Great, so M3 gets the same flawed navigation.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
seriously folks, try to get Otmar to comment, he is a tinker'er with experience tearing down tesla packs and occasionally on TMC
Otmar
I think it's further worth repeating - the HUD is nothing but rumor. There's nothing that I've seen indicating anything beyond vague hopes on that front.
Yet I see it mentioned here and on every blog. No tweets from Elon, leaks, samples, anything. It's all conjecture and I think people need to stop hanging their hat on it.
I'd like to be wrong, but I want to be accurate.
CALGARYARSENAL
Member
Tesla doesn't advertise with them.
The point is that it will not have any bearing on timeframe of the launch.
Yep, exactly right. Elon is set to give guidance that is far above the estimates. I think MS/MX guidance will come in at 100-110k, which in itself is above estimates. M3 is the wildcard. If they can guide for 50-100k M3, credibly, then they can effectively almost double auto guidance. Wildcard 2 is TE. Everyone has it as a 0 or close to it. I expect guidance reflecting that "crazy, bonkers" demand Elon has talked about that would start in Q4. Wildcard 3 is solar. Basically everyone has it as negative or 0 right now. They could guide to some big numbers here, too - remember we will get 1-2 quarters of roof deliveries too.
If all this guidance hits in the Q4 call, analysts will be given the choice to either adjust models and significantly increase price targets or assume he's lying and do nothing. I honestly expect the latter, but at some point when Elon is achieving 90-100% of what he set out to do in 2017 the market will have to reward him.
Buy a car with better navigation. let us know which one it is.
Zhelko Dimic
Careful bull
I'm sure M3 launch will be better than MX.
But I'd trust Elon's inner growth a lot more if he didn't do SCTY deal.
Not because deal is wrong, but because doing it showed 1. disregard for what WS thinks, and 2. added risk.
#1 shows he doesn't have modicum of wish to play by common rules, and much of WS doesn't want to deal with that kind of person, until he convince them again he can walk on water. And he will, in time, but for now, we are where we are...
#2 adding risk shows he was comfortable he can handle it, and is a form of hubris, especially in the light of #1
These pictures are as good as anything offered as a result of tear down - they come from Tesla. This is how relevant elements of inside construction of the pack prior to change look.
Hint: count quantity of cells per module to see if it matches what was discovered during the tear downs.
Last edited:
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
This is misleading as only a small portion of one side of each cell is contacted by the cooling tubes.
Thanks for the several references to prismatic cells. However I still don't have any idea how these are actually constructed.
Unlike the cylindrical cells where the GF1 open house shared details on how the jelly roll content is constructed and how much TSLA is participating in the content of the cell cans. The Panasonic secret sauce appears to be transforming large rolls into small sliced rolls and stuffing them into the cans. The formats mechanical advantages would appear to provide a non-trivial portion of the scaling cost efficiencies of a GF.
From a first principals perspective, cylinders are very efficient at a cell level. This is also a convenient scale at which to perform quality control of the pack content, by 'discarding' under performing cells prior to pack construction.
So, the quoted content makes less sense than before.
Clearly the acknowledged pack level advantage in part derives from the mechanical advantages (or key properties) of the cylindrical format.
Possibly - I couldn't tell from Vlad's prior posting of the two pics whether both those were from the known 18650's or whether the rhs was from a conjectured 21-70, etc. BUT - I'm in no position to worry about whether we're discussing what is versus what might be: after all, isn't mischievous speculation 99% of what occurs here? So I'm considering the transfer through air - or whatever other medium surrounds every battery in each pack - of heat.
Of course, to be considered as being even remotely rigorous, I concede that one then needs demonstrate efficacy of any basal "active" transfer medium (Vlad's position) vs. whatever might be bathing the sidewall and how such heat thereafter is removed.
Didn't I say I was finished here? I should be doing year-end tax stuff...
And by increasing the cell, this small portion becomes even (relatively) smaller.
No ammo available at Fidelity as of 11:10am.
However, given high thermal conductivity of aluminum, the whole circumference of casing, although only one side of it is in contact with cooling duct, will have virtually the same temperature, slightly above the cooling duct temperature...
Last edited:
That's pretty loose, though. That guy's an industrial designer - he's not a technology guy.
Plus, AR has lots of uses beyond in-vehicle - such as service and design work.
The amount of chatter people are giving to HUD on blogs and forums is a little much, they're at the point it's just an assumption and there's no real evidence of that.
Many people out of the USA are priced out of Mercedes, BMW, Porsche , etc.
The strong dollar never seems to reduce BMW prices in the USA
Last edited:
I agree it's not a smoking gun on its own, but added onto the 'spaceship' comments and general spartan design of the 3's prototype interior, I would place an extremely high probability of a HUD. And by that I don't necessarily mean anything ground-breaking, but at least on par with what other automakers offer today. At least to start.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
