Beware of Model X

[Richbot]

All of them were whatever the first tranche the evening of/day after the big press conference reservations

It's been interesting watching for sure. But mostly, it just looks like any other new vehicle rollout recently - supply constrained, lots of people getting theirs but not as many as have orders. Maverick launch was similar

 

[White Shadow]

Actually, I think the biggest problem the traditional manufacturers have, is they are forced (required by law) to sell through their dealers. Unless they can get control over their distribution, it is not going to go well for them. Ford is trying, by requiring potential E dealers to fork over millions per location, just to retain access to the product line. I just can't imagine that will go well for them.

Tesla did a bunch of things right as you say, battery management and charging infrastructure. But they also have secured their supply chain way beyond anyone else. They also have complete control over distribution and service. All through Tesla stores, not just in .US, but world wide. Far from perfect as folks here will be happy to point out. But Tesla owns it completely until the vehicle is sitting in your driveway. "From farm to table" if you will. No one else has even conceived of anything like it. Brilliant IMO.

Personally, I don't like Tesla's way of selling cars. It reminds me of the now defunct Saturn. Pay their sticker price or there's the door. I'd rather negotiate using the traditional dealership network. Maybe because negotiation is something that I do all the time, but I usually end up paying less than the average. In fairness, a lot of people don't like dealing with negotiating a car purchase, so I can see the appeal for them if it's a pay-one-price transaction. But not me, that's for sure.

 

[White Shadow]

Mazda and Honda for instance absolutely do not have the resources. Porsches IPO specifically stated that a large portion of capital raise will go to software development-another (very expensive) area in which legacy OEMs are very behind. I’m not sure a Cadillac IPO for example raises enough capital.

Why are manufacturers like Ford having huge issues with pricing, sourcing and manufacturing of its EV (Mach E)? According to your theory, those things shouldn’t be happening? But they will. There is a huge adjustment in switching to an EV only company on many levels from my professional experience.

The question isn’t whether or not Tesla will be ‘caught’ as far as benchmarks are concerned. They will be. Chevy caught Toyota within 20 years after the dreadful
1980s-1990s era products. But the damage had been done and Chevrolet still hasn’t regained that market share or place in buyers consciousness on both coasts-huge markets. We are now 10 years in from the start of the EV business cycle. Solid state batteries are another two product generations away per anything I’ve been able to pry from my former colleagues at various OEMs.

I’m not sure anything can be spoken in absolutes when looking at the landscape objectively.

Don't look too far into it, but Porsche will always be backed by VW. That's even true if Porsche does end up with their own IPO/stock. Interestingly, VW is investing heavily into QuantumScape for their SS battery technolgoy. Porsche is doing the same with Group 14 Technologies, as they ahve invested $400 million. I believe they are still tied to QuantumScape as well. Anyway, the point I'm making is that these kinds of BEV development costs will be funded because the race to make a BEV that is truly an ICE car alternative is still a huge goal. For mass adoption, they need to get the infrastrucure in place, but they also need cars that can charge much faster than today's BEVs and provide an acceptably long range.

 

[henderrj]

The F-150 orderability is largely based on when you signed up and price. If your BIL purchased one of the expensive models like the Platinum ($80K+) in the first few hours he should be able to order. If he was like me and picked a cheap ($60K) and signed days late he may have longer to wait. Potentially a lot longer. It very reminiscent of Tesla and ordering Plaid vs LR, Performance vs SR, ...

It is almost like the CEO of Ford is looking over Elon's shoulder for clues on how to run Ford's EV line. Hmmm.

Trying to order the top end model. He's a neurosurgeon. So, no, more money doesn't get it to you faster!

 

[ForDesign]

Don't look too far into it, but Porsche will always be backed by VW. That's even true if Porsche does end up with their own IPO/stock. Interestingly, VW is investing heavily into QuantumScape for their SS battery technolgoy. Porsche is doing the same with Group 14 Technologies, as they ahve invested $400 million. I believe they are still tied to QuantumScape as well. Anyway, the point I'm making is that these kinds of BEV development costs will be funded because the race to make a BEV that is truly an ICE car alternative is still a huge goal. For mass adoption, they need to get the infrastrucure in place, but they also need cars that can charge much faster than today's BEVs and provide an acceptably long range.

VW group has a budget just like everyone else. The Lamborghini Urus had to use Audi/Bentley crash structure and the result was a compromised design-not my words these are documented. Things are actually more complicated from a PP POV when you have such a large grouping of brands-along with the improved economies of scale. These technologies have been discussed in advanced product studios in various OEMs-the question is how many product generations will this take to come to market? How much will these brands be able to charge for those subsequent costs (pass through a consumer). Meanwhile Tesla has products in showroom, making sales and impressions today.

What happens if these innovations are a product cycle away? So 2030? I've never argued that TSLA will never be caught in the innovative cycle-all companies are in the product world. But TIMING is everything. Samsung today makes innovative products vs Apple. Guess who most rather buy? Some of this as I and others have mentioned will be coming to market in an environment multi generational consumer programing by the time these products make it to market.

Once companies grab a stranglehold on consumers, there is usually a period of 20-30 years of dominance within that timeframe.

Note that VW had massive issues with software development-that and the advances of Apple, Google, and Sony in the software space in the automotive sector is a huge tell in what the industry sees as a weakness. Again...how long before things are aligned? Time is ticking.

 

[White Shadow]

VW group has a budget just like everyone else. The Lamborghini Urus had to use Audi/Bentley crash structure and the result was a compromised design-not my words these are documented. Things are actually more complicated from a PP POV when you have such a large grouping of brands-along with the improved economies of scale. These technologies have been discussed in advanced product studios in various OEMs-the question is how many product generations will this take to come to market? How much will these brands be able to charge for those subsequent costs (pass through a consumer). Meanwhile Tesla has products in showroom, making sales and impressions today.

What happens if these innovations are a product cycle away? So 2030? I've never argued that TSLA will never be caught in the innovative cycle-all companies are in the product world. But TIMING is everything. Samsung today makes innovative products vs Apple. Guess who most rather buy? Some of this as I and others have mentioned will be coming to market in an environment multi generational consumer programing by the time these products make it to market.

Once companies grab a stranglehold on consumers, there is usually a period of 20-30 years of dominance within that timeframe.

Note that VW had massive issues with software development-that and the advances of Apple, Google, and Sony in the software space in the automotive sector is a huge tell in what the industry sees as a weakness. Again...how long before things are aligned? Time is ticking.

Not surprising....it's all part of the whole platform sharing thing. All manufacturers are trying to minimize developement costs. That's why we see Toyota working with not just BMW, but also Subaru. This becomes a competitive advantage, if nothing else. I think the legacy automakers are all in on electrification and that's going to be good for everyone. I hope Tesla does well, but in reality they are still basically a niche manufacturer at around 3% market share.

 

[ForDesign]

Not surprising....it's all part of the whole platform sharing thing. All manufacturers are trying to minimize developement costs. That's why we see Toyota working with not just BMW, but also Subaru. This becomes a competitive advantage, if nothing else. I think the legacy automakers are all in on electrification and that's going to be good for everyone. I hope Tesla does well, but in reality they are still basically a niche manufacturer at around 3% market share.

My greater point is there are compromises-and as a result, non optimization of the software/platform sharing model. Not all OEMs are Porsche (generate capital via IPOs) so the size of the company, which means via my professional experience that it’s now tied into the supplier ecosystem (hardware, software) which is a weakness vs Tesla directly.

Cost sensitivity/partnerships via the industry is nothing new. Which is why most cars share many universal parts regardless of brand. Tesla strategically is within its own space (vertically integrated vs the rest of the industry), so I’m not sure why the industry switching to EVs means ‘Tesla isn’t going to survive/thrive’-while I get that surface POV, the answer is more nuanced then that.

 

[White Shadow]

My greater point is there are compromises-and as a result, non optimization of the software/platform sharing model. Not all OEMs are Porsche (generate capital via IPOs) so the size of the company, which means via my professional experience that it’s now tied into the supplier ecosystem (hardware, software) which is a weakness vs Tesla directly.

Cost sensitivity/partnerships via the industry is nothing new. Which is why most cars share many universal parts regardless of brand. Tesla strategically is within its own space (vertically integrated vs the rest of the industry), so I’m not sure why the industry switching to EVs means ‘Tesla isn’t going to survive/thrive’-while I get that surface POV, the answer is more nuanced then that.

So you're saying that legacy automakers are somehow at a competitive disadvantage because their supply chain is shared among the brands under their umbrella? If that's what you're saying, I'd have to disagree. For sure there are supply chain issues that have been problematic for quite some time now, but the sheer number of vehicles being manufactured and sold absolutely dwarfs what Tesla is going right now. If Tesla could somehow scale up production to, say, 30 times what they are doing right now, I'm pretty sure they'd be having huge problems with their supply chain.

Seriously, demand for the Model 3 is very high (comparitively speaking in the world of EVs)...so they stopped taking orders. Some people see that as a good problem to have. I see that as a huge issue because there will be many who decide to purchase an EV from competitors instead of waiting a year for their Model 3.

Tesla is clearly not prepared to handle the level of demand that they are experiencing currently. I'm sure that makes the competition happy.

 

[ForDesign]

So you're saying that legacy automakers are somehow at a competitive disadvantage because their supply chain is shared among the brands under their umbrella? If that's what you're saying, I'd have to disagree. For sure there are supply chain issues that have been problematic for quite some time now, but the sheer number of vehicles being manufactured and sold absolutely dwarfs what Tesla is going right now. If Tesla could somehow scale up production to, say, 30 times what they are doing right now, I'm pretty sure they'd be having huge problems with their supply chain.

Seriously, demand for the Model 3 is very high (comparitively speaking in the world of EVs)...so they stopped taking orders. Some people see that as a good problem to have. I see that as a huge issue because there will be many who decide to purchase an EV from competitors instead of waiting a year for their Model 3.

Tesla is clearly not prepared to handle the level of demand that they are experiencing currently. I'm sure that makes the competition happy.

I'm saying exactly is that every approach has its disadvantages/advantages. Example:

If you're on a larger companies design program, you have to draw from a number of internal parts to hit both budget and design deliverables. So if, say an automotive interior design is more 'tech' focused (i.e. an EV buyer in this particular case) then there is no way your design manager/finance isn't going to suggest a tech laden current part that might cost 10X of what your original part would've have cost. So you could've had a new part designed, molded, and mass produced for $1 instead of $10. NBD except thousands of decisions are made throughout just the interior design alone.

The point exactly is most of todays cars are made from a mash up of existing parts, which can result in some baked in compromises that aren't easily navigated.

I'm not sure of you have an agenda here, but you statements can be applied to any automaker scaling up EV production, large or small. But not my words or opinions:

So legacy OEMs are chomping at the bit to seize market share and profits from Tesla?

Ford’s Mustang Mach-E Profit Wiped Out by Commodity Costs

Ford Motor Co.’s hot-selling Mustang Mach-E electric SUV and other plug-in models are being rendered unprofitable by rising raw material costs.

www.bloomberg.com

"Ford Motor Co.’s hot-selling Mustang Mach-E electric SUV and other plug-in models are being rendered unprofitable by rising raw material costs.

“We actually had a positive bottom line profit when we launched the Mach-E, commodity costs have wiped that out,” Chief Financial Officer John Lawler said Wednesday at the Deutsche Bank Global Automotive Conference, referring to 2020, when the vehicle went on sale. “You’re going to see pressure on the bottom line when we launch our EVs, they’re not going to be positive.”

So legacy OEMs will sell you a EV with no wait time vs Tesla?

https://www.carsdirect.com/automotive-news/green-technology/2023-ford-mach-e-deliveries-already-have-a-24-week-wait

"After closing orders books for the 2022 Ford Mustang Mach-E in April 2022, Ford finally reopened them for the 2023 Mach-E before the end of August. Unfortunately, the 2023 Mach-E arrived with a large price increase of up to $8,300. Now, we have some more bad news for consumers looking to purchase a 2023 Mach-E. Ford’s website for the electric SUV claims that shoppers could be waiting up to 24 weeks for their EVs to arrive.

Ford conveniently lists wait times for the Mach-E lineup on the vehicle’s configurator page. Shoppers looking to put in an order for the Select, California Route 1, and GT trims are looking at waiting between 18 to 22 weeks. The Premium trim has a wait time of 18 to 24 weeks. The wait times listed on Ford’s website are estimated delivery times for new orders."

OK, well....that's just Ford, others will sell you a EV right on the spot while Tesla is sold out!

Factory Ordering a Car? These Are Wait Times We're Seeing in 2024

The chip shortage isn't over, but the worst is behind us. Still, factory ordering a car in 2024 often comes with a long wait.

joinyaa.com

For plug-in hybrid (PHEV) options, the wait will be at least this long. The Hyundai Tucson and Santa Fe PHEVs are few and far between, and could leave you waiting for 8 months to one year for delivery. The situation is similar, if not worse, for the Hyundai IONIQ 5. Hyundai’s semiconductor chip supplier canceled a few month’s worth of chips that were slated for the IONIQ 5. Right now, factory orders may take between eight months and one year for delivery.


So beyond feelings and speculation, I'm saying there is no absolute path here-nothing is set in stone.

 

[White Shadow]

I'm saying exactly is that every approach has its disadvantages/advantages. Example:

If you're on a larger companies design program, you have to draw from a number of internal parts to hit both budget and design deliverables. So if, say an automotive interior design is more 'tech' focused (i.e. an EV buyer in this particular case) then there is no way your design manager/finance isn't going to suggest a tech laden current part that might cost 10X of what your original part would've have cost. So you could've had a new part designed, molded, and mass produced for $1 instead of $10. NBD except thousands of decisions are made throughout just the interior design alone.

The point exactly is most of todays cars are made from a mash up of existing parts, which can result in some baked in compromises that aren't easily navigated.

I'm not sure of you have an agenda here, but you statements can be applied to any automaker scaling up EV production, large or small. But not my words or opinions:

So legacy OEMs are chomping at the bit to seize market share and profits from Tesla?

Ford’s Mustang Mach-E Profit Wiped Out by Commodity Costs

Ford Motor Co.’s hot-selling Mustang Mach-E electric SUV and other plug-in models are being rendered unprofitable by rising raw material costs.

www.bloomberg.com

"Ford Motor Co.’s hot-selling Mustang Mach-E electric SUV and other plug-in models are being rendered unprofitable by rising raw material costs.

“We actually had a positive bottom line profit when we launched the Mach-E, commodity costs have wiped that out,” Chief Financial Officer John Lawler said Wednesday at the Deutsche Bank Global Automotive Conference, referring to 2020, when the vehicle went on sale. “You’re going to see pressure on the bottom line when we launch our EVs, they’re not going to be positive.”

So legacy OEMs will sell you a EV with no wait time vs Tesla?

https://www.carsdirect.com/automotive-news/green-technology/2023-ford-mach-e-deliveries-already-have-a-24-week-wait

"After closing orders books for the 2022 Ford Mustang Mach-E in April 2022, Ford finally reopened them for the 2023 Mach-E before the end of August. Unfortunately, the 2023 Mach-E arrived with a large price increase of up to $8,300. Now, we have some more bad news for consumers looking to purchase a 2023 Mach-E. Ford’s website for the electric SUV claims that shoppers could be waiting up to 24 weeks for their EVs to arrive.

Ford conveniently lists wait times for the Mach-E lineup on the vehicle’s configurator page. Shoppers looking to put in an order for the Select, California Route 1, and GT trims are looking at waiting between 18 to 22 weeks. The Premium trim has a wait time of 18 to 24 weeks. The wait times listed on Ford’s website are estimated delivery times for new orders."

OK, well....that's just Ford, others will sell you a EV right on the spot while Tesla is sold out!

Factory Ordering a Car? These Are Wait Times We're Seeing in 2024

The chip shortage isn't over, but the worst is behind us. Still, factory ordering a car in 2024 often comes with a long wait.

joinyaa.com

For plug-in hybrid (PHEV) options, the wait will be at least this long. The Hyundai Tucson and Santa Fe PHEVs are few and far between, and could leave you waiting for 8 months to one year for delivery. The situation is similar, if not worse, for the Hyundai IONIQ 5. Hyundai’s semiconductor chip supplier canceled a few month’s worth of chips that were slated for the IONIQ 5. Right now, factory orders may take between eight months and one year for delivery.


So beyond feelings and speculation, I'm saying there is no absolute path here-nothing is set in stone.

I don't disagree with most of what you're saying here, but the bigger point is that there's a huge difference between legacy automakers and Tesla. The difference is that Tesla relies 100% on EV sales (obviously) and the legacy automakers do not. Over time, I'm quite sure that things will gradually shift, but the fact of the matter is that every legacy automaker is relying almost exclusively on ICE sales today. Electric is just a very small percentage of their revenue, especially when EVs aren't nearly as profitable for them compared to ICE cars, if profitable at all.

So I see your point, but in a ridiculous "what if" scenario, I'm pretty certain that Ford could easily keep pace with demand if they decided to go all in on EVs by suddenly abandoning ICE all at once. That's obviously not reality, but the point I'm making is that Ford, like any of the larger legacy automakers, has the potential to do so.

Personally, I don't think the "electric revolution" is going to happen quite as quickly as some people seem to think. I think it's going to be a long, slow process. Everyone always talks about how they keep hearing that ICE sales are being banned by 2035 or whatever, but that's still more than 10 years off and by that time we'll still have a hugely lopsided majority of ICE cars on the roads. I'm curious to see how far we'll see the infrastructure improve over those 10 years because that's going to be a major factor in the decision to go electric for lots of people. And of course battery technology too....how much advancement will we see in 10 years? The bottom line is that the teeming millions want quicker charge times and longer ranges before they'll be willing to make the switch. And if they still have the option of buying a new ICE car, I think that's what they'll do unless we start to see some level of parity between ICE and EV when it comes to range and fueling time.

 

[ForDesign]

I don't disagree with most of what you're saying here, but the bigger point is that there's a huge difference between legacy automakers and Tesla. The difference is that Tesla relies 100% on EV sales (obviously) and the legacy automakers do not. Over time, I'm quite sure that things will gradually shift, but the fact of the matter is that every legacy automaker is relying almost exclusively on ICE sales today. Electric is just a very small percentage of their revenue, especially when EVs aren't nearly as profitable for them compared to ICE cars, if profitable at all.

So I see your point, but in a ridiculous "what if" scenario, I'm pretty certain that Ford could easily keep pace with demand if they decided to go all in on EVs by suddenly abandoning ICE all at once. That's obviously not reality, but the point I'm making is that Ford, like any of the larger legacy automakers, has the potential to do so.

Personally, I don't think the "electric revolution" is going to happen quite as quickly as some people seem to think. I think it's going to be a long, slow process. Everyone always talks about how they keep hearing that ICE sales are being banned by 2035 or whatever, but that's still more than 10 years off and by that time we'll still have a hugely lopsided majority of ICE cars on the roads. I'm curious to see how far we'll see the infrastructure improve over those 10 years because that's going to be a major factor in the decision to go electric for lots of people. And of course battery technology too....how much advancement will we see in 10 years? The bottom line is that the teeming millions want quicker charge times and longer ranges before they'll be willing to make the switch. And if they still have the option of buying a new ICE car, I think that's what they'll do unless we start to see some level of parity between ICE and EV when it comes to range and fueling time.

No OEMs can't 'just ramp up production of EVs'. Ford, for example cannot secure enough parts to make them.

Stellantis CEO warns of electric vehicle battery shortage, followed by lack of raw materials

Carlos Tavares expects a shortage of electric vehicle batteries by 2024-2025, followed by a lack of raw materials by 2027-2028.

www.cnbc.com

Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares said he expects shortages of the batteries and raw materials needed to make electric vehicles in the coming years, as the global automotive industry pivots to EVs to meet an expected increase in consumer demand and government regulations.

Tavares said he expects a shortage of EV batteries by 2024-2025, followed by a lack of raw materials for the vehicles that will slow availability and adoption of EVs by 2027-2028.

Executives have been saying this privately since 2017. The supply chain from which legacy automakers rely on hasn't been ready to make the switch, and there is an enormous learning curve transitioning to EVs from production to design. Which proves my point-there will not be a heard of new EVs coming to market in 24 months, more like the later half of 2025 onward.

Which will be a nearly 4 generation lead for Tesla in the EV space.

White Shadow said:
I think you're underestimating the legacy car manufacturers. Sure, they got into the game late, but it seems like everyone is committed at this point and these companies not only have the resources, but also decades of experience manufacturing cars to a much higher standard than Tesla can even imagine at this point. Tesla is an absolute noob in comparison. And it shows in the cars they are making right now.

The big advanatge for Tesla at the moment is battery technology/management and infrastructure. But that advantage will evaporate in the future as we see solid state battery technology come on line & mature and infrastructure improve vastly. I think Tesla has a HUGE job ahead of them if the goal is stay ahead of legacy automakers in the BEV game. Personally, I don't even think it's possible.

So perhaps you can see my confusion here. Are SSS batteries and vast manufacturing capabilities right around the corner or far off into the future?

Can you walk into a dealership and get a mass produced EV with less wait time outside of Tesla or is that not a big deal anymore (three posts ago)?

?????

 

[Kano-riha]

My Model X started making some weird noises coming from the front suspension. Brought it in for service. Changed
- aft link assembly (both sides)
- fore link assembly (both sides)
- tie rod ball (both sides)
- driven Hub (both sides)
total costs over $5,000

After picking it up I noticed there were still noises so I brought it back again. Now the air spring needed replacement. Additional cost $3,500

I was very taken aback. Where are all these people telling me they drive 500.000 miles with only changing the washer fluid? I talked to the lady at the reception and she said that this is normal for higher mileage Model X. They are now coming in in droves with similar issues. She has worked at other high-end dealerships (Lexus. Mercedes) but she never seen anything like this with Model X. The other day there was a client who needed both front and rear suspension repair. Total cost $16,000!

The lady told me that Tesla - being a newer company- doesn’t have the experience in designing good suspensions and now we are paying the price for that. I even have to sell stock to pay for this!

We also talked about FSD. She told me to not hold our breath for having this anytime soon. My believe in Tesla is shaken to its core..

Doesn’t your insurance cover the suspension damages?
Given the $ to get the suspension fixed, it should cover it, right?

 

[MP3Mike]

Doesn’t your insurance cover the suspension damages?
Given the $ to get the suspension fixed, it should cover it, right?

What coverage are you seeing would cover it? Was it collision damage?

 

[Kano-riha]

What coverage are you seeing would cover it? Was it collision damage?

Not a collision damage.
A wear and tear damage as yours.

 

[MP3Mike]

A wear and tear damage as yours.

Insurance doesn't cover wear and tear.

 

[Xtrordinary]

No surprise here. Elon/Tesla are always the smartest people in the room. They way they do it has to be the best and the way everyone else has done it has to be wrong. Because Elon is a micromanager from hell, no one actually competent will work for him (see also: revolving door of senior leadership). So Tesla reinvents the wheel over and over again.

Don't get me wrong, reinventing the wheel in areas like the drivetrain, are absolutely outstanding. This outside the box thinking has produced some amazing advancements. But it would be better if Tesla would hire and retain a few graybeards to help them with the things that are common across all vehicles and vehicle manufacturers. Stuff like suspension, glass, logistics and parts supply, etc. If they were able to take the best of the current industry and combine it w/ their advancements in places the current industry falls short, they would be unstoppable.

Of course, it's easy for me to say that sitting behind my keyboard. In practice it is much harder to know what parts of the current industry are the best and what can be improved without first trying new things.

It's no secret that the S/X suspension puts strain on the front half-shafts and chews them up. Running in the lowest suspension setting helps. Supposedly the Refresh model has an all-new suspension that hopefully addresses the issue. Though some people are reporting vibration under acceleration which I believe is what destroys the half shafts.

All that being said, I would be nervous owning a Tesla outside of the warranty period. My wife and I have decisions to make as hers is up in December, 2022. She hates the yoke so doesn't want a new S.

Running low suspension might help the suspension, but the wheels camber out and the inside of the tires get chewed up. I had to replace both my winter and summer tires twice in the first 4 years. In my first year out of warranty, I've now spent over $12 on repairs, almost all of it suspension.