Car and Driver Review of Model 3

[rocketlow49]

Hi guys, hope all is well!

I have just completed my read of Car and Driver's in-depth review of the Model 3. Is it me or are they seemingly purposely ignoring super important value proposition of the car considering they are calling it an "In-depth" review - for whatever reason. It almost seems like they are trying to dissuade people to buy it - perhaps they were paid off by one of the traditional car companies or oil companies to write negative press about the car? It seems like a lot of that is going on these days everywhere! Here are a few reasons why I feel that way.

• They never mention Autopilot at all, other than the fact that it costs money. <- one main reason why people buy this car
• The car is gorgeous by any standard, especially compared to other butt ugly EVs (you can say that is subjective... but come on!).
• User-experience of climate control vents (or lack of vents visually)
• Auto-park for both parallel and reverse
• They complain about lack of Carplay/Android Auto, but fail to mention that it has the best nav system out there
• They complain about lack of Sat Radio, but fail to mention that there is free music streaming (free LTE for life)
• 15inch LCD screen is the largest in any other car other than the S/X
• They keep comparing to cars that are not even in the same price range (cheaper), something they would never do with their other car reviews.
• They seem to never mention the biggest value-add for this car compared to 95% of the other cars they review which is; you never need to fill it up with gas, Tesla Super Charger Network, and zero-emissions.

All that, yet they complain about smaller than average door storage!

Here is the link
2018 Tesla Model 3 | In-Depth Model Review | Car and Driver

What do you guys think?
Hank

 

[TexasEV]

We think it’s been discussed extensively here already.

 

[nvx1977]

disappointing real-world efficiency

I've seen this in multiple reviews and I just can't fathom under what conditions they tested the car that led them to that conclusion. I am slaughtering the EPA ratings for the 3. And in cold weather because freaking New England weather. It snowed today.

 

[DR61]

I just can't fathom under what conditions they tested the car

They tested at 28F if I remember correctly. There is another long thread on this...

 

[rocketlow49]

Dang should of did a search first. But man.. The more I read it, the more apparent they were paid off...I have been a BMW fan for ages. Owned many of them. Still drive a 3016 328XI sedan. The moment I sat in an Model 3 and test drove a Model X, I never looked at my car the same. And... and just a few months ago, I was a Tesla naysayer. I will never read another CD magazine again!

 

[nvx1977]

ok this rings a bell. that thread became a clusterf*k - basically people who enjoy C&D battling with ppl who think C&D is a joke when it comes to EV evaluation. Yeah, we don't really need another one of those threads

 

[SSonnentag]

The way I look at it is, if they're stooping to nit picking the door pocket size, the car must be pretty good.

 

[WileyTheMan]

I suppose it's better than being MotorTrended!

 

[SageBrush]

And... and just a few months ago, I was a Tesla naysayer.

Oh ?

What did you say, and why did you say it ?

 

[SageBrush]

I view car magazine reviews as lousy entertainment posing as information. Never something to take seriously if read at all.

 

[Uncle Paul]

Wait until all the car magazines realize how close in design the Model 3 is to their beloved Porsche 911.

Rear engine, rear wheel drive, frunk, sophisticated multi link suspensions, low center of gravity, excellent throttle control, aerodynamic body shape, fuel efficient, etc.

 

[jsmay311]

I've seen this in multiple reviews and I just can't fathom under what conditions they tested the car that led them to that conclusion. I am slaughtering the EPA ratings for the 3. And in cold weather because freaking New England weather. It snowed today.

Edmund's long-term test drive is also finding poor efficiency relative to EPA ratings. So far over 3 months they're averaging 317 Wh/mile vs the EPA's 270 Wh/mile (for the 2017 model). This is in mild-to-warm southern California temps. They also note that this under-performance is not typical for their other tests of other EVs. Their Bolt has been beating its EPA ratings in the same weather conditions, for example.

Unlike probably 90%+ of Model 3 owners, they are measuring efficiency from the wall, not simply going by what's displayed on the screen. I wonder how much Tesla's high vampire losses play into this.

 

[nvx1977]

EPA's rating is not from the wall. EPA rates cars on how far the car can go based on the amount of fuel/electricity IN the car.

If Edmunds wants to test electricity usage at the wall, they should be doing that across all their EV tests (they might be, I haven't verified), and they should disclose that their numbers may look worse than EPA ratings because of that.

It really makes me want to do a long term test on my car. My lifetime number is 221Wh/mi with ~1500 miles driven. Weather has been stubbornly cold since I received the car (march 30). I've only seen numbers in the 300Wh/mi range when I'm gunning it at every single light, or i sit in my car idle with the heat on for 5-10 min before I pull out of my parking space. I frequently am under 200Wh/mi commuting to work.

Now, if you were to say that my numbers are off because I should be measuring from the wall, yeah my numbers would be worse. But THAT much worse?

Take my lifetime reading from the car: 221Wh/mi. If that represents only 80% of what was pulled from my house, then at the breaker, I'd be at 276Wh/mi. Still way better than the 318Wh/mi Edmunds is getting. And I suspect my losses are not as bad to yield only 80% per charge.

 

[SageBrush]

EPA's rating is not from the wall.

MPGe is from the wall, as is the kWh/100 miles.

 

[rocketlow49]

Dang should of did a search first. But man.. The more I read it, the more apparent they were paid off...I have been a BMW fan for ages. Owned many of them. Still drive a 3016 328XI sedan. The moment I sat in an Model 3 and test drove a Model X, I never looked at my car the same. And... and just a few months ago, I was a Tesla naysayer. I will never read another CD magazine again!

I use to think Teslas were over priced. I don't think so anymore. We are paying for the experience of owning a Tesla. Based on my previous flawed logic, I could have said the same thing for Ferraris and Lambos - but people still buy them.

 

[jsmay311]

EPA's rating is not from the wall. EPA rates cars on how far the car can go based on the amount of fuel/electricity IN the car.

My only regret is I can only click "disagree" once.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/EPA test procedure for EVs-PHEVs-7-5-2012.pdf
"[...] the battery is recharged from a normal AC source and the energy consumption of the vehicle is determined by dividing the kilowatt-hours of energy to recharge the battery by the miles traveled by the vehicle."

 

[T34ME]

I view car magazine reviews as lousy entertainment posing as information.

Ohhhhhh, I am having trouble resisting the urge to make the same observation about "adult entertainment" media!

 

[SSonnentag]

Yeah, that 317 WH/mile seems really suspect. My S is averaging 29x WH/mile (over 12,000 miles) and I know the 3 is more efficient than the S.

 

[nvx1977]

MPGe is from the wall, as is the kWh/100 miles.

My only regret is I can only click "disagree" once.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/EPA test procedure for EVs-PHEVs-7-5-2012.pdf
"[...] the battery is recharged from a normal AC source and the energy consumption of the vehicle is determined by dividing the kilowatt-hours of energy to recharge the battery by the miles traveled by the vehicle."

I stand corrected; thanks guys

 

[SageBrush]

Ohhhhhh, I am having trouble resisting the urge to make the same observation about "adult entertainment" media!

Limbaugh came to mind.