UPDATE: Tesla Model 3 Production Reportedly Hit 8,000 Per Week

FEB 11 2019 BY MARK KANE 70

8,000 per week burst rate achieved?

According to Bloomberg’s Tesla Model 3 Tracker, Tesla produced cumulatively more than 192,000 Tesla Model 3 and over 36,000 so far this quarter. At such a pace, Tesla should be able to produce between 70,000-80,000 Model 3 this quarter, which would be its best quarter ever.

*UPDATE: See Editor’s note below.

The average rate of production for the past 13 weeks is at nearly 5,200 per week. The Tesla Model 3 Tracker shows also that the estimated individual results already increased beyond 6,000 and 7,000 with a peak at more than 8,000.

The number consists of officially announced production results in previous quarters and estimated production rates in the current quarter.

The main question is how close to sustaining such output is Tesla? In the past, the high production rates were available only for short periods, after which the company was conducting further upgrades to the production lines. We guess that the latest increase is in part the result of new equipment from Tesla Grohmann, which was expected to increase the production to ~8,000 / week with minimal additional capital investment.

Production and deliveries of Model 3 in previous quarters thus far:

  • 2017’Q3 – 260 produced, and 222 delivered
  • 2017’Q4 – 2,425 produced and 1,542 delivered
  • 2018’Q1 – 9,766 produced and 8,182 delivered
  • 2018’Q2 – 28,578 produced and 18,449 delivered
  • 2018’Q3 – 53,239 produced and 56,065 delivered
  • 2018’Q4 – 61,394 produced and 63,150 delivered
  • 2019’Q1 – already 36,514 produced (estimated)

Cumulative by the end of 2018’Q4 – 155,662 produced and 147,610 delivered.

Tesla registered 278,893 VIN numbers for the Model 3, including more than 53,000 for international markets (outside of North America).

Editor’s note: It’s important to remember that no one really knows Tesla’s official production or delivery figures. At InsideEVs we work hard to provide our sales scorecard and continue to offer the best Tesla estimates in the business. Nonetheless, regardless of the situation with the Bloomberg Model 3 Tracker, it’s always interesting for us to see what they’ve gleaned and to share it regularly. It’s just one of a number of sources that we take a look at each day and over the long term to try to keep a handle on the situation. While it’s not accurate in the short term, it has been pretty accurate over time. Still, even if it just attempts to catch a  burst here or there, we appreciate its existence. 

Source: Tesla Model 3 TrackerModel 3 VINs

Categories: Tesla

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

70 Comments on "UPDATE: Tesla Model 3 Production Reportedly Hit 8,000 Per Week"

newest oldest most voted

The bursts are a result of batch-VIN-registration. I recommend reading the Bloomberg blog, it explains the shortcomings of the model quite well.
I would ignore the weekly stats, the 13 week average is more sensible since we just don’t have better data.
The cumulative data (production per quarter) has been extremely close though.
So, good work with the limited data available by Bloombergs Tom Randall et. al. .

Some insiders indicate they have been producing around 6000 per week since mid Nov. The 13 week tracker is close to that. I think Elon has already said that all portions of process are capable of more than 7,000 per week when run individually. Seems to me the Machine is flowing more smoothly now.

It’s weird though, since they recently introduced a change to the model that was supposed to reduce the effect of of bulk VIN registrations…

They focus their efforts on the smoothed line on that chart. They basically say to ignore the green bars. The line is nowhere near 8000, though, and won’t get clicks.

The line is just the average of the bars going back 13 weeks. So if you believe that the line is accurate then you believe that the bars are accurate.

If the bars have a cyclic pattern of error across each quarter, but the numbers come out spot on at the end of each quarter, then averaging over the length of one quarter does indeed remove the systematic errors… Though of course it reduces resolution significantly in exchange.

Very good. Tesla is on the right track. Standard Range Model 3 will come in the next months. I’m already thrilled for February European and American sales. 😉

The 40k USD standard range with pup could come July when tax credit is further reduced and Tesla need the extra demand to keep production at full speed.

This is misleading. As Bloomberg themselves notes, these spikes could be cause by large VIN batch registrations. This does in no way mean that they are at this production rate (not even for bursts!). If you want to trust a number, then trust the trailing 13-week-average.

Right. You can see from the notes that Bloomberg has posted to the page that their estimates are often very far off. They do adjust their previous estimates to be closer to reality. So, as you say Michel, the 13 week average is much closer to being at least a reasonable estimate.

But I still say it’s wildly inaccurate to call what Bloomberg does a “production tracker”. It’s actually projecting what’s merely a highly inaccurate estimate of production, and for recent data it’s only tracking batches of VIN registrations… not production at all.

Did they not retool to increase the production.
If you stop production for a week, it better gives result

If you trust the 13 week average then you must trust the weeks that make up the average. That data, the bars on the graph, show that Tesla is making 8,000 Model 3’s a week

Nah, the weekly figures have a lot of noise. The process of averaging them over a 13 week period removes a lot of that noise, but not all. The Bloomberg report is useful and a good indicator of the longterm trend, but not all that accurate in the week to week aspect of the report.

So the trend is that they were making around 5,000 a week and now they are making around 8,000 a week.

Do Not Read Between The Lines

Well, I hope they’re improving. They need the SR.

This appears to be a speculative story based on a speculative model. Bloomberg themselves has said that they don’t consider the instantaneous production rate reliable because it gets “too hot” when Tesla registers a large batch of VINs (see post on the tracker page itself dated January 23rd). I hope Tesla has hit a production rate of 8,000 per week, but these data are unconvincing.

The Bloomberg tracker’s weekly rate is useless. We all should know that by now.

Tesla says their goal for Fremont is 7000/week, and they plan to be at that rate by year end. Expect 65-68k this quarter.

You should pull this article. You’re putting your hard-earned credibility on the line for no good reason.

Yeah, I don’t know why InsideEVs keeps giving attention to Bloomberg’s wildly inaccurate estimations. They have repeatedly been proven quite wrong, as Bloomberg readily admits itself in notes posted to that site.

The signal-to-noise ratio here at InsideEVs would be improved by no more coverage of Bloomberg’s wildly inaccurate estimator.

It gets the clicks. Most people don’t circle back at the end of the quarter to see whether these stories were right or not.

Because over time, Bloomberg’s shipping model has been accurate for quite awhile.

I hope some analyst at SA don’t use those Bloomberg numbers to say that Tesla missed “their” projected production rate and that they are defrauding investor buy over estimating “their” production capacity..

I’m sure that many of the anti-Tesla “Wolf! Wolf! Wolf!” pack posting to SA (aka Reeking Alpha) have already done so, many times.

A troll’s gotta do what a troll’s gotta do, right? 🙄

Strongly agree.

Few things in business/economics/public policy/etc. bother me more than the poor use of statistics. If you publish a really shaky number, tell everyone it’s really shaky, then people will cite it and treat it as if it’s the word of God.

Bloomberg should stop publishing such a flaky indicator, and this site should stop quoting it.

(And before anyone chimes in here with a “but we have to use the best information we have”, let me say: If it’s a crappy number then it’s a crappy number, and you should run away from it. You don’t “have to” use it.)

Yep, you’re right, Dog. Very misleading headline that they should change. If Tesla is working hard to raise the production level to 7000/week by the end of the year, as they indicate, there is zero chance that they have already hit 8000/week.

I would be happy with a sustained 7000/wk

I’d be happy if Elon gave me a Model 3 (red, please) for extensive field testing.

I suspect you’ll get your wish before I get mine, though…

5,000 pays the bonds, keeps the lights on, and allows new product development with a small profit.

Anything over accelerates the process.

John Fitzgerald Kennedy?

Who says that?
Is that a thing in Vladivostok?

Actually, most Russian troll farms are mostly in Leningrad.

Is that where you’re based?

No, I’m retired from US Army, what is your pathetic excuse?l

So in the past?

I am waiting for Alex to chime in soon with the predictable Russian trolling rant. It would be “silly” for her not to.

The known Russian troll farms are based in Saint Petersburg, employing several thousand people at any time.

But wait the shorts told me that this was impossible!

Still, please take it with a grain of salt, since the Bloomberg tracer is not accurate on a short-term basis. Still, if this is any indication of bursts, this is welcome news. We hope to have a better idea at the end of the quarter.

I think your article headline could have had a better title.

Is a month a “short term basis”?

Reuters is reporting
Some 150 employees out of a team of about 230 were let go in January at the Las Vegas facility that gets tens of thousands of Model 3s into the hands of U.S. and Canadian buyers, they said, in a sign the company expected the pace of deliveries to significantly slow in the near term.

Of course. Since most production is going overseas now. At least in the short term US deliveries will be much lower

Sure, but what company hires full time employees for a temporary spike in deliveries?

Sometimes I think Tesla planning is an oxymoron, like jumbo shrimp.

True. These games to redirect production to minimize cars in transit for end of quarters, and also to adapt to the ever shifting tariffs and govt incentives, are causing a lot of spiky deliveries. In the long run this makes no sense, once Tesla gets to scale a few deliveries recognized in one quarter vs the next makes no difference to long term profitability.

“…what company hires full time employees for a temporary spike in deliveries?”

This is nothing, when compared to Sprint (the phone company) repeatedly bingeing and purging on hiring sprees, followed several months or a very few years later by large-scale layoffs.

I agree that Tesla should have planned better, but to suggest that there is no precedent for this amount of hiring followed by layoffs, is pretty uninformed. One can easily find much, much worse examples.

Hire a bunch for the surge. Layoff as many duds as you can identify.

This has been reported by others days ago. Reuters is embarrassing themselves by not only being late, but also claiming the Las Vegas facility is a production site; and that this indicates lower than expected demand. (A dip in North American deliveries was, in fact, fully expected.)

Story is dated 2/8/19. I was late reading it. Story clearly states production site is Fremont.

Down votes on a Reuters news story? Here is more of it for the fan boys

The two former delivery workers said the 2018 sales push has left Tesla’s reservations list plucked clean of North American buyers willing to pay current prices of over $40,000 to get their hands on a Model 3.

“There are not enough deliveries,” one of the former employees told Reuters. “You don’t need a team because there are not that many cars coming through.”

It’s like your name. Spin. Reuters, don’t have a clue, as usual.
Tesla probably hired more delivery people in Europe, but do they report that?

The Reuters story about Tesla? The one from a day or two ago which was withdrawn to correct errors, or are you talking about a more recent one?

Dated 2/8/19. I read it today

Well of course domestic Model 3 deliveries will slow this year, since most of them will be sent overseas this year. Especially the very near term, since January and February are generally by far the worst months for automobile sales.

But only serial Tesla bashers, and clueless “useful idiots” parroting their disinformation, will claim this is an indication that global demand for Tesla’s cars is diminishing, or even claim demand has stopped strongly expanding.

Tesla building its new auto assembly plant in Shanghai, and getting serious about plans to install assembly lines at Gigafactory 1 in Nevada, are very strong signs that Tesla is still in a phase of rapid growth, despite what the increasingly desperate Tesla bashers keep claiming.

Pushy-I usually don’t say anything but the name calling you do on this site is really getting old. It is bad enough that it seems you have to insert yourself in every thread, even on subjects you obviously know nothing about. I come here like most others for an interesting conversation about a subject I have been interested in most of my life. I am not a “serial Tesla Basher”, nor am I clueless about the subject. I post when I have something to share, good or bad, about Tesla or any other company or subject. Steven, if you are reading this I would like to lodge a formal complaint about this and any other name calling that goes on on this site.

Just an FYI – I reported FACTUAL information that Tesla itself had reported earlier and Pushmi accused me of bashing Tesla and being a short-seller of Tesla stock (when I never owned a position in Tesla securities). So when Tesla announced this bad information, then that was okay but when I repeated the same bad information, Pushmi viewed it as I was bashing Tesla. I was just repeating information in the public domain.

That was simply uncalled for but is standard Pushmi operating position as a Tesla fan boy. I have nothing against any Tesla fan boy, but Pushmi’s name calling went over the line.

Moshe Vaknin - The Electric Israeli

They may be able to get to 400,000 Model 3 delivered this year. I just posted a video on my channel this morning on this topic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0NNUhazfP0


Tesla says 360-400k this year for all variants. So figure about 300k Model 3s.

IMO Tesla is sandbagging.

Yeah, Elon the old sandbagger, lol.

Who reported production reached 8k/wk? Not Bloomberg, they just have a chart influenced by VIN registrations.

Bloomberg indicates 8k a week.

I believe you have to interpret their weekly averages. Even Bloomberg says their weekly estimates vary a lot but their totals at the end of the quarter are quite good.

And I believe that the trend of the weekly estimates indicates that they are now making around 8,000 a week.

This article is an embarrassment to InsideEVs and should be pulled.

The tracker shows that Tesla has been making more than 6,000 Model 3’s per week for the last six weeks. How far off do you think that it is? 5%? 10%?

That is a looong way from 8000/wk. Now if the article had said Tesla was making over 6k/wk for the last month, it would still be impressive. Even Elon said the goal was to achieve 7k/wk so how is 8k/wk justified?

The tracker shows that they made 8,000 in the last week after a steady progression for the last six weeks.

If they produce and sell even about the same as Q4 this Q1, it says a lot that they can pull that off in a historically slow quarter for car sales in most markets. With international markets now online for Model 3, there’s no end in sight. I would expect each quarter that follows to get more and more bonkers, especially with the base Model starting production mid-year. Flat growth from Q4 to Q1 will of course be declared a disaster for Tesla by detractors to make themselves feel better.

It looks like Elon has learned to under promise and over deliver

Exactly. He is sandbagging 2019.