Photo: Geely
It is frequently said that Tesla has a lead in electric vehicles, but Kent Bovellan begs to disagree. In a group interview in which Paultan.org was present, the chief engineer of the SEA (Sustainable Experience Architecture) said that there are only two things in which Tesla stands out: software and performance. In everything else, Geely’s EV architecture would be superior.
According to Bovellan, Tesla fares worse when it comes to mechanical aspects of the platform such as NVH (noise, vibration, and harshness), interior space, and mass – it would be lighter than Tesla’s architecture with a smart combination of aluminum and steel. The engineer also said that the cost of production and the cost of ownership of SEA-equipped vehicles is far better than those in any Tesla.
If you consider that the real motor for the EV transformation is software, as some specialists pointed out to autoevolution, then Tesla would have nothing to worry about. However, the mechanical part is also necessary to gain customer’s trust. Tesla’s issues with panel gaps and suspension components show that the American company should give more attention to the “dinosaur stuff,” as Sandy Munro once said manufacturing was.
It would be great to have an independent specialist such as him analyzing both the Tesla platform and the SEA. He would be able to say if Geely also came up with innovative solutions such as the Super Manifold and the Octovalve or if its cooling system is more similar to that of the Ford Mustang Mach-E – which made Munro “faint.”
NVH levels require a very different sort of analysis, one that we suspect Bovellan conducted for him to be so convinced of the SEA qualities. Since the Zeekr 001 is the first vehicle to present the new platform, it will take some time until we can hear about its qualities and defects from someone that is not directly involved with conceiving it. In other words, we’re yet to see if consumers agree with Bovellan or not.
If you consider that the real motor for the EV transformation is software, as some specialists pointed out to autoevolution, then Tesla would have nothing to worry about. However, the mechanical part is also necessary to gain customer’s trust. Tesla’s issues with panel gaps and suspension components show that the American company should give more attention to the “dinosaur stuff,” as Sandy Munro once said manufacturing was.
It would be great to have an independent specialist such as him analyzing both the Tesla platform and the SEA. He would be able to say if Geely also came up with innovative solutions such as the Super Manifold and the Octovalve or if its cooling system is more similar to that of the Ford Mustang Mach-E – which made Munro “faint.”
NVH levels require a very different sort of analysis, one that we suspect Bovellan conducted for him to be so convinced of the SEA qualities. Since the Zeekr 001 is the first vehicle to present the new platform, it will take some time until we can hear about its qualities and defects from someone that is not directly involved with conceiving it. In other words, we’re yet to see if consumers agree with Bovellan or not.
Google News