This is what Tesla Owners said about the Bolt last year!

[DucRider]

Tesla might have shown us the way originally with EV but Chevy bolt is the one that will get us all there

Well, if by "all" you mean the limited production run that Chevy will produce, and the lackluster dealerships that will de-promote them, then yes, "all".

Tesla accelerating their plans to produce more EV's in one year in 2020 than Chevy will have sold in their entire history by 2020, Bolt's included.

I guess it's possible that Tesla will someday meet a deadline. It might or might not be the Model 3 roll out. They could make the deadline the same way they started with the Model X (where they hand made 5 cars to deliver in October, then basically stopped production for 2+ months - See! We shipped cars!)
The original "pencils down" deadline on the Model 3 design was announced as June 30th. They are still "tweaking" things - like redesigning the trunk opening, trying to improve CD to below .21, etc. All admirable, but not conducive to getting serious production started on time.

I doubt they will be producing in volume until well into 2018, and even then at far below their stated goals (unless all semblance of QC goes out the window).

Tesla is very much production constrained, and have a very hard time meeting current projections with the low volumes (relatively) they are currently producing. Ramping that up by a factor of a hundred could be a recipe for disaster. They should be looking to other automakers to start poaching some people with real volume production experience to get the physical plant set up (and a year is a VERY short window to do it).

In order to build a completely new car, there are procedures that have been developed to ensure the best quality product. GM ran hundreds of "test" or pre-production Bolts months before the line was scheduled to start. I doubt if that is in Tesla's plans.

I have a friend who works with start-ups to bring products to market. He constantly has to tell clients "There are ten steps in bringing a prodcut to market. If You try and skip from 6 to 9, you'll wind up coming back to do it later. And it will cost you MORE time and money than if you had done it right the first time." I believe that is the root of many of the problems with the Model X. It was already delayed 2+ years, and they were under tremendous pressure to get product shipping - and are still paying the price.

If they follow the same path and philosophy with the Model 3, it could spell the end of the company. When you have 100x the volume, recalls and build quality issues get exponentially more costly. Particularly since many Model 3 buyers will be hundreds of miles from the nearest service center.

Tesla is able to design and engineer fabulous cars. Time will tell whether they can produce them in volume. In my book, the jury is still out.

GM's "Limited production run" is a misnomer. They have estimated 30K the first year, but are completely capable of producing 3 times that. And yes, some Chevy dealers have been slow on the uptake to adopt EV's, but there are many who are 100% behind it and excited to get the product.

 

[elpwr]

I have a Tesla model S and a Chevy Spark EV. I am generally quite pleased with both of these cars - but I'm probably going to buy a Bolt when they're available. Tesla has been 1-2 years late in the introduction of both of their previous cars and there is no real indication that the Model 3 will be any different.

Unlike a lot of the Tesla fans, I am not blinded to my cars' shortcomings - it's a great vehicle but certainly has its share of problems and issues. And if Tesla is able to produce (and sell) anywhere near the number of Model 3's they anticipate, it's going to require a massive increase in the size and number of their service facilities.

My Spark EV's reliability has been excellent and I would have no qualms at all about buying another GM EV. GM's huge dealer network will probably be able to accommodate the service which could be a real problem for Tesla - already many of the Tesla service centers are overwhelmed and appointments several weeks out for service are not uncommon.

I really love electric propulsion; both of my EV's so far have been great. And I'm really looking forward to the Bolt.

 

[Anonymous]

If they follow the same path and philosophy with the Model 3, it could spell the end of the company. ...
Tesla is able to design and engineer fabulous cars. Time will tell whether they can produce them in volume.

Tesla has stated they will be focusing on reducing the complexity of manufacturing the Model 3.
Tesla is producing >2000 EV's per week, which is more than GM Volt sells in a month. That's 4x !
Tesla are on track to produce >100,000 EV's next year, S & X.
Whereas Chevy only crossed 100,000 total Volt's sold all-time just 6 months ago.

It's laughable that anyone would claim that GM can produce more EV's in volume, the facts completely refute this claim.

As for the Bolt, I hope it does well, but we all know the dealers outside of a few California locations will be out to lunch on this car and will fail badly. As for the Chevy Spark showing the way, it's a compliance car that Chevy refused to sell widely, because they didn't have a supportive dealer network outside of California. The facts are crystal clear on this. The vast majority of auto dealers are not a benefit to selling and supporting EV's.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

If they follow the same path and philosophy with the Model 3, it could spell the end of the company. ...
Tesla is able to design and engineer fabulous cars. Time will tell whether they can produce them in volume.

Tesla has stated they will be focusing on reducing the complexity of manufacturing the Model 3.
Tesla is producing >2000 EV's per week, which is more than GM Volt sells in a month. That's 4x !
Tesla are on track to produce >100,000 EV's next year, S & X.
Whereas Chevy only crossed 100,000 total Volt's sold all-time just 6 months ago.

It's laughable that anyone would claim that GM can produce more EV's in volume, the facts completely refute this claim.

The fact is that Tesla currently produces more EVs than GM currently does. This does not lead to your conclusion that Tesla can produce EVs in large volumes better than GM can. I think it speaks more towards desire than capability. When talking about Model III volumes, we are talking about orders of magnitude greater than S & X combined. GM already builds and sells millions of cars per year. Tesla is currently at 1/100th that rate.

I'm rooting for Tesla as much as anyone, but let's be realistic. They have a huge (though not insurmountable) mountain to climb here.

 

[DucRider]

You seem to be focused on the number of EV's GM has built, when an EV is just a car. EV's are not that different to produce than an ICE car - in many ways they are actually simpler (one of the benefits to owning one). Tesla has nowhere near the manufacturing experience of ANY of the major automakers.

Building 10K or even 20K Bolts a month would not be a big deal to GM. They have loads of experience with that kind of volume. While it is true that that is not in EV's, most of Tesla's production problems are unrelated to the EV aspect and attributable to the simple fact of producing a highly complex product with thousands of components (any car falls in this category).

I too wish Tesla well and they have and will continue to drive much of the advancement and sales of ALL EV's.

But there seems to be an assumption that they will be able to ramp production to 100x their current level with no issues when the have consistently had issues at their current (and previously even lower) volumes. Yes, they can get there. But the speed that they are planning to do it is probably not realistic. Meeting production goals and deadlines is not their strong suit, and the Model 3 numbers they are talking about are a much, much bigger task than they have ever attempted.

Established automakers have the luxury of doing what GM is with the Bolt: Re-tool an existing assembly line close to a year before producing a new model. Months before production is scheduled to begin, build a few hundred on the line as a test of production and to train their employees. Drive those all over the country in real world conditions for months (a couple were quick charging at Electric Avenue in Portland last week) to find any QC or design issues. Only then will production and sales begin.

Tesla has had (partly out of necessity) a completely different philosophy - push 'em out the door as soon as you can make even one. This has created serious problems with the Model X, and it's exacerbated by the relative scarcity of service centers. Current Model S owners are very vocal about the long lead times to book service as the centers are being overwhelmed by Model X issues. If you multiply this times 100 for the Model 3 (even at 20% of the Model X rate) and it will be a very, very big issue. Look at the service center map and figure out the number of cars for each when Tesla reaches a million cars on the road. https://www.tesla.com/findus#/bounds/49.38,-66.94,25.82,-124.39?search=service,&name=us

Yes, they need to push as hard and as fast as possible to ramp production to become a major automobile company. Yes, they are the biggest EV producer, but EV sales are a small percentage of all car sales. They have growing pains in their future, many pitfalls to overcome, and not all are related to production.

 

[SeanNelson]

...I too wish Tesla well and they have and will continue to drive much of the advancement and sales of ALL EV's.

But there seems to be an assumption that they will be able to ramp production to 100x their current level with no issues when the have consistently had issues at their current (and previously even lower) volumes...

I don't think anyone really expects there will be no issues. The big question is whether the issues will overwhelm the company. Nobody, including Elon Musk, really knows that - they're just going to have to forge ahead and do the best they can.

I'm not a Tesla guy, but I hope they succeed. They're really raising the bar for everyone and we all benefit from that.

 

[Anonymous]

You seem to be focused on the number of EV's GM has built, when an EV is just a car

Sorry no. EV's have one important component, the high voltage battery, which requires many cells, and GM simply does not have a partner which has scaled production to produce cells in anywhere near the quantity to make the Bolt and Volt anything more than a marginal play in GM's overall line up of vehicles.

GM can not build in volumes competing with their ICE (Gas) car product lines. Therefore, these products will be available in relatively small quantities, with insufficient dealer quantities to sell without ordering or waiting.

Being a large scale manufacturer in the gas world means nothing in the EV world when the primary component of the car is outsourced (cells) and produced in lower volumes than their direct competitor (Tesla + Panasonic). The dealer network is largely incompetent with respect to selling and servicing EV's, so that is a low benefit too.

Anecdote : Booked my first service appointment for my Smart ED yesterday after almost three years with not a single visit back to the dealer for any reason, the service staff showed insufficient knowledge, I had to spoon feed them the parts and items to work on.

 

[DucRider]

Sorry no. EV's have one important component, the high voltage battery, which requires many cells, and GM simply does not have a partner which has scaled production to produce cells in anywhere near the quantity to make the Bolt and Volt anything more than a marginal play in GM's overall line up of vehicles.

GM can not build in volumes competing with their ICE (Gas) car product lines. Therefore, these products will be available in relatively small quantities, with insufficient dealer quantities to sell without ordering or waiting.

Being a large scale manufacturer in the gas world means nothing in the EV world when the primary component of the car is outsourced (cells) and produced in lower volumes than their direct competitor (Tesla + Panasonic). The dealer network is largely incompetent with respect to selling and servicing EV's, so that is a low benefit too.

So which is it, GM can't produce cars in volume or their cell supplier can't supply enough cells?

I guess it doesn't matter because I don't agree with either of those arguments.

Yes, EV's are a small percentage of the vehicles GM produces, but that was actually my original point. GM has experience producing hundreds of thousand of vehicles a year. Tesla does not.

LG has supplied cells for more vehicles than Tesla has manufactured in total (and Tesla themselves use LG cells for the Roadster 400 mile pack upgrade). NOBODY has made packs/cells in the volumes we are talking about, so saying that Tesla is more capable than LG is actually a bit silly.

And as far as the battery pack being the only component that matters, tell that to the Model X owners with leaking door seals, doors that don't open/close properly or any of the other non EV related problems plaguing the Model X.

Tesla has always outsourced their cells and will continue to do so (Panasonic will still manufacture the cells, just in space provided by/leased from Tesla).

You're criticizing GM in that you think that people will have to order a Bolt and wait for it? Isn't that Tesla's entire business model? I find it much more likely that you will be able to test drive a Bolt and take one home that same day than needing to wait (once the initial demand is met).

Yes, Tesla will likely overcome all these hurdles, and likely even expand their service centers so there is at least ONE in every State. But saying GM can't manufacture EV's in volume is Ludicrous (pun intended). GM will likely hit the 200K mark before Tesla.

 

[Anonymous]

So which is it, GM can't produce cars in volume or their cell supplier can't supply enough cells?

GM does not build EV's in volume, that is fact, you tried to change my claim to be about producing any car in volume, nice straw man. GM does not produce electric vehicles today at Tesla's current rate, so claiming GM are better positioned to outproduce Tesla is not backed by facts. GM could produce more, but does not, and that is on purpose, they have chosen to deliberately cap their risk/investment in doing so. They are not better positioned, because they don't want to be, or are clueless, perhaps both if you look at the Cadillac Volt they tried to sell for Tesla money.

LG has produced exactly zero high voltage battery cells which have made it into a 200+ mile electric only vehicle available for sale. Panasonic has made billions of cells for 150,000 of said cars, and accelerating now up to 2000+ cars per week. LG makes cells for low volume compliance cars, Panasonic is spending billions to scale out production to produce hundreds of thousands of long range electric cars.

These are all facts and are true today.

Perhaps one day GM and LG will compete on volume, but that's not what's happening today, and by the time the Bolt has had it's initial 8 month production run before mid-year retooling, Tesla will be releasing their high volume long range car. My guess is that Chevy will sell 4000 thousand Bolt's per month over the next few years, they will need a head start as Tesla will be making 4000 per week within the next two years.

 

[DucRider]

GM does not build EV's in volume, that is fact, you tried to change my claim to be about producing any car in volume, nice straw man. GM does not produce electric vehicles today at Tesla's current rate, so claiming GM are better positioned to outproduce Tesla is not backed by facts. GM could produce more, but does not, and that is on purpose, they have chosen to deliberately cap their risk/investment in doing so. They are not better positioned, because they don't want to be, or are clueless, perhaps both if you look at the Cadillac Volt they tried to sell for Tesla money.

LG has produced exactly zero high voltage battery cells which have made it into a 200+ mile electric only vehicle available for sale. Panasonic has made billions of cells for 150,000 of said cars, and accelerating now up to 2000+ cars per week. LG makes cells for low volume compliance cars, Panasonic is spending billions to scale out production to produce hundreds of thousands of long range electric cars.

These are all facts and are true today.

Perhaps one day GM and LG will compete on volume, but that's not what's happening today, and by the time the Bolt has had it's initial 8 month production run before mid-year retooling, Tesla will be releasing their high volume long range car. My guess is that Chevy will sell 4000 thousand Bolt's per month over the next few years, they will need a head start as Tesla will be making 4000 per week within the next two years.

My point is not that GM is capable of producing EV's in volume, where you claim that is beyond their capability.
From an earlier post

It's laughable that anyone would claim that GM can produce more EV's in volume, the facts completely refute this claim.

I'd put money on the fact that GM will produce more EV's in 2017 than Tesla. And that could also easily be true in 2018. Yes, Tesla has lots of reservations (not orders) for the Model 3. Yes, it is likely to be a great car and sell well. No, they will not start making 20K+ a month by the end of 2017.

LG is the ONLY manufacturer providing cells for a 400+ mile EV (Tesla Roadster).

Just because Tesla chose to use Panasonic and an existing laptop battery cell does not make Panasonic the only cell provider capable of producing in volume. In fact, that format cell will not be used in the Model 3, and is not ideal for any EV being designed today. Prismatic and other formats are much more suitable for EVs. You claim it as a fact that only Panasonic can produce cells in volume to supply EV manufacturers? You try and use the argument that because LG have not produced that volume in the past, they can't do it in the future. But not when it comes to Tesla? And Panasonic? The Gigafactory?

The Volt is not a compliance car. The Zoe is not a compliance car. The LEAF 2.0 is not a compliance car. (BTW, if you define "compliance car" as "Only exists because the manufacturer garners ZEV credits for it's sale", the Model S qualifies).

Nobody is currently producing EV's in the volumes you are talking about. GM has the factories and tooling in place to manufacture in the kinds of volume Tesla is proposing they will do. Yes EV's are a small percentage of what GM sells, but what does that have to do with production capability? You seem to see it as a negative, I see it as a positive. GM has the tooling, plants, assembly lines, experience and personnel in place to produce 200K a year of a given model. How many of those can Tesla claim?

You seem to keep switching between GM does not have the capability, their suppliers can't provide parts, they don't have the desire and will deliberately cap sales. You state these all as facts when they are opinions.

GM is taking a conservative approach in estimating Bolt sales. Other analysts have postulated 80K the first year (and GM has confirmed they could do that if needed).

I don't know how many Bolts will sell the first couple of years, but stating that GM does not have the capability too produce them is flat out wrong.

It's not a race where there is only one winner. There better be more choices than Tesla on the market or EV's will have failed miserably. I admire Tesla, but claiming they are the only manufacturer that can or will produce in high volumes has no basis in fact.

 

[SeanNelson]

I admire Tesla, but claiming they are the only manufacturer that can or will produce in high volumes has no basis in fact.

I agree. The most unique thing about Tesla right now is that they've managed to fire the imagination and get a much broader swath of people interested in buying an EV than any of the other manufacturers. But I think everyone would agree that they've faced a bunch of challenges in actually getting cars out the door. Their missteps may have shown them the way to eliminate those problems and really start pumping out EVs in large numbers - but I think the jury's still out on that one.

GM, on the other hand, is strong on procurement, testing and manufacturing and weak on the excitement. The jury's still out on the Bolt, but like Tesla it's too early to write it off just yet.

 

[ssspinball]

I'd put money on the fact that GM will produce more EV's in 2017 than Tesla. And that could also easily be true in 2018. Yes, Tesla has lots of reservations (not orders) for the Model 3. Yes, it is likely to be a great car and sell well. No, they will not start making 20K+ a month by the end of 2017.

This doesn't make sense unless you are referring only to Model 3 vs Bolt. Tesla in on pace to sell 70,000+ EVs in 2016 alone. GM has sold zero.

 

[DucRider]

This doesn't make sense unless you are referring only to Model 3 vs Bolt. Tesla in on pace to sell 70,000+ EVs in 2016 alone. GM has sold zero.

US sales figures::
Tesla sold ~20K Model S/X combined in the first 6 months, so on pace for 40K.
GM sold ~11K in the same time frame (did you forget about the Volt & Spark EV?)

Thru the end of 2015, Tesla had produced about ~50K vehicles towards the 200K tax credit phase out, GM had sold ~95K.

 

[ssspinball]

GM sold ~11K in the same time frame (did you forget about the Volt & Spark EV?)

I did forget about the CARB state limited Spark EV, but the Volt is PHEV not EV. That's not a car that competes with Tesla.

 

[DucRider]

I did forget about the CARB state limited Spark EV, but the Volt is PHEV not EV. That's not a car that competes with Tesla.

We were talking about manufacturing capability, not the merits of one EV over another (whether PHEV or BEV).

Making 100K+ Volts that do have a battery pack and electric motors - plus the added complexity of the Voltec drive train and ICE components certainly shows the ability to manufacture in volume.

And your right, Tesla does not have a car that competes with the Volt.

 

[Aidan]

If possible can I get some clarification.... why doesn't Tesla have a car that competes with the volt is it only price range or is it the actual specifications? Is it the buyer profile for the Volt that Tesla has no interest in being part of?

 

[Zoomit]

The Volt (or equivalent) is a step backwards for them in their quest to create sustainable transportation. It's dead end technology.

 

[Breezy]

If possible can I get some clarification.... why doesn't Tesla have a car that competes with the volt is it only price range or is it the actual specifications? Is it the buyer profile for the Volt that Tesla has no interest in being part of?

Ten years ago, Tesla was planning to have gasoline range extenders in their vehicles. The reason they don't is primarily because of the cost and complexity of integrating ICE powertrains. It also frees them from the regulatory burden of dealing with the EPA and equivalent international regulators.

And yes, it also feeds into the image of being a forward-thinking, purist, EV-only company. EREVs are ultimately a dead-end, but whether that dead end is 10 or 50 years from now remains to be seen.

 

[DucRider]

If possible can I get some clarification.... why doesn't Tesla have a car that competes with the volt is it only price range or is it the actual specifications? Is it the buyer profile for the Volt that Tesla has no interest in being part of?

Ten years ago, Tesla was planning to have gasoline range extenders in their vehicles. The reason they don't is primarily because of the cost and complexity of integrating ICE powertrains. It also frees them from the regulatory burden of dealing with the EPA and equivalent international regulators.

And yes, it also feeds into the image of being a forward-thinking, purist, EV-only company. EREVs are ultimately a dead-end, but whether that dead end is 10 or 50 years from now remains to be seen.

A Tesla isn't viable for long distance travel away from the major interstates, and current models cost significantly more than a Volt.

And Tesla DOES need to deal with the EPA to produce the Monroney label (MPGe, range, fuel savings, etc.).

 

[rsewill]

It's my belief we should be grateful to Tesla.

Tesla acted as a trailblazer.

If my poor memory is correct, even ten years ago most people, and I suspect car manufacturers, would have said electric vehicles could never be anything more than glorified electric golf carts.

Tesla may not have the manufacturing facilities to turn the trail into an asphalt highway, but Elon Musk doesn't seem to care.

If I take Elon Musk, at his word, he doesn't view other electric car manufacturers as competitors. He views them as collaborators.

I believe the same is true for SpaceX. Elon Musk is trying to blaze a trail. Others will have to pave the trail and turn the trail into a paved road.

If it weren't for the Chinese driving the price of solar panels down like they did, I would have given credit to Elon Musk for trying to blaze that trail too.

Elon Musk is also trying to be a trailblazer for energy storage.

We pretend the Bolt will take a piece of Tesla's pie, but I believe, thanks to Tesla, the pie is growing. There is plenty of pie to go around.

The Bolt will appeal to people who want a hatchback. Elon Musk doesn't seem to want to build hatchbacks.

We need trailblazers. We need people with the courage to blaze a trail.

In my thirty-five years of employment, I learned there's a place for trailblazers and a place for those who pave the trail.

It's rare, in my opinion, when the same person, or company, can be both a trailblazer, and pave the trail.

Even if Tesla fails, and if it fails, it will be a spectacular failure, we owe much to Tesla. If Tesla bites off more than it can chew, I hope, I profoundly hope, a consortium of companies will invest in Tesla to keep Tesla going. We need trailblazers.