Despite Other’s Initial Efforts, Tesla’s Gigafactory Is Years Ahead

2 months ago by EVANNEX 119

Tesla Gigafactory

Tesla Gigafactory August 2017 Aerial Construction Update – Duncan Sinfield

IN THE GLOBAL ARMS RACE FOR BATTERIES, ELON MUSK IS KING AND TESLA GIGAFACTORY IS HIS CASTLE

CNBC recently reported that, “There’s a kind of arms race on batteries around the world. We know that Elon Musk with Tesla has got this Gigafactory. The Chinese are racing to overtake him; they’ll have three times the capacity. And then in Germany, we’ve just heard [the] announcement of a new plan for a $1 billion factory on batteries,” according to Giles Keating, a former Credit Suisse research chief, currently serving as chairman at investment consultancy Werthstein Institute.

Tesla Gigacfcatory

Early view of construction at the $5 billion Tesla Gigafactory located on Electric Avenue – Image Credit: @jameslipman (Instagram)

While China’s efforts are to be applauded to accommodate batteries for its own massive in-country EV market, many question if Germany’s automakers can catch up to Tesla.

Keating thinks they’re late to the party: “Tesla was always all about electric cars, whereas I think the conventional auto manufacturers, they were in denial. They just kind of almost wanted batteries to be weak so that they wouldn’t have to go that route so that their existing route of [internal combustion engine] business can continue… For most conventional manufacturers it was about beating the emissions rules rather than about trying to revolutionize stuff.”

*This article comes to us courtesy of EVANNEX (which also makes aftermarket Tesla accessories). Authored by Matt Pressman.

Above: A look at the “battery arms race” heating up worldwide (Youtube: CNBC)

It’s evident that the German automakers are waking up to Tesla, but, could Tesla’s Elon Musk be in jeopardy of losing his Gigafactory leadership position? Electrek reports that “Elon Musk now says that the [Giga]factory is already producing more batteries than any other factory in the world.” And media outlet, Oil Price, proclaimed in a tantalizing headline: “There is no dethroning Tesla as the Gigafactory leader.”

Tesla Gigafactory

Driving into the Tesla Gigafactory in Sparks, Nevada (Image: Nathaniel Fisher)

To understand how the lithium-ion battery market is unfolding, all around the globe “from Australia to China, everyone seems to be building Gigafactories so they can take a piece of the battery pie. EVs and energy storage systems are the key ingredients of this pie, and everything suggests that the pie will be a massive one. In fact, according to Volkswagen, the world will soon need more than 40 Gigafactories… [and] Bloomberg estimated in May that battery manufacturing capacity in the world will rise to almost 280 GWh by 2021.”

Tesla Gigafactory

Tesla’s Full Vehicle Lineup On Display Outside Gigafactory

So can Germany make a run at Tesla? It turns out that: “A 17-company German consortium has announced plans to build a 34-GWh lithium-ion battery Gigafactory, which is reportedly set to rival Tesla’s Reno facility. Rivalry, however, is too strong a word, and here’s why. Tesla’s Gigafactory, with an annual capacity of 35 GWh, is already being built. Terra E Holding’s facility will break ground in late 2019. Full capacity will only be reached in 2028. Meanwhile, Tesla plans to reach its initial capacity by next year, before the German rival even breaks ground… it will take a lot to challenge Tesla’s leadership position.”

Above: Tesla Gigafactory currently has about 4.9 million square feet of operational space representing only ~30% of the total finished Gigafactory. Once completed in 2020, Tesla plans for Gigafactory 1 to be the largest building on earth by footprint (Source: Electrek via Duncan Sinfield)

And that’s not all. “By 2020, the [Tesla] Reno Gigafactory should have a battery cell capacity of 105 GWh, with battery pack capacity at 150 GWh. At that time, the German factory may still be under construction.” And Elon Musk is pushing ahead with more Gigafactories. “Tesla, meanwhile, has three more Gigafactories in the works, at least two of these in the U.S. The maker of the first Gigafactory is not sitting around, waiting for the competition to catch up—it is making sure it remains a step ahead of emerging rivals.”

*Editor’s Note: EVANNEX, which also sells aftermarket gear for Teslas, has kindly allowed us to share some of its content with our readers. Our thanks go out to EVANNEX, Check out the site here.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

119 responses to "Despite Other’s Initial Efforts, Tesla’s Gigafactory Is Years Ahead"

  1. Pinewold says:

    In other words, even with a few factorys in the EU, if real competition for Tesla requires 40 Gigafactories, lots of folks are about to be in a 3-5 year hole where Tesla just eats market share. Even when other manufacturers have supplies, their supply is more like 30,000 battery packs per company so will competitors will run out quickly.

    China will use every battery they can make in China, but they may sell to USA and EU instead if the prices go high enough to price out local car companies. China needs to hold car companies to their mandate to prevent exports from happening.

    1. trackdaze says:

      There will be 1 million plug ins sold this year that dont have tesla batteries.

      This will continue to grow at exponential rates.

      Plenty of competition.

    2. Paul Smith says:

      Keep in mind that Chinese companies will build factories in the U.S. and other places around the world. not just in China.

  2. John says:

    The oil companies really have to hate these stories. We’re seeing things accomplished in a few years that they’ve been saying would take decades.

    Haven’t people learned that tech moves FAST!
    Buckle up, it’s gonna be one helluva ride!

    1. Mister G says:

      Who cares I’m looking for a job “cleaning coal” LOL

      1. speculawyer says:

        Ugh…He doesn’t even have a remote clue as to what he is talking about. It is so embarrassing.

        At this point, I think he is TRYING to get impeached because he knows that Mueller is going to have serious dirt on him. So he wants to get impeached and pardoned before TSHTF. What else could explain such absolutely crazy behavior.

  3. Another Euro point of view says:

    I would be a bit more cautious in painting a future which, by definition, we know nothing about. For example, China destroyed foreign solar panels production. Being leader in a loss making niche market is one thing but as soon as profits will be made selling EV’s it is rather likely that competition hell will break loose. We haven’t reach that point yet.

    1. Toni says:

      If by “foreign” you mean the overpriced german crap -then yes, they did.
      But exactly the cheap chinese solar panels enabled the clean energy revolution we are witnessing today…

  4. Alex a says:

    If Tesla is years ahead, why was the GM Bolt the first > 200 mile car for less than 35K? Surely if Tesla has such a massive advantage in the cost of batteries the Model 3 should be retailing for less $35K?
    If Tesla is so far ahead how come they are losing close to $2 BILLION a year – compared to the other profitable automakers?
    If Tesla is so far ahead and the Model 3 has been launched – how come there are no proud owners extolling its virtues on youtube?

    1. bro1999 says:

      *doing my best TSLA fanatic impression*

      “If Tesla is years ahead, why was the GM Bolt the first > 200 mile car for less than 35K?”
      – GM only sells the Bolt because it’s forced to for compliance! Its gobs of ICE sales allow GM to sell the Bolt for a loss! Oh, and the Bolt is FUGLY!

      “Surely if Tesla has such a massive advantage in the cost of batteries the Model 3 should be retailing for less $35K?”
      – See above. p.s. Bolt is FUGLY!

      “If Tesla is so far ahead how come they are losing close to $2 BILLION a year – compared to the other profitable automakers?”
      – Have to spend money to make money! Did I mention the Bolt is FUGLY?

      “If Tesla is so far ahead and the Model 3 has been launched – how come there are no proud owners extolling its virtues on youtube?”
      – The 30 or so Model 3 owners are having too awesome a time with their sexy 3’s to post anything online! I mean….Tesla…WOOO!
      p.p.s. Bolt sooooo FUGLY!

      1. ffbj says:

        You made sense for a while, in your first sentences, and then, well, you sort of didn’t make sense any more.

        1. bro1999 says:

          Ok, so my TSLA fanboi impression was pretty spot on then.

          1. ffbj says:

            Yeah, it was not bad. To be fair you have had lots of examples to drawn from.

          2. Tom says:

            Best laugh so far today. Thank you kind sir. Yes he was with you until he realized it was satire.

            Tesla is cool. Less sure they have some kind of massive insurmountable battery lead. And they aren’t the only game in town. Weren’t there more electric vehicles sold last MONTH in China than Tesla did all year in 2016?

          3. Tom says:

            Oh and notice others are quoting your fugly comment without realization it is a joke.

            For the record I prefer the hatchback look and it’s way more practical. This PARTICULAR hatchback design? Maybe not. The nose of the vehicle looks bad to me. Rest of the car fine. Not as ugly as a Prius though.

          4. Soakee says:

            As was your arrogance. Congrats.

      2. speculawyer says:

        Whether you like it or not, aesthetics matter. People are more likely to drop $35+K for a good looking Model 3 than a Chevy Bolt that looks just like any other economy car.

        So go ahead and mock the fanbois…but they have a very good point. The Bolt sales numbers and Model 3 pre-orders prove it.

    2. leafowner says:

      Alex – GM could maybe make 50k units per year with their agreement with LG — a far cry from the 500k reservations for the Model 3…..

      If GM were to get even 100k in sales — they would NOT be able to supply them.

      1. Alex a says:

        refundable deposit can be refunded. I doubt Tesla will ever sell even 250K model 3 per year.

        1. Stimpy says:

          I bet you owned a blackberry in 2009.

        2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          “Alex a” posted more FUD:

          “I doubt Tesla will ever sell even 250K model 3 per year.”

          It would be fun to go back and look at all the things repeated thousands of times by Tesla trolls and short-sellers all over the internet:

          2008: “The Tesla Roadster is vaporware!”

          2009: “There is no way a startup like Tesla can survive competing with the Detroit Big Three.”

          2010: “Nobody will invest in Tesla stock. It will soon be a penny stock.”

          2011: “Tesla isn’t going to get the NUMMI assembly plant running again. They bought it just for show.”

          2012: “The Tesla Model S is vaporware!”

          2013: “Tesla is losing money every quarter, and the company will fail soon.”

          2014: “The Gigafactory is just a sham. It’s an empty lot, and Tesla will never build it.”

          2015: “Tesla is faking its production and sales numbers. They are selling ‘inventory’ cars on the gray market.”

          2016: “Tesla will never get the Model 3 into production on time. It’s vaporware!”

          2017: “Tesla will never make 250,000 cars per year, let alone 500,000+!”

          But hey… the Tesla bashers get an A+ in goal post moving!
          😀 😀 😀

    3. jelloslug says:

      $37k is not less than $35k.

      1. Alex a says:

        GM Bolt is already being discounted up to 5K

        https://electrek.co/2017/03/20/chevy-bolt-
        ev-discounts/

        37 – 5 = 32.

        1. Tech01x says:

          Such early discounting to those levels is not a good thing for the Bolt.

          1. ffbj says:

            Yes, and down shutting production, well that is not really a sign that they are flying off the shelves.
            I think it was a good effort from Chevy, but with it’s drawbacks the blush has faded from that rose.

            1. Alex a says:

              Why are sales increasing in the US month on month then? And last month being the best selling EV in the US? You seem to have a somewhat tenuous grasp on reality.

              1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                “Alex a” wrote in with another entry in our “Count the basher fallacies” contest:

                “Why are sales increasing in the US month on month then?”

                Hmmm, that’s only true by ignoring the first 5 months of sales, and looking only at the last 4 months.

                “And last month being the best selling EV in the US?”

                Gosh, last month the Bolt EV managed to rise to 5th place for this year’s sales, behind both the Model S and the Model X, despite being far less expensive than either. Are we supposed to be impressed? If you think so, then you must be even more impressed at Tesla’s sales for March and June!

                “You seem to have a somewhat tenuous grasp on reality.”

                Presumably you were looking in the mirror when you said that?

                😀 😀 😀

                Thanks for keeping us laughing, Alex. I hope you’ll continue to play the class clown!

              2. Paul Smith says:

                By December Bolt sales will be a thing to pity. Model 3 will be out selling them several times over. Watch for big Bolt discounts for Christmas.

            2. bro1999 says:

              *shutting down production to adjust the lines to make MORE Bolts. Those pesky details.

              1. ffbj says:

                Sure, If you buy GM’s story. 1 month so far to readjust the lines, which were already producing Bolts. Probably take another month.
                It’a an old whine in new bottles.

                  1. L'amata says:

                    They’re adjusting to Slow Sales…I’ll buy one as a spare car for $20 Grand , they need the Carbon Credits , Btw, that’s $20Grand before rebate…ha ha !

                1. bro1999 says:

                  Uh, Bolts have been back in production for several weeks now.

                  Expect another all-time monthly sales record for Aug.

        2. electron says:

          it is great the bolt exist, but as mentioned earlier it is fugly. but most likely the bigger reason sales are slow is the charging, the supercharger network basically eliminates range anxiety. if gm would build a volt style pickup and get it under 50k, it would sell like hotcakes, but won’t happen because it would canibalize current very profitable gas pickup sales….

        3. Jelloslug says:

          That

        4. Jelloslug says:

          That does not change the MSRP.

        5. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          “Alex a” continued his desperate attempts to bash Tesla:

          “GM Bolt is already being discounted up to 5K”

          Ohhhh, cherry-picking the sales prices of individual deals from high-volume dealers! Hey, two can play at that game: Some low-volume Chevrolet dealers have been reported to have tacked on an upcharge on the Bolt EV of up to $5000.

          Fortunately for Tesla’s customers, they don’t get jerked around by auto makers pasting an above fair market value MSRP on the car, expecting customers to haggle the dealer down.

          How about we stick to average prices, instead of cherry-picking the highest or lowest selling prices, Mr. Tesla basher?

          For example, Kelley Blue Book reports a “fair purchase price” for the Chevrolet Bolt EV of $35,282, and an “out-the-door target price” of $38,790.

          Both prices are above Tesla’s MSRP for the base Model 3 of $35,000.

          https://www.kbb.com/chevrolet/bolt-ev/2017/lt/

    4. CDAVIS says:

      @Alex-a said: “…If Tesla is so far ahead how come they are losing close to $2 BILLION a year – compared to the other profitable automakers? …”
      ——

      Study Amazon vs Walmart and you will have your answer.

      1. Alex a says:

        Amazon at least has cash flow and has not had to rely on endless capital raises for its survival. Unlike Tesla with its junk bond issuance.

        1. CDAVIS says:

          @Alex-a said: “Amazon at least has cash flow and has not had to rely on endless capital raises for its survival…”
          —-

          Wrong… the opposite is true.

          Amazon like Tesla did for long while need successive capital/debt raises to support NOLs.

          How Amazon stratigically investment spent to come out ahead of Walmart (and other traditional retailers) is very similar to how Tesla is today investment spending to come out ahead of traditional car makers.

        2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          “Amazon at least has cash flow and has not had to rely on endless capital raises for its survival.”

          Two years ago people were saying exactly the same things about Amazon.com that you’re saying now about Tesla.

          I guess you were hoping we wouldn’t know that, hmmmm, Mr. Troll?

        3. Paul Smith says:

          Time to buy Tesla short then Alex. Go for it.

    5. Mister G says:

      Alex I’m hiring workers to “clean coal”
      Interested????LOL

    6. Tech01x says:

      Given that GM is one of the world’s biggest automakers, the question is, why isn’t the Bolt better than it is?

      Why skimp on the DCFC capabilities? Why have such horrible interior including really crappy front seats? The Bolt competes against ICE vehicles like the Buick Encore and the Kia Soul Turbo… vehicles that have base prices in the mid $20k’s.

      Clearly, GM also did not line up the production capacity for 100,000’s of Bolts. They are looking at building less than 30,000 for the first year. Therefore, they didn’t have to spend a lot of time prepping the cell supply, battery pack integration, or so forth at the level that Tesla is looking to do with the Model 3. It is also pretty easy to see that the Bolt is aimed at CARB ZEV credits since the math works given the amount of ZEV credits GM needs from the program.

      As for profitability, go examine the various new energy vehicle programs. Does GM make any profits from any BEVs at this juncture? Nissan is reportedly still negative on the Leaf. It now appears that Tesla will be the first through crossing the chasm for battery electric vehicles.

      1. ffbj says:

        That pretty much it, though GM never had the capability to produce many more than 30k, battery constrained.
        I think they cut a few corners, on the seats, interior, because it was hard to get in under 35k.
        It got a lot of awards and was a noble effort, so I think we need give credit to GM, where it is due, though I agree they never planned to sell that many outside of CARB states, and ZEV credits were the impetus for it’s roll-out, and to beat Tesla to the punch, which they did.
        I am going stop there, since this getting long for a agreeing response.

    7. Beall says:

      So many silly observation but 1) who wants a Bolt ? 2) why even try and sell a car at less than $35,000 since he can not make enough cars to sell at 50,000. Selling st less than 35,000 only becomes relevant when 1) wait times are less than 3 months 2) The Fed Tax credit “fully” ends – both these two scenarios will not happen till after July 1, 2019… by which time Tesla will have sufficient economies of scale to discount the cheapest models and improve the top models… and $9,000 bump for the larger battery can fall to less than $5,000.
      Please try thinking before posting- it is time consuming dealing with such…

    8. Ianstuart says:

      Troll alert. No mention of the fact that model 3 has access to supercharger Network, that bolt depends on LG for batteries and motors, that Bolt sales have averaged around 1000 per month, that Bolt costs more than model 3 when comparably optioned etc etc etc

    9. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “Alex a” copied and pasted anti-Tesla FUD to this forum:

      “If Tesla is years ahead, why was the GM Bolt the first > 200 mile car for less than 35K? Surely if Tesla has such a massive advantage in the cost of batteries the Model 3 should be retailing for less $35K?”

      Did you just make a cookie-cutter FUD post here? The article makes absolutely no claim that Tesla has any cost advantage to its batteries; only a very large advantage in quantity. That advantage will become very apparent by early next year at the latest, as the Model 3 outsells the Bolt EV by a wide and rapidly growing margin.

      Oh, and the Bolt EV has a base MSRP of $37,500… not <$35,000 as you're claiming.

      "If Tesla is so far ahead how come they are losing close to $2 BILLION a year – compared to the other profitable automakers?"

      They're not. They are investing close to $2 billion a year. Sorry that you apparently can’t understand the difference between “losing” and investing. Fortunately, most investors are not as clueless.

      “If Tesla is so far ahead and the Model 3 has been launched – how come there are no proud owners extolling its virtues on youtube?”

      Because all the early buyers had to sign a “mum’s the word” NDA, probably one that stipulated they can’t publicly post photos or videos.

      There is, however, an almost embarrassingly complimentary love letter of a driving review from Motor Trend, which starts:

      “The Tesla Model 3 is here, and it is the most important vehicle of the century.”

      http://www.motortrend.com/cars/tesla/model-3/2018/exclusive-tesla-model-3-first-drive-review/

    10. Tosho says:

      Well, the Bolt costs 37 500 USD. And 37 500 is not less than 35 000, dude….

  5. bro1999 says:

    Oh look, another Tesla puff piece courtesy of Evannex.

    Serioisly Jay, is Evannex a paid content provider or something?

    1. Rob says:

      +1

      Evannex is not a neutral news source and often far biased in favour of tesla. if i would like to read their news i would visit their homepage and not insideevs

      cheers

      1. Jay Cole says:

        bro1999,

        As you know, they are not a paid content provider, we don’t put up any sponsored content, or accept money for any type of promotion – ever…we never have, and as long as I am here, we never will.

        Quite honestly, readers want a lot of Tesla content, and Evannex puts a lot of time and effort into doing just that…so we asked to share pieces we found interesting here, Matt pver at Evannex said sure we could (without any conditions) – of which, we appreciate very much.

        This saves our in-house writer’s time to be able to produce more content…on many EV topics. And because we appreciate Evannex’s kindness in this regard (letting us have more Tesla-related articles), we are happy to give their site a nod, and mention the fact they make aftermarket Tesla accessories.

        The pieces are clearly tagged as Evannex, and the disclaimers are there if you/someone does not care to read them.

        1. Nick says:

          Yep.

          Thanks for all the great Tesla and EV articles Jay! Keep the Bolt EV articles coming too. We’re all on the same team. 🙂

          It’s very much appreciated.

    2. Tech01x says:

      Care to address the facts?

      1. needa says:

        Actually I would. But this post only wants to talk about this ‘German Consortium’ thing and nothing else. A quick dismissal to a China plant and no mention of what anyone else is doing. Which is way more than Tesla ATM.

        1. needa says:

          I should clarify:
          The other companies doing more part. They are producing more batts than Tesla ATM.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            The other companies all together, including BYD, are producing more batteries than Tesla’s Gigafactory 1, yes.

            Note this article only claims that Gigafactory 1 is now producing more batteries than any other single factory. And Gigafactory 1 likely will never out-produce everybody else put together, since other battery makers are finally, belatedly, starting to build out capacity rapidly.

            Tesla’s claim was that Gigafactory 1 would eventually out-produce the total global supply of EV batteries in 2013. The “…in 2013” qualifier has been truncated in all too many citations of that original claim, making it seem that Tesla is claiming Gigafactory 1 alone will out-produce the current global supply.

    3. CDAVIS says:

      @bro1999 said: “Oh look, another Tesla puff piece courtesy of Evannex.”
      —–

      I find the Evannex articles that are re-posted on InsideEVs to be well written and informative.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Most of them, certainly including this one, are far more interesting and readable than the anti-Tesla troll comments this forum seems to be increasingly infested with!

    4. ffbj says:

      Killing the messenger.

  6. Another Euro point of view says:

    The biggest competitive advantage of Tesla IMO is their ability of understanding what markets wants. And this is hugely important, for example both GM and BMW do not have the right perception IMO of what EV owners expect from a new EV . For the rest there is next to no competitive advantage. That was very well exposed with new Model 3 motor. Tesla having to play technological catch up with Hyundai as to match Ioniq’s motor efficiency.

    1. Another Euro point of view says:

      I mean for example no one knows at this point if in mid term GF is a competitive advantage or not. It could be one but it could also become a liability if withing 24 months it appears that costs of making cells and batteries in Nevada proves more expensive than doing them in China for example. Same for SC network, right know it is a competitive advantage however it could very likely become a liability. We should already see north European SC network becoming a liability within next 24 months due to other fast charging networks expending so fast. Those are very exciting time and it is indeed good timing for Evannex to write wishful thinking pieces now as near future is likely to deliver a dream breaking reality.

      1. BenG says:

        I don’t see how the SuperCharger network ever becomes a liability. May become less of an advantage, sure, but a liability? How so?

        Worst comes to worst, Tesla spins off the SuperCharger assets into a separate company and moves to a more technology-neutral approach.

        The SC network seems well thought out though. I think they’ll be able to operate it at revenue neutral and it will be a good selling point for decades to come.

        Elon will be bumping up the max charging speed before too long, I bet. He won’t let another commercial network pass pass it by.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        “I mean for example no one knows at this point if in mid term GF is a competitive advantage or not. It could be one but it could also become a liability if withing 24 months it appears that costs of making cells and batteries in Nevada proves more expensive than doing them in China for example.”

        That’s not entirely true. The primary purpose Tesla spent billions of US Dollars to build a battery Gigafactory wasn’t to reduce the price; it was to ensure Tesla would have sufficient battery supply to ramp up Model 3 production to ~400,000 cars a year. Tesla was repeatedly production constrained by Panasonic’s unwillingness to build out battery manufacturing capacity as rapidly as Tesla wanted them to, and there is absolutely no way Panasonic would have supplied Tesla with sufficient battery supply to ramp up to ~500,000 cars within 2-3 years.

        If GF1 (Gigafactory 1) batteries wind up being modestly more expensive than batteries from China, then Gf1 will still have been a wise investment for Tesla, because it will enable the auto maker to capture a far larger segment of the market than it could if it were relying on buying batteries from Panasonic and/or China.

    2. Tech01x says:

      You have zero data on the motor’s efficiency… merely the overall figures of the car which includes the fact that the Ioniq has about half the battery capacity and therefore a lower curb weight.

      1. Another Euro point of view says:

        We know two things:

        1/ Model 3 is massively more efficient than Model S and Model X

        2/ Model 3 uses permanent magnet motor which means Tesla made a U turn as regards motor technology, thus effectively following (with delay) Hyundai current EV efficiency leader.

        The massive lead Tesla has is in designing attractive cars, understanding what and this is hugely important. When I look at BMW’s they look so 20th century.

        1. ffbj says:

          Completely overlooking the newer batteries which pack more punch, for the same weight, as the old batteries thus increasing efficiency.
          In addition you do not compare the weight of the two vehicles, which is also important in determining efficiency.
          Your answer is incomplete since it does not include all factors in your declaration.

          As evidence I would point out that simply by adding a larger battery pack the Model 3 becomes more efficient. That has nothing to do with the motor.

          1. Doggydogworld says:

            There’s no evidence the 2170s have better specific energy. It looks to be about the same, though we’ll have to wait for better data once the cars ship to outside customers.

            It’s clear the Model 3 goes farther per kWh. Some of that is lower weight, some is smaller size and some appears to be a more efficient drive train. Again, we’ll know more when we get accurate kWh numbers (the EPA sheets are a little hard to interpret).

        2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          “Hyundai current EV efficiency leader.”

          I seriously doubt you’re gonna find many people to agree that Hyundai is more advanced in EV tech than Tesla, just because Hyundai’s compact 2016 low-performance** BEV is more energy-efficient than Tesla’s “large mid-sized” 2012 high-performance BEV.

          Now, when Tesla finally tells us what the kWh capacity of the Model 3 is, then we’ll have a much better basis for comparison.

          And frankly, it’s getting a bit tiresome seeing all those uninformed claims that Tesla was at a disadvantage by using induction motors instead of permanent magnet motors. The difference in efficiency is minuscule.

          **The Ioniq Electric’s 0-60 time, according to 0-60 Specs.com, is rated at between 8.1 and 9.4 seconds. Hopefully it’s not necessary to repeat the Model S’s amazingly low 0-60 times here! Source below:

          https://www.0-60specs.com/hyundai-ioniq-0-60-times/

  7. Someone out there says:

    If they are so far ahead why are they using Samsung battery cells?

    1. Taser54 says:

      Shhh. Pay no atttention to the man behind the curtain.

    2. Tech01x says:

      The original public Gigafactory plan was always to use their own cells and also source additional cells from other vendors. It is also in their filings that they seek additional cell supply.

      1. needa says:

        No doubt. But you don’t guarantee a 100 day turn-around, along with a 50%(?) off deal, and then use someone else’s batteries. It makes you look like you ‘aren’t there’ yet.

        1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

          You don’t sole source either, that’s shooting yourself in the foot.
          Anyone that’s ever planned for parts sourcing knows that ‘you are your worst supplier’.

          Multiple sources gives you a place to fall back on.

          1. Another Euro point of view says:

            ‘you are your worst supplier’

            yes, this is common wisdom, may explain at least in part why Nissan sold its battery production arm. The logic of having its own GF was for sure a good 2010 logic, will it still be in 2020 ?
            For sure Tesla is not a company run by accountants, for the better and the worse. Take for example Tesla decision to make its own car seats (providing info I received was reliable…). That was an OK decision in Henry Ford times but not now in that specific industry where profit margins are so tight. The all business model is based on public accepting huge losses because “this time its different”. Problem is to my best knowledge there never was a company like that in the past, Apple never made losses for such long period of time. Amazon never relied solely on growth. For Tesla to end up well you need two conditions 1/ that “this time it’s different” for real 2/ that they start making profits while at the same time loosing market share to competition (around 2020). Imagine someone coming from an outer planet to whom you need to explain that without all the hype and Elon shows & twitter.

            1. Another Euro point of view says:

              Amazon never relied on capital markets for growth…(correction).

              1. BenG says:

                Huh? Amazon borrowed money at a pretty big clip early on to build and ramp up all those huge data centers and warehouses. True they did get to cash-flow positive sooner than Tesla but they weren’t for years.

                Tesla is tackling a much more capital intensive business, so they’re borrowing much more and it’s taking longer to build up the assets to compete in the industry on a large scale.

                I think Model 3 is going to be a hit, but I wouldn’t invest in Tesla stock, personally. Too pricey and too much company and industry specific risk.

              2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                “Amazon never relied on capital markets for growth…(correction).”

                You don’t know what you’re talking about. Until two years ago, Amazon.com was not consistently making a net profit every quarter; in fact, a profitable quarter was pretty unusual. A lot of people were saying exactly — and I do mean exactly — the same things about Amazon.com two years ago that all too many people are saying about Tesla now. “Oh! Amazon.com is ‘losing’ money! Oh! Amazon.com can’t possibly be successful if they’re borrowing that much money to grow!”

                Of course, Amazon.com having turned out to be such an amazing success is no guarantee that Tesla will too. But to claim that no successful company has ever followed a business plan like Tesla, is ignoring history. In fact, Tesla appears to be pretty closely following Amazon.com’s business plan.

            2. Brian says:

              European makers will loose market share when they start selling Tesla competitive cars. They don’t have a plan to charge the cars, if they are as good as a Tesla then they will make their own ICE cars obsolete, supply won’t meet demand, most buyers still don’t know much about Tesla but they will when they start cross shopping against Mission E, Audi ETRON, etc. and Tesla will have four models to choose from rather than one.

  8. L'amata says:

    The Bolt is $37,500 Base price average price is $42500 +-.NOT $35,000 ..& it’s 1/3rd the Car or less of a Model 3 @ $35000 Base $44,000 average with 310+Plus mile range…The Bolt is a “compliance Car”..The Model 3 is a Real Car..there is Nothing to compare between the two, from size to Build configuration etc:. One is a “Puddle Jumper” the other is Luxury & for less money ! , Apples & watermellons they’re both fruits…Comparing Phillis Diller to Marylynn Munroe, they’re both women …Get It????…

    1. Vapor says:

      If it was a real car you could go out an buy it today….and you cant…get it?

      1. John says:

        In most opinions…once a car has received all of the regulatory approvals and has been registered to drive on public roads by normal people, it’s considered a “real car.”

        Calling it vapor ware really isn’t possible anymore. Find a new FUD tactic. This one is broken.

        1. bro1999 says:

          So based off your comment, the $35k Model 3 is still vaporware. Gotcha.

          1. John says:

            Tesla is still a car company.
            Every dealership here runs adds for cars they don’t have. “BUY A NEW ****** FOR $15,999.99!!!!” They scream. Go to the dealer. Oh….we don’t have any of those in stock…we’ve got the deluxe trim version for $22,999.99….and we can special order you the base version and have it here in 6 months. But by then, the sale will be over. Too bad.

            I thin Tesla will actually sell a fair number of base model 3’s. It’ll just take a while, which is just smart business.

        2. Another Euro point of view says:

          “in most opinions”

          ????

          No.

          There are many good reasons to have all regulatory steps passed and still not make a specific version of a car not widely available. The main problem with Tesla enthusiast is that they lack the “wait and see” approach. Will the $35K version of the Model 3 be widely available. Maybe. My advice is to switch off the “Elon said…” mode and switch on the “wait and see” mode.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            “The main problem with Tesla enthusiast is that they lack the ‘wait and see’ approach.”

            Hmmmm, no, that’s an almost infinitely greater problem with Tesla bashers than it is with Tesla supporters. It’s the bashers who are always crying “vaporware” just because one of Tesla’s cars is delayed, or — for example — claiming that Gigafactory 1 is a sham because the construction site sat idle for a few months between ground clearing and start of major construction.

      2. L'amata says:

        It’s Real, with a Huge Demand of 500,000 Plus Orders ahead of me ,that is the reason I can’t buy one today . Unlike the bolt where they Halted production because of a Lack of demand…See the Difference???

    2. drbs says:

      The price of the bolt is $36,620. Please correct all of your previous posts.

      1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

        Please correct your post…..

        http://www.chevrolet.com/bolt-ev-electric-vehicle

        Oh wait, you have to go to a Stealership and haggle your price down.
        Oh wait, not all Stealership have the same sticker so there’s disparate pricing/gouging going on.

        Oh wait, you have to add the destination fees on top of this so called MSRP.

        Now you can try and figure out who’s lying about the price.

        1. Drbs says:

          WOW, what an irrational and hate filled response to a simple fact.

          When comparing prices between vehicles all should be consistent and either include or exclude destination fees, else they be misleading.

          The MSRPs without destination fees

          Model 3: $35,000
          Bolt: $36,620

          With destination fees

          Model 3: $36,200*
          Bolt : $37,495

          Now you know. Use the right values and all is forgiven and remember your mother loves you.

          *This is based on the Model S destination fee of $1200.

          1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

            I didn’t post a number/price, just a link to the official GM Bolt site.
            Everything I posted is all Truth.

            You posted the Truth that the Bolt MSRP cost more than the M3.

            Take your meds dude.

            1. drbs says:

              “…the Bolt MSRP cost more than the M3”

              Well done sir!

              And now that we have the correct prices for comparison, not only can we say that the Bolt MSRP is greater than the Model 3’s, we can say it is $1,295* greater.

              *I chose to use MSRP+destination fee

              1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

                lol…….funny guy.

                “*I chose to use MSRP+destination fee”

                +1

          2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            “WOW, what an irrational and hate filled response to a simple fact.”

            Claiming that the figure you arrived at by arbitrarily choosing which costs to include and which to omit, doesn’t make your figure a “fact”. Claiming your opinion is a “fact”, however, certainly does mark you as rather arrogant.

            The industry uses MSRPs to compare prices, because that’s what the manufacturer says is the bottom price. So do car reviews, and therefore so should we.

            Anything else is just cherry-picking which fees, taxes, incentives, dealer prep, delivery fees, dealer holdback, or whatever else you want to include from the laundry list of what a car dealer tacks onto the price.

            Much of that laundry list are charges Tesla doesn’t tack on. So if you’re going to argue that Chevrolet does not tack on as many added fees as Tesla, that’s an argument you’ll lose on the facts.

            And by that I mean actual facts… not your “alternative facts”.

  9. Someone out there says:

    It’s a matter of cash flow control. You don’t build more than you need to, when you need to. You can build a factory pretty quickly if you really need to but it doesn’t make any sense to plow down billions into a battery production facility if it’s going to operate at 10% capacity for the next 5 years.

    1. L'amata says:

      If you are referring to Musk’s Gigafactory, it is , as we speak producing “More” batteries than all Battery Factories on this planet Combined., and it is far from full capacity until it’s completion , And, Utilizing ALL OF THEM, with demand for more Some are going in the Model 3 NOW !, Which they have 500,000+ Plus reservations with Deposits to back them..Do your Research…peace out ..

      1. Doggydogworld says:

        “Musk’s Gigafactory, it is , as we speak producing “More” batteries than all Battery Factories on this planet Combined.,”

        Completely false. GF today makes very few cells. Total Powerwall/Powerpack was 105 MWh the first six months of the year. The Australian deal will use Samsung cells. Total 2017 Model 3 production is in the 2-3 GWh range. China alone will make ~20 GWh this year with another 10 from Korea.

    2. James P Heartney says:

      Apparently it takes years from greenlight to finished factory, if you are trying to build at GW scale. If EV sales hit an inflection point, no one but Tesla will be in position to meet the new demand for multiple years.

      Given the number of M3 reservations, Tesla’s first gigafactory is nearly guaranteed to be operating at capacity for some years. And we haven’t even reached the inflection point.

  10. Another Euro point of view says:

    Also, what makes those GF articles/commenting thoroughly brainless is that no one here inthe EV enthusiast community knows how long it takes to expend a battery production facility and people who do know have probably better things to do than hang around in the commenting section. I mean if LG for example is provided with the billions and supply contracts from large car makers how long will it take them for example to triple cells & batteries production ? one year ? two years ? Three years ? Writing about this would be high quality journalism as it would involve interviewing specialist/industries etc…what about that Evannex ? That would make yourself a very interesting job almost overnight. Next step would then be writing for the Economist for example. Good quality journalism must be an amazingly rewarding thing to do.

    1. Mister G says:

      Have you read the cover story about Tesla in the Economist? Very informative.

      1. Another Euro point of view says:

        Yes I did. it was indeed very informative.

        1. Get Real says:

          And….did you see the point that these top-notch journalists at The Economist made that Tesla has a healthy lead in this market???

          1. Another Euro point of view says:

            As you know leader in EVs has always been Nissan/Renault/Mitsu group but indeed Tesla is doing amazingly well considering how expensive their cars are.

            1. Another Euro point of view says:

              …by doing amazingly well I mean on a sales point of view. Though it would be good if they started making profits at some point.

    2. James P Heartney says:

      This isn’t all that hard to know. Building a plant on this scale takes years. Three years from go decision to final facility operating at capacity is probably very optimistic. Site selection, permits, plans, financing, contracting, subcontracting, logistics, hiring of construction workforce, materials sourcing and manufacture, materials delivery, utilities, building, design of manufacturing process, sourcing robots and assembly lines, hiring of permanent workforce, building assembly lines, sourcing and delivery of raw materials and supplies, testing of manufacturing process, ramp-up of manufacturing, and of course fixing problems and glitches at every step. (And that’s just the stuff I can think of as a non-expert.)

      Tesla first announced the Gigafactory in November 2013, although they’d been doing initial planning well before that. Assuming initial build decision in early autumn 2013, that’s four years ago. And the place is still not at full capacity for production.

      1. Another Euro point of view says:

        The process you describe is indeed likely to take years but not so much expanding production from an existing factory for example. We have one example where such cells factory was put in place in a rather short time frame, that is the Samsung factory in Hungary. When construction was announced (end of August 2016) Samsung aimed for start of production in second quarter 2018. That is less than two years. However they did rather transform existing buildings than build all new ones. I guess there is a huge variety of situations. I bet cloning an existing factory in China to take a lot less time than building from scratch a new factory in environmental conscious Sweden or red tape prone France for example. For battery factories I would closely watch China for that sort of industry. if this industry is backed by authorities I bet no more than two years between breaking ground and start of production is achievable. Don’t forget China is by far the biggest EV market.

        1. premium salmon says:

          There are two big EV battery factories in the making in Eastern Central Europe:
          -Samsung SDI has one in Göd, Hungary and
          -LG Chem is building one near Wroclaw in Poland.

          There is a third cell producer: SK Innovation, also from South-Korea, planning a large battery factory in the Czech Republic, or Hungary. Construction works will start late this year, production in 2018.

          The investment and the number of employees is roughly the same: cca. $350 million and $375 million, 600 and 700 people. No production capacity is known, unless: batteries for 50 000 cars / Samsung, or 100 000 batteries (sic!) / LG Chem) – whatever these wording means.

          Both are special cases and thus of great speed: Samsung revitalizes a part of its abondant production hall of 322 000(!) m2, where as LG Chem is expending an existing facility with 41 300 m2. Both triggered construction in the autumn of 2016, Samsung has started production May 30, LG Chem plans kick-off still this year.

          If an average e-car in the close future needs some 75 kW capacity, 50 000 EV means 3,75 GWh output per annum – or?

          What does 100 000 batteries/year mean: not cells, but modules, packs, total units? And what is their capacity in kWh?

          Finally annuak production in GWh of Samsung SDI Hungary and LG Chem Poland?

          Anybody with numbers? Thanks!

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        I don’t think Gigafactory 1 is a good example of the time it typically takes to build a factory; not even a large factory.

        Gigafactory 1 is being built out in stages. Tesla’s intent is to ramp up GF1 production fast enough to make sure it stays ahead of what they need for automobile production, but obviously Tesla doesn’t want to build out large sections of the finished factory only to have it sit idle. There is a cost for borrowing money; money can be “cheap” or “expensive” depending on how borrowing and using that money for capital improvements is handled. If Tesla makes that investment before it’s needed, the the money borrowed becomes more “expensive” than necessary.

        If Tesla really wanted to build GF1 to completion quickly, it could do so by simply hiring more construction companies to build all the sections simultaneously. Since it’s not a skyscraper, it’s not like they have to wait for part of the building to be constructing before starting on the rest of it.

        Bottom line: If Tesla really wanted to build GF1 rapidly to completion, rather than setting the pace of construction according to need, then they could likely do it from start to finish in two years or not much longer, and that includes installation and test-runs for all the production lines inside.

    3. ffbj says:

      It’s not rocket science.

  11. Mad says:

    ITT: A lot of people who think Tesla isn’t worth what it is.

    Great for me! I have stock in Tesla. The people who don’t understand it now will be surprised when Tesla hits their Model 3 goals.

    1. Another Euro point of view says:

      If I had Tsla stock I would match closely what “smart money” does. That is the large investment funds that are the main shareholders of Tesla. Sell when they sell. On the contrary I would stay as far away as possible from “dumb money”, the retail investors, see Tesla Motors club investor forum for example. Having good financial/accounting knowledge I can tell you there is no limit to stupidities one can read about Tsla on retail investors sites.

      1. Stimpy says:

        Do you remember when the “smart money” was all about selling APPL?

        I do.

        1. Another Euro point of view says:

          They do their mistakes too indeed but all in all are better than retail investors just because they have better access to needed information.

  12. ffbj says:

    I sort of miss the gunslinger days, when See Through, and Counter Strike Cat were around.
    Then Sven got cut off at the knees.
    It’s been like a mausoleum around here without them, though there are some new posers around they can’t hold a candle to those legends.(I am mot trying to incite people to follow those aforesaid examples, I am just recalling some history).
    @bro1999,tftf, hang in there.
    (noble opposition)

    I completely understand, why they had to go, as they were totally off the reservation.

    I did not mean to leave any out of being mentioned, just exemplary.

    1. Doggydogworld says:

      I miss Sven. He may have crossed the line but he also posted a lot of good data.

  13. buu says:

    I really dont like evanex articles they have too little content just rehashes old info, but what a pleasure to see broXYZ blablabing about it /me pops beer bottle…

    1. Stimpy says:

      He has serious misgivings he went ahead and bought an econocar Bolt when the Model 3 is a mere few months away.

  14. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    “I mean if LG for example is provided with the billions and supply contracts from large car makers how long will it take them for example to triple cells & batteries production ? one year ? two years ? Three years ? Writing about this would be high quality journalism as it would involve interviewing specialist/industries etc…”

    The rule of thumb for building a new factory and fine-tuning it for mass production is about two years. For the record, it was about 1-3/4 years between when Tesla took possession of the NUMMI plant and when the Model S first went into production, but then Tesla had a big head start because the factory building was already built and a lot of the auto assembly machinery was still in place and still in usable condition.

    LG Chem was taking orders two years in advance for its so-called “200 mile battery”, so that again points to a two year lead time for putting a new product into production.

    This isn’t exactly arcane knowledge.

    Somewhat related to this subject, if not precisely on point, Jay Cole had this to say:

    “There is no battery supplier that will let a company make a set order, then guarantee 2X expansion of that order over the short term/‘just in time’ model if that OEM finds unexpected demand. Especially not LG Chem, who is first to market with inexpensive/2nd gen batteries and currently has ~21 different OEM contracts. They would of course say they will do their best to oblige as best they can, but that would be it… there is no leverage.”

    — Jay Cole, comment at InsideEVs.com, May 30, 2017 (source below)

    http://insideevs.com/nissan-close-to-exiting-battery-business/#comment-1214733

    1. premium salmon says:

      There are two big EV battery factories of South Korean ownership in the making in Eastern Central Europe:
      -Samsung SDI has one in Göd, Hungary and
      -LG Chem is building one near Wroclaw in Poland.

      There is a third cell producer: SK Innovation (also from South-Korea) planning a large battery factory in the Czech Republic, or Hungary. Construction works will start late this year, production in 2018.

      The investment and the number of employees is roughly the same: cca. $350 million and $375 million, 600 and 700 people. No production capacity is known, unless: batteries for 50 000 cars / Samsung and 100 000 batteries (sic!) / LG Chem – whatever this wording means.

      Both are special cases and thus of great speed: Samsung is revitalizing a part of its abandoned production hall of 322 000(!) m2, where as LG Chem is expending an existing facility with just 41 300 m2.

      Both triggered construction in the autumn of 2016, Samsung started production on May 30(!), LG Chem plans to kick-off still this year. That was quick!

      Q1: If an average e-car in the close future needs some 75 kW, 50 000 EV means 3,75 GWh demand per annum – or?

      Q2: What does 100 000 batteries/year mean: not cells, but modules, packs, total units? And what is their capacity in kWh? So what is the annual production in GWh of LG Chem Poland?

      Mind you Tesla GF1 may have 35 GWh battery cell / 50 GWh(!) battery pack output from 2018

      Anybody with numbers? Thanks!

Leave a Reply