Saki GT

Tesla has been in the news for setting and finally meeting its goal to build 5,000 3s a week. So I have images of Gung Ho in my head now...



Regardless your feelings about the 3, my question is, would you want such a car where production quantity was stressed? I'm thinking quality was sacrificed for the numbers...

TsukubaCody

I would not. If a company does not have systems in place, I wouldn't want to take a risk on them.

That and it seems quality was not even a focus for Tesla before these numbers.

vader1

I had read that this goal was being met with smoke and mirrors. They were going to go all out to meet it just for show, but would not be able to maintain the number.

Having driven my brothers. it is cool but not worth $50,000 to me just because the re are much better offerings at that price IMHO. But the car (3 weeks old) has not had any major defect or any issues so far. From what I could tell, it was built to a decent standard. For Tesla long term though, I don't know what they do to stay relevant. The model 3 has been in the public eye for a couple years now even though they have only delivered a few. Before they can get to the bottom of the wait list it will be time for a new model already, and if they don't have something new in the pipeline (and I mean in the segment, not just adding a roadster or pickup) then they will be competing against many models from all over the globe with and over-priced model 3 that is outdated as well. And probably X and S in dire need of a redo.

WolfpackS2k

All I know is, no way would I want to take delivery of one of the Model 3s was that assembled in the temporary parking lot tent outside of the factory. Seriously, wtf?

TommyDeVito

JonBoy

Nope, nope, nope.

They built 11,000 cars in the last month but 5,000 in the last week. That means they were averaging 2,000 cars a week for the previous weeks. You don't ramp that quickly without sacrificing quality. It makes no logical sense.

Elon's desperately trying to save his company by hitting goals (a year late?) but I guarantee he won't sustain 5,000 cars a week from this point on....which means that (as others have said) the last week's production wasn't real either.

Unless he's knocking out 20,000+ cars a month from now on, he's still a liar.

white98ls

I read that they are running the machinery at over the manufacturers' recommended limits. Kind of a "build more as quickly as we can no matter what" mentality. They also found 300 welds that they determined were no longer needed. No thanks.

rwheelz

WOW why would anyone even mention or admit they eliminated 300 welds? They are begging for a law suit down the road!

gerry100

JonBoy

I read the same article (I think). They're running the machines faster (ie, swinging and moving them faster), which will definitely cause potential failures down the road. The actual structures will probably be fine but the bearings and motors are what will take a beating. They'll ultimately end up with a maintenance problem, if nothing else.

They have 5000 welds on these vehicles and eliminated 300. That's 6% of the welds, which isn't THAT much. The engineering team has to sign off for any changes so they're taking a lot of liability if they disagree with the change. I wouldn't worry TOO much about it, but it does seem like a weird thing to remove, consider how much design work is done up-front to ensure the vehicles are structurally sound.