No more Model S/X production

[gaskiller]

They threw the kitchen sink at the Cybertruck; steer - by-wire, 800V, 48V, new construction, upgraded 4680s, rear steer. Of course, the only customer noticeable thing was the steer by wire with the yoke wheel thing. The rest the other competitors already had or things were not material (ie 48V, truck still 1.5x promised original price, no price or capability advantage over the competition).

The Tesla yoke steering wheel is a joke, and taking away stalks is stupid. Tesla made a lot of dumb decisions just to save a few dollars. No common sense. Just hype.

 

[gaskiller]

A lot of the criticism of the robotaxis and robots needing remote control seems a bit short sighted. Of course they will need a lot of data of these things operating in the way that we want them to. Remote operation seems like a reasonable way of getting that data.

It also seems outlandish that Tesla can gather enough data in a reasonable timeframe from these limited uses. If I owned Tesla stock, and I don’t, I would want to see A LOT more remotely operated vehicles. And that seems like an unwise investment considering Nvidia seems to be catching up via synthetic data. And the future Tesla is aiming toward is one where everyone has this tech and they aren’t special.

Others will quickly catch up to Tesla using NVIDIA Alpamo model. Musk knows this, so he moving to “making” humanoids….if they even exist. Whatever keeps the gravy coming in ….

I bet you in 10 years he will still be saying there will be one in every home next year.

 

[Saksak]

I sure hope that’s true, but I suspect not.
Gravity doesn’t have the Nvidia hardware that the Mercedes CLA has. I think that Earth will get the Nvidia AGX system for L2.
L4 requires the halo thingy.

I could be wrong, though.

The Gravity has the Nvidia AGX Orin processor for L2/L3. This will give us at least the current level of Tesla supervised FSD, hopefully by the end of the year. I have high hopes as Nvidia has a great track record.

The Mercedes CLA has the Nvidia AGX Thor processor for L3/L4. The upcoming Lucid Earth will also have Thor.

It will be interesting to see if the Gravity can be upgraded to Thor. Marc Winterhoff mentioned the Nuro version of the Gravity has the Thor processor, so it’s technically feasible.

 

[Smorgasbord]

The Gravity has the Nvidia AGX Orin processor for L2/L3. This will give us at least the current level of Tesla supervised FSD, hopefully by the end of the year. I have high hopes as Nvidia has a great track record.

The Mercedes CLA has the Nvidia AGX Thor processor for L3/L4. The upcoming Lucid Earth will also have Thor.

It will be interesting to see if the Gravity can be upgraded to Thor. Marc Winterhoff mentioned the Nuro version of the Gravity has the Thor processor, so it’s technically feasible.

From what I've seen of the demos, Nvidia's AGX/Thor running Alhpamayo is close to FSD, but not yet at that level. So I don't have high hopes for the previous version of hardware to reach that level. There's also a question of what quality and number of cameras are in Gravity today, maybe even whether the LiDAR is up to snuff. And, of course, how much effort Lucid will put into it (it's not plug and play from Nvidia from my understanding).

It's certainly possible future Gravitys will use Thor (or its successor), but I don't hold out much hope for retrofits as well as software updates for those of us that already own (or will in the near future) Gravitys.

It's going to be an interesting year. When the CLA comes out and has Alphamayo, I'm sure there will be lots of comparison videos, so maybe then we'll have a better understanding of where those two are relative to each other. I do hope Lucid follows through on its L2 plans for current and near-term Gravitys, but at this point they need to prove they can crawl before they self drive, at least in terms of software.

 

[tmichael]

I hate to mention the elephant in the room, however Lucid's competition was never going to end up just being Tesla. The Chinese manufacturers are coming and they are subsidized behemoths well versed in software.

Joanna Stern in the Wall Street Journal this morning... Xiaomi SU7 Max article


Did the US auto industry adjust and improve when Japanese cars started coming in? Yes, and it is better off for it. How about German car companies? Competition breeds better products, however there are always failures caused by competition and as the auto industry continues to consolidate (Just look at the brands VW owns!), expect Chinese automotive companies to have a major impact on the industry for quite some time into the future. To paraphrase Paul Revere would not be polite, but the auto industry of of 2050 will be substantially different than today. Hang on to your hats - I, for one, am looking forward to the ride! It will be scary at times and exhilarating at times, but I still love a good roller coaster!

Dream ahead!

 

[TahoeMichael]

I hate to mention the elephant in the room, however Lucid's competition was never going to end up just being Tesla. The Chinese manufacturers are coming and they are subsidized behemoths well versed in software.

Joanna Stern in the Wall Street Journal this morning... Xiaomi SU7 Max article


Did the US auto industry adjust and improve when Japanese cars started coming in? Yes, and it is better off for it. How about German car companies? Competition breeds better products, however there are always failures caused by competition and as the auto industry continues to consolidate (Just look at the brands VW owns!), expect Chinese automotive companies to have a major impact on the industry for quite some time into the future. To paraphrase Paul Revere would not be polite, but the auto industry of of 2050 will be substantially different than today. Hang on to your hats - I, for one, am looking forward to the ride! It will be scary at times and exhilarating at times, but I still love a good roller coaster!

Dream ahead!

Automakers that want to survive need to not bury their heads in the sand. Manufacturers need to master cheap construction of reliable vehicles, they need to establish solid software capabilities, and they need either build or partner for AI. Mastering two of those and missing on one dramatically increases the chance of going out of business.

 

[tmichael]

Though Chinese cars are cheaper and full of tech, lots of it is gimmicky in my opinion. Do you need auto open and close doors? Do you need a cool box? Do you need a screen that swivels?

And the engineering in those cars is questionable- how much testing have they done? Not much because they roll these out like sardines. Safety and reliability is to be proven.

But they are cheap, that will sell a lot.

I agree with your description of the small, urban and inexpensive models meant for the domestic Chinese market. Those won't be sold here because there is little market for that kind of thing and they probably wouldn't pass our safety requirements.

Auto open and close doors. Cool box. Screen that swivels. You just described products available from Cadillac and Tesla in the US today.

Finally, the engineering. Giga castings, CAD, robotics manufacturing - they are not only used outside of China. Lotus, Volvo/Polestar, the Buick Envision and Envista - they are all made in China. To generalize that Chinese products are inferior in design and execution would sound just like my dad (an automotive engineer) who picked on Honda and Toyota in the 70s. Look how that turned out...

I don't think this is a political issue - this is a capitalism issue. China has figured out how some capitalistic ideas can actually move an economy forward - and they are implementing. We can't complain, we have to compete. It has worked for 250 years, let's not change now!

 

[BrianBigNFun]

I sure hope that’s true, but I suspect not.
Gravity doesn’t have the Nvidia hardware that the Mercedes CLA has. I think that Earth will get the Nvidia AGX system for L2.
L4 requires the halo thingy.

I could be wrong, though.

The Gravity has the Nvidia AGX Orin processor for L2/L3. This will give us at least the current level of Tesla supervised FSD, hopefully by the end of the year. I have high hopes as Nvidia has a great track record.

The Mercedes CLA has the Nvidia AGX Thor processor for L3/L4. The upcoming Lucid Earth will also have Thor.

It will be interesting to see if the Gravity can be upgraded to Thor. Marc Winterhoff mentioned the Nuro version of the Gravity has the Thor processor, so it’s technically feasible.

my hope is that when my lease is up (and Lucid is still here) the Gravity gets updated hardware by then

 

[tmichael]

my hope is that when my lease is up (and Lucid is still here) the Gravity gets updated hardware by then

My plan, exactly... Battery tech should be improved as well, which is my primary hope. Lighter and longer range is my wish.

 

[hmp10]

Finally, the engineering. Giga castings, CAD, robotics manufacturing - they are not only used outside of China. Lotus, Volvo/Polestar, the Buick Envision and Envista - they are all made in China. To generalize that Chinese products are inferior in design and execution would sound just like my dad (an automotive engineer) who picked on Honda and Toyota in the 70s. Look how that turned out...

While I think Sandy Munro has his issues, he has spent a lot of time in China looking at their automotive industry. He insists they are making huge strides in materials and production quality and have attained world class in many regards. Against the backdrop of Chinese drywall, toothpaste, and plywood scandals and my own experience with crappy Chinese metallurgy in several products, I had my doubts. But now I'm wondering if Munro might be right.

I think we're seeing a similar trajectory to what we saw with Japanese manufacturing and design between the 1950's and 1970's. Their immediate postwar products were known for being cheap and poorly made. But the hangover of this widespread public perception actually provided a curtain behind which Japan took the work of Edwards Deming and six-sigma design and manufacturing to heart and began to produce products poised to take on the world in the electronics and automotive realms. Almost without realizing it was happening names like Sony and Panasonic broke onto the scene with top-tier audio and video products. And when the oil crisis of the early 1970's broke over our heads, we seemed doomed to live with such flimsy excrescences as the Chevy Vega, the Ford Pinto, and the Cadillac Cimarron . . . until Honda arrived on the scene with the surprisingly capable Civic, followed soon by the Accord. These products quickly became the global standard for affordable, superbly-engineered and robustly-built automobiles that even today still form one of the anchors of the automotive world.

 

[hmp10]

My plan, exactly... Battery tech should be improved as well, which is my primary hope. Lighter and longer range is my wish.

I'm an outlier on battery weight. While I understand all the advantages that lighter weight brings to efficiency and braking, I am a real fan of the low centers of gravity in EVs derived largely from that battery weight.

My first Tesla (a 2015 Model S P90D) replaced a 2011 Audi R8 V10 Spyder. The Audi had one of the lowest centers of gravity of any ICE car due things such as a dry sump oil system that allowed dropping the engine lower in the chassis by dispensing with an oil pan. I was absolutely shocked to discover how a sedan on relatively skinny tires could approach the handling dynamics of that Audi, thanks in large part to the Tesla's remarkably low center of gravity (plus a healthy dollop of Peter Rawlinson's almost magical suspension elixir).

Flash forward eleven years and I still see that battery weight as playing a large role in how flatly and precisely our Gravities execute maneuvers (again with another dollop of the suspension magic Rawlinson and the people he chose brought to the table).

It's one of the reasons I think the likes of a Jason Cammisa can credibly suggest Lucid raises the question of the obsolescence of the sports car.

 

[tmichael]

I'm an outlier on battery weight. While I understand all the advantages that lighter weight brings to efficiency and braking, I am a real fan of the low centers of gravity in EVs derived largely from that battery weight.

My first Tesla (a 2015 Model S P90D) replaced a 2011 Audi R8 V10 Spyder. The Audi had one of the lowest centers of gravity of any ICE car due things such as a dry sump oil system that allowed dropping the engine lower in the chassis by dispensing with an oil pan. I was absolutely shocked to discover how a sedan on relatively skinny tires could approach the handling dynamics of that Audi, thanks in large part to the Tesla's remarkably low center of gravity (plus a healthy dollop of Peter Rawlinson's almost magical suspension elixir).

Flash forward eleven years and I still see that battery weight as playing a large role in how flatly and precisely our Gravities execute maneuvers (again with another dollop of the suspension magic Rawlinson and the people he chose brought to the table).

It's one of the reasons I think the likes of a Jason Cammisa can credibly suggest Lucid raises the question of the obsolescence of the sports car.

I'm with you 100% on the low center of gravity and the advantage it provides in handling.

Lighter weight battery benefits cascade throughout the car. The lighter weight the battery, the less weight in suspension components, in structural components, crash absorption components, brakes, tires, etc. I don't think of a battery weight reduction as a singular effect - I'm good with the battery remaining the same percentage of the total car weight, but a lighter weight battery can make a lighter weight vehicle, which reduces polar movement, etc. The advantage of the battery being in the center and down low in the car will remain, if simply for repair purposes, so we should continue to benefit from centered and low battery placement, and the handling characteristics of a low center of gravity, but with total weight losses allowing for more range.

 

[hmp10]

. . . I'm good with the battery remaining the same percentage of the total car weight . . .

Agree with lightening the battery pack if there are proportional weight reductions in other components, especially unsprung ones. That's the trick of it, though. It's something a company such as Lucid will probably pay attention to.

But I think of something such as the Cadillac Escalade IQ. It's probably that gargantuan two-tier battery pack that keeps it from flipping over like an Explorer on low-pressure tires. I wonder how much of its grossly inefficient chassis and swollen body design will shed weight along with the battery pack.

 

[BrianBigNFun]

But I think of something such as the Cadillac Escalade IQ. It's probably that gargantuan two-tier battery pack that keeps it from flipping over like an Explorer on low-pressure tires.

 

[Babyrocko1908]

Why does this post about Tesla Model S and X get more attention then any of the other Lucid announcements on a Lucid forum?

Are we that ANTI-ELON / TESLA here lol!?

Are you new here?

 

[prgarg]

BTW, here's RJ Scaringe's take on moving downmarket (R2 way more important than R1), software-defined vehicles, and autonomy:

Swisher will insert her Elon hate every chance she gets, but RJ is too smart to take the bait. That said, he has a very similar view to Musk, and I hope he's successful, too.

One tidbit was that Rivian put lidar on the Gen-2 R1 vehicles not to enable autonomy, but to gather data ("ground truth") for future autonomy. Another is what Tesla doesn't talk about, which is the change everyone has made in autonomy from separate AI-perception code bases paired with human-coded driving policy, to an all-AI codebase. Tesla literally had to start over, and my guess is that was about the time Karpathy left Tesla.

On and Pivot = my 2 fav podcasts

 

[Pragmatic]

The Escalade IQ is a convenient punching bag. I think GM designed the vehicle their buyers wanted. Its not the vehicle I want but it fills its niche. Also with sales of 8100 in 2025 it probably out sold the Gravity. Lucid does not break out sales by model, but with 15841 sales for the year, it quite likely the Gravity share was less than 8100.

 

[borski]

A lot of the criticism of the robotaxis and robots needing remote control seems a bit short sighted. Of course they will need a lot of data of these things operating in the way that we want them to. Remote operation seems like a reasonable way of getting that data.

You’re completely right. And if they simply stated that, I would have absolutely zero issue with this at all. But instead, they claim they’ve already solved the problem, which is just an outright lie.

It also seems outlandish that Tesla can gather enough data in a reasonable timeframe from these limited uses. If I owned Tesla stock, and I don’t, I would want to see A LOT more remotely operated vehicles. And that seems like an unwise investment considering Nvidia seems to be catching up via synthetic data. And the future Tesla is aiming toward is one where everyone has this tech and they aren’t special.

Yup.

 

[borski]

L4 requires the halo thingy.

Given we have no idea what the car looks like, it very well may not. It’s possible they integrate components elsewhere. The reason you see the “halo” on gravity and in waymo is explicitly because they are retrofitting hardware to the vehicle. That isn't the case with Earth.

 

[borski]

It's certainly possible future Gravitys will use Thor (or its successor), but I don't hold out much hope for retrofits as well as software updates for those of us that already own (or will in the near future) Gravitys.

Why? They have already offered a CCC upgrade for the Air; I don’t see why they couldn’t do something similar for ADAS, assuming the rest of the hardware remains constant.