Tesla produces 400 model S each week

http://automotivediscovery.com/tesla-model-s-attains-weekly-production-benchmark/9216356/

by neuralnetwork • 13 years ago

89 83 13 years ago

sasvari• 13 years ago

  Jerome Guillen, the company’s director of Model S programs
  previously directed the business business innovation
  department at Daimler AG. He comments, “We are doing things
  in a couple weeks that, at my previous employer, would have
  taken two years.”

Knowing quite some people working within the German automobile industry (mainly BMW) attesting how slow and corporate the decision finding process is, I think this is what will cause the traditional car manufacturers quite some headache in the future.

loceng3• 13 years ago

Traditional manufacturers are already in trouble. Tesla will ramp up relatively very quickly once infrastructure gets in place.

jacquesm2• 13 years ago

I'm a huge fan of Elon Musk. That said, if you think that Tesla is a source of trouble for traditional manufacturers then I think that goes against every bit of wisdom out there at the moment.

Tesla is interesting, a pioneer, much like Elons other ventures. But it is not a threat by any stretch of the imagination to established car manufacturers. Think of it as a large scale testbed, technology to be licensed when proven over the longer term, just like what happened to every other technology in the car industry.

Don't forget that the era of the electric car already came and went once before, it definitely looks like it is here to stay but it will be a long time before Tesla will be named as a viable contender to Toyota, VW, MB, BMW, Ford or even GM. This is not virgin territory, the cards have been dealt, customers have to be won from other suppliers and brand loyalty counts for quite a bit.

By the numbers Tesla is still a very small player, and likely to remain small for quite a while.

SilasX2• 13 years ago

But why is it taking so long? Given how profitable they are, and how much demand there is, and how much could be gained from scale-related cuts in unit production costs, why haven't they been able to raise enough money to produce at a closer rate to the bigger car makers?

TylerE• 13 years ago

The catch, of course, is that cars are much more difficult to patch than software. There is something to be said for being sure your're getting it right the first time.

sliverstorm3• 13 years ago

Not just more difficult to patch, but a whole hell of a lot more deadly than most software.

Although I imagine the bug reports still read similarly: "Unexpected user input causing fatal crashes"

jonknee• 13 years ago

Well, somewhat. From the article:

> The most impressive one is the software updates that will change driving dynamics. This update is sent to customer’s cars without them having to visit their service location, just like updating your computer via the internet.

That's pretty slick for a car.

brianbreslin4• 13 years ago

luckily for the majors, tesla and its peers are making such a small volume that it isn't going to kill any of the old-guard any time soon. 400 cars a week, GM makes that per HOUR.

CapitalistCartr2• 13 years ago

If you imagine GM making cars 24/7 they'd produce about 1,000 cars per hour. Its incredible how big they are.

rm999• 13 years ago

Major car companies probably don't want to evolve their cars too quickly at the risk of confusing their customers. Tesla, on the other hand, must quickly turn its funding into entirely new cars. The needs of new and established car companies are entirely different.

I also think TylerE makes a great point: cars are expensive machines with high expectations of reliability; this is another argument that established car companies need to be slow and meticulous. Toyota's stuck accelerator issues, which may very well have never even existed, probably cost them more than Tesla's entire marketcap (I read somewhere that the estimated hit to Toyota was in the 6B USD neighborhood).

fnordfnordfnord3• 13 years ago

>this is another argument that established car companies need to be slow and meticulous.

They need to be meticulous and deliberate. Being slow is a bug, not a feature.

cube132• 13 years ago

>Major car companies probably don't want to evolve their cars too quickly at the risk of confusing their customers. Tesla, on the other hand, must quickly turn its funding into entirely new cars. The needs of new and established car companies are entirely different.

They also don't want to alienate their customers. Imagine if you bought a new, $100,000 Mercedes, then they announced a week later that the new one would be more powerful, better styled, had all sorts of new gadgets, and would be immediately on sale for $100,000.

You'd be pretty pissed. You're spending major money, and would want to know that you're spending it correctly. That's part of why the big manufacturers have year-long hype and PR cycles. You don't want to surprise your customers.

The other problem with quickly making new models is repairs. Tesla actually has a lot of luck in this space, because mechanically, their cars are a LOT simpler than a normal, gas powered car. They don't have to worry about things like gearboxes or clutches. However, it is a tendentious benefit for the consumer, especially as the cars become more common, to have spare parts easily ordered or at hand.

salimmadjd2• 13 years ago

On the flip side what these car companies manufacture in 2 weeks will take Tesla two years to manufacture.

On the other hand, Tesla is not doing the kind of innovation on the automotive side that would create a meaningful barrier to entry. The big players are all catching up (already caught up) and are going to chisel marketshare away from Tesla. IMHO, Tesla will close or sell within two years!

AdamTReineke• 13 years ago

Is there an equal to the Model S? Seems unlikely they'll be closing since they're profitable and their flagship model has no equal.

CapitalistCartr2• 13 years ago

GM makes about 345 thousand cars in two weeks. At 400 cars per week, that would take Tesla about sixteen and a half years to make. The scale difference at present between Tesla and the major manufacturers is huge.

_k• 13 years ago

I'm gonna push back a little bit by raising a few questions:

Jerome Guillen is talking about incremental improvements because when they launched, the car wasn't good enough. Being able to update the software is great but is it really a strength ? It's not, unless your car has Google Car type of innovation in it !

Imagine how exciting it would be to get updates for the Nokia phones we bought in the 90s ? It's not exciting at all. The Model S is a year 2000 design, still on the market 10 years later. I know I'm not being nice when I say that but when did that ever help someone invent the future ?

Now look at the Model X. They are catching up and that's good. But the concept was revealed in February 2012 and it won't be ready before early 2014. I don't know what I will be thinking in 2014 but I do know an incremental software update won't make me go wow. What we really need is not another walkman. We need an iPod. We don't need an iPod, we need an iPhone. We don't need another PC, we need an iPad. Are those falcon doors impressive ? They are a gimmick, designed to attract attention. Those doors are a problem and I bet they are giving Elon's team headaches!

I did see those backview mirrors in the Model X. My first thought was MEH... But if what Elon is really doing is secretly building camera's inside the car, then I'm gonna be like NOW THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT !! Imagine everyone driving around with those camera's recording everything !! Imagine Tim Cook signing a deal with Elon in order to get the map data. Up she goes !! But as far as I know, that's not the case.

The article mentions 20,000 Model S cars a year. The first prototype was revealed in I think September 2009 and the first one was delivered in June 2012. Henry Ford was making 1 Model T a day in 1908. He electrified his factory with Tesla's invention. Fast forward 2 years and he was building over 100,000 cars a year. That's 5 times more than Elon. It's not about how fast you can do your software updates. It's about creating demand and how fast you can build those cars !

I do like the solar power play. It disrupts everyone's business model. But a major concern has to be the fuel cell threat. Lots of car manufacturers are placing their bets on it. Is it because Elon has the market locked up with his patents ? Should he be working on fuel cells as well ? Are the fuel cell problems too big to overcome or is that market locked up with patents ?

gamegoblin3• 13 years ago

I really want Tesla to succeed.

I live in Arkansas and just saw a Chevy Volt in the wild for the first time about two weeks ago, and they are two years old now.

If Tesla succeeds, it will force the autobehemoths to step up their game, which will be good for everyone. I'll be interested to see what the old guard will be able to come up with to match Tesla in the (hopefully) new generation of auto. There is a lot to be said about having such massive resources to leverage, so I wouldn't write them off as being out of the game quite yet.

Shivetya• 13 years ago

One item to consider, Tesla is only going the route of battery powered cars. The majors are investigating multiple different sources, hydrogen, natural gas, compressed air, battery only, simple hybrid, and series hybrids. So as for stepping up their game I am not sure what you think they need to do.

There are already a half a dozen or so cars that are full battery powered for under forty thousand, or less than half the price of the current transaction prices of the S. The luxury market is safe territory because the margins are large enough for Tesla to fit within.

As for interior work, I am not sold on a full size touch screen. For the most part it looks a bit tacky to me, its just too "there". That and I am a dial person, specifically for radio and such. I just like the idea of feedback. Sure I could talk to my car and one day that may work when I don't have to drive it but I am not ready to give up that fun.

gamegoblin3• 13 years ago

I'm saying that if Tesla somehow becomes wildly successful/dominant in the electric car industry, then it will be interesting to see what the bigger companies do.

As it stands, their game plan is just fine.

bathat2• 13 years ago

> One item to consider, Tesla is only going the route of battery powered cars. The majors are investigating multiple different sources, hydrogen, natural gas, compressed air, battery only, simple hybrid, and series hybrids. So as for stepping up their game I am not sure what you think they need to do.

I don't see how that benefits the incumbents. Unfortunately, the realities of physics and economics (to say nothing about total pollution generated) mean that there are really only two choices: Burn liquid hydrocarbons; or store electricity in a battery (or some combination of the two). Tesla is currently pursing the second option and traditional auto manufacturers are using both. Hydrogen, natural gas and compressed air have all the limitations of batteries and more: The technology that goes in the car is more expensive, the infrastructure is more expensive and exists in fewer places (excluding natural gas), range is short, and 'refuling' times are long.

About ten years ago, as an undergrad, I worked on an NSF- and DOE-funded project to use single-walled carbon nanotubes both as a catalyst in hydrogen fuel cells and for hydrogen storage. Unfortunately, the efficiency gains were minimal, and I'm not aware of much[1] progress that has been made since (but I now work in a different sub-field). That means that a practical fuel cell, big enough to power a lightweight vehicle still costs hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars (mostly due to the requirement for large amounts of platinum to catalyze the H2 in to 2H). Frankly, there has been enough money wasted on pie-in-the-sky projects when there is already-existing technology that works (lithium-ion batteries).

If you don't trust a random stranger on the Internet, then please trust the managers of auto companies. Honda has effectively abandoned their FCX Clairity project because it is cheaper to meet CARB (CA Air Resources Board) requirements by buying zero-emissions credits from Toyota, Tesla, or GM. The FCX, by the way, was a hybrid that only used a fuel cell to meet the average load for electricity and batteries to meet the peak load.

[1] You need at least an order of magnitude better catalyst performance before you can even consider using PEM fuel cells in a mass-produced car. Every time I've seen a press release about better fuel cells, they seem to mention a few percent. At the current rate of improvement, it will take a quarter of a century before we even solve one of the show-stoppers for hydrogen cars.

brooksbp• 13 years ago

Buy one.

protomyth2• 13 years ago

I typed in my work zip (58335) and got the "We don't sell cars in your country" dialog. Uhm.....

gamegoblin3• 13 years ago

1) Already have a car 2) Broke college student, etc.

Aloisius2• 13 years ago

If it makes you feel any better, I live in San Francisco and have seen exactly two Tesla roadsters ever and maybe five Chevy Volts. I have yet to see a Tesla S, but then, maybe San Francisco is a bad place to drive a car that size.

toufka• 13 years ago

You're just not looking... in SF, and on highway 280 - I see a roadster about once every other week (for the past few years), and a couple of Ss in the past few months.

jsiarto• 13 years ago

I live in Michigan and wife's cousin's husband (still with me here?) was the first in Michigan to get a Model S. I've had the privilege to ride in it and it's an amazing piece of engineering. No detail was overlooked and I truly felt like I was riding in the future.

Everything from the LCD center panel to the door handles popping out when you get close to them--just fucking amazing. I'm a huge supporter of Tesla and everything Musk is doing--crossing my fingers that they can stay viable.

phil2• 13 years ago

I find the door handles deeply unnerving, even though they're also pretty cool.

DEinspanjer• 13 years ago

The article site was having trouble serving when I tried to read it, so I'll just say...

Ugh.. 400 per week just reminds me how long I have to wait before mine is ready to be delivered. :)

specto• 13 years ago

Lucky, I just recently got a chance to see one at a mall kiosk. It's certainly a beautiful vehicle. I hope Tesla does well.

brianbreslin4• 13 years ago

Is tesla's factory fully robotic? Or do they still have human labor in the build process?

msandford2• 13 years ago

Lots of humans in the build process. They might have robots making battery packs but all the engineering on those is done and dusted, probably a decade ago.

Generally people don't start building/buying robots to do this stuff until the economics forces it. That probably doesn't happen until they sell a million or more cars per year.

EDIT: This is factually incorrect as Tesla does employ a lot of automation. But there are still plenty of people in the loop as well.

fnordfnordfnord3• 13 years ago

Tesla's factory is fully automated, as automated as any other automobile factory. It is practically impossible to get the necessary level of repeatable precision without it. http://www.teslamotors.com/gallery#

seferphier• 13 years ago

I think most of the factory is automatic from watching the Tesla Factory video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToVqccRd6Hg

I'm not sure though.

cloudwalking• 13 years ago

Most of the car is built by hand. Robots move the vehicle along the production line, perform a lot of the body and frame spot welding, and stamp aluminum panels. Most of the work is done by people.

Right now the car is still evolving--both design and manufacturing is changing (literally) daily. It doesn't make sense to use robots yet.

Source: I toured the factory last week.

VLM2• 13 years ago

There are no factories in the world that do not have human labor as an expense on the P/L sheet. Automation/robotic-ness is not a yes or no question or even a single floating point number. "the build process" is not a well defined constraint, perhaps automatic screw machines and contour/turret lathes were "fully robotic builds" a century or so ago.

Given those restrictions, from a mfg background and looking at the pix its basically more or less similar to other automobile plants, not particularly under or over capitalized. Their "secret sauce" is not their shop floor. Note I'm not in any way implying there is anything wrong or imperfect with their shop floor, I'm merely claiming that the production floor is not their "secret sauce".

This is probably by design. If you're going to push the boundaries in numerous areas of technology, it would be pretty dumb to push your luck and in addition to everything else, try to hyper automate a factory. If anyone would try a hyperautomated factory, I would guess it would be one of the giant incumbents, probably Ford, probably on a known and simple/cheap model. I would expect the worlds first "never touched by human hands" automobile to be something very similar to a Ford Focus rather than a Tesla.

stephenhuey• 13 years ago

Here's hoping they can find the balance between increasing production and keeping quality high. Most of these aren't mission critical, but I think only some early adopters would be ok with all of these reported issues if they proliferate:

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1081935_tesla-model-s-gl...

timdorr2• 13 years ago

Some of those are fixed in software (4.2 fixes the sunroof issue and deep-sleep related issues). Some are hardware issues that Tesla has been resolving on a case by case basis (door handles and charge ports). The regenerative breaking issue is a feature. It will reduce the breaking ability if the batteries are too cold or if they are full (and the standard charge mode only goes to 90%, so it rarely is a cause). When breaking is reduced (or acceleration is too), the car shows a dashed yellow line on the current gauge. So, there is an indicator and you can know to expect the reduced breaking force.

Regardless, it's by far the best car I've ever owned. Considering the vehicle didn't exist outside of a CAD program 4 years ago, the minimal number of issues people have found is amazing. Tesla is a very well-run company and it's clear quality is their top priority.

jacquesm2• 13 years ago

How big a reduction in braking power is it?

Can you notice the difference? Does it do this while you are already braking and the batteries end up full? (in other words, does the braking action change while you are braking?)

ChuckMcM• 13 years ago

Nice to see, site load load takes forever though :-), 400 / week was their minimum cut-off [1] (thats 20,000 /year if you work 50 out of 52 weeks a year) Now they have to do that for a year without a serious glitch to bank enough to for the next step.

[1] http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/14/autoshow-tesla-pro...

kayoone2• 13 years ago

So in a few years customers will drive Beta cars which get patched to stability later ? Doesnt sound good :)

SnowLprd• 13 years ago

It's certainly an improvement over what otherwise currently happens: unless there's a recall, we are all driving "beta" cars with bugs that never get patched. At least this way there is an easy method for correcting software defects.

kayoone2• 13 years ago

yeah i know, i was just trying to make fun of certain aspects of the software industry :) In the end its a good thing of course and car makers have alot of validation to go through before a new car can be released anyway.

codex• 13 years ago

Tesla needs to innovate quickly because they're in a bad spot. It turns out that creating electric vehicles just isn't that hard. BMW has the i3. Nissan has the Leaf. Ford has the Focus Electric. These are not has good as the Tesla, but they're much cheaper, and are taking the bottom of the market away. But most importantly, these manufacturers have non-electric car lines that they can use to achieve massive economies of scale. Once these manufacturers decide to do a high end product, Tesla is in a bad way. Tesla can out innovate these guys easily, but there just isn't much innovation differential in cars except at the very high end, which is not enough to survive on.

The lesson of Tesla is that you can produce really cool things if you can throw a ton of money away up front and wave your hands around vulnerability to established competitors. In this respect the conservative approach of existing manufacturers towards electrics looks much more prudent than Tesla's high risk approach.

jeremyarussell• 13 years ago

If I'm not mistaken they've already brought many innovations to the field of entirely electronic cars, from the battery placement and chassis design, down to the superchargers. And Tesla is aiming for high end now, but I'm certain Elon Musk has had plans for making even cheaper version once he finds where he can make it truly economical for the average family to buy.

TL;DR - I think Elon will do just fine.

crusso• 13 years ago

"But others can create/sell cheaper inferior products" has always been the argument against companies like Apple, Neiman Marcus, Porche, Rolex, etc.

Tesla is in a very good position in the market. They have a hot product, visionary leadership, good funding, and political tailwinds.

bjelkeman-again• 13 years ago

400 cars per week is 20,800 in a year. That is nearly twice as many as GM made Chevy Corvettes in 2012, just as an interesting perspective. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvette#Production

stcredzero• 13 years ago

Though the cachet vector is different, the cachet magnitude is about the same, and many other kinds of utility are greater in the Model S.

In retrospect, that would've sounded like a compelling but seemingly too good to be true pitch in the pre-Tesla years.

pclark• 13 years ago

Toyota sells over 900k Priuses each year, 1.2M Corollas, nearly 10M automobiles in total.

phil2• 13 years ago

At an ASP of $75k (probably pretty close), that's about $1.5b/yr or about 1/3 their market cap... not bad at all.

Tesla produces 400 model S each week

Related Stories