I know Tesla and the various models have their issues but the Cybertruck and the rest of the Tesla models seem like they are made from two completely different companies. Every time I see one of these driving around trim pieces are missing from them which I don't recall seeing from any other brand.
For all the initial PR they got, they've always had quality issues that rarely plague other manufacturers. Elon has just done a great job of creating a reality distortion field around the cars. Once he started getting into politics and the veneer started wearing off, people started asking questions.
I think people forget the Model 3 literally had the bumper falling off from driving in rain. And it took Tesla a LONG time to admit to it being their fault.
Fit and finish is wildly variable. Panel gaps on the 3 and Y can be huge! I can tell which model in my office parking lot is mine solely based on the trunk and rear quarterpanel gaps.
Only for US made Tesla's. I live in Australia. We get Chinese made Tesla's here, and they have better fit and finish than the BYD's (as good as most other cars you care to name).
It's odd. The USA can make quality cars. Not Lexus quality, but cars you would be happy to own if they weren't so expensive. USA Tesla is the counter example. It makes you wonder about those self promoting stories from Elon about he saved the USA Tesla manufacturing operation by roving the manufacturing plants, making tweaks here and there. Maybe his tweaks wasn't the great boon he made them out to be.
They literally went from an exoskeleton based truck bent into shape to an aluminium truck whose interior frame shatters on impact instead of the panels absorbing the hit - so instead of having to replace cheap plastic trim and collision absorbing metal bars, the energy gets dissipated inside the (almost unrepairable) aluminium frame.
Additionally, they didn't manage to find a satisfactory solution to attach the steel panels to the frame so they glued them on.
I suspect the 'parts falling off' has something to do with the inflexibility of both materials as well as the different thermal expansion coefficients.
On normal cars, bodywork is either made of flexible plastic, or is attached via spring joints so that the vibration doesn't damage them - that's why you have panel gaps - so they can move around a bit.
If you fix them rigidly, they're going to shake off eventually.
It doesn't help perception that the last time I saw a cybertruck in SF, it was broken down the middle lane with the driver slowly walking sideways parallel to traffic alongside the truck... presumably to reattach or reset something? Why anyone would pay $$$ for this POS is beyond me.
That's because Musk personally oversaw the design of the Cybertruck and likely rejected all pleas to make sensible decisions. Musk did not design the other models.
Just like how SpaceX and Tesla and Twitter seem like they have three different CEOs; the degree of their competency is inversely proportional to the amount of day-to-day feedback Musk has into their operations.
He was happy enough to be able to spell s3xy with those cars. Maybe they could have come up with something extremely juvenile for him to do while they designed a rivian
Idea: A car that detects when there's only one occupant, and shouts expletives through the audio system when the driver narrowly avoids hitting something at high speed.
You do see glimpses of it in the other models. Eg. The removal of the indicator stalk likely saved <$100 (if that!) but it's a non-starter for many buyers. That has to be Musk's doing right?
> You do see glimpses of it in the other models. Eg. The removal of the indicator stalk likely saved <$100 (if that!) but it's a non-starter for many buyers. That has to be Musk's doing right?
"all input is error" - elon musk
wdyt? From where I'm sitting anyone with that position would deprecate the input devices...
He actually shares a lot in common with his former(?) friend Kanye West. Both crave the validation of others, but when they get it, instead of being satisfied, they become even more needy and insecure. So they pursue anything except what they're actually good at because then if they fail at the thing people actually value them for, it would be too painful. And they surround themselves with yes men who tell them how great they are. All these factors make them more and more isolated and insecure. Combine that with drugs, alcohol, and sex and you have a toxic brew.
You may say this armchair analysis is unfair, but both these men have been so candid, veiled by the thinnest layer of irony, that it's impossible not to see how fragile they are.
I don't think this is unfair at all. I mean this literally has to be one of the three oldest stories ever? And I mean that literally. There is no more timeless a story than: "man gets powerful enough to eliminate negative feedback, becomes stupid/ineffective/self-damaging"
Without actually getting into the specific actions he took while in government, I dare say that what he did during that time was material to people's revulsion and that a different version of him who took different actions would have been differently popular.
For sure but deciding what to do is part of political instincts. He rolled in, threw some "roman salutes" fired tons of people in an insanely chaotic way while waving a chainsaw around on stage then showed up in the Whitehouse with a black eye he blamed on his toddler
That's a requirement, part of being in a cult is being rejected by "outsiders" so that you think you have no other options other than staying in the cult.
The benchmark for good management is higher than “often delivers.”
I have no issue calling Musk a wildly successful businessman as he has made several great investments including getting companies off the ground, however his track record for actually running things is questionable. Was ‘taking Tesla over from its founders’ a good idea or not is different than ‘was investing in Tesla’ a good idea. Financially it definitely allowed him to extract more money from the company so it’s a good business decision, but as far as actually running things I don’t know.
The Roadster v2 is a no show and the Cybertruck is a failure, the 3 on the other hand is successful but part of the initial pitch for the company. The minimally innovative model Y is arguably his biggest success as a manager. Even the charging network Telsa’s biggest strategic advantage has become deprioritized. Boring, X, and Tesla Solar have clearly been mismanaged. Neuralink is a long way from delivering anything viable as a company.
The parts of SpaceX he’s seemingly ignoring are doing way better than the bits under his focus. Starlink is doing well and he definitely had a hand on that so that’s something significant.
SpaceX’s strategy has been really questionable for a while.
Falcon Heavy has done 11 flights since 2018 and now they’re building an even larger platform despite heavy launch not really being a viable market segment. Starship has been slower than the now canceled SLS program run by Boing. If Starship succeeds it seems to guarantee than Falcon Heavy will have a negative ROI, but Starship needs to be wildly successful to have a positive ROI.
Starlink helps justify a high launch capacity, but isn’t in need of a heavy launch platform. A more reusable Falcon 9 would have simplified thermal issues, reduced R&D costs, and presumably increased profits much sooner. That IMO would have been a far better strategy than scaling, up while changing to a wildly different engine, and targeting increased reusability, etc.
> Falcon Heavy isn't relevant to anything SpaceX is doing with Starlink.
You misunderstood my point, Starlink only cares about lower cost per kg to LEO. Spaceship is trying to do that and increase payload capacity.
Spaceship trying to do both is a major reason its R&D costs are so high. Where Falcon heavy is relevant is it demonstrates that there’s little demand for Shapeship’s significant increase in cargo capacity. There’s little economic justification that paying for the size related added R&D complexity driving up both timelines and costs is going to be worth it.
> Seems you've never heard of creative destruction
I was arguing for creative destruction namely killing off all manufacturing of Falcon 9 rockets which would then make Falcon heavy non viable without the economies of scale on the first stage.
> The things they intend to do with Starship aren't possible with Falcon 9 or Heavy period
The things that depend on cost per kg could be accomplished with a NEW but smaller than Starship rocket that could already be in service if they had gone down a different path. The only thing they gain from its current size is the ability to send payloads of that size.
It’s not my money being wasted here, but I’d like SpaceX to be on better financial footing simply to reduce the risks to Starlink.
Clearly how? Seems to me analogous to Tesla where the one thing he's clearly fixated on (Cybertruck and Starship) are very likely to be flops and potentially take down each company as a whole.
Am I the only one who works in an org where the strategy team, on a good day, is completely decoupled from efforts that result in delivery. On a normal day they actively sabotage those efforts.
Like promising your team will create a Mars colony by 2036 while they're trying to make commercial rocketry efficient and safe.
> If you want to build a ship, don't drum up the men to gather wood, divide the work and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea.
I only know one person currently at spaceX, but I'm willing to bet there's a large contingent of people working there who would sell their souls to die on Mars.
I'll be honest, I've never been the CEO of a successful 10,000+ employee company (or even an unsuccessful one, lol), but at that level, the amount of doing that a person can do themselves is limited.
I've never seen a cybertruck with a missing trim piece, and there are usually a few at my local super charger. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but it's certainly not some ongoing common issue like you're implying
I don't disagree that it happens/happened, just that I disagree with the implied frequency, as I've never seen it in person and I see a lot of cybertrucks at my local chargers.
Also this recall is for the lightbar, the trim piece was recalled in March.
