Internal documents reveal the grueling way Tesla hit its 5,000 Model 3 target(thisisinsider.com)
thisisinsider.com
Internal documents reveal the grueling way Tesla hit its 5,000 Model 3 target
https://www.thisisinsider.com/tesla-hit-model-3-target-by-reworking-thousands-of-cars-2018-8
177 comments
The article hasn't described the root cause but Musk had hinted at it in one of the interviews. I think what happened was that when gigafactory started, they had this huge vision of complete end-to-end automated assembly. So there were robots designed for each portions of assembly, including some robots which were supposed to operate in inperfect situations through vision data, for example, locating a dangling hose, grasping it and connecting it within a car. The big learning was that robotic functions that operated in uncertain environment, relied on vision and tried to perform manipulation tasks failed big time to do the job consistently. Musk mentioned that human would pick up a gangling hose and connect to its expected position effortlessly in a second while a robot will fumble around and dig in to car even damaging it. In past few months, I think they have put a lot many more humans at work turning in to more traditional way of assembly, although more automated than other car manufacturers.
37 minutes of rework per car doesn't sound like very much. It would be interesting to know what fraction of the total time that is.
37 minutes * 4300 cars = 2,651 hours of work.
2,651 hours/week * $30/hour = ~$80k/week. on a volume of cars that brings in $200m/week. so what? its a minor inefficiency.
[deleted]
not really. each rework is the equivalent of a branching prediction failure in a very very long cpu pipeline.
all tasks are massively parallelized in a production line. to reach 5000 car month tesla need to crank a car every seven minutes.
now imagine a production line that pump a car out every seven minutes and you need 37 minutes manual labor for each of them
the inefficence doesn't look so minor. it's also a logisticsl nightmare, just imagine parking all those cars while the rework stations free up.
all tasks are massively parallelized in a production line. to reach 5000 car month tesla need to crank a car every seven minutes.
now imagine a production line that pump a car out every seven minutes and you need 37 minutes manual labor for each of them
the inefficence doesn't look so minor. it's also a logisticsl nightmare, just imagine parking all those cars while the rework stations free up.
In the time it takes one person to do the 37 minutes of rework you have taken 5 more cars off the line.
So 6 mechanics in 6 bays at the end of the line do the rework jobs and cars continue to flow out of the plant one every 7 minutes.
An extra $20 in COGS per car. Is this really so horrible? What am I missing?
Even if it’s 10 mechanics and 10 drivers moving cars into and out of the bays, with some bays idle some of the time and let’s call it an extra $60 in COGS.
Their gross margin is already way better than anyone expected to see on the Model 3, they used some very impressive electrical design to save in so many places.
Even just their rear view mirror is more than $50 cheaper than the competition’s mirrors because of their smart electrical design. [1]
Right now they need volume more than anything else. Speaking as a reservation holder.
[1] - https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-solidly-profitable-s...
So 6 mechanics in 6 bays at the end of the line do the rework jobs and cars continue to flow out of the plant one every 7 minutes.
An extra $20 in COGS per car. Is this really so horrible? What am I missing?
Even if it’s 10 mechanics and 10 drivers moving cars into and out of the bays, with some bays idle some of the time and let’s call it an extra $60 in COGS.
Their gross margin is already way better than anyone expected to see on the Model 3, they used some very impressive electrical design to save in so many places.
Even just their rear view mirror is more than $50 cheaper than the competition’s mirrors because of their smart electrical design. [1]
Right now they need volume more than anything else. Speaking as a reservation holder.
[1] - https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-solidly-profitable-s...
> What am I missing?
just on top on my mind tooling, factory space, training, burnout, turns, above average defects that will have to be handled by the post sales network.
> they used some very impressive electrical design
oh yes they are brilliant car, no question about that. it's less impressive when you get an engineering marvel and the build quality is random depending on the hands that worked on it in post processing.
just on top on my mind tooling, factory space, training, burnout, turns, above average defects that will have to be handled by the post sales network.
> they used some very impressive electrical design
oh yes they are brilliant car, no question about that. it's less impressive when you get an engineering marvel and the build quality is random depending on the hands that worked on it in post processing.
> the inefficence doesn't look so minor. it's also a logisticsl nightmare, just imagine parking all those cars while the rework stations free up.
To park a car every seven minutes? Maybe one extra full time employee?
To park a car every seven minutes? Maybe one extra full time employee?
> logisticsl
(and btw it's 3x that because full time still only means 8 hours a day)
(and btw it's 3x that because full time still only means 8 hours a day)
Per employee doing rework. To complete tasks which involve taking pieces off and putting them back on in ~30 minutes, you're probably looking at up to 10 people (for example, changing a bushing on a Mercedes that requires the complete disassembly of the rear of the car is around 6 hours of labor).
As a point of comparison, large car manufacturers get into the "how much would a lawsuit and recall cost" when discussing adding costs of $4-$5 per car.
As a point of comparison, large car manufacturers get into the "how much would a lawsuit and recall cost" when discussing adding costs of $4-$5 per car.
Per [0] it seems like line workers make ~$20/hr, so that's over $50,000 per week to fix the cars, not including the cost of parts or associated delays. It's only about $12 per car, but for Tesla I imagine every dollar counts.
[0]: https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Tesla/salaries?location=US%2FCA%2...
[0]: https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Tesla/salaries?location=US%2FCA%2...
That's assuming the cost of labor is the only operating factor here. There are assumedly parts, factory operation, other opportunity costs at play here.
Also, since Tesla has all of these cars under warranty themselves, if they do have issues after delivery, which quality control problems like this usually indicate it can really blow through their margins quickly.
Also, since Tesla has all of these cars under warranty themselves, if they do have issues after delivery, which quality control problems like this usually indicate it can really blow through their margins quickly.
It's a bit more than the output from a single person in a year. You just have to hire 2 more guys and you're good.
It takes 9 months to make a baby. You can't get 9 women and produce a baby in a month.
2 new guys don't have a year to rework 4300 cars.
2 new guys don't have a year to rework 4300 cars.
So basically one full time employee for a year.
It depends on what parts need rework. It may not be doable by one employee.
If it's $80K a week, isn't that more like ~50 full-time employees for a year?
Oh I didn't realize it was per week. You're right.
No, but if 85% of cars need it that adds up fast.
Is this expected to be how things are going to go for the foreseeable future? If the situation is improved quickly, I don't see how this matters at all.
They made a big deal about their push and how they made the number of cars they said they would (finally).
Now we find out that there was an asterisk to that. The cars weren’t ready for sale without lots of manual rework.
It makes their statement/accomplishment look much worse than they tried to play it.
“85% of cars need manual fixes” is not a good look for any automaker. But it’s especially bad for one that there are lots of questions about who tried to use that goal as proof they were last their issues.
Now we find out that there was an asterisk to that. The cars weren’t ready for sale without lots of manual rework.
It makes their statement/accomplishment look much worse than they tried to play it.
“85% of cars need manual fixes” is not a good look for any automaker. But it’s especially bad for one that there are lots of questions about who tried to use that goal as proof they were last their issues.
As noted in other comments, other major carmakers can complete a car in about 1-3 minutes, not including customization tasks like painting.
So 37 minutes of rework per vehicle means that they're less than 5% as efficient as their competitors, despite the massive investments they've made their factory line. It's indicative of serious production issues and will be a major roadblock to scaling future production, since it means that if they don't solve the production issues leading to the rework, then they would need to spend 20x what their competitors to achieve the same volume of production.
EDIT: The 3 minutes is time-between cars. Each car takes 17-18 hours to get through the entire line. So 37 additional minutes is still pretty bad, but it's not 20x as inefficient on a time-basis. However, given the number of workers at the Tesla factory, they are still 20x as inefficient on a labor basis.
So 37 minutes of rework per vehicle means that they're less than 5% as efficient as their competitors, despite the massive investments they've made their factory line. It's indicative of serious production issues and will be a major roadblock to scaling future production, since it means that if they don't solve the production issues leading to the rework, then they would need to spend 20x what their competitors to achieve the same volume of production.
EDIT: The 3 minutes is time-between cars. Each car takes 17-18 hours to get through the entire line. So 37 additional minutes is still pretty bad, but it's not 20x as inefficient on a time-basis. However, given the number of workers at the Tesla factory, they are still 20x as inefficient on a labor basis.
Are you sure? Not a production expert, but it sounds to me like this is a confusion of 'complete a car every 1-3 minutes' and 'complete a car in 1-3 minutes' They are two very different things, and I'm quite sure that no one is completing entire cars in 1-3 minutes.
That's pipelined time, not per-car time. Just because a car is produced every 3 minutes does not mean it takes 3 minutes to produce - that would be incredible.
It's not bad at all, because it is only needed once until the bug is fixed. It's only a wrong manual task, so fixing this task sounds even trivial.
The problem is that it's not one particular problem with the assembly of the car--it's many problems that all need manual fixing. ("Manual task" in Teslaspeak refers to any task performed by a human on the line, not to any particular task.)
Exactly.
Tesla says they pay $25/hour at Gigafactory, glassdoor says they’re paying $17-$22 hours to manufacturing workers.
I’m not into manufacturing, but extra $10-15, for a car with starting price $35k, looks normal.
Tesla says they pay $25/hour at Gigafactory, glassdoor says they’re paying $17-$22 hours to manufacturing workers.
I’m not into manufacturing, but extra $10-15, for a car with starting price $35k, looks normal.
It's also fixing a manual part, not an already automated part. Remember, Tesla has a much higher automation factor than everyone else, esp. to get the quality up and costs down in the end.
Fixing just this failing manual part is not the drama the competitors are declaring. Tesla also needed this artificial 5.000 number to reach their mandatory milestone.
Fixing just this failing manual part is not the drama the competitors are declaring. Tesla also needed this artificial 5.000 number to reach their mandatory milestone.
[deleted]
I can't stop myself thinking that this looks like short seller's propaganda. Producing a new car require adjustments in the process. This info tells me the feedback loop is in full swing to enhance production quality. I fully understand why Elon Musk wants to make Tesla a private company again.
Short seller's activity is toxic for the US industry. Allowing to make profit on other peoples failure is a good recipe to pull down an economy. Good luck with that.
Short seller's activity is toxic for the US industry. Allowing to make profit on other peoples failure is a good recipe to pull down an economy. Good luck with that.
I think you're being a bit too sensitive. I agree with you - building a whole new production line, and Tesla's share holders understand that too. This is just more information for those shareholders. It's important that there's accurate information about Tesla's manufacturing process for the market to correctly value the stock. It's no more objectionable for short sellers to emphasise bad news to drive the stock down than it is for Tesla to emphasise good news to drive it up.
Ideally, information should be objective. The efforts and pressures should go toward this goal.
What you say, if I understood correctly, is that it is normal to have disinformation news and that they will cancel themselves out. Unfortunately, information doesn't add up like numbers.
What you say, if I understood correctly, is that it is normal to have disinformation news and that they will cancel themselves out. Unfortunately, information doesn't add up like numbers.
If this impacts the total time to make each car, wouldn't that impact your production volume? It seems weird that something that should make you slower is what allows you to hit your target? Unless they're saying the target doesn't take this into account -- which would just seem stupid.
I think what it means is that they gave up on correcting the automation process in favor of just pumping out cars and fixing them up manually. The former having longer-term benefits, but stalling car production until its complete. In other words, they just threw more bodies at the problem to get it out asap
If your production line has 10 machines that break the car windscreen, the long-term most efficient thing would be to fix those 10 machines.
But that'll take time, and in the short term putting a guy at the end of the line replacing all the windscreens gets cars out the door today.
But that'll take time, and in the short term putting a guy at the end of the line replacing all the windscreens gets cars out the door today.
Classic case of throughput (i.e., how many cars are completed per month) v. latency (i.e., how long it takes one car from start to end) — the targets are almost always about throughput and not latency.
I think the title "Tesla hit Model 3 target by reworking thousands of cars" should be read as "Tesla hit Model 3 target by not only producing the cars, but also reworking them in time".
It's confusing, I prefer the article's headline "Internal documents reveal the grueling way Tesla hit its 5,000 Model 3 target" (the submission title is from the URL)
It's confusing, I prefer the article's headline "Internal documents reveal the grueling way Tesla hit its 5,000 Model 3 target" (the submission title is from the URL)
I'm wondering if what they're saying is that there was a large enough quantity of to-be-reworked assemblies from a prior week that reworking them and calling them done gave them enough "completed" vehicles to put them over the target for a later week.
It's not that it affected the time to make each car, it's that a large majority of the cars needed to have some issue addressed after they were manufactured (86% according to the article).
Tesla was always accused of some chicanery when they claimed to hit a 5000/week of "factory gated" cars -- a term they had never used before. Also, last quarter, they had more than 10,000 cars "in transit" between the factory and delivery, which they didn't fully explain how much re-work might be needed on before a customer can accept delivery. It's part of a pattern of a company being misleading with its metrics.
So what? They talk about it like it is a bad thing.
Their cars work, they met their target, who cares about the details of the manufacturing process? Yes, there is room for improvement, there is always room for improvement, I let the guys at Tesla deal with their priorities.
It is a nice insight on how things are done at Tesla but that's about it.
Their cars work, they met their target, who cares about the details of the manufacturing process? Yes, there is room for improvement, there is always room for improvement, I let the guys at Tesla deal with their priorities.
It is a nice insight on how things are done at Tesla but that's about it.
High rework rates are indicative of overall quality issues. Issues caught and flagged for rework are the obvious ones, not all of the defects.
A high rework rate is a huge red flag for at-scale manufacturing and says that something is wrong.
It seems like this should be obvious. How healthy is a software engineering environment where 80% of the commits fail at the tail end of the development pipeline and require fixes? I’ve never seen an org that bad.
A high rework rate is a huge red flag for at-scale manufacturing and says that something is wrong.
It seems like this should be obvious. How healthy is a software engineering environment where 80% of the commits fail at the tail end of the development pipeline and require fixes? I’ve never seen an org that bad.
Quality issues? Hmm, possibly related to bumpers falling off in rain.
>High rework rates are indicative of overall quality issues
Maybe, maybe not. We can look at the actual quality of the new cars instead of trying to guess.
Maybe, maybe not. We can look at the actual quality of the new cars instead of trying to guess.
There are two numbers at play here: the frequency of production mistakes, and the percentage of mistakes that get caught and reworked.
The high rework rate could be because they catch a lot of mistakes. That would clearly be a good thing. But given what we actually observe from their cars it seems more likely that they catch mistakes with an average success rate but produce more mistakes than normal. That means both more rework, and lower quality because of all the uncaught mistakes.
The high rework rate could be because they catch a lot of mistakes. That would clearly be a good thing. But given what we actually observe from their cars it seems more likely that they catch mistakes with an average success rate but produce more mistakes than normal. That means both more rework, and lower quality because of all the uncaught mistakes.
Everyone seems up in arms but this is the only point I'm making.
> We can look at the actual quality of the new cars instead of trying to guess.
A lot of people have declined their Model 3's at the dealerships due to issues, even knowing that means they go back onto the wait list.
There are tons of threads about this issue on the Tesla Reddit forums. Less so for Tesla's other vehicles.
A lot of people have declined their Model 3's at the dealerships due to issues, even knowing that means they go back onto the wait list.
There are tons of threads about this issue on the Tesla Reddit forums. Less so for Tesla's other vehicles.
If you've ever done work on the dash you'll know that it never goes back on "just right" there is always a little bit of extra rattle introduced. A lot of the body is designed for one way assembly. Rework inevetably is lower quality than manufactured right the first time.
That’s not how quality assessment works. You don’t assess something as having a high observed defect rate and then conclude that the likely situation is that non-observed defects are rare or dismiss the implication as “well maybe not.”
These issues are important because who cares about the quality of their cars if Tesla goes out of business.
And you can’t sustain profitability with this level of rework.
And you can’t sustain profitability with this level of rework.
Weren't Teslas creating a reputation of being unreliable over the last few years? I remember seeing a lot of stories on HN of people trying to get their teslas fixed, and how sometimes it would take months.
Previously Tesla manufactured low volume luxury models. People who buy those want the performance and style and just accept that the car needs more repair. Tesla also paid huge sum per car for repairs/recalls and recall insurance. I think the total was something like $2000 per car.
Model 3 is completely different beast. If they succeed manufacturing it 5000, then 10,000 per week, the quality must be up if they want to make money.
Model 3 is completely different beast. If they succeed manufacturing it 5000, then 10,000 per week, the quality must be up if they want to make money.
That's generally due to parts availability (and is still an issue for lots of folks).
For instance, mine had body damage from a road hazard - not an issue of quality, but definitely needing repair. It took a few weeks before the parts were available.
As you can imagine, if your car isn't drivable in the interim that's a big pain and rental bill, but if it is drivable then you just have to wait longer.
For instance, mine had body damage from a road hazard - not an issue of quality, but definitely needing repair. It took a few weeks before the parts were available.
As you can imagine, if your car isn't drivable in the interim that's a big pain and rental bill, but if it is drivable then you just have to wait longer.
There's definitely a number of anecdotes about Model 3 quality that hasn't been positive. Also, the insurance rates, and overall lemon reports haven't been positive either.
No, my brother in law works in vehicle manufacturing and rework at the end of the line is a bad thing to be avoided. To fix issues they often have to take parts of the car apart and they're often not put back in precisely the same location.
Manufacturing rate is one measure of success. First Pass Yield (FPY - % of cars that don't require rework) is another. It seems like Tesla is sacrificing the latter in service of the former, or at least they were towards the end of Q2. I want to see Tesla succeed, but it seems like they really need to focus on increasing FPY in order to improve their long-term odds of success.
First Pass Yield (FPY - % of cars that don't require rework) is another
I get that, but isn't it expected that if you create a new car factory, sort of from scratch, your FPY won't be exceptionally high? Unless you really know what you're doing due to previous experience in car manufacturing?
I get that, but isn't it expected that if you create a new car factory, sort of from scratch, your FPY won't be exceptionally high? Unless you really know what you're doing due to previous experience in car manufacturing?
> Unless you really know what you're doing due to previous experience in car manufacturing?
If you hire the right people you will have that expertise.
If you hire the right people you will have that expertise.
Wouldn’t you learn how to properly manufacture a car before trying to release it at scale ?
To learn to build it is one thing; you could have a dozen highly trained engineers assemble it at their leisure and have a near perfect car every time. But to build the same car at scale on a production line is going to be an entirely different kettle of fish, with all new lessons to be learnt.
It seems to me that it would be an entertaining albeit high pressure job/problem sorting that out. You would of course try to engineer as much of the solution ahead of time, but in production scenarios, shit most definitely happens.
It seems to me that it would be an entertaining albeit high pressure job/problem sorting that out. You would of course try to engineer as much of the solution ahead of time, but in production scenarios, shit most definitely happens.
What makes FPY an important factor seperate from manufacturing rate? (if we assume a car is manufactured once it is ready to ship)
Of course it impacts your manufacturing rate, since anything not passing on first pass needs rework and possibly additional parts, making logistics more difficult etc. But all of that just influences manufacturing rate and cost per vehicle.
Of course it impacts your manufacturing rate, since anything not passing on first pass needs rework and possibly additional parts, making logistics more difficult etc. But all of that just influences manufacturing rate and cost per vehicle.
In the Toyota / lean-theory rework is the start of an near-exponential process where different tasks are waiting for the other to be completed ad infinitum. If you've ever worked at an old-school firm you'll recognize this: the quality of your input, a colleagues output (say, a dataset) is sub-par, so you start checking it regularly. If it falls short to your standards, you ask for a new set and wait. He does his work again, and you restart your task and start checking his work even before you start your real work. That's a lot of time ill spent.
Multiply that over departments and many processes and the result is great inefficiency. So FPY is the KPI to stop all that. FPY is not really valuable by itself, but hopefully by the culture it supports. Swapping FPY for # delivered is false management and points to cultural issues. In this case: managing by the wrong target (# delivered instead of the "total worth of the value chain").
Nobody would care if Tesla would just deliver growing amounts of cars at falling costs. It's the bootstrapping (in the Baron of M-sense) towards false metrics that gets the poison going and management is totally working within that frame of mind. They should find their own frame, and operational excellence just might be one. (Apologies for the MBA bs-bingo, but in this case I think it's to the point.)
Multiply that over departments and many processes and the result is great inefficiency. So FPY is the KPI to stop all that. FPY is not really valuable by itself, but hopefully by the culture it supports. Swapping FPY for # delivered is false management and points to cultural issues. In this case: managing by the wrong target (# delivered instead of the "total worth of the value chain").
Nobody would care if Tesla would just deliver growing amounts of cars at falling costs. It's the bootstrapping (in the Baron of M-sense) towards false metrics that gets the poison going and management is totally working within that frame of mind. They should find their own frame, and operational excellence just might be one. (Apologies for the MBA bs-bingo, but in this case I think it's to the point.)
Telsa really should aspire to Toyota levels of efficiency, but you also have to account for the fact that Toyota has had decades of experience as well as a stable and long-term relationship with their parts suppliers. Stopping the line and reconfiguring that plant in a Toyota plant is likely a minor rework for efficiency. But when a model and line and entire system is all new, a stoppage might not be a small rework despite best efforts to have arranged for it to be so ahead of time. Even the timeline and difficulty to setup a new Toyota plant vs a new Tesla plant aren't really comparable, because Toyota also has and excellent and stable set of design practices and supplier relationships. If two to three years from now, the rework ratio hasn't dropped considerably then Tesla is doing something wrong, but right now I think it's understandable that Tesla is just getting on it's legs wrt truly mass production. You always have to learn new things at each order of magnitude of production - even with products and methods that have been successful at the previous production level.
A thought: We're at a point in time where Toyota employees and management (and many other manufacturers' employees and management) have that experience. This experience is not something that has to be learned with every new iteration of the car production line - it's something that can quite literally be bought.
The question that follows on: What internal process has prevented that experience from being bought? Instead Tesla seems to have opted to gain that experience from scratch at great cost to investors (and consumers).
The question that follows on: What internal process has prevented that experience from being bought? Instead Tesla seems to have opted to gain that experience from scratch at great cost to investors (and consumers).
Some expertise can be bought, but some of the support is built over time, intrinsically outside the factory into the overall Toyota system. But ironically, thinking one can just buy an expert is to apply the same short-term mentality to the process that Tesla is accused of misapplying to product.
When Toyota first started creating their own US factories, they took the steps of shipping floor employees in the US to japan a few at a time and working for weeks of training each class. When other auto companies tried to replicate Toyota processes in their own factories, it didn't help yield in the factories in many cases because often the input supplies needed so much rework. And then they had problems changing suppliers configurations because those relationships were contentious, and not of the nature of Toyota to it's suppliers. When you're trying to stand the whole system up at once, it's not just a matter of "don't write bugs" in one part of the final assembly.
When Boeing reworked it's production design process for the 787, they had years of production problems to re-iron out, despite having years of great process experience previously.
When Toyota first started creating their own US factories, they took the steps of shipping floor employees in the US to japan a few at a time and working for weeks of training each class. When other auto companies tried to replicate Toyota processes in their own factories, it didn't help yield in the factories in many cases because often the input supplies needed so much rework. And then they had problems changing suppliers configurations because those relationships were contentious, and not of the nature of Toyota to it's suppliers. When you're trying to stand the whole system up at once, it's not just a matter of "don't write bugs" in one part of the final assembly.
When Boeing reworked it's production design process for the 787, they had years of production problems to re-iron out, despite having years of great process experience previously.
The problem here seems to be that they seem to be striving for significantly short term goals, like meeting production targets, rather than really doing the work change the entire system and culture to one that would focus more on quality.
That doesn't really bode well for their future if they consider their current production rates that imminently important to their success.
That doesn't really bode well for their future if they consider their current production rates that imminently important to their success.
But who is going to give them money to shut down the production line again and retool everything to increase FPY? And will they do it again when more issues are found?
Isn't swapping FPY for # delivered while they determine the root of the issue and fix it a good plan? It keeps the money flowing in, it helps them find other issues in parallel, and keeps cars getting delivered.
I see a lot of people critisizing Tesla here, but my question is what would you do? You are already in a situation where your plant is producing cars with flaws, no pretending that you don't make mistakes or are infallible and would never be there.
Garbage is flying off the line, what is the solution that you would go with that is better than what Tesla is currently doing?
Isn't swapping FPY for # delivered while they determine the root of the issue and fix it a good plan? It keeps the money flowing in, it helps them find other issues in parallel, and keeps cars getting delivered.
I see a lot of people critisizing Tesla here, but my question is what would you do? You are already in a situation where your plant is producing cars with flaws, no pretending that you don't make mistakes or are infallible and would never be there.
Garbage is flying off the line, what is the solution that you would go with that is better than what Tesla is currently doing?
Agree. FPY might not be the metric fitting the current status of the company best. It's all situation-dependent. FPY of 14% is clearly unsustainable though. That's because quality is not one or zero, but a continuum. So what's the SPY, TPY, etc.
Yeah, i'd love to hear final numbers on how many have issues once in the hands of customers, or what kind of issues they are fixing, or how long they plan on having this "manual" patch in place.
Without that information, it seems kind of silly seeing everyone proclaim how Tesla is done because of this... It's like telling your doctor that you don't want the medicine because the better solution is to just never get sick in the first place... yeah, everyone agrees, but you are sick, so here take this.
Without that information, it seems kind of silly seeing everyone proclaim how Tesla is done because of this... It's like telling your doctor that you don't want the medicine because the better solution is to just never get sick in the first place... yeah, everyone agrees, but you are sick, so here take this.
> But who is going to give them money to shut down the production line again and retool everything to increase FPY?
I imagine that it's significantly cheaper to fix the problem (and identify a root cause) when the car is still in pieces than to disassemble the finished product to fix the problem.
As for re-tooling, that can be done down the line with a manual fix in place in the short term (after all, they're able to fix it manually after the assembly line is completed).
Much like how in software development it's cheaper and faster to fix a bug caught in development than it is in production.
I imagine that it's significantly cheaper to fix the problem (and identify a root cause) when the car is still in pieces than to disassemble the finished product to fix the problem.
As for re-tooling, that can be done down the line with a manual fix in place in the short term (after all, they're able to fix it manually after the assembly line is completed).
Much like how in software development it's cheaper and faster to fix a bug caught in development than it is in production.
Yes, but if you find a bug in development and you are days away from shipping, and you have a solution that fixes the problem but doesn't address the root cause, are you going to delay the whole launch so you can fix it before hand? or are you going to release with the patch, and fix the root cause later?
Now software is different than cars, but I'm gonna say that I'd go for the latter just about every time. Both as a developer, and as a user.
Now software is different than cars, but I'm gonna say that I'd go for the latter just about every time. Both as a developer, and as a user.
> all of that just influences manufacturing rate and cost per vehicle.
It seems like you answered your own question? These are really important for a company that's trying to make money.
It seems like you answered your own question? These are really important for a company that's trying to make money.
Unless it's found that it's cheaper and faster to crank out the cars with a poor FPY, and fix most of them up afterwards.
Especially if the problems are known problems. If a specific step needs a person or 2 to fix a problem on 90% of cars, but afterwords it works 100% of the time, what's the issue? Changing that step to fix that problem might introduce other issues, or cause problems with the supply chain, or could possibly just not work.
Hiring a few extra people to fix the problem that you know about in order to keep moving forward not only gives you the time to really design and think about a "proper" solution, but also keeps the money flowing in.
Especially if the problems are known problems. If a specific step needs a person or 2 to fix a problem on 90% of cars, but afterwords it works 100% of the time, what's the issue? Changing that step to fix that problem might introduce other issues, or cause problems with the supply chain, or could possibly just not work.
Hiring a few extra people to fix the problem that you know about in order to keep moving forward not only gives you the time to really design and think about a "proper" solution, but also keeps the money flowing in.
Its not cheaper, and it won't result in better quality. Any time rework is done outside of the normal process it is a big deal. There are whole organizations meant to make sure things like that happen as little as possible.
It seems significantly cheaper than stopping production to fix the initial problem, test it, ensure it doesn't cause any other problems, ensure it doesn't upset the supply chain, ensure it is reliable, and more.
Yeah, it is cheaper than stopping the world. It is much more expensive than not making the mistake in the first place. So much so that I would guess that Tesla is losing money on each car that they had to rework. And remember, Tesla had so many production issues that they _did_ have to stop the world and move into a tent of all places.
You think Tesla is losing money because of 37 minutes per car that needs rework? Roughly $15 per car of labor?
Not making the mistake in the first place isn't possible at this point... Your options here are "stop everything and fix it at the source, burning piles of cash every second it's down" or "hire some workers to spend 37 minutes per car to fix these known issue while you work on solving them at the root".
And going with option 1 seems like a fast track to bankruptcy.
Not making the mistake in the first place isn't possible at this point... Your options here are "stop everything and fix it at the source, burning piles of cash every second it's down" or "hire some workers to spend 37 minutes per car to fix these known issue while you work on solving them at the root".
And going with option 1 seems like a fast track to bankruptcy.
Do you know how long it takes to build an entire vehicle? If its 60 hours, then 37 minutes probably isn't breaking, but if its 8 hours, then that 37 minutes is 7.5% of a vehicle's construction time. If Tesla is wasting 7.5% of its time fixing defects, its running at at least 7.5% less than peak efficiency, and if margins are less than 7.5%, that does indeed mean that the vehicles are being produced at a loss.
I'm sorry but that math makes no sense at all... It's a matter of throughput vs latency.
Who cares if it takes an extra 37 minutes per car, if they can maintain the same throughput, it won't matter a single bit (except possibly someone having to wait an extra 37 minutes to get their car...)
The extra time spent on manufacturing has as much to do with margins as the delivery truck getting stuck in traffic does. As long as it's not holding anything up, then there isn't an issue.
And it sounds to me like this is a temporary solutions while they fix the root cause, which seems like a really goddamn good idea vs just shutting the whole operation down and giving up.
Who cares if it takes an extra 37 minutes per car, if they can maintain the same throughput, it won't matter a single bit (except possibly someone having to wait an extra 37 minutes to get their car...)
The extra time spent on manufacturing has as much to do with margins as the delivery truck getting stuck in traffic does. As long as it's not holding anything up, then there isn't an issue.
And it sounds to me like this is a temporary solutions while they fix the root cause, which seems like a really goddamn good idea vs just shutting the whole operation down and giving up.
Exactly, it's a question of capital costs vs burn.
If you need say 100 million in hardware and 1,000$ in manpower to build a car then spending an extra 100$ in manpower is cheap even * (5,000 * 0.14) = 70k per week. Meanwhile you might be paying 70k per hour the line's stopped.
Granted, you don't want to wait a full year to fix a production issue, but you can batch things so you are fixing several parts of the line at the same time. And if one of those batched fixes was not 100% correct but is re-workable then you can wait another few weeks for the next batch of fixes.
Conversely, if you where producing 50,000 cars per week then rework costs go up and shutting things down quickly to make a minor fix is more viable.
If you need say 100 million in hardware and 1,000$ in manpower to build a car then spending an extra 100$ in manpower is cheap even * (5,000 * 0.14) = 70k per week. Meanwhile you might be paying 70k per hour the line's stopped.
Granted, you don't want to wait a full year to fix a production issue, but you can batch things so you are fixing several parts of the line at the same time. And if one of those batched fixes was not 100% correct but is re-workable then you can wait another few weeks for the next batch of fixes.
Conversely, if you where producing 50,000 cars per week then rework costs go up and shutting things down quickly to make a minor fix is more viable.
Making up numbers isn't helpful here. TFA says the average is 37 minutes/car. I am not sure where you get the $15 from, but usually manufacturing companies have an internal hourly rate for different stations within the plant. For example, the machine shop at the last company I worked for was ~$400/hour. Further, it is likely that there is also significant material cost associated w/ these reworks. Given that the model 3 is a low cost vehicle, it is probably also pretty low margin (I haven't looked). I would guess that this means that they are selling the model 3 at a loss, especially if you throw in the costs for the recent retooling.
I got the $15 from other areas that have said the cost of labor is roughly $30/hr for stuff like this.
But regardless, if you really think a 37 minute fix is costing them enough that it means they are selling the car for a loss, then I can see why people are upset by this news, as it means that shutting down the entire plant would make more financial sense than selling at a loss.
But since we are both working from a guess of a guess of a guess, I'm fairly certain that an extra 37 minutes per car of work isn't eating over 100% of their profits, and that their choice of not stopping production over small fixable issues is a smart choice. And even if it were, i'd argue that keeping your workforce from getting other jobs because they can't get work at your company while you endlessly tinker with the production lines to try and achieve what only a few companies in existence have done before (almost 100% FPY) isn't good business sense either...
But then you want to throw in the cost of tooling changes, and now this conversation isn't against the cost of a car, but the entire cashflow of the business, which if you are curious you can lookup. They aren't turning a profit, and nobody thinks they are yet. But if people are holding them to the ability to get everything right on the very first try and the second there is an issue to shut down again, then they are going to be disappointed regardless.
But regardless, if you really think a 37 minute fix is costing them enough that it means they are selling the car for a loss, then I can see why people are upset by this news, as it means that shutting down the entire plant would make more financial sense than selling at a loss.
But since we are both working from a guess of a guess of a guess, I'm fairly certain that an extra 37 minutes per car of work isn't eating over 100% of their profits, and that their choice of not stopping production over small fixable issues is a smart choice. And even if it were, i'd argue that keeping your workforce from getting other jobs because they can't get work at your company while you endlessly tinker with the production lines to try and achieve what only a few companies in existence have done before (almost 100% FPY) isn't good business sense either...
But then you want to throw in the cost of tooling changes, and now this conversation isn't against the cost of a car, but the entire cashflow of the business, which if you are curious you can lookup. They aren't turning a profit, and nobody thinks they are yet. But if people are holding them to the ability to get everything right on the very first try and the second there is an issue to shut down again, then they are going to be disappointed regardless.
The industry as a whole tries to avoid rework as much as possible, but you are saying that a 20% FPY is fine, and it only costs $30/ vehicle anyway. I am not saying that I know much about the specifics of Tesla's finances, but I can say that you are missing the big picture here.
Having poor FPY means difficulty scaling, which is indeed one of Tesla's problems--their production scales not-quite-linearly with the number of bodies they throw at the problem.
It depends on the difficulty of the "fix". half an hour per car doesn't seem that bad, and while they will clearly try to fix that (and I'm not trying to imply they shouldn't), I don't think the fact that they are continuing to pump out cars with a "flawed" system (while presumably working on solving the problem internally) is any indication that they are unable to scale forever.
>>> they really need to focus on increasing FPY in order to improve their long-term odds of success.
They really need to start being a car company rather than an investment factory. Car companies, particularly the BMWs and Hondas Tesla wants to compete with, care more about their reputation than factory output. I cannot imagine a BMW exec ever sacrificing unit completeness in the name of productivity. For Honda, an unfinished car simply isn't a car worth counting. Tesla has a long way to go before winning me over. (also Toyota)
They really need to start being a car company rather than an investment factory. Car companies, particularly the BMWs and Hondas Tesla wants to compete with, care more about their reputation than factory output. I cannot imagine a BMW exec ever sacrificing unit completeness in the name of productivity. For Honda, an unfinished car simply isn't a car worth counting. Tesla has a long way to go before winning me over. (also Toyota)
> I cannot imagine a BMW exec ever sacrificing unit completeness in the name of productivity.
You're very naive and haven't read the news in the past few years, it seems.
PS: Referring to the emission scandal.
You're very naive and haven't read the news in the past few years, it seems.
PS: Referring to the emission scandal.
Emissions is a totally different issue. The cars with the illegal emissions were flawed in design, but the factory that made them still made them perfectly. It is naive to equate errors in design with errors in production. The former are largely irrelevant until you have a handle on the later.
Nobody is saying they should sacrifice completeness, and nobody is receiving incomplete or unfinished cars.
According to the article, it's an average of 37 minutes of extra work per car that has to happen.
According to the article, it's an average of 37 minutes of extra work per car that has to happen.
A friend has a Tesla without a back bumper because it fell off when it rained. She's not alone, either.
Tesla's saying Tesla should sacrifice completeness because Tesla chose to sacrifice completeness. And a car with a bumper that falls off in the rain is in some way one of incomplete or unfinished.
Tesla's saying Tesla should sacrifice completeness because Tesla chose to sacrifice completeness. And a car with a bumper that falls off in the rain is in some way one of incomplete or unfinished.
I worked as a mechanic several years ago, I can't tell you the number of times we were working on a car before it was sold. Cleaning up seals, fixing window motors, applying recalls.
2 years ago I bought an Audi that I was unable to get into after it dropped below freezing for the first time, because the window leaked water internally which froze and the door can't be opened unless the window comes down slightly. That doesn't mean the Audi was unfinished, or that all Audis are awful...
Shit happens, not every car is perfect, and i'm not saying it is, i'm just saying that they aren't selling half-finished cars. Defects are defects, not an incomplete product.
2 years ago I bought an Audi that I was unable to get into after it dropped below freezing for the first time, because the window leaked water internally which froze and the door can't be opened unless the window comes down slightly. That doesn't mean the Audi was unfinished, or that all Audis are awful...
Shit happens, not every car is perfect, and i'm not saying it is, i'm just saying that they aren't selling half-finished cars. Defects are defects, not an incomplete product.
Nobodies saying that other cars are defect free. But what they are saying is that Teslas have more defects than other cars, which is a problem--especially when they have yet to scale up to meaningful production quantities.
Having this many defects with this few cars made indicates serious production quality control issues, which just gets worse as production scales.
Having this many defects with this few cars made indicates serious production quality control issues, which just gets worse as production scales.
Why do people think it's easy to make perfect cars in small numbers?
I would assume that defects will go down as they scale up, as things will become less manual and more automated, and they find the common problems and fix them at manufacturing time.
Are there other car companies that started from nothing that went a different direction? Did they start with nearly perfect cars then get progressively worse as they scaled up? Did they plan to mass manufacturer cars?
I would assume that defects will go down as they scale up, as things will become less manual and more automated, and they find the common problems and fix them at manufacturing time.
Are there other car companies that started from nothing that went a different direction? Did they start with nearly perfect cars then get progressively worse as they scaled up? Did they plan to mass manufacturer cars?
The Model 3 is still roughly in its first year of production and I would expect it to have more defects that need rework than a car that has been made for 10.
They don’t state in the article that the quoted facts about other automakers are for cars in their first model year.
They don’t state in the article that the quoted facts about other automakers are for cars in their first model year.
This from Electrek.com:
"For some unknown reason, Tesla says that it won’t be shipping the Performance Model 3 with the spoiler included in the performance package for the early production of the vehicle.
Owners will be able to have it shipped and installed at their local service center.
The badge was also a question mark for a long time since the first 50,000 Model 3 vehicles that Tesla produced had no badge beyond the Tesla logo."
https://electrek.co/2018/07/19/tesla-model-3-performance-spo...
The factory not installing something that was part of the vehicle means that the car is incomplete.
"For some unknown reason, Tesla says that it won’t be shipping the Performance Model 3 with the spoiler included in the performance package for the early production of the vehicle.
Owners will be able to have it shipped and installed at their local service center.
The badge was also a question mark for a long time since the first 50,000 Model 3 vehicles that Tesla produced had no badge beyond the Tesla logo."
https://electrek.co/2018/07/19/tesla-model-3-performance-spo...
The factory not installing something that was part of the vehicle means that the car is incomplete.
These are cars that aren't coming off the line clean. Toyota/honda/BMW would see this as a horrible situation. They would say that with so many errors needing fixing that there is little doubt other errors are happening unnoticed.
Why do you think Tesla doesn't see this as a horrible situation?
Pretend your are Honda and you just found out this is happening, what do you do? Shut down the plant and fix it properly? Who is going to fund that? What happens if it causes other issues? How long can you afford to do this?
Or would you get some people to fix the problem after production manually while you worked on solving the root of the issue? Exactly what Tesla is doing here...
Pretend your are Honda and you just found out this is happening, what do you do? Shut down the plant and fix it properly? Who is going to fund that? What happens if it causes other issues? How long can you afford to do this?
Or would you get some people to fix the problem after production manually while you worked on solving the root of the issue? Exactly what Tesla is doing here...
>>Shut down the plant and fix it properly?
Yes.
>> Who is going to fund that? What happens if it causes other issues? How long can you afford to do this?
I don't care. I am not an investor. I am a consumer, a potential customer. I don't care whether the Tesla company lives or dies. I care about the quality of the vehicle I might purchase. Seeing this sort of problem at Tesla is a red flag. I don't want to buy a car made in a factory with such problems.
What really worries me isn't so much the problem, but that Tesla isn't in full panic mode about it. The more defensive they and their supporters are, the more rooted the problem seems. A full shutdown and re-tooling would be a signal that they are a serious company. Musk has the money to do this. Instead we read about bandage solutions. The roots of the problem must be very deep.
Yes.
>> Who is going to fund that? What happens if it causes other issues? How long can you afford to do this?
I don't care. I am not an investor. I am a consumer, a potential customer. I don't care whether the Tesla company lives or dies. I care about the quality of the vehicle I might purchase. Seeing this sort of problem at Tesla is a red flag. I don't want to buy a car made in a factory with such problems.
What really worries me isn't so much the problem, but that Tesla isn't in full panic mode about it. The more defensive they and their supporters are, the more rooted the problem seems. A full shutdown and re-tooling would be a signal that they are a serious company. Musk has the money to do this. Instead we read about bandage solutions. The roots of the problem must be very deep.
This has happened to every other car company on the planet at one time. Pretending it hasn't is silly.
If you don't want a car that has ever had any production issues at any point in it's life, you don't want a car.
It's like complaining that Intel has low yield numbers for their CPUs, or that some of the apples that your local orchid grows are rotten.
The cars are being manufactured to the correct specs, it's just a different (more manual) way of doing it. If you care about nothing but your car, then you wouldn't give a shit how it's manufactured as long as it's good.
If you have an issue with the end result of these cars, that's another thing. But the FPY has nothing to do with that. A car made to shitty specs and with awful tolerances is going to be awful regardless of whether they made it awful on the first try or the 10th.
If you don't want a car that has ever had any production issues at any point in it's life, you don't want a car.
It's like complaining that Intel has low yield numbers for their CPUs, or that some of the apples that your local orchid grows are rotten.
The cars are being manufactured to the correct specs, it's just a different (more manual) way of doing it. If you care about nothing but your car, then you wouldn't give a shit how it's manufactured as long as it's good.
If you have an issue with the end result of these cars, that's another thing. But the FPY has nothing to do with that. A car made to shitty specs and with awful tolerances is going to be awful regardless of whether they made it awful on the first try or the 10th.
That is exactly what Honda would do. Shut down the plant and fix it properly. In fact, that's what every other carmaker actually does, except that they do trial runs of their factory lines before actually initiating mass production precisely so they can identify and fix problems in the assembly line like the ones Tesla is now facing.
And who will fund that? Because Tesla is not Honda, they don't have the ability to sit back and spend a year or 2 on just prototyping assembly, they don't have the decades of experience running factories like this, they don't have the money to shut everything down for a few months to fix what amounts to 37 minute of fixes per car...
It seems absolutely insane to me that they Honda would stop the world for something like that. It's like what, $15 per car in labor? $30 per car in labor? And you want to stop the whole factory output for potentially weeks to stop that? That seems like a monumental waste of time and money.
It seems absolutely insane to me that they Honda would stop the world for something like that. It's like what, $15 per car in labor? $30 per car in labor? And you want to stop the whole factory output for potentially weeks to stop that? That seems like a monumental waste of time and money.
> they don't have the decades of experience running factories like this
Then Elon Musk is incompetent. Because the fact is, if you don't have the experience in running a factory, you hire someone that does. This is literally a problem that you throw money at, and it goes away.
Then Elon Musk is incompetent. Because the fact is, if you don't have the experience in running a factory, you hire someone that does. This is literally a problem that you throw money at, and it goes away.
It's better to waste a little bit of time and money upfront then a lot of time and money later, especially when the one-time fix will eliminate a recurring time/money sink. It may seem insane to you, but it's just common business sense to a carmaker thats been around for decades.
But that's what they are doing... Wasting a little time and money up front by manually fixing it while they develop and deploy a fulltime fix...
People here seem to be implying that they should entirely shut down the entire factory and not start it up again until all of these flaws are completely fixed, and that's not "wasting a little bit of time and money" that's putting a bullet in the head of the company.
People here seem to be implying that they should entirely shut down the entire factory and not start it up again until all of these flaws are completely fixed, and that's not "wasting a little bit of time and money" that's putting a bullet in the head of the company.
Tesla is wasting a lot of time and money fixing each car individually rather than actually addressing the problem in their assembly line. They actually do shut down their lines for at least a week each quarter--they've simply failed to make all the necessary fixes when they do, meaning that the even their shutdowns are a waste of time and money.
They are wasting an average of 37 minute per car, and I still haven't heard a reasonable explanation of why 37 minutes is going to cost them everything. Even if it cost them an extra $500 per car for those 37 minutes, it's not going to ruin them, especially when it's temporary.
Most companies shut down their lines every quarter, it's a pretty common thing, and implying that Tesla is "failing" to make all the changes when they do so is silly, this is still a moving target, shit is still changing and improving. If they weren't closing down their line every quarter still, then i'd be worried that they can't keep up and aren't even trying to improve things any more.
Most companies shut down their lines every quarter, it's a pretty common thing, and implying that Tesla is "failing" to make all the changes when they do so is silly, this is still a moving target, shit is still changing and improving. If they weren't closing down their line every quarter still, then i'd be worried that they can't keep up and aren't even trying to improve things any more.
>So what? They talk about it like it is a bad thing.
How do you expect them to be "world leaders" in manufacturing technology when they have to rework so many cars? Remember, the narrative is that no one can do it as well as they can. Huge margins!
>who cares about the details of the manufacturing process?
Yeah, who cars about the manufacturing process when your whole business is manufacturing...
How do you expect them to be "world leaders" in manufacturing technology when they have to rework so many cars? Remember, the narrative is that no one can do it as well as they can. Huge margins!
>who cares about the details of the manufacturing process?
Yeah, who cars about the manufacturing process when your whole business is manufacturing...
It's terrible from a supply chain and logistics standpoint.
For a cash strapped company that critically depends on delivering large enough volumes to survive the year, I can see why many investors would be interested in the nature of the headline numbers announced publicly. Otherwise I agree that it normally takes years to adjust the production of a new product, particularly for a young company, and it is unreasonable to expect high yields on year 1.
>”who cares?”
Investors
Investors
> who cares about the details of the manufacturing process?
buyers worried for assembly quality and overall reliability?
for example a misplaced or improperly installed mounting brakets make panels noisy over time, panel misalignment will affect resale value, badly tightened glasses will opacize etc.
people aren't able to see the car they're going to get beforehand, at most they can refuse upon delivery, se yes knowing assembly line issues is kinda important for a car, not everyone is a valley software engineer pulling 150k+
edit: wow musketeers out in masses I see
buyers worried for assembly quality and overall reliability?
for example a misplaced or improperly installed mounting brakets make panels noisy over time, panel misalignment will affect resale value, badly tightened glasses will opacize etc.
people aren't able to see the car they're going to get beforehand, at most they can refuse upon delivery, se yes knowing assembly line issues is kinda important for a car, not everyone is a valley software engineer pulling 150k+
edit: wow musketeers out in masses I see
grillvogel(1)
[deleted]
>14% of the vehicles made didn't need rework [...]
>The most common reason Model 3 cars require rework is a "failed manual task," followed by cosmetic issues
Given how entirely ad-hoc their entire production line still is, and how the car doesn't seem to be designed for easy assembly at all, this is unsurprising. But at least they don't seem to skimp on quality control.
>The most common reason Model 3 cars require rework is a "failed manual task," followed by cosmetic issues
Given how entirely ad-hoc their entire production line still is, and how the car doesn't seem to be designed for easy assembly at all, this is unsurprising. But at least they don't seem to skimp on quality control.
> But at least they don't seem to skimp on quality control.
I don't think this is true (remember, reworking only addresses the problems you can see).
Last weekend I rented somebody's Model 3 on Turo to see what it was like, and while I enjoyed it, the QC problems are real. The touchscreen crashed twice, and the cupholder in the center spar doesn't close unless you push it very slowly. This is in a $60,000 car! Things like that don't inspire confidence in long-term reliability and I definitely won't be spending my own money on a Model 3 until I see some assurance that they are overhauling their QC in a big way.
I don't think this is true (remember, reworking only addresses the problems you can see).
Last weekend I rented somebody's Model 3 on Turo to see what it was like, and while I enjoyed it, the QC problems are real. The touchscreen crashed twice, and the cupholder in the center spar doesn't close unless you push it very slowly. This is in a $60,000 car! Things like that don't inspire confidence in long-term reliability and I definitely won't be spending my own money on a Model 3 until I see some assurance that they are overhauling their QC in a big way.
> The touchscreen crashed twice
In this case, do you lose the speedometer etc while it resets? Does it reset automatically or do you have to press something? Genuinely curious.
Edit: this will become the go-to excuse for speeding in the future - "I'm sorry officer, I don't know how fast I was going, the speedometer had crashed and needed to reboot".
In this case, do you lose the speedometer etc while it resets? Does it reset automatically or do you have to press something? Genuinely curious.
Edit: this will become the go-to excuse for speeding in the future - "I'm sorry officer, I don't know how fast I was going, the speedometer had crashed and needed to reboot".
another example was a P3D version with mismatched interior door panels. how that ever got to a customer is mind boggling.
still I have a deposit on a M3 since 8/5, will take a large number of pictures when it ever arrives and hopefully by then it comes out fine
still I have a deposit on a M3 since 8/5, will take a large number of pictures when it ever arrives and hopefully by then it comes out fine
>But at least they don't seem to skimp on quality control.
Then why are so many deliveries being canceled/postponed for quality issues? Their quality control, from what I read, is horrible.
Then why are so many deliveries being canceled/postponed for quality issues? Their quality control, from what I read, is horrible.
The battery pack with the attached electronics bay seem quite well optimized for easy assembly.
Is Insider an especially important source? Why is the title editorialized to include it?
It wasn't; it was part of the HTML doc title. Most publications do this. We take those bits out.
Seems that a lot of people think that car making begins and ends with the production line. The bit you see on TV - 'final assembly' - is not the whole car making process, it is just the coming together of the many parts that have been assembled elsewhere into bigger parts that then get put together in this 'final assembly'.
Sounds as if Tesla's 'final assembly' is not that final with a little bit of work being picked up in quality control. The spin of the story is that Tesla are cheating their figures by just repairing a few extra cars to get them out the door, but there is probably a happier story than this - at least those defects were not shipped to customers.
It is okay for a new company to take time to re-learn what has gone on before. I jokingly imagine Tesla to be actually catching up to 1970's British Leyland quality control 'circles' with the next step being a relearning of the 'Toyota Way'. It takes time to build a culture of quality control, efficiency and all these good things. The only thing is that soon our friends in China are going to be offering plenty of very nice electric cars to customers who just want electric rather than dinosaur power. Will Tesla be able to compete once China have enough EVs for their own market?
Sounds as if Tesla's 'final assembly' is not that final with a little bit of work being picked up in quality control. The spin of the story is that Tesla are cheating their figures by just repairing a few extra cars to get them out the door, but there is probably a happier story than this - at least those defects were not shipped to customers.
It is okay for a new company to take time to re-learn what has gone on before. I jokingly imagine Tesla to be actually catching up to 1970's British Leyland quality control 'circles' with the next step being a relearning of the 'Toyota Way'. It takes time to build a culture of quality control, efficiency and all these good things. The only thing is that soon our friends in China are going to be offering plenty of very nice electric cars to customers who just want electric rather than dinosaur power. Will Tesla be able to compete once China have enough EVs for their own market?
>It is okay for a new company to take time to re-learn what has gone on before. I jokingly imagine Tesla to be actually catching up to 1970's British Leyland quality control 'circles' with the next step being a relearning of the 'Toyota Way'.
This would be okay if we actually were living in the 70s right now. The problem is of course that Tesla consumes money (like basically nobody else) and the real Toyota is still around and produces as many cars on a weekend as Tesla does in an entire year.
It's not like people are going to stop buying Toyota cars out of goodwill for Tesla.
> who just want electric rather than dinosaur power.
this too seems to be part of the reality distortion field around Tesla. All big manufacturers already produce hybrid and electric cars, and their research budgets dwarf Tesla, they will be ready in a few years as the market grows.
This would be okay if we actually were living in the 70s right now. The problem is of course that Tesla consumes money (like basically nobody else) and the real Toyota is still around and produces as many cars on a weekend as Tesla does in an entire year.
It's not like people are going to stop buying Toyota cars out of goodwill for Tesla.
> who just want electric rather than dinosaur power.
this too seems to be part of the reality distortion field around Tesla. All big manufacturers already produce hybrid and electric cars, and their research budgets dwarf Tesla, they will be ready in a few years as the market grows.
With this company so shorted how are we supposed to tell the difference between actual news and a hit piece?
Read the article and then use your noggin.
Its one hell of a gigantic conservative industry Tesla is up against. When jeremy clarkson (top gear) did his hit piece [1] there were (probably still are) a lot of people who were completely convinced by it and who saw nothing wrong with it at all.
I think its quite prudent to admit to uncertainty instead of being foolishly opinionated in either direction and wrong. But people are so full of themselves, its rather disconcerting.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_(series_12)#Tesla_Roa...
I think its quite prudent to admit to uncertainty instead of being foolishly opinionated in either direction and wrong. But people are so full of themselves, its rather disconcerting.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_(series_12)#Tesla_Roa...
I think you can normally say the opposite more often. With billions invested in the company, how can you tell the difference between actual news and a puff piece. There is way more money long Tesla than short it.
Tesla is almost at 6000 Model 3’s a week.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-tesla-tracker/
And I believe that they’re building almost 2,000 Model X,S cars a week.
At almost 400,000 cars a year, Tesla has got to be doing better than many expected.
Elon seems to be doing fine in this recent interview:
https://youtu.be/mr9kK0_7x08
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-tesla-tracker/
And I believe that they’re building almost 2,000 Model X,S cars a week.
At almost 400,000 cars a year, Tesla has got to be doing better than many expected.
Elon seems to be doing fine in this recent interview:
https://youtu.be/mr9kK0_7x08
That's not bad for one line. Most auto production final assembly lines make about one car a minute. Tesla Fremont is now running 7 days a week, 2 shifts, and talking about 3 shifts. That's usually considered overdoing it. Few auto plants run more than two shifts, and do maintenance on the third shift and Saturday. More than that, and quality suffers and the workers burn out. 5,000 cars a week per line is about right.
Also, running that many shifts is a lot of overtime paid.
"Impulsively calling rescuers 'pedos'" and "impulsively violating securities laws with false claims about secured funding for going private in order to screw short-sellers" are just about the opposite of "doing fine".
Edit: the heck? How is that not evidence against "Elon doing fine"? Is this just "don't feed the trolls", or auto-downvotes of anything anti-Musk?
Edit: the heck? How is that not evidence against "Elon doing fine"? Is this just "don't feed the trolls", or auto-downvotes of anything anti-Musk?
One slipup on twitter during an argument and and one incident where there is a question weather it is totally legal or not, lets wait for the ruling on that. Overall his companies are doing fantastic.
I'm not sure having only $1.3 billion in available cash, when you've been burning $700 million a quarter, and with $10 billion in debt is ever what someone would judge a company as "doing fantastic" on.
Those are the wrong things to focus on, and its also only about Tesla.
The important thing is that they are producing 8k cars a week and that will allow them to raise money if they really need it. Specially because they have 100'000s of reservations.
The important thing is that they are producing 8k cars a week and that will allow them to raise money if they really need it. Specially because they have 100'000s of reservations.
There's a lot to unpack here:
* With the reservation numbers, sure, there are a large number of people who put down a refundable $1,000 for a $35K car with a $7,500 tax credit, but what is currently available is a $50K car with a rapidly expiring tax credit. I wouldn't call that proof of demand of the current product.
* Can they raise money? If they can, why haven't they? There's no MBA1 who would ever recommend leaving a company in the cash position they currently are in. Also, you seem to be under the assumption that billions of dollars exist that can just immediately appear. That's not how the capital markets work. Money raises take many months of effort to materialize.
* Also, as this article states the 8,000 cars a week metric might not be the best to focus on. Especially as a company that personally owns all the warranty liability for their cars, if 8,000 cars are being produced by cutting corners, that's not really the positive sign you would expect.
* With the reservation numbers, sure, there are a large number of people who put down a refundable $1,000 for a $35K car with a $7,500 tax credit, but what is currently available is a $50K car with a rapidly expiring tax credit. I wouldn't call that proof of demand of the current product.
* Can they raise money? If they can, why haven't they? There's no MBA1 who would ever recommend leaving a company in the cash position they currently are in. Also, you seem to be under the assumption that billions of dollars exist that can just immediately appear. That's not how the capital markets work. Money raises take many months of effort to materialize.
* Also, as this article states the 8,000 cars a week metric might not be the best to focus on. Especially as a company that personally owns all the warranty liability for their cars, if 8,000 cars are being produced by cutting corners, that's not really the positive sign you would expect.
* Tesla sells well in places without a tax credit.
* There is no reason to think that Tesla want be selling a 35k car
* If 400000 preorders and the most talked about car in human history is not enough for you to prove that there is 'demand', I don't know how t oargue agianst that.
* Of course they can raise money, and I think even most bears would agree that this is the case. They have not raised more money because they currently don't need to raise more money, if that changes, they can do so.
Honest, people have been making doom and gloom prediction about Tesla 'cash position' for about 10 years and by now their actual cash inflow is growing massively.
* If you had actual prove that those 8000 are all broken and a warranty liability then you might have point but up to now very little of these problems have materialized and the quality has gotten better over time
* There is no reason to think that Tesla want be selling a 35k car
* If 400000 preorders and the most talked about car in human history is not enough for you to prove that there is 'demand', I don't know how t oargue agianst that.
* Of course they can raise money, and I think even most bears would agree that this is the case. They have not raised more money because they currently don't need to raise more money, if that changes, they can do so.
Honest, people have been making doom and gloom prediction about Tesla 'cash position' for about 10 years and by now their actual cash inflow is growing massively.
* If you had actual prove that those 8000 are all broken and a warranty liability then you might have point but up to now very little of these problems have materialized and the quality has gotten better over time
> Tesla sells well in places without a tax credit.
Where? The biggest market is the US by far, and many other locations, like Canada, demand has dissolved without the tax credit.
> There is no reason to think that Tesla want be selling a 35k car
Other than the CEO once gave a large presentation two years ago selling it as a $35,000 car? And they raised capital multiple times under that premise? That seems pretty significant.
> Of course they can raise money, and I think even most bears would agree that this is the case. They have not raised more money because they currently don't need to raise more money, if that changes, they can do so.
Well, depends on what "raise money" means? Who is providing this capital and at what terms? Do I think Tesla could raise more debt at the 7-8% that it's debt is currently trading at? Sure, but that has a significant number of long term consequences raising debt at Michael Milken rates.
> Honest, people have been making doom and gloom prediction about Tesla 'cash position' for about 10 years and by now their actual cash inflow is growing massively.
I don't understand this at all. The company has never once been cash flow positive. What exactly do you mean by cash inflow and "cash position"? Also, Tesla was barely talked about until 5 years ago. Who are these people who are talking doom and gloom before the company went public in 2010?
> If you had actual prove that those 8000 are all broken and a warranty liability then you might have point but up to now very little of these problems have materialized and the quality has gotten better over time
The major problem here is that the company has had a number of instances being incompletely forthright with its metrics. That creates a pattern of distrust with how exactly to value the company. Any sort of financial projection of Tesla hinges completely on Model 3 margins. There's a growing concern of whether the company's quoted margins are accurate.
Where? The biggest market is the US by far, and many other locations, like Canada, demand has dissolved without the tax credit.
> There is no reason to think that Tesla want be selling a 35k car
Other than the CEO once gave a large presentation two years ago selling it as a $35,000 car? And they raised capital multiple times under that premise? That seems pretty significant.
> Of course they can raise money, and I think even most bears would agree that this is the case. They have not raised more money because they currently don't need to raise more money, if that changes, they can do so.
Well, depends on what "raise money" means? Who is providing this capital and at what terms? Do I think Tesla could raise more debt at the 7-8% that it's debt is currently trading at? Sure, but that has a significant number of long term consequences raising debt at Michael Milken rates.
> Honest, people have been making doom and gloom prediction about Tesla 'cash position' for about 10 years and by now their actual cash inflow is growing massively.
I don't understand this at all. The company has never once been cash flow positive. What exactly do you mean by cash inflow and "cash position"? Also, Tesla was barely talked about until 5 years ago. Who are these people who are talking doom and gloom before the company went public in 2010?
> If you had actual prove that those 8000 are all broken and a warranty liability then you might have point but up to now very little of these problems have materialized and the quality has gotten better over time
The major problem here is that the company has had a number of instances being incompletely forthright with its metrics. That creates a pattern of distrust with how exactly to value the company. Any sort of financial projection of Tesla hinges completely on Model 3 margins. There's a growing concern of whether the company's quoted margins are accurate.
> and many other locations, like Canada, demand has dissolved without the tax credit.
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1117616_tesla-dominated...
> Electric cars accounted for nearly 3 percent of all passenger vehicles sold in Canada in June, thanks to a surge of Tesla Model 3 deliveries.
And the article also has a graphic of sales going back to 2011:
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1117616_tesla-dominated...
Looks like sales have risen each year.
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1117616_tesla-dominated...
> Electric cars accounted for nearly 3 percent of all passenger vehicles sold in Canada in June, thanks to a surge of Tesla Model 3 deliveries.
And the article also has a graphic of sales going back to 2011:
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1117616_tesla-dominated...
Looks like sales have risen each year.
> Other than the CEO once gave a large presentation two years ago selling it as a $35,000 car? And they raised capital multiple times under that premise? That seems pretty significant.
Independent analysis did agree that there is no technical reason they can not build it. Building the more expensive variant while they get the marginal cost down is just smart business.
> Well, depends on what "raise money" means?
They have wide range of options, including issuing further stocks. The Saudis for example multiple times asked if they would issue more stocks exclusively.
I have heard analysis from multiple different people and pretty much all agree that Tesla is in a good position to raise money.
> I don't understand this at all. The company has never once been cash flow positive. What exactly do you mean by cash inflow and "cash position"? Also, Tesla was barely talked about until 5 years ago. Who are these people who are talking doom and gloom before the company went public in 2010?
> What exactly do you mean by cash inflow and "cash position"?
When you are selling 8000 cars a week you get a lot of cash inflow. Because the production line is up and running the capex is going down at the same time. That makes their current position regarding to cash not very problematic.
> Also, Tesla was barely talked about until 5 years ago.
Yeah I don't know who you talk to but Tesla was talked about a lot 5 years ago, and even more so in 2008.
> Who are these people who are talking doom and gloom before the company went public in 2010?
Well they actually did almost go down in 2008 but there were always people, with the S and the X and the Model 3 who claimed (a) Tesla is spending to much (b) Tesla can't deliver on time and so on.
You can find articles to that extend all the way back to 2010.
> The major problem here is that the company has had a number of instances being incompletely forthright with its metrics. That creates a pattern of distrust with how exactly to value the company. Any sort of financial projection of Tesla hinges completely on Model 3 margins. There's a growing concern of whether the company's quoted margins are accurate.
Where is this 'growing concern'. Independent analysis agree that the Model 3 could be produced at good margins. Maybe not as high as Elon hopes, but a huge amount better then any other company can do with electric cars.
It seems this huge 'OMG they are using humans' has people now speculating that humans are way to expensive and are gone ruin their margins, but their car lines are pretty efficient and they are not using excessive amounts of labor. Overall their plant is still pretty heavily automated.
Independent analysis did agree that there is no technical reason they can not build it. Building the more expensive variant while they get the marginal cost down is just smart business.
> Well, depends on what "raise money" means?
They have wide range of options, including issuing further stocks. The Saudis for example multiple times asked if they would issue more stocks exclusively.
I have heard analysis from multiple different people and pretty much all agree that Tesla is in a good position to raise money.
> I don't understand this at all. The company has never once been cash flow positive. What exactly do you mean by cash inflow and "cash position"? Also, Tesla was barely talked about until 5 years ago. Who are these people who are talking doom and gloom before the company went public in 2010?
> What exactly do you mean by cash inflow and "cash position"?
When you are selling 8000 cars a week you get a lot of cash inflow. Because the production line is up and running the capex is going down at the same time. That makes their current position regarding to cash not very problematic.
> Also, Tesla was barely talked about until 5 years ago.
Yeah I don't know who you talk to but Tesla was talked about a lot 5 years ago, and even more so in 2008.
> Who are these people who are talking doom and gloom before the company went public in 2010?
Well they actually did almost go down in 2008 but there were always people, with the S and the X and the Model 3 who claimed (a) Tesla is spending to much (b) Tesla can't deliver on time and so on.
You can find articles to that extend all the way back to 2010.
> The major problem here is that the company has had a number of instances being incompletely forthright with its metrics. That creates a pattern of distrust with how exactly to value the company. Any sort of financial projection of Tesla hinges completely on Model 3 margins. There's a growing concern of whether the company's quoted margins are accurate.
Where is this 'growing concern'. Independent analysis agree that the Model 3 could be produced at good margins. Maybe not as high as Elon hopes, but a huge amount better then any other company can do with electric cars.
It seems this huge 'OMG they are using humans' has people now speculating that humans are way to expensive and are gone ruin their margins, but their car lines are pretty efficient and they are not using excessive amounts of labor. Overall their plant is still pretty heavily automated.
That headline could also be read as "Tesla hit Model 3 target DESPITE reworking thousands of cars". Presumably they've got technicians both doing the rework, and also technicians and engineers working on solving the underlying issues causing the rework. Once the latter is done, they'll have freed up a lot of technicians for other tasks, and making 5000 cars a week will be almost trivial in comparison.
Which is good since other manufacturers are making 200,000 or so.
It's almost as if scaling an operation > 100% YOY poses different challenges than continuing to run a stable and mature enterprise.
Tesla is 15 years old, and operates out the NUMMI plant, that that was building 428,633 cars a year.[0]
Auto manufacturers changes models, every year. They either tweak them, completely redesign them, or launch new models. Ford even changed the entire frame and welding setup when they transitioned from steel to aluminum for the F150. None of them has these problems.
I'm sorry, but Tesla's growing pains should be over. And if they shouldn't be over, when should they? Does it take 20 years to figure out how to mass produce an item that has been mass produced by many different companies, from around the world, for about 100 years now?
At some point, you've got a man that has no previous experience running a manufacturing plant, repeating the same mistakes the industry made 40 years ago. Including most damningly trying to automate final assembly[1], because he thinks he's being clever.
Let's be honest here. Building a car with zero defects is possible. It's done every day at scale, at every Toyota plant in the world.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NUMMI
[1] https://qz.com/1261214/how-exactly-tesla-shot-itself-in-the-...
Auto manufacturers changes models, every year. They either tweak them, completely redesign them, or launch new models. Ford even changed the entire frame and welding setup when they transitioned from steel to aluminum for the F150. None of them has these problems.
I'm sorry, but Tesla's growing pains should be over. And if they shouldn't be over, when should they? Does it take 20 years to figure out how to mass produce an item that has been mass produced by many different companies, from around the world, for about 100 years now?
At some point, you've got a man that has no previous experience running a manufacturing plant, repeating the same mistakes the industry made 40 years ago. Including most damningly trying to automate final assembly[1], because he thinks he's being clever.
Let's be honest here. Building a car with zero defects is possible. It's done every day at scale, at every Toyota plant in the world.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NUMMI
[1] https://qz.com/1261214/how-exactly-tesla-shot-itself-in-the-...
There's an important part of the Tesla story about what they've gotten wrong. Musk has admitted, and perhaps downplayed, the mistakes made in attempting to overly automate the factory and becoming distracted by the "art" of the Model X.
I would be curious to know more about the impact producing so many of their own parts, to custom specs, has had on Tesla's successes or failures. This is another area where Tesla has diverged from the norms in automotive manufacturing.
Generally, it is unclear to me why Musk has taken Tesla on a course so different from how cars are typically produced and assembled, besides where it really count: electric power.
I would be curious to know more about the impact producing so many of their own parts, to custom specs, has had on Tesla's successes or failures. This is another area where Tesla has diverged from the norms in automotive manufacturing.
Generally, it is unclear to me why Musk has taken Tesla on a course so different from how cars are typically produced and assembled, besides where it really count: electric power.
To be fair, a tesla car has little in common with an "item that has been mass produced by many different companies, from around the world, for about 100 years now". Almost all of the internals are as different as a computer is to a typewriter (please don't argue on the analogy, it's bad but gets the point)
If the problems were limited to the drive train, then I might concede the point, but we'd still be talking about 15 years of experience. From what I understand, the batteries aren't blowing up, and electric motors work, so I guess the drive train is fine.
The damning part is that these not the problems that people are talking about. People are reporting not being able to put a piece of metal on straight. We're talking about gluing a rubber gasket on to a piece of glass. This is 100 years old, and this is what they're fucking up.
The damning part is that these not the problems that people are talking about. People are reporting not being able to put a piece of metal on straight. We're talking about gluing a rubber gasket on to a piece of glass. This is 100 years old, and this is what they're fucking up.
Electric cars are generally simpler than their ICE counterparts. There are way less total working pieces in an electric vehicle than a ICE one.
Also, a huge part of the manufacturing process doesn't even deal with the real guts of the car, it is making sure that the seats are installed, or there aren't panel gaps, or that the paint has been applied properly. All of those are exactly the same for Tesla as they would be for any other automaker.
Also, a huge part of the manufacturing process doesn't even deal with the real guts of the car, it is making sure that the seats are installed, or there aren't panel gaps, or that the paint has been applied properly. All of those are exactly the same for Tesla as they would be for any other automaker.
Electric motor is indeed like a typewriter. And BMW’s B58 engine is a computer. That’s why Chinese guys failed develop their own internal combustion engines, but can do great cheap electric cars. Tesla never had a chance if they needed to build something like B58.
Could you explain this more? A Tesla car is largely the same as any other modern car in how it functions and is manufactured. The major difference is the battery + electric motor. So besides the production of the battery and motor, how are the internals so different? Certainly nothing on the scale of computer vs. typewriter.
I would suggest mechanical vs. electric typewriter as a better analogy.
I would suggest mechanical vs. electric typewriter as a better analogy.
Except they set this goal for themselves.
And they couldn’t don’t without an 85% defect rate.
That doesn’t look good.
And they couldn’t don’t without an 85% defect rate.
That doesn’t look good.
[deleted]
Couldn't they also be bursting to this rate by accumulating a queue of needs-rework vehicles in previous weeks, then accounting them all in the same week when the rework happens in combination with that week's production line numbers? It would artificially inflate the number for a given week, without actually being sustainable.
Not sure why this would be flagged. Seems like an article of general interest.
Why was this flagged?
This has been a big issue in auto manufacturing for decades. At one time, the Detroit automakers ran "dealer preparation centers" to finish what the production line hadn't done. Toyota's big innovation was figuring out how to get it right the first time, which got costs down and quality up. In a Toyota plant, if you have to stop the line for 10 seconds to get it right, a worker can do that. Videos of Toyota plants show a cycle time display and a vehicles per hour display over the line. It's expected that a car will take an extra few seconds every once in a while.
This has been a big issue in auto manufacturing for decades. At one time, the Detroit automakers ran "dealer preparation centers" to finish what the production line hadn't done. Toyota's big innovation was figuring out how to get it right the first time, which got costs down and quality up. In a Toyota plant, if you have to stop the line for 10 seconds to get it right, a worker can do that. Videos of Toyota plants show a cycle time display and a vehicles per hour display over the line. It's expected that a car will take an extra few seconds every once in a while.
At one time, the Detroit automakers ran "dealer preparation centers" to finish what the production line hadn't done.
Is that the "dealer prep" line that always seems to appear as a non-optional line item in the price of a new car?
Is that the "dealer prep" line that always seems to appear as a non-optional line item in the price of a new car?
These days dealer prep mostly involves taking off the plastic paint protection film, removing any other hardware that protects the car during shipping (suspension blocks, door bump pads, etc), checking functionality of major components, verifying fluid levels, etc, and finally detailing the car (well, washing and vacuuming at least).
You can actually find the dealer prep checklist for a lot of cars with Google, for example GM has theirs freely published on their public web site.
You can actually find the dealer prep checklist for a lot of cars with Google, for example GM has theirs freely published on their public web site.
That’s the dealers dealer prep. The dealer prep the op refers to is an area where they fix all the stuff done wrong in the production line.
I can't speak for all manufacturers and/or dealers, but it is almost certainly the same people, or at least the same process. During dealer prep they will definitely fix anything broken, or damage to the car that made it past the factory inspector or happened during transit. And they will install certain options that you can buy but are not done at the factory, including installing parts that are prone to being damaged during transport (for example, the spoiler on my GM car is not optional, supplied by the factory, and has to be installed by the dealer body shop after the car arrives).
No. The "dealer prep" you're referring to is literally taking just taking the plastic wrap off the car.
He's talking about fixing production errors, like panels being stuck on wrong[0], or window gaskets being misinstalled[3].
As a side note, this is the first time I've heard anyone defend the lemons coming out of Detroit in the 70s. It was so bad, that my dad would check the VINs, so that he would never buy a car that was built on a Monday or Friday, because it was too likely that the workers were either drunk or hungover.[1][2][4] And this is when he was in the UAW as mechanic and then a body man.
I thought these production issues might be overblown, so I checked the deck lids on three 3s in the parking lot at work. All three were misaligned. I didn't expect them to be perfect (it's not laser perfect on my 2010 Jetta either), but I didn't expect to fit my finger through the gaps. All three cars. All three in different places. That killed it for me. I will never buy a Tesla 3.
[0] https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/body-panel-gap-and-a...
[1] https://jalopnik.com/the-ten-worst-car-factories-in-history-...
[2] https://jalopnik.com/5645880/auto-workers-drinking-getting-h...
[3] https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/unfinished-metal-and...
[4] https://www.thisamericanlife.org/403/transcript
He's talking about fixing production errors, like panels being stuck on wrong[0], or window gaskets being misinstalled[3].
As a side note, this is the first time I've heard anyone defend the lemons coming out of Detroit in the 70s. It was so bad, that my dad would check the VINs, so that he would never buy a car that was built on a Monday or Friday, because it was too likely that the workers were either drunk or hungover.[1][2][4] And this is when he was in the UAW as mechanic and then a body man.
I thought these production issues might be overblown, so I checked the deck lids on three 3s in the parking lot at work. All three were misaligned. I didn't expect them to be perfect (it's not laser perfect on my 2010 Jetta either), but I didn't expect to fit my finger through the gaps. All three cars. All three in different places. That killed it for me. I will never buy a Tesla 3.
[0] https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/body-panel-gap-and-a...
[1] https://jalopnik.com/the-ten-worst-car-factories-in-history-...
[2] https://jalopnik.com/5645880/auto-workers-drinking-getting-h...
[3] https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/unfinished-metal-and...
[4] https://www.thisamericanlife.org/403/transcript
Do you have any pictures of the three 3s? I can see alignment being off a little, but not enough to fit a finger in the gaps.
I’m sure there’s plenty of pictures online. But no, I didn’t bother to take picture of me putting my hand through strangers’ cars. Why would I think to do this?
To provide proof of your claims. After looking at my 3, I'm thinking you either have the hands of a small child, or you're spreading FUD.
I can see panel gaps being an issue for some cars, but I can't see the deck lid being misaligned to the point where you're able to put your hand through any gaps.
I can see panel gaps being an issue for some cars, but I can't see the deck lid being misaligned to the point where you're able to put your hand through any gaps.
My fingers are thin, and it was a little finger.
A photo of my hand can be provided upon request.
A photo of my hand can be provided upon request.
How do you convert a VIN to the date of manufacture?
https://electrek.co/2017/07/18/tesla-model-3-vin-decoder/
EDIT: whoops, missed the context. The above just tells you the model year. But you were replying to someone that implied it could be done down to the day. It can be done down to the month, but in my experience down to the day is rare, if non-existent (none of my vehicle VINs have that resolution).
EDIT: whoops, missed the context. The above just tells you the model year. But you were replying to someone that implied it could be done down to the day. It can be done down to the month, but in my experience down to the day is rare, if non-existent (none of my vehicle VINs have that resolution).
The last few digits are sequential within a model. Combination of this and knowing when the transports arrive might give you an estimate.
I’m telling you what I remember him telling me. How accurate he actually was, I don’t know. But Detroit earned their horrible reputation, and the Japanese manufactures are them alive.
I’m telling you what I remember him telling me. How accurate he actually was, I don’t know. But Detroit earned their horrible reputation, and the Japanese manufactures are them alive.
> Why was this flagged?
It seems some people flag anything Tesla / Elon Musk related
It seems some people flag anything Tesla / Elon Musk related
This is great.
Mr Musk is a perfectionist, like Japanese are. He is not selling bad finished cars(like other companies will do).
They are also using lots of automation. This means there are lots of problems at first. With automation, once you solve a problem, it is solved forever.
How you could compare Tesla rework with other companies rework, where the threshold that determines if a car needs reworking is decided by the executives of the same companies?
I could make rework zero just selling broken cars. I bought a European car with a problem in one valve of the engine when it was brand new. I told the dealers about the strange sound, they told me it was normal. It was not and gave me lots of headaches later.
They are also using lots of automation. This means there are lots of problems at first. With automation, once you solve a problem, it is solved forever.
How you could compare Tesla rework with other companies rework, where the threshold that determines if a car needs reworking is decided by the executives of the same companies?
I could make rework zero just selling broken cars. I bought a European car with a problem in one valve of the engine when it was brand new. I told the dealers about the strange sound, they told me it was normal. It was not and gave me lots of headaches later.
Most other companies would fire a factory manager if even a fraction of the cars produced at the factory required rework of any kind, let alone the majority of the cars requiring 37 minutes of rework.
Take your Eurocar example, and then multiply that by multiple systems. And then apply that to almost every purchaser of the vehicle. And now you understand Tesla's problem. Somewhere along the way, Mr. Musk's "perfectionism" is interfering with the actual production and quality control of the vehicles and resulting in vehicles that are very far from perfect....when they easily could be, if he were to let the professionals run the company.
Take your Eurocar example, and then multiply that by multiple systems. And then apply that to almost every purchaser of the vehicle. And now you understand Tesla's problem. Somewhere along the way, Mr. Musk's "perfectionism" is interfering with the actual production and quality control of the vehicles and resulting in vehicles that are very far from perfect....when they easily could be, if he were to let the professionals run the company.