Tesla Releases Master Plan Part 2 – New Kind Of Pickup Truck Part Of Plan


Part Deux

Tesla CEO Elon Musk first published “The Secret Tesla Motors Master Plan (just between you and me)” way back in August 2006.

The bullet points of that original secret plan was/is as follows:

  1. Build sports car
  2. Use that money to build an affordable car
  3. Use that money to build an even more affordable car
  4. While doing above, also provide zero emission electric power generation options
  5. Don’t tell anyone

Then just last week, Musk took to Twitter to reveal that he’s working on Part 2 of the “Top Secret Tesla Master Plan,” which he had hoped to publish by Sunday. Sunday came and went without the Part 2 announcement.

A SpaceX launch over the weekend, as well as some other issues, delayed the release of Master Plan Part 2 by a little bit, but now the plan has been made public.

Master Plan Part 2 Delayed A Bit Due To SpaceX Launch

Master Plan Part 2 Delayed A Bit Due To SpaceX Launch

Tesla Autopilot

Tesla Autopilot

So much anticipation and it’s finally here…Master Plan Part Duex, penned by CEO Elon Musk.  And it is not quite as simple as the first.

Summarized, here are the main points from Musk (full text by the CEO can be found below):

  • Create stunning solar roofs with seamlessly integrated battery storage
  • Expand the electric vehicle product line to address all major segments
  • Develop a self-driving capability that is 10X safer than manual via massive fleet learning
  • Enable your car to make money for you when you aren’t using it

The main point of Part Deux is the focus on making available electric cars in all segments, which of course would include an electric truck then too. As Musk states:

“Today, Tesla addresses two relatively small segments of premium sedans and SUVs. With the Model 3, a future compact SUV and a new kind of pickup truck, we plan to address most of the consumer market.”

SolarCity Introduces Affordable New Energy Storage Services Across the U.S.

SolarCity Introduces Affordable New Energy Storage Services Across the U.S.

Tesla had hinted at this truck several times in the past, so no surprise that it now will be become a reality.  The “future compact SUV” we assumed to be the already foreshadowed, re-purposed Model 3 (ala the Model S and Model X).

Tesla also says it is getting into heavy trucking (think “Tesla Semi”) as well as high passenger density urban transportation (which sounds a lot like a bus to us).

“In addition to consumer vehicles, there are two other types of electric vehicle needed: heavy-duty trucks and high passenger-density urban transport. Both are in the early stages of development at Tesla and should be ready for unveiling next year. We believe the Tesla Semi will deliver a substantial reduction in the cost of cargo transport, while increasing safety and making it really fun to operate.”

Update: On the trucking front, Tesla’s Jermone Guillen is “driving Tesla Semi” and leading a team tasked to make it a reality, whereas the “urban transportation” solution has been inspired by VW’s Kombi design.

Tesla says it is getting into the heavy trucking building...not unlike similarly named Nikola, and the recently debuted Nikola One

Tesla says it is getting into the heavy trucking building…perhaps not all that unlike the similarly named Nikola, and the recently debuted Nikola One

And integration of solar was expected too, following the SolarCity acquisition announcement:

“Create a smoothly integrated and beautiful solar-roof-with-battery product that just works, empowering the individual as their own utility, and then scale that throughout the world. One ordering experience, one installation, one service contact, one phone app.”

“We can’t do this well if Tesla and SolarCity are different companies…”

Some other highlights from Part Deux include that Tesla really has no plan to offer a car cheaper than the Model 3 because it believes car sharing is a major part of future transport. This is a disappointing statement in our eyes. Quoting Musk:

“You will also be able to add your car to the Tesla shared fleet just by tapping a button on the Tesla phone app and have it generate income for you while you’re at work or on vacation, significantly offsetting and at times potentially exceeding the monthly loan or lease cost. This dramatically lowers the true cost of ownership to the point where almost anyone could own a Tesla. Since most cars are only in use by their owner for 5% to 10% of the day, the fundamental economic utility of a true self-driving car is likely to be several times that of a car which is not.”

And lastly, autonomy will (and has been for quite some time now) a major focus area for Tesla: Per Musk:

“As the technology matures, all Tesla vehicles will have the hardware necessary to be fully self-driving with fail-operational capability, meaning that any given system in the car could break and your car will still drive itself safely. It is important to emphasize that refinement and validation of the software will take much longer than putting in place the cameras, radar, sonar and computing hardware.”

And here’s Part Deux in its entirety:

Master Plan, Part Deux

Elon Musk July 20, 2016
The first master plan that I wrote 10 years ago is now in the final stages of completion. It wasn’t all that complicated and basically consisted of:

Create a low volume car, which would necessarily be expensive
Use that money to develop a medium volume car at a lower price
Use that money to create an affordable, high volume car
Provide solar power. No kidding, this has literally been on our website for 10 years.
The reason we had to start off with step 1 was that it was all I could afford to do with what I made from PayPal. I thought our chances of success were so low that I didn’t want to risk anyone’s funds in the beginning but my own. The list of successful car company startups is short. As of 2016, the number of American car companies that haven’t gone bankrupt is a grand total of two: Ford and Tesla. Starting a car company is idiotic and an electric car company is idiocy squared.

Tesla plans for new EV architecture in an all-electric truck

Tesla plans for new EV architecture in an all-electric truck

Also, a low volume car means a much smaller, simpler factory, albeit with most things done by hand. Without economies of scale, anything we built would be expensive, whether it was an economy sedan or a sports car. While at least some people would be prepared to pay a high price for a sports car, no one was going to pay $100k for an electric Honda Civic, no matter how cool it looked.

Part of the reason I wrote the first master plan was to defend against the inevitable attacks Tesla would face accusing us of just caring about making cars for rich people, implying that we felt there was a shortage of sports car companies or some other bizarre rationale. Unfortunately, the blog didn’t stop countless attack articles on exactly these grounds, so it pretty much completely failed that objective.

However, the main reason was to explain how our actions fit into a larger picture, so that they would seem less random. The point of all this was, and remains, accelerating the advent of sustainable energy, so that we can imagine far into the future and life is still good. That’s what “sustainable” means. It’s not some silly, hippy thing — it matters for everyone.

By definition, we must at some point achieve a sustainable energy economy or we will run out of fossil fuels to burn and civilization will collapse. Given that we must get off fossil fuels anyway and that virtually all scientists agree that dramatically increasing atmospheric and oceanic carbon levels is insane, the faster we achieve sustainability, the better.

Here is what we plan to do to make that day come sooner:

Integrate Energy Generation and Storage

SolarCity and Tesla - Bringing sexy back to solar...apparently

SolarCity and Tesla – Bringing sexy back to solar…apparently

Create a smoothly integrated and beautiful solar-roof-with-battery product that just works, empowering the individual as their own utility, and then scale that throughout the world. One ordering experience, one installation, one service contact, one phone app.

We can’t do this well if Tesla and SolarCity are different companies, which is why we need to combine and break down the barriers inherent to being separate companies. That they are separate at all, despite similar origins and pursuit of the same overarching goal of sustainable energy, is largely an accident of history. Now that Tesla is ready to scale Powerwall and SolarCity is ready to provide highly differentiated solar, the time has come to bring them together.

Expand to Cover the Major Forms of Terrestrial Transport

Tesla Model 3 platform to likely see compact SUV configuration soon

Tesla Model 3 platform to likely see compact SUV configuration soon

Today, Tesla addresses two relatively small segments of premium sedans and SUVs. With the Model 3, a future compact SUV and a new kind of pickup truck, we plan to address most of the consumer market. A lower cost vehicle than the Model 3 is unlikely to be necessary, because of the third part of the plan described below.

What really matters to accelerate a sustainable future is being able to scale up production volume as quickly as possible. That is why Tesla engineering has transitioned to focus heavily on designing the machine that makes the machine — turning the factory itself into a product. A first principles physics analysis of automotive production suggests that somewhere between a 5 to 10 fold improvement is achievable by version 3 on a roughly 2 year iteration cycle. The first Model 3 factory machine should be thought of as version 0.5, with version 1.0 probably in 2018.

In addition to consumer vehicles, there are two other types of electric vehicle needed: heavy-duty trucks and high passenger-density urban transport. Both are in the early stages of development at Tesla and should be ready for unveiling next year. We believe the Tesla Semi will deliver a substantial reduction in the cost of cargo transport, while increasing safety and making it really fun to operate.

With the advent of autonomy, it will probably make sense to shrink the size of buses and transition the role of bus driver to that of fleet manager. Traffic congestion would improve due to increased passenger areal density by eliminating the center aisle and putting seats where there are currently entryways, and matching acceleration and braking to other vehicles, thus avoiding the inertial impedance to smooth traffic flow of traditional heavy buses. It would also take people all the way to their destination. Fixed summon buttons at existing bus stops would serve those who don’t have a phone. Design accommodates wheelchairs, strollers and bikes.


Tesla & Autonomy - a hot topic of late

Tesla & Autonomy – a hot topic of late

As the technology matures, all Tesla vehicles will have the hardware necessary to be fully self-driving with fail-operational capability, meaning that any given system in the car could break and your car will still drive itself safely. It is important to emphasize that refinement and validation of the software will take much longer than putting in place the cameras, radar, sonar and computing hardware.

Even once the software is highly refined and far better than the average human driver, there will still be a significant time gap, varying widely by jurisdiction, before true self-driving is approved by regulators. We expect that worldwide regulatory approval will require something on the order of 6 billion miles (10 billion km). Current fleet learning is happening at just over 3 million miles (5 million km) per day.

I should add a note here to explain why Tesla is deploying partial autonomy now, rather than waiting until some point in the future. The most important reason is that, when used correctly, it is already significantly safer than a person driving by themselves and it would therefore be morally reprehensible to delay release simply for fear of bad press or some mercantile calculation of legal liability.

According to the recently released 2015 NHTSA report, automotive fatalities increased by 8% to one death every 89 million miles. Autopilot miles will soon exceed twice that number and the system gets better every day. It would no more make sense to disable Tesla’s Autopilot, as some have called for, than it would to disable autopilot in aircraft, after which our system is named.

It is also important to explain why we refer to Autopilot as “beta”. This is not beta software in any normal sense of the word. Every release goes through extensive internal validation before it reaches any customers. It is called beta in order to decrease complacency and indicate that it will continue to improve (Autopilot is always off by default). Once we get to the point where Autopilot is approximately 10 times safer than the US vehicle average, the beta label will be removed.

When true self-driving is approved by regulators, it will mean that you will be able to summon your Tesla from pretty much anywhere. Once it picks you up, you will be able to sleep, read or do anything else enroute to your destination.

You will also be able to add your car to the Tesla shared fleet just by tapping a button on the Tesla phone app and have it generate income for you while you’re at work or on vacation, significantly offsetting and at times potentially exceeding the monthly loan or lease cost. This dramatically lowers the true cost of ownership to the point where almost anyone could own a Tesla. Since most cars are only in use by their owner for 5% to 10% of the day, the fundamental economic utility of a true self-driving car is likely to be several times that of a car which is not.

In cities where demand exceeds the supply of customer-owned cars, Tesla will operate its own fleet, ensuring you can always hail a ride from us no matter where you are.

So, in short, Master Plan, Part Deux is:

Create stunning solar roofs with seamlessly integrated battery storage
Expand the electric vehicle product line to address all major segments
Develop a self-driving capability that is 10X safer than manual via massive fleet learning
Enable your car to make money for you when you aren’t using it

Categories: Tesla

Tags: , , , ,

Leave a Reply

210 Comments on "Tesla Releases Master Plan Part 2 – New Kind Of Pickup Truck Part Of Plan"

newest oldest most voted

So, Tesla is going after the commercial segment.

Love it! Bring on the EV truck!

My expectation is that the Tesla pickup will look a lot like and El Camino, but larger.

The Tesla Semi is interesting. I can’t imagine we’re ready for long distance trucking, but this could work to move goods from the city center out to the suburbs.

local deliveries generally use rigid trucks, not semis. if tesla is thinking in terms of offering a semi, they are going to be talking in terms of a range of hundreds of miles. it is hard to see how tesla is going to pull that off with current technology, but tesla has been talking about developing megawatt charging stations.

Being an engineer i did some fairly detailed calculations on the feasibility of ev long range semi trucks this was done fir 1.5 years ago. To my surprise i found that it was fully economicallyfeasible to build semitrucks with 60 metric tonnes on normal roadprofiles with ranges upto 400 kilometers. The calculayion has just been improving ever since with battery improvements being made. The main problem where charging infrastructure back thrn. But that, as tesla has shown, is solvable.battery driven autonomous semis will revolutionize our logistics. And it is very likely to happen within a 5 year period (note, i refer to an omplementation of a system not a full replacement).

@jh,@no comment

I have not done the calcs but intuitively it’s pretty hard for me to imagine a pure EV semi truck…..unless one has megawatt (?) charging capabilities…..and It’s pretty hard for me to imagine a charger with that kind of power. I suppose we would be talking a system of 2000 volts or something to keep the current down.


As far as the electric pick up I’m betting Elon has plans to up the Voltage of all his super chargers to accommodate the larger pickups.

the charging system that i have read as being described by the tesla cto delivered 1500v to the charger head. so you are correct, we are talking about delivery of voltages in the kV range to the charger head.

Why is Megawatt charging needed? If you could get the range to the maximum distance a trucker can travel before required sleep (plus some buffer), they could use the existing superchargers, and just charge while sleeping. No real need for Megawatt chargers if that could be pulled off properly.

What I don’t know, though, is whether or not they could ever stack that many batteries in to give them that kind of “all day” range. Probably unlikely, but I don’t know all the economies-of-scale potential that comes with the Gigafactory.

a truck driver can drive 11 hours in a day. so, a truck driver is going to have to stop during the day. when he has to stop, he can’t waste time waiting for a battery to recharge because the driver can spend at most 3 hours above the 11 hours to do other stuff before he has to end his day.

a typical diesel semi can drive 1,500 to 2000 miles on a 250-300 gallon capacity tank(s). so a typical driver does not have to stop for diesel every day.

so a bev semi could theoretically work if it had enough range for a full day of driving and could be recharged during the 10 down time period. i’m not sure how economically feasible such a bev semi would be though…

Drive for 6 hours, stop for 3 to recharge, then drive for 5 hours. Seems simple to me.

things are simple when it’s nothing to you. 3 hours is for *anything* related to duty time. you’re suggesting that a truck driver should devote all of his non-driving duty time to driving, which means when the driver does have to do other things: such as loading/unloading, wait time a weighing or inspection stations, and the like, that time for those extra duties should come out of the time that the driver has available for driving.

it’s nothing to you, so it’s easy for you to suggest that other people who have to make a living driving a rig should be willing to make such sacrifices.

Why do you think it’s nothing to me? We are looking for solutions here. Why not just charge for 1 hour while eating lunch/showering/you-name-it? That would be time stopped anyway. Another option would be to charge while load/unloading. The distribution centers could have charging set up.

I’m suggesting that if there is sufficient range/batteries, then he can be charging while he’s sleeping. I’m not sure why that’s so hard to understand.

The big question is whether or not there can be sufficient range/batteries for that scenario.

I wonder how Nikola Motors feels about the semi-truck competition from Tesla? (funny both companies named after Nikola Tesla)

They’re crushed.

They will strike a deal with Tesla.

Since Tesla doesn’t offer anything like that today or in the next several years, best advertising they could have ever hoped for…and free.

Kdawg said:

“…Nikola Motors… competition from Tesla? (funny both companies named after Nikola Tesla)”

It’s not a coincidence at all. Nikola Motors is very obviously trying to imitate the public image of Tesla Motors in every way possible, including the name. “Faraday Future” is another example of a startup trying to imitate the public image of Tesla Motors, with a somewhat similar name… altho with that company, there is a very noticeable absence of substance behind the image.

do you have any idea of how many kWh would be required for a heavy duty truck with the range that you suggest?

the issue with trucks is that truck drivers can’t afford long recharge times. that’s why i stated that tesla was investigating megawatt charging stations, because such stations could possibly reduce charging time to a time that would be acceptable for trucking use. it is certainly the case that a 135kW charging station would not be sufficient.

And electric grid can’t afford equipment for megawatt load suddenly appearing out of nowhere. There is no magic battery between you and power plant, LiOn is too expensive to be used at $500/kWh like Powerpack.
Theoretically it can be done by swapping batteries. But more likely it is yet another wild dream that will not materialize, just like Musk Plan #1 – no money from electric sports car, no money from affordable car that is not affordable at all, just serial stock sales as financing source.

Dude, we’re trying to have an intelligent conversation here. Please take your anti-Tesla short-selling FUD back to Seeking Alpha, where it came from.

Wow….just wow!

Oh, rubbish! You have no power here. Begone, before someone drops a house on you.


Napkin math, but a semi-truck can weigh 80,000lbs. The Tesla Model S weighs 5000lbs. The semi truck is the equivalent of 16 Model S cars. Let’s target 500 miles before a recharge is needed. My guess would be that it would take 1.5kW per mile, so that’s 750kWh of battery. The Tesla battery weighs about 15lbs/kWh, so that would be 11,250lbs of battery. Add in the weight of the traction motor(s) and the tires/cab/etc, I think you are still below 20,000lbs. That leaves 60,000lbs for hauling stuff.

maybe i’m completely understanding the figures that you are presenting, but if a 5,000 lb tesla gets 3mi/kWh, how is an 80,000 lb truck going to do 2/3 mile/kWh?

diesel semi’s average 5 or 6 mpg. to provide enough range for at least 11 hours of operation under all conditions (including cold weather), my thinking is that you are looking at at least 4-5MWh’s of capacity.

keep in mind that a trucker is not going to buy the “90% of driving needs…” crap; he’s driving to make a living, and so he isn’t going to pretty much going to want guarantees that he can put in a full day under any circumstances, as he can with a diesel truck.

If a semi truck is 6 times as inefficient as my Volt, which uses 250Wh/mile, then the truck would use 1.5kWh/mile. If you want some buffer for cold, I’ll give you 1MWh of energy, but I don’t think 4 or 5MWh is necessary.

Semi-truck range is mostly about aerodynamics in highway driving, not city driving. Tesla has proven state-of-the-art at aero design.

As an example, the Model S 90D (270 wH/m) beats the 2016 Volt (282 wH/m) in highway efficiency despite being a bigger vehicle. That is using the reported available kWh (82 and 13.8) divided by the EPA highway range number (303 and 48.9).

Maybe Tesla can make significant improvements on the efficiency of a semi-truck.

your statement is untrue. the chevrolet volt is rated at 93 mpge and the tesla model s is rated at around 90 mpge.

i guess i just don’t follow your math: if you have a 40 ton semi that weighs over *20* times as much as a chevrolet volt, how is it that the semi is only *6* times less efficient than the volt? with equal rolling resistance (which is not the case because the truck has 18 wheels versus 4 for the volt), i would think that the amount of energy required to move a body would scale approximately linearly with weight. apparently, you’re assuming a non-linear relationship…

You should compare a 40 ton semi with 20 Volts.
If those 20 Volts drive 300 feet apart, they have to conquer air resistance 20 times.
The semi has to conquer a bigger air resistance only once.
The 20 Volts have 80 wheels, the semi only 18 (bigger) wheels.
The volt is measured at 65m/h or 80m/h. The semi at 45 m/h. Driving at 65m/h instead of 45m/h consumes more than double the energy.

A 40 ton semi using 6 times the energy of a Volt per mile is realistic.

Weight and efficiency are not proportional linearly.
Aerodynamics is actually a much bigger issue.

@kdawg: are you suggesting that an 18 wheel semi is more aerodynamic than is a chevrolet volt??? i mean, even if you were operating in a vacuum (where aerodynamics would make no difference) it would still be the case that the rolling resistance for turning 18 wheels is going to be a lot more than that for turning 4 wheels. any way that i look at it, i just don’t following your reasoning.

No, I’m saying aerodynamics has much more effect than weight. I don’t have the numbers handy, but comparing these has been looked at a lot. You also said the rolling resistance will be “a lot more”. I’d argue that 6 times is a lot more, but this is still a small percentage of the overall work being done, especially at highway speeds which is what we are talking about.

If you just want to look at the energy used from the liquid fuel, a semi-truck will get 8mpg (that’s not one optimized for aerodynamics, just a regular one). My Volt will get 38mpg in gas mode. Divide by 0.9 to account for the energy difference between gas/diesel, and that’s 42.2mpg.

If you divide 42.2 by 8 you get a factor of 5.3. I was saying a factor of 6.

the thing to keep in mind is that truck driving is not a leisure time activity. i suspect that the life of a truck driver isn’t as simple and predictable as you apparently believe it to be. you’ve got to figure that there is a reason why semis have enough fuel capacity for 1500-2000 miles of driving.

so when it comes to the idea of a bev semi, i assume that the driver is going to need at least enough range for 11 hours of driving. if i take your figures: a volt can get about 2mi/kWh in winter conditions; divide that by 6 and you get 0.33 mi/kWh. so to get 1,000 miles of range, you need a 3MW battery. i was a bit less optimistic than you (the average mpg for a semi is 5.5 mpg), so i came up with 4-5MW.

I don’t know where you are coming up with your numbers. In the WORST case in Michigan winter, I still get about 3 miles per kWh. Again, this is just a few days of the year when its negative temps out. Note that the loss due to temp is not a straight percentage of the battery either. You have to deal with more dense air, but as far as cabin heating goes, it’s a set amount of KJ not a set % of the battery kWh.

They will sell the drive trains. They already offered it 6 years ago.

Oh please, Tesla, do not make it look like an El Camino.

Would you be OK with it looking like a Ranchero?

awesome +!

I’d be OK with that – it would be relatively aerodynamic and handle well…practical.

However, part of the pickup truck deal is high clearance…El Camino clearance is no better than a sedan.

I really enjoyed driving my compact 1992 Toyota Pickup partly because it did not have an exceptionally high ground clearance, which made it much easier to get in and out of.

If you don’t plan do to a lot of off-roading, then you don’t need a high ground clearance.

“the Tesla pickup will look a lot like and El Camino, but larger.”

So you mean it will look like a Chevy Avalanche, or a Honda Ridgeline?

There are other single-body vehicles with beds other than the El Camino…..

Need 100 kWh pickup. Please bring it by 2020! Under $60K for bare bones base model would make me happy with everything Tesla! Full Size Hauler Needed, Please! Thanks Elon for keeping the dream alive!

I was at the Honda dealer the other day getting my van services and was checking out the new Ridgeline and thought how perfect a Tesla equivalent would be.

Yeah except that already no one buys ridgelines

Tesla pickup can’t be a Ridgeline.

If you can’t put a 4×8 sheet in the bed, then, a Tesla pickup won’t cut it. It needs to completely replace my RAM1500 HEMI in all functions, or, it’s not viable.

If the price of the kWh of batteries drops below $100 then a 100 kWh for a car or truck will be less than $10,000. At which point there will be no contest between ICE and EV. Also if you think that $60,000 – $10,000 for the body of the car software etc then the profit margin is too high. I suspect that $10K for the battery and another for the body. And a price tag of around $30k is smarter since that is a more affordable price for the masses.

$60k pickup truck is affordable to the masses if you are collecting $500 plus per month in shared mobility rental fees.

Maybe. But ideally you want to take the F-150 head on – it’s the top selling vehicle in the US for twenty years in a row. Any threat to it would force Ford to immediately take action beyond their compliance car game (Focus Electric).

Good point!?

Master plan makes sense. After all you cannot accelerate the transition to sustainable transportation solely by putting more cars on the road, zero emission or not. Single-occupancy vehicles are horribly space inefficient. A low-cost, autonomous Tesla/Uber Pool would be excellent for cities and even sub-urban areas.

Tesla P… P… Pickup Truck???




Nope, it will be Model T, to really send Ford into a fury.

Darn it! Ford says we can’t have ‘sEx’ and that no ‘T’ will be served!?

I wouldn’t hold my breath for the truck. Surely he adds these details to stir the pot with the legacy boys.

A Tesla truck would have them shivering in their shoes. That truck, however, would have to be tested to be tough, all-terrain and reliable – REALLY challenging things to do when EVs suffer from heat under loads like towing, and have to deal with submersion as with 4X4s, etc.

– plus the EV truck would not be as the VIA – with limitless daily utility due to two fuel sources.

No, it won’t work for serious work truck or off roaders.

But just like the Model X (which isn’t really a real SUV but more a car based crossover), Model “K”? Would be really just a car based Pickup for “pretender” pickup buyers like the buyers for Honda Ridgeline.

Plenty of those buyers only “haul” stuff occasionally or tow something small. That is still a big market which will make an impact.

But I hope it comes with accessory power supply onboard to run power tools at remote site which would be totally cool.

That commercial trucks is interesting since it would require something like 300kWh to 400kWh in order just to get about 100-200 miles out of it. I don’t know how that will work with charging network. Maybe it will be battery swap at that point. But many commercial trucks are local delivery anyway.

Of course, autopilot makes complete sense on those trucks that goes long haul.

Wouldn’t hyper loop makes more sense for long haul delivery?

Most of the part2 plan makes sense especially combined with the car sharing point of view. Some of the details seems to be far fetched though…

Car sharing sucks. I didn’t own a car for about a year while I lived in Manhattan, and used Zip Car and other car sharing services quite a bit during that time. People are slobs, if not outright pigs. The cars where often filthy inside and littered with garbage from previous drivers. The cars also stunk (smelled), but that’s what happens when you leave food inside a car on a 95 degree day. If I needed a car for a day or more, I’d make the trek to a traditional car rental business where they clean their cars upon return, rather than risk getting stuck driving a pigsty on wheels. If you car share your autonomous Tesla, there will be no way of preventing people from damaging your car and doing all sorts of unseemly acts. After some drinken frat bros use your car while bar hopping, Elon isn’t going to come over to your house to clean the puke out of your car’s upholstery and carpet; you’ll be stuck with that glorious job. People will also use your car as a hot sheets motel on wheels for a quicky, and you’ll get a headliner full of bodily fluids and… Read more »

The opposite is true with Uber vs. cabs. Sounds like Zipcar just doesn’t run their business well. They should have found a mechanism to fix that issue.

I don’t often agree with you, but you are 100% right this time.

I thought about the same possible problems when I’ve heard about this plan.

I think the solution is quite simple. have the person that wants to use the car ID themselves first before getting in. Proper wifi secured ID, double-checked based on bio parameters (face, retina, ++). have the car inside with at least 10-20 cameras from all imaginable angles. Any tampering with the car, camera system, will cause serious liability/jaill for that person. So if you’re soiling, damaging the car in any way you are liable. If you’re a decent person simply traveling, no problem.

So just use a proper stick and cameras+other sensors inside.

Meh. If a dude is sitting in the back seat getting a ride in an autonomous car share and really wants to rub one out, he’s going to do it regardless of the deterrent of serious liability/jail time as punishment. Heck, multiple times a year guys get caught on cell phone camera masturbating or exposing themselves on crowded NYC subway trains. This is the world we live in today, not some utopian society where the threat of harsh punishment or enormous liability deters everyone from daring to consider breaking the law or engaging in unseemly conduct.

I agree with you in general, but there are mechanisms to curb this.

For example, Uber has riders rate the drivers to ensure drivers are providing good service to the customer. What people don’t realize is that Uber drivers rate riders. This gives Uber a way to make sure “bad apple” riders can be identified.

You’re pretty on point…Few people would even live within a short walk to wear you could pick up a car…The few places that it does make sense is where ever there are dorms…College Campus’s and Military installations where the youngins’ live on base…

I do believe Musk is too smart to confuse CAR sharing (eg zipcar) to RIDE sharing (eg Uber) and did indeed mean CAR sharing…

The pickups we used on my grandpa’s farm were all what I guess you’d call “pretender” pickups. Postwar Fords, they were 2WD without exceptionally high ground clearance. Very definitely not the oversized, overpowered “macho” pickups of today, which are far more often cases of conspicuous consumption than anything anyone actually needs.

But they certainly were work trucks! We drove them into the fields, and used them for hauling and towing. We didn’t use them merely to run to town and back!

There is still a market for what used to be considered a normal pickup, rather than these modern oversized, over-powered ones that are advertised so much. Perhaps that market has moved mostly to third-world countries, but on an international basis that market is still there. Personally, I think Tesla would find a big enough market even in the USA for a “compact pickup”, to make it worthwhile developing and marketing it.

No, it won’t fit everyone’s needs. But then, no car or light truck does. That’s why there are hundreds of models of cars and light trucks, rather than just one.

I would venture to guess that 95%+ of all pickup trucks sold are never used for any of the “challenging” things or capability features that they are sold on. Most will never leave the pavement. People buy them because it boosts their manly ego. That said, if Tesla can’t appeal to the “manly ego” they’ll never complete against the big boys in this arena. EV’s have a long, uphill battle in terms of convincing most “real men” of their worth.

Wait…you mean trucks aren’t primarily designed as commuter vehicles for one person?!

Someone better get that memo out!!!

It would crush sales!

I disagree. Heavy trucks are where EVs make the *most* sense, because fuel costs are a larger part of the TCO than for other vehicles. Fuel is a greater expense than even the salary of the driver with many trucks burning off $40 an hour (even at currently low diesel prices). So even if some charging stops must be made, meaning some time lost, it can still be more economical.

Also, just like with the Nikola One, there are multiple other benefits. The ability to maintain speed under load going up a steep incline. Saving brakes and “fuel” (energy) by regenerating when going down. Shorter stopping distance. Less maintenance (at least when designs mature). Better acceleration.

Basically all the benefits of EVs in cars are there and at least as important in heavy trucks. Latency is actually *less* important in trucking than personal transport – the real issue is *cost*.

I haven’t done the math, but it seems to me that when EVs can work for car applications, there’s every reason to think it’d work for trucks.

The Nikola One currently exists only as a design on paper. Claiming practicality on the basis of a theoretical model… doesn’t cut it. If and when the Nikola One actually goes into production, you can bet the actual performance will be less than what’s claimed.

“In theory, there’s no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.”

This is where battery swapping could really come to the fore. Hot swappable packs, charged and ready to go when a truck pulls into a station. Out with the drained packs and in with the new, in less time than it takes to fully fuel a big rig and in less time than it takes for the drivers(in non-autonomous rigs) to refuel themselves.

Using such a method, would allow for more leisurely charge rates, as the packs are no longer under time constraints. This would mean extreme amounts of power would not be needed, with the added benefits of quick turnaround times, improving overall efficiency and reducing cost.

Tesla will NEVER put an Infernal Combustion Engine in their vehicles. Their all electric truck will do it better than existing ones, as they do now.

I wouldn’t assume he meant to count out a more affordable EV than Model 3 just from those statements posted.

They’ve said multiple times that a more affordable EV under the 3 would be in the mix. Naturally, the pencil pushers have reminded Musk that with current cell production costs, that is still far out. This would explain the diversion to car sharing (for now).

The autonomous car dream is a pipedream. As intelligent as Musk is – he surely has to see that there aren’t enough failsafes on earth to avoid critical accidents and incredible insurance quagmires. Even a look at Autopilot today shows us just how much of an infancy the whole auto-driving car subject is at the moment. It’s the subject du jour for many people when talking cars – but a fantasy, just the same.

Ask any lawyer licking their chops who would be liable when a self-driving vehicle kills, maims and causes property damage…PHEW!

I’m no sure how to take this new vision from Tesla other than to gives stockholders a handle on one reason he wants to meld Tesla and SolarCity together.

I think it’s unwise to call sharing a diversion. If autonomy really gets here – and I mean actually self-driving cars, not aids of various kinds – the entire ownership model changes.

Today he average car is parked some 95% of the time. So except for the 5% of the time it’s actually used it’s mainly just contributing to making it difficult to find anywhere to park!

This isn’t an intelligent way to organize things. Especially not in a world of too many people, too much resource consumption and unclean energy. These fundamental drivers will sooner or later become felt as economic drivers, and it will be ridiculously expensive to have your own dedicated car that nobody else uses. In big cities most cars might be minibuses that usually carry about ten people around. I don’t know – but clearly it’s possible to do a lot better than the current model with barely more than one person per car and everyone stuck in a queue half of the day!

Autonomous self landing rockets are possible (proven), so I don’t think it is an issue of technical feasibility. It is an issue of cost and acceptance.

The technology will be here in the next five years, but the cost and acceptance might take another decade.

Got one word for ya. Kurzweil.

Double-exponential growth will cause automation that surpasses (by 10x at least) a human’s feeble effort to survive driving.

Double-exponential growth is exponential growth with exponential rate growth combined.

Something that we think (with our linear thinking) will take 30 years will take 3. Or less.

Full automation will only be delayed by government not moving the regs fast enough.

James said:

“Ask any lawyer licking their chops who would be liable when a self-driving vehicle kills, maims and causes property damage…PHEW!”

I think you’re looking at this from the wrong perspective. If the rate of accidents goes down by a factor of 10 or even more, then insurance rates will plummet. Even if the weight of liability shifts mostly away from the driver to the car, even if the car has to be a bit more expensive to make up for the increased cost of liability, the TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) will go down because of significantly lower insurance rates. And with an accident rate 10x lower in autonomous cars, there is no way the cost of the car will increase nearly as much as the insurance rates will be lowered.

That’s going to make autonomous cars very popular even if they’re a bit more expensive than their non-autonomous cousins.

This is, as cowboys say on the prairie – “Afar out”. I imagine Tesla, if it survives a couple decades – will be into all sorts of EV transportation, commercial and personal.

When he forms Plan Part 3, it probably will include military equipment. This is where the established auto industry went to expand their trade. Trucks, buses, tanks, troop transport… You name it – they build ém.

The big IF is whether Tesla can build M3 and get it out to enough people fast enough. It’s a no-brainer a Model Y crossover with normal doors will spring forth after that…And this talk of a new Roadster…Well, they pushed that back a few months ago to …maybe…after a more affordable subcompact car….So the truck…be it as it may – the biggest seller of the gassers… I think that is a tall order that is a decade away at best.

The original plan of August 2006 was ten years ago, and if the Model 3 is delivered next fall / winter, that’s eleven years.

So, a pickup within a decade seems like a safe bet.

that’s a fair point. after all, the reason why it is called a “master plan” is that it is supposed to represent a long term strategic plan.

Your “logic” boils down to “part one took 11 years, so part two should take about the same”. But *why* should it take about the same?!?

I reckon it’s more typical for Musk to try to deliver these things ASAP ZULU as usual… if he stays around. As far as I’ve understood it used to be the plan that Elon would step down from Tesla once the Model 3 production is up and running at scale, but this does make me wonder if he maybe doesn’t feel his work here is done quite yet.

maybe it won’t take 11 years, but a strategic long term plan should at least cover 5 years. so you can think of it as a kind of “5 year plan”. 🙂

Exponential growth will blow this prediction out of the water.

i think electric vehicles are at least a decade away from anything close to be what could be called maturity. we don’t know whether the “winner” will be bev or fcev. even within the bev segment, we don’t know whether the “winner” will be lithium ion, or some other battery technology. there is so much that is up in the air right now, that a 10 year horizon is actually not a ridiculous prediction.

“no comment” commented:

“we don’t know whether the ‘winner’ will be bev or fcev…”

I agree we don’t know what will become the standard tech for storing electricity or generating it onboard EVs, but we certainly do know that hydrogen fueled FCEVs are not the wave of the future. It’s possible that lithium-air fuel cells (typically if wrongly called “batteries”), or some other type of fuel cells, will replace li-ion batteries.

Personally, I’m hoping for onboard direct conversion of nuclear power to electricity, and no, I’m perfectly serious:


An interesting notion, but fraught with engineering, health, monetary and regulatory issues.

James said:

“When he forms Plan Part 3…”

I doubt Elon will be in charge of Tesla Motors when it’s time for Part 3. He has said he plans to leave Tesla Motors, or sell his stock position, in 4-5 years, or after the Model ≡ ramp-up is completed.

Great to see a leader with vision. I want my car to pay for itself so how about V2G??? Seems like the perfect way to go.
With pencils down on model 3 you need those engineers working on a new design and it looks like they’ve got a lot to keep busy with.

i think that “make money with your car” idea is pretty weird. i think the gm approach of a time-share use of a car makes a lot more sense. if it is a stretch for me to afford a car, and if i don’t use a car that much, then i would not buy a car at all and use a time share approach. but the view of car ownership has never been based on the idea that you calculate percentage utilization at the time of purchase; the idea is that the car is there for you to use when you want to use it.

It’s all about decentralisation and globalisation of everything. A car sharing company needs to buy 1000’s of cars, maintain them, handle complaints, etc…. What he is suggesting is basically the eBay version of car share model. You buy a car and pay a subscription or % of the transaction to let others use it. As with eBay the indervidual doesn’t pay tax, employ anyone or make any profit so they are pretty bloody cheap compared to any conventional business. The trick to slave labour is to convince the slave they are doing something fun or free.

Just_chris said:

“As with eBay the indervidual doesn’t pay tax, employ anyone or make any profit…”

If you think nobody makes a profit off selling on ebay, then you don’t know much about ebay sales. There are lots of companies whose primary, or only, sales are through ebay.

So you would have to hail a ride from someone else’s Tesla.

They sell powerwall, not a good idea offer V2G. Then the demand for powerwall is down.

i’ve never understood the notion of vehicle to grid. maybe the idea is that you “sell” the electricity when the usage rate is high, but do you really make enough money from that scheme to cover the cost of the extra battery capacity that you would have to maintain in your car?

i don’t see how v2g impacts powerwall, though. unlike a powerwall, you need stored energy in your car to operate the vehicle. the only use that i would see for v2g is as a backup emergency generator.

In Japan V2Home you will save money. The costs are around 3000 dollar for the box and you save 40-60 $ a month. There is a report about that cars are cheaper energy storage than the normal energy storage solutions.
The life of battery will be not influenced much with 40 -60 kWh in cars.
Because the battery has calender life of 10-12 years. This calender life is not much influenc from if you use 25 MWh or 35 MWh in this 10 years. Average house in Europe, 5 kWh energy storage has 200 cylce/year ~ 1000 kWh. A normal car battery from todays cars should last around 40 MWh. Driving would need ~ 25-30 MWh in 10 years, 15 MWh left over. With bigger batteries like Bolt it could spend ~ 60 MWh over it’s live, so it makes no sense not using it because the calender life will lifespan ends anyway after ~ 10 years.

Musk has explained (somewhere) why they are “philosophically” against V2G and V2H. It has to do with the complexities of the many and diverse regulatory bodies that come into play (the bureaucracy not being worth it, basically).


Thanks for that information, that finally makes sense to me…

Sad but true. Tech is there. Demand is there. Freedom not.

Gsned57 asked: “I want my car to pay for itself so how about V2G???” I don’t see that ever working economically. Why would the EV owner want to wear out his battery pack to benefit the electric utility? Why would the electric utility be willing to pay the EV owner a fair market value for wearing out his battery pack, when the utility could buy its own stationary storage more cheaply than EV batteries, on a per-kWh basis? I also question the practicality of renting out your EV to others. The benefit of having a car is that it’s available for your exclusive use when you need it. If you’re always renting it out, then you can never be sure you’ll have it when you need it. So in that case, what’s the benefit of actually owning a car? Might as well just call for a taxi whenever you need a car. I realize, of course, that if you’re using it to commute, you can simply not make it available during the hours you’re commuting. That’s nice in theory… but let’s see how well it works in practice. How many times is a car going to be returned late, making… Read more »

Sharing makes sense.

Commercial trucks? Not so sure.

Auto driving of those commercial trucks, makes total sense.

Pickup trucks… Maybe.

Model Y, hell yeah!

Solar and powerwall? Sure, makes sense and expected. But why does it have to be solar city?

So, I would say about half of them makes sense.

The next 10-15 years will be very interesting for sure.

Either it will happen or Tesla will fail miserably… But its push to new low emission transportation will get all the establishment moving in that direction for sure. Maybe that is the point after all. Regardless of whether Tesla makes it all happen or not, the wheel of change is already turning and can’t be stopped now.

Commercial trucks for local deliveries make 100% total sense. There is a large distribution center near me and there ate hundreds of trucks going in and out. The center is right near a main rail line. They off-load containers – move the goods around – then load up the trucks for local delivery to Wal-Mart, Kroger, Target……etc. None of these trucks go more than a hundred or so miles in a day. And where the efficiency is pathetic for these local trucks is – stop & go….where electric is perfect. These rigs can also charge at these large distribution centers as they wait for their next haul (or while they off-load)

Makes 100% perfect sense…..


Heavy duty trucks also make sense. Versus diesel it should already stack up pretty well. But it’s worst enemy it the future electric truck!

Battery prices are expected to continue to fall rapidly, so the savings made in the first year or two likely are less than the reduction in the cost of the battery, making it profitable to wait.

Fuel is the biggest component of heavy duty truck TCO – so making them electric should make more economic sense than cars.

In a strange twist of history, contrary to cars, for semi trucks, battery exchange would suddenly make sense again. This would solve the high purchase price of an ev truck because the battery would be a mere power service, you pay for the service of receiving a loaded battery every 300 miles along the road. The truck would be cheaper than a diesel one without the purchase of the battery and the battery service cost would be lower than the monthly diesel bill. In more the truck could load the battery from a dock all by itself thanks to his own hydraulic system. You go stand in front of a dock where a full battery is indicated by a green light above it, your piston pull in the battery in the truck in front and the truck uses the battery to drive 300 miles until the next dock station. The truck pay for the use and energy of the battery. When the battery is empty it is unloaded at a dock and another full battery is loaded. Exceptionally, the truck driver can decide to charge the battery on his own but that would not be the standard procedure contrary to… Read more »

leafowner said:

“Commercial trucks for local deliveries make 100% total sense”

1. The article talks about semi tractor-trailer rigs, not the type of freight truck used for local deliveries.

2. If EV tech has advanced to the point that EV trucks used for local deliveries is economically competitive, then why have UPS and FedEx not moved past using a few test vehicles? There may be a niche market for some delivery routes, a niche where EV delivery trucks make sense, but I think UPS and FedEx will be the barometer for EV delivery trucks going mainstream.

Ford has been getting ready for this with there aluminum body,they knew this was coming.

LOL. Wishful thinking.

I was looking at self-balancing unicycles today. Turns out that for less than 5 km, it’s usually faster than a car, and can be as fast as public transit for distances up to 10 km in a city. To me, this is the solution to the last mile personal transportation problem. You can use this to go to the train/transit/car sharing station, you can bring it with you and charge it at your office since it’s much less bulky than an electric bike, and you don’t have to sweat to get to your destination. I truly think this technology has the potential to change the transportation paradigm in cities.

It’s hard to tell where your sarcasm starts in there.

Or maybe Segways!There are also two wheeled hands free self balancing scooters.

Exactly. “…this technology has the potential to change the transportation paradigm in cities” is precisely what the makers of the Segway claimed, back in the day.

So, a vastly overpriced electric scooter that you can’t sit down on, is too fast and too heavy for safe use on sidewalks, and is too heavy for the average person to lift into the back of a car or truck unassisted. Sure, how could that possibly fail to sell like hotcakes? 🙄

Some of the self-propelled unicycles I’ve seen also lack any place to sit down. Why not just use electric powered roller skates? It would accomplish the same thing and would be far more compact. And if you think I’m not serious… well, I don’t think self-propelled unicycles are any more serious.

Yes, Rocket Skates. A little price for ten miles but they show promise.


I’ve never tried one but agree it holds huge promise! The small size is key as it allows taking it with you easily when you get to public transit/car.

Doubt I’d want to go 10 km on one though, especially in bad weather (I live in Norway and sometimes winter is a bit harsh).

Visionary. NOT!!!

What a disappointment.

Oh, please indulge us in what you imagine to be far more visionary, and yet, actually attainable within a single human lifetime.


i think it is visionary in the sense that it is a good long term strategy that provides a clear set of overarching goals to act guiding principles for tesla.

What were you expecting?

It’s not mind-blowing at this stage. We’re used to these dreams already. But it is no less important for that reason!

“You know, I have one simple request. And that’s sharks with fricken laser beams attached to their heads!”

Solar roofs and storage only make sense if grid solar and storage is more expensive than residential solar and storage. These days I doubt that will be the case.

Off Grid is by far cheaper than just the transmition cost. Think about all these software boys that will try an squeeze every penny out of you because of the brain work they will put in the system to make you have a smooth uninterrupted power at your home at all times.

If everybody goes off grid, then everybody needs to size their solar and battery for the worst case scenario (e.g. a week-long rain storm, back-to-back days with lots of EV driving). If we connect everybody’s homes with these wires that we conveniently already have installed across the planet, then we benefit from diversity (not everyone’s worst case scenario will happen at the same time), and don’t need nearly as much energy storage overall.

Musk’s plan still applies within the grid, it’ll just help the grid to accommodate all of this additional distributed generation and additional load, especially in regions where the grid is far less established. But just because going off-grid has a certain romantic appeal doesn’t mean it’s the most cost effective approach.

i don’t see where home battery storage makes sense in the united states the power systems tend to be reliable. on the other hand, if your local system doesn’t support net metering, maybe then battery storage might make sense (although there is a move by some utilities to make net metering less attractive because apparently too many people are installing solar).

in countries where you have unreliable power systems, home battery storage would make sense.

It’s mostly balancing and, to some extent, local distribution. It should improve overall efficiency, particularly for fickle wind and solar generation.

sign me up!
Have my car drive me to work, then go out and ferry others around as needed, before getting back to pick me up and take me home.
That checks all the boxes. I want to own my own car, but leaving it sitting around is a missed opportunity.
Then its sideline of part time taxi is offsetting its purchase cost.

And what happens when it comes back with a big old scratch on a side panel, or a big stain from pomegranate juice on the back seat? Hmm, lots to be thought through and ironed out.

What if someone eats that half eaten cheeseburger I was saving for the way home? /sarc 😉
Seriously though; you would have to take all personal possessions with you into workplace.


It is a flawless plan.

I wish we had people like him here in Egypt!

You could say that the US needs him more, because with all the cars in America Americans pollute more than Egyptians…

I have been pretty impressed with what Wrightspeed has been doing in the Medium Duty segment. Now that Tesla wants to expand to all major market segments, maybe it would make sense for Tesla and Wrightspeed to come back together. My understanding is that Ian sees more gallons to displace with commercial vehicles than personal vehicles and that’s why he parted ways with Tesla. Of course, I have no idea about the interpersonals between Ian and Elon.

If Wrightspeed brings their Geared Traction Drive technology, Tesla brings capital markets and inexpensive batteries, it looks like a good combo.

i’m pretty sure that wrightspeed does not rely on bev technology, so unless musk is willing to change his tune, there is probably are pretty strong difference in philosophy between musk and wright.

A cursory glance through wrightspeed’s technology page suggests just the opposite. only batteries + an electric motor (or two?) drive the truck. The turbine is just a unique, quiet and very efficient “range extender”. Very much dependent on batteries and BEV technology.

I’d love to see them collaborate 15 years after going separate ways!

the existence of the turbine “range extender” is why it appears to me that wrightspeed does not use a bev model. for example, the chevrolet volt requires a battery at all times to operate the vehicle (which makes the volt different from a typical “hybrid”), but the chevrolet volt is not a bev.

The older Wrightspeed X1, built by Ian Wright and his team, was a BEV racecar.


I don’t think Ian Wright is philosophically opposed to BEVs. It’s just that he recognizes the limitations of BEV tech, and how that, in most applications, it’s impractical for medium or heavy trucks with the current state of EV tech development. If Tesla thinks that the state of the art is now such that they can move forward into those markets, well more power to them and I certainly hope they succeed! I’d simply love to be proven wrong on those subjects.

I don’t know how Ian and Elon get along. But my guess is that Ian, like the other two actual founders of Tesla Motors, don’t much appreciate Elon claiming all the credit for Tesla Motors’ vision for himself, when Elon isn’t even one of the original founders of the company… despite what he keeps claiming.

That “Secret Master Plan Part One”? Elon didn’t make that plan. He just grabbed it, promoted it, and now pretends that he created it.

On the other hand, Ian Wright is one of the people who helped create that original not-so-secret “master plan” for Tesla Motors.

This is just too much to swallow. GM has Bolt ready for production in October and Tesla hasn’t even showed us a final prototype of model 3 (remember different door handles). We’re talking 2 years before they have a production version of model 3-will they be able to burn cash for that long while promising us bright future?

It’ll take GM 5-10 years to sell as many Bolts and Tesla has *reservations* for their Model 3. So GM will “have the lead” in sales and vehicles on the road for perhaps 18 months before Tesla is looking at them in the proverbial rear-view mirror (as it were).

I don’t think GM will try to sell 100s of thousands of Bolts, and even if they hoped to, they wouldn’t be able to produce that many because of lack of batteries.

So you’re saying Tesla can build a cell and pack assembly plant in two years with limited funds. But, LG which has spare capacity and manufacturing space and can build their own machinery for producing cells can’t?

I see it a little different. Let’s be honest any of the large automakers could do what Tesla has done, but what is their motivation right now – market share, profits, etc. Right now neither exist in the EV market. This game has just started and people are trying to declare winners.

Unlike Apple which people are trying to compare Tesla to. Apple came in with a unique product at a critical junction of products. The iPod naturally grew into the iPhone and they had already tied people to their products with iTunes.

Tesla on the other hand is selling to a very mature market. And the only thing unique is it’s electric which fives it certain advantages over ICE vehicles.

We’ll see about that. Very skeptical of GM’s pretentions… I doubt other places than america will see the bolt or ampera before 2018.

Opel Norway confirmed the Ampera-e will be on sale in Norway spring 2017. This was back in February though and it’s been silent since. So I’m still expecting to see it at least before the end of Q2, hopefully sooner, but am not feeling 100% confident.

If it does come soon we should hear about it, and probably see it, in Paris this autumn.

At the moment Tesla is two weeks behind its schedule. Pencils down was half July instead of first of the month. Factory building looks to go as planned as wel.

While the Bolt starts production in October, due to its dealer based business model, sales start in January 2017. Just six month before the deliveries of Model 3 start.
GM has allocated capacity for 25k cars a year for the Bolt. Tesla plans to produce more cars each month.

Even if the Bolt is a huge sales succes, they don’t have the production capacity for the Bolt in much bigger numbers.

If Elon didn’t plan to build a number of new factories, the cashflow problems would be over in Q3 2017. But I think most of his investors will be very happy if he keeps growing and investing like he is doing now.

The flex line that Bolt is on can scale a lot quicker than building a line from scratch.

Bolt could easily exceed Model 3 builds if GM wants to go that way.

One thing GM does well is build cars. Lots of them. Very fast. Once they turn a line on, it’s like triggering a machine gun. If ya don’t let go fast enough, the dealers get some overflow stock.

the production targets for the bolt are more reflective of gm’s sales forecasting. if gm’s analysis of the market indicated that there really was a market for selling hundreds of thousands of bev’s per year, gm would have planned for higher production volumes.

Loboc, it’s batteries. Nobody questions the latent ability for GM to make more cars and distribute them quicker…it comes down to two issues:

1) Will GM choose to meet demand? Pretty much only Toyota and Nissan make an effort to meet demand for their alternative-fuel products (Toyota hybrids, Nissan Leaf); and

2) battery supply. Samsung SDI, among others, are starting to build battery factories, but Tesla is ahead in terms of planning and building to meet demand.

In the highly unlikely event that GM chooses to increase production of the Bolt in order to meet what everyone expects to be a demand far higher than 25K/yr, then they need batteries. Lots of batteries. Where are such large volumes going to come from in 2017? 2018? 2019?

maybe they can add another shift at the LG Holland plant? Of course the LG parts are coming from Korea for the Bolt EV, so maybe they would source the batteries from there.

I would like to hear more about LG increasing their US production.

exactly, increasing the production volume for gm is mainly a matter of managing the supply chain. what that means is that increases in production wouldn’t happen instantaneously, but it would be manageable.

It has been widely publicized that LG Chem gave GM a startlingly low cost for the battery cells for the Bolt; $145/kWh. That very likely came as part of a deal whereby LG Electronics supplied the entire EV powertrain. For GM to make more Bolts than LG will be supplying batteries for, then they’ll have to find another source… almost certainly another battery supplier which will want more money. If GM’s profit margin is dependent on LG’s very low, probably at-cost price, then there is no way they’re going to be able to make a profit selling Bolts with batteries from another supplier. I’m sure you’ve noticed that there are a lot of “ifs” there. But I don’t think it’s any coincidence at all that GM announced the Bolt after LG Chem announced what it called the “200 mile battery”. Right now, it looks like LG Chem is the only company capable of supplying batteries at such a low cost. Of course that will change in the future, but it seems almost certain that GM is locked into a single-source supply for batteries and for the EV powertrain in the first MY (Model Year) of Bolt production. And if I’m… Read more »

Single “source” but that source has plants all over the world. I’d just rather them supply the batteries from the US.

it’s unusual for a company like gm to have a product depend on a single source. my suspicion is that the bolt is a niche, halo type product to get them credibility in the ev segment but that gm’s real strategy is directed toward phev’s.

Loboc said:

“The flex line that Bolt is on can scale a lot quicker than building a line from scratch.”

Doesn’t matter how flexible GM’s auto assembly lines are. GM has made production of the Bolt limited by how many EV powertrains LG Electronics can supply, and how many battery cells LG Chem can supply. Note that LG Chem signs contracts for delivery of battery cells in large quantities two years in advance.

It continues to amaze me how many people posting to InsideEVs apparently think GM can just turn a dial and significantly crank up production of the Bolt.

If and when GM decides to ramp up Bolt production, they will signal that intention well in advance by moving some or most of the EV powertrain production in-house, and by ceasing to single-source other parts of the EV powertrain. That sort of change, if and when it happens, will come only in future model years.

actually being able to deliver cars to customers requires a lot more than just production (although production is an obvious necessity). it’s worth noting that the gm product distribution model is much better adapted to high volume sales than is the current tesla distribution model. the current tesla distribution model probably works better for low volume sales.

Mitja Čampa said:

“This is just too much to swallow. GM has Bolt ready for production in October and Tesla hasn’t even showed us a final prototype of model 3…”

Is it not clear that this “Master Plan Part Two” is a long-range plan; a plan for the future of Tesla Motors over the next 5-10 years? The article starts by noting that Musk’s blog post about “The Secret Tesla Motors Master Plan” (Part One) was published in August 2006, almost exactly 10 years ago. That should be a hint!

Humans need a lot more long-term planning. A lot more! Too much sort-term thinking is responsible for a lot of things that are wrong with business culture and the economy today, and human society in general.

The heavy duty vehicles should have a warranty based on running hours so they can also feed power into whatever needs it or else they can really measure battey use when its running stationary.

I wonder how far away are Tesla tractors as they would be super useful as EVs.

I think Elon’s real master plan is Mars. He’s probably setting up the first colonization of Mars through robotics and AI.

LOL … He’s now after Pluto, you missed that, eh?

He was being serious. Elon and SpaceX will present more information regarding the MCT later this fall.

Now i get why they put those idiotic doors on the Model X. They will put them on the “bus” Elon is talking about in the plan: “With the advent of autonomy, it will probably make sense to shrink the size of buses and transition the role of bus driver to that of fleet manager. Traffic congestion would improve due to increased passenger areal density by eliminating the center aisle and putting seats where there are currently entryways”

Well, for families, the Falcon Wing doors are not idiotic in the least. They do what they were designed to do – vastly improve access to both the 2nd and 3rd row seats.

However, you make a good point about these buses – they will probably have FW doors on both sides, all along the length of it, in order to fit 5, maybe 6 people across (no aisles, as you noted, so what else can they do?).

Dear Elon,
Just a suggestion, but before you go all in with long distance over the road semi’s, might I suggest “yard trucks”. Yes, they are for short distances, but they stay within arms reach of the owner. The owner could have their own private use(?) Supercharger, and you’ll still get loads of data about their near constant use.

I’m sorry, but installing a supercharger dedicated to servicing a single vehicle has got to be a really bad idea. It’s a recipe for super low utilization.

For fleet operators private chargers could possibly make sense. But I imagine a better solution would be to set up chargers at big warehouses where trucks must remain stationary for loading or unloading – twenty minutes after all is enough for a two-third to three-quarter refill.

Large freight yards, the type that exist at large port cities and large railroad yards, could certainly have multiple EV yard trucks sharing a charger or chargers. Some of them already do.

Here’s one InsideEVs article on the subject, from a year ago:


Sounds like an OK plan, although few pipe dreams there for sure … Like Tesla semi …. It will never happen in my view.

The other problem I see is that, a lot of his plan is applicable only to certain countries and geographic locations.

It also doesn’t address the increasing population and instead of getting cars off the road, he’s adding them …. Whether as privately owned or as Tesla fleet. This will not work …. To add seats to current local buses will not cut it. He makes it sound easy, bu it’s anything but.

But I appreciate he’s trying.

Actually, yes it does – he explicitly addresses that. Providing a significant number of small, autonomous buses will reduce the need for private vehicles. And for those that do/can afford a private vehicle, they can choose to let their vehicle pick up/drop off people throughout the day and night while they aren’t using it.

I don’t understand your criticism.

Mxs said:

“To add seats to current local buses will not cut it.”

Hmmm, I don’t think that’s what Elon is suggesting. It reads to me like he’s suggesting redesigning the typical city bus to be smaller, more compact and more efficient, but reducing wasted space inside the bus and packing passengers in more tightly.

Elon suggested a similar seating arrangement for his HyperLoop concept; a tightly packed row of seats and the entire side of the passenger capsule opening up as a door.

I don’t think that’s practical, and more recent designs for HyperLoop systems from other designers have shown doors and seats for the cars/capsules more like a typical subway car.

* * * * *

It’s an interesting cultural phenomenon that in Japan, they have employees whose job it is to literally shove as many people as they can get into the cars on their “bullet trains”. I don’t think Americans would put up with that!

Fantastic news! Love the idea of smaller buses and safer trucks that don’t pollute.

Love to see a Tesla pickup truck! This should make FCA, FMC, GM, Nissan & Toyota quake in their boots to have their biggest cash cows in Teslas crosshairs.

By the time Tesla actually builds an electric pickup there will probably already be a couple on the market. Teslas only hope is to give their pickup added value.

So Saint Elon is promising to make everything except a profit and the fan boys go wild. Surprise, surprise.

I wonder how much longer before Elon gets openly philosophical about the company’s progress, and maybe return of invested capital, being all shareholders should really expect. Why not? His behavior says he’s almost there, and I’m sure a few are good with it.

Pivotal institutions owning both TSLA and SCTY are fine with the merger. Imagine that?

Not short. Not very long TSLA.

and the trolls come out and s*** on everything that he has done, and continues to do. surprise, surprise…

please tell us, what have you done for humanity?

Elon may have issues with timelines, profitability, exaggeration, etc, but he’s TRYING to make the world a better place.

Maybe Tesla can put a single SC accross from their already existing SCs for the occasional Model X hauling a trailer.

The charging infrastructure for semis is non-existent. Even the Superchargers can’t charge semi truck batteries quickly enough to be practical. There’s going have to be a completely new high powered charging infrastructure before semi charging is practical.

Tesla should build electric RV chassis that can use Superchargers. The RVs could benefit from both RV park charging and Supercharger charging. And charging time is not near as critical for RVs as it is for a semis.

Long distance BEV heavy trucks will require either battery swap stations, or else high-tension electric lines coming directly into the truck stop. I expect the latter will happen eventually, altho that might not become commonplace within my lifetime (I’m 60).

I think EV tech will have to advance to something better than li-ion batteries before we see long distance BEV heavy freight trucks.

The secret masterplan sounds more like a defense.
1. Case for Solar city acquisition.
2. Case for autopilot.
3. If AP can’t detect trailer, then create their own semi.

of course, elon musk is going to want to justify the acquisition of solar city by showing that there was a plan. this scheme works for now because all of the activities under the tesla umbrella are relatively small. furthermore, there are some overlapping core competencies. but to the extent that any of these activities takes off, this company structure is ripe for breakup.

Both of you are not making sense. There is neither need nor reason to infer deceit from these plans. They do make practical and economic sense, and there is no doubt that consolidation will make the solar and storage goals easier/cheaper to accomplish. I don’t like the idea of letting my car be used by others, and then being stuck with cleaning someone else’s mess, but I’m not in this “millenial” generation, which apparently views things a bit differently. There may very likely be a large market for such features, if Zipcar and Uber are anything to go by. As far as autonomy goes, that’s coming, and soon. Everyone’s going after it, from Google to Tesla and most automakers, at Universities worldwide, military and civilian gov’t applications, etc. Rooftop solar is still popular nationally, both residential and commercial, and definitely popular globally, particularly in countries that do not have an established, comprehensive grid. I see no genuine revenue concerns there. As long as the whole Model 3 thing goes off more or less as planned, then that will solve most, if not all, lingering cash flow issues. The S already pays for itself plus profit margin, and so will the… Read more »

TomArt said:

“…there is no doubt that consolidation will make the solar and storage goals easier/cheaper to accomplish.”

Oh, I think there is a great deal of doubt that Tesla can save money on future production of solar power systems by consolidating with a company whose economic model was based on short-term subsidies for solar power (“net metering”); subsidies which are now being reduced or disappearing. Doubly so because SolarCity’s project to build a solar panel “gigafactory” is ensnared in the Buffalo Billion project, a project slowed by investigations by both federal and State agencies for possible improper lobbying and undisclosed conflicts of interest. (Note I am not suggesting any improper or unethical action on the part of SolarCity.)

There may well come a time at which it’s appropriate for Tesla Energy to offer a “complete package” for home solar customers. And maybe it’s time for Tesla to start moving in that direction… and maybe it’s still too early, because the tech for making solar panels is still advancing rapidly.

But it never will make any sense for Tesla to burden itself with a failing company which may never be able to manufacture solar panels at a competitive price.

Back in early June it was announced that the Model 3 design would be finished in six weeks. Six weeks has came and went with no announcement as to whether the design is finished. Is the Model 3 design finished or is this just another missed Tesla deadline?

I have a ‘pencils down’ date of July 14th on my calendar. I haven’t seen any final render much less a pre-production validation sample yet either.

I would expect little information about Model 3, until the Gigafactory Party.


My personal feeling is this would allow his team time to build an updated prototype to show off at the event. Hate the trunk? Look, this is what we did, .etc. Time to party. 😉

Just don’t expect to see much of the interior / dashboard / driver controls. Probably not enough time for the new designer to have finalized a re-design yet.

No – I do not expect anything until part 2 of the Model 3 reveal. It will take time to go from “pencils down” to pre-production test vehicles, and then have a design sufficiently locked in for crash testing, etc.

As I’ve posted before, I’ll point it out again – there is no reason to expect any significant interior changes. Based on what the drivers said on the youtube videos of test drives, everything about it was carefully thought out for specific, unequivocal advantages:

1) that large glass roof for preserving rear passenger head clearance while maintaining a leading coefficient of drag (it appears that only the middle portion will be the part that may be opted for a solid body roof), and of course, it provides a more spacious feel within the cabin;

2) low dash and forward seating for greater efficient use of cabin space, improved driver visibility, and improved air circulation in the cabin;

3) center “stack” (screen) appeared to be standard and pretty much set. The one driver said that the software interface was an ongoing project, but the physical layout was pretty much locked at the time of reveal.

I seriously do not expect any substantial design changes beyond somehow increasing the trunk opening (how, I don’t know, because it would almost certainly require changing the body structure, which would alter the structural integrity, for better or worse).

A deadline? More of a suggested date. But Tesla saying they won’t be late is like the Russian Olympic Team, (R.O.T.) saying it doesn’t cheat, even though everyone knows they do.

If you have no friends then get a Tesla truck.
Then you will have friends, but then, you will have to help them move stuff.

Of course you can always say F…off, when they ask for your help, but then you will have no friends again, but you will still have a cool truck. Life is funny that way.

“Traffic congestion would improve due to increased passenger areal density by eliminating the center aisle and putting seats where there are currently entryways,”

Actually eliminating the center aisle and entryways and replacing them with seats would result in decreased passenger areal density, not increased.
During rush hour in many cities, the bus center aisles and entryways are packed with standing passengers, because all seats are already occupied. Seats takes up a lot more space than standing passengers with no seats does.

Perhaps – that sentence does seem to think so.

I took the whole thing from the bigger picture – each bus in use would take a dozen or more individual cars off the road…and putting seats in the aisle and typical entry/exit areas makes the experience more comfortable and more civilized, compared to standing, packed like sardines, swaying with the pitch of the bus.

Overall, there would be a significant net increase in passenger areal density.

Let me take a moment to explain the difference between a pilot and a driver. Websters: Pilot 1 a : one employed to steer a ship : helmsman b : a person who is qualified and usually licensed to conduct a ship into and out of a port or in specified waters c : a person who flies or is qualified to fly an aircraft or spacecraft 2: guide, leader 3: cowcatcher 4: a piece that guides a tool or machine part Ie., it is a person that directs or guides a ship. Driver a : coachman b : the operator of a motor vehicle c : an implement (as a hammer) for driving d : a mechanical piece for imparting motion to another piece e : one that provides impulse or motivation A pilot is a person who rarely directly steers the ship or craft, but rather gives orders to the steering and engine crews, ie., “hard a starboard” “full ahead”. A pilot as in an airplane breaks the definition, admittedly, but the term “autopilot” has history as the automated steering for a ship, which carries over to airplanes. “autopilot” for cars is completely incorrect. There is no “pilot”… Read more »

Scott Franco said:

“A pilot is a person who rarely directly steers the ship or craft, but rather gives orders to the steering and engine crews…”

Um, no. The captain or senior officer on the bridge would normally be the one directing the pilot (or helmsman) on how to steer the ship.

The term “pilot” dates at least back to the steam riverboat era, and again the pilot is the one actually steering the ship, and shouldn’t be confused with the captain.

As you note, for large ships there are often locally based harbor pilots who come aboard to guide a ship safely to its designated dock, and in such cases it’s that pilot who is given control of setting the ship’s course, rather than the captain or senior officer on the bridge. Yes, in such cases the “pilot” isn’t actually manning the helm; he’s directing the helmsman. But that’s an exception to the rule about what pilots do.


Ok, six new cars?!

There are actually two trucks (had to read twice)?

So we “get”: M3, M3 SUV, semi and pick-up truck, bus, Roadster2/sports car2.

Seriously, where is the focus?!

These are all multi-billion projects.

The Model3 alone would be more than enough work for years to come!

Tesla has lost all focus with this plan and the SCTY merger (aka bailout).

You have to put an appropriate time frame on the Master Plan in order to understand it. The first Master Plan was issued 10 years ago and it’s not completely realized yet. Franz’s team has been done with Model 3 for quite a while, so they have likely been working on Model Y (Crossover version of Model 3) since then. They probably also have sketches and architectural targets for the next Roadster and light duty truck.

This is hard to understand why some of these comments these individuals find it hard to see pickups and semis using electric motors. You have to understand that trains have been using electric motors completely since the 1940s. Also in WW2 the German uboats used electric motors and batteries underwater. Today we have lithium batteries that go a lot farther on charge and size and weight. Also by the time these vehicles are being made better batteries may be here. Also these semi may be like the trains but a smaller motor and generator. This is how the Volt was designed. All in all we need to get away from gas and diesel engines for the drive train of vehicles and use electric motors as a traction motor which is how the Volt is designed

You’ve misread the comments. It’s not that we resist the idea of heavy trucks (or even trains) propelled by electric motors. The problem is the energy required to power those electric motors, and the severe limitation imposed by carrying energy stored onboard in batteries. How many gallons of diesel does the average long-distance semi carry? Googling a bit, according to one post “Most over the road trucks prefer to use two 150 gal tanks”. That’s 300 gallons of diesel. 1 gallon of diesel yields 40.7 kWh of energy. In cars, a BEV is about 3.5 times as energy efficient as a gasmobile. But diesel engines are more efficient than gasoline engines. If diesel engines are typically 30-35% more energy efficient than gasoline engines, then that reduces the BEV advantage to about 2.6. So, if we want that hypothetical EV semi tractor to have the range of a typical diesel semi, that means it has to carry (40.7 x 300 / 2.6 =) ~4696 kWh of batteries. The 2012 Tesla Model S85 battery pack weighed over 1200 lbs, but let’s use 1200 as our figure for this back-of-the-envelope calculation. If energy efficiency improves at 7.5% per year, that suggests, hypothetically, that… Read more »

Nice work, but you slipped a factor of 85 in there. It’s actually about 30 tons of batteries. And that much range is overkill, 600 miles is enough since drivers have to sleep (by law). At 0.3 mile/kWh that’s about 2000 kWh or about 10 tons. Still way too much.

Many trains in Europe, including TGV, are pure electric. Pantographs pull juice from wires above the track. We should wire up our highways similarly so EVs and trucks could go cross-country on grid power. Batteries will still be used locally.

Not the equivalent range of 300 gallons but 300 miles should be feasible. By the way they like 300 gallon tanks because that allow them to pump diesel where it is conveniently cheaper not because they burn 300 gallons on a single day. Such a volume of diesel would bring a semi truck 1500 miles of range. For the calculation there is another way to take into account the difference between cars and trucks. Typically where a car makes 20-30 mpg a semi truck will do five times less which is actually very good considering the weight difference. Of course aerodynamics is bad but the truck is quiet elongated and usually drives slower which helps a lot. So 4-6 mpg is rather good. If the Model S can do 300 miles with 90 KWh, it is realistic to expect an optimized semi truck to do 300 miles on a 450 KWh battery. That’s still a 3 ton battery for a relatively short 300 miles, but it is a realistic goal that should be feasible. Having swap docks each 300 miles is also realistic especially since they would be simpler because the truck hydraulics would do the moving not a sophisticated… Read more »

Phoenix Motors used to make an electric utility pick-up. It looked a bit like the old Chevy El Camino and Ford Ranchero but the Phoenix was a 4 door King cab set up. The actor Ed Begley Jr. had one back in 2008-9 era.

The company is located in Ontario, CA. They are now building commercial electric vehicles such as shuttle buses, flatbeds and electric company lineman trucks. Apparently, Phoenix no longer make the pick up.

2008-9 Pickup truck photo link:


Everything, and I mean everything, in this Part 2 master plan hinges on the following actually happening in the planned timeframe – as Elon himself says, “What REALLY matters”

“What really matters to accelerate a sustainable future is being able to scale up production volume as quickly as possible. That is why Tesla engineering has transitioned to focus heavily on designing the machine that makes the machine — turning the factory itself into a product. A first principles physics analysis of automotive production suggests that somewhere between a 5 to 10 fold improvement is achievable by version 3 on a roughly 2 year iteration cycle. The first Model 3 factory machine should be thought of as version 0.5, with version 1.0 probably in 2018.”

Conclusion – Manufacturing engineering is everything now. Tesla’s life depends on it. If Tesla can not build a high-quality Model 3 – in quantity and at a profit – by 2018, there is no part 2 master plan, other than planning whether to file Chapter 7 or Chapter 11


Oh how I wish I could have details on that machine…

The machine that builds the machine sounds like van neumann… (which funnily would fit for spacex…)

Go Elon go!

“we are young, we are free, we are going to make ourselves extinct…”

Robocalypse now!

Good to see they are focused on the right challenge. I think the Model X’s quality problems really got Musk’s attention and he now understands that they cannot happen with the Model 3.

While a Tesla pickup truck makes sense since there are more pickups sold year after year, by a nice margin, I think it’ll have a minimal effect on the pickup sales from the big three…If you aspire to own a Tesla, why would you even want a pickup version? It’s nearly guaranteed to provide far worse range and cost more than a sedan…It will most likely cost more…Trucks are very macho, people love to lift them and put on bigger tires which affect their MPG or in the case of Tesla, will effect range…They also love LOUD exhausts…With current technology I just don’t see an average F150/Silverado/Ram owner, in the market for a new truck to even look at the Tesla truck which will most likely cost twice as much and maybe get 300 miles of range for about $70K for a stripped model…

The ones that actually use it for work might (because of the economics). For the others it depends if it somehow gets to become a trend among their peers, which is hard to imagine, but you never know.

Hmmm, lots of “steak” here to ruminate on and discuss. This is the very opposite of a fluff article! “…a new kind of pickup truck” Pickups are notorious for having really awful drag. Does Tesla plan to redesign the basic shape of a pickup to make it more streamlined? I look forward to seeing just what “new kind” of pickup that Tesla designs! * * * * * “…heavy-duty trucks…” I don’t think the state of the art of li-ion batteries are anywere near advanced enough to make competitive long-distance freight trucks. But there are some possibilities: 1. Short-range heavy EV trucks, which are already being used where they operate in a very limited location, such as moving cargo in a port or freight terminal. 2. Battery swapping. I’m not the only one who has proposed that fleets of long-range heavy freight trucks could use battery swapping along fixed routes by putting battery swap stations along those routes. In practice, those would likely look a lot like freight truck weighing stations, with large parking lots for the trucks. I’m not at all sure the economics of that are yet competitive; it may be that batteries are too expensive. But one… Read more »

“New kind of pickup truck”

Maybe something like an El Camino? Not so good for off roading, but there’s no reason it couldn’t be engineered to tow and haul cargo as well as any pickup on the market.

But if any company can make an El Camino configuration sexy it is Tesla. Even the Model X, which IMO is their worst design, is among the sexiest large CUVs on the road.

The pickup truck buyers Tesla could have problems with are the ones who buy a pickup as a fashion accessory. Most don’t actually drive on dirt roads much less off-road, but their masculinity is augmented by the very idea that they could use their big truck to dominate the wilderness. They like noisy and dirty exhausts, with the extreme example being the one’s who find EVs, pull in front of them, and roll coal. It would be interesting to know how large a proportion of pickup buyers the troglodytes comprise.

Look for scraped knuckles that drag the ground as they walk…

I think, when these people find out that a Tesla pickup can destroy them off the line, it will grab their attention.

People who feel inadequately masculine and feel the need to “pump up” their self-image with a big, tough-looking “macho” pickup, aren’t going to be interested in an EV, period. There’s no point in Tesla aiming at that market, because they’ll never have much market penetration with a vehicle that doesn’t go “VROOOM!” when you press the accelerator.

Personally, I don’t think of an El Camino style as a “new” pickup design; rather an old one. But maybe that’s just me.

Obviously they won’t buy EVs, the question is how large a proportion of the truck market they are.

El Camino design is definitely old, but nothing like it is currently produced so I presume Tesla could argue it’s new. There’s not much else to do with a vehicle built around a cargo bed. Can you think of anything else?

Was hoping that they would buy up Proterra…

Fantasic news! EV trucks and SUVs will have the most immediate effect on reducing carbon emissions. Cars are easier so of course they come first, but trucks are needed by some and preferred by many, and they escape the more stringent fuel efficiency requirements of cars.

Even a CUV version of the Model 3 could be Tesla’s most potent weapon against climate change.

Commercial trucking will probably come later, but it’s not hard to imagine a rapid sea change if EV trucks can save significantly over diesel.

Of course there is also Tesla’s founder Ian Wright’s Wrightspeed which focus exclusively on commercial trucks. Very good things may come if both Tesla and Wrightspeed both compete for the same market.

Poor Kevin. Suffering so much from TES*. Take the cure, Kevin! Just sell off your Tesla stock “short” position, and get fast relief from your compulsion to post anti-Tesla FUD!

*Tesla Envy Syndrome

With up to 762 Hp, AWD, and trailer towing capability the Model X already is a truck! Why not just offer the ‘rolling chassis’ to 3rd party manufacturers to convert it to a Shuttle Bus, Motor Home, Pick-up Truck, Van, or …?

Awesome, really excited to see what the pickup will look like.. I really don’t see why everyone is so confused about how a tesla semi could even be conceivable.. Honestly if musk is announcing that they will be making a semi then he must have some method to the madness.. Besides the gigafactory is supposed to not only be the highest production factory for LION batteries but Musk has also stated that these LION’s will be some of the most advanced on the market.. Who knows what possibilities lay in that.. Technology continues to improve at a massive rate.. But if we really want to be technical why not have a tesla aerodynamic trailer to match with high capacity and additional battery storage? I think that would more then sustain for a days worth of driving.. Also higher voltage isn’t exactly ridiculous.. A lot of companies are bragging they will be able to produce very high voltage being able to recharge the full battery in a matter of 10-15min.. If a normal vehicle would charge that quickly, I’m sure that a semi with substantial amounts of battery storage (even if it needed 5 hours of charge time) would be very… Read more »