Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla BEV Competition Developments

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
To me this is just as much vapourware as other concept cars until I see it in production.

Safety is easier on larger cars. Making it smaller means less crumple zones. Also using Alumnium can have had some benefits here which the Model 3 won't have.

Low drag will also won't be easier on a smaller car and also stands in contrast with a great looking car and safety.

Then you have the lower price which also limits you in materials and manufacturing methodes.


There will be compromises.

Elon will not compromise on safety. The car will have a very low drag coefficient. Tesla has always been very creative in solving problems. You are free to think Model 3 is vaporware, but at this point you'd have to either not have been paying close enough attention to what's happened or asleep.

- - - Updated - - -

True but aluminum is lighter.

Requires less horsepower to move the car.

Requires less robust suspension components to uphold the car.

Less prone to metal fatigue and much less prone to rust making the vehicle more durable.

These are benefits that make aluminum inherently more valuable.

There is this little thing called high strength (low-alloy) steel. That would fit the bill perfectly between aluminum and conventional steel.
 
Elon will not compromise on safety. The car will have a very low drag coefficient. Tesla has always been very creative in solving problems. You are free to think Model 3 is vaporware, but at this point you'd have to either not have been paying close enough attention to what's happened or asleep.
I meant all the things it is supposed to be not the car as a whole.

Sure maybe they focus on star rating and very low drag, but that might mean the design suffers.

And yes Tesla has been creative, but that's a luxury you mostly have with high margin cars, not so much with a mainstream high volume car.
 
There is this little thing called high strength (low-alloy) steel. That would fit the bill perfectly between aluminum and conventional steel.


The price of high strength steel also fits in between aluminum and conventional steel.

It is not a given that high strength steel is a better value.

If it was a slam dunk the Ford F-150 would not have an aluminum body.

Tesla already has all the tools and know-how to work with aluminum.

It has never manufactured a high strength steel car before.


But no one really knows what the current thinking inside Tesla is beyond Elon and a few senior executives. Maybe 3% aluminum maybe 85%.

- - - Updated - - -

And yes Tesla has been creative, but that's a luxury you mostly have with high margin cars, not so much with a mainstream high volume car.

Tesla is benchmarking the BMW 3 Series and Audi A4.

Not the VW Golf or VW Jetta.
 
Sure maybe they focus on star rating and very low drag, but that might mean the design suffers.

Won't happen. The Model 3 must be (and therefore it will be) better than any ICE in its segment and thus so compelling that people have no logical choice but to buy it, otherwise their Secret Master Plan is at risk of not coming to fruition.

And yes Tesla has been creative, but that's a luxury you mostly have with high margin cars, not so much with a mainstream high volume car.

Creativity is not synonymous with high margin cars. The whole point of creativity is the ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, etc... Tesla excels at creativity.

- - - Updated - - -

Tesla already has all the tools and know-how to work with aluminum. It has never manufactured a high strength steel car before.

Stop now. Tesla had never built an EV before the Roadster. But they did. Tesla had never designed and built an EV from the ground up. But they did. Tesla had never manufactured an aluminum vehicle before. But they did. I can go on for several lines, but I think you get the idea.

They will have to build (via the recently acquired tooling shop in Michigan?) a new set of tooling for the Model 3. So it's a non-issue to design and build tooling for something like HSLA steel instead of aluminum. If they don't have any toolmakers on hand that know how to work with HSLA (highly doubt it), then they can hire some. There's no need to worry about press lines. What they have will be capable of stamping steel parts. Big presses tend not to be fussy that way, they're happy to hit harder or softer, faster or slower, deeper or shallower.

But no one really knows what the current thinking inside Tesla is beyond Elon and a few senior executives. Maybe 3% aluminum maybe 85%.

Correct. I was specifically addressing the 'a steel car is too heavy, blah, blah, blah, blah, therefore it has to be aluminum, blah, blah, blah' arguments.
 
Last edited:
Stop now. Tesla had never built an EV before the Roadster. But they did. Tesla had never designed and built an EV from the ground up. But they did. Tesla had never manufactured an aluminum vehicle before. But they did. I can go on for several lines, but I think you get the idea.

They will have to build (via the recently acquired tooling shop in Michigan?) a new set of tooling for the Model 3. So it's a non-issue to design and build tooling for something like HSLA steel instead of aluminum. If they don't have any toolmakers on hand that know how to work with HSLA (highly doubt it), then they can hire some. There's no need to worry about press lines. What they have will be capable of stamping steel parts. Big presses tend not to be fussy that way, they're happy to hit harder or softer, faster or slower, deeper or shallower.

But now they have experience manufacturing aluminum vehicles, unlike 2008. Manufacturing steel vehicles is another bridge to cross that they may not have to cross. Tesla is not required to make life for itself the most difficult possible.
 
Details are kind of underwhelming. A bulk of it is spent on "electrified" vehicles (which can include hybrids). The new Focus EV is better than the old (on par with new 30kWh Leaf with ~100 miles of range and DC charging), but compared to the Bolt obviously is much less compelling. They are also using LG Chem cells, but I guess less energy dense. Ford did push for 150kW CCS, but given the low range I'm guessing the new Focus EV does not have it yet.
 
Details are kind of underwhelming. A bulk of it is spent on "electrified" vehicles (which can include hybrids). The new Focus EV is better than the old (on par with new 30kWh Leaf with ~100 miles of range and DC charging), but compared to the Bolt obviously is much less compelling. They are also using LG Chem cells, but I guess less energy dense. Ford did push for 150kW CCS, but given the low range I'm guessing the new Focus EV does not have it yet.

The Verge's article is pretty terrible.

For a more comprehensive analysis, read Car & Driver's take: http://blog.caranddriver.com/ford-announces-4-5-billion-investment-in-electrified-vehicles-by-2020/

Car & Driver's staff understands the distinction between "electrified", which can include hybrids of different kinds, and "electric". They also have a nice rundown of which models are likely to fall into Ford's plans.
 
LOL! When has Tesla ever concerned itself with how difficult a task might be? Non-issue.

That is why Tesla owners/investors have coined the term Soonvember and Tesla Time.

Maybe with mass market vehicle where it must remain on schedule with Gigafactory in order to keep the company solvent they should start concerning themselves with how difficult a task they set up for themselves.

If Model 3 is delayed even 6 months after GF is fully operational it is a very larger issue and bigger as the delay becomes longer.

- - - Updated - - -

Details are kind of underwhelming. A bulk of it is spent on "electrified" vehicles (which can include hybrids).

Ford includes vehicles with start-stop ICE technology as "electrified" because it contains a tiny lithium ion battery.
 
Details are kind of underwhelming. A bulk of it is spent on "electrified" vehicles (which can include hybrids). The new Focus EV is better than the old (on par with new 30kWh Leaf with ~100 miles of range and DC charging), but compared to the Bolt obviously is much less compelling. They are also using LG Chem cells, but I guess less energy dense. Ford did push for 150kW CCS, but given the low range I'm guessing the new Focus EV does not have it yet.

I don't think Ford will only offer the updated Focus EV going forward.

As you mentioned they were quite specific asking for 150 KW CCS options months ago. This only makes sense if they think about bigger batteries / more range.

What if Ford (for example) follows Honda's Clarity and Hyundai's Ioniq route and offers larger PHEVs with a pure EV option one day?
 
Last edited:
I don't think Ford will only offer the updated Focus EV going forward.

As you mentioned they were quite specific asking for 150 KW CCS options months ago. This only makes sense if they think about bigger batteries / more range.

What if Ford (for example) follows Honda's Clarity and Hyundai's Ioniq route and offers larger PHEVs with a pure EV option one day?

Yeah, and when will that happen? They're offering a 100 mile, low volume, Focus at the end of 2016, that will have to compete with the Chevy Bolt. Going to have price them pretty low to entice anyone.

Ford seems to be shuffling their feet with a dedicated BEV...or even a practical PHEV. FWIW, my parents have a C-Max Energi...but it has some serious limitations if you need to travel anywhere with more than 2 people.

Even if they start building them, I have seen no evidence of their commitment to selling them in volume, nationwide.
 
In the future, of course. It's all about the future.

Except for Tesla. Tesla is screwed in the future.

Ford will continue to add new vehicles...

Raj Nair, head of global product development, said Ford will be in the game."We will introduce vehicles with competitive range within the (five-year) time frame, Nair said.
The expectation is the next-generation Focus will meet or exceed the 200-range milestone that is becoming a necessity to be competitive. Ford is expected to introduce an all-new Focus in 2018, when production of the Focus moves from Michigan Assembly Plant to a facility outside the country, likely in Mexico.

and

Ford is also expected to show the next-generation Fusion Energi plug-in hybrid next month at the 2016 North American International Auto Show in Detroit.

In the future, all new products will be designed to be powered by engines or batteries.

Ford to spend $4.5 billion by 2020 on electric vehicles

When will Tesla's Model3 ship by comparison? I doubt before 2018-2019 in significant volume.

I didn't write Tesla is screwed, but the market will get incredibly crowded for PHEVs and EVs well before 2020.
 
Last edited:
Ford will continue to add new vehicles...

and

Ford to spend $4.5 billion by 2020 on electric vehicles

When will Tesla's Model3 ship by comparison? I doubt before 2018-2019 in significant volume.

I didn't write Tesla is screwed, but the market will get incredibly crowded for PHEVs and EVs well before 2020.
In summary: Tesla will be screwed because they will be late, while others who didn't even promise a timeline or volume for a 200 mile EV (only a 100 mile one for the 2017 model year) will have their car out before then. Basically the same narrative.
 
I contend there is no separate market for PHEVs and EVs. There is only one market, for Vs. That one is big enough for everybody who produces quality Vs.

Ok, there's one car market (many bulls here pretend that Tesla is somehow a "unique" tech/energy company, not a car company and therefore deserves a huge premium).

If you apply the same valuation metrics to Tesla as to all major car makers then it's grossly overvalued.
 
I contend there is no separate market for PHEVs and EVs. There is only one market, for Vs. That one is big enough for everybody who produces quality Vs.
This is another common bear misconception. The idea that all EVs share a market "the EV market" while the overall automarket is actually many different markets (the luxury market, the SUV market, the CUV market, mid-size, compact, sub-compact, full size, pickup truck, etc, etc.) What they don't realize is that many people cross shop a model S against a Mercedes S class, but very few cross shop it against a Smart ED (but they believe the Model S and ED are in the same class (class being EVs) but the S class and Model S are in different classes (S class in the luxury car class and Model S in the EV class)
 
Ok, there's one car market (many bulls here pretend that Tesla is somehow a "unique" tech/energy company, not a car company and therefore deserves a huge premium).

If you apply the same valuation metrics to Tesla as to all major car makers then it's grossly overvalued.
That is not at all a correct characterization. How many major car makers have shown a 50% YoY growth? How many major car makers are less than 20 years old? How many major car makers spend 15+% of revenue on R&D?

While the overall market they are competing in is the same, that says nothing about the characteristics of the company itself.

Your "incredibly crowded" narrative is the same narrative people have continued to criticize, esp. given you also argue it is battery constrained right now and will reach millions annually by 2020, which suggests it is not demand constrained right now.