Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#131

Post by BuyMyBitcoins » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 5:52 PM UTC

api wrote: post #122

csours wrote: post #51

Disclaimer up front: I work for GM. I don't work on chips or components for my day job. What follows is solely my own opinion. Some things to emphasize: OEMs (GM, Ford, Toyota, VW, etc) do not design components, and they do not want to. They design specifications for components, and then get suppliers to bid. This is great for efficiency in established ecosystems, not great for agility. To my knowledge, GM did not ca…

> OEMs (GM, Ford, Toyota, VW, etc) do not design components, and they do not want to. They design specifications for components, and then get suppliers to bid. This is great for efficiency in established ecosystems, not great for agility. There are some great stories about SpaceX trying to source components this way and then finally ending up having to DIY. What they found was that modern CAD and rapid prototyping ma…

I wish company leadership knew that conventional wisdom is time-bound and has an expiration date. Of course, actually trying to figure out if the conventional wisdom still holds involves risking time and money on R&D. And, the larger the institution the more risk averse the leadership will be. It’s a real shame that the companies you would think have the most ability to absorb risk are the most averse towards taking them.

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#132

Post by coryrc » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 6:02 PM UTC

dale_glass wrote: post #123

coryrc wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment displays a breathtaking amount of ignorance.

Then I welcome the opportunity to learn about something new. Please explain what's wrong, I'm most interested.

Start reading IEEE, SAE, or other trade magazines; get an EE degree in the Midwest; get a job in the automobile supplier industry; go to industry conferences or just read their proceedings...

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#133

Post by snthd » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 6:05 PM UTC

csours wrote: post #51

Disclaimer up front: I work for GM. I don't work on chips or components for my day job. What follows is solely my own opinion. Some things to emphasize: OEMs (GM, Ford, Toyota, VW, etc) do not design components, and they do not want to. They design specifications for components, and then get suppliers to bid. This is great for efficiency in established ecosystems, not great for agility. To my knowledge, GM did not ca…

>40-60V system

What makes that voltage a better trade off?

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#134

Post by kjksf » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 6:06 PM UTC

csours wrote: post #121

mwint wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fundamentally, what is it that prevents the established auto makers from making changes mid lifecycle? Seems like Tesla keeps pulling it off; why can’t GM? Is it that the component specification+acquisition cycle you describe is optimized to take as long as the development cycle of a new car?

Small company risk is failure to grow. Big company risk is every other failure. Tesla is valued as a growth/tech company. As long as people believe in their growth, they get more cash. I don't personally understand how Tesla hasn't had more problems with their apparently uncontrolled engineering changes. At least part of it is customer enthusiasm for the product papering over any drawbacks. It's not that GM can't mak…

Alternatively, maybe just like SpaceX has faster development cycle AND greater safety and reliability of rockets, Tesla has faster development cycle AND greater safety and reliability of cars?

Judging by the number of recalls, Tesla doesn't seem to be doing worse than GM, Porsche or Ford.

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#135

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 6:07 PM UTC

shiftpgdn wrote: post #38

01100011 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I can tell, Tesla plays fast and loose, treating their product like a manufacturer of consumer electronics and not a manufacturer of a dangerous and durable good. That obviously allows them to out-compete other auto manufacturers who are more aware of things like product liability. See the Toyota accelerator-gate lawsuits. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009%E2%80%932011_Toyota_vehic... : > However, on…

Toyota accelerator-gate is largely a farce. Almost all of the people involved with Toyota unintended acceleration were over the age of 65 and had the poorly designed loose floor mats in their cars. Even if they had perfect readable John Carmack tier coding they still would have lost.

[deleted]

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#136

Post by UncleEntity » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 6:08 PM UTC

dboreham wrote: post #11

Admittedly it was a long time ago, but I worked in the semi industry and this isn't how things were done. We manufactured batches of totally obsolete EOLed devices for various customers when they had sufficient volume. Devices that are in volume production (e.g. for cars) are carefully managed by people who do nothing but ensure that they're available in the right place at the right time in the right volume. In order…

Due to covid I’m back to driving trucks and they have the same supply problems as everyone else — the dude I’m working for can’t find a used truck to put me in because new trucks are taking 6-8 months to get.

Used trucks sell as fast as they go up on the websites (with the lease returns from the company we’re running for selling even before that) and the truck dealers apparently think this is the time to charge excessive finance fees (basically doubling the cost of the truck) because they can.

Quite a stressful time…for him. I don’t really care since I’m making money and team driving isn’t as bad as I remember it from the last time I did it 23 years ago.

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#137

Post by jcampbell1 » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 6:10 PM UTC

shiftpgdn wrote: post #38

01100011 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I can tell, Tesla plays fast and loose, treating their product like a manufacturer of consumer electronics and not a manufacturer of a dangerous and durable good. That obviously allows them to out-compete other auto manufacturers who are more aware of things like product liability. See the Toyota accelerator-gate lawsuits. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009%E2%80%932011_Toyota_vehic... : > However, on…

Toyota accelerator-gate is largely a farce. Almost all of the people involved with Toyota unintended acceleration were over the age of 65 and had the poorly designed loose floor mats in their cars. Even if they had perfect readable John Carmack tier coding they still would have lost.

I worked for ford many years ago and I remember a really funny conversation between young engineers and MBA types. The issue was the Lincoln Towncar was designed to have extremely low pedal pressure because that is what the old buyers liked. Combine old people with limited hearing, no pedal pressure, and a quiet cabin it was a perfect recipe for old people to shift and send the car through the garage wall. Lol. The classic issue of when customers want something stupid, do you build it?

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#138

Post by orthoxerox » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 6:12 PM UTC

snthd wrote: post #133

csours wrote: post #51

Disclaimer up front: I work for GM. I don't work on chips or components for my day job. What follows is solely my own opinion. Some things to emphasize: OEMs (GM, Ford, Toyota, VW, etc) do not design components, and they do not want to. They design specifications for components, and then get suppliers to bid. This is great for efficiency in established ecosystems, not great for agility. To my knowledge, GM did not ca…

>40-60V system What makes that voltage a better trade off?

Lower amperage.

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#139

Post by dotancohen » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 6:13 PM UTC

snthd wrote: post #133

csours wrote: post #51

Disclaimer up front: I work for GM. I don't work on chips or components for my day job. What follows is solely my own opinion. Some things to emphasize: OEMs (GM, Ford, Toyota, VW, etc) do not design components, and they do not want to. They design specifications for components, and then get suppliers to bid. This is great for efficiency in established ecosystems, not great for agility. To my knowledge, GM did not ca…

>40-60V system What makes that voltage a better trade off?

I'm not the OP nor an electrical engineer, but I believe that you can get higher DC power with less resistance losses using higher voltage and lower amperage. Additionally, this allows the use of thinner wire (lighter, cheaper, easier to package in tight locations).

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#140

Post by weinzierl » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 6:16 PM UTC

api wrote: post #122

csours wrote: post #51

Disclaimer up front: I work for GM. I don't work on chips or components for my day job. What follows is solely my own opinion. Some things to emphasize: OEMs (GM, Ford, Toyota, VW, etc) do not design components, and they do not want to. They design specifications for components, and then get suppliers to bid. This is great for efficiency in established ecosystems, not great for agility. To my knowledge, GM did not ca…

> OEMs (GM, Ford, Toyota, VW, etc) do not design components, and they do not want to. They design specifications for components, and then get suppliers to bid. This is great for efficiency in established ecosystems, not great for agility. There are some great stories about SpaceX trying to source components this way and then finally ending up having to DIY. What they found was that modern CAD and rapid prototyping ma…

I worked in aerospace for six years before changing into automotive. The difference could not be bigger.

In aerospace cost didn't matter a lot and many things are custom built, even down to custom alloys and materials. Also the amount of planning, numerical analysis, simulation, preparation and especially testing is insane. Project timelines are sometimes more than a decade.

In automotive 'cost down' is the mantra and is often enough measured in fractions of cents. Almost nothing is customized and parts reused for different product lines whenever possible.