Thanks but the Model 3 teardown shows that Tesla knows how to build EV profitably: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAS-yjWj9DY

The i3 one might be technically interesting, but the car was never intended to be produced in volume so it's just a nice niche thing.

> The i3 one might be technically interesting, but the car was never intended to be produced in volume so it's just a nice niche thing.

It's a proof of concept, and a way to test the market before really committing to sustained production of electric cars. BMW could produce other electric cars in volume if they decide the market is viable.

It's worth pointing out that even though the sales were disappointing to the point that BMW might be losing money on the car (I remember reading back in the day an estimate that they needed to sell 20k to be profitable), it was also their way of testing out a process for making inexpensive carbon fiber which is currently making money in other areas. They're the only auto manufacturer who has got that technology right now, and it's highly relevant in the luxury electric space.

The McLaren people make carbon fibre tubs for their road cars and they are opening a new factory for this in the UK 'due to Brexit' (the carbon fibre tubs were being made in Austria).

In the bigger scheme of things McLaren sell roughly as many cars as BMW sell i3s, i.e. a rounding error in global auto sales.

McLaren got there first in making carbon fibre tub a road going reality, for the super-rich, just as they did on the track in the world of F1 almost four decades ago.

Nobody is arguing BMW invented the use of carbon fiber in an automobile. BMW's process is a big step forward in terms of cost (different chemistry, much faster production at lower temperature).

The i3 costs about as much as the brakes on a McLaren. Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just an odd comparison to make.

If you're looking for a way to attenuate somebody's enthusiasm about BMW's amazing, relatively cheap carbon fiber process, it's that BMW is publicly downplaying its importance in favor of aluminum. That's either about production costs or about complicated problems of meeting passenger car safety standards with carbon fiber, depending on who you talk to...

> McLaren got there first in making carbon fibre tub a road going reality

The i3 is actually a carbon fiber body-on-frame design relying on aluminum. It's wild, but definitely not something McLaren would want to use for a 700-hp sports car.

I think you underestimate how many i3 BMW have sold, they built almost 100 000 from 2013 to 2017[0]. McLaren on the other hand celebrated 15 000 cars total in may this year[1]. BMW also have a smaller budget for each tub so it's pretty impressive that they have a production car with a carbon fiber tub.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_i3#Marketing_and_sales [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/nargessbanks/2018/05/29/mclaren...

Maybe, but why don't they have any big plan for EV now? Did the i3 lead them to conclude they can't ramp up with their current tech / production?

Meanwhile, every review about the Model 3 (LR and Performance) shows that the 3 series and the M3 don't appeal much. And the Model Y will be shown in a few months to compete head to head with the BMW X3 and X5 in a few months.

I'm not sure why you're being downvoted, since the i3 teardown is utterly fascinating.

A better comparison might be Toyota, though, when it comes to innovating on manufacturing. One of the things you'd really want to hear from Tesla is why a given part of the assembly line differs from established best practices, and that sort of explanation is something you never really hear from them. You do hear things like "oh, yeah, we just got rid of that stupid, fantastically expensive automatic conveyor belt system and replaced it with something simpler," and if you read the histories you know that Toyota and others retreated from systems similar to that in years past for similar reasons.

I agree, knowing why things were done the way they were is far more interesting just knowing how they were done and the supposed advantages.

Maybe if Tesla fails (or succeeds wildly, has a IPO and many people cash out and take jobs at more established car makers) we'll get to hear the stories behind these sorts of decisions.

Uh, they’re already public. $TSLA