Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla Q1 2021 Results

tesla-cdn.thron.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 591 posts

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#221

Post by zeroping »

fshbbdssbbgdd wrote: post #137
cs702 wrote: post #132

Whatever you may think of Tesla and Musk, you have to agree that they've accomplished something rather incredible. Few would have thought this possible not that long ago: * 185K vehicle deliveries in Q1, +109% versus a year ago [a] * 2.7K supercharger stations, +41% versus a year ago * 24.5K supercharger connectors, +44% versus a year ago * 92 MW of solar generation deployed in Q1, +163% versus a year ago * 445 MWh o…

> 92 MWh of solar generation deployed in Q1, +163% versus a year ago This is a typo (should be 92 MW), but also made me think about how you could have fun metrics like MW/h rate of solar deployed or MW rate of storage deployed.

I find it delightful to think of EV charging rates in MPH. The original Leaf tops out at around 24 MPH, while modern Tesla super chargers are 200+ MPH charge rate.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#222

Post by blamazon »

ErikVandeWater wrote: post #194
blamazon wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unnecessary cost and complexity are the reasons Tesla has quoted before. One less sensor to buy, or replace when it breaks. I’m not convinced. There’s good reasons they’re the lone player in the self driving space with this vision only play.

Since Lidar doesn't use moving parts I imagine it should be easy to make it last longer than the life of the vehicle.

You are confusing radar and lidar I think. True solid state automotive lidar is largely still in a research state. Most 'solid state' lidar sensors actually have very tiny moving parts in the form of MEMS assemblies. Even more delicate than a macro mechanical assembly.

But for radar, correct, those modules are available as a commodity for automotive lifescales.

The general problem is that simple, cost effective radar is low precision while expensive, complex lidar is high precision.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#223

Post by bpodgursky »

habeebtc wrote: post #208
cs702 wrote: post #132

Whatever you may think of Tesla and Musk, you have to agree that they've accomplished something rather incredible. Few would have thought this possible not that long ago: * 185K vehicle deliveries in Q1, +109% versus a year ago [a] * 2.7K supercharger stations, +41% versus a year ago * 24.5K supercharger connectors, +44% versus a year ago * 92 MW of solar generation deployed in Q1, +163% versus a year ago * 445 MWh o…

I have two separate and (mostly) unrelated feelings. Musk has done something remarkable as you say. At the same time, the market cap is nuts and a portent of doom. Bigger than all car companies combined, by market cap? A market crash could take down Tesla and set back electric car adoption by 20 years.

Tesla doesn't _need_ to raise more money now though. They may do so to accelerate factory buildouts etc, but it's cash-positive.

So a stock crash would be inconvenient, but unless it leads to a shareholder revolt or something, wouldn't really matter.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#224

Post by lumost »

cs702 wrote: post #132

Whatever you may think of Tesla and Musk, you have to agree that they've accomplished something rather incredible. Few would have thought this possible not that long ago: * 185K vehicle deliveries in Q1, +109% versus a year ago [a] * 2.7K supercharger stations, +41% versus a year ago * 24.5K supercharger connectors, +44% versus a year ago * 92 MW of solar generation deployed in Q1, +163% versus a year ago * 445 MWh o…

I had to look it up but for reference in Q1 2021 the big auto makers delivered the following.

Ford: 521,334 GM: 642,250 Toyota: 2.46 million VW: 2.5 million

If Tesla holds up they'll be larger than Ford in 2 years and be the largest automaker in the world in 4 years.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#225

Post by ogre_codes »

missedthecue wrote: post #158
brianwawok wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now compare 0-60 and infotainment systems. Is premium how fast the car goes, or how many paint colors it comes in? Different people have different requirements. You are likely paying over 100k to get a car as fast as a model 3.

Premium sedan, not sports car. E classes do not and have never competed on 0-60 times

“Premium Sedan” includes a lot of things. BMW certainly classifies driving performance as part of that. As does Lexus. Mercedes has it’s own performance models.

Now if you wanted to argue that the Tesla Model 3/Y aren’t “Luxury Sedans”, I think you have a point. Not so much for the reasons you list, but because the ride is harsher than the Mercedes. But then, some BMWs have a similar ride so it’s hard to say.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#226

Post by nimithryn »

jrallison wrote: post #180
nimithryn wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't find this argument convincing at all. Just ignore the lidar in situations where lidar and vision conflict and you have the original decision. They probably started without lidar due to the cost (Tesla is one of few companies actually selling cars to customers, who are sensitive to price). The price of lidar has come down, but I would guess it requires a fair amount of expensive rearchitecture to add it in now…

"Just ignore the lidar in situations where lidar and vision conflict and you have the original decision." Then why have lidar? If it's only purpose is to agree with vision or you just discard it, then why even have it?

I’m arguing against the idea that conflicting sensors is an issue. Clearly you can do no worse with sensors A and B than with just sensor A.

You might want to not have sensor B to lower the cost (as I suggested). Or you might want to have both sensors A and B because the provide some synergies (as gkop pointed out, better range of view, increased confidence, etc.). But it’s definitely not enough to just argue that the sensors may conflict.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#227

Post by ogre_codes »

Klonoar wrote: post #186
11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #2

"Model 3 was the best-selling premium sedan in the world, outselling long-time industry leaders such as the 3 Series and E Class. This demonstrates that an electric vehicle can be a category leader and outsell its gas-powered counterparts." I find this to be a major milestone in the transition to BEV. This is an achievement.

Honest question: how does this factor in with BMW's leasing program? Most people I know (outside of... myself... lol) refuse to actually buy a BMW, and just lease it. Are these numbers included?

Teslas are still pretty new, but generally speaking leasing them is not a great choice. The terms are fine, but financially you are better off buying one and selling it after 3 years. They tend to hold their price a lot better than a Mercedes or a BMW.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#228

Post by nimithryn »

ctdonath wrote: post #191
nimithryn wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't find this argument convincing at all. Just ignore the lidar in situations where lidar and vision conflict and you have the original decision. They probably started without lidar due to the cost (Tesla is one of few companies actually selling cars to customers, who are sensitive to price). The price of lidar has come down, but I would guess it requires a fair amount of expensive rearchitecture to add it in now…

Sounds like a good reason to dump LIDAR. if vision is good enough to always defer to, why bother with something contradicting?

See my other comment. I’m making a counter argument to the specific claim that conflicting sensors is an issue. I have no idea if the added benefit of Lidar outweighs the costs, but it doesn’t seem logical that “conflicting signals” could be an issue.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#229

Post by rsj_hn »

lumost wrote: post #224
cs702 wrote: post #132

Whatever you may think of Tesla and Musk, you have to agree that they've accomplished something rather incredible. Few would have thought this possible not that long ago: * 185K vehicle deliveries in Q1, +109% versus a year ago [a] * 2.7K supercharger stations, +41% versus a year ago * 24.5K supercharger connectors, +44% versus a year ago * 92 MW of solar generation deployed in Q1, +163% versus a year ago * 445 MWh o…

I had to look it up but for reference in Q1 2021 the big auto makers delivered the following. Ford: 521,334 GM: 642,250 Toyota: 2.46 million VW: 2.5 million If Tesla holds up they'll be larger than Ford in 2 years and be the largest automaker in the world in 4 years.

Obligatory xkcd https://xkcd.com/605/

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#230

Post by nimithryn »

moduspol wrote: post #130
blamazon wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unnecessary cost and complexity are the reasons Tesla has quoted before. One less sensor to buy, or replace when it breaks. I’m not convinced. There’s good reasons they’re the lone player in the self driving space with this vision only play.

> When radar and vision disagree, which one do you believe? Vision has much more precision, so better to double down on vision than do sensor fusion. [1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1380796939151704071

As I’ve commented above, “conflicting sensors” doesn’t make much sense as an argument. If sensors A and B conflicted, you could just ignore sensor B and get performance at least as good as just having sensor A.

Does sensor B have enough other benefits to outweigh the costs of adding it? I don’t know, but that’s the actual crux of this problem.

Post reply on HN