It's not about quality. They're comparable for all intent and purposes. The key here is quantity. They make A LOT of them and it will take other battery manufacturers a lot of capital and time to expand production. Tesla has secured itself all the batteries that they need and channels to sell surplus and old ones (energy projects, home batteries, etc...).
That's a very good point. Those things are backed-up by big contracts. Other companies will need to invest heavily to follow up on this, and they certainly will soon.
But I don't see Tesla becoming an EXTREMELY profitable company and others will just eat it alive soon, as the margins in that sector are just bad. Of course it can standout and still exist, become one company like VW or another one, but it won't become THE automobile company.
The biggest beneficiaries of this will be us, the users. They will compete hard and we will get a more environment-friendly car. Government will soon go harder on this and make everybody drive a more environment friendly car. Awesome.
In today's world, this is more important to the world than profits. I see this actually as the new economy. Governments will start to take policies aggressively against things which are better economically, but makes no sense environmentally-wise.
Thats their "unlawful" advantage: they do know about batteries better than others, which is the biggest problem any electric car faces: good batteries.
So, why now sell the whole car at retail price instead of selling batteries at volume price?
I think it's the other way around. Tesla knew that they need batteries for their cars and that the battery market is highly competitive and volatile. The only way to ensure a reliable supply chain for batteries is to build batteries themselves.
Either way they'll win - make batteries at cost for their own cars, or sell batteries with profit for other manufacturer's electric cars. They also win in goodwill. And with the supercharger network, which I'm sure they'll open up (if they aren't already) to all electric cars. How much does a charge cost there?
I wonder why there so much focus on "carmakers" like BMW or Daimler instad of "partmakers" like Bosch that have been working in electric car parts for years, and are able to manufacture up to 60-70% of the inner components of a (electric|gasoline|diesel) car.
Frontend vs backend, basically. Why is there so much attention on JS framework of the month, and so little on the classic Java back-ends that fuel them all with data (for example)?
Good, but a lot of models have yet to hit production and here in Germany the only fancy electric cars you can see are Teslas...
Also, I don't think Tesla's advantage is batteries as somebody here is commenting - it's software and data. Tesla is probably the best in class when it comes to software between automakers. German automakers don't make good software and I'd argue don't take it seriously enough even (just look at status and salary of programmers in Germany vs US). Tesla is collecting data on each of their cars, German automakers don't do that yet.
Driveless cars are going to be about software and data and German automakers are weak in both categories.
The only competitive advantage I see is production scale, but how long will this last?
You could have said the same thing when Nokia was at its peak. Sometimes its not about the money, the top execs have to "get it" that software has to be taken seriously as well.
Yeah it's more about being willing to cannabalise their existing product lines in favour of EVs, and throw away decades of internal combustion engine (and the associated paraphernalia) know-how, in favour of something new. Pretty terrifying for an incumbent car maker.
Right, hardware people just can't do software (The only exception is Apple). Nokia was making phones then at the last minute picking an OS to bodge in there.
Car companies don't write software, they outsource it.
Musk's first companies were software based, and he doesn't have an existing business to prop up, that's the main advantage.
If he manages to make his one car factory as fast as he predicts it will be able make as many cars as Ford's 30 factories, leaving Ford with 29 worthless factories. He'll need self driving cars just to get them out of the factory fast enough.
>Tesla is collecting data on each of their cars, German automakers don't do that yet.
This is a perfect example of how US software companies are ruining everyone's privacy. Company A gets competitive advantage through spyware and then everyone thinks they have to spy to keep up.
Almost everything that a Tesla customer does in that car is recorded and probably uploaded to the mothership. When analysing accidents they're able to reconstruct what happened to a disturbing level of detail.
"When analysing accidents they're able to reconstruct what happened to a disturbing level of detail."
I'm strongly pro-privacy on ethical grounds, but is this really a complaint you want to make?
It establishes fault in accidents and provides statistically significant information to educate both the AI and the public as to what causes road accidents and how to avoid them.
Until there's clear laws establishing who can see the data, what can be collected, when it must be deleted and to give the driver control over shutting it off, that's exactly the argument that needs to be made.
Right now Tesla does whatever they want with it, including publishing accident details for defensive PR.
Re: collecting data. They will never do it. The cannot because the law does not allow it. A more stricter law is coming. For the suppliers of self driving components is a nightmare, they only can infer datapoints.
Tesla also cannot collect any data from cars driving in EU, but they gather enough data in US.
Uploading of collected data is indeed deactivated by default on Tesla's cars in the EU.
But you can opt-in by checking a box in the cars setting. You can also opt-in to share driving videos from the eight cameras sourounding the car, to help improve the selfdriving system.
> Tesla also cannot collect any data from cars driving in EU, but they gather enough data in US.
I'm a relatively recent driver (I've only gotten my license 3 years ago), but even so, from what I've read and what I've seen with my own eyes driving cross-border around several European countries I can tell you that there definitely is a "cultural" difference in driving between different areas of the globe.
More exactly, a driver in Switzerland in Germany will react and act differently on the road compared to a driver from Romania, and a driver from a smaller city will certainly drive differently compared to a driver from a big, congested city (I noticed this phenomena with my own eyes a couple of weeks ago when I went to a quieter part of my country and I didn't understand why most of the incoming drivers weren't "negotiating" more when the roads were getting narrower, like it happens in the big city where I currently live, they were just sitting in front of my car not making any maneuver, waiting for I don't know what).
Taking all this into consideration, I'm pretty sure that the differences in driving styles between Europe and the USA are big enough that Tesla's data collected in the States will be of not that much use when applied to European driving styles. Also, see this recent thread on /r/cars of car-obsessed redditors discussing about why German-like autobahns could never work in the States: https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/comments/6p30xd/would_an_ameri....
I remember a chap who enjoyed driving around the US for days. Then when on the Dutch road he was completely worn out after 2 hours explaining there was way to much going on for his taste.
> Re: collecting data. They will never do it. The cannot because the law does not allow it.
Have you followed the news regarding German automakers and the law? As far as Germany is concerned, they are the law (as in OEM lobbyists literally writing the verbatim law texts that affect them).
Indeed, but they cannot go over the constitutional law and overrule the data protection that is fundamental.
They have to remove painstakingly all the obvious traces of you from all a data dump. All the non-obvious must be also possible to request for removal, if a citizen requires.
> just look at status and salary of programmers in Germany vs US
While you do have a point you probably mean Germany vs Silicon Valley. The average developer salary in Germany isn't that much different from the average in the US as a whole.
That said, in industries where software isn't seen as the main product but merely as something that helps selling that main products programmers have a low prestige (and by extension a lower salary) but I suppose that's the same in any country. Case in point: The ridiculously low rates programmers get in the financial industry in London.
> The average developer salary in Germany isn't that much different from the average in the US as a whole.
I think you'd be surprised. Can't find a good source now, but last time I checked US average is roughly double Germany & UK.
> The ridiculously low rates programmers get in the financial industry in London
The finance industry in London is one of the few markets outside US that are comparable with US in salary, particularly contractors - £800/day is not uncommon for finance devs.
> I think you'd be surprised. Can't find a good source now, but last time I checked US average is roughly double Germany & UK.
There's a lot of variance and of course these kinds of surveys are also always contingent on industry and years of experience but taking currency exchange rates into account (which of course is questionable, too because in many aspects of daily life 1 USD probably equals 1 EUR) the factor is more like 1.3 to 1.5 at the most:
> The finance industry in London is one of the few markets outside US that are comparable with US in salary, particularly contractors - £800/day is not uncommon for finance devs.
From my experience (which comes from client leads) the maximum is more like £550 / day with the average at about £400 and even £300 per day not being unheard of and that's pre-Brexit-vote. Since then daily rates have decreased.
We are a after-thought, something that is fired and forgot about. But to be fair, most Car-Makers have that ingrained into there production cycle (same in the US)
Few years ago, CEO of Audi and others was making fun of Tesla and today all of them jumping on same boat as Tesla did, because of FOMO. Reminds me classical quote: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
I hope Tesla wins, because they deserve it. There was no real innovation for ages, as auto companies only did minimum to keep their profits. Also we should not forget diesel gate scandal. They didn't want to invest into cleaner cars and rather cheated. I've personal aversion agains this industry, because of that.
And Tesla even affords the attitude to say they don't want to claim the whole market and they're happy to let others use their ideas, because they want a world with fewer carbon. So, even if they don't win, they can claim it was their plan all along ;)
The traditional car companies will catch up with them (Apple was 5 years ahead of the competition at the time of the iPhone too for example), but by then Tesla will have over 50% of the world's battery production, and guess what all electric cars need? Batteries, and lots of them, and they will need to be replaced every 7-10 years.
Tesla right now does pretty well as a car manufacturer and the Model 3 will probably do well too, but by 2025 when the established car companies (like the German ones) have caught up, unless Tesla innovated far beyond those, it'll be a marginal car company - but a huge battery and energy company, as well as a "fuel" company with their supercharger networks.
> but by then Tesla will have over 50% of the world's battery production
I'm not sure whether you are referring to control or consumption, but in case it's the former: the cells Tesla uses are produced by Panasonic, so technically, they would be in control.
Tesla and Elon Musk are not the same entity.
Tesla is controlled by a board of directors unlike SpaceX it's a public company.
Elon Musk took the reign because he had the vision, if his ideals will eventually come to an impasse with Tesla's financial future he can be just as easily removed.
Tesla opening its patents and IP was more than just sharing it was a brilliant move to prevent a future patent war in the EV space that could put Tesla at risk by claims brought forth by the car behemoths, now it's much easier to claim previous work.
A single company cannot corner the market and its unrealistic for Tesla to have 50% or more of the EV market in the long term but if you think they are OK with just packing it up and going home as long as some one else picks up the tortch you really do not understand how companies work.
If anything it looks like Tesla wants to evolve into being a service provider in the automotive space, batteries, charging networks, auto-pilot tech and many other technical solutions on top of having a production line.
Heck I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla drops car production completely in 10 or so years if they can corner the battery manufacturing and automotive charging market.
> There was not real innovation for ages, as auto companies only did minimum to keep their profits.
I wouldn't say that. ICE has improved a lot in the last 50 years and so have other elements of a car, from structural integrity to braking systems. The ICE car we have today is an amazing machine compared to the ones we drove in the 50s or 60s.
It is true that traditional car companies have not done enough to push the electric car forward but a lot of innovation has happened, and some of it will benefit electric cars directly (regenerative braking, for example).
I'm with you, though. I hope Tesla comes out of this as a powerful car company because they deserve to be an example for the rest of the industry.
> There was not real innovation for ages, as auto companies only did minimum to keep their profits.
You are very, very mistaken, and anybody who's driven a few different cars can tell you that. Any car made 25 years ago was basically a coffin with wheels.
I agree. Also, consistent, sub 1% innovation is very important, but people like to forget that and (over-)value the 10X or "disruptive" innovation everyone keeps talking about recently.
> Last year, they teamed up to buy Nokia’s HERE, a digital mapping service crucial for driverless cars. Volkswagen’s Müller says he does not want to be dependent on digital services companies in the fast-growing market for self-driving technology and mobility services. “We want to be in control of our destiny,” he told Handelsblatt in June.
I can understand why they want that, but as a consumer I want a good experience. When non-software companies write software, it seems it is almost invariably inferior. I never actually enjoyed the experience of using a car stereo until I got a deck that supports CarPlay (Apple) and Android Auto (Google). These standards let you attach your phone to the stereo and let the phone run the UI. They are so much better than the software that comes on stereo decks.
Even Apple Maps, made by a good software company, is still noticeably inferior to Google Maps in my opinion. Apple has severely demoted Google Maps on its platform, presumably for the same reason as the carmakers: they don't want to be dependent on Google. So you can't use Google Maps in CarPlay, and if you click on an address in iMessage "Open in Google Maps" is not an option. For Apple I'm sure they see this as being less dependent on Google, but for me as a user it's pushing me away from their platform. I want the best maps product out there, and for me that is Google Maps. So I'm planning for my next phone to be a Google phone.
(It's almost hilarious how far Apple goes in this. If you delete the Apple Maps app from your phone, and then click an address in iMessage, "Open in Google Maps" still isn't an option. But there is an option to re-install Apple Maps. This strikes me as pretty insecure that their maps product can compete on its merits.)
EDIT: I had slightly misunderstood: HERE is an acquisition consisting of all the Navteq data. So it does have legitimately good data behind it.
I reguarly drive rentals from all German premium brands. All their navigation is good, but the VW/Audi navigation system stands out. It has the cleanest interface and displays exactly the information you need.
Also, the VW/Audi system that offers route changes around traffic jams is the most transparent.
Years ago, I would navigate using my smartphone. Haven't been doing that though. The only thing I am missing is voice input for addresses.
Unfortunately, map updates to car navigation systems are quite expensive.
Anecdote: My father used to drive an Audi that showed all kinds of places on the map: restaurants, gas stations, Audi dealers. All could be switched off.
Except cemeteries. Those were always shown, quite prominently. You were driving overland, and you were constantly seeing cemeteries.
Maybe Audi's contribution to traffic safety education...
Of course you can use Google Maps in Carplay. Just make sure you have location and background refresh enabled for the app and open it. It's that simple.
Have you tried it? I have and Google Maps doesn't actually show up on the car stereo's screen, only the phone's. But putting the app on the stereo's screen is the whole point of CarPlay.
Oh yes, you are right on the usage of the screen. I only use spoken directions while driving and those work fine, but right now Carplay only allows audio apps.
FWIW, I've talked to a lot of people in logistics companies, and they seem to universally use HERE Map data - apparently because it's gradient information is significantly better than any of the alternatives, which can be used to optimise fuel consumption if you know the load weights and enough about the trucks to use that to provide hints to drivers about the optimal speeds to climb every hill. For long haul trucking that makes for significant fuel/money savings. (And here in Australia, pretty much everywhere that counts is at least 1000km away from everywhere else - and almost all freight moves on trucks.)
It's understandable though that Apple might prefer customers not to use Google services as they are direct competitors. But car manufacturers do not compete on the "digital maps" market (nor are they direct competitors to Apple or Google... yet), so I really don't get why they'd prefer to reinvent the wheel. Independance is one thing, but as a customer, as you said, I want the best experience for me, not the manufacturer.
It's not news, companies go away because they make repeatedly bad changes, one after the other, thinking they're doing the best ones.
I think German automakers are simply too late for the Tech train. Don't get me wrong, they'll sell lots of cars in the near/far future, but they'll probably become a "commodities" type of industry, like Oil.
Tesla has advantages but they're not making cars with broad appeal outside technocrats. The performance is great, but it's not everything. They're pretty ugly, the interiors are naff and the dashboard + software is distracting in the worst way. I don't drive often, but when I do, it's for covering long distances across Europe and I cannot imagine wanting to be in a Tesla compared to my 11-year-old Audi. The major automobile companies are starting to understand their own strengths and more competition here should help everyone raise their game.
How does Tesla's 'autopilot' fare with German streets? I've only seen videos from wide multi-lane US-American streets, nothing with cramped 100-year old German inner-city streets
If you've ever driven Berlin inner city during rush our with cyclists driving on the road, vans parking on regular traffic lane to unload (no joke), people jaywalking, etc. you'll probably find it hard to believe that any autonomous driving system should handle that in the near future.
Probably by stopping a lot and moving very slowly. Pedestrians and cyclists will soon have the upper hand by a huge margin once they figure out that autonomous cars will never run them over and they can herd those cars like a border collie with sheep.
I just love berlin streets, I believe the future is actually without cars... I don't see it as outdated, but the future. We have so many bikers and everything goes generally smooth.
How about making roads only for bike lanes, having proper metro stations and public utility(such as ambulances?).
In addition, how does it do on Germany's high-speed highways? They have a number of unlimited speed highways, great for high-performance BMW's and Audi's but probably not great for battery powered cars.
I imagine Teslas perform well, I've seen a few on the autobahn, but battery life will be limited somewhat at very high speeds, which is why I imagine they limit the top speed of the Model S. Autopilot is all very well, but on two-lane autobahns, where the speed disparity between lanes can be very high (Lorries in one lane, overtaking in the other), one needs to be fairly vigilant.
I drive daily my german Autobahn. With no exception, I haven't seen a Tesla drive faster than 120 Km/H. Most of them trail behind a truck, probably to conserve energy - less wind resistance.
I almost laugh when I see them crawling like that.
> Most of them trail behind a truck, probably to conserve energy - less wind resistance.
Most likely the car is on autopilot, and the driver opined to take his attention off the road and do something else. I see that occasionally with Teslas driving from LA to Vegas - a giant semitruck up front is something that you know radar won't screw up, plus it removes incentives for other guys to cut in front of you, as a spot behind a truck is rarely that desirable.
Range will suffer greatly, but in terms of top speed and acceleration a Tesla does not have to hide. This is one of the better videos of a Tesla accelerating, as it does not show the passengers but just the road / speedometer. The driver stops at the end of the on-ramp and then goes straight from 0 to 220kph (136mph) in a few seconds: https://youtu.be/x-BlQCpZ6UM?t=68
German highways are not ideal for a Tesla. The right lane is usually to slow, with numerous trucks going at about 90kph.
You can drive fast on the left lane, a Tesla goes up to 220kph super fast, but there is usually traffic and you frequenty have to slow down to 120kph for a while and than accelarate back to 220kph.
That frequent accelaration from 120kph to 220kph, is what kills range.
Ideally, if there is no traffic, you engage Autopilot and go with a constant 150kph for great range and good enough speed.
However you can't keep 150kph on the left lane, since BMWs and Audis will push you off when they come with 250kph or more.
Tesla may not be universally pretty but just look at Prius, Leaf, i3, Zoe, Vbolt and Bvolt and trillion microcars with micro battery - they are ugly as hell, way way more ugly than Model 3.
The strength of Tesla's autopilot pretty much forgives their interior design sins, especially, I'd imagine, "for covering long distances across Europe". As far as interior design, while you cannot add switches or knobs, you can buy after-market accessories like center consoles and extra cupholders.
The spartan interior design is a product of range anxiety - each additional pound reduces the electric vehicle's range, so understandably manufacturers prefer the range reduction be done by customer. You see the same effect in ultracompact hybrids, which compete on EPA MPG.
And then of course there is the fact that they basically built their profits on cheating the emissions systems of Europe and North America as an organized crime body
I think I'll stick to Tesla who probably won't have a perfect record across its history, but certainly is trending better than german automakers that lie, cheat and kill both in the past and currently.
Too bad that.. Tesla is funded by money which at the end of the tail came from the printing press from the USA which makes conflicts in all the world for profit, not to mention how much it profits from the misery it creates on third-world countries leveraging their influence and shitty culture.
Not to mention that it doesn't value in any way the user's privacy, just like all American companies.
So your response is, all those other things are irrelevant because you perceive that the US is unethical. You are confusing my objection to CORPORATIONS to your objections to NATIONS. I don't believe anyone claimed the US, or Germany (for instance) has a clean record of not oppressing people in horrific ways. That doesn't change my point at all though. These companies have repeatedly done horrific things and regularly continue to collude to price fix, harm air and generally disregard the laws and people across the world. The US's military conquests are pretty outrageous, no doubt about it, and if you asked me I have the same objections to most of the military industrial complex of which Tesla is not (as far as I know) and the german auto makers are historically a major part of.
This year marks the 20th anniversary of the Toyota Prius. Yet, German manufacturers have no competing product to offer: cars with electric components are those at the high end of the price list, totally overpriced. And when you ask the salespeople, they will tell you in all honesty to better NOT take that hybrid because of the questionably quality.
Cars like the Renault ZOE, Kia Niro, Hyundai Ioniq and a lot of other types show that you can make a hybrid/electric car at reasonable prices and good reliability. The German manufacturers seem to have nothing learned from it yet. This summer, the new fully-electric Smart comes out. Range: 120km. Who needs that shit? They say "most people don't drive more than that to work every day". What a bad excuse! They had that 5 years ago. Yet people love their Teslas because they don't have to think about charging every few kilometers. Buy a regular Golf: 17.000€. Buy a plugin-hybrid Golf (one of the very few German offerings): 35.000€. Clearly a sign they try to ride a dead horse. Invest now - live off the scaling effects tomorrow! Something that seems unthinkable in a traditional shareholder-value driven industry like the German car industry, that prides themselves to be at the forefront of technology, yet don't want to stop depending on 130 year old technology. Do you know what Mercedes began to offer in the year the Renault ZOE came out? They were proud on their brand new Mercedes G AMG65 with 12 cylinders. A 32 year old car that (almost) no one needs nowadays.
Look at the (German) Audi website. They have their G-Tron initiative. Looks quite impressive, next to their E-Tron stuff. G-Tron is CNG gas... they are just using the old engines further, branding them as "green" somehow.
I had an hybrid A3 rental just 6 weeks ago. If I could, I'd never drive something else. It's smooth in the city like you would expect from an electric car, and you can travel long distance at over 100mph and still stay arround 33mpg.
Relevant when shopping for interior and interior alone, accepting no compromises. But then again, such shopper would not betray the consistent luxury of Maybach or Rolls-Royce.
I will, if it has sane price, but most likely it wouldn't. For as long as there are countries with huge lump sum EV subsidies, there is no need for EV makers to go below ~35k.
For me a range of 100 km would be good enough. I'm just not willing to pay 20.000€+ for that. And so I'm currently looking into a Renault Twizy, which has a range of up to 100 km, for around 8700€. Only problem I have with it is that it's a one person car, and the battery rent is 50€ per month, which is more than I currently pay for gasoline.
Sharing your Opinion. If price is low, then a lower range is ok, too. It is just that for the price of the Smart you could get a real car (Renault ZOE, which in in my opinion has the same revolutionary traits as the Teslas) with large electric range for the same price. They are missing almost every opportunity.
Just a quick remark that electic cars aren't exactly new either. I have a bunch of engineering magazines from inherited my grandfather, dated to the late 1930's, where a new electic car is written about in a way that show readers are expected to already know about this development.
Nothing can express, their aversion against innovation as Fiat CEO statement: "Please don't buy Fiat 500e electric car".
They only made Fiat 500 electric to fulfill regulation requirements, so they can sells more of 130 years tech, which is cheaper then investing into new clean tech . Only Tesla's success, made them finally innovate. I personally consider this attitude arrogant and would never buy product from such a company.
If you look at the history of Fiat/Chrysler in the last years is a history of resurgence from troubled waters, probably not the right company to be the innovator in a money-loosing field at this point in time.
So I don't think their attitude is conservatorism or lack of vision, judging from the business results of the last years I bet they'll jump on the EV bandwagon as soon as it starts making money.
Well, they are paying lip-service to electric cars now. I am, however, still rather sceptical: these companies have so much baggage, it remains to be seen if they're capable of such changes.
They are, for example, extremely enamoured with whatever tech someone who is now in power masterminded 20+ years ago when he came through the ranks. If every road everywhere were to move underground, they'd still install windshield wipers, if that was the CEO's specialty at some point. Just look at their obsession with Diesels, with got quite close to sinking VW, and may still spread to others (Mercedes seems to have done much the same).
But they'd be the best windshield wipers, ever. Obviously.
The move to electric means they can throw away around half their technology. Make that 70%+ if they're also self-driving. Just the difference in weight, and where the components are mounted, means you're redesigning everything.
I'd also fear that consumers will regard "electric car" as a separate, new category, where the formerly most-regarded manufacturers are suddenly the old guard. For Tesla, or tech companies like Apple, this could be a window where they can capture mindshare.
All that at a moment where they're financially hurting from the Diesel affair, with the next (a cartel) just being reported now. With their dominant position in bot the industry and the country, they've had a decade+ of growing complacent, creating somewhat-corrupt structures, and laughing at the competition that may be eating their lunch, soon. Meanwhile, the car is no longer the status symbol it once was. In their home market, young people no longer buy cars. A 2-digit % of them doesn't even bother with a driver's license anymore. When you do use a car, the brand isn't that important anymore–both because of the loss in status, but also because cheaper foreign brands have come a long way. (Except US cars, obviously. Those are still a tasteless abomination)
> Volkswagen is investing heavily in batteries and reportedly working on its own factory.
> Batteries are a commodity once production is established.
I would like more info on what it takes to establish battery production for the output of millions of cars (especially in terms of resource availability and timescale for the big players). Pretty much all the articles I saw skip this point all together.
Imagine you are CEO of a german car company- and you see the change coming, you want to change your whole company to adapt to that.
Now first thing you would have to break is the "Zyklus". The "Zyklus" is a 5 year period, in which a care is designed, everything is specified, prototypes are produced and tested, part-deliverers are driven in "netherland"-auctions to go to the lowest price for a specified part (like the software), assembly lines are errected (and "Sonder-maschinen" are ordered for that) and finally the car is produced.
Each of this departments is in more or less open rebellion against your intentions. And they got good arguments. Electric cars are not green currently. They are coal cars - says the marketing department.
Methanol-Cars, using re-synthesized straw is a 100 % green fuel and could re-use our existing technology not dropping our advantage says engineering. And there have been some small-scale breakthroughs there recently regarding method efficiency. Fuels are definatly a better storage then batterys.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/BtL-Kraftstoff
All parts vital for a electric cars are easy to get at any time, except batterys, so lets avoid those and switch later, when we dont have to re-invest so much for the tech - says the "Einkauf".
Its a death by a thousand stings. The best thing they could do, is basically form completely seperate companys inside there old mother companys, that are not bound to these cycles and rules.
This is where the power-structure comes to kill you. In any feudal-hierarchical power-structure creating a new department - creates a rush of power-thirsty individuals who want to get to the top. So far so natural. These individuals, will migrate from the old-parts of your company into the new part- bringing along the experience and the mindset of the old company.
And thats it. Thats is how a dinosaur dies. Willing to change, but the body wont rearrange.
Another factor is that fuel based propulsion systems are a key differentiator for them, it's complex machinery which is not simply bought from some supplier like most other components. Electric propulsion is way simpler with a lot less moving parts, "everybody" can do it. This also will result in jobs disappearing and politics, which is deeply tied to that industry does its best to delay that inevitable change. Without outside pressure you can't really fight these internal power structures because currently business is still running great.
103 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 185 ms ] threadBut I don't see Tesla becoming an EXTREMELY profitable company and others will just eat it alive soon, as the margins in that sector are just bad. Of course it can standout and still exist, become one company like VW or another one, but it won't become THE automobile company.
The biggest beneficiaries of this will be us, the users. They will compete hard and we will get a more environment-friendly car. Government will soon go harder on this and make everybody drive a more environment friendly car. Awesome.
In today's world, this is more important to the world than profits. I see this actually as the new economy. Governments will start to take policies aggressively against things which are better economically, but makes no sense environmentally-wise.
So, why now sell the whole car at retail price instead of selling batteries at volume price?
Teoretically Bosch + Infineon could team up and produce an electric car with no help from outside.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-21/audi-join...
Also, I don't think Tesla's advantage is batteries as somebody here is commenting - it's software and data. Tesla is probably the best in class when it comes to software between automakers. German automakers don't make good software and I'd argue don't take it seriously enough even (just look at status and salary of programmers in Germany vs US). Tesla is collecting data on each of their cars, German automakers don't do that yet.
Driveless cars are going to be about software and data and German automakers are weak in both categories.
The only competitive advantage I see is production scale, but how long will this last?
Car companies don't write software, they outsource it.
Musk's first companies were software based, and he doesn't have an existing business to prop up, that's the main advantage.
If he manages to make his one car factory as fast as he predicts it will be able make as many cars as Ford's 30 factories, leaving Ford with 29 worthless factories. He'll need self driving cars just to get them out of the factory fast enough.
They can start working today in hopes to catch up later but it won't be fast.
This is a perfect example of how US software companies are ruining everyone's privacy. Company A gets competitive advantage through spyware and then everyone thinks they have to spy to keep up.
Almost everything that a Tesla customer does in that car is recorded and probably uploaded to the mothership. When analysing accidents they're able to reconstruct what happened to a disturbing level of detail.
I'm strongly pro-privacy on ethical grounds, but is this really a complaint you want to make?
It establishes fault in accidents and provides statistically significant information to educate both the AI and the public as to what causes road accidents and how to avoid them.
Right now Tesla does whatever they want with it, including publishing accident details for defensive PR.
Tesla also cannot collect any data from cars driving in EU, but they gather enough data in US.
I'm a relatively recent driver (I've only gotten my license 3 years ago), but even so, from what I've read and what I've seen with my own eyes driving cross-border around several European countries I can tell you that there definitely is a "cultural" difference in driving between different areas of the globe.
More exactly, a driver in Switzerland in Germany will react and act differently on the road compared to a driver from Romania, and a driver from a smaller city will certainly drive differently compared to a driver from a big, congested city (I noticed this phenomena with my own eyes a couple of weeks ago when I went to a quieter part of my country and I didn't understand why most of the incoming drivers weren't "negotiating" more when the roads were getting narrower, like it happens in the big city where I currently live, they were just sitting in front of my car not making any maneuver, waiting for I don't know what).
Taking all this into consideration, I'm pretty sure that the differences in driving styles between Europe and the USA are big enough that Tesla's data collected in the States will be of not that much use when applied to European driving styles. Also, see this recent thread on /r/cars of car-obsessed redditors discussing about why German-like autobahns could never work in the States: https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/comments/6p30xd/would_an_ameri....
Have you followed the news regarding German automakers and the law? As far as Germany is concerned, they are the law (as in OEM lobbyists literally writing the verbatim law texts that affect them).
They have to remove painstakingly all the obvious traces of you from all a data dump. All the non-obvious must be also possible to request for removal, if a citizen requires.
While you do have a point you probably mean Germany vs Silicon Valley. The average developer salary in Germany isn't that much different from the average in the US as a whole.
That said, in industries where software isn't seen as the main product but merely as something that helps selling that main products programmers have a low prestige (and by extension a lower salary) but I suppose that's the same in any country. Case in point: The ridiculously low rates programmers get in the financial industry in London.
I think you'd be surprised. Can't find a good source now, but last time I checked US average is roughly double Germany & UK.
> The ridiculously low rates programmers get in the financial industry in London
The finance industry in London is one of the few markets outside US that are comparable with US in salary, particularly contractors - £800/day is not uncommon for finance devs.
There's a lot of variance and of course these kinds of surveys are also always contingent on industry and years of experience but taking currency exchange rates into account (which of course is questionable, too because in many aspects of daily life 1 USD probably equals 1 EUR) the factor is more like 1.3 to 1.5 at the most:
https://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/software-develope... http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Developer/S... https://www.computerwoche.de/a/der-grosse-gehaltsvergleich-f...
> The finance industry in London is one of the few markets outside US that are comparable with US in salary, particularly contractors - £800/day is not uncommon for finance devs.
From my experience (which comes from client leads) the maximum is more like £550 / day with the average at about £400 and even £300 per day not being unheard of and that's pre-Brexit-vote. Since then daily rates have decreased.
Data is saleable to advertising guys thought.
Engineers should just engineer.
Germany will simply have towing cables in the road and make all cars self-driving, electric, 300 km/h etc
By 2022 non of them will have engines.
Tesla right now does pretty well as a car manufacturer and the Model 3 will probably do well too, but by 2025 when the established car companies (like the German ones) have caught up, unless Tesla innovated far beyond those, it'll be a marginal car company - but a huge battery and energy company, as well as a "fuel" company with their supercharger networks.
I'm not sure whether you are referring to control or consumption, but in case it's the former: the cells Tesla uses are produced by Panasonic, so technically, they would be in control.
You mean just like Apple became a marginal tech company?
I find it fascinating how people make bold claims here in the comments, predicting the future like this...
A highly doubtful statement. At the time Apple released it, there were smartphonese capable of steamrolling over and over, just nobody sold them in US
I wouldn't say that. ICE has improved a lot in the last 50 years and so have other elements of a car, from structural integrity to braking systems. The ICE car we have today is an amazing machine compared to the ones we drove in the 50s or 60s.
It is true that traditional car companies have not done enough to push the electric car forward but a lot of innovation has happened, and some of it will benefit electric cars directly (regenerative braking, for example).
I'm with you, though. I hope Tesla comes out of this as a powerful car company because they deserve to be an example for the rest of the industry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F
You are very, very mistaken, and anybody who's driven a few different cars can tell you that. Any car made 25 years ago was basically a coffin with wheels.
I can understand why they want that, but as a consumer I want a good experience. When non-software companies write software, it seems it is almost invariably inferior. I never actually enjoyed the experience of using a car stereo until I got a deck that supports CarPlay (Apple) and Android Auto (Google). These standards let you attach your phone to the stereo and let the phone run the UI. They are so much better than the software that comes on stereo decks.
Even Apple Maps, made by a good software company, is still noticeably inferior to Google Maps in my opinion. Apple has severely demoted Google Maps on its platform, presumably for the same reason as the carmakers: they don't want to be dependent on Google. So you can't use Google Maps in CarPlay, and if you click on an address in iMessage "Open in Google Maps" is not an option. For Apple I'm sure they see this as being less dependent on Google, but for me as a user it's pushing me away from their platform. I want the best maps product out there, and for me that is Google Maps. So I'm planning for my next phone to be a Google phone.
(It's almost hilarious how far Apple goes in this. If you delete the Apple Maps app from your phone, and then click an address in iMessage, "Open in Google Maps" still isn't an option. But there is an option to re-install Apple Maps. This strikes me as pretty insecure that their maps product can compete on its merits.)
EDIT: I had slightly misunderstood: HERE is an acquisition consisting of all the Navteq data. So it does have legitimately good data behind it.
It goes back a long time, I've already had it on my Nokia 5800 and then on my Windows phone.
Also, the VW/Audi system that offers route changes around traffic jams is the most transparent.
Years ago, I would navigate using my smartphone. Haven't been doing that though. The only thing I am missing is voice input for addresses.
Anecdote: My father used to drive an Audi that showed all kinds of places on the map: restaurants, gas stations, Audi dealers. All could be switched off.
Except cemeteries. Those were always shown, quite prominently. You were driving overland, and you were constantly seeing cemeteries.
Maybe Audi's contribution to traffic safety education...
> Unfortunately, map updates to car navigation systems are quite expensive.
I thought cars would get their updates via a connection to a cell network?
- search along the route for things like gas stations, etc. (showing the amount of travel time added for each option)
- light grey lines showing me different turns I could take if I wanted to, and Google's estimate of how much slower they would be.
I'm glad to hear that these manufacturers aren't putting bad products in their cars though.
Of course you can use Google Maps in Carplay. Just make sure you have location and background refresh enabled for the app and open it. It's that simple.
It's not news, companies go away because they make repeatedly bad changes, one after the other, thinking they're doing the best ones.
I think German automakers are simply too late for the Tech train. Don't get me wrong, they'll sell lots of cars in the near/far future, but they'll probably become a "commodities" type of industry, like Oil.
If you've ever driven Berlin inner city during rush our with cyclists driving on the road, vans parking on regular traffic lane to unload (no joke), people jaywalking, etc. you'll probably find it hard to believe that any autonomous driving system should handle that in the near future.
How about making roads only for bike lanes, having proper metro stations and public utility(such as ambulances?).
I almost laugh when I see them crawling like that.
Most likely the car is on autopilot, and the driver opined to take his attention off the road and do something else. I see that occasionally with Teslas driving from LA to Vegas - a giant semitruck up front is something that you know radar won't screw up, plus it removes incentives for other guys to cut in front of you, as a spot behind a truck is rarely that desirable.
And then Porsche/Audi/BMW drivers behind you flashes their lights for you to slow down to 90kph and move to the truck lane...
You can drive fast on the left lane, a Tesla goes up to 220kph super fast, but there is usually traffic and you frequenty have to slow down to 120kph for a while and than accelarate back to 220kph.
That frequent accelaration from 120kph to 220kph, is what kills range.
Ideally, if there is no traffic, you engage Autopilot and go with a constant 150kph for great range and good enough speed.
However you can't keep 150kph on the left lane, since BMWs and Audis will push you off when they come with 250kph or more.
The spartan interior design is a product of range anxiety - each additional pound reduces the electric vehicle's range, so understandably manufacturers prefer the range reduction be done by customer. You see the same effect in ultracompact hybrids, which compete on EPA MPG.
https://www.thelocal.de/20170721/german-car-giants-secretly-...
And used slave labor.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/german-car-maker-audi-reveals-n...
I think I'll stick to Tesla who probably won't have a perfect record across its history, but certainly is trending better than german automakers that lie, cheat and kill both in the past and currently.
Too bad that.. Tesla is funded by money which at the end of the tail came from the printing press from the USA which makes conflicts in all the world for profit, not to mention how much it profits from the misery it creates on third-world countries leveraging their influence and shitty culture.
Not to mention that it doesn't value in any way the user's privacy, just like all American companies.
Look at the (German) Audi website. They have their G-Tron initiative. Looks quite impressive, next to their E-Tron stuff. G-Tron is CNG gas... they are just using the old engines further, branding them as "green" somehow.
I had an hybrid A3 rental just 6 weeks ago. If I could, I'd never drive something else. It's smooth in the city like you would expect from an electric car, and you can travel long distance at over 100mph and still stay arround 33mpg.
I will, if it has sane price, but most likely it wouldn't. For as long as there are countries with huge lump sum EV subsidies, there is no need for EV makers to go below ~35k.
Just a quick remark that electic cars aren't exactly new either. I have a bunch of engineering magazines from inherited my grandfather, dated to the late 1930's, where a new electic car is written about in a way that show readers are expected to already know about this development.
Edit: Wikipedia says even those magazines were 40 years late: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_electric_vehicl...
They only made Fiat 500 electric to fulfill regulation requirements, so they can sells more of 130 years tech, which is cheaper then investing into new clean tech . Only Tesla's success, made them finally innovate. I personally consider this attitude arrogant and would never buy product from such a company.
http://www.reuters.com/article/chrsyelr-ceo-evs-idUSL1N0O71M...
So I don't think their attitude is conservatorism or lack of vision, judging from the business results of the last years I bet they'll jump on the EV bandwagon as soon as it starts making money.
They are, for example, extremely enamoured with whatever tech someone who is now in power masterminded 20+ years ago when he came through the ranks. If every road everywhere were to move underground, they'd still install windshield wipers, if that was the CEO's specialty at some point. Just look at their obsession with Diesels, with got quite close to sinking VW, and may still spread to others (Mercedes seems to have done much the same).
But they'd be the best windshield wipers, ever. Obviously.
The move to electric means they can throw away around half their technology. Make that 70%+ if they're also self-driving. Just the difference in weight, and where the components are mounted, means you're redesigning everything.
I'd also fear that consumers will regard "electric car" as a separate, new category, where the formerly most-regarded manufacturers are suddenly the old guard. For Tesla, or tech companies like Apple, this could be a window where they can capture mindshare.
All that at a moment where they're financially hurting from the Diesel affair, with the next (a cartel) just being reported now. With their dominant position in bot the industry and the country, they've had a decade+ of growing complacent, creating somewhat-corrupt structures, and laughing at the competition that may be eating their lunch, soon. Meanwhile, the car is no longer the status symbol it once was. In their home market, young people no longer buy cars. A 2-digit % of them doesn't even bother with a driver's license anymore. When you do use a car, the brand isn't that important anymore–both because of the loss in status, but also because cheaper foreign brands have come a long way. (Except US cars, obviously. Those are still a tasteless abomination)
(I'm German, btw)
I would like more info on what it takes to establish battery production for the output of millions of cars (especially in terms of resource availability and timescale for the big players). Pretty much all the articles I saw skip this point all together.
Now first thing you would have to break is the "Zyklus". The "Zyklus" is a 5 year period, in which a care is designed, everything is specified, prototypes are produced and tested, part-deliverers are driven in "netherland"-auctions to go to the lowest price for a specified part (like the software), assembly lines are errected (and "Sonder-maschinen" are ordered for that) and finally the car is produced.
Each of this departments is in more or less open rebellion against your intentions. And they got good arguments. Electric cars are not green currently. They are coal cars - says the marketing department.
Methanol-Cars, using re-synthesized straw is a 100 % green fuel and could re-use our existing technology not dropping our advantage says engineering. And there have been some small-scale breakthroughs there recently regarding method efficiency. Fuels are definatly a better storage then batterys. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/BtL-Kraftstoff
All parts vital for a electric cars are easy to get at any time, except batterys, so lets avoid those and switch later, when we dont have to re-invest so much for the tech - says the "Einkauf".
Its a death by a thousand stings. The best thing they could do, is basically form completely seperate companys inside there old mother companys, that are not bound to these cycles and rules.
This is where the power-structure comes to kill you. In any feudal-hierarchical power-structure creating a new department - creates a rush of power-thirsty individuals who want to get to the top. So far so natural. These individuals, will migrate from the old-parts of your company into the new part- bringing along the experience and the mindset of the old company.
And thats it. Thats is how a dinosaur dies. Willing to change, but the body wont rearrange.
Well, Tesla even made their patents free for you to do so.
The industry is slowly getting it, but I doubt it'll really get big in EVs.