0-60 ludicrous model 3 - How much will you pay and How fast should it be?

[melindav]

No where where I live can you use that full power without totaling your car. You'd literally will go right off the road or spin out of control. Way too curvy and hilly here.

Reading thru this thread two thoughts came to mind

1- "when WAS the last time I drive 60mph?" Forget 0-60 times, I'm lucky if my day to day driving reaches 45mph (and that's over about 12 miles of freeway driving)
2- we are going to see a lot of stories of totaled Model 3s with in the first year ​

I get the 'want' for the lowest 0-60 time, but practically speaking, the 'need' for anything quicker than 4-5 seconds (outside of a true track car) someone may need to explain to me a situation where that is 'needed' in a street car.

 

[WarpedOne]

A Model 3 that does 0-60 in under 3 seconds (the '2's) will cut into Model S sales quite massively. What would be the point of buying a £150k ludicrous Model S P100D when you could get the same acceleration in a car that costs less than £100k?

If model 3 could do 2s but tesla limits it not to 'eat' MS sales, then some BMW will come with 2s EV that will eat tesla sales. Tesla is NOT scared to canibalize their own products with their own products. If S100D brings home $30k profit, 390D could bring home some $40k profit.

What is there not to like?

 

[tsla007]

If 3 can do 2.0 flat-expect mdl S sales to tank to 10 sales a yr. Only 10 because someone has 5 kids and wants one.
*I roll my eyes* We can discuss speculations and rumor til we are black in the face (dead) ( no offense to anyone who is black), but all this is just that rumor and speculations.
I'll use Topher's closing-
Thank you kindly.

 

[SarahsDad]

I would definitely pay $90k for a sub 3 second Model 3 P90DL. If only sub 4 seconds then I'll just keep what I have since I'm already at sub 4. And I'm not interested in spending up to $150k for a sub 3 second Model S. I actually prefer the smaller form factor.

 

[Garlan Garner]

I would definitely pay $90k for a sub 3 second Model 3 P90DL. If only sub 4 seconds then I'll just keep what I have since I'm already at sub 4. And I'm not interested in spending up to $150k for a sub 3 second Model S. I actually prefer the smaller form factor.

If only I were rich.......

There is no way I'm paying $90K for ANY car.

 

[R.S]

C63 is faster than an S63 despite costing almost 100k less
different cars for different folks

The C63 S has the same 0-60 as the S63, but the S63 isn't the top model, that would be the (slower) S65 and the S-Class isn't really their performance sedan. That would be the E-Class and the new E63S will again be quicker than the C-Class. If Tesla hadn't put so much emphasis on Model S performance, it could be that the Model 3 would be quicker, or as quick. But the P100D only sells because of its extreme 0-60, other than that there is no reason not to go for the much cheaper 100D. But I don't think they will need a large gap between the 3 and the S in terms of performance. If the 3 does it in 2.5 seconds the S still has the bragging rights. And since no one who goes for that kind of acceleration will be contempt with second to best, if money isn't a problem, they will still find people to buy the P100D.

So the P100D will continue to be their flagship model for performance sedans. The next Roadster will surely beat the Model S, but I doubt we will see the R PXX(X?)D for less than 100k.

I'd also say that we might have to compare the Model 3 to the future Model S. With the new cells the Model S will be lighter, resulting in slightly better grip and a better power to weight ratio.

 

[dsvick]

A Model 3 that does 0-60 in under 3 seconds (the '2's) will cut into Model S sales quite massively. What would be the point of buying a £150k ludicrous Model S P100D when you could get the same acceleration in a car that costs less than £100k?

If the base Model 3 can do 0-60 in under 6 seconds, I would think the ludicrous P version would probably do it in under 4.

That would be true if people only bought the Model S for its acceleration. There are a lot of reasons people will still buy the Model S over the Model 3 regardless of acceleration, Tesla isn't worried about the Model 3 eating into sales of the S. Will it? Sure it will. Massively? No, not likely.

 

[Garlan Garner]

That would be true if people only bought the Model S for its acceleration. There are a lot of reasons people will still buy the Model S over the Model 3 regardless of acceleration, Tesla isn't worried about the Model 3 eating into sales of the S. Will it? Sure it will. Massively? No, not likely.

I still can't figure out how you guys know all of this information when Tesla has been all but silent about the M3.

 

[EXOTIC1]

The C63 S has the same 0-60 as the S63, but the S63 isn't the top model, that would be the (slower) S65 and the S-Class isn't really their performance sedan. That would be the E-Class and the new E63S will again be quicker than the C-Class. If Tesla hadn't put so much emphasis on Model S performance, it could be that the Model 3 would be quicker, or as quick. But the P100D only sells because of its extreme 0-60, other than that there is no reason not to go for the much cheaper 100D. But I don't think they will need a large gap between the 3 and the S in terms of performance. If the 3 does it in 2.5 seconds the S still has the bragging rights. And since no one who goes for that kind of acceleration will be contempt with second to best, if money isn't a problem, they will still find people to buy the P100D.

So the P100D will continue to be their flagship model for performance sedans. The next Roadster will surely beat the Model S, but I doubt we will see the R PXX(X?)D for less than 100k.

I'd also say that we might have to compare the Model 3 to the future Model S. With the new cells the Model S will be lighter, resulting in slightly better grip and a better power to weight ratio.

i was making reference to the price difference vs performance. I'm well aware as the all the cars you mentioned above have been in my garage at one point or another over the past few years ... minus the new C63S. I don't think just because the m3 having the same or better performance numbers is going to have HUGE effect on ms sales. Different cars for different buyers
Thanks

Model 3 vs Model S | Tesla

 

[strider]

Yes we're all speculating. My $0.02 is that profit margins will be higher on Model 3 than on Model S/X so it's actually better for Tesla if more people buy 3PXXDL's instead of SP100DL's. This makes the whole idea of cannibalizing into a positive for Tesla, not a negative.

Also, look at Tesla's competition: List of fastest production cars by acceleration - Wikipedia

#1 costs like $900K. #2 is the SP100DL at $150K. Cars further down cost $300K, $400K, +. If the 3PXXDL is fast enough they could easily price it at $150K and sell plenty (and that doesn't change anything about the base model). I don't know if Elon will keep something in reserve for the next Roadster. He did say he was reserving "Plaid" for the next Roadster but what's unclear to me is whether he will limit Model 3 to make that true or if he will build Model 3 as fast as possible and rely on tech improvements to make the next Roadster even faster.

It's also possible that along with the move to 2170 cells they use a higher voltage pack which will help with output to feed the P100DL drivetrain.

Reading thru this thread two thoughts came to mind

1- "when WAS the last time I drive 60mph?" Forget 0-60 times, I'm lucky if my day to day driving reaches 45mph (and that's over about 12 miles of freeway driving)
2- we are going to see a lot of stories of totaled Model 3s with in the first year ​

I get the 'want' for the lowest 0-60 time, but practically speaking, the 'need' for anything quicker than 4-5 seconds (outside of a true track car) someone may need to explain to me a situation where that is 'needed' in a street car.

And THAT is one of the reasons I left the Bay Area. I was like you once, stuck in grinding traffic for over an hour per day. Now, I run to 60 a few times per day.

I agree w/ you on the need for high top speeds. I don't track my cars (save that for motorcycles) so top speed means little. But I merge onto freeways and run to 50mph from back road stop signs regularly. That is where EV's shine and I enjoy it every day. I will take as much as I can afford. I can always moderate w/ my right foot.

 

[eisbock]

i was making reference to the price difference vs performance. I'm well aware as the all the cars you mentioned above have been in my garage at one point or another over the past few years ... minus the new C63S. I don't think just because the m3 having the same or better performance numbers is going to have HUGE effect on ms sales. Different cars for different buyers

The S-class has never really been marketed as a performance car, but rather a luxury car. The Model S is marketed very heavily as a powerful performance sedan. There is absolutely zero chance any iteration of the Model 3 outperforms a top-of-the-line Model S. I know many of you will have opinions on this, but as far as we've seen or heard, the Model 3 is not being marketed as a performance car, but rather a mass-market EV designed to accelerate EV adoption. Elon simply said it wouldn't be slow, but he never said it would blow anybody's socks off. We'll see what "Ludicrous" really means for the 3, if it'll have that option at all. Remember, Elon is a master of hype but not everything he says is entirely truthful.

Also, you keep saying "different cars for different buyers", but it's the same buyer who's choosing between a S and a 3, and most will choose the 3 because they can afford it. At least at this time because everybody's expecting Model S performance in a smaller package. Once it's revealed that the Model 3 is slower and has more drawbacks than the Model S, then your "different cars for different buyers" will actually mean something.

 

[eisbock]

Yes we're all speculating. My $0.02 is that profit margins will be higher on Model 3 than on Model S/X

Interesting.

 

[eisbock]

Tesla is NOT scared to canibalize their own products with their own products.

Not sure where people keep getting this idea. Tesla only has two products, and they don't really compete because Tesla doesn't care who buys the S or the X because they make the same amount of money. There is no evidence that Tesla is not afraid to cannibalize their product line because we've yet to see it. Or not see it. All we have are anecdotes from people on forums and telepathic interpretations of what is going on inside Elon's head.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Yes we're all speculating. My $0.02 is that profit margins will be higher on Model 3 than on Model S/X so it's actually better for Tesla if more people buy 3PXXDL's instead of SP100DL's. This makes the whole idea of cannibalizing into a positive for Tesla, not a negative.

Not sure where you get this. I'm pretty sure Tesla had said in multiple occasions that the profit margin (as a percentage) will be lower for the Model 3 than for the Model S/X. And given the ASP will be lower, the margin as an absolute number will also be lower.

Or are you talking specifically about 3 PxxDL vs S P100DL?

 

[Sonny Daze]

There are varying numbers out there, but most information I find seems to say that they hope to get 15%-20% on the 3 and they are currently getting around 25% on the $100,000 average sale price of the S. This excludes any ZEV credits.

 

[Maximilien]

If Model 3 Performance gets like less than 3.0 second for 0-60 and priced like 50K ~ 70K, I am in!

 

[strider]

The S-class has never really been marketed as a performance car, but rather a luxury car. The Model S is marketed very heavily as a powerful performance sedan. There is absolutely zero chance any iteration of the Model 3 outperforms a top-of-the-line Model S. I know many of you will have opinions on this, but as far as we've seen or heard, the Model 3 is not being marketed as a performance car, but rather a mass-market EV designed to accelerate EV adoption. Elon simply said it wouldn't be slow, but he never said it would blow anybody's socks off. We'll see what "Ludicrous" really means for the 3, if it'll have that option at all. Remember, Elon is a master of hype but not everything he says is entirely truthful.

Also, you keep saying "different cars for different buyers", but it's the same buyer who's choosing between a S and a 3, and most will choose the 3 because they can afford it. At least at this time because everybody's expecting Model S performance in a smaller package. Once it's revealed that the Model 3 is slower and has more drawbacks than the Model S, then your "different cars for different buyers" will actually mean something.

Why do you say it's the same buyer? That's like saying the same buyers choose between and Audi A8 and A4 or BMW 7 and BMW 3. If what you say is true then no one would buy the A8 or 7 series as they are both slower and more expensive than the smaller models. Yet Audi and BMW sell those larger models.

Also, keep in mind that Tesla "marketing" really means "however Elon is feeling that day" so I'm not sure we can put the models in a bucket. What better way to accelerate EV adoption than to have a car variant for everyone? Why not have 1 platform that could go after both Camry and German hi-po sedan buyers?

Not sure where you get this. I'm pretty sure Tesla had said in multiple occasions that the profit margin (as a percentage) will be lower for the Model 3 than for the Model S/X. And given the ASP will be lower, the margin as an absolute number will also be lower.

Or are you talking specifically about 3 PxxDL vs S P100DL?

I'm talking specifically about the PDL models. The tooling costs will be allocated over way more models, the battery pack will be cheaper (it's smaller and will use Gigafactory cells), and they have said the car itself will be cheaper to manufacture (more steel, different techniques, etc). To me this means higher margins on the top end cars while lower margins on the cheaper cars will bring the blended margin below S/X. Having a PDL Model 3 will give Tesla both a halo car to get people into the galleries (much like people coming in to look as a Challenger Hellcat and then buying the V6) and also push the blended margins up to keep Wall St. happy.

 

[arnis]

Tesla is not going to prove once more, that electric car can be the fastest stock car in the world.
Now they will prove that electric car can be unnecessarily fast with good price (less than 50k)

Model 3 will not be designed around performance. It will be designed around needs (like headroom in the rear).
Model 3 ludicrous sales will be less than Model S ludicrous sales (percents).
Designing a car that be sold in hundreds of thousands around variation that will be sold in few tens of thousands, is foolish.
I expect Model 3 ludicrous sales will be kept in reasonable numbers due to extremely good price for ludicrousness.

And an answer for the main topic question. I would not pay a dime if I can't use it on snow.
Most of the customers (more than 95%) will get more performance than they need and want from their Model 3.

 

[eisbock]

Why do you say it's the same buyer? That's like saying the same buyers choose between and Audi A8 and A4 or BMW 7 and BMW 3. If what you say is true then no one would buy the A8 or 7 series as they are both slower and more expensive than the smaller models. Yet Audi and BMW sell those larger models.

People buy the A8 or 7-series because it's a more luxurious car. They don't buy the car for performance. The type of person who goes for a 3-series might want to burn rubber and melt faces, and the guy who gets the 7-series wants to be served fruity drinks on a beach while servants fan him with palm leaves.

Model S is a performance car, not a luxury car, as nearly every person who's ever sat in a A8 or 7-series will tell you. If the 3 outperforms the S, why would anybody buy an S? The interior won't be that much better. Maybe it's a little bigger, looks a little better, and is a hatchback, but surely those things aren't worth double the price! That's like coupe vs sedan territory. Those options are worth a few thousand dollars, not $40000.

That's why I say the S and 3 buyer are mostly the same. Once it's revealed that the 3 is slower than the S, there's not much reason one would prefer a 3 to an S if they had the means to choose comfortably between the two. And no, I'm not accepting "the S is too big" as an answer, because a few extra inches here and there are not valid reasons to completely eliminate a car choice. I'll accept that answer if your garage won't physically fit an S though.

 

[strider]

Ok, maybe A8/7-series was too far. Maybe A6/5-series? My dad has a 5 series and it is no more luxurious than a Model S (unless you equate having 1,000 buttons with cryptic icons on them with luxury). Per your post size doesn't matter so then why do the A6 and 5-series exist? For your money you're pretty much only getting a larger vehicle. Very recently the mid-size cars are a bit quicker than the smaller ones but that hasn't been true in the past yet the mid-size cars have been around for awhile.

And why limit it to the Germans? Why would anyone buy a Camry? It's just a bigger Corolla (or whatever they're calling their small-ish car nowadays) and they have the Avalon on the luxury end.

But I think it comes down to 2 things:
1) Will Tesla make more profit from a 3PDL than an SPDL? If yes then there is no issue w/ 3's taking S orders as the company actually makes more money.
2) Will the 3PDL be faster than the SPDL? Depending on the answer to #1 Tesla may limit the 3PDL or because of the current state of the art v1 of the 3PDL may just be slower than the SPDL.