Tesla needs to refresh the Model S, asap.

[strider]

Part of the MISSION is to move the world from polluting ICEs to EVs, and to make a profit whilst at it. Semis and Pickup are next in line. Then Ocean going ships. If it means a facelift every tens years, so be it. Others manufacturers will give enough facelift alright.

Oh by the way, I need the Pickup truck with 500miles range and enough capacity to spare, to power the house. I'd say the equivalent of two PowerWalls and a way round the regulations, by treating the Pickup truck as a power generator of sorts.

So, to the stars and beyond ….and enough bottom-line to keep everybody happy.

Yes, but the devil is in that last part. Tesla's balance sheet is a wreck. If they overextend themselves and go out of business that hurts everyone (there have been numerous stories lately about how close they have been to folding quite regularly). They need to focus on a few models and get to a point where they can deliver those profitably. Then branch out from there. But Elon is from the raven school of management and can't focus on anything for more than 5 minutes so here we are.

 

[sandpiper]

Yes, but the devil is in that last part. Tesla's balance sheet is a wreck. If they overextend themselves and go out of business that hurts everyone (there have been numerous stories lately about how close they have been to folding quite regularly). They need to focus on a few models and get to a point where they can deliver those profitably. Then branch out from there. But Elon is from the raven school of management and can't focus on anything for more than 5 minutes so here we are.

I'm not sure that I agree with that. An auto company is a different animal than a typical business.

a) Products take a long time to get from idea to market. 3 years is exceptionally fast.
b) There is an enormous capital requirement, and most of that is laid out well before delivery.
c) Consumers expect change every few years. They don't want anything that seems "old". That creates major demand cycles.
d) The few existing suppliers are HUGE and exceptionally well financed with enormous political power.

If Tesla wants to survive they need a diversity of products to smooth out the demand cycles. And they need the scale of operations to give them some political clout to fight the headwinds that powerful entrenched competitors are directing at Tesla. To survive, I think Tesla needs a "get big fast" approach. Given the time it takes to bring a vehicle to market that means that they appear to be shotgunning everything and producing little, while the reality is all of these things are moving forward behind the curtain. And it means that we're going to see a stream of new products hitting the market regularly from here on in.

Automotive is the true "go big or go home" industry.

 

[strider]

I'm not sure that I agree with that. An auto company is a different animal than a typical business.

a) Products take a long time to get from idea to market. 3 years is exceptionally fast.
b) There is an enormous capital requirement, and most of that is laid out well before delivery.
c) Consumers expect change every few years. They don't want anything that seems "old". That creates major demand cycles.
d) The few existing suppliers are HUGE and exceptionally well financed with enormous political power.

If Tesla wants to survive they need a diversity of products to smooth out the demand cycles. And they need the scale of operations to give them some political clout to fight the headwinds that powerful entrenched competitors are directing at Tesla. To survive, I think Tesla needs a "get big fast" approach. Given the time it takes to bring a vehicle to market that means that they appear to be shotgunning everything and producing little, while the reality is all of these things are moving forward behind the curtain. And it means that we're going to see a stream of new products hitting the market regularly from here on in.

Automotive is the true "go big or go home" industry.

I have no argument to anything you said. Now tell me how semi trucks fits in there? Freightliner is part of Daimler but in general, NO automotive company makes semi trucks. The markets are colossally different. Tesla knows absolutely nothing about the semi market and there is literally zero common things they can use for efficiency gains. Semis require all new superchargers, all new service/support mechanism, all new chassis, body panels, regulatory concerns, and on and on and on. This is the last thing they need right now, investing monumental amounts of capital on a market they have no idea how to compete in. But that's Elon for you. Genius cuts both ways.

 

[rooter]

From the beginning I've felt that Tesla Semi is 'too much'. Although, alot of ppl have lost fortunes betting against Elon.

There is that $billion note about to come due...

 

[sam2035]

Tesla knows absolutely nothing about the semi market and there is literally zero common things they can use for efficiency gains.

Tesla knew next to nothing about the automobile market or high end sedans when they started (or so we think). Yet quite a lot of people bought into the dream. There are indeed common and major components in the Semi and the other cars - battery technology, charging technology, motor design and autonomous driving. Early takers of Semis will be large fleet operators with own charging infrastructures at end points. So I think the argument about Tesla building Semis is moot. The big three in the USA are scrambling to electrify their brands, particularly the pickup segment. Mercedes Benz, Volkswagen are building electric vehicles and have advance truck and Semi programs. Tesla is the catalyst and agent provocateu and catalyst for all that is going on in the automobile industry right now. Tesla as continuously upgraded its vehicles with over the air updates software upgrades, adding value and improving safety and convenience. Therefore, upgrades is part of the DNA of a Tesla.

AMG was an independent that built supped up engines and high end accessories for the Mercedes brand until bought over by Mercedes Benz. ​

If the market for refresh is so big, independents will come in as we have seen with some bumpers and consoles for the Tesla S.

Therefore, if you can get a Tesla, do not wait, get one now. You need to upgrade to the latest hardware suites of cameras and autonomous computer models? Do so. Enjoy your Tesla and key on to the bigger dream.

Cheers.​

 

[sandpiper]

I have no argument to anything you said. Now tell me how semi trucks fits in there? Freightliner is part of Daimler but in general, NO automotive company makes semi trucks. The markets are colossally different. Tesla knows absolutely nothing about the semi market and there is literally zero common things they can use for efficiency gains. Semis require all new superchargers, all new service/support mechanism, all new chassis, body panels, regulatory concerns, and on and on and on. This is the last thing they need right now, investing monumental amounts of capital on a market they have no idea how to compete in. But that's Elon for you. Genius cuts both ways.

Good question. I don't claim to know a lot about semi trucks or the market. But I'll throw some things out, with the qualification that I may well be full of crap.

a) There are some very significant technical commonalities between the semi and Tesla's other vehicles:
- the motor/drive/inverter units come from the M3.
- the battery modules come from the M3.
- most of the software comes from the existing vehicles.

b) From an engineering perspective, the rest of the truck is relatively simple and a lot will be similar to what exists on the market. And I suspect that a lot of components can be bought from third party manufacturers. You've got a welded steel chassis, suspension, steering gear, braking systems and then the cab/operator controls. You're not looking at enormous sales volumes, so the manufacturing tooling and automation capital required to assemble a semi truck is much less than it would be for a high volume car. It's simply a more manual process.

c) Service and support is an issue for sure. They'd be smart to enlist private service shops. I think this is inevitable for the cars as well, but that's a different debate. There will likely be far less maintenance on the drive train, but certainly everything else will still need scheduled service.

d) Tesla and related companies have shown some skill on the regulatory side. They know how to get what they need through the bureaucracy.

e) The "megacharger" will borrow heavily from the existing and V3 superchargers, and the Telsa energy products. The current supercharger are simply parallel stacks of the same charger that is installed in all of the vehicles. There is no reason why the "mega charger" would be different. And with the Tesla energy storage systems, Tesla clearly has a lot of capability in dealing with high voltage/high current power distribution. I expect that you're going to see the early megachargers bought and paid for by the fleet owners that need them.

e) And one good thing about this market... it's driven by accountants. If there's a financial payback, these things will sell. The market is not driven by the whims of flaky consumers.

Feel free to shoot me down.

 

[strider]

I've had a think about this during the night.

The only way I could see the semi working is if they follow the original Roadster model and buy rolling chassis from an existing manufacturer. Then Tesla installs the drive train and puts the battery where the sleeper cab would go. That would simplify homologation and manufacturing.

I still have concerns about the megachargers. Not about the tech, but the simple cost of deploying them. They are already stretched thin deploying SCs. Now they have to deploy megachargers in parallel which is a huge redundant cost. I also think commercial demand charges will make the megachargers uneconomical in many markets.

I still don't think the semi is a good idea. Tesla will have to employ entire teams for sales, service, support, and manufacturing on a low-volume (and likely low margin) product. Based on an electrek article the $180,000 semi will have a 1MWh pack. Just the cells will cost $111,000 based on a November, 2018 electrek article. I just don't see the margin....

I absolutely agree with @sam2035 that Tesla has been a change agent in the industry. The fact that other companies have sprung up (along with the majors) to do electric semis means that Tesla has done its job.

So again, I say, why do this? They should spend the time and money to make their current products better and expand within the passenger car and light truck segment. The semi just doesn't fit at all with the rest of the company.

 

[whitex]

Totally agree. I am dying to buy a Model S and have been holding out for about a year now. Not dropping a single penny while I know that the 3 has a better battery pack.

Good news for you! It turns out the 18650's used today in the Model X and S P100D already outperform the 2170 battery, therefore the 3 does not have a better battery pack, therefore you can stop dying and order your Model S P100D!

Tesla Model 3 2170 Energy Density Compared To Bolt, Model S P100D - Tesla Motors Club

 

[scole04]

Good news for you! It turns out the 18650's used today in the Model X and S P100D already outperform the 2170 battery, therefore the 3 does not have a better battery pack, therefore you can stop dying and order your Model S P100D!

Tesla Model 3 2170 Energy Density Compared To Bolt, Model S P100D - Tesla Motors Club

View attachment 375754

This purely looks at density. Model 3s batteries handling track mode for example is beyond what 18650 cells can handle. 2170 is overall better for the money. The owners spending the most should have access to this.

 

[ucmndd]

Model 3s batteries handling track mode for example is beyond what 18650 cells can handle.

Model S being unable to sustain track speeds for an extended period has nothing to do with the cells.

 

[scole04]

Model S being unable to sustain track speeds for an extended period has nothing to do with the cells.

2170 cells are advantageous or Tesla would not have wasted time in design, production and implementation. We are making arguments that its ok that tesla gives us older cells in the car we pay the most for. Tesla wants our best in turns of money i think its reasonable to get the most up to date cells even if there is no advantage other than being newer.

 

[jgs]

2170 cells are advantageous or Tesla would not have wasted time in design, production and implementation.

There are multiple factors to optimize for, and for Model 3, the most important one to Tesla is cost of goods. Presumably "I want to help Tesla's margins improve" is not going to be the top priority for most (any?) customers when making their buying decision.

 

[FMinMI]

Although the drop in model S/X demand can be attributed to buyers opting for the model 3. I think it’s buyers who are waiting for a refresh.
Besides the front fascia update and slight rear bumper difference along with seat changes, the model s is very much like the 2012 model

I think there are many people waiting for a new model s, a redisigned S.
It’s been over 6 years!

I consider the 2016.5 a refresh so it has not been 6 years.

Tesla does things differently - never do you get new features on 'last years' model if you bought a GM, Ford, Chrysler... There has been new seats, new hardware, ever-updating software.

 

[AMPd]

2170 cells are advantageous or Tesla would not have wasted time in design, production and implementation. We are making arguments that its ok that tesla gives us older cells in the car we pay the most for. Tesla wants our best in turns of money i think its reasonable to get the most up to date cells even if there is no advantage other than being newer.

What difference does it make what cells are in the car?
You pay for what tesla is advertising.

I consider the 2016.5 a refresh so it has not been 6 years.

Tesla does things differently - never do you get new features on 'last years' model if you bought a GM, Ford, Chrysler... There has been new seats, new hardware, ever-updating software.

have you received free hardware upgrades? Or any free useful features?

 

[ucmndd]

2170 cells are advantageous or Tesla would not have wasted time in design, production and implementation. We are making arguments that its ok that tesla gives us older cells in the car we pay the most for. Tesla wants our best in turns of money i think its reasonable to get the most up to date cells even if there is no advantage other than being newer.

All of which is completely irrelevant to your initial baseless claim about “track mode” in the model 3 being due to superior battery cells.

 

[Uncle Paul]

People wanting an overall refresh should notice that Tesla does not typically do overall refreshes. Instead they have a program of continous self improvement. They have teams working on the suspension, lighting, batteries, motors, computers, displays, steering, braking, handling, interior, quality control, cost containment, sound systems, etc.
From time to time they seamlessly institute a running change that is designed to make the current model better or less expensive. No need to do an overall total refresh. The current Model S is still stunning, with an ageless look. Not sure is is possible to predict a time when the entire car might be re-designed.

Designers are mostly working on new Roadster, Truck, Semi, etc.

 

[AMPd]

People wanting an overall refresh should notice that Tesla does not typically do overall refreshes. Instead they have a program of continous self improvement. They have teams working on the suspension, lighting, batteries, motors, computers, displays, steering, braking, handling, interior, quality control, cost containment, sound systems, etc.
From time to time they seamlessly institute a running change that is designed to make the current model better or less expensive. No need to do an overall total refresh. The current Model S is still stunning, with an ageless look. Not sure is is possible to predict a time when the entire car might be re-designed.

Designers are mostly working on new Roadster, Truck, Semi, etc.

And what are you basing this on? Their oldest car is the model S, which has only now reached the typical cycle where cars get a refresh.

 

[maximizese]

And what are you basing this on? Their oldest car is the model S, which has only now reached the typical cycle where cars get a refresh.

Roadster...and some might argue the 2nd gen Toyota RAV4 EV predated the MS, but I get what you're saying.

 

[AMPd]

Roadster...and some might argue the 2nd gen Toyota RAV4 EV predated the MS, but I get what you're saying.

The Roadster was a limited production car that lasted, what? 4 years?

Toyota RAV4? What does that car from a different car company have to do with tesla and it’s refresh cycle?

 

[Jonathantuba]

I would think the model S has lost a lot of sales to the model 3. The fact that I believe model X sales for the first time exceeded model S would so indicate. No doubt when the model Y comes out, the model X will loose sales, but at present it really has no competition if you want a Tesla SUV.

Tesla’s priorities should be to get out the model Y and the pick-up truck - over update to the already excellent model S and X. I like the new pricing/model structure!