Car and Driver Model 3 Test - Not Great

[Stoneymonster]

Really? That's a valid counter argument?

It’s not a counter argument , it’s a warning.

 

[metier]

Because it is Auto Pilot driver assist. The driver is in control, even if it is bad control. Why does Tesla allow you to exceed the speed limit? Why does Tesla allow you to manually pull out in front of another car? Why does Tesla allow you to text while driving? Etc. We have TACC on our current car and we ALWAYS set the following distance to maximum regardless of speed, but sometimes we apply the brakes manually because we just don't feel comfortable in a driving situation that is developing,,,,,,,even though we are confident the car will brake automatically if required. It is called personal responsibility.

Eventually, Tesla will control all of these bad decisions by drivers. The car computer will make good decisions for bad drivers. It is called Full Self Driving. C&D reviewers failed to acknowledge that in their "review."

Well as far as I know AP 2.0 does not read speed limit signs so it can not limit your speed to the speed limit. As far a pulling out in front, does Tesla even warn you about on coming cars or is it able to detect cars coming if you are at a stand still? Again as far as texting goes it's against the law in some states, and Tesla doesn't have a camera in the S and X to monitor if you are texting or using a phone, so how would they be able to stop this?

 

[cella]

Really? That's a valid counter argument?

Even if it was, what does that have to do with this particular accident? The car didn't crash into another car, but into a stationary object, and according to Tesla the view was unobstructed. The only reason why Tesla even mentioned the follow-distance is that they want to paint the driver as being reckless.

 

[Eclectic]

I'm responding to the fact that you are calling the Model 3 drive-train "lowly" (really?), while defending C&D who thinks the Chevy Bolt was one of the 10 best cars of 2017. In C&D's Bolt write-up, they talk about how it is "quick", and how it has excellent range. And yet, when they write about the much quicker and much longer-range Model 3, they aren't happy. Which is it?

So you make things up when you respond to opinions you don't like???

 

[T34ME]

Well as far as I know AP 2.0 does not read speed limit signs so it can not limit yoru speed to the speed limit. As far a pulling out in front does, Tesla even warn you about on coming cars or is it able to detect cars coming if you are at a stand still? Again as far as texting goes it's against the law in some states, and Tesla doesn't have a camera in the S and X to monitor if you are texting or using a phone, so how would they be able to stop this?

How would Tesla be able to stop breaking the law and bad decisions by drivers? Full Self Driving. In the meantime, the driver is ultimately responsible for the car under all conditions.

 

[Eclectic]

Our S sat idle for the last month of its lease.

Why was that? Did you intentionally waste the money or was the car not operable?

 

[T34ME]

Even if it was, what does that have to do with this particular accident? The car didn't crash into another car, but into a stationary object, and according to Tesla the view was unobstructed. The only reason why Tesla even mentioned the follow-distance is that they want to paint the driver as being reckless.

Tesla AP cannot currently distinguish between a stationary object and a stationary car. If the following distance is set to "one" the car won't brake until the parameter is met. Why did the driver not brake if the driver had an unobstructed view of the stationary object? Driver reckless error or driver was physically disabled or driver was impaired in another way. Would you have braked manually if you had an unobstructed view of a stationary object? I know I would have, AP or not! If the car had FSD enabled (which is not currently available), I would agree with your argument.

 

[Stoneymonster]

Why was that? Did you intentionally waste the money or was the car not operable?

The 3 was more fun and comfortable to drive. But yes, I love wasting money and that was a big part of the plan. Does every decision you make involve an economic calculation? Think of all the money I could have made if only I’d worked instead of surfing/going to the movies/sleeping.

 

[cella]

Tesla AP cannot currently distinguish between a stationary object and a stationary car. If the following distance is set to "one" the car won't brake until the parameter is met.

At this speed the crash would not have been prevented by setting a higher follow-distance since the car wasn't following another car. So why even mention it? It is obvious that Tesla is trying to deflect blame, but their statement is one-sided and based on claims that nobody can verify at this point. It is also slightly deceptive in my opinion. I hate this kind of carefully calibrated lawyer-speak and am disappointed that Tesla is using it.

Why did the driver not brake if the driver had an unobstructed view of the stationary object? Driver reckless error or driver was physically disabled or driver was impaired in another way.

We don't know. Perhaps he was just trying to use the touch screen interface, which can easily distract your attention for a few seconds.

 

[fbitz777]

At this speed the crash would not have been prevented by setting a higher follow-distance since the car wasn't following another car. So why even mention it? It is obvious that Tesla is trying to deflect blame, but their statement is one-sided and based on claims that nobody can verify at this point. It is also slightly deceptive in my opinion. I hate this kind of carefully calibrated lawyer-speak and am disappointed that Tesla is using it.
We don't know. Perhaps he was just trying to use the touch screen interface, which can easily distract your attention for a few seconds.

I agree about the follow up distance not making a difference in this case. The question is why does not AEB take over? I have been frustrated on my X (AP2) for over a year not seeing any AEB action when dealing with stationary cars (and deer) . Works on the Bolt!

 

[kbM3]

I will second all of that. The review was tough but fair without being overly critical. The real world range, in cool temperatures, is something that over 75% of the country is going to have to deal with every year.

Tesla is moving out from targeting purely EV enthusiasts with the Model 3 and they have to be prepared to have their new baby compared to other cars in the same segment from companies whose $50,000 automobiles are their bread and butter (BMW, Mercedes, Audi).

The Model 3 skid pad results were not impressive. Noise level worse than an A4? This car has no engine, that's simply not acceptable.

Many of the people (myself included) who have a Model 3 on order have done so not necessarily because we are interested in the environmental aspect of owning an EV, but because we want to legitimately see if an electric car can deliver the premium sports sedan with newer more exciting technology and with the benefit of never needing to visit a gas station again.

We are going to see more commentary like the C&D review from drivers who aren't simply enamored with the Tesla "mission" but who are replacing their previous BMW or Audi whip with a Model 3 and will be particularly critical considering the $56,000 asking price of the only configuration currently available.

This review also makes me wonder if Tesla's reason for not offering Model-3 testers, even in road show form for current reservation holders, has less to do with them desperately trying to get to all reservation holders first, or if it's fear of what is going to happen when someone does a back to back test drive of a Model 3 against a BMW 340i, Audi S4, Mercedes C450.

One area that the C&D review really missed the mark on was that the federal tax incentive, for those who earn enough will make the car more competitive with similar ICE cars. There is a $5,000 state tax credit in addition to the federal credit in my state, lopping $12,500 off of the cost of a Model 3 through probably the end of this year. If an AWD Model 3 ends up being $60,000 I will be comparing it with what I can get from Audi, Mercedes and BMW at the $47,500 mark and making my decision based on that.

A very balanced review by people who clearly weren’t overly impressed by the Model 3.

C&D’s audience doesn’t want know if the Model 3 is a good electric car. They want to know if its a good car, full stop. In that broad context, relative to peers at the same $56k+ price range, the Model 3 is not currently very impressive.

Clearly someone who is enamored with having a fully electric car or one that doesn’t burn petrol is perhaps willing to overlook other shortfalls, but thats not the job of C&D and not the role that its readers want either.

OR, the negative tone of the review is entirely explained by the first paragraph that explains Tesla would not give C&D a car to test. They gave Motor Trend exclusive early looks and submitted one for car of the year, but C&D got no love.

 

[Eclectic]

The 3 was more fun and comfortable to drive. But yes, I love wasting money and that was a big part of the plan. Does every decision you make involve an economic calculation? Think of all the money I could have made if only I’d worked instead of surfing/going to the movies/sleeping.

If you think paying for a car to sit in a garage brings as much entertainment as going to a movie or surfing, I now understand why you are so enamored of the middling Model 3...

 

[techmaven]

My big problem with a slew of Model 3 reviews is consistency with other reviews. And several reviews admit it that the bar is set so high, it is nearly impossible to meet. But when writing a review, it matters that there is consistency between reviews.

For example, on range, C&D wrote on the Chevy Bolt:

We’ve already verified that the Bolt will actually cover 238 miles during a leisurely jaunt up the California coast that left us with an indicated 34 miles of remaining range. However, the quadratic effects of aerodynamic drag mean that the faster you drive, the faster the battery drains. So in our most recent rendezvous with the Bolt, we performed a real-world range test that mimics a long highway road trip. With the cruise control set to 75 mph and the climate system set to 72 degrees, we drove the battery to exhaustion in 190 miles.

As far as we’re concerned, that’s still more than enough for daily-driving duties.

Now on the Model 3:

That latter metric, although a crucial one for any EV, is prone to such a large degree of variability that it’s difficult to gauge exactly how disappointing the Model 3’s result is in our real-world 75-mph highway fuel-economy test. Our calculated range of 200 miles is far below the EPA’s overall estimates of 310 miles in combined driving and 293 miles in highway driving, but it was certainly affected by the 28-degree-Fahrenheit ambient temperature. Two similar tests of a Chevy Bolt, the Model 3’s closest EV competitor, revealed a difference in observed range of more than 25 percent between a 56-degree and a 36-degree run (190 miles versus 140 miles against an EPA-estimated highway range of 217 miles).

So the Bolt was run at 56 and 36 degrees F, got 140 miles of range, but the 200 miles of range out of the Model 3 LR is lacking at 28 degrees F? How is this consistent?

Their summary of lows:

Not the price we were promised, not the range we were hoping for, the questionable build quality we’ve learned to expect.

Wait... so the Bolt's 140 miles of range is "more than enough for daily-driving duties" and their highlights for the Bolt include "The range and price we were promised with better performance than we expected."

Again, how exactly is 140 miles of range (59%) the amount promised but the 200 miles of range on the Model 3 LR (65%) is "not the range we were hoping for?"

Then on the interior. It is widely acknowledged by even Bolt fans that the front seats are horrid. The interior is amongst the cheapest that GM makes, worse than the Buick Encore at $25k price. What did C&D say about the interior and the front seats?

From that perch, the Bolt feels much narrower than its 69.5-inch width suggests. You’re always aware that you’re sitting close to the person in the passenger seat, even if the cabin never feels cramped or claustrophobic. Chevy did a nice job organizing the interior with a center console that accommodates drinks and phones and still leaves room for elbows on the armrest. There’s also a large bin on the floor between the driver and front passenger for a purse or other large items. Exceptionally slender front seats—made by suspending plastic sheets from metal frames and covering them with a fraction of the usual padding—leave ample room in the rear seats for adults. Although not at a compact-crossover level of spaciousness, that back seat is more generous than those of compact hatchbacks. However, the cargo area, at 17 cubic feet, would be on the small side for a hatchback and is less than half that of the typical crossover.

Wow... really searching for praise here.

The cabin neither looks nor feels like that of a $40,000 car. It’s clear in the Bolt that most of your money is paying for that big brick of battery cells developed to live up to an eight-year, 100,000-mile warranty rather than luxury trappings. The seats are wrapped in economy-car-grade leather, and the door armrests are formed from an unpleasant hard plastic. A 10.2-inch touchscreen is standard equipment, but a navigation system isn’t offered.

And yet...

These are minor criticisms at this early stage for affordable EVs, when the battery technology remains so expensive. The Bolt team focused its priorities where they matter—on the substance—and built the most important vehicle for battery-electric technology to date.

For the Model 3 LR...

The rear seat, however, may be proof of Musk’s contempt for standard-issue humans—not because of its lack of space but because its low bottom cushion drives passengers’ knees into their chests...

On balance, Tesla may have been smart to design such a simplistic interior, as it’s presumably easier and cheaper to assemble on a large scale and also is distinct enough to avoid direct comparison to the more complex and special cabins found in some of the aforementioned German luxury cars. But while we did not observe any glaring fit-and-finish issues inside the Model 3...

Hmmm... it's ok that the Bolt has a one of the crappiest interiors... but maybe it was smart for Tesla not to compete directly against the best German interiors? And a bit of hyperbole on the rear seats there... knees into their chests? No, not even close. Go look at what a person looks like sitting in a Hyundai Kona EV, one of the supposed Model 3/Y killers coming out.

The list price difference between the Bolt and the Model 3 LR accounts for the difference in attitude here. But the price difference is not actually as great as implied. The Model 3 LR as tested as options not available on the Bolt at all, including vastly greater range. So if you adjust for the price differential, you have to make all the adjustments.

On driving dynamics for the Bolt:

It delivers a comfortable ride over broken pavement, anchored by the low-mounted battery and cushioned by well-tuned damping. The Bolt evidences a similar level of chassis-tuning competence to what GM has achieved of late with vehicles as varied as the Cadillac CT6 and the Chevrolet Malibu. Without being punishing or overtly sporty, the Bolt steers tidily, turns readily, and rides amicably
...

The Bolt’s handling exhibits exactly the kind of benign behavior you’d expect from a front-wheel-drive car with a focus on efficiency above all else. The Michelin Energy Saver A/S tires deliver a modest 0.78 g of grip around the skidpad while the low-mounted battery pack helps keep handling relatively flat.

Again, highlight is:

The range and price we were promised with better performance than we expected.

For the Model 3 LR:

The car we tested rode on the base 18-inch tires, which means workaday 235/45R-18 Michelin Primacy MXM4 all-season rubber. As such, the chassis test numbers—a 176-foot stop from 70 mph and 0.84 g around the skidpad—were unremarkable, even by mainstream-family-sedan standards. There’s no YouTube-friendly, power-boosting Ludicrous mode here as in the Model S, but the electric motor still provided a decent if not eye-opening shove as it propelled the car from zero to 60 mph in 5.1 seconds—just a smidge quicker than the Audi A4 and the BMW 330i, which both have turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-fours. That acceleration rate suggests that the Tesla puts out more than the quoted 221 horsepower. Push the Model 3 a bit closer to its handling limits, as we did on our 10Best loop, and the tires give up early and understeer becomes the predominant dynamic trait.

Now... you would think that the Model 3 did terribly on the skidpad. But the BMW 330i that C&D references gets, on their 2016 instrumented test... 0.83g's. Worse than the Model 3 LR. Their comment on the 330i:

In our braking and lateral-grip tests, the new 330i’s 168-foot stop from 70 mph and 0.83-g skidpad performance were within spitting distance of the numbers achieved by the 2016 328i xDrive. Passable, considering the less-than-sticky Continental ContiSportContact summer tires mounted to our test car. But 0.83 g would have tied with the Toyota Camry SE, the loser in our most recent comparison test of four mid-size family sedans, a decidedly nonsporty bunch.

So no additional context for the Model 3 LR with 18" wheels to note that it betters the 330i even given the less than sticky and built for range/wear/noise Michelin MXM4's.

Some more comparisons with the BMW 330i as tested by C&D, 330i -> Model 3 LR:
0-60: 5.4 versus 5.1
30-50: 3.6 versus 1.9
1/4 mile: 14.0 @ 100 mph versus 13.8 @ 101 mph
braking 70-0: 168 versus 176 (comment is weirdest set of stops for Model 3 LR)
noise level: basically the same
price as tested: $47,645 versus $56,000 (but EAP is $5000 of that, not available on the 330i, so real difference is $51k versus $48k)
weather: 67-75 degrees versus 30-38 degrees

So the Model 3 LR trounces the BMW 330i on acceleration, passing, about tied on skidpad, quarter mile, and noise levels. Loses on braking. However... the Model 3 LR was tested at almost 35 degrees colder weather. That affects the tire grip and energy usage.

In general, beyond C&D, the Bolt is compared against vehicles like the Honda Fit or other econobox CUVs/hatchbacks and its driving dynamics are evaluated against basically cars that aren't expected to handle well at all. The Model 3 is compared against the best handling sport sedans available. The Model 3 has to carry the mantle of the best of the very best in all categories. The Bolt is considered great for just having 200+ miles of EPA range and costing less than $40k.

I think the biggest problem is that these reviewers have an agenda... they want to see a $35k Model 3 base vehicle. And they punish Tesla for not having that vehicle available. It is like being upset in a BMW 330i review if you can't buy the BMW 320i in that particular country.

 

[Stoneymonster]

If you think paying for a car to sit in a garage brings as much entertainment as going to a movie or surfing, I now understand why you are so enamored of the middling Model 3...

Sure pal. You are right, I should have just driven both cars around, one with each foot, squealing about the money I was saving.

 

[Gen3Joe]

[SNIP]...I now understand why you are so enamored of the middling Model 3...

Why are you on the Model 3 forum? That's a serious question BTW I honestly would like to know.

 

[Gen3Joe]

My big problem with a slew of Model 3 reviews is consistency with other reviews. And several reviews admit it that the bar is set so high, it is nearly impossible to meet. But when writing a review, it matters that there is consistency between reviews.

For example, on range, C&D wrote on the Chevy Bolt:



Now on the Model 3:



So the Bolt was run at 56 and 36 degrees F, got 140 miles of range, but the 200 miles of range out of the Model 3 LR is lacking at 28 degrees F? How is this consistent?

Their summary of lows:



Wait... so the Bolt's 140 miles of range is "more than enough for daily-driving duties" and their highlights for the Bolt include "The range and price we were promised with better performance than we expected."

Again, how exactly is 140 miles of range (59%) the amount promised but the 200 miles of range on the Model 3 LR (65%) is "not the range we were hoping for?"

Then on the interior. It is widely acknowledged by even Bolt fans that the front seats are horrid. The interior is amongst the cheapest that GM makes, worse than the Buick Encore at $25k price. What did C&D say about the interior and the front seats?



Wow... really searching for praise here.



And yet...



For the Model 3 LR...



Hmmm... it's ok that the Bolt has a one of the crappiest interiors... but maybe it was smart for Tesla not to compete directly against the best German interiors? And a bit of hyperbole on the rear seats there... knees into their chests? No, not even close. Go look at what a person looks like sitting in a Hyundai Kona EV, one of the supposed Model 3/Y killers coming out.

The list price difference between the Bolt and the Model 3 LR accounts for the difference in attitude here. But the price difference is not actually as great as implied. The Model 3 LR as tested as options not available on the Bolt at all, including vastly greater range. So if you adjust for the price differential, you have to make all the adjustments.

On driving dynamics for the Bolt:



Again, highlight is:



For the Model 3 LR:



Now... you would think that the Model 3 did terribly on the skidpad. But the BMW 330i that C&D references gets, on their 2016 instrumented test... 0.83g's. Worse than the Model 3 LR. Their comment on the 330i:



So no additional context for the Model 3 LR with 18" wheels to note that it betters the 330i even given the less than sticky and built for range/wear/noise Michelin MXM4's.

Some more comparisons with the BMW 330i as tested by C&D, 330i -> Model 3 LR:
0-60: 5.4 versus 5.1
30-50: 3.6 versus 1.9
1/4 mile: 14.0 @ 100 mph versus 13.8 @ 101 mph
braking 70-0: 168 versus 176 (comment is weirdest set of stops for Model 3 LR)
noise level: basically the same
price as tested: $47,645 versus $56,000 (but EAP is $5000 of that, not available on the 330i, so real difference is $51k versus $48k)
weather: 67-75 degrees versus 30-38 degrees

So the Model 3 LR trounces the BMW 330i on acceleration, passing, about tied on skidpad, quarter mile, and noise levels. Loses on braking. However... the Model 3 LR was tested at almost 35 degrees colder weather. That affects the tire grip and energy usage.

In general, beyond C&D, the Bolt is compared against vehicles like the Honda Fit or other econobox CUVs/hatchbacks and its driving dynamics are evaluated against basically cars that aren't expected to handle well at all. The Model 3 is compared against the best handling sport sedans available. The Model 3 has to carry the mantle of the best of the very best in all categories. The Bolt is considered great for just having 200+ miles of EPA range and costing less than $40k.

I think the biggest problem is that these reviewers have an agenda... they want to see a $35k Model 3 base vehicle. And they punish Tesla for not having that vehicle available. It is like being upset in a BMW 330i review if you can't buy the BMW 320i in that particular country.

Nicely done. That took a lot of work to writeup. Thanks for the comparison.

 

[Brando]

WINTER TESTING since at least 2007

Tesla done winter testing always, from the very beginning. Internet searches will verify.
Even the Roadster in 2007 was testing in Sweden in the prototype stage.

==================
Slip-Sliding Away
Iain Morrison, Test & Validation Engineer April 3, 2007
Slip-Sliding Away

===========================================
Cold Weather Climate Testing the Model S
Tesla Motors April 10, 2012
Cold Weather Climate Testing the Model S

===========================
A Most Peculiar Test Drive
Elon Musk, Chairman, Product Architect & CEO February 13, 2013
A Most Peculiar Test Drive

==============================================
Tesla Model S Ice Drive - Swedish Test Track
April 23, 2014
Tesla Model S Ice Drive - Swedish Test Track

===================================
Winter Challenge on Snow and Ice
Diego Sebastian Dudli March 3, 2016

Winter Challenge on Snow and Ice


You can find many more example with your own internet searching.
======================
In cold climate people often

1- have heated garages
2- have engine heater plugs to avoid freezing
3- would have their electric car charging just before leaving home to have battery at operating temperature to get max. range
(and preheated the interior of the car for comfort)

One last video showing Model S handling on ice.
Winter Testing for Tesla's Model S Electric Sedan

 

[igotzzoom]

Re: Bolt vs. Model 3 reviews...I think some of it may be due to a subliminal counter-reaction to the hyperbolic hype that has preceded the Model 3 from Elon and some of the other fanboy sites. For the Bolt on the other hand, I think expectations were pretty low on it, and reviewers were pleasantly surprised by its performance and range relative to expectations. I try to cut through the “greatest car ever” hype to see the Model 3 for what it is.

 

[sreams]

Both of these are against the law so when you are caught you get a fine, so you are not allowed, you do it at your own risk. And since the law can not confirm what your following distance is set to then it should be up to the manufacture to not allow it

Why? Manufacturers could just as easily not allow cars not utilizing AP to follow too closely. But they do.

AP is a driver assist. It is not the driver.

 

[sreams]

Re: Bolt vs. Model 3 reviews...I think some of it may be due to a subliminal counter-reaction to the hyperbolic hype that has preceded the Model 3 from Elon and some of the other fanboy sites. For the Bolt on the other hand, I think expectations were pretty low on it, and reviewers were pleasantly surprised by its performance and range relative to expectations. I try to cut through the “greatest car ever” hype to see the Model 3 for what it is.

Great. So reviewers choose not to be objective because they get suckered in by hype.

So in order to become one of Car & Driver's top ten cars of the year, one must simply set very low expectations in the first place. Wonderful.