Featured Munro on Tesla

it matters not, really. but it is funny that if he has one negative comment, all the negative nancy's come out of the woodwork to shout 'i told you so!'

 

I watched part of the video and body rigidity was his big complaint.
I had a car that was a convertible that when you jacked the car at the rear bumper you couldn't open the door on that side.
I know they have to reinforce convertibles for that reason.
How bad does the Tesla 3 flex?

 

I imagine it can't flex too much considering it's one of the safest cars on the road.

 

did he give a reason why it wasn't rigid, or just looking for a nit to pick?

for all the talk of great handling, it makes you wonder

 

The big problem with cars with front mounted engines is as soon as they are hit square in the front the engine is pushed into the fire wall, so much for that crumple zone. I can see where Tesla has a big advantage not having a big chunk of metal between the bumper and the passenger compartment creating a huge crumple zone. This still doesn't mean the car doesn't flex.

 

that's where munro dropped the ball in his analysis

 

I didn't watch the whole thing but is he expressing his opinion or does he have data to back up his claim?
I'm guessing opinion.

 

Front engine cars are often designed so, in a frontal crash, the engine slides under the firewall. I've seen it happen and folks walk away as far back as 20 years ago.

Munro wasn't complaining about any flexing, said it was quite structurally rigid. Just that the structure was overbuilt. Too much weight to achieve what it could have if the battery was factored into the design and the trunk lid was made of lighter materials.

 

I watched a little of the video, and his problem is that unlike the models S and X the battery doesn't add stiffness which makes him think that the frame weighs too much and is too complicated. Reference this here - Here is the response from someone on the stiffness/weight. Counterpoint To Munro’s Negative Analysis Of Tesla Model 3 Body Design
Here is a different take from same analysis that the model 3 is too stiff ;-) Another Tesla Model 3 Teardown Highlights Strengths & Opportunities For Tesla | CleanTechnica

He said that he was using the bmw 328i body in white versus tesla model 3 body in white without the glass roof and battery, they weighed the same, and he thought the tesla should be lighter. Siemen's tested the crashworthiness and it was the same with and without the battery pack. That shows the pack does not add stiffness or rigidity, but ... the pack is lighter than the model S and X because it is not a structural element. So data but is that weight important? IMHO tesla can improve with a redesign, but their modular design is to shave weight from the battery packs and use the steel frame to protect the battery and the occupants. The design of the body does make the door alignment sensitive (mine is going to the shop to make this better) which adds labor and cost.

IMHO you need inovators to design a car to get as good as a porsche 911 or a tesla model 3. Hopefully they can get some Lexus/BMW/Audi/Mercedes manufacturing engineers to improve it and shave some cost.

 

This is what I love about forums especially PC .. personal opinion
Anywho
Munro was in favor of the high level of detail on the electronics, motor design, battery pack design
However
Not impress with panel gaps and aluminum body parts overbuilt and lack of light weighting . He also said the BMW looked like star wars storm trooper. Watch interview and pay for a teardown analysis a lot of companies have done so excluding GM Ford FCA

 

hasn't helped them much...

 

Gee he saves the weight of shipping for two trips, factory to factory and factory to delivery point. And the car owner carries the extra weight on how many trips? The math doesn't add up for someone intent on greening the planet. Somehow I doubt that was the reason but is something someone came up with after the fact.

 

wow, we are really picking nits in this thread

 

que

 

hasn't helped gm, ford or fca much