[home][rumors and news][model release matrix][dealer network][desktop calendar][exhaust notes][tov forums][links][search][sponsors][garage][login]

Tire Rack Upgrade Garage
 Search for a Dealer:
 Canadian Flag US Flag
 Honda Acura
 ZIP  
NSX GT3 Evo To Compete Globally in 2019
More.......................
2019 Acura ILX Arrives with Dynamic New Styling, Major Technology Upgrades and New A-Spec Treatment
More.......................
Honda Joins with Cruise and General Motors to Build New Autonomous Vehicle
More.......................
Honda reports September 2018 sales numbers
More.......................
Honda recalling 232,000 2018 Accords and 2019 Insights for rear camera software update
More.......................
2019 Accord arriving in showrooms by November
More.......................
Is a base trim of the Civic Type R finally arriving for MY 2019? (More MY2019 info inside)
More.......................
Team Honda Research wins ST2 at NASA Nationals with their NC1 NSX
More.......................
Professional Motorsports --> Re: F1 - 2018 United States Grand Prix Race Spoilers
Join Discussion......
Type R --> Re: Top Gear: Here's what seven months living with a Honda Civic Type R is like
Join Discussion......
Accord --> Accord 2.0 Touring: First Impressions
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> So they took apart a Tesla 3 and found.......
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: CR-V Hybrid 4wd iMMD
Join Discussion......
RDX --> Re: Drove one over the weekend...
Join Discussion......
IMA/Hybrids --> Re: Check IMA System light is on - what could it mean?
Join Discussion......
Fuel Cell Technology --> Re: DMV Stickers, we don't need no stinking stickers
Join Discussion......
S2000 --> Bridgewater Acura Meet
Join Discussion......
Ridgeline - General Talk --> Re: Honda to bring mystery off-road truck to 2018 SEMA
Join Discussion......
Professional Motorsports --> Re: 2018 MotoGP
Join Discussion......
RDX --> Re: Switch Wheels 2019 RDX Tech to Advance ????
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Re: evo's best Japanese cars, 5 new, 5 old
Join Discussion......
Type R --> Re: Engineering Explained on the CTR and its motor
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Re: European CO2 madness and why electromobility is pointless
Join Discussion......
First Drive: 2019 Honda Pilot
Read Article....................
2019 Honda Pilot PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................
First Drive: 2019 Honda Insight
Read Article....................
2019 Honda Insight PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................
First Drive: 2019 Acura RDX
Read Article....................
2019 Acura RDX Features & Specifications
Read Article....................

[fancy] [flat] [simple]
TOV Forums > Today's Reading Links > > Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3

Go to:

Viewing Threshold (What is this?)

Thread Page - 1 2 3 4 [5] 6
Author
  Post New Thread
KaizenDo
Profile for KaizenDo
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-13-2018 18:35
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Musk’s Model 3 Miscalculation Culminates in Major Tesla Job Cuts
owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-01-2018 17:45
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
atomiclightbulb wrote:
owequitit wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
owequitit wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
owequitit wrote:
Musk is a tool and his legions of fanboys and religious zealots are
tools.

The difference though was that they didn't run around telling everyone how stupid and inferior they were while simultaneously falling flat on their face.

Like I have said repeatedly. It has less to do with the vision and more to do with the way he goes about it.


Ok, leaving aside prior disputes,

What specific instances are you referring to when you say that Elon Musk told everyone else (other industry players) that they were "stupid and inferior"?

With regards to the "falling flat on their face" part, I don't see this as a bad thing. Failing is a part of any business enterprise. Much of the technology industry today exists because people failed at something and learned a lot from those failures. This is the only way people learn and evolve. Soichiro Honda is often quoted as having said: "Success is 99% failure", although I don't know if he actually did say this.



It was pretty much linked in the post I said it in, and it has been implied in many of his statements in the past. When I care enough to go back around in circles with you and give you fodder for propaganda invention, I will compile a list and post it here.





I looked at your links, and I disagree with your assertion that Musk told everyone that others were "stupid and inferior".

The Forbes article you linked quotes Elon Musk as saying:

"“The car industry thinks they're really good at manufacturing and actually they are quite good at manufacturing. But they just don't realize just how much potential there is for improvement. It's way more than they think,”

This is not as simple as calling everyone "stupid and inferior".

A person or organization can be very intelligent and competent at their work, but they can simultaneously also not see a better way to do things, or they could be stuck in a particular mindset.

I am reminded of Research in Motion, the company most famous for BlackBerry phones.

BlackBerry made excellent Smart Phones in the mid-2000's, but they were stuck in the mindset that Smart Phones were primarily a device for work email. They didn't realize that the Smart Phone had the potential to do far more than secure email or messaging. Subsequently, they got wiped out by Apple and Google because mobile computing hardware improved to the point where a mobile device could handle rich web content, high def multimedia/gaming, and multi-touch gestures. Initially, BlackBerry's leadership couldn't think past the mental barrier that a phone had to have a physical keyboard.

It's entirely possible that people at Tesla have thought up of ways to improve manufacturing speed, that other companies haven't thought of or are unwilling to try.

While Tesla has had manufacturing problems for most of its history, I see this as a byproduct of their willingness to experiment in the pursuit of improvement.



Telling the world you are going to school Toyota on lean manufacturing, when your *only* current plant would have to improve by almost 700% just to match where Toyota was almost 2 decades ago when they LEFT the very same building is doing exactly what I say.

But of course, I also said there were other examples and I would provide them, but I haven't had time to.



Two points:

(1) Tesla is much closer to Toyota's #'s than you think. 700% improvement to match Toyota/GM is a wild exaggeration -- off by about an order of magnitude.

According to Ward's Automotive, the Fremont factory, then known as NUMMI, produced a high of 428,633 automobiles for GM and Toyota in 2006. Source: http://www.wardsauto.com/news-analysis/toyota-s-decision-abandon-nummi-closes-book-25-year-experiment.

That's approximately 8,243 cars/week for Toyota/GM.

Tesla, as discussed above,

Produces about 2,000 Model S and X cars per week.

Bloomberg's Model 3 Tracker, which has proven to be fairly accurate, estimates that Tesla is currently producing 2,677 Model 3s per week, and further projects 3,000-4,000/week in the next week or two.

If Tesla's current rate of production is 4,677 cars/week total, they need to boost unit output by 76% to match NUMMI's record.

If Bloomberg's forward looking analysis is correct, and Tesla gets to 4k/week of Model 3, total output rises to 6,000 cars/week, leaving Tesla a 37% gap with Toyota.

Neither of these is even close to 700%.


(2) Tesla's factory does a lot more than just body stamping, painting, and final assembly. Tesla builds many of its components in-house at Fremont.

For example: https://www.wired.com/story/teslas-secret-second-floor/

Tesla uses the 2nd floor of NUMMI to build battery packs, electronics, and motors.

Another example: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-06-08/tesla-model-3-photos-of-elon-musk-s-factory-in-fremont

Tesla has built seats in-house, since 2015, rather than sourcing them from a parts supplier. Model 3 seat construction appears highly automated (photo with yellow robots, about 80% through the article).

As far as I know, when the factory was run by NUMMI, the facility did not build components like motors or seats for the cars. So comparing Tesla's operation to Toyota's operation, is Apples and Oranges. Tesla is doing more manufacturing steps.



1) They still have to increase production by over 400% to match Toyota so still not an "order of magnitude" off.

You see, you are playing loose and fast with the numbers again. You are comparing a single solitary week for Tesla (and a high point at that) for a larger average for Toyota. The first and fundamental problem with that is that Toyota AVERAGED 8,000+ cars per week, including downtime. Tesla does not. In your last tirade, you went on and on about how I was an idiot because my numbers didn't include "downtime." Toyota's do include downtime and last I checked, Tesla was currently producing just over 100K cars per year on a sustained basis. That will certainly go up with Model 3 production, but they still will be lucky to be at HALF of Toyota's capacity by the time all is said and done.

Let me put into a metaphor for you. If I plan a flight that I claim is just as good as someone else's flight, and only complete 25% of it, then I am NOWHERE near the other's level of performance. Simple as that. You want to ignore "orders of magnitude" when it suits your argument, but you want to acknowledge them when it suits your argument.

Fact: Tesla is nowhere near producing the same volume that Toyota managed to pump out of that factory for decades.

Fact: Telsa is, in fact, in some cases averaging 14% of what Toyota was when considering single model production (which is effectively what Toyota/GM produced there) when downtime is included.

Fact: When I made that post, I was speaking specifically to "mass market" prodcution of the Model 3, which was still quite a ways away from achieving it's "ramp up" in a giant tent in the parking lot. But, since you will complain about that, adjusting the numbers for ALL production in that plant, Musk is still off by almost 400%.

Fact: Toyota left that plant nearly a decade ago. Production technology has surely moved on since then.

2) If Musk chooses to waste limited resources on shit that he should have subcontracted, that is on him. Every other automaker outsources that stuff for a reason. It makes the process simpler, it shares the engineering work load, and it makes the process faster and cheaper.

I used to work for an electronics manufacturer. We didn't build everything in house because it didn't make sense. So we outsourced the stuff that didn't make sense. Not only is it common sense, but it is the same solution that every single segment of manufacturing (aerospace, automotive, clothing, electronics, etc) came to many decades ago.

The problem is that Musk's ego will not allow Tesla to do that.

3) Speaking of Musk's ego, here are 2 simple examples of him being a douche toward all of the other expertise in the auto industry, just in the last few months:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller/2018/02/16/tesla-thinks-it-will-school-toyota-on-lean-manufacturing-fixing-model-3-launch-would-be-a-start/#4ca2d3524c74

Here is Musk talking about how Tesla is going to "school" Toyota on lean manufacturing. However, as buyable as the hype might be for Musk worshippers, the reality is a little bit different. Not only is he nowhere near even matching Toyota's level, but he certainly hasn't "schooled" them on anything.

The definition of "schooling" is that A) you have to play on the same level and then you have to B) soundly beat your opponent on their level. He has absolutely, unquestionably and undeniably done neither.

In fact, he appears to be not only NOT achieving his goals, but he seems to be repeating previously learned industry lessons from 30-40 years ago:

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/04/experts-say-tesla-has-repeated-car-industry-mistakes-from-the-1980s/

A year later, Musk himself was touting Tesla's advanced robotics expertise. "We are pushing robots to the limit in terms of the speed that they can operate at, and asking our suppliers to make robots go way faster, and they are shocked because nobody has ever asked them that question," Musk said on a conference call last November. "It’s like if you can see the robot move, it’s too slow.”

Musk now admits he was wrong about this. "Excessive automation at Tesla was a mistake," Musk tweeted recently. "To be precise, my mistake. Humans are underrated."

"We had this crazy, complex network of conveyor belts," Musk told CBS News. "And it was not working, so we got rid of that whole thing."

Musk is discovering that large-scale car manufacturing is really hard, and it's not easy to improve on the methods of conventional automakers. And while automation obviously plays an important role in car manufacturing, it's not the magic bullet Musk imagined a couple of years ago. Far from leapfrogging the techniques of conventional automakers, Tesla is now struggling just to match the efficiency of its more established rivals.

And most of the auto industry experts we talked to thought Musk still had a lot to learn.

"A lot of the mistakes we're hearing about are mistakes that were made in the rest of the industry in the 1980s and the 1990s," says Sam Abuelsamid, an industry analyst at Navigant Research. He points to the experience of General Motors, which wasted billions of dollars in a largely fruitless effort to automate car production in the 1980s.


Then there were Musk's claims about an "alien dreadnaught factory" where machines moved so fast that humans wouldn't be safe. Of course, this isn't an OVERT attack on the industry, but it IS an insinuation that he is going to do so much better than established practice that it would embarrass other players in the industry who haven't been able to achieve such high levels of awesomeness.

http://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-is-failing-to-build-the-factory-of-the-future-2018-6

Further, when speaking of the nearby Ford plant to upchurch his apparently endless production ramp of the Model 3, he called the mood at Ford's F150 factory like a morgue as though to play off the workers having to work 10-12 hour shifts 6 days a week as a good thing (not to mention the giant tent in the parking lot).

Ford had the best response to the whole thing that could possibly be made:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/features/ford-fires-back-after-teslas-elon-musk-calls-it-a-morgue

“No doubt the vibe is funky in that ‘makeshift tent,’ but it’s not bad either across the street at the #FordRouge plant where a high quality, high-tech F-150 rolls off the line every 53 seconds like clockwork,” Truby wrote. “Come check it out @elonmusk.”


So let's put this into proper perspective:

One manufacturer produces millions of cars a year worldwide and delivers them on time and on budget and one of them is building cars in a tent in a parking lot.

One manufacturer has a "vibe" and the other let's workers have 2 days a week off and sends them home after a normal shift while still producing a vehicle every 53 seconds.

It's all just a bunch of hype, in usual Musk fashion.

P.S. in the interest of your pursuit of "fairness" and "accurate data, I would suggest that any production data from the tent be "excluded' from Tesla's numbers since Toyota never built any cars in a giant tent in the parking lot.

P.S.S. It looks like Musk just BARELY squeaked in that 5,000th Tesla 5 hours after the deadline. They did it for 1 week only, and they had to resort to extreme measures to get there, so before you cry foul, don't forget that the 5,000 per week was a stated average and didn't include building cars in a tent in the parking lot...

I want to know if the "tent edition" models get a special plaque that says "Veni, Vidi, Vicci #XXXX."

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-01-2018 17:53
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
I found this mildly amusing. "The Tesla Way" of management:

https://www.leanblog.org/2018/05/lessons-from-tesla-schooling-toyota-did-you-get-the-memo/

Meeting Targets
At the end of the first quarter, Tesla was very far behind its stated production goals for the Model 3. The stated goal was 2500 cars per week. They managed to hit 2020 in the last week of the quarter.

This was after they missed their original goal of 5000 cars per week by the end of Q1.

Lesson: If you can't make your goals, lower them. You had a goal of getting your average Emergency Department waiting time down from 4 hours to 2? Don't have it down to 2… revise the goal to 3 hours. Promise that you'll get the average waiting time down to 2 hours next quarter.

Motivating Staff
What contributed to this Q1 “near make” for Tesla? One factor might have been what some might label a “motivational” email memo that was sent to Tesla employees by Doug Field, their head of engineering and production, before the final end-of-quarter push.

The Los Angeles Times framed it as:

“Tesla executive exhorts workers to ramp up Model 3 production and prove ‘haters' wrong“
Ah, exhortations. Elon Musk might not have the time of day for that old (dead, actually) fuddy-duddy W. Edwards Deming used to complain about exhorting workers all the time.

Point #10 of his famed “14 Points” said:

10. Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets for the work force asking for zero defects and new levels of productivity. Such exhortations only create adversarial relationships, as the bulk of the causes of low quality and low productivity belong to the system and thus lie beyond the power of the workforce.

Eliminate work standards (quotas) on the factory floor. Substitute leadership.
Eliminate management by objective. Eliminate management by numbers, numerical goals. Substitute leadership.
Well, Elon Musk and Tesla might say they are going to school Deming on quality and leadership.

Exhort away…

Field wrote (the memo was obtained by Bloomberg):

“The world is watching us very closely, to understand one thing: How many Model 3's can Tesla build in a week?” Field wrote. “This is a critical moment in Tesla's history, and there are a number of reasons it's so important. You should pick the one that hits you in the gut and makes you want to win.”
At the time, Tesla was reportedly building 200 Model 3s a day. Field was exhorting the employees to build 300 a day. That's a 50% jump.

The question of “How many Model 3s can Tesla build in a week?” should be answered by executives, including Musk and Field.

Lesson: Send memos to hospital staff telling them THEY need to figure out how to improve patient flow. “How many patients can this hospital see in one week?” Imply that your staff aren't winners unless they hit this goal.

A memo exhorting the workers to care more and to try harder is Tesla's attempt at schooling GM in the preachy, blaming memo department (as I wrote about here and here with GM stories from over 20 years ago).

Does Field really think that the problem is the workers? They are probably doing the best they can given the decisions made by leaders about system design and automation (including a mistake that Musk admitted, as I blogged about here).

Finding External Enemies
Field, in his memo, was trying to create an “us against the world” mentality. I guess that's better than workers focusing on an “us against management” mindset.

Those of us who are doubting or criticizing Tesla are being labeled as “haters.” Well, that's constructive. Let's pick an external enemy instead of focusing on what you can control. Field wrote:

“I find that personally insulting, and you should too,” Field wrote in the March 23 email. “Let's make them regret ever betting against us. You will prove a bunch of haters wrong.”


Lesson: Blame an outside party, like the Leapfrog Group or the Joint Commission. Tell staff that Leapfrog patient safety grade of “C” is “personally insulting.” Call the Joint Commission “a bunch of haters.” That will certainly motivate your staff. Unless your staff are also a bunch of haters.

Not to be schooled on motivational memos by Field, Elon Musk sent his own missive to employees (after taking over production from Field), where he set a goal of 6000 per week.

“Any Tesla department or supplier that is unable to do this will need to have a very good explanation why not, along with a plan for fixing the problem and present that to me directly. If anyone needs help achieving this, please let me know as soon as possible. We are going to find a way or make a way to get there.”
What if the problem is an over-reliance on automation, which Musk earlier admitted was his fault?

Memos like this, and the ones sent by GM, follow the pattern of blaming the workers and those lower in the organization.

“We are going to find a way or make a way to get there,” writes Musk. If it's that easy, where was that attitude and focus in previous quarters?

Lesson: If your hospital executive team chose a bad Electronic Health Records (EHR) system or didn't provide enough training, and that's bogging down patient flow, tell the staff and the departments that THEY need to come up with plans.

Last year, Musk was praised for sending a memo where he said he'd meet with workers who got hurt and that he'd come do the job of anyone who got hurt. Even Tesla admits he hasn't followed through on that.



Lesson: Write a memo promising to meet with any employee or patient who is hurt. Say that you'll go and do the same work (paging Dr. Musk) have the same medical procedures done to yourself to prove that things are safe.

Another View
I'm not the only “hater” regarding these memos. Read this insightful article:

“Tesla doesn't understand that its goals are different from its employees'“
“to a lot of people, shipping out 2,500 Model 3s per week probably sounds like a pretty arbitrary thing to strive for.”
There's that pesky Deming popping up, with his warnings against arbitrary targets (it's in that same point #10). As Brian Joiner wrote in his book Fourth Generation Management: The New Business Consciousness, there are three things that can happen when you have a quota or a target:

Distort the system
Distort the numbers
Improve the system
The number of cars produced is pretty hard to distort, since those are easily counted (although somebody could report inaccurate numbers). It's more likely that people are pressured into distorting the system (including letting quality and/or safety suffer). Or, they could actually improve.

I hope it's the latter. And that improvement would probably mean Tesla leaders improving systems, rather than thinking the results came from workers working harder.

Fleshing out “The Tesla Way?”
So what is “The Tesla Way?”

Maybe Jeff Liker can write a book called The Tesla Way. Nah, Musk would call him a “hater.” Will an MIT research team go and study Tesla (Jim Womack has already volunteered, in a way). Maybe a whole industry of consultants will pop up to certify you as a “Tesla Belt.”

Are you inspired by the Tesla Production System? Want to adopt or adapt it for your organization?

“But we don't build electric cars…”

OK, never mind.


JeffX
Profile for JeffX
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-01-2018 18:12
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
owequitit wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
owequitit wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
owequitit wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
owequitit wrote:
Musk is a tool and his legions of fanboys and religious zealots are
tools.

The difference though was that they didn't run around telling everyone how stupid and inferior they were while simultaneously falling flat on their face.

Like I have said repeatedly. It has less to do with the vision and more to do with the way he goes about it.


Ok, leaving aside prior disputes,

What specific instances are you referring to when you say that Elon Musk told everyone else (other industry players) that they were "stupid and inferior"?

With regards to the "falling flat on their face" part, I don't see this as a bad thing. Failing is a part of any business enterprise. Much of the technology industry today exists because people failed at something and learned a lot from those failures. This is the only way people learn and evolve. Soichiro Honda is often quoted as having said: "Success is 99% failure", although I don't know if he actually did say this.



It was pretty much linked in the post I said it in, and it has been implied in many of his statements in the past. When I care enough to go back around in circles with you and give you fodder for propaganda invention, I will compile a list and post it here.





I looked at your links, and I disagree with your assertion that Musk told everyone that others were "stupid and inferior".

The Forbes article you linked quotes Elon Musk as saying:

"“The car industry thinks they're really good at manufacturing and actually they are quite good at manufacturing. But they just don't realize just how much potential there is for improvement. It's way more than they think,”

This is not as simple as calling everyone "stupid and inferior".

A person or organization can be very intelligent and competent at their work, but they can simultaneously also not see a better way to do things, or they could be stuck in a particular mindset.

I am reminded of Research in Motion, the company most famous for BlackBerry phones.

BlackBerry made excellent Smart Phones in the mid-2000's, but they were stuck in the mindset that Smart Phones were primarily a device for work email. They didn't realize that the Smart Phone had the potential to do far more than secure email or messaging. Subsequently, they got wiped out by Apple and Google because mobile computing hardware improved to the point where a mobile device could handle rich web content, high def multimedia/gaming, and multi-touch gestures. Initially, BlackBerry's leadership couldn't think past the mental barrier that a phone had to have a physical keyboard.

It's entirely possible that people at Tesla have thought up of ways to improve manufacturing speed, that other companies haven't thought of or are unwilling to try.

While Tesla has had manufacturing problems for most of its history, I see this as a byproduct of their willingness to experiment in the pursuit of improvement.



Telling the world you are going to school Toyota on lean manufacturing, when your *only* current plant would have to improve by almost 700% just to match where Toyota was almost 2 decades ago when they LEFT the very same building is doing exactly what I say.

But of course, I also said there were other examples and I would provide them, but I haven't had time to.



Two points:

(1) Tesla is much closer to Toyota's #'s than you think. 700% improvement to match Toyota/GM is a wild exaggeration -- off by about an order of magnitude.

According to Ward's Automotive, the Fremont factory, then known as NUMMI, produced a high of 428,633 automobiles for GM and Toyota in 2006. Source: http://www.wardsauto.com/news-analysis/toyota-s-decision-abandon-nummi-closes-book-25-year-experiment.

That's approximately 8,243 cars/week for Toyota/GM.

Tesla, as discussed above,

Produces about 2,000 Model S and X cars per week.

Bloomberg's Model 3 Tracker, which has proven to be fairly accurate, estimates that Tesla is currently producing 2,677 Model 3s per week, and further projects 3,000-4,000/week in the next week or two.

If Tesla's current rate of production is 4,677 cars/week total, they need to boost unit output by 76% to match NUMMI's record.

If Bloomberg's forward looking analysis is correct, and Tesla gets to 4k/week of Model 3, total output rises to 6,000 cars/week, leaving Tesla a 37% gap with Toyota.

Neither of these is even close to 700%.


(2) Tesla's factory does a lot more than just body stamping, painting, and final assembly. Tesla builds many of its components in-house at Fremont.

For example: https://www.wired.com/story/teslas-secret-second-floor/

Tesla uses the 2nd floor of NUMMI to build battery packs, electronics, and motors.

Another example: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-06-08/tesla-model-3-photos-of-elon-musk-s-factory-in-fremont

Tesla has built seats in-house, since 2015, rather than sourcing them from a parts supplier. Model 3 seat construction appears highly automated (photo with yellow robots, about 80% through the article).

As far as I know, when the factory was run by NUMMI, the facility did not build components like motors or seats for the cars. So comparing Tesla's operation to Toyota's operation, is Apples and Oranges. Tesla is doing more manufacturing steps.



1) They still have to increase production by over 400% to match Toyota so still not an "order of magnitude" off.

You see, you are playing loose and fast with the numbers again. You are comparing a single solitary week for Tesla (and a high point at that) for a larger average for Toyota. The first and fundamental problem with that is that Toyota AVERAGED 8,000+ cars per week, including downtime. Tesla does not. In your last tirade, you went on and on about how I was an idiot because my numbers didn't include "downtime." Toyota's do include downtime and last I checked, Tesla was currently producing just over 100K cars per year on a sustained basis. That will certainly go up with Model 3 production, but they still will be lucky to be at HALF of Toyota's capacity by the time all is said and done.

Let me put into a metaphor for you. If I plan a flight that I claim is just as good as someone else's flight, and only complete 25% of it, then I am NOWHERE near the other's level of performance. Simple as that. You want to ignore "orders of magnitude" when it suits your argument, but you want to acknowledge them when it suits your argument.

Fact: Tesla is nowhere near producing the same volume that Toyota managed to pump out of that factory for decades.

Fact: Telsa is, in fact, in some cases averaging 14% of what Toyota was when considering single model production (which is effectively what Toyota/GM produced there) when downtime is included.

Fact: When I made that post, I was speaking specifically to "mass market" prodcution of the Model 3, which was still quite a ways away from achieving it's "ramp up" in a giant tent in the parking lot. But, since you will complain about that, adjusting the numbers for ALL production in that plant, Musk is still off by almost 400%.

Fact: Toyota left that plant nearly a decade ago. Production technology has surely moved on since then.

2) If Musk chooses to waste limited resources on shit that he should have subcontracted, that is on him. Every other automaker outsources that stuff for a reason. It makes the process simpler, it shares the engineering work load, and it makes the process faster and cheaper.

I used to work for an electronics manufacturer. We didn't build everything in house because it didn't make sense. So we outsourced the stuff that didn't make sense. Not only is it common sense, but it is the same solution that every single segment of manufacturing (aerospace, automotive, clothing, electronics, etc) came to many decades ago.

The problem is that Musk's ego will not allow Tesla to do that.

3) Speaking of Musk's ego, here are 2 simple examples of him being a douche toward all of the other expertise in the auto industry, just in the last few months:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller/2018/02/16/tesla-thinks-it-will-school-toyota-on-lean-manufacturing-fixing-model-3-launch-would-be-a-start/#4ca2d3524c74

Here is Musk talking about how Tesla is going to "school" Toyota on lean manufacturing. However, as buyable as the hype might be for Musk worshippers, the reality is a little bit different. Not only is he nowhere near even matching Toyota's level, but he certainly hasn't "schooled" them on anything.

The definition of "schooling" is that A) you have to play on the same level and then you have to B) soundly beat your opponent on their level. He has absolutely, unquestionably and undeniably done neither.

In fact, he appears to be not only NOT achieving his goals, but he seems to be repeating previously learned industry lessons from 30-40 years ago:

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/04/experts-say-tesla-has-repeated-car-industry-mistakes-from-the-1980s/

A year later, Musk himself was touting Tesla's advanced robotics expertise. "We are pushing robots to the limit in terms of the speed that they can operate at, and asking our suppliers to make robots go way faster, and they are shocked because nobody has ever asked them that question," Musk said on a conference call last November. "It’s like if you can see the robot move, it’s too slow.”

Musk now admits he was wrong about this. "Excessive automation at Tesla was a mistake," Musk tweeted recently. "To be precise, my mistake. Humans are underrated."

"We had this crazy, complex network of conveyor belts," Musk told CBS News. "And it was not working, so we got rid of that whole thing."

Musk is discovering that large-scale car manufacturing is really hard, and it's not easy to improve on the methods of conventional automakers. And while automation obviously plays an important role in car manufacturing, it's not the magic bullet Musk imagined a couple of years ago. Far from leapfrogging the techniques of conventional automakers, Tesla is now struggling just to match the efficiency of its more established rivals.

And most of the auto industry experts we talked to thought Musk still had a lot to learn.

"A lot of the mistakes we're hearing about are mistakes that were made in the rest of the industry in the 1980s and the 1990s," says Sam Abuelsamid, an industry analyst at Navigant Research. He points to the experience of General Motors, which wasted billions of dollars in a largely fruitless effort to automate car production in the 1980s.


Then there were Musk's claims about an "alien dreadnaught factory" where machines moved so fast that humans wouldn't be safe. Of course, this isn't an OVERT attack on the industry, but it IS an insinuation that he is going to do so much better than established practice that it would embarrass other players in the industry who haven't been able to achieve such high levels of awesomeness.

http://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-is-failing-to-build-the-factory-of-the-future-2018-6

Further, when speaking of the nearby Ford plant to upchurch his apparently endless production ramp of the Model 3, he called the mood at Ford's F150 factory like a morgue as though to play off the workers having to work 10-12 hour shifts 6 days a week as a good thing (not to mention the giant tent in the parking lot).

Ford had the best response to the whole thing that could possibly be made:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/features/ford-fires-back-after-teslas-elon-musk-calls-it-a-morgue

“No doubt the vibe is funky in that ‘makeshift tent,’ but it’s not bad either across the street at the #FordRouge plant where a high quality, high-tech F-150 rolls off the line every 53 seconds like clockwork,” Truby wrote. “Come check it out @elonmusk.”


So let's put this into proper perspective:

One manufacturer produces millions of cars a year worldwide and delivers them on time and on budget and one of them is building cars in a tent in a parking lot.

One manufacturer has a "vibe" and the other let's workers have 2 days a week off and sends them home after a normal shift while still producing a vehicle every 53 seconds.

It's all just a bunch of hype, in usual Musk fashion.

P.S. in the interest of your pursuit of "fairness" and "accurate data, I would suggest that any production data from the tent be "excluded' from Tesla's numbers since Toyota never built any cars in a giant tent in the parking lot.

P.S.S. It looks like Musk just BARELY squeaked in that 5,000th Tesla 5 hours after the deadline. They did it for 1 week only, and they had to resort to extreme measures to get there, so before you cry foul, don't forget that the 5,000 per week was a stated average and didn't include building cars in a tent in the parking lot...

I want to know if the "tent edition" models get a special plaque that says "Veni, Vidi, Vicci #XXXX."



Note that Musk didn't say they built 5000 in a week. He said they "Factory Gated" 5000. What does that even mean?


NorCalSales
Profile for NorCalSales
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-01-2018 21:07
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Pretty sure it means he punched a bunch through that he made weeks earlier with QQ issues.

Then again I thought those reports a few weeks back were just a way to delay some cars and hit the number this week.

atomiclightbulb
Profile for atomiclightbulb
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-01-2018 21:58
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
My response to today's news is measured. I agree with Autotrader's Michelle Krebs:

What Musk still needs to prove is that this level of output can endure.

“Now that Tesla has achieved the 5,000 mark, it needs to do so on a steady, routine basis and with excellent quality,” said Michelle Krebs, an analyst with car-shopping website Autotrader.


Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-01/tesla-said-to-reach-model-3-production-goal-in-june-s-final-week

For now, I will sit back and watch what happens with Tesla's progress. They may succeed, or they may fail.

Regardless of what I write, it will make no difference to the outcome.
Consequently, I have decided that it is a waste of my time to respond to people like owequitit.

I am sorry that ToV has become such a toxic and hateful place.

With Honda having many fine products, like the Civic Type R, new Accord, 3G Insight, and Acura showing vast improvement in the new RDX, there is really no reason for this. While I disagree with Honda's powertrain strategy as far as BEVs and FCEVs, this is a company that pulled itself out of the doldrums of the late 2000's/early 2010's to make some very compelling products.

I end this post with what Soichiro Honda is credited as saying:

"Success is 99% failure".

https://www.stevefogg.com/2010/01/15/success-is-99-failure/

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-01-2018 22:15
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
atomiclightbulb wrote:
My response to today's news is measured. I agree with Autotrader's Michelle Krebs:

What Musk still needs to prove is that this level of output can endure.

“Now that Tesla has achieved the 5,000 mark, it needs to do so on a steady, routine basis and with excellent quality,” said Michelle Krebs, an analyst with car-shopping website Autotrader.


Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-01/tesla-said-to-reach-model-3-production-goal-in-june-s-final-week

For now, I will sit back and watch what happens with Tesla's progress. They may succeed, or they may fail.

Regardless of what I write, it will make no difference to the outcome.
Consequently, I have decided that it is a waste of my time to respond to people like owequitit.

I am sorry that ToV has become such a toxic and hateful place.

With Honda having many fine products, like the Civic Type R, new Accord, 3G Insight, and Acura showing vast improvement in the new RDX, there is really no reason for this. While I disagree with Honda's powertrain strategy as far as BEVs and FCEVs, this is a company that pulled itself out of the doldrums of the late 2000's/early 2010's to make some very compelling products.

I end this post with what Soichiro Honda is credited as saying:

"Success is 99% failure".

https://www.stevefogg.com/2010/01/15/success-is-99-failure/



That is your choice.

I haven't said a single thing that was toxic and vile, and yet again, I have fully substantiated every_single_thing I did say.

"Success is 99% failure" but I would add that sometimes failure is 99% success. Details matter.

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-01-2018 23:38
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
JeffX wrote:
owequitit wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
owequitit wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
owequitit wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
owequitit wrote:
Musk is a tool and his legions of fanboys and religious zealots are
tools.

The difference though was that they didn't run around telling everyone how stupid and inferior they were while simultaneously falling flat on their face.

Like I have said repeatedly. It has less to do with the vision and more to do with the way he goes about it.


Ok, leaving aside prior disputes,

What specific instances are you referring to when you say that Elon Musk told everyone else (other industry players) that they were "stupid and inferior"?

With regards to the "falling flat on their face" part, I don't see this as a bad thing. Failing is a part of any business enterprise. Much of the technology industry today exists because people failed at something and learned a lot from those failures. This is the only way people learn and evolve. Soichiro Honda is often quoted as having said: "Success is 99% failure", although I don't know if he actually did say this.



It was pretty much linked in the post I said it in, and it has been implied in many of his statements in the past. When I care enough to go back around in circles with you and give you fodder for propaganda invention, I will compile a list and post it here.





I looked at your links, and I disagree with your assertion that Musk told everyone that others were "stupid and inferior".

The Forbes article you linked quotes Elon Musk as saying:

"“The car industry thinks they're really good at manufacturing and actually they are quite good at manufacturing. But they just don't realize just how much potential there is for improvement. It's way more than they think,”

This is not as simple as calling everyone "stupid and inferior".

A person or organization can be very intelligent and competent at their work, but they can simultaneously also not see a better way to do things, or they could be stuck in a particular mindset.

I am reminded of Research in Motion, the company most famous for BlackBerry phones.

BlackBerry made excellent Smart Phones in the mid-2000's, but they were stuck in the mindset that Smart Phones were primarily a device for work email. They didn't realize that the Smart Phone had the potential to do far more than secure email or messaging. Subsequently, they got wiped out by Apple and Google because mobile computing hardware improved to the point where a mobile device could handle rich web content, high def multimedia/gaming, and multi-touch gestures. Initially, BlackBerry's leadership couldn't think past the mental barrier that a phone had to have a physical keyboard.

It's entirely possible that people at Tesla have thought up of ways to improve manufacturing speed, that other companies haven't thought of or are unwilling to try.

While Tesla has had manufacturing problems for most of its history, I see this as a byproduct of their willingness to experiment in the pursuit of improvement.



Telling the world you are going to school Toyota on lean manufacturing, when your *only* current plant would have to improve by almost 700% just to match where Toyota was almost 2 decades ago when they LEFT the very same building is doing exactly what I say.

But of course, I also said there were other examples and I would provide them, but I haven't had time to.



Two points:

(1) Tesla is much closer to Toyota's #'s than you think. 700% improvement to match Toyota/GM is a wild exaggeration -- off by about an order of magnitude.

According to Ward's Automotive, the Fremont factory, then known as NUMMI, produced a high of 428,633 automobiles for GM and Toyota in 2006. Source: http://www.wardsauto.com/news-analysis/toyota-s-decision-abandon-nummi-closes-book-25-year-experiment.

That's approximately 8,243 cars/week for Toyota/GM.

Tesla, as discussed above,

Produces about 2,000 Model S and X cars per week.

Bloomberg's Model 3 Tracker, which has proven to be fairly accurate, estimates that Tesla is currently producing 2,677 Model 3s per week, and further projects 3,000-4,000/week in the next week or two.

If Tesla's current rate of production is 4,677 cars/week total, they need to boost unit output by 76% to match NUMMI's record.

If Bloomberg's forward looking analysis is correct, and Tesla gets to 4k/week of Model 3, total output rises to 6,000 cars/week, leaving Tesla a 37% gap with Toyota.

Neither of these is even close to 700%.


(2) Tesla's factory does a lot more than just body stamping, painting, and final assembly. Tesla builds many of its components in-house at Fremont.

For example: https://www.wired.com/story/teslas-secret-second-floor/

Tesla uses the 2nd floor of NUMMI to build battery packs, electronics, and motors.

Another example: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-06-08/tesla-model-3-photos-of-elon-musk-s-factory-in-fremont

Tesla has built seats in-house, since 2015, rather than sourcing them from a parts supplier. Model 3 seat construction appears highly automated (photo with yellow robots, about 80% through the article).

As far as I know, when the factory was run by NUMMI, the facility did not build components like motors or seats for the cars. So comparing Tesla's operation to Toyota's operation, is Apples and Oranges. Tesla is doing more manufacturing steps.



1) They still have to increase production by over 400% to match Toyota so still not an "order of magnitude" off.

You see, you are playing loose and fast with the numbers again. You are comparing a single solitary week for Tesla (and a high point at that) for a larger average for Toyota. The first and fundamental problem with that is that Toyota AVERAGED 8,000+ cars per week, including downtime. Tesla does not. In your last tirade, you went on and on about how I was an idiot because my numbers didn't include "downtime." Toyota's do include downtime and last I checked, Tesla was currently producing just over 100K cars per year on a sustained basis. That will certainly go up with Model 3 production, but they still will be lucky to be at HALF of Toyota's capacity by the time all is said and done.

Let me put into a metaphor for you. If I plan a flight that I claim is just as good as someone else's flight, and only complete 25% of it, then I am NOWHERE near the other's level of performance. Simple as that. You want to ignore "orders of magnitude" when it suits your argument, but you want to acknowledge them when it suits your argument.

Fact: Tesla is nowhere near producing the same volume that Toyota managed to pump out of that factory for decades.

Fact: Telsa is, in fact, in some cases averaging 14% of what Toyota was when considering single model production (which is effectively what Toyota/GM produced there) when downtime is included.

Fact: When I made that post, I was speaking specifically to "mass market" prodcution of the Model 3, which was still quite a ways away from achieving it's "ramp up" in a giant tent in the parking lot. But, since you will complain about that, adjusting the numbers for ALL production in that plant, Musk is still off by almost 400%.

Fact: Toyota left that plant nearly a decade ago. Production technology has surely moved on since then.

2) If Musk chooses to waste limited resources on shit that he should have subcontracted, that is on him. Every other automaker outsources that stuff for a reason. It makes the process simpler, it shares the engineering work load, and it makes the process faster and cheaper.

I used to work for an electronics manufacturer. We didn't build everything in house because it didn't make sense. So we outsourced the stuff that didn't make sense. Not only is it common sense, but it is the same solution that every single segment of manufacturing (aerospace, automotive, clothing, electronics, etc) came to many decades ago.

The problem is that Musk's ego will not allow Tesla to do that.

3) Speaking of Musk's ego, here are 2 simple examples of him being a douche toward all of the other expertise in the auto industry, just in the last few months:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller/2018/02/16/tesla-thinks-it-will-school-toyota-on-lean-manufacturing-fixing-model-3-launch-would-be-a-start/#4ca2d3524c74

Here is Musk talking about how Tesla is going to "school" Toyota on lean manufacturing. However, as buyable as the hype might be for Musk worshippers, the reality is a little bit different. Not only is he nowhere near even matching Toyota's level, but he certainly hasn't "schooled" them on anything.

The definition of "schooling" is that A) you have to play on the same level and then you have to B) soundly beat your opponent on their level. He has absolutely, unquestionably and undeniably done neither.

In fact, he appears to be not only NOT achieving his goals, but he seems to be repeating previously learned industry lessons from 30-40 years ago:

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/04/experts-say-tesla-has-repeated-car-industry-mistakes-from-the-1980s/

A year later, Musk himself was touting Tesla's advanced robotics expertise. "We are pushing robots to the limit in terms of the speed that they can operate at, and asking our suppliers to make robots go way faster, and they are shocked because nobody has ever asked them that question," Musk said on a conference call last November. "It’s like if you can see the robot move, it’s too slow.”

Musk now admits he was wrong about this. "Excessive automation at Tesla was a mistake," Musk tweeted recently. "To be precise, my mistake. Humans are underrated."

"We had this crazy, complex network of conveyor belts," Musk told CBS News. "And it was not working, so we got rid of that whole thing."

Musk is discovering that large-scale car manufacturing is really hard, and it's not easy to improve on the methods of conventional automakers. And while automation obviously plays an important role in car manufacturing, it's not the magic bullet Musk imagined a couple of years ago. Far from leapfrogging the techniques of conventional automakers, Tesla is now struggling just to match the efficiency of its more established rivals.

And most of the auto industry experts we talked to thought Musk still had a lot to learn.

"A lot of the mistakes we're hearing about are mistakes that were made in the rest of the industry in the 1980s and the 1990s," says Sam Abuelsamid, an industry analyst at Navigant Research. He points to the experience of General Motors, which wasted billions of dollars in a largely fruitless effort to automate car production in the 1980s.


Then there were Musk's claims about an "alien dreadnaught factory" where machines moved so fast that humans wouldn't be safe. Of course, this isn't an OVERT attack on the industry, but it IS an insinuation that he is going to do so much better than established practice that it would embarrass other players in the industry who haven't been able to achieve such high levels of awesomeness.

http://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-is-failing-to-build-the-factory-of-the-future-2018-6

Further, when speaking of the nearby Ford plant to upchurch his apparently endless production ramp of the Model 3, he called the mood at Ford's F150 factory like a morgue as though to play off the workers having to work 10-12 hour shifts 6 days a week as a good thing (not to mention the giant tent in the parking lot).

Ford had the best response to the whole thing that could possibly be made:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/features/ford-fires-back-after-teslas-elon-musk-calls-it-a-morgue

“No doubt the vibe is funky in that ‘makeshift tent,’ but it’s not bad either across the street at the #FordRouge plant where a high quality, high-tech F-150 rolls off the line every 53 seconds like clockwork,” Truby wrote. “Come check it out @elonmusk.”


So let's put this into proper perspective:

One manufacturer produces millions of cars a year worldwide and delivers them on time and on budget and one of them is building cars in a tent in a parking lot.

One manufacturer has a "vibe" and the other let's workers have 2 days a week off and sends them home after a normal shift while still producing a vehicle every 53 seconds.

It's all just a bunch of hype, in usual Musk fashion.

P.S. in the interest of your pursuit of "fairness" and "accurate data, I would suggest that any production data from the tent be "excluded' from Tesla's numbers since Toyota never built any cars in a giant tent in the parking lot.

P.S.S. It looks like Musk just BARELY squeaked in that 5,000th Tesla 5 hours after the deadline. They did it for 1 week only, and they had to resort to extreme measures to get there, so before you cry foul, don't forget that the 5,000 per week was a stated average and didn't include building cars in a tent in the parking lot...

I want to know if the "tent edition" models get a special plaque that says "Veni, Vidi, Vicci #XXXX."



Note that Musk didn't say they built 5000 in a week. He said they "Factory Gated" 5000. What does that even mean?




I honestly have no idea what that means. I googled the term and it doesn't seem to be any sort of standard industry term.

Also, IMO, given the length of the delay and the hype surrounding it, "close" doesn't work in this case. They either meet it or they don't. I am sure the stock price will be OK for now, but I see a future where they have to borrow more money because they are so far behind the curve at this point. I think the more troubling issue though is going to be the billions of dollars in bonds that come due starting early next year and are currently trading at junk status. That combined with the capital burn and where the production is makes me think the biggest bumps may still be ahead.

Honestly, I could see Tesla as a prospective takeover target. It is clear at this point that they have made a name for themselves, so perhaps it could be absorbed as a luxury electric brand by a larger automaker in the future. I don't think the name will die and I think the product will live on in some form or another regardless what the future holds. Which is actually OK, because I really do like the styling overall.

Would there be a gain to updating the cell form factor?

Mikgtir
Profile for Mikgtir
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-02-2018 06:36
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
They have no marketing expenses and Doctor Musk is their sole PR and selling point.

They have sufficient wealthy fan base to buy their cars for the next 10 years.

A takeover from Musk and/or rebranding would be a failure.

Their fans are usually over knowledgeable and fully wired to Tesla news.

I would like to know the percentage overall of Tesla sold to non enthusiasts. Ans then compare it with mainstream brands.

Again, up to date, their the Apple of cars. But without one cent spent in advertising.

Dren
Profile for Dren
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-02-2018 07:10
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
But all of my Apple products have been quality, and I received them 1-2 days after purchase.
rev2damoon
Profile for rev2damoon
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-02-2018 07:46
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Hmmm...."The Apple of cars". I don't know that I'd agree with that, but I'm always open to hearing an explanation.

I've never been a big fan of Apple, but I do respect that they make high quality products. I've never driven a Tesla product, so I cannot comment on the quality of the drive. However, from a "visual" quality perspective, many Tesla products that I personally see driving on roads are lacking. I'm talking about misaligned body panels, panel gaps as wide as the Grand Canyon, doors that don't seem to be level once closed. It is quite frankly atrocious and unbecoming of a supposedly "luxury" product. This is of course my personal experience.

atomiclightbulb
Profile for atomiclightbulb
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-02-2018 18:31
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
JeffX wrote:

Note that Musk didn't say they built 5000 in a week. He said they "Factory Gated" 5000. What does that even mean?


Tesla reported official production numbers today: http://ir.tesla.com/news-releases/news-release-details/tesla-q2-2018-vehicle-production-and-deliveries

Summary:

* In the last seven days of Q2, Tesla produced 5,031 Model 3 and 1,913 Model S and X vehicles.
* Q2 production totaled 53,339 vehicles,
* Model 3 production (28,578)
* Model S and X production (24,761),

* GA4 (aka "Tent") was responsible for roughly 20% of Model 3s produced, with quality from that line being as good as regular GA3 line
* Estimated that that GA3 alone can reach a production rate of 5,000 Model 3s per week soon

GA1 is the integrated Model S/X assembly line. GA2 and GA3 are the original Model 3 assembly lines. GA4 is the tent.

* The company still has a backlog of 420,000 active Model 3 reservations to fill. This is with no advertising, and very few demo cars in stores (as far as I know, no test drives, only sitting inside the cabin allowed).


My Analysis:

As cited in an above post, the Fremont Factory, when it was under NUMMI management, produced nearly 429k cars/year at its peak in 2006.

If Tesla's production rate were to hold steady at 53,339 cars/quarter, that would put them at just over 213k cars/year, or 49.7% of Toyota/GM's best year at NUMMI.

However, it is clear that Tesla is NOT going to stop improving its output. Their history, and stated intent, is continuous ramping:

From 2012-2017, Tesla went from about 5000 units/year (Model S sold about 2600 units for all of '12, but production only started in June '12) to 100,000 units/year. That's approximately going from 100 units/week to 2000 units/week in roughly 4.5 years for vehicles on the Model S/X platform. Tesla achieved a roughly steady state of 2k cars/month in late 2016, which I believe is the max capacity of the S/X line.

By comparison, for the Model 3 platform, Tesla went from close to 0 cars/week at the end of July 2017, to 5031 cars/week at the end of June 2018 (11 months later).

I do not know whether Tesla can maintain 5k/week of Model 3, but their stated intent is that Model 3 production will go higher, and based on their past actions, I believe they mean it.

It is not difficult to observe that Tesla is almost always late on the timelines that Elon Musk sets, but that they eventually achieve what Musk wants them to achieve.

I therefore believe it is unwise to bet against Tesla in the long run.



A note on terminology:

The phrase "Production Gate" doesn't IMO mean anything other than the car went through final QC and drove out the factory gates to the shipping lot.

Tesla has used nonstandard terminology in the past. For example, they use software terminology (like "Alpha" and "Beta") to describe their prototype cars, which I don't believe I've heard used to describe prototype cars of other manufacturers. "Frunk" is another example.

Musk said that they "Production Gated" 5,000 Model 3. Tesla's official statement said 5,031 were produced. They basically mean the same thing.


owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-02-2018 19:09
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Mikgtir wrote:
They have no marketing expenses and Doctor Musk is their sole PR and selling point.

They have sufficient wealthy fan base to buy their cars for the next 10 years.

A takeover from Musk and/or rebranding would be a failure.

Their fans are usually over knowledgeable and fully wired to Tesla news.

I would like to know the percentage overall of Tesla sold to non enthusiasts. Ans then compare it with mainstream brands.

Again, up to date, their the Apple of cars. But without one cent spent in advertising.



I don't really see any parallels between Apple and Tesla to be honest.

I have had many Apple devices and they have all been dead reliable, well engineered and easy to deal with. I haven't had quality issues either.

Most importantly though, every time Apple has said they were going to launch a product and it would be available and ready to ship on day XX, it was.

Further, Apple is not financially unstable with an overinflated stock price relative to its financial performance, market share, or net worth.

Mikgtir
Profile for Mikgtir
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-02-2018 19:09
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Dren wrote:
But all of my Apple products have been quality, and I received them 1-2 days after purchase.

Agreed, was just comparing the brand and its link between customer and CEO (Steve Jobs/Elon Musk : their fans).

Rate of failure of I phones compared to Android competitors is higher. Reliability is not so good in average for some apple products compared to others. Myself I do buy Apple for laptops.

I just meant that the company Tesla without Musk would drop both in stock price value first and then on sales.

Same happened (even if there is no certainty on the correlation) when Bill Gates moved out of Microsoft as CEO. It went down the first years. But another animal here, there is not the same crazy fan base as Tesla or Apple, far from that for Microsoft.

Perception and vision of a leader can make or brake a product, whatever its quality.

Mikgtir
Profile for Mikgtir
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-02-2018 19:22
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Agreed for laptops, not so sure on I phones any more:

https://www.google.lu/amp/s/www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/iphones-less-reliable-than-android/amp/

My opinion is out of the post, but I do fancy Apple better as a consumer, I'm attracted by their products, design and interface.

I just need to use some apps when travelling that are not ios compatible.

It s always the question of durable vs reliable, German cars were known to be durable but not so much reliable (it can last 30 + years (80's models) or American cars (some brands/models) but you need to change half the parts of the car or more to get there . VS reliable / Japanese cars of the 90's (not all...), we're you could drive them 20 years with simple maintenance usual parts. That s the idea.

Tesla should be durable but not reliable (+ need to change full battery pack after a while, etc). Made in aluminium, you will change 80 % of the parts bit it will alive in 30 years. Cannot say that of an IPhone in general, even if they have the technology to make it durable, they build it expandable to push for the acquisition of a new one. If a Tesla would be reliable, they will be bankrupt before 2023.Manu owners will lease and change every 2 to 4 years for a new one.

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-02-2018 22:54
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Mikgtir wrote:
Dren wrote:
But all of my Apple products have been quality, and I received them 1-2 days after purchase.

Agreed, was just comparing the brand and its link between customer and CEO (Steve Jobs/Elon Musk : their fans).

Rate of failure of I phones compared to Android competitors is higher. Reliability is not so good in average for some apple products compared to others. Myself I do buy Apple for laptops.

I just meant that the company Tesla without Musk would drop both in stock price value first and then on sales.

Same happened (even if there is no certainty on the correlation) when Bill Gates moved out of Microsoft as CEO. It went down the first years. But another animal here, there is not the same crazy fan base as Tesla or Apple, far from that for Microsoft.

Perception and vision of a leader can make or brake a product, whatever its quality.



Correlation does not equal causation, as you say.

The difference between Apple and Microsoft is stark. Microsoft tanked because their products sucked and Apple largely became a viable option. Especially as Steve Jobs realized that he could pull more people in by making it easier to work across devices and making them everything Microsoft wasn't: user friendly.

I specifically left Microsoft around that same era because I was tired of the B.S. and crap product. What was REALLY telling about how bad Microsoft was is that my Apple stuff ran my Microsoft stuff BETTER than my Microsoft stuff did. As technology moved away from desktop based computing, Microsoft specifically couldn't compete, which is why their entire push has been into mobile devices. I used to have a Surface 3 for work. It was a pile of garbage. Have had several work based iPads and they have all worked better. Failure rate was lower too. They used to keep around 20 spare Surfaces in each base because they failed frequently.

I will agree that Apple is sliding compared to the Jobs years, but not all Apple users are blind Jobs fans, just like all Tesla owners aren't blind Musk fans.

Mikgtir
Profile for Mikgtir
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-03-2018 10:52
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
owequitit wrote:
Mikgtir wrote:
Dren wrote:
But all of my Apple products have been quality, and I received them 1-2 days after purchase.

Agreed, was just comparing the brand and its link between customer and CEO (Steve Jobs/Elon Musk : their fans).

Rate of failure of I phones compared to Android competitors is higher. Reliability is not so good in average for some apple products compared to others. Myself I do buy Apple for laptops.

I just meant that the company Tesla without Musk would drop both in stock price value first and then on sales.

Same happened (even if there is no certainty on the correlation) when Bill Gates moved out of Microsoft as CEO. It went down the first years. But another animal here, there is not the same crazy fan base as Tesla or Apple, far from that for Microsoft.

Perception and vision of a leader can make or brake a product, whatever its quality.



Correlation does not equal causation, as you say.

The difference between Apple and Microsoft is stark. Microsoft tanked because their products sucked and Apple largely became a viable option. Especially as Steve Jobs realized that he could pull more people in by making it easier to work across devices and making them everything Microsoft wasn't: user friendly.

I specifically left Microsoft around that same era because I was tired of the B.S. and crap product. What was REALLY telling about how bad Microsoft was is that my Apple stuff ran my Microsoft stuff BETTER than my Microsoft stuff did. As technology moved away from desktop based computing, Microsoft specifically couldn't compete, which is why their entire push has been into mobile devices. I used to have a Surface 3 for work. It was a pile of garbage. Have had several work based iPads and they have all worked better. Failure rate was lower too. They used to keep around 20 spare Surfaces in each base because they failed frequently.

I will agree that Apple is sliding compared to the Jobs years, but not all Apple users are blind Jobs fans, just like all Tesla owners aren't blind Musk fans.



So if not only their fans buy from them, what Tesla is doing is quite impressive.


JeffX
Profile for JeffX
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-03-2018 11:23
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Mikgtir wrote:
owequitit wrote:
Mikgtir wrote:
Dren wrote:
But all of my Apple products have been quality, and I received them 1-2 days after purchase.

Agreed, was just comparing the brand and its link between customer and CEO (Steve Jobs/Elon Musk : their fans).

Rate of failure of I phones compared to Android competitors is higher. Reliability is not so good in average for some apple products compared to others. Myself I do buy Apple for laptops.

I just meant that the company Tesla without Musk would drop both in stock price value first and then on sales.

Same happened (even if there is no certainty on the correlation) when Bill Gates moved out of Microsoft as CEO. It went down the first years. But another animal here, there is not the same crazy fan base as Tesla or Apple, far from that for Microsoft.

Perception and vision of a leader can make or brake a product, whatever its quality.



Correlation does not equal causation, as you say.

The difference between Apple and Microsoft is stark. Microsoft tanked because their products sucked and Apple largely became a viable option. Especially as Steve Jobs realized that he could pull more people in by making it easier to work across devices and making them everything Microsoft wasn't: user friendly.

I specifically left Microsoft around that same era because I was tired of the B.S. and crap product. What was REALLY telling about how bad Microsoft was is that my Apple stuff ran my Microsoft stuff BETTER than my Microsoft stuff did. As technology moved away from desktop based computing, Microsoft specifically couldn't compete, which is why their entire push has been into mobile devices. I used to have a Surface 3 for work. It was a pile of garbage. Have had several work based iPads and they have all worked better. Failure rate was lower too. They used to keep around 20 spare Surfaces in each base because they failed frequently.

I will agree that Apple is sliding compared to the Jobs years, but not all Apple users are blind Jobs fans, just like all Tesla owners aren't blind Musk fans.



So if not only their fans buy from them, what Tesla is doing is quite impressive.




So, there are reports that Tesla took a number of shortcuts to achieve their target (which they actually missed by several hundred units it seems).

To speed up the line they eliminated some 300 spot welds from the body. I don't know what that does to the structural integrity but I imagine it's not a positive benefit. And as they were falling behind plan during this ridiculous, unsustainable "burst production" week, apparently there was an executive order sent down that eliminated some sort of "brake and roll" test.

Elon Musk ordered Tesla engineers to stop doing a critical brake test on Model 3s

"If you just abandon that [the test] you could potentially have a lot of quality issues with your customers," he said. "Every plant does that ... it's part of finishing the build of the car."


If you buy one of these hunks of shit after seeing stuff like this (and how crappy they've generally been coming off the line), you deserve all of the inconvenience and pain of ownership that's coming your way.



Dren
Profile for Dren
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-03-2018 13:48
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
That's part of the Tesla buying experience. You get to wait a long time for your car and then when you receive it, you're paying to be the test engineer and QA/QC guy, too! It's the interactive Tesla learning experience. The risk of having a fatal accident amplifies the driving excitement! Tesla wants you to feel like you're driving a Formula 1 car from the 60s made of magnesium that bursts into flames in a crash. Ludicrous!
Mikgtir
Profile for Mikgtir
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-03-2018 15:30
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
https://jalopnik.com/its-possible-to-have-mixed-feelings-about-tesla-1827290718

Mixed feelings is a good one. I would like to be impressed, but cannot.

superchg2
Profile for superchg2
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-03-2018 15:50
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Dren wrote:
That's part of the Tesla buying experience. You get to wait a long time for your car and then when you receive it, you're paying to be the test engineer and QA/QC guy, too! It's the interactive Tesla learning experience. The risk of having a fatal accident amplifies the driving excitement! Tesla wants you to feel like you're driving a Formula 1 car from the 60s made of magnesium that bursts into flames in a crash. Ludicrous!

The proud new owner may need to allow time to get the bugs out of his/her new Model 3 that wandered into the tent!
:)



atomiclightbulb
Profile for atomiclightbulb
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-03-2018 18:14
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
JeffX wrote:
So, there are reports that Tesla took a number of shortcuts to achieve their target (which they actually missed by several hundred units it seems).

To speed up the line they eliminated some 300 spot welds from the body. I don't know what that does to the structural integrity but I imagine it's not a positive benefit.


The Times article says that the Model 3 still has approximately 5000 spot welds. 300 welds out of 5300 is 5.7% of the total.

People should note that the decision to make this engineering change happened in a vague time period, stated as "recent weeks" according to the article. We don't know exactly when this change was made, or the testing and analysis done.

I think it is highly unlikely that Tesla would put this into production without verifying that safety and performance would not be compromised.

People should also note that rapid design changes were common with the Model S. Many parts underwent significant revisions, even if the car still looked the same on the outside.



And as they were falling behind plan during this ridiculous, unsustainable "burst production" week, apparently there was an executive order sent down that eliminated some sort of "brake and roll" test.

Elon Musk ordered Tesla engineers to stop doing a critical brake test on Model 3s

"If you just abandon that [the test] you could potentially have a lot of quality issues with your customers," he said. "Every plant does that ... it's part of finishing the build of the car."


If you buy one of these hunks of shit after seeing stuff like this (and how crappy they've generally been coming off the line), you deserve all of the inconvenience and pain of ownership that's coming your way.


Again, we do not know the rationale for eliminating this test.

Based on what I've seen on YouTube and Model3OwnersClub, the quality of Model 3 has gotten better and better over the past few months.

I think it is premature to reach such confident (and hateful) conclusions.

atomiclightbulb
Profile for atomiclightbulb
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-03-2018 18:21
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Mikgtir wrote:
https://jalopnik.com/its-possible-to-have-mixed-feelings-about-tesla-1827290718

Mixed feelings is a good one. I would like to be impressed, but cannot.



Thanks for posting that article. I think the author's opinion is fair and realistic:

"And when we report something that happens at Tesla, it isn’t meant to be “negative” or “positive.” They’re just things that happen, and when what people consider to be “bad news” is reported about Tesla, that’s on Tesla, just as Tesla is more than welcome to take credit—and people should be more than happy to give credit—when it does something well.

It’s possible that Tesla can make great cars, and it’s possible that Tesla needs to get its shit together.

Acknowledging both is just acknowledging reality.
"

atomiclightbulb
Profile for atomiclightbulb
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-03-2018 18:31
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
I also recommend this opinion piece by Alex Roy of 'The Drive':

http://www.thedrive.com/tech/20813/the-tesla-effect-is-hurting-tesla

Alex writes:

"In the five years since Tesla started delivering the Model S, it's become almost impossible to have a rational conversation about anything they make. Tesla's cars are victims of what I call The Tesla Effect; every Tesla is trapped in a garage of mirrors, surrounded by fans/investors who believe in the Tesla/Musk vision, and foes betting against the stock. What is the relationship between the Tesla discourse and actual ownership?

Almost zero."


Alex's observation is that much of the narrative around Tesla is stoked up by:

(1) Journalists and the Mainstream Media, who have little actual knowledge of cars.

(2) Wall Street entities, either betting on Tesla stock to fail or go sky high, and

Of the money-interested parties, Alex criticizes their sensationalization of everything Tesla:

"These are really toxic, deceptive people, all of them orbiting the steaming pile of discourse whose hazy stench obscures the only questions that matter:

Should I buy one? How does Autopilot work?"

sadlerau
Profile for sadlerau
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-04-2018 03:23
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
atomiclightbulb wrote:
Should I buy one? How does Autopilot work?"


I would have thought the most important part of that is - What will be my effective range? Surely that is the most relevant item for a would be owner??

atomiclightbulb
Profile for atomiclightbulb
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-04-2018 08:02
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
sadlerau wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
Should I buy one? How does Autopilot work?"


I would have thought the most important part of that is - What will be my effective range? Surely that is the most relevant item for a would be owner??



I think most people in Tesla's home market of the United States, only take a few road trips per year. A Model 3 LR has a nominal range of 310 miles, which is far more than the vast majority of people need in a day.

BEVs perform the worst in cold climates, because cold inhibits the chemical reactions of the battery, and because electric heat saps battery life.

Owners have been testing the Cold Weather capability for some time now. For example: https://insideevs.com/tesla-model-3-winter-range-in-the-real-world-video/

With the car sitting outside overnight, and outside temperatures at -6 C, 70 MPH highway runs yielded the results:

Trip A (with heating): 261 miles (420 km) and 281 Wh/mile
Trip B (no heating): 308.6 miles (496 km) and 243 Wh/mile

Snow and lower temperatures would likely reduce range further.

People should keep in mind that the Tesla Supercharger network will allow a Tesla to add up to 170 miles of nominal range in about 30 minutes.

JeffX
Profile for JeffX
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-04-2018 14:29
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
atomiclightbulb wrote:
JeffX wrote:
So, there are reports that Tesla took a number of shortcuts to achieve their target (which they actually missed by several hundred units it seems).

To speed up the line they eliminated some 300 spot welds from the body. I don't know what that does to the structural integrity but I imagine it's not a positive benefit.


The Times article says that the Model 3 still has approximately 5000 spot welds. 300 welds out of 5300 is 5.7% of the total.

People should note that the decision to make this engineering change happened in a vague time period, stated as "recent weeks" according to the article. We don't know exactly when this change was made, or the testing and analysis done.

I think it is highly unlikely that Tesla would put this into production without verifying that safety and performance would not be compromised.

People should also note that rapid design changes were common with the Model S. Many parts underwent significant revisions, even if the car still looked the same on the outside.



I'm not surprised that you think this because you take everything they say at face value. I, however, have learned over the years to be very skeptical of their claims, as many of them have been proven to be deceptive if not outright lies.

My take is that it was done exclusively to speed the production line up. There is no way it is making the body in white a better product and there's a good chance they are making some sacrifices. Maybe they don't make a material difference in the prescribed crash tests but there's a good chance the inferior build quality will be revealed in other crash modes or even during general wear conditions.

People should note that Model S and Model X suspension parts are STILL failing at an unacceptable rate. But apparently this is 'acceptable' to Tesla as they have not formally issued a recall. Oh yeah, their steering racks are shearing bolts and falling apart as well. At least they recalled those.


And as they were falling behind plan during this ridiculous, unsustainable "burst production" week, apparently there was an executive order sent down that eliminated some sort of "brake and roll" test.

Elon Musk ordered Tesla engineers to stop doing a critical brake test on Model 3s

"If you just abandon that [the test] you could potentially have a lot of quality issues with your customers," he said. "Every plant does that ... it's part of finishing the build of the car."


If you buy one of these hunks of shit after seeing stuff like this (and how crappy they've generally been coming off the line), you deserve all of the inconvenience and pain of ownership that's coming your way.


Again, we do not know the rationale for eliminating this test.

Based on what I've seen on YouTube and Model3OwnersClub, the quality of Model 3 has gotten better and better over the past few months.

I think it is premature to reach such confident (and hateful) conclusions.




I'm not some clueless wall street bro in the peanut gallery nor some clueless starry-eyed member of mainstream media.

After earning a degree in electrical engineering, my first job out of college was as a quality engineer at a tier 1 automotive supplier. Our primary product was electric motors but there were other items made there. My desk was in the cube farm front office portion of a >300000 square foot factory. The lines moved extremely fast - I don't remember how many components per shift we were putting out but it was a big number. It was a 6-sigma operation so there were QC tests at every stage of production and my job was to track the results, make sure the test equipment was always properly calibrated, identify any production issues, diagnose the cause, and if necessary, we'd have to design a solution to fix and improve the quality.

I have also toured numerous automotive factories and R&D facilities in the US and Japan. I have spoken to a number of production engineers, design engineers, and manufacturing associates to understand their processes and how everything is checked for quality.

You just can't remove a rigorous instrumented multi-stage quality check from the process and expect everything to be okay. Tesla is able to satisfy their adoring masses by saying they "test" everything on a track. There is absolutely no way that driving the car around the track can possibly reveal the same type of quality issues that a precision test instrument could reveal at the component level on the production line. Sure, a human can test for obvious defects with a drive (and most car companies do these types of tests at the end of the line) but you'll never be able to catch things that are slightly out of spec. That's why you have those tests further upstream.







Last edited by JeffX on 07-04-2018 14:32
superchg2
Profile for superchg2
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-04-2018 17:30
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
JeffX wrote:

If you buy one of these hunks of shit after seeing stuff like this (and how crappy they've generally been coming off the line), you deserve all of the inconvenience and pain of ownership that's coming your way.


Well said JeffX!

Happy 4th of July to you all!


superchg2
Profile for superchg2
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-04-2018 17:42
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
superchg2 wrote:
JeffX wrote:

If you buy one of these hunks of shit after seeing stuff like this (and how crappy they've generally been coming off the line), you deserve all of the inconvenience and pain of ownership that's coming your way.


Well said JeffX!

Happy 4th of July to you all!




atomiclightbulb
Profile for atomiclightbulb
Re: Motor Trend first impressions drive of Tesla Model 3    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-05-2018 19:36
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
JeffX, we are not going to agree on the welds, but frankly, neither of us has enough data to say whether there is an impact to safety or long term reliability.

JeffX wrote:

And as they were falling behind plan during this ridiculous, unsustainable "burst production" week, apparently there was an executive order sent down that eliminated some sort of "brake and roll" test.

Elon Musk ordered Tesla engineers to stop doing a critical brake test on Model 3s

"If you just abandon that [the test] you could potentially have a lot of quality issues with your customers," he said. "Every plant does that ... it's part of finishing the build of the car."


If you buy one of these hunks of shit after seeing stuff like this (and how crappy they've generally been coming off the line), you deserve all of the inconvenience and pain of ownership that's coming your way.


Again, we do not know the rationale for eliminating this test.

Based on what I've seen on YouTube and Model3OwnersClub, the quality of Model 3 has gotten better and better over the past few months.

I think it is premature to reach such confident (and hateful) conclusions.




I'm not some clueless wall street bro in the peanut gallery nor some clueless starry-eyed member of mainstream media.

After earning a degree in electrical engineering, my first job out of college was as a quality engineer at a tier 1 automotive supplier. Our primary product was electric motors but there were other items made there. My desk was in the cube farm front office portion of a >300000 square foot factory. The lines moved extremely fast - I don't remember how many components per shift we were putting out but it was a big number. It was a 6-sigma operation so there were QC tests at every stage of production and my job was to track the results, make sure the test equipment was always properly calibrated, identify any production issues, diagnose the cause, and if necessary, we'd have to design a solution to fix and improve the quality.

I have also toured numerous automotive factories and R&D facilities in the US and Japan. I have spoken to a number of production engineers, design engineers, and manufacturing associates to understand their processes and how everything is checked for quality.

You just can't remove a rigorous instrumented multi-stage quality check from the process and expect everything to be okay. Tesla is able to satisfy their adoring masses by saying they "test" everything on a track. There is absolutely no way that driving the car around the track can possibly reveal the same type of quality issues that a precision test instrument could reveal at the component level on the production line. Sure, a human can test for obvious defects with a drive (and most car companies do these types of tests at the end of the line) but you'll never be able to catch things that are slightly out of spec. That's why you have those tests further upstream.



(1) You accuse me of taking what Tesla says at "face value", yet, you apparently take Business Insider's accusations at "face value", despite the fact that this publication is (a) a member of the "clueless" (your words) "mainstream media", and (b) caters to "clueless" (again your words) "Wall Street bro[s]".

(2) You do not know what "brake and roll" is. You in fact characterized it as "some sort of "brake and roll" test."

You therefore aren't in any position to say whether the test might be redundant. We simply do not know if there are checks elsewhere in the production line that observe for proper alignment and brake system functionality.

What would be a red flag, is if Alignment and Brakes are listed as issues in the Consumer Reports reliability survey. There is simply not enough information to say whether or not this is an issue, because we don't have the full picture of the manufacturing process.


 
Thread Page - 1 2 3 4 [5] 6
Go to:
Contact TOV | Submit Your Article | Submit Your Link | Advertise | TOV Shop | Events | Our Sponsors | TOV Archives
Copyright © 2018 Velocitech Inc. All information contained herein remains the property of Velocitech Inc.
The Temple of VTEC is not affiliated with American Honda Motor Co., Inc. TOV Policies and Guidelines - Credits - Privacy Policy
29 mobile: 0