SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
https://electrek.co/2019/02/09/tesla-model-3-cost-surprise-porsche-audi-reverse-engineering/:
Tesla Model 3 is now entering the European market and it is making some automakers nervous. According to a new report, Porsche and Audi reverse-engineered Tesla’s new electric car and they were quite surprised by its cost.
[...] During the early production ramp up, it was difficult to get your hands on a Model 3, but some automakers paid a pretty penny to be amongst the first to be able to check out the new electric car.
About a year ago, two Model 3 vehicles were spotted on their way to Germany – presumably to be reverse-engineered.
Later, a report came out about a German automaker being impressed by Model 3 after reverse-engineering it.
Now a new report from Germany’s Manager Magazin [in German and paywalled] includes a deep dive into the state of Audi with comments from executives and insider sources.
It claims that Porsche and Audi, who are working together on a next-generation electric platform, had to change their approach because the cost was too high compared to what Tesla is achieving.
(Score: 2) by theluggage on Tuesday February 19 2019, @05:20PM (1 child)
That's rich. You presented numbers without naming the source, I searched for where you might have got those figures from, provided links to the source and then actually read the small print that showed why you were comparing apples with oranges.
Compare averages without reading the small print is little better than relying on anecdotes (and, unfortunately, the small print doesn't often make it onto the interwebs because it so often spoils a good story).
Meanwhile your own posts are littered with vague, unsubstantiated claims like "many people do day trips to the Sierras" or "You may do a 300 mile each way trip once per year, but not many people in the UK do." (you even misquoted my 'anecdote') or "Many people ... charge their Teslas at the weekend at their local supercharger station" so you really shouldn't be lobbing any bricks in that particular greenhouse.
...well, at least (a) you've provided a link to the source that people can check and (b) the two figures they're comparing are apparently measuring the same thing, so its a vast improvement over your first figures. However if you read on, you'll also find out that it is 20 year old data - it is a second-hand estimate from a 2008 paper that cited a 1998 chart from a report that is no longer easily available. So there's no way of checking that they didn't make the same mistake you did.
NB: the main clam in that paper seemed to be that miles driven was correlated with fuel price. Now that might be a plausible reason why EVs are proving more popular in Europe...
From your stats: 6500 km per capita for UK in 1998. From the RAC page I linked to: [racfoundation.org] 9,200 miles (14800 km) per car for UK in 2002. So, yes, you absolutely can get a 2x margin from what you dismiss as "minor quibbles about methodology".
"additional cost/time" - compared with what? Even if it involves a ferry, going by car - esp. with more than one person - is typically cheaper and not always much slower when measured door-to-door.
Passports? Most of continental Europe and Scandinavia is the border-free Shengen Area [wikipedia.org] - and although you still need a passport to travel between the UK and mainland Europe, there's no visa requirements, "EU passport holder" fast lanes and minimal bureaucracy (OK, that might change now Brexit is turning into a clusterfuck) - and although the "only 10% of Americans have passports" figure is bunk, passport ownership is still quite a bit more common in the UK/EU c.f. the US [bbc.co.uk] so its not a big deal.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Whoever on Wednesday February 20 2019, @04:21AM
You have provided absolutely zero citations to support your claim that people in the UK have a similar need to drive long distances as people in the USA.
You provided your personal anecdote, which I countered with my personal anecdote.
Find something to support your assertion or GTFO.