2021 Model 3 2021 Long Range Awd Autopilot Nav Pano Blind 38k on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Tesla Model X delayed, again, but Musk says Model S demand remains high

Tesla CEO Elon Musk made one thing clear today as he announced his company's third-quarter sales figures: the company has more than enough demand for its luxury electric vehicles and its main problem is getting production ramped up. In fact, Tesla expects Model S orders and deliveries to increase by 50 percent next year. Buried in the good news, though, was word that the upcoming SUV version, the Model X, is going to be delayed. Again. That the Model X isn't exactly on schedule is not news. There have been delays talked about before. The original release date was 2013 which became late 2014 and then early 2015. The company is certainly getting ready for the X but now says it wants to deliver an all-electric SUVs that offers a good experience to buyers, without any problems. In a year plagued with a record number of recalls in the automotive industry, this is not a surprising stance to take. In the shareholder letter (available in the gallery below), Musk writes: In anticipation of this effort, we now expect Model X deliveries to start in Q3 of 2015, a few months later than previously expected. This also is a legitimate criticism of Tesla – we prefer to forgo revenue, rather than bring a product to market that does not delight customers. Doing so negatively affects the short term, but positively affects the long term. Back to the good news. This is where Musk has some strong numbers to point to, including Tesla's highest ever quarterly deliveries of the Model S – 7,785 vehicles – and the most deliveries in a single day – 907. The company also said that the new tech announced a few weeks ago, the dual motor option and the autopilot capabilities, have "further accelerate[d] Model S demand." To meet this demand, Tesla is expanding its production capability so it can make "more than 2,000 vehicles per week by the end of 2015." Of course, if Tesla wanted to be a bit more transparent about global demand and US sales and deliveries in particular, it could simply announce monthly sales numbers, just like the major OEMs do, But, when asked if Tesla would consider releasing those numbers on a call with investors today, Musk's reply was short and sweet: "Um, no. Sorry."

2016: The year of the autonomous-car promise

About half of the news we covered this year related in some way to The Great Autonomous Future, or at least it seemed that way. If you listen to automakers, by 2020 everyone will be driving (riding?) around in self-driving cars. But what will they look like, how will we make the transition from driven to driverless, and how will laws and infrastructure adapt? We got very few answers to those questions, and instead were handed big promises, vague timelines, and a dose of misdirection by automakers. There has been a lot of talk, but we still don't know that much about these proposed vehicles, which are at least three years off. That's half a development cycle in this industry. We generally only start to get an idea of what a company will build about two years before it goes on sale. So instead of concrete information about autonomous cars, 2016 has brought us a lot of promises, many in the form of concept cars. They have popped up from just about every automaker accompanied by the CEO's pledge to deliver a Level 4 autonomous, all-electric model (usually a crossover) in a few years. It's very easy to say that a static design study sitting on a stage will be able to drive itself while projecting a movie on the windshield, but it's another thing entirely to make good on that promise. With a few exceptions, 2016 has been stuck in the promising stage. It's a strange thing, really; automakers are famous for responding with "we don't discuss future product" whenever we ask about models or variants known to be in the pipeline, yet when it comes to self-driving electric wondermobiles, companies have been falling all over themselves to let us know that theirs is coming soon, it'll be oh so great, and, hey, that makes them a mobility company now, not just an automaker. A lot of this is posturing and marketing, showing the public, shareholders, and the rest of the industry that "we're making one, too, we swear!" It has set off a domino effect – once a few companies make the guarantee, the rest feel forced to throw out a grandiose yet vague plan for an unknown future. And indeed there are usually scant details to go along with such announcements – an imprecise mileage estimate here, or a far-off, percentage-based goal there. Instead of useful discussion of future product, we get demonstrations of test mules, announcements of big R&D budgets and new test centers they'll fund, those futuristic concept cars, and, yeah, more promises.

FTC staff comes out in favor of Tesla, direct vehicle sales

On the subject of Tesla Motors and its efforts to legally sell its electric vehicles directly to consumers without franchised dealerships, the FTC has taken aim at Missouri and New Jersey. The Commission hasn't made any nationwide decision on the subject quite yet, but in a May 16 statement it encouraged the two states to reconsider policies that would further prohibit automakers from selling directly to consumers. And the FTC didn't mince words, calling such laws an example of "protection that is likely harming both competition and consumers." This is much further than the FTC has ever gone before in support of direct vehicle sales. FTC didn't mince words, saying such laws were "likely harming both competition and consumers." The statement follows an April blog post from three FTC officials, who wrote that the anti-direct sales mandates were "protectionist" and "bad policy." Tesla has been doing battle with a number of states as well as lobbying efforts from the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA), which represents 16,000 new car and truck dealerships representing about 32,000 domestic and international franchises. The NADA has been supporting dealers who oppose Tesla's direct sales for years. In fact, Jonathan Collegio, vice president of public affairs for the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA), maintained that the states need to retain the right to regulate the automobile sales distribution channel. "These arguments ignore the fact that fierce competition between local dealers drives down prices both within and across brands. When three Ford dealers compete for the same customer, the customer wins, period," Collegio wrote in an e-mail to AutoblogGreen. "Finally, it's a major fallacy to compare buying cars with buying other goods, like books or computers. New cars are major purchases that require licensing, insurance, complex financing involving trade-ins, contain hazardous materials, and if operated incorrectly can cause serious bodily injury." Tesla representatives didn't immediately respond to a request for comment from AutoblogGreen. New Jersey and Missouri have both been in the news lately. Garden State politicos have created a bit of a grey area, first voting in mid-March to stop Tesla stores from selling cars starting April 1, then extending the deadline to April 15.