They could have tried a little harder with the name. It makes me take them less seriously with a copycat name like they're not confident enough in their product and need to glom onto Tesla's success. What an awful decision.
Yeah! I thought this was a subsidiary or some other project that was secret until now related to Tesla until I couldn't find any mention of it on the website.
I don't think that truck is ever seeing the light of day; the name and the rest of it all seems incredibly unlikely to materialize except as some money in someone's pockets.
you could say the same about elon musk, as the original inventor was called nikola tesla and they both ripped off the same thing
also, there was an electronics company called tesla in communist czecoslovakia, which is realatively well known in central/eastern europe.
The whole company looks a bit shady to me. The claims, the name, the renders, no legal entity named, no info on founders/advisors/investors on the website or LinkedIn, etc.
Also, why would you redesign the cabin from scratch if what's unique is the drivetrain?
"NO COMPETITION"
"MANY TIMES CLEANER THAN DIESEL ENGINES"
"Nikola Motor Company is not currently accepting walk in visitors. After we launch the vehicles at the live press release later this year, contact numbers and locations will be provided for visits."
And is apparently run by a guy named Troy A Wallin.
I hate it when companies put up a web site and then don't say the least bit about who manages the company or is involved in it in some way. Does make things look less than honest.
EDIT: I also found in an article the name of the CEO, and here is his LinkedIn profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/theofficialtrevormilton ... Not sure if there actually is a direct relationship to Bluegentech, LLC... the Nikola Motor Company from the article is described as being Salt Lake City, Utah based. Bluegentech, LLC is registered as a foreign company in Utah. (And, yes, I am just avoiding real work this morning.)
Final EDIT: It's interesting. Going back to the original idea that the company had a fly-by-night feel. I now know that the people involved have some actual experience in their industry (at least generally). My perception of them, while still very limited, is somewhat better. I can't help but thinking that being a little more upfront about the principals would improve their first impressions... despite the name ;-)
> Nikola (pronounced Neek-oh-la) Motor Company (NMC), named
after the famous electrical engineer Nikola Tesla, was quietly formed by Founder and CEO
Trevor Milton years ago to design and manufacture electric vehicles, energy storage systems
and electric vehicle drivetrain components.
Apparently they put up the website with their 3d models a few days ago.
The fact that they claim to own their own wells and liquification is pretty fishy. What kind of startup is going to have expertise in both gas extraction and electric vehicle engineering? And why on earth would they even want to when there's pretty good infrastructure for that already?
The choice of name alone ensures that the first impression is of a copycat at best and a scam at worst. Even if neither of those things are true and this company is totally legit, the fact that whoever is behind this company chose to use the name really kills their credibility. So, three possibilities here:
* The whole thing is a scam
* It's a copycat company
* The backers have money and/or connections but no taste or business sense
All from a name. Congrats guys, way to crater a business before it even gets off the ground. It's like trying to compete with Ford by naming your company "Henry".
The company's Facebook account only appeared on May 1st and their Twitter sometime since then [1][2]. It also appears that their website only became public on May 4th [3]. Given the recentness of their public presence, I would not imagine that they were expecting this much publicity yet.
I think that they are legitimate because the "What's Inside" photo for the Nikola One is definitely an export from a real CAD model [4]. And Google Image search cannot find the photos they have on their social media profiles used anywhere else besides when referring to them [5]. That said, they seem distinctly in the prototype phase and have a long way to go before actually shipping something. Tesla took 6 years to ship less than 150 cars. [6]
[4] https://nikolamotor.com/one#safety (my dad does mechanical engineering, and the only place I've seen pictures like the one on Nikola's page is in CAD exports)
It has to be a joke... right? I don't see how it could be serious.
I mean, even ignoring the naming (which only makes sense as parody), nobody is going to put down nearly $1000 to reserve a car based on what looks like a bunch of early 2000s 3D renders, right?
That said, it isn't a particularly funny joke, there's not really even any subtle humor here, but at the same time I can't understand how this could be a real thing.
At the very least this early on you should have some page listing all the people involved and their qualification along with any investors involved. It gives you legitimacy. As it stands this screams vapourware to me.
My scam meeter is off the charts. It's exactly like Tesla except no tangible product, no funding, no founder with a proven track record, and way too many details.
I found it odd how difficult it was to figure out what the company's products are: a CNG powered hybrid semi truck and an all terrain vehicle. (Not clear why its a UTV instead of an ATV).
UTV = Utility Task Vehicle
"UTVs differ from all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) in that UTVs typically have a side-by-side seating arrangement, many have seat belts and roll-over protection, and most have a cargo box at the rear of the vehicle. UTVs generally have a higher payload capability and are longer and wider than ATVs"[0]
UTVs are a huge market. According to one article[1], there were 670,000 sold between 2010 and 2012. That's about 223,000 per year. They range from about $10K - $25K new, and are popular for hunting, recreation and outdoor work (think a mini pickup that can go anywhere). If we assume the average purchase price is $15K, that's $3.3 Billion in annual sales.
I'm amazed by how many people around me, in rural Idaho, have spent ~$15K on one.
But, even assuming this thing is real, no one is going to spend $42K on one. Especially when I suspect there's a significant overlap between "people who are skeptical of electric vehicles" and "people who are likely to purchase a UTV".
You'll notice they left price out of their comparison table, because it would look like this:
* NIKOLA ZERO: $42,000
* POLARIS RZR 1000 TURBO: $24,999
* CANAM MAVERICK TURBO: $22,999
* ARTIC CAT WILDCAT: $20,999
And they're comparing the Zero to top of the line most expensive models from their competitors. I think the average purchase price is probably much closer to $15K on a UTV.
I will say that the pricing is the one thing that lends credibility to this company. I expect building a good electric UTV really would cost close to $40K. If I were just trying to build hype, I'd price it much closer to my competitors.
ATVs have a very different market – with different needs. UTVs are for commercial use, where a high payload is useful, such as construction. It's clear they're not a consumer company, which is why they aren't offering an ATV.
Interesting that they went with onboard CNG generators that are directly charging batteries. Those types of generators are a proven reliable technology, and batteries seem to have proven mostly reliable in Tesla products, so I can see their longevity claims of 2x higher than diesel trucks being at least plausible.
It's a pretty well established system in marine applications, so it seems like a good idea. Of course, the hard part isn't the tech, it's building a company.
Apparently, the Nikola Motor Company is a Utah-based startup. According to [1]:
"The company is run by Trevor Milton, a former executive at dHybrid Systems, which developed a CNG system for tractor-trailers that’s now owned by Worthington Industries."
All their products seem target at city stop-n-go usage for some reason. Which is an interesting contrast. (As is already having physical products/prototypes.)
I want to list all the things wrong with this project. But the Automotive Industry does need to be disrupted so even horrible execution may work.
If the founders need a software engineer with experience in emission testing, fuel economy testing, info-tainment programming, and engine control programming email: [email protected] based in Detroit willing to relocate (but you appear based there too).
Site looks super shady, however the technology could work. They're pitching a series hybrid CNG (they do call it fuel agnostic and state Diesel would work too) turbine-electric truck. Very similar to the way hybrid Diesel trains work.
This does smell a bit like a "throw together a lot of high-tech buzzwords" design exercise more than a real product.
First, series hybrids are generally a bad idea for road-going vehicles, where a mechanical link is a) pretty straightforward and b) a lot more efficient at cruise, which is where fuel economy really matters for most applications.
Secondly, gas turbines are primarily an advantage where power-to-weight ratio is important (much more of a concern in, say, a helicopter than a heavy truck). They are generally less efficient than diesels, especially at the size needed to power a truck, and even more so when running at less than full power. (Incidentally, diesels are pretty trivial to convert to run on CNG).
Total vaporware. Their claimed performance is just ridiculous - they propose a massive hauler truck with 4x the battery capacity of a Tesla Model S while getting...5x the range? and 4x the HP.
It is not a fully electric system like the Model S. The drive system is electric but the electricity itself comes from an onboard CNG turbine. The battery just acts as a buffer and place to store regenerative breaking energy.
Based on the fact that every image on the site is a digital rendering, I'm going to guess they need the reservation fees to actually build the first vehicles.
I think this is very legit, and when we see a built prototype, which they project by the end of the year, it could be a game changer in fleets. If you research the owner (Trevor Milton), you'll find he started a company called D Hybrid. It involved natural gas conversion technology of diesel systems. It was bought by Worthington Industries, a publicly traded company, so he was able to pass that test. This seems like a logical profession of an innovator. The name does seem like a miss step, but they aren't a direct competitor with Tesla motors (at this stage). I'm only basing this on what I can trace about the founder and I'm thinking the founder is an innovator that knows what they are doing. As they say, build it and they will come. They'll call you crazy or a fraud until you do. My bet is this is very real and we'll know relatively soon.
This appears to be a CNG hybrid-electric truck, not an electric one. Hybrid-electric buses (diesel or CNG engine generates electricity for electric motor, which spins the wheels) have been around at least for a decade. What's different/new about this?
Also, from memory, burning CNG generates about half the pollution of burning diesel.
Not sure where to begin with this, looks like a complete scam to me, and looking at the spec of the zero buggy, it claims 20" suspension clearance (this would be travel, not clearance), and that the regenerative braking means you can corner "2-3x" faster.
[+] [-] eumoria|10 years ago|reply
The truck looks neat, though.
[+] [-] speps|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zodPod|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] waylandsmithers|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tcoppi|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TrevorJ|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fhgksjfgh|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Aelinsaar|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] llcoolv|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] misnome|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] adamsch|10 years ago|reply
Also, why would you redesign the cabin from scratch if what's unique is the drivetrain?
"NO COMPETITION"
"MANY TIMES CLEANER THAN DIESEL ENGINES"
"Nikola Motor Company is not currently accepting walk in visitors. After we launch the vehicles at the live press release later this year, contact numbers and locations will be provided for visits."
[+] [-] sbuttgereit|10 years ago|reply
The Nevada corporate filing for Bluegentech, LLC:
http://nvsos.gov/SOSEntitySearch/CorpDetails.aspx?lx8nvq=EAF...
And is apparently run by a guy named Troy A Wallin.
I hate it when companies put up a web site and then don't say the least bit about who manages the company or is involved in it in some way. Does make things look less than honest.
EDIT: I also found in an article the name of the CEO, and here is his LinkedIn profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/theofficialtrevormilton ... Not sure if there actually is a direct relationship to Bluegentech, LLC... the Nikola Motor Company from the article is described as being Salt Lake City, Utah based. Bluegentech, LLC is registered as a foreign company in Utah. (And, yes, I am just avoiding real work this morning.)
2nd EDIT: Ok there is a relationship.... another Nevada corporate filing (DHYBRID, INC.) links Troy A Wallin to Trevor Milton: http://nvsos.gov/SOSEntitySearch/CorpDetails.aspx?lx8nvq=QQd...
(Ah the joy of public filings)
Final EDIT: It's interesting. Going back to the original idea that the company had a fly-by-night feel. I now know that the people involved have some actual experience in their industry (at least generally). My perception of them, while still very limited, is somewhat better. I can't help but thinking that being a little more upfront about the principals would improve their first impressions... despite the name ;-)
[+] [-] return0|10 years ago|reply
Apparently they put up the website with their 3d models a few days ago.
[+] [-] kemiller|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] flurpitude|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mwfunk|10 years ago|reply
* The whole thing is a scam
* It's a copycat company
* The backers have money and/or connections but no taste or business sense
All from a name. Congrats guys, way to crater a business before it even gets off the ground. It's like trying to compete with Ford by naming your company "Henry".
[+] [-] JoshuaJB|10 years ago|reply
I think that they are legitimate because the "What's Inside" photo for the Nikola One is definitely an export from a real CAD model [4]. And Google Image search cannot find the photos they have on their social media profiles used anywhere else besides when referring to them [5]. That said, they seem distinctly in the prototype phase and have a long way to go before actually shipping something. Tesla took 6 years to ship less than 150 cars. [6]
[1] https://twitter.com/nikolamotor
[2] https://www.facebook.com/nikolamotorcompany
[3] http://whois.domaintools.com/nikolamotor.com
[4] https://nikolamotor.com/one#safety (my dad does mechanical engineering, and the only place I've seen pictures like the one on Nikola's page is in CAD exports)
[5] (monster URL, had to shorten) http://tinyurl.com/zsvt8hx
[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Motors#History
[+] [-] larrik|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] georgemcbay|10 years ago|reply
I mean, even ignoring the naming (which only makes sense as parody), nobody is going to put down nearly $1000 to reserve a car based on what looks like a bunch of early 2000s 3D renders, right?
That said, it isn't a particularly funny joke, there's not really even any subtle humor here, but at the same time I can't understand how this could be a real thing.
[+] [-] glennos|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ctack|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tadzik_|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lumberjack|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xphilter|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] calebsurfs|10 years ago|reply
UTV = Utility Task Vehicle
"UTVs differ from all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) in that UTVs typically have a side-by-side seating arrangement, many have seat belts and roll-over protection, and most have a cargo box at the rear of the vehicle. UTVs generally have a higher payload capability and are longer and wider than ATVs"[0]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Side_by_Side_(UTV)
[+] [-] atourgates|10 years ago|reply
I'm amazed by how many people around me, in rural Idaho, have spent ~$15K on one.
But, even assuming this thing is real, no one is going to spend $42K on one. Especially when I suspect there's a significant overlap between "people who are skeptical of electric vehicles" and "people who are likely to purchase a UTV".
You'll notice they left price out of their comparison table, because it would look like this:
* NIKOLA ZERO: $42,000
* POLARIS RZR 1000 TURBO: $24,999
* CANAM MAVERICK TURBO: $22,999
* ARTIC CAT WILDCAT: $20,999
And they're comparing the Zero to top of the line most expensive models from their competitors. I think the average purchase price is probably much closer to $15K on a UTV.
I will say that the pricing is the one thing that lends credibility to this company. I expect building a good electric UTV really would cost close to $40K. If I were just trying to build hype, I'd price it much closer to my competitors.
[1] https://www.sema.org/sema-news/2014/07/utility-task-vehicles...
[+] [-] JacobJans|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tcoppi|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] protomyth|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sawthat|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sah2ed|10 years ago|reply
"The company is run by Trevor Milton, a former executive at dHybrid Systems, which developed a CNG system for tractor-trailers that’s now owned by Worthington Industries."
[1] http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2016/05/11/nikola-motors-slee...
[+] [-] jpm_sd|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Glyptodon|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mtw|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] runholm|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] valarauca1|10 years ago|reply
If the founders need a software engineer with experience in emission testing, fuel economy testing, info-tainment programming, and engine control programming email: [email protected] based in Detroit willing to relocate (but you appear based there too).
[+] [-] deadlycrayon|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] boredpudding|10 years ago|reply
> NEVER PLUG IN - TURBINE CHARGES BATTERIES AUTOMATICALLY WHILE DRIVING
On the 'Nikola One' page. Of course this isn't possible.
[+] [-] arcticbull|10 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_train
[+] [-] frankus|10 years ago|reply
First, series hybrids are generally a bad idea for road-going vehicles, where a mechanical link is a) pretty straightforward and b) a lot more efficient at cruise, which is where fuel economy really matters for most applications.
Secondly, gas turbines are primarily an advantage where power-to-weight ratio is important (much more of a concern in, say, a helicopter than a heavy truck). They are generally less efficient than diesels, especially at the size needed to power a truck, and even more so when running at less than full power. (Incidentally, diesels are pretty trivial to convert to run on CNG).
This approach (minus the energy storage) has been tried for locomotives and found to be lacking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_turbine_locomotive.
[+] [-] TylerE|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zaphoyd|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] robotresearcher|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] KaiserPro|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TheBiv|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] exhilaration|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stevewilhelm|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] taylo5|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andr|10 years ago|reply
Also, from memory, burning CNG generates about half the pollution of burning diesel.
[+] [-] djaychela|10 years ago|reply
Knock knock. Who's there? Physics.