Financing Elio Motors Development And Production

[Smitty901]

Smaller engine the exhaust needs to be shorter to retain heat. ELIO is not about looking cool but running right and getting MPG

 

[Rickb]

Smaller engine the exhaust needs to be shorter to retain heat. ELIO is not about looking cool but running right and getting MPG

Elio is about running right, getting MPG, and looking cool. IMO

 

[Kuda]

I don't think the Morgan is nearly as robust as the Elio will be. Yet, it endures.

http://www.elioowners.com/threads/adjustable-rear-suspension-a-must-on-elio.1004/

 

[ternion]

For anyone wondering about this timeline this is based on something I was told that I can actually share. The exact parts for production need to be finalized about 3 months prior to production to give the suppliers time to finalize their assembly process in order to deliver these final parts on time. Also EM needs about six months or so of testing to finalize the hardware parts selection process. This is 9 months total so as long as they have the first E-series vehicles by the end of this year they have a shot of getting production online by the end of the 3rd quarter of 2015 even if it is a tight schedule. Software programming and tuning can continue pretty much until production starts up.

So knowing this timeline if we know that a running P5/E0 exists by mid-November and the production of the E-series is underway by the end of the year then this is what we need to see and if we don't then we have an issue which likely means another production delay. So everyone should just relax a bit and enjoy the ride as we still have two months or so before mid-November and the first trouble sign deadline.

So based on what you had said and the limited progress since you said it, how do you think the timeline looks now that we are at the end of the year?

 

[goofyone]

So based on what you had said and the limited progress since you said it, how do you think the timeline looks now that we are at the end of the year?

That is an excellent question. Since I wrote that in mid September, hard to believe it was 3.5 months ago already, I have actually had several opportunities to chat directly in person with Elio VP Jerome Vassallo and as a result my understanding of the process has been clarified. It is now my understanding that the entire process can be completed in six months from the time the first vehicle is completed to when testing is over and vehicles can roll off the line.

The way I understand it is that the six months of vehicle testing remains the same however what changed is my understanding about the three month parts lead time as this will apparently happen concurrently and not in addition to the vehicle testing period. Three months is apparently the maximum lead time that a part could require however EM is planning testing to complete all their requirements while at the same time completing the testing enough to make the required parts selection decisions.

So with this new understanding of the time-frames required it appears to me that if EM has a running engine and the money for the plant by mid year they could very well get into production before the end of the year. Of course any development advances made ahead of this time, such as running pre-production prototypes, would make getting into production sooner a possibility.

If EM does make the money they expect from selling off the plant equipment they have said they can complete the vehicle development process and at this point I really do not have much doubt they will be able to do that before the end of next year one way or another.

The big question to me is still the $120+ million it will take to finish outfitting the plant for production. The timing of the ATVM loan decision matters and if that does not work out the timing of private funding then comes into play. If the ATVM loan does not work out my guess is that investors will want EM to complete the vehicle development process before they commit to funding the plant which could easily push the production timeline past mid 2016. We all hope the ATVM loan works out as this would be 'easy' money for EM however if this does work out the timing also matters. If the ATVM loan is approved in the first half of they year then I would say the deciding factor in 2015 production will be any delays in vehicle development however the later this decision comes in the year the less likely it is EM can have the plant ready for production in 2015.

 

[JEBar]

That is an excellent question. Since I wrote that in mid September, hard to believe it was 3.5 months ago already, I have actually had several opportunities to chat directly in person with Elio VP Jerome Vassallo and as a result my understanding of the process has been clarified. It is now my understanding that the entire process can be completed in six months from the time the first vehicle is completed to when testing is over and vehicles can roll off the line.

The way I understand it is that the six months of vehicle testing remains the same however what changed is my understanding about the three month parts lead time as this will apparently happen concurrently and not in addition to the vehicle testing period. Three months is apparently the maximum lead time that a part could require however EM is planning testing to complete all their requirements while at the same time completing the testing enough to make the required parts selection decisions.

So with this new understanding of the time-frames required it appears to me that if EM has a running engine and the money for the plant by mid year they could very well get into production before the end of the year. Of course any development advances made ahead of this time, such as running pre-production prototypes, would make getting into production sooner a possibility.

If EM does make the money they expect from selling off the plant equipment they have said they can complete the vehicle development process and at this point I really do not have much doubt they will be able to do that before the end of next year one way or another.

The big question to me is still the $120+ million it will take to finish outfitting the plant for production. The timing of the ATVM loan decision matters and if that does not work out the timing of private funding then comes into play. If the ATVM loan does not work out my guess is that investors will want EM to complete the vehicle development process before they commit to funding the plant which could easily push the production timeline past mid 2016. We all hope the ATVM loan works out as this would be 'easy' money for EM however if this does work out the timing also matters. If the ATVM loan is approved in the first half of they year then I would say the deciding factor in 2015 production will be any delays in vehicle development however the later this decision comes in the year the less likely it is EM can have the plant ready for production in 2015.

well thought out analysis .... makes sense to me

Jim

 

[evboy]

One thing I am confused about. If it is going to take 6 months to do all the testing, what happens in june if the car doesnt meet the safety standards and fuel mpg that they advertised. They cant just redesign everything and then retest all in time for production by december. does the 6 months of testing mean they will be crashing cars and checking mpg the whole time and tweaking the car after every crash and test to meet the standards by june.

 

[Bert]

The engine will take about six Months to test. I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain they've done a lot of testing for crush zones and such, before making the P3 and P4. The formal Government testing, should it actually be done, will be on "off the production line" vehicles, not ones made specifically for the tests.
I'm hoping the present suspension system is what they go with. I love the "pull rod" design on the front, and the rear upper shock mount appears to include a well braced area to prevent premature frame failure, or metal fatigue.
Individual "pre assembly" parts are already in production and used on many vehicles already on the road. No further testing needed. IMO.
Give us a reliable engine and a final body specification design, and I think "we" are good to go!

 

[JEBar]

unless things have changed, it might pay to remember that with it's classification as a motorcycle, EM doesn't have to subject its product to crash testing, EPA MPG testing, or automotive pollution testing .... doing so has been a long time marketing point made by EM .... as such they have some flexibility and wiggle room that automotive manufactures don't have .... I suspect that they have already made arrangements with whatever testing agencies they have decided to use so that they will be able to move quickly when they are ready to do so

 

[goofyone]

One thing I am confused about. If it is going to take 6 months to do all the testing, what happens in june if the car doesnt meet the safety standards and fuel mpg that they advertised. They cant just redesign everything and then retest all in time for production by december. does the 6 months of testing mean they will be crashing cars and checking mpg the whole time and tweaking the car after every crash and test to meet the standards by june.

The answer to this really depends on exactly what Elio finds out during the testing. With extensive modern simulation testing to both the chassis and engine it would be very unusual for EM to encounter an issue serious enough to halt further testing or which would cause a long testing extension while the design is tweaked. Instead the most likely issues will be easily resolved with parts substitutions and/or small design tweaks which would have minimal or no impact on the overall testing timeline.

Elio Motors has spent years on chassis design and gone through several generations of chassis builds including multiple generations of computerized crash simulation testing so the likelihood of a major chassis design flaw at this point is small. It is much more likely that any issue with crash testing will be just a matter of adding more reinforcement in select places to ensure safety. This type of design tweak should not impact other testing areas so those would continue while an updated chassis is prepared for another crash test.

MPG is likely the easiest to solve with the most wiggle room for EM. I doubt EM will do much at all if they are 3-4 MPG short of the target numbers. If they hit 80/45 they would likely just go with those however if they are lower than that then EM always has the option of a more advanced variable valve timing and lift system to help improve those numbers at a bit of extra cost. I seriously doubt they would be more than a few MPG off anyway as this engine is actually being designed so IAV actually plans to detune it for maximum MPG so they have built in wiggle room in the design. MPG optimization can easily happen in parallel with the rest of the testing as this is just a matter of tweaking the ECU settings and installing existing off the shelf components as needed.