Elon Says Final Cybertruck Design is Now Locked! Updated Production Timeline = Mid-2023

[Throwcomputer]

It is literally, truly horrible. Regularly purging the employment ranks will cause workers to overwhelmingly choose short-term benefits regardless of long-term consequences.

Not only that, but it fosters an employee base that sees themselves as expendable.. which itself leads to employees that don't care about their jobs or employers. Employment works best for both parties when they both respect each other. This idea that it's a one way street favoring the employer is archaic and a detriment to productivity.

Sponsored

 

[Tinker71]

It is literally, truly horrible. Regularly purging the employment ranks will cause workers to overwhelmingly choose short-term benefits regardless of long-term consequences.

It would be interesting to see the review system @ Tesla. The review systems are supposed to help filter out the short term benefits and provide constructive feedback for struggling employees. I did it for 13 team leaders that reported to me. Some of them made adjustments based on the reviews some did not. It took a lot of time. You have to be pretty bad for HR to let you get fired.
Unfortunately the purges make it easier.

Dead weight accumulates over time. The 10% rule is probably about right. Either it is a purge or a continuous sorting effort.

 

[Sirfun]

Not only that, but it fosters an employee base that sees themselves as expendable.. which itself leads to employees that don't care about their jobs or employers. Employment works best for both parties when they both respect each other. This idea that it's a one way street favoring the employer is archaic and a detriment to productivity.

Just like anything in life, there has to be a balance point. You can't have everybody feeling like they're on the game Survivor. In construction a lot of times it would be just like that. An out of town company would call up our little local union and request a temporary work force for their project, and once that job was over everybody gets laid off. It could be very cut throat because workers are trying to outlast the others.
But the other side of the coin is having a business where people feel like they're protected and their job is totally secure (government work comes to mind). That's not healthy either. An employer has to be able to clean house every once in a while. And employees have to know, their job is performance based to a degree. There has to be some balance, somewhere in the middle.

 

[TheLastStarfighter]

would you guys still get a plaid CT quad motor if it only gives you 300 miles of range??
im hoping for nothing less than 400.

I'll get the best one I can afford. I honestly don't know what model that is yet. But range is more important to me than acceleration, at least when you're talking Tesla acceleration. They're all fast.

 

[Ogre]

For me, I'm going for the model with the longest range. I don't care about getting to 60 mph under 2 seconds, honestly. I'm hoping for at least 500 miles (to be able to have decent range when towing).

I think this is how most of us feel.

Though I’d be happy with 400 miles range myself. I’m confident the acceleration on the truck will be fine for me.

 

[intimidator]

For me, I'm going for the model with the longest range. I don't care about getting to 60 mph under 2 seconds, honestly. I'm hoping for at least 500 miles (to be able to have decent range when towing).

I think for the next few years, 500 miles of range is going to be slightly out of reach to most EV manufacturers.

I know Tesla promised 500 miles on the Tri-Motor when they introduced the CyberTruck, but I suppose they could say that now they are only going to produce a Quad-motor, and that will only have 400 miles of range do to the power demands (or some other reason).

I would love more range, but I think 400 miles is our threshold right now (the Rivian Max Pack, the Chevy Silverado, Cybertruck Quad>?). At least until there is a big leap in battery tech. I don't think using 4680s will get us to 500 miles. (unless you put in a massive, heavy battery pack in the truck). Maybe someone will produce an EV truck with a range extender (yes, it would require an ICE engine).

 

[Crissa]

For me, I'm going for the model with the longest range. I don't care about getting to 60 mph under 2 seconds, honestly. I'm hoping for at least 500 miles (to be able to have decent range when towing).

The reason the fastest model generally had the longest range is because the fastest model needs the larger battery to feed those hungry motors.

-Crissa

 

[WildhavenMI]

I think this is how most of us feel.

Though I’d be happy with 400 miles range myself. I’m confident the acceleration on the truck will be fine for me.

I'm in this camp. If the trade off for 400+ miles is 8+ second 0-60, sign me up for the mileage. But I honestly don't think that's a factor and we're not sacrificing range for acceleration since we can always just go slower ourselves. I think its truly a cost/weight thing. 400 miles, 2 mi/kwh average (Lightning, Rivian), that's a 200kWh pack. That's gonna be heavy af. And expensive.

 

[Tinker71]

The reason the fastest model generally had the longest range is because the fastest model needs the larger battery to feed those hungry motors.

-Crissa

Adding hp to existing motors is super cheap. A 400 hp ct2 would cost about $1000 more than a 800 hp ct2 all things being equal. That's a lot of wow for $1000. That is why Tesla does it. That acceleration still does wonders for marketing.

 

[rlhamil]

Not only that, but it fosters an employee base that sees themselves as expendable.. which itself leads to employees that don't care about their jobs or employers. Employment works best for both parties when they both respect each other. This idea that it's a one way street favoring the employer is archaic and a detriment to productivity.

The bottom performers ARE...not expendable, but at the very least if they cost more to keep than not to keep, in need of either upping their game or being replaced.

Underperforming does NOT deserve respect, even if the individual's personhood (whatever that is) deserves the same default degree of respect as anyone else.

A job is NOT an entitlement. And respect for the employer means doing one's best, or as close as mere mortals with finite attention spans and endurance can get. And these days, doing one task repetitively for years is no longer an option; one needs to be constantly learning, adapting, adjusting, acquiring new skills, or one ends up at the bottom. A partial exception exists for some specialists, but they're people with diagnostic skills or something that puts them (for now) on a different level than human substitutes for not yet available or affordable advanced robots.

That said, some accommodations are not unreasonable, and if someone demonstrates a willingness to make an effort to up their game, some degree of training, coaching, etc MIGHT be worth the cost as compared to starting from scratch with someone else (even someone else that starts sharper will have their own learning curve).

 

[Ogre]

Adding hp to existing motors is super cheap. A 400 hp ct2 would cost about $1000 more than a 800 hp ct2 all things being equal. That's a lot of wow for $1000. That is why Tesla does it. That acceleration still does wonders for marketing.

Not just the cost difference either, doubling the HP on an EV only adds a small amount of weight. You do list a tiny bit of efficiency but it’s mostly a cheap upgrade.

The big catch is you have to have a battery system that can deliver the power the motors need.

 

[rlhamil]

I’m not as sure. (Either way)

The quad motor config could be more focused on performance rather than range in which case shaving 500 pounds or more of battery might make more sense.

There will likely be a long range version with a 200 kWh pack, but it might not be the quad.

Unless it's about tradeoffs to limit the maximum price, I don't see why more motors should mean less range. There's less dead weight components (no differentials needed with one motor per wheel) and at any given speed or acceleration, each motor is not working as hard.

IMO the hope of a million mile power train is greater with four motors, too.

 

[Ogre]

Unless it's about tradeoffs to limit the maximum price, I don't see why more motors should mean less range. There's less dead weight components (no differentials needed with one motor per wheel) and at any given speed or acceleration, each motor is not working as hard.

IMO the hope of a million mile power train is greater with four motors, too.

Model S/X Plaid has less range than LR trims.

Model 3/Y Performance have less range than their LR trims.

That is all I was looking at. Might not be a huge delta, but just pointing out that in Tesla’s lineup “Performance” and “Range” are not typically paired together.

This is also why I think the tri motor config might be kept around.

 

[Ogre]

I'll get the best one I can afford. I honestly don't know what model that is yet. But range is more important to me than acceleration, at least when you're talking Tesla acceleration. They're all fast.

But what is the “Best”?

With the Model X, the Plaid is much faster but the LR has 6% more range. So if the quad has 470 miles range and the LR 500 miles, which is the best? Particularly if the quad is $18% more expensive like the plaid is.

It would be very tough for me to pay more money for the lower range truck even if it has melt-your-face performance.

 

[rlhamil]

But what is the “Best”?

With the Model X, the Plaid is much faster but the LR has 6% more range. So if the quad has 470 miles range and the LR 500 miles, which is the best? Particularly if the quad is $18% more expensive like the plaid is.

It would be very tough for me to pay more money for the lower range truck even if it has melt-your-face performance.

My interest is not performance in terms of acceleration so much as in terms of better handling; and also that I believe that four motors means better life-vs-maintenance.

My wish is a range that would reflect a comfortable (not necessarily for work) daily drive without too many stops.

I don't see 500 mi vs 470 mi as a critical difference; half an hour at moderate highway speeds.

If and when FSD gets to level 4 or 5 or even 3 if I can trust myself to remain awake but relaxed, I might feel differently, wanting to go as far as possible.

Sponsored