Talk:Tesla next-generation vehicle platform

Tesla 2

While Tesla has not announced an official name, the vehicle is very, very commonly referred to in the press as the "Tesla 2" and the name is thus worth mentioning here as well. Jpatokal (talk) 09:32, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

The "Model 2" moniker given to the next-gen driver-operated version has been used by multiple news sources, and it is now represented that way in the article. N2e (talk) 15:34, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

'Half the cost' of which, when and how?

The Model 3 years ago was briefly priced very low with a cheap variant that was hard to find on the vehicle configurator. More recently the Model 3 and Model Y again have cheaper variants that, with all full possible state and federal tax credits, are as cheap as it was promised they would be (an under $35,000 Tesla). The average price of the 3/Y as purchased is more like 50 to 60 thousand dollars, of which a 'Model 2' at $25,000 would be half the price. However, going by the cheapest sale price after incentives of under $30,000, half would mean a Tesla cheaper than any car currently for sale in the US at 15 to $20,000. Maybe there should be some clarification here or trimming of speculation. B137 (talk) 01:53, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Agree, if "half the cost" is spoken of, it should be tied to an epoch of time when that talk originated. Have made some copyedits now to clarify that, per sources, all the "half the cost" talk & sources was in the timeframe when the Model 3/Y base models were in the $50k/60k price range. N2e (talk) 15:34, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Texas and Mexico

The Next Generation platform vehicles are slated to be built in Tesla's Giga Mexico plant which will be located in Monterrey, Mexico. Tesla is currently standing up a production line for the vehicle in Giga Texas. Production for the vehicle will begin in Texas where the engineering teams will be able to iron out any issues early on. Tesla expects that production will stabilize in time for Giga Mexico to open at which time mass production of the Next Generation platform vehicles will overtake the numbers being produced in Texas. Texas is not the planned long-term facility for NextGen, it will only kick off the builds until Mexico is ready to take over. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.253.177.151 (talk) 12:31, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

As always, we need supporting references. See WP:FACT and WP:RS.  Stepho  talk  11:35, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done—The article prose is cleaned up now, and well sourced. Tesla will bring up the assembly line in Texas, and then mass manufacture (per sources) at Mexico, Berlin-Brandenburg, and likely others. Government of India & Tesla are in talks, so has been proposed there. Haven't found a source yet for Shanghai, but would be hard to believe such a new low-cost platform would not also be manufactured in China; but we will wait for a source before mentioning it in the article prose. N2e (talk) 03:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Split off Cybercab

Following the announcement today, Tesla Cybercab should probably be split off into its own article. Jpatokal (talk) 04:15, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done — It was hived off, by another editor, and now many have contributed to make that article more complete now that the concept robotaxi/Cybercab has been unveiled. The unveil event was light on technical details about the autonomous version, but is clear Tesla is taking that version of the next-gen platform forward first, ahead of a full next-gen smaller driver-operated version. (although Tesla has made clear, in the early 2024 announcements, that some of the next-gen processes and architecture will be integrated into an upgraded version of one of their existing Mod 3/Y vehicles in early 2025.) N2e (talk) 15:34, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Pullquote

I strongly disagree with @Jpatokal's revert to include a pullquote in the article that highlights a passage from a Verge article. It violates WP:NPOV & WP:UNDUE to arbitrarily highlight this particular source's assessment of the article's topic. We should just quote it in the article text as normal, along with anything else. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 23:29, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Plus, the quote is largely about the Model 3, which isn't the topic of this article. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 23:34, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

A pullquote by definition quotes the article itself. This is not that, it's an ordinary quote of any external source. Perhaps you are confusing pullquotes with quoteboxes?

Formatting aside, the content of the article largely documents Tesla's marketing that has been promising an "affordable car" since 2006, while the quote presents an industry view that highlights Tesla's continued failure to deliver on this promise. If anything, I think it adds balance to have both views clearly presented. Jpatokal (talk) 05:40, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps my main point isn't coming through -- why is this particular source's perspective deserving of being highlighted in the article? --ZimZalaBim ^talk 13:12, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Because it's basically factual (it quotes the prices) and accurately represents a common viewpoint that's at odds with Tesla's marketing.

At the end of the day, the automotive media is not a monolithic entity, so the question is really: is the quote somehow inaccurate or unrepresentative? If yes, can you find a better one? Jpatokal (talk) 22:20, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Again, missing the point. I don't question the accuracy or applicability of the quote. It should be included in the main text along with any other reliable source. But why highlight it in a special box that draws the reader's attention? That's POV/UNDUE. (The only logic for possibly having a quote highlighted like this would be if the quote was somehow remarkable in itself, and itself received substantial independent coverage by RS. That's clearly not the case here). --ZimZalaBim ^talk 22:27, 28 October 2024 (UTC)