Personally, I think GM came out with the Bolt just to try and put pressure on Tesla. Good for them, maybe it will help push Tesla to deliver on time if the Bolt is supposed to be available in 2017. HOWEVER, since I (HOPEFULLY will) have my choice of which 200 mile range ~$30,000 EV I will be buying in a few years I will be going with the Tesla III, not the Bolt. I had a Volt, I am going to have another, but they are not in the same league with Tesla.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Steven Loyens
Member
http://www.autoevolution.com/news/c...ghai-with-260-km-range-live-photos-94655.html
I think TESLA need's to hurry up or the Chinese will sell more cars than them. And at lower prices also.
The moment the first cars are out that can deliver me 200 Miles - 360 km driving in winter with the AC on at mostly normal highway speeds under 25.000€ I'll be getting on the EV bandwagon.
Having tasted EV driving lots of times already at work and Tesla's First Tuesdays here in Belgium it can't come soon enough for me so I can ditch my diesel powered Toyota.
I think TESLA need's to hurry up or the Chinese will sell more cars than them. And at lower prices also.
The moment the first cars are out that can deliver me 200 Miles - 360 km driving in winter with the AC on at mostly normal highway speeds under 25.000€ I'll be getting on the EV bandwagon.
Having tasted EV driving lots of times already at work and Tesla's First Tuesdays here in Belgium it can't come soon enough for me so I can ditch my diesel powered Toyota.
Trev Page
Member
Remember: without a Supercharger network the competition isn't going to sell anything near what Tesla will do. Never forget about the SC system when discussing EVs. It's the magic bullet that Tesla has that no one else does.
Adm
Active Member
More competition is a good thing. It will mature the market and gives Tesla an electric opponent to go up against. The market is going to be big enough for more manufacturers, stronger yet, the market is going to grow beyond Tesla's means. Talk about Tesla killers is nonsense unless they have product that's better and they need the capacity to flood the market. There are no concrete plans by manufacturers to do either.
Tesla has this down:
What has GM/GM's supplier?
People still don't get it: It's the Batteries, Stupid!
A car without multi-GWh annual battery supply does not matter.
50k ModelS per year is +4GWh EV.
200mile bolt will need ~40kWh battery. At 50k annual production that is 2GWh worth of batteries. Where/whom from?
Come on, it's not that hard. In fact, If you believe this argument: Tesla isn't an auto maker, it's a battery company, then the answer to "Where does GM get it's batteries" is, from Tesla, of course. After all, it's all about advancing EV's, right?
Besides, if Tesla can get +4GWh/year now from Panasonic's Japanese factories, it's not a stretch to assume GM can get a few there, too. Yes, GM uses a different chemistry/form factor, but that's a minor problem they can easily work around.
This argument only fails if Tesla is absorbing nearly 100% of worldwide production. And if that happens, I have a suspicion that someone just might build another plant or two.
Red Sage
The Cybernetic Samurai
Precisely! All this means is that Model ≡ won't be released in Q1 or Q2 of 2016. What's the big deal? We already knew that! The cars are due in 2017. With luck, I'll be able to take delivery for my 50th birthday in July! ;-)
Agreed! Thrice, even!
Indeed. Correct on all points. This is the very essence of the Secret Master Plan. Tesla Motors presents both the carrot and the stick. First showing how electrified transportation is desirable and beneficial... Then showing how it can dominate a market over those who don't follow suit.
I believe that General Motors expects to get their batteries from LG in Korea. They also have a facility in Michigan. GM has also invested in a small battery research firm that is based in Michigan, that claims to be on track to exceed Tesla Motors' capabilities... SOON. We'll see.
GM has no intention of going wide with Bolt/Volt anytime, if ever. They intend to sell ten times as many Cruze/Malibu instead, every year. If anything, hybrid versions of Cruze/Malibu will outsell Bolt/Volt on their own. If it has a plug, traditional automobile manufacturers will always limit public exposure.
JohnSnowNW
Active Member
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
Yep, it's all about the infrastructure. Tesla nailed it.
Oregon has minimal incentives for an EV buyer. Yet Oregon has one of the highest EV adoption rates in the US, easily beating out the states with high incentives. Why? Because Oregon decided to put money into building an EV infrastructure, instead of direct incentives to buyers. And it has worked.
https://transportevolved.com/2014/1...doption-isnt-necessarily-purchase-incentives/
Oregon has minimal incentives for an EV buyer. Yet Oregon has one of the highest EV adoption rates in the US, easily beating out the states with high incentives. Why? Because Oregon decided to put money into building an EV infrastructure, instead of direct incentives to buyers. And it has worked.
https://transportevolved.com/2014/1...doption-isnt-necessarily-purchase-incentives/
Having a vast EV charging infrastructure network, specifically a fast charge, means that EVs can go more places. They are not restricted to just what they can do with overnight charging. This makes them appeal to a larger segment of the car-buying population.
Oregon EV Charging Infrastructure, November 2014 (via PlugShare)
Incentives alone cannot increase the market size for EVs. Without an infrastructure to support them, EVs are only useful within a radius of 50% of their range. In such infrastructure barren areas battery electric EVs, even long range EVs, will only appeal to diehard few.
No, its even harder when you start to grasp what 4GWh actually means.
100k Model 3 with 60kWh battery will consume 6 GWh of batteries. 50% more than current panasonic production.
Every other car maker is silently relying on Chinese to deliver all the battery they want and need. No go.
Their total combined production capacity does not come close to tesla's gigafactory. They would have to stop delivering cells to all the laptop makers etc and would still come short.
I will dance a dance of joy when LG-chem or XY company announce their own "dekagiga" factory. Just giga is not enough anymore.
Remember, gigafactory is actually 30-giga factory, with 50-Giga pack capacity.
1 GWh will only suffice for ~40k 200 mile EVs per year. There is a very good reason tesla was forced into building their own battery production. There just ain't enough others to produce enough batteries for real 'lowcost' EV produced in hundreds of thousands per year.
So, don't bother showing me EV prototipes. Without a really big battery factory one will not be able to make them anyway.
Red Sage
The Cybernetic Samurai
Maybe the Great State of California intends to use that process to make hydrogen fuel cell cars viable. It will only take fifty years and untold billions of taxpayer dollars. Never mind that it would cost 1/100th as much to expand charging opportunities for EVs here.
Honestly, there's probably a reasonable cost analysis to be done to determine whether or not Tesla should farm out its charging stations to other auto makers as well.
ZachShahan
Active Member
Tesla has already stated it would provide others with access to the Superchargers if they built their EVs to be compatible with them. As far as I know, no one has gone anywhere with that offer.
Of course, you have to assume that Tesla would charge for that, and the auto manufacturers would have to roll the cost into the cost of a car.
The Supercharger network is getting better every day. The longer other automakers delay doing something serious in the charging space, the more inevitable it seems that everyone's going to be paying Tesla to use its chargers.
Tesla's huge competitive advantages, imho, are: 1) the battery supply chain it is building for itself (and maybe some friends), 2) its wonderful supercharger network, 3) software that is several leagues above the competition, 4) a reputation for building superb products that "wow" people, and 5) a reputation for wanting to serve customers in a direct, honest way -- not just take their money. Excluding the 2 subjective points at the end, I'm not seeing another automaker offer something comparable for 1, 2, or 3, let alone 1, 2, and 3.
What that means is: they simply aren't serious about electrification, or they are far too slow-moving to compete. In either case, it looks like Tesla dominates the future of automobiles.
My 2 cents.
