Battery Electric Vehicle News / Enjoying the Transportation Revolution

michaels

Magnitio said:

michaels said:

Magnitio said:

michaels said:

Coastalwatch said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Martyn1981 said:

Speaking of innovation, there is a chance that Tesla will be releasing a new model(s) soon. These are to be the 'more affordable models' that they've been promising for some time.

I was quite skeptical, despite the 2024 Q2 & Q3 earnings reports stating the first half of 2025. So waited to see what the Q4 report would say (released 29th Jan), 90% sure that they would remove. revise, or water down the previous statements, but no, they said it again:

Plans for new vehicles, including more affordable models, remain on track for start of production in the first half of 2025. These vehicles will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms and will be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up.

So, late Jan statement for H1, seems too close, unless they are pretty much on target and confident. But at the same time, the statement is typical Tesla ambiquous, allowing for some interpretation, maybe just one vehicle in H1, and maybe test production, which market(s) .... etc etc.

Also, I'm surprised there have been no leaks, whatsoever, which raises doubts. But Tesla does try to keep things under cover (literally), and if based on existing architecture and hardware, that may explain why no test vehicles have been spotted. Typically, camo vehicles get spotted 3-6 months before launch for drivetrain testing in the real world.

So I remain skeptical for H1, but they may surprise.

I notice from the latest marketing I have received from Tesla that the entry level TM3 is priced just below the "premium vehicle" VED threshold.
It may well be that the "more affordable" models that have been long promised might realise and allow Tesla to keep models below that threshold and gain a competitive advantage.  If the new model is a "truncated" TM3 (think along the lines of the original BMW 3-Series Compact versus standard 3-Series), the development costs could be far less than a full new car platform.

Unless they were well on the way with the new platform but then had to redesign due to FSD not being any time soon so reverting to an old fashioned steering wheel.
I've no idea when FSD was first muted but it seems to have been a topic of conversation for a few years now!

Of course the steering wheel is less of a problem if they can use steer by wire from the cybertruck (just chuck in a PS/xbox controller).  However I don't think brake by wire is licensed technology so there is still some need for 'real' control interfaces.

There are plenty of cars that now use brake-by-wire, including the Cybertruck.

Really - no direct linkage/hydraulic back up - I though that was not allowed?

There is a hydraulic backup in case of failure, but when everything is working, any input via the brake pedal is interpreted based on numerous factors including pedal force, speed, steering angle, battery state, tyre grip, proximity to other vehicles etc. to determine how the car is slowed. This could involve using the motor(s) to slow the car, activating the brake pads or a combination. If all systems fail, it should allow the brake pads to be operated by hydraulic pressure alone.

I was talking specifically about the removal of a mechanical linkage altogether as has (I believe) been done with steering. If it was allowed for braking then you could literally start with a 'cyber cab' and add controls however you wanted to.  Similarly LHD/RHD would require 'zero' engineering.

zeupater

Magnitio said:

michaels said:

Magnitio said:

michaels said:

Coastalwatch said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Martyn1981 said:

Speaking of innovation, there is a chance that Tesla will be releasing a new model(s) soon. These are to be the 'more affordable models' that they've been promising for some time.

I was quite skeptical, despite the 2024 Q2 & Q3 earnings reports stating the first half of 2025. So waited to see what the Q4 report would say (released 29th Jan), 90% sure that they would remove. revise, or water down the previous statements, but no, they said it again:

Plans for new vehicles, including more affordable models, remain on track for start of production in the first half of 2025. These vehicles will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms and will be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up.

So, late Jan statement for H1, seems too close, unless they are pretty much on target and confident. But at the same time, the statement is typical Tesla ambiquous, allowing for some interpretation, maybe just one vehicle in H1, and maybe test production, which market(s) .... etc etc.

Also, I'm surprised there have been no leaks, whatsoever, which raises doubts. But Tesla does try to keep things under cover (literally), and if based on existing architecture and hardware, that may explain why no test vehicles have been spotted. Typically, camo vehicles get spotted 3-6 months before launch for drivetrain testing in the real world.

So I remain skeptical for H1, but they may surprise.

I notice from the latest marketing I have received from Tesla that the entry level TM3 is priced just below the "premium vehicle" VED threshold.
It may well be that the "more affordable" models that have been long promised might realise and allow Tesla to keep models below that threshold and gain a competitive advantage.  If the new model is a "truncated" TM3 (think along the lines of the original BMW 3-Series Compact versus standard 3-Series), the development costs could be far less than a full new car platform.

Unless they were well on the way with the new platform but then had to redesign due to FSD not being any time soon so reverting to an old fashioned steering wheel.
I've no idea when FSD was first muted but it seems to have been a topic of conversation for a few years now!

Of course the steering wheel is less of a problem if they can use steer by wire from the cybertruck (just chuck in a PS/xbox controller).  However I don't think brake by wire is licensed technology so there is still some need for 'real' control interfaces.

There are plenty of cars that now use brake-by-wire, including the Cybertruck.

Really - no direct linkage/hydraulic back up - I though that was not allowed?

There is a hydraulic backup in case of failure, but when everything is working, any input via the brake pedal is interpreted based on numerous factors including pedal force, speed, steering angle, battery state, tyre grip, proximity to other vehicles etc. to determine how the car is slowed. This could involve using the motor(s) to slow the car, activating the brake pads or a combination. If all systems fail, it should allow the brake pads to be operated by hydraulic pressure alone.

Hi

Isn't it really the case that the brake system on most (/all - except CT and a handful of others) regen enabled HE/E(V)ehicles are essentially fully hydraulic/mechanical where either ... 

(i) low/no accelerator pressure -and/or- low brake pedal pressure doesn't engage the master cylinder, thus allowing the KERS functionality to enable the electric drive system to generate electricity and (re)charge the battery, with many also having the ability to select the desired recovery level depending on preference/terrain/etc ....

.. or ..

(ii) the KERS system is fully independent of the mechanical braking system, often allowing a varying degree of full 'one pedal driving' to control speed in most conditions, with the mechanical brake pedal only being used for occasional final adjustments & disaster avoidance .... 

MrsZ's vehicles have had (i) for well over a decade so it's not really new, with the latest having (ii) .... I'm pretty sure that the majority of modern EVs do/will fall into the (ii) category for the foreseeable future, mainly because its a simpler, and thus cheaper, engineering/manufacturing solution at a time where cost competitiveness in the EV sector is a prime consideration. Full brake by wire systems will happen, however the solution needs risk management through multiple layers of redundancy, which simply adds complexity and cost, so (like most new automotive developments) expect initial introduction to be in limited build, high value, high end vehicles .... 

I've known about the potential of 'brake by wire' for 30-40 years, however changing anything involving safety critical items in the automotive industry invites tight regulatory scrutiny & acceptance on a global basis ... and what is more safety critical than being able to stop the vehicle when you need it to stop! ...  

HTH - Z

Magnitio

michaels said:

Magnitio said:

michaels said:

Magnitio said:

michaels said:

Coastalwatch said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Martyn1981 said:

Speaking of innovation, there is a chance that Tesla will be releasing a new model(s) soon. These are to be the 'more affordable models' that they've been promising for some time.

I was quite skeptical, despite the 2024 Q2 & Q3 earnings reports stating the first half of 2025. So waited to see what the Q4 report would say (released 29th Jan), 90% sure that they would remove. revise, or water down the previous statements, but no, they said it again:

Plans for new vehicles, including more affordable models, remain on track for start of production in the first half of 2025. These vehicles will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms and will be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up.

So, late Jan statement for H1, seems too close, unless they are pretty much on target and confident. But at the same time, the statement is typical Tesla ambiquous, allowing for some interpretation, maybe just one vehicle in H1, and maybe test production, which market(s) .... etc etc.

Also, I'm surprised there have been no leaks, whatsoever, which raises doubts. But Tesla does try to keep things under cover (literally), and if based on existing architecture and hardware, that may explain why no test vehicles have been spotted. Typically, camo vehicles get spotted 3-6 months before launch for drivetrain testing in the real world.

So I remain skeptical for H1, but they may surprise.

I notice from the latest marketing I have received from Tesla that the entry level TM3 is priced just below the "premium vehicle" VED threshold.
It may well be that the "more affordable" models that have been long promised might realise and allow Tesla to keep models below that threshold and gain a competitive advantage.  If the new model is a "truncated" TM3 (think along the lines of the original BMW 3-Series Compact versus standard 3-Series), the development costs could be far less than a full new car platform.

Unless they were well on the way with the new platform but then had to redesign due to FSD not being any time soon so reverting to an old fashioned steering wheel.
I've no idea when FSD was first muted but it seems to have been a topic of conversation for a few years now!

Of course the steering wheel is less of a problem if they can use steer by wire from the cybertruck (just chuck in a PS/xbox controller).  However I don't think brake by wire is licensed technology so there is still some need for 'real' control interfaces.

There are plenty of cars that now use brake-by-wire, including the Cybertruck.

Really - no direct linkage/hydraulic back up - I though that was not allowed?

There is a hydraulic backup in case of failure, but when everything is working, any input via the brake pedal is interpreted based on numerous factors including pedal force, speed, steering angle, battery state, tyre grip, proximity to other vehicles etc. to determine how the car is slowed. This could involve using the motor(s) to slow the car, activating the brake pads or a combination. If all systems fail, it should allow the brake pads to be operated by hydraulic pressure alone.

I was talking specifically about the removal of a mechanical linkage altogether as has (I believe) been done with steering. If it was allowed for braking then you could literally start with a 'cyber cab' and add controls however you wanted to.  Similarly LHD/RHD would require 'zero' engineering.

The move to full drive-by-wire without a hydraulic link between the pedal and the brakes is progressing. Alfa Romeo has introduced a system from Continental called MKC1 that separates the pedal from the hydraulics and is implemented in the Giulia and Stelvio. Bosch is also near to introducing a brake-by-wire system that will be more widely available to manufacturers. See https://www.bosch-mobility.com/en/solutions/driving-safety/brake-by-wire/

zeupater

Magnitio said:

michaels said:

Magnitio said:

michaels said:

Magnitio said:

michaels said:

Coastalwatch said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Martyn1981 said:

Speaking of innovation, there is a chance that Tesla will be releasing a new model(s) soon. These are to be the 'more affordable models' that they've been promising for some time.

I was quite skeptical, despite the 2024 Q2 & Q3 earnings reports stating the first half of 2025. So waited to see what the Q4 report would say (released 29th Jan), 90% sure that they would remove. revise, or water down the previous statements, but no, they said it again:

Plans for new vehicles, including more affordable models, remain on track for start of production in the first half of 2025. These vehicles will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms and will be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up.

So, late Jan statement for H1, seems too close, unless they are pretty much on target and confident. But at the same time, the statement is typical Tesla ambiquous, allowing for some interpretation, maybe just one vehicle in H1, and maybe test production, which market(s) .... etc etc.

Also, I'm surprised there have been no leaks, whatsoever, which raises doubts. But Tesla does try to keep things under cover (literally), and if based on existing architecture and hardware, that may explain why no test vehicles have been spotted. Typically, camo vehicles get spotted 3-6 months before launch for drivetrain testing in the real world.

So I remain skeptical for H1, but they may surprise.

I notice from the latest marketing I have received from Tesla that the entry level TM3 is priced just below the "premium vehicle" VED threshold.
It may well be that the "more affordable" models that have been long promised might realise and allow Tesla to keep models below that threshold and gain a competitive advantage.  If the new model is a "truncated" TM3 (think along the lines of the original BMW 3-Series Compact versus standard 3-Series), the development costs could be far less than a full new car platform.

Unless they were well on the way with the new platform but then had to redesign due to FSD not being any time soon so reverting to an old fashioned steering wheel.
I've no idea when FSD was first muted but it seems to have been a topic of conversation for a few years now!

Of course the steering wheel is less of a problem if they can use steer by wire from the cybertruck (just chuck in a PS/xbox controller).  However I don't think brake by wire is licensed technology so there is still some need for 'real' control interfaces.

There are plenty of cars that now use brake-by-wire, including the Cybertruck.

Really - no direct linkage/hydraulic back up - I though that was not allowed?

There is a hydraulic backup in case of failure, but when everything is working, any input via the brake pedal is interpreted based on numerous factors including pedal force, speed, steering angle, battery state, tyre grip, proximity to other vehicles etc. to determine how the car is slowed. This could involve using the motor(s) to slow the car, activating the brake pads or a combination. If all systems fail, it should allow the brake pads to be operated by hydraulic pressure alone.

I was talking specifically about the removal of a mechanical linkage altogether as has (I believe) been done with steering. If it was allowed for braking then you could literally start with a 'cyber cab' and add controls however you wanted to.  Similarly LHD/RHD would require 'zero' engineering.

The move to full drive-by-wire without a hydraulic link between the pedal and the brakes is progressing. Alfa Romeo has introduced a system from Continental called MKC1 that separates the pedal from the hydraulics and is implemented in the Giulia and Stelvio. Bosch is also near to introducing a brake-by-wire system that will be more widely available to manufacturers. See https://www.bosch-mobility.com/en/solutions/driving-safety/brake-by-wire/

Hi

The question there is whether this is a full brake by wire solution -or- simply hydraulically decoupling the brake pedal from the servo unit and introducing an electrical link between the two before relocating the servo unit from the engine bulkhead to the drive train .... yes this can theoretically allow for further digital management of the brake system and the saving of a few metres of brake tube (~0.2kg/vehicle), but again the issue revolves around added complexity required to mitigate potential failure and the redundancy requirements that this raises.

Failure modes move from mainly hydraulic toward hydraulic + electrical connectivity + power source + digital processing etc, all of which introduce additional potential points of failure (aka - risk) which requires considerable FMEA work to address ... ie, the question - " What happens if this potential failure happens & how can it be solved/mitigated?" ... remember, unlike most parts that make up a vehicle, all components of the braking system are considered and highlighted at the engineering stage as being safety critical which requires additional and more rigorous manufacturing quality standards.

At a time that the automotive sector needs to seriously address their cost base it must be questioned whether the cost savings related to deletion of a fully hydraulic solution would even outweigh the cost of additional failure point mitigation. My own opinion the current issue is that the majority of the automotive sector is playing catch up in a sector that they don't really fully understand, that of BEV ... vehicles just got simpler by definition and instead of addressing the improvement of manufacturing process to world class standards and rapidly removing unnecessary cost from their businesses, they seem to be playing at the edges ... this simply makes me think of the cartoon meme - an engineer dog designing a braking system with the company burning all around him ... the boss asks if there's a 'solution to the problem yet' and the answer/caption is "Everything is Fine" ... Priority management, what's that?

HTH - Z

Exiled_Tyke

Not quite 'enjoying the transportation revolution'  but an issue which really does need sorting.   Given some of the extortionate prices public chargers impose on us, I guess every little helps. On the other hand would they pass the savings on to us?   

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/feb/11/ev-electric-car-drivers-vat-public-chargers-pavement-tax

zeupater

Exiled_Tyke said:

Not quite 'enjoying the transportation revolution'  but an issue which really does need sorting.   Given some of the extortionate prices public chargers impose on us, I guess every little helps. On the other hand would they pass the savings on to us?   

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/feb/11/ev-electric-car-drivers-vat-public-chargers-pavement-tax

Hi

Regarding passing on the savings .... that really depends how the government would interpret and address what the article says about disparity - "Carmakers argued that removing the disparity in VAT rates would help increase demand for electric cars."  ... 

The disparity could be removed by applying the domestic 5% VAT rate to public chargers, however considering that the continuing move to EVs is already creating a massive hole in national finances (producer tax + fuel tax +VAT), and that's just going to grow, then an obvious & totally credible alternative would be to increase the VAT on all domestic energy supply to the full 20% VAT rate .... why "all" ... well, increasing VAT on electricity and not gas wouldn't exactly be seen by the ("ubergreen") government to encourage the move from "unsustainable, dirty, nasty & horribly polluting" (their stated opinion) gas heating towards heat-pumps, so any increase on one domestic energy source would logically need to apply to both in order to avoid further disparity ....

Nothing's free and governments need to make a simple choice when revenues are falling, either cut spending or increase tax .... so maybe the "Carmakers" have a valid point in that the government could remove the public charging cost disparity & address the looming additional "black hole" in public finances at the same time ... careful what we wish for when involving governments .... /

HTH - Z     

QrizB

Raising VAT on domestic energy to 20% would need some sort of compensatory measure for low-income households, though. 

Thet's not meant as an argument against it!

I'd also like to see the Fuel Price Escalator un-frozen, but that's another political headache.

EricMears

QrizB said:

Raising VAT on domestic energy to 20% would need some sort of compensatory measure for low-income households, though. 

Thet's not meant as an argument against it!

I'd also like to see the Fuel Price Escalator un-frozen, but that's another political headache.

You (and indeed I) may think that but we're not in government.

Suspect official position might be "poor people have to pay the same rate of vat as everyone else on other items; why single out fuel" !

Unfreezing  Fuel Price Escalator might offer dual advantage of raising revenue and encouraging switch from ICEV to EV.  If Rachel can spare time from editing her cv she might well consider it.

michaels

EricMears said:

QrizB said:

Raising VAT on domestic energy to 20% would need some sort of compensatory measure for low-income households, though. 

Thet's not meant as an argument against it!

I'd also like to see the Fuel Price Escalator un-frozen, but that's another political headache.

You (and indeed I) may think that but we're not in government.

Suspect official position might be "poor people have to pay the same rate of vat as everyone else on other items; why single out fuel" !

Unfreezing  Fuel Price Escalator might offer dual advantage of raising revenue and encouraging switch from ICEV to EV.  If Rachel can spare time from editing her cv she might well consider it.

We all know that if they added VAT at 20% to domestic fuel and then subsidised those on low incomes that subsidy would like the current ones be funded out of everyone else's bills - thus neatly moving support for the poorest from being something paid for out of taxation to being something paid for out of other people's consumption.  Personally I think that is a terrible option but you can see the political calculus....

My vote is road per mile pricing adjusted for vehicle weight and emissions replacing VED and fuel duty.

Magnitio

zeupater said:

Magnitio said:

michaels said:

Magnitio said:

michaels said:

Magnitio said:

michaels said:

Coastalwatch said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Martyn1981 said:

Speaking of innovation, there is a chance that Tesla will be releasing a new model(s) soon. These are to be the 'more affordable models' that they've been promising for some time.

I was quite skeptical, despite the 2024 Q2 & Q3 earnings reports stating the first half of 2025. So waited to see what the Q4 report would say (released 29th Jan), 90% sure that they would remove. revise, or water down the previous statements, but no, they said it again:

Plans for new vehicles, including more affordable models, remain on track for start of production in the first half of 2025. These vehicles will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms and will be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up.

So, late Jan statement for H1, seems too close, unless they are pretty much on target and confident. But at the same time, the statement is typical Tesla ambiquous, allowing for some interpretation, maybe just one vehicle in H1, and maybe test production, which market(s) .... etc etc.

Also, I'm surprised there have been no leaks, whatsoever, which raises doubts. But Tesla does try to keep things under cover (literally), and if based on existing architecture and hardware, that may explain why no test vehicles have been spotted. Typically, camo vehicles get spotted 3-6 months before launch for drivetrain testing in the real world.

So I remain skeptical for H1, but they may surprise.

I notice from the latest marketing I have received from Tesla that the entry level TM3 is priced just below the "premium vehicle" VED threshold.
It may well be that the "more affordable" models that have been long promised might realise and allow Tesla to keep models below that threshold and gain a competitive advantage.  If the new model is a "truncated" TM3 (think along the lines of the original BMW 3-Series Compact versus standard 3-Series), the development costs could be far less than a full new car platform.

Unless they were well on the way with the new platform but then had to redesign due to FSD not being any time soon so reverting to an old fashioned steering wheel.
I've no idea when FSD was first muted but it seems to have been a topic of conversation for a few years now!

Of course the steering wheel is less of a problem if they can use steer by wire from the cybertruck (just chuck in a PS/xbox controller).  However I don't think brake by wire is licensed technology so there is still some need for 'real' control interfaces.

There are plenty of cars that now use brake-by-wire, including the Cybertruck.

Really - no direct linkage/hydraulic back up - I though that was not allowed?

There is a hydraulic backup in case of failure, but when everything is working, any input via the brake pedal is interpreted based on numerous factors including pedal force, speed, steering angle, battery state, tyre grip, proximity to other vehicles etc. to determine how the car is slowed. This could involve using the motor(s) to slow the car, activating the brake pads or a combination. If all systems fail, it should allow the brake pads to be operated by hydraulic pressure alone.

I was talking specifically about the removal of a mechanical linkage altogether as has (I believe) been done with steering. If it was allowed for braking then you could literally start with a 'cyber cab' and add controls however you wanted to.  Similarly LHD/RHD would require 'zero' engineering.

The move to full drive-by-wire without a hydraulic link between the pedal and the brakes is progressing. Alfa Romeo has introduced a system from Continental called MKC1 that separates the pedal from the hydraulics and is implemented in the Giulia and Stelvio. Bosch is also near to introducing a brake-by-wire system that will be more widely available to manufacturers. See https://www.bosch-mobility.com/en/solutions/driving-safety/brake-by-wire/

Hi

The question there is whether this is a full brake by wire solution -or- simply hydraulically decoupling the brake pedal from the servo unit and introducing an electrical link between the two before relocating the servo unit from the engine bulkhead to the drive train .... yes this can theoretically allow for further digital management of the brake system and the saving of a few metres of brake tube (~0.2kg/vehicle), but again the issue revolves around added complexity required to mitigate potential failure and the redundancy requirements that this raises.

Failure modes move from mainly hydraulic toward hydraulic + electrical connectivity + power source + digital processing etc, all of which introduce additional potential points of failure (aka - risk) which requires considerable FMEA work to address ... ie, the question - " What happens if this potential failure happens & how can it be solved/mitigated?" ... remember, unlike most parts that make up a vehicle, all components of the braking system are considered and highlighted at the engineering stage as being safety critical which requires additional and more rigorous manufacturing quality standards.

At a time that the automotive sector needs to seriously address their cost base it must be questioned whether the cost savings related to deletion of a fully hydraulic solution would even outweigh the cost of additional failure point mitigation. My own opinion the current issue is that the majority of the automotive sector is playing catch up in a sector that they don't really fully understand, that of BEV ... vehicles just got simpler by definition and instead of addressing the improvement of manufacturing process to world class standards and rapidly removing unnecessary cost from their businesses, they seem to be playing at the edges ... this simply makes me think of the cartoon meme - an engineer dog designing a braking system with the company burning all around him ... the boss asks if there's a 'solution to the problem yet' and the answer/caption is "Everything is Fine" ... Priority management, what's that?

HTH - Z

The second of the Bosch brake-by-wire solutions is based on a pure electrical link between the pedal and the brake calipers. If reliability and fail-safe concerns are properly addressed, this greatly simplifies the implementation of braking systems, reduces component count and weight, requires less servicing (no brake fluid changes) and can provide a greater pad-to-disc gap for improved efficiency.