MyTeslaWeekend Rumor - Dual Motor only for the first 500k units produced!

[Crissa]

I think Tesla has been struggling with ramping up 4680 at Austin as well. Last shareholders meeting they said they still weren’t producing them in Texas. I know the cathode plant is coming online soon, but I hadn’t realized that was part of the game plan.

I’d heard some of the parts to turn 2170s into structural packs had gotten trapped in Shanghai during the shutdown and that was a big part of it.

I think the observation they were only using a dry anode and not cathode was key to this: Austin wasn't designed to have any of a wet process in it. So it may be that something tripped them up at scale.

Of course, few were expecting a dry anode at all, so...

-Crissa

Sponsored

 

[Jstoltz54]

FWIW, just now from @wholemarscatalog

 

[Tinker71]

FWIW, just now from @wholemarscatalog

Tesla maybe conceeding lower end vehicles to others. Many people are willing to spend $10k on AWD even though they only need it 5% of the time. That is good margin.


It can be snowy in Utah. I could get by with fwd but my wife won't consider a car without AWD.

 

[Crissa]

Until their capacity is in the millions, they just don't need to make cheap trucks for people like me. I understand that.

This is a demand problem - they have too much of it to feed.

Once they had 2x the reservations that Ford stopped at, it was clear it was going to be a problem.

But that doesn't mean it's canceled, it just means they have a crazy-long queue.

-Crissa

 

[charliemagpie]

If it comes down to building 2 versions instead of 4, I think it certainly will help the price.

A Dual and Quad would each serve their majority customer orders, and in all likelihood remove the prospect of playing funny buggers with price points.

No charging premiums for the little tech Easter eggs.

My gut feeling is Tesla's manufacturing prowess will incorporate these tech innovations into mass production at a legacy price. Or less !!!

The only downside, is those with the Single order missing out.
It was always likely to be late. I predict it is still down the track.

 

[Throwcomputer]

Think it was pretty obvious and natural conclusion once they announced quad motor variant.. that they would really only do dual and quad. single and tri make no sense and only add complication to the manufacturing lines.

 

[JBee]

Yep quad for 4WD and maybe sometime later on, if at all, dual motor rear wheel drive only. Single in ten years when they need to mop up the bottom end and they are building SS trucks for $25k?

I highly suspect we'll see a more compact, higher output, lower geared, CF wrapped motor on all new motors including the CTs.

BTW the front and rear castings currently have little to do with the front and rear motor and drivetrain housings, so the castings could easily accommodate any motor configuration if needed. I just highly doubt they need to make anything less than a QM, with motors costing $700ea.

Once again we're working on the traction limit of the tyres with these drivetrains, theres just no point making a motor with 100HP less to save $50.

 

[Tinker71]

Think it was pretty obvious and natural conclusion once they announced quad motor variant.. that they would really only do dual and quad. single and tri make no sense and only add complication to the manufacturing lines.

I look at it a little different. There only needs to be 3 configurations of front and rear castings .


Single motor front/front (motor delete/no guts)
2 motor front
2 motor rear

Basically the only thing that changes is the front end. As many have hypothesized the motors can be tuned up and down with software, but they are basically the same size.

This could give you:
1.) A very effective RWD with torque vectoring
2.) A tri motor (to replace the CT2)
3.) The Quad variant
4.) Quad Plaid.

 

[cvalue13]

Yep quad for 4WD and maybe sometime later on, if at all, dual motor rear wheel drive only.

Why would they limit dual motor to rear wheel drive only? Merely to differentiate trim levels?

I’d assume the dual motor would still be 4WD, just as with the F150L and Rivian

 

[Jstoltz54]

Until their capacity is in the millions, they just don't need to make cheap trucks for people like me. I understand that.

This is a demand problem - they have too much of it to feed.

Once they had 2x the reservations that Ford stopped at, it was clear it was going to be a problem.

But that doesn't mean it's canceled, it just means they have a crazy-long queue.

-Crissa

i think they’ll take a lot into consideration in this decision.profitability, will they sell more FSD in the lower end pricing? Will that off set the extra usage of hard to replace parts I.e. batteries, and the cost of transporting end product to users. Maybe difficulty in achieving production rates, is a 2 motor variant substantially easier to assemble? Impact of tax credits on take rate. A long long list of variables to weigh one against the other.
so we’re back to simply waiting for Tesla to share those decisions on model and pricing and also, maybe, delivery Schedules. TX then CA then FL, then highest orders by state or region? Or still prioritize based on distance to the factory? Or, or, or who knows what. Patience is a virtue ( yeah yeah I know, my shiny hieny)

 

[charliemagpie]

I just think the contraption with the lot wheel assembly will not be hugely more expensive than a standard wheel assembly.

What could we be talking about ? $1000 per assembly? which includes :
- Brembo Braking
- Sensify
- Steer By Wire / Force feedback
- Variable Ratio Steering
- Rear Wheel Steering
- Torque Vectoring
- Diamond Steering, Crab Walk and Tank Turning

And all of these whilst seeming expensive , replace the more expensive centralized systems such as brake fluid assemblies, steering assemblies etc.

Time and Labor savings.

$1000 per wheel extra we are getting robbed lol


I am probably wrong, but I see the superior Tesla engineering at play here.

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

You guys assume that WMC knows squat about what he is talking about. Do you read what he posts regularly? More than 50% of the time he is whacko. What you want to do is to remember the original premise of the Cybertruck and the mission of Tesla in general: massive adoption of BEVs. They simply must have a low-priced BEV truck, just like the Model 3 brought BEVs to a much larger audience. It would make sense for Tesla to start production with the flagship trim because the demand might be lower and the audience more able to accommodate the debugging process, but as quickly as possible Tesla needs to build an affordable CT trim.

 

[Crissa]

You guys assume that WMC knows squat about what he is talking about. Do you read what he posts regularly? More than 50% of the time he is whacko. What you want to do is to remember the original premise of the Cybertruck and the mission of Tesla in general: massive adoption of BEVs. They simply must have a low-priced BEV truck, just like the Model 3 brought BEVs to a much larger audience. It would make sense for Tesla to start production with the flagship trim because the demand might be lower and the audience more able to accommodate the debugging process, but as quickly as possible Tesla needs to build an affordable CT trim.

I don't think anyone is taking the YouTuber seriously.

But that's also why I pointed out a really long queue isn't the same as canceled.

I look at it a little different. There only needs to be 3 configurations of front and rear castings .

Also, we don't have evidence the twined motor uses even a different cover in the Model S. But until supply exceeds demand, they don't need new variants.

-Crissa

PS, the advantages of each motors are:

• Twinned in rear - torque vectoring, high towing capacity
• One rear - light weight, less expensive
• One forward - more range efficiency, basic all-wheel drive
• Twinned in front - more torque vectoring, super performance

Tesla tends to only go for three configurations of drive train max: Optimized for range, optimized for price, and optimized for performance.

But a truck will let them get into the demand space of millions of trucks a year... and that's where you start having different optimizations for cargo and rough road which might mess up that trinity.

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

I don't think anyone is taking the YouTuber seriously.

But that's also why I pointed out a really long queue isn't the same as canceled.


Also, we don't have evidence the twined motor uses even a different cover in the Model S. But until supply exceeds demand, they don't need new variants.

-Crissa

PS, the advantages of each motors are:

• Twinned in rear - torque vectoring, high towing capacity
• One rear - light weight, less expensive
• One forward - more range efficiency, basic all-wheel drive
• Twinned in front - more torque vectoring, super performance

Tesla tends to only go for three configurations of drive train max: Optimized for range, optimized for price, and optimized for performance.

But a truck will let them get into the demand space of millions of trucks a year... and that's where you start having different optimizations for cargo and rough road which might mess up that trinity.

Is there any reason why they couldn't use the same casting in both front and rear regardless of the drive unit? That is, could they design the front and rear to accommodate both a single or dual motor setup? They certainly have had the time, and it would be easier for them in the long run. I am thinking that they are putting the same suspension and 4WS in all of the CTs and those would have a major impact on the casting design, maybe more so that the drivetrain arrangement.

 

[Tinker71]

BEV adoption is still in it's infancy. For the sake of argument lets call 2010 year zero with the introduction of the Roadster. We are still less than 5% cumulative saturation. On most of these curves true mass production for the masses doesn't take off until 10% saturation.

Most of us are still considered early adopters and we will probably pay a premium in the next couple years. Cost will start to drop in 2024 or so when supply chain catches up to demand and more options are available.

I guess my point is that Tesla doesn't need to force too many options. They can't change the curve by themselves. They will be a leader and push boundaries, but won't sacrifice overall profit. That is why they are not concentrating on the model 2 and may not make the CT3 or it's equivalent in the next couple years.

Rumors are rumors until published on the Tesla site. This is just speculation but there is some support.

Sponsored