Elon Musk is a nice chap

[fourfathom]

... but even that was one failure away from the entire company failing at one point.
...Once again Tesla was very close to failure at one point.

So what?  Startups that are pushing the envelope usually face imminent failure at several points along the way to success (or failure).  The couple of successful startups I've been involved with certainly have had their precarious moments-- technical, financial, regulatory, market, personnel, etc. -- but if it had been easy someone else would have already done it.  And sometimes we fail, I've been there as well.

[mikeselectricstuff]

And one very important electric car is missing from your list: the Toyota Prius.

The Prius is not an electric car, it's just a more efficient petrol car.

[bdunham7]

Tesla has made significant in roads to global battery production capacity. Looking up the reasons given by Toyota for their lack of BEV offering I didn't see much that looked very convincing, do you have a source you can share?

I can't find the quote and I don't know if it was the CEO Toyoda or some other exec, but it basically said what I've written.  And your statement here reinforces that--Tesla is the biggest player by far in the EV battery supply market and they haven't made anywhere near 10 million vehicles.  So where would Toyota have sourced the batteries? 

[sandalcandal]

Tesla has made significant in roads to global battery production capacity. Looking up the reasons given by Toyota for their lack of BEV offering I didn't see much that looked very convincing, do you have a source you can share?

I can't find the quote and I don't know if it was the CEO Toyoda or some other exec, but it basically said what I've written.  And your statement here reinforces that--Tesla is the biggest player by far in the EV battery supply market and they haven't made anywhere near 10 million vehicles.  So where would Toyota have sourced the batteries?

Your quote seems reasonable enough so I'll take it as a statement in and of itself without attribution. So fair to say production and sale of 10M vehicles would not have been easy. As for the question of battery sourcing, if a start up in Palo Alto making luxury EVs can become the biggest player in the EV battery supply market then why couldn't Toyota who has for a long time been THE top automaker by sales? They are obviously very different companies and the risks which Toyota would have needed to undertake would probably not sit well with Toyota shareholders (part from one that are also Tesla shareholders).

Startups have the ability and expectation to take risky and unproven approaches to market problems. Some people here seem to forget this unique value. When a startup (or Elon Musk for that) tries a new idea its more about why they'll fail and no one else has done it rather than what are the practical challenges they face and how can they over come those challenges and how likely are they to succeed in over coming those challenges. It often becomes a pissing contest of trying to be a "skeptic" and take down a blurred company+problem rather than take an object view of the problem and how/if that particular company can solve that problem. It's degenerate behaviour that just makes people pissed off at a constructed "con man" (strawman) and degrades one's objective and "real" view of the world.

Not all startups are good nor are all startups destined to save the world. Most are probably doomed to fail for a variety of reasons but not all of them (in my experience very few) are "cons" or other bad faith. Nikola comes to mind as a recent example of a real dodgy venture for what could otherwise be a good solution and there was good discussion previously pointing out problems with Nikola using the technical information people were able to garner. When people start pushing misinformation, usually due to lack of fact checking, usually parroted from poor sources (like Sky/Fox News) and then those "facts" are accepted in the discussion without challenge that hugely undermines honest, constructive and truthful discourse. It's fair to try weed out the cons and fakes but predicating arguments on misrepresented information or outright lies helps nothing ...and that's why I felt the need to post. (same with that BS Common Sense Skeptic Video posted a few days ago and that BS documentary)

The topic Elon Musk definitely has issues with both rabid, delusional fans and rabid, delusional "skeptics". The many combined reasons this is has occurred could warrant a discussion on it's own (here's one reason and some others). A good discussion should present "real" facts without the emotional energy and take an objective judgement... in my opinion

Edited for emphasis.

[nctnico]

Tesla has made significant in roads to global battery production capacity. Looking up the reasons given by Toyota for their lack of BEV offering I didn't see much that looked very convincing, do you have a source you can share?

I can't find the quote and I don't know if it was the CEO Toyoda or some other exec, but it basically said what I've written.  And your statement here reinforces that--Tesla is the biggest player by far in the EV battery supply market and they haven't made anywhere near 10 million vehicles.  So where would Toyota have sourced the batteries?

Your quote seems reasonable enough so I'll take it as a statement in and of itself without attribution. So fair to say production and sale of 10M vehicles would not have been easy. As for the question of battery sourcing, if a start up in Palo Alto making luxury EVs can become the biggest player in the EV battery supply market then why couldn't Toyota who has for a long time been THE top automaker by sales? They are obviously very different companies and the risks which Toyota would have needed to undertake would probably not sit well with Toyota shareholders (part from one that are also Tesla shareholders).

You do realise that Toyota used to own Tesla shares very early on as part of a technology partner deal?

[sandalcandal]

You do realise that Toyota used to own Tesla shares very early on as part of a technology partner deal?

As did Daimler? What's your point? Do either have BEV sales higher than Tesla? Have either managed to capitalise on the BEV+PHEV market better than Tesla (globally)?
Sources:
http://ev-sales.blogspot.com/
https://insideevs.com/news/486325/world-top-ev-automotive-groups-2020/ (cleaner report using same above source)

Edit: To be fair, the investment from Toyota and Daimler, their financial contribution to Tesla's life and growth is a financial risk the companies took which has resulted in pay off, for them financially and for the world receiving Tesla products. Investment is very different to actually taking on the full risks and executing the actual plan however.

[james_s]

With the added caveat that the Toyota Prius to this day uses NiMH batteries although some tiers have lithium ion since 2015 (which is a point to make in terms of successful technology adoption). Deleting the gasoline generator and adding more batteries isn't trivial but I could stretch to agree it at least doesn't require extensive "innovation". Tesla has made significant in roads to global battery production capacity. Looking up the reasons given by Toyota for their lack of BEV offering I didn't see much that looked very convincing, do you have a source you can share?

You are also entirely entitled to choose your own car based on your own judgement. I can certainly see non-Tesla EVs being the objectively better choice for many people. I can only hope you make your purchasing decisions with intellectual honesty.

You can't just "delete the generator and add more batteries" to a Prius. It is not an EV, it is a hybrid and there is no separate gasoline generator. The electric motor-generators are integrated into the transaxle and gear ratios are achieved by controlling the relative speeds of a motor-generator and the ICE. A Prius can creep in a parking lot under full electric power but as soon as you get above a certain speed the engine fires up to accelerate the car. The ICE is integral to the package and cannot be deleted, the system could not work without it. A pure EV has a vastly different arrangement, a much larger electric motor geared directly to the wheels through a fixed ratio gearbox and the battery capacity in an EV is more than an order of magnitude greater than that of a hybrid. In a hybrid the electric motor is used to augment the torque of the engine, allowing a much smaller and more efficient engine to be used while still providing reasonable acceleration, and allowing the engine to shut off when not needed, but it is not enough to provide anything close to adequate performance on its own. They could conceivably put a fully electric powertrain into a Prius chassis but it would not be appreciably easier than making an electric version of any other car. You'd still face the challenge of finding a place for a vastly larger number of batteries.

[sandalcandal]

With the added caveat that the Toyota Prius to this day uses NiMH batteries although some tiers have lithium ion since 2015 (which is a point to make in terms of successful technology adoption). Deleting the gasoline generator and adding more batteries isn't trivial but I could stretch to agree it at least doesn't require extensive "innovation". Tesla has made significant in roads to global battery production capacity. Looking up the reasons given by Toyota for their lack of BEV offering I didn't see much that looked very convincing, do you have a source you can share?

You are also entirely entitled to choose your own car based on your own judgement. I can certainly see non-Tesla EVs being the objectively better choice for many people. I can only hope you make your purchasing decisions with intellectual honesty.

You can't just "delete the generator and add more batteries" to a Prius. It is not an EV, it is a hybrid and there is no separate gasoline generator. The electric motor-generators are integrated into the transaxle and gear ratios are achieved by controlling the relative speeds of a motor-generator and the ICE. A Prius can creep in a parking lot under full electric power but as soon as you get above a certain speed the engine fires up to accelerate the car. The ICE is integral to the package and cannot be deleted, the system could not work without it. A pure EV has a vastly different arrangement, a much larger electric motor geared directly to the wheels through a fixed ratio gearbox and the battery capacity in an EV is more than an order of magnitude greater than that of a hybrid. In a hybrid the electric motor is used to augment the torque of the engine, allowing a much smaller and more efficient engine to be used while still providing reasonable acceleration, and allowing the engine to shut off when not needed, but it is not enough to provide anything close to adequate performance on its own. They could conceivably put a fully electric powertrain into a Prius chassis but it would not be appreciably easier than making an electric version of any other car. You'd still face the challenge of finding a place for a vastly larger number of batteries.

Thanks for making point on hybrid vs BEV drivetrains. I'm aware of the differences. I did say it isn't trivial.

My admission was that making an EV isn't extensively innovative (because other companies apart from Tesla have produced competent EVs). It would have been better if you replied to the original statement coming from bdunham7:

Were the "10 million hybrid electric cars by 2017" PHEVs??

I didn't say they were.  But I would say that the Prius of any flavor is actually an EV, just not an exclusive BEV.  It is electric drive and just happens to be partly or mostly powered by a gasoline generator. Deleting the gas part and installing a ton of batteries would not really be all that innovative and Toyota has explained in detail why they didn't choose to go that route.  In short, given the limited supply of batteries, they could have made 10 million economically priced very-low-emission hybrids or maybe 500K very expensive "zero-emissions" BEVs.  Tesla's main achievement here is coming up with a large supply of batteries.

[james_s]

My point is that starting with a Prius isn't really any different than starting with any similar sized conventional ICE powered car. The electric component of the Prius hybrid drive is useless as a base for a pure EV, you'd have to start over with a whole new powertrain either way.

[nctnico]

My point is that starting with a Prius isn't really any different than starting with any similar sized conventional ICE powered car. The electric component of the Prius hybrid drive is useless as a base for a pure EV, you'd have to start over with a whole new powertrain either way.

Still governments regard hybrids as electric cars. They don't care about the practical implications of how cars are built.

[james_s]

My point is that starting with a Prius isn't really any different than starting with any similar sized conventional ICE powered car. The electric component of the Prius hybrid drive is useless as a base for a pure EV, you'd have to start over with a whole new powertrain either way.

Still governments regard hybrids as electric cars. They don't care about the practical implications of how cars are built.

Well then the governments are wrong. Hybrids are not electric cars, period. They are hybrids, they cannot be driven at all without fuel. Governments in general are not widely known for understanding technology.

[sandalcandal]

My point is that starting with a Prius isn't really any different than starting with any similar sized conventional ICE powered car. The electric component of the Prius hybrid drive is useless as a base for a pure EV, you'd have to start over with a whole new powertrain either way.

Still governments regard hybrids as electric cars. They don't care about the practical implications of how cars are built.

But we care in this discussion because it is about whether or not Telsa/Elon Musk has made "innovations" worthy of credit. Governments come in because they (CARB) had set the stage on which Tesla enabled change for tougher ZEV regulations by releasing BEVs with strong market demand.

Hybrids (PHEV or otherwise) were a compromise made by the CARB with automakers.

[sandalcandal]

My point is that starting with a Prius isn't really any different than starting with any similar sized conventional ICE powered car. The electric component of the Prius hybrid drive is useless as a base for a pure EV, you'd have to start over with a whole new powertrain either way.

Still governments regard hybrids as electric cars. They don't care about the practical implications of how cars are built.

Well then the governments are wrong. Hybrids are not electric cars, period. They are hybrids, they cannot be driven at all without fuel. Governments in general are not widely known for understanding technology.

It's not as simple as "the government is a big dumb dumb" that's not a nuanced or constructive stance to take. Look my earlier post for sources about the CARB ZEV program. Its a complex issue with corporate interests against regulatory goals mixed with consumer interests. Naturally with anything government related there's politics (and lobbyists) at play.

[bdunham7]

My point is that starting with a Prius isn't really any different than starting with any similar sized conventional ICE powered car. The electric component of the Prius hybrid drive is useless as a base for a pure EV, you'd have to start over with a whole new powertrain either way.

It would require a varying amount of modification depending on the year and model.  Prime models can already drive on electric only, so less for those.  You certainly wouldn't need to 'start over' (Toyota almost never 'starts over' btw) and there have been people that have modded Prii in this way.  I think all HSD models would be capable of full EV operation with enough batteries and very minor modifications, although the earlier models would certainly not be ideal.  Even on those, the primary reason that you need the engine at highway speeds is the very limited battery power output.  Whether Toyota would choose to reuse a modified HSD or go with an all-new EV drivetrain is anyone's guess.  In the case of the Mirai, they reused the HSD system from the Camry Hybrid, so there's no doubt that using an HSD system in an EV is workable.

Some other hybrids are similar.  The Volt, for example, is almost always purely electric drive, except for one 'supercruising' mode that engages the engine mechanically.  Fords Hybrid Drive used on the C-Max and Fusion is likewise capable of full-EV mode.

[bdunham7]

Hybrids are not electric cars, period. They are hybrids, they cannot be driven at all without fuel.

That's getting into semantics, not technology.  Is a BMW I3 w/ REX an EV?  What you call it isn't as important as how it works and what fuel it actually uses in practice.

I know people with first-gen Volts that only use enough fuel occasionally to prevent gumming up of the system.  Add Stabil, use a gallon of fuel per month, things like that.  If the ICE threw a rod, they could drain the oil and still go to work every day.  If your concern is using electricity instead of gas, they are 99% EV.

[EEVblog]

This guys has just started a (debunking) series on colonising Mars:

[eti]

Let Elon and his cars, be sent to Mars! He can enjoy EV dominance of the planet, and stay there for eternity.

[tszaboo]

Nissan Leaf 2010

Yes, and the Nissan Leaf was the best selling EV till 2019. Nissan didn't copy the Tesla, because it was in the works before the roadster came out, and the roadster was an expensive kit car built on back of a failing British car company, Lotus.
They sold half a million Leaf. Meanwhile Tesla up until 2019 was producing cars, that only few people could afford.
But as Dave also listed, he had like 10 projects, and two was sucessful of it.

My favorite now, is when he bought a billion dollar Bitcoin, just to realize that a single transfer costs  910 KWh energy (not a typo) and to realize thats not very green. So he dropped a tweet, and all the sheep that are hanging by every words of Jobs and Musks and other Techno-Jesus (that never had to do real engineering in their entire life)  started selling like crazy, market cap dropped by about 150 Billion dollars.

[sandalcandal]

This guys has just started a (debunking) series on colonising Mars:

I have low hopes that guy has any better info than the last time one of their videos was posted and I fact checked it. https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/elon-musks-vegas-loop-debunking/msg3557594/#msg3557594
That channel as the same off sense of sensationalist "skepticism" as thunderfoot. https://www.eevblog.com/forum/dodgy-technology/its-2020-sf-to-la-for-$25-on-elon-musks-hyperloop-are-you-buying-it/msg3327712/#msg3327712

[sandalcandal]

[DELETED]

If you have something useful to say then say it. I never said anything is the end of the line, I'm referencing previous writing and bringing it forward for people to respond to. No need to try laughable childish attempts at provocation.

Edit: deleted quote of deleted post

[eti]

It's ADORABLE when random members of the public come along and proclaim they've "fact checked" something... therefore their "fact checking" is the end of the line, therefore no other discourse will be entered into. LOL.

"Butttt I debunked it!"


 

If you have something useful to say then say it. I never said anything is the end of the line, I'm referencing previous writing and bringing it forward for people to respond to. No need to try laughable childish attempts at provocation.

You're right, and I am sorry; it was not called for, so I removed my post.

[sandalcandal]

[DELETED]

If you have something useful to say then say it. I never said anything is the end of the line, I'm referencing previous writing and bringing it forward for people to respond to. No need to try laughable childish attempts at provocation.

You're right, and I am sorry; it was not called for, so I removed my post.

You have restored an ounce of my respect.

Edit: I hope you reflect on this and conduct yourself better in future. I've deleted quotes of the deleted post.
Also I think I'll take a break from this thread.

[EEVblog]

People here keep saying Tesla cars were absolutely nothing new, do you even remember or know how EVs were designed before Tesla stepped up to the plate? Horrible, ugly, weak and slow little cars with poor range (sound like a familiar description of EVs?). They were cars that all but a select few would want for environmental reasons let alone practical reasons.

Err, they filled a niche just like the Tesla did.
100km of range was enough for plenty of daily usage scenarios.
Telsa didn't have the range because it was better engineered or had magical new technology, it simply cost a crap load more because it has a ton more batteries and was designed for a different market. Tesla's were and still are firming in the luxury car catgeory, screw the cost. Even the Model 3 barely scraps in under the Australian luxury car tax threshold.

Edit: To be clear, there was a lot of good work and products done by other mostly Asian car makers but particularly for the US market and regulation/politics in the US, Tesla has made a massive impact. Which is probably why there's so much marketing (propaganda) against Tesla.

Tesla have made a huge impact for sure, especially in the US market (helped by the government). But I'm also sure the EV revolution would have happened without them, just maybe not at the same pace.

[Psi]

One of the reasons people like Elon is that he spends time down on the factory floor to actually solve technical issues and improving processes. It's extremely uncommon for the CEO of a big company to get their hands dirty like that.
They're usually either having meetings with top-level managers or on holiday somewhere enjoying their piles of money.

Is also uncommon for CEO's to have actual engineering skills and science/physics qualifications, having a business degree is much more common.

[EEVblog]

One of the reasons people like Elon is that he spends time down on the factory floor to actually solve technical issues and improving processes. It's extremely uncommon for the CEO of a big company to get their hands dirty like that.
They're usually either having meetings with top-level managers or on holiday somewhere enjoying their piles of money.

There is name for that "management by walking around" and it was pioneed by Bill & Dave from HP.
Reminds me of the former Altium CEO/founder Nick Martin, and the software industry equivalent. It was not uncommon to come into work in the morning to find your code or project had been modified by Nick at 1am in the morning.