Does anyone think All wheel Steering will be available on all models?

[Crissa]

I don’t care. RWS isn’t necessity. Had 1972 Chev Crewcab dually. What a stretch! It wasn’t difficult to avoid cutting curbs and Elon cones.
...
RWS is nice, but considering the vehicle, tire fitment and clearance totally no necessity.

'More safe' is not 'impossible to manage'.

That you did without seatbelts and headrests doesn't mean we shouldn't include them in modern vehicles.

-Crissa

Sponsored

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

You really don’t get it do you? You use the term “justify” when I would use the term “explain”. The difference is that your usage makes an assumption that Tesla is in it for the money while mine assumes that they are in it for social change (which is what they say). There are a few people in the world that still have and adhere to their values. In the end you may be right but I hope that you won’t be.

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

There has never been any suggestion that 4WS would change the original pricing. Elon did say that pricing would change based on inflation and supply chain logistics but has never commented on features like 4WS or quad motors. They may impact the price; he just hasn’t talked about it.

I am not in a position to guess at the cost of adding 4WS compared to the improvement in manufacturing simplicity/efficiency but based on things Sandy Munro has said I would expect that the savings on the manufacturing side would far outweigh any parts cost. If so Tesla might be able to keep prices the same (adjusted for inflation).

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

Tesla’s margins are high because they are smart about everything they do. They are virtually integrated, make most everything in house, and are far more efficient in manufacturing than the rest of the industry. As a result they can offer a superior product at a competitive price and still make [a lot of] money. And yes, they do reinvest that money into increasing their manufacturing ability and lead. I only challenge your focus on their motivation to make money which I stand by. I did acknowledge that you might be right. That is as chill as I am likely to get.

 

[Crissa]

...Also Tesla gets negative press whenever their margins even approach the rest of the industry.

-Crissa

 

[JBee]

I didn't ask about the retail cost yet. What they "can" charge for an extra feature is not necessarily the benchmark though, its more what they can "reasonably expect to charge." Negative press will have a feild day otherwise and legacy industry would offer it cheaper. Other customers might not even want it and will bulk at any cost.

This all still hangs on the assumption its a "option" you can choose. Given the wheelbase and safety enhancement, and continuity of handling accross the range that a standard 4WS will offer, I don't think you will get a CT without it. Tesla also have a safety reputation to keep, and 4WS will help that and raise the bar in the industry.

As such it's in their own interest to only charge the same margin, around 30% on top of cost, and even if it was 50-70% margin for 4WS, that will mean its still not enough for making it an optional extra with its own price. So its likely to be standard accross the range, and they will try to hide the feature cost together with the inflation and commodity price rise.

 

[Ogre]

...Also Tesla gets negative press whenever their margins…

Tesla gets negative press whenever their margins
… exceed the rest of the industry
… drop near the rest of the industry.
… are zero.
… are negative.
… are infinite!
… div/ zero error!
… can only be expressed as a multiple of pi.
… have an imaginary component (in the mathematical sense).

Doesn’t matter what happens… negative press happens.

 

[Throwcomputer]

I haven't made a stew in a long while, but I have soup at least once a week. I'm not a bean counter though, I just don't like beans, so I don't own any to count. As such my costings can be all over the show.

It never fails to surprise me though how easy it is to overestimate fabrication costs.

I think the tendency is that if you take something as a standalone, one peice, custom product that isn't commonly available, one ends up with quite high cost expectations. This might be true for a hand sculpture but as soon as you scale it up with mass production you start approaching the raw material resource cost, and then you start fiddling with that too, and bang, all of a sudden you're sitting on a gold mine.

I was talking to my neighbour the other day that works in a gold mine, he said they are extracting gold at a rate of 3-4g (1/6th ounce) per ton of excavated material. Thats 3,000,000th of a ton of gold, and its still worth it! Just imagine if you had to do that by hand and how high the price of gold would be!

Another fun fact: gold mines sell the gold in the ground before they even extract and process it. I'm going to try that with the carrots I'm growing in my vege garden at the next local farmers market. I'm sure it will take off! You should bring your soapbox and we'll have ourselves a grand ole time!

One day I'd really like to see the cost breakdown for every part of the CT, and each resource and manufacturing cost.

You can buy it from Monroe when the CT is released. Let us know.

Btw, loving that my formerly unpopular opinion that they will only produce a quad motor (to save on manufacturing costs associated with complexity of lines with many options) sold in software limited variants for cheaper models is now seemingly more acceptable to the larger crowd!

I will enjoy that when it comes to fruition.

 

[tidmutt]

Charlie mate, sorry to shoot you down again buddy, but there will be no diamond steering as per my posts above, and all models will be quad motor and have 4WS standard.

I know you're really clucky for diamond steering so you can turn around in your front driveway without making cactus of your roses, so you can load a slab and a goon, your esky full of tucker, barbie for the snags, and that mob of ankle biters in the back of the ute for a day out woop woops, all just so you can impress your Sheila.

Now that's turning the Aussie up to 11.

 

[tidmutt]

I would! Never been a truck owner, I've occasionally driven large vehicles, but rarely and never for more than a day or two. Largest vehicle I've owned in my current Model Y. I'm sure I'll adapt to a truck, but the 4WS will hopefully make it a bit more idiot proof. That and the cameras and other sensors and software.

 

[charliemagpie]

Maybe we are looking into the past where new tech was reserved for luxury first, and then over the years filtered down to mainstram vehicles.

Tesla adds a new thing to market practically every month, we should as pointed out, look at the cost of manufacture, and I think mostly, we should think of adding margins instead of premiums.

 

[JBee]

You can buy it from Monroe when the CT is released. Let us know.

Btw, loving that my formerly unpopular opinion that they will only produce a quad motor (to save on manufacturing costs associated with complexity of lines with many options) sold in software limited variants for cheaper models is now seemingly more acceptable to the larger crowd!

I will enjoy that when it comes to fruition.

Well personally I think EM has been reading my posts from last year for inspiration:

Its a fun exercise to explore the possibility though

You do have a point with the TM only having one front motor, that likely won't absorb full adhesion regen, but it wouldn't be possible to have a single motor front braking anyway, you need a motor per front wheel to modulate ABS otherwise you'd be going off-road faster than you think

But if we're on the subject of wishful thinking, another thing I'd like to see is the brake rotors on the motor side of the axle shaft. Especially on a off-road vehicle, that will keep it out of the dirt and dust a bit more, plus protect lines from brush, rock scrapes and mud, and lowers the unsuspended mass of the wheel. The thing they need to do though is make the motor hollow and put the axle shaft through it to the middle to make the axle/suspension arms as long as possible to increase wheel articulation as well.

Then chuck a planetary gear in the hub as final ratio (adds some weight again) but gives you portal axles like a Unimog. Huge clearance right up to the wheel. Then add inboard suspension as well and a central tyre inflation system (easier on a portal hub) and four wheel steering with crab and counter steer....then we'd be rocking! :-D

So since then in June last year, we got Quad motor, four wheel steering, a Tesla CTIS patent from a Mercedes engineer that worked on portal hubs for Unimog and at least inboard/pushroad suspension on the rear axle. (Likely on the prototype but only obvious from recent photos)

I have another post in that same thread about wanting vision controlled active suspension, that Tesla now released as a software update for MS/MX last week. So we're getting that for sure in the CT.

The things we're missing from my historical hitlist is inboard brakes with long suspension arms, planetary gear (this will be good on the QM anyway), possibly with portal hubs, CTIS confirmation (maybe as an option) and of course the sliding solar glass vault cover and a midgate. We're getting there!

P.S. nearly forgot the we still need the maglev BAW!

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

I didn't ask about the retail cost yet. What they "can" charge for an extra feature is not necessarily the benchmark though, its more what they can "reasonably expect to charge." Negative press will have a feild day otherwise and legacy industry would offer it cheaper. Other customers might not even want it and will bulk at any cost.

This all still hangs on the assumption its a "option" you can choose. Given the wheelbase and safety enhancement, and continuity of handling accross the range that a standard 4WS will offer, I don't think you will get a CT without it. Tesla also have a safety reputation to keep, and 4WS will help that and raise the bar in the industry.

As such it's in their own interest to only charge the same margin, around 30% on top of cost, and even if it was 50-70% margin for 4WS, that will mean its still not enough for making it an optional extra with its own price. So its likely to be standard accross the range, and they will try to hide the feature cost together with the inflation and commodity price rise.

I agree with most of what you say, but have a slightly different perspective. You say “reasonably expect to charge” and From what I have heard Elon say I would say it more like “reasonably willing to charge”. I don’t think they will charge a dime more than they have to - no matter how many people say otherwise.

 

[WA-CyberDriver]

Well personally I think EM has been reading my posts from last year for inspiration:

So since then in June last year, we got Quad motor, four wheel steering, a Tesla CTIS patent from a Mercedes engineer...

...

P.S. nearly forgot the we still need the maglev BAW!

OMG! It just occurred to me... Did we miss the patent filing on the BAW??? I'd hope that they'd keep that secret in house at Tesla as long as possible!!

Sponsored