Panasonic Attempts to Pull Tesla Out of Production Hell

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

When Tesla Motors began production of its Model 3 sedan, CEO Elon Musk announced the firm was entering into a kind of “ production hell.” He probably didn’t realize just how accurate a statement that would turn out to be. Already contending with a backlog of orders for the Model 3, Tesla simply couldn’t meet the volume targets it set for itself over the last year. It’s now bending over backwards to finish the quarter strong and prove to investors it is capable of turning a profit.

The automaker frequently referenced production bottlenecks as the culprit for the Model 3’s delay. Panasonic, the sole battery supplier for the vehicle, appears to be taking ownership of the issue. “The bottleneck for Model 3 production has been our batteries,” Yoshio Ito, Executive Vice President of Panasonic, said on Tuesday. “They just want us to make as many as possible.”

However, it’s not really Panasonic’s fault.

Tesla was short an entire assembly line (which was waiting for pickup at its German manufacturing unit Grohmann) for months. “That’s got to be disassembled, brought over to the Gigafactory, and re-assembled and then brought into operation at the Gigafactory,” Musk said in February. “It’s not a question of whether it works or not. It’s just a question of disassembly, transport and reassembly.”

Ultimately, Tesla decided to ship every piece of the necessary tooling via cargo plane to save time. It was then confronted with production restraints at its facility in Fremont, California. That issue was solved through the construction of an outdoor assembly line, but it created a new problem. Tesla found itself having trouble getting vehicles to the applicable delivery centers due to a lack of car carriers. It now claims to be constructing its own while satisfied customers volunteer at its various delivery hubs.

There’s a lot of moving pieces when it comes to the construction of a car. Not wanting to be a weak link in the supply chain, Panasonic already promised to add three production lines at Tesla’s Nevada Gigafactory by the end of the year. However, Bloomberg reports that the company said on Tuesday that it wants to push that timeline up as much as possible.

While not responsible for the battery packs themselves, Panasonic is responsible for the cells that go into them, plus much of the associated tooling. The three new lines will bring the plant’s total to 13, with a claimed capacity of 35 gigawatt hours, Ito said. While the majority of its cells will go into automobiles, some are also intended for home energy storage solutions. That’s a part of the business Tesla hasn’t been as keen on lately.

Either way, the new lines should help. Last November, Musk said the Gigafactory was holding back Model 3 volume — specifically the assembly line that packages battery cells, which Musk blamed on a subcontractor that “really dropped the ball.”

[Image: Tesla Motors]

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 5 comments
  • Tstag Tstag on Sep 28, 2018

    I read an interesting article the other day which explained that Jaguar only managed to make 140 I Paces in Austria last month due to production problems! I suspect Jaguar will be free of its own production hell much much more quickly than Tesla but it goes to show that even an established car maker is struggling with electric car manufacturing.

  • Redapple Redapple on Sep 28, 2018

    Production problems listed above dont pass the smell test. I think they are making excuses but the real delay was unbuildable design. Munro tear down show real primitive design.

  • ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
  • ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
  • Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
  • Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
Next