make this assertions is when people laugh and Tesla lose credibility.
Probably have couple hundred moving vs several thousand which is pretty good, however 18 moving parts isn't even credible.
Unless the doors, frunk, trunk are welded and the windows can't open and mirrors are manual, no brakes, the wheel doesn't turn, etc. Only there you already have more than 25 moving parts, I'm not sure what the "expert" is counting, when we make this assertions is when people laugh and Tesla lose credibility.
Probably have couple hundred moving vs several thousand which is pretty good, however 18 moving parts isn't even credible.
EarlyAdopter
Active Member
Probably correct with regards to the drivetrain - 18 moving parts on a Tesla drivetrain, vs. 2000 in a typical ICE drivetrain.
Agreed, there are plenty more parts that move that could break on the rest of the car, but those are a common denominator between an EV and an ICE.
Agreed, there are plenty more parts that move that could break on the rest of the car, but those are a common denominator between an EV and an ICE.
That may be true, but even with a small number of moving parts, it will be a while before the reliability is appreciably better than with an ICE. I've only been on these forums for a few months, but anecdotally it seems to me that the MS is no more reliable than a good quality ICE car.
It will take Tesla a while to discover all of the possible failure modes for each part of the machine, and to make them all bullet proof. I'm guessing it will take another 5 years. The ICE engineers have been working on it for 100 years, and so they've got a pretty good handle on how to make a reliable ICE - even if it is vastly more complex.
The other thing that concerns me is that Tesla behaves a lot like a software company. All of these firmware updates are great - but each time an update is pushed, there is a risk of a serious bug. And from what I've read, these bugs sometimes cause the car to become inoperative until the software reset. That introduces a whole new dimension of potential reliability problems that simply don't exist in a conventional car. I think there may have to be some learnings required on the software QA side. Not that I advocate utilizing their processes, but in avionics systems, it's relatively rare for software to be deployed with a serious bug.
Unless the motor in the Roadster somehow has no bearings, it has more than one moving part.
Similar threads
