Elon Tweet: No 'significantly new consumer-facing technology' in Model 3

[tomas]

The analysis upstream is confusing the issue. @Az_Rael is more accurate: while the BEV drivetrain is less expensive that ICE drivetrain, but the BEV battery is far far more expensive than the ICE gas tank.

It is still the battery costs that "displace" other features. Though none of us know Tesla's cost basis after gigaplant, I would guess (this is MY GUESS) you are looking at 6k extra battery costs that are not recovered in drivetrain simplicities. To deliver same non drivetrain features at same price as ICE, they need to drive $ out of other components. I'm sure some of that is happening, but not $6k worth. Let's say they find $2k somehow, plus save $2k on distribution network (vs dealers). That still leaves $2k in features to cut. That seems consistent with what we are seeing people B&M about on this forum. I think Tesla is doing a great job of making up for that in excellent body design, glass roof, and generally rethinking things. Beyond that, I want to see the car before jumping to conclusions.

 

[zenmaster]

There is no source, but if you honestly believe we'll have fully functioning autonomous cars within 5 years, you're delusional and part of the same camp that's disappointed that the Model 3 will not be faster with longer range than the Model S.

I would separate the camps, but I do believe we won't have "fully functioning" or driverless cars within 5 years. It's hype. They will meet the level 5 standard however, which is something different and related to safety.
The key thing is that we don't yet have a definition of "fully functioning". So I highly doubt an autonomous car maker will ever claim it is "fully functioning" because there will always be some shortcoming, even silly from a common-sense point of view, that the system can't properly handle. What will probably happen as this tech evolves is that a much more qualified set of capabilities (i.e. test-case scenarios) will be cited as being met for a particular version of the driving system. The capabilities will become some kind of standard.

 

[Wolverinegeoff]

I would separate the camps, but I do believe we won't have "fully functioning" or driverless cars within 5 years. It's hype. They will meet the level 5 standard however, which is something different and related to safety.
The key thing is that we don't yet have a definition of "fully functioning". So I highly doubt an autonomous car maker will ever claim it is "fully functioning" because there will always be some shortcoming, even silly from a common-sense point of view, that the system can't properly handle. What will probably happen as this tech evolves is that a much more qualified set of capabilities (i.e. test-case scenarios) will be cited as being met for a particular version of the driving system. The capabilities will become some kind of standard.

Watch some of the BB-8 video from Nvidia. It's pretty amazing how that system learns, and they already have ways to teach it how to respond differently to school buses and traffic cops. Already can do cones and construction sites. I think it'll be a couple years probably, but lvl 4 is enough for most of us in most situations.

 

[Kant.Ing]

If the architecture isn't right, nVidia's solution or AP2 might never see the end of its own tunnel or be forgotten in the competition. Anyway, just ride the hype as it's still beneficial to human kinds.

 

[zenmaster]

It is unlikely that the Model 3 was intended for luxury customers.

"Entry level" luxury customers. The ones that buy the BMW 3-series, Audi A4, MB C class. That was the intention all along.

 

[Clomer]

I might be a rarity here on this forum, but to me the lack of an instrument cluster (on a screen or otherwise) in front of the driver might very well be a dealbreaker. Such a design choice won't make sense until L5 autonomy is actually available, not just as a stated intention that may or may not happen with current hardware in an unknown amount of time.

This is extremely disappointing, because I have been looking forward to the 3 ever since I first heard of Tesla 3 years ago.

 

[zenmaster]

I might be a rarity here on this forum, but to me the lack of an instrument cluster (on a screen or otherwise) in front of the driver might very well be a dealbreaker. Such a design choice won't make sense until L5 autonomy is actually available, not just as a stated intention that may or may not happen with current hardware in an unknown amount of time.

This is extremely disappointing, because I have been looking forward to the 3 ever since I first heard of Tesla 3 years ago.

If Tesla isn't holding out for a big surprise in that rather key area for the final "reveal", I think the market will eventually persuade them to change the driving info layout. Although Musk's recent comments do not seem to reinforce such a surprise. So, if deal-breaker: How long until Model 3 gets updated instrumentation? Perhaps after the flood of upcoming competitive EV offerings?

 

[EV-lutioin]

They were talking about size. Look at the question that was being asked. Don't just pull out one tweet and base things on it.

Look at the question that was being asked.

It doesn't matter. Elon can say whatever he wants to most people and they just smile and ask form more. I'm sorry that I want to trust what he says the first time. From here on out...I suppose maybe I won't.

Um, the tweet does not mention size.... it says "like". Oh well, in the end you will either buy a Model 3 or not. Personally, I trust Tesla to continue to create awesome cars. Will I like every single aspect of them?... probably not, but from what I have experienced so far I'm impressed by their cars, I'm am impressed by their commitment to our planet, I'm impressed by their service and I'm impressed by their responsiveness to customer requests. Yep, I admit it... I am fan.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Yes, but as I said, it's about twice as expensive as the Model 3. It's really a Model X competitor - but Jaguar should watch out if the Model Y arrives in 2019, then they may be screwed.

Availability is also an issue - the planned production is only something like 20k units per year. If it turns out to be compelling, that's barely noticable.

They haven't released the price of the I-Pace yet. Neither has Tesla released the price of the dual motor Model 3 yet. How are you comparing prices?

I heard what you said. Trust me I did. That does not mean that you are right.

The I-Pace is a beautiful car. We do have the ability to visually compare the two cars. Comment on that. Compare the visuals to any tesla you choose.

 

[Garlan Garner]

I agree. People seem to think that the second motor just instantly zaps into existence. Sure, if they where sourcing them from some other company, but Telsa builds both motors. Also, Elon has made a commitment to getting as many cars into peoples has for Tax incentives. Once they hit 200,000, depending on timing, they will have a limited window to fulfill cars for the tax credits. Then they are gone. Anything to increase that number will really help the cause.

Also, HUDs are not just simple plug in add-ons. We do not want a repeat the FWD issues. KISS, keep it simple.

No one is asking anything to zap into existence. The dual motor system is already designed, produced and sold. Tesla for sure knows how to include a dual motor in a car.

Its already here .

 

[SageBrush]

BEV battery is far far more expensive than the ICE gas tank.

How much does a good ICE and 6 speed transmission cost ? If close to $6k then that is within spitting distance of battery cell cost for a 60 kWh battery. Left then would be battery packaging, inverter and motor.

 

[tomas]

How much does a good ICE and 6 speed transmission cost ? If close to $6k then that is within spitting distance of battery cell cost for a 60 kWh battery. Left then would be battery packaging, inverter and motor.

Missing my point. ICE motor, transmission etc is 6 k less than BEV battery, DU, inverter, etc.

 

[Yggdrasill]

They haven't released the price of the I-Pace yet. Neither has Tesla released the price of the dual motor Model 3 yet. How are you comparing prices?

Jaguar has said it will be ~20% more expensive than an equivalently equipped F-Pace. Also ~5% less than the equivalent Tesla. The people over on the Norwegian EV forum who have ordered the I-Pace estimate at least 65k USD. Jaguar Norway is communicating around 90k USD to the reservation holders. At least one person has "estimated price: 140k USD" in their contract (that's probably not the base version, though). The exact price remains to be seen, but it won't be very cheap.

The Model 3 on the other hand has a planned starting price of 35k USD, and Musk has said AWD will cost under 5k USD extra. So a 55D will likely be at least 25k USD cheaper than the base Jaguar I-Pace.

The I-Pace is a beautiful car. We do have the ability to visually compare the two cars. Comment on that. Compare the visuals to any tesla you choose.

The I-Pace looks pretty good. I would say it looks better than the Model X and about as good as the Model 3/S. Probably the Model 3 looks best - it reminds me of a Porsche, in a very good way. (I just hope they haven't done anything to the front end.)

 

[Yggdrasill]

No one is asking anything to zap into existence. The dual motor system is already designed, produced and sold. Tesla for sure knows how to include a dual motor in a car.

Its already here .

I believe Tesla when they say the dual motor configuration was delayed to streamline production. Tesla has produced a lot of drive units, but both the front and rear drive unit probably have been changed substantially from the Model S/X. Ramping up production on two different drive units at the same time can be challenging.

In a few months, Tesla needs to go from producing around 175k drive units per year to producing 800-900k drive units per year. It simplifies things if they can focus on cranking out a single version of the drive units for the first few months. The front drive unit will likely have it's own production line - and working out the kinks in two or more high volume production lines at the same time can be quite challenging.

Additionally, not having to integrate front drive unit assembly into the vehicle production line from the start reduces complexity and risk there as well. It's probably a very smart move - derisking the production ramp significantly.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Yes, this will be interesting once we get details to see which one Tesla is aiming for. I was hoping for a premium entry level sedan ala Audi A4 or my old Lexus IS. Something I can get with leather, memory seats, rain sensing wipers, HID headlights, NAV, voice recognition, etc. All stuff that is pretty standard options in the category.

If the 3 turns out to be closer to the Chevy Bolt in interior options, I probably won't be buying one.

I would separate the camps, but I do believe we won't have "fully functioning" or driverless cars within 5 years. It's hype. They will meet the level 5 standard however, which is something different and related to safety.
The key thing is that we don't yet have a definition of "fully functioning". So I highly doubt an autonomous car maker will ever claim it is "fully functioning" because there will always be some shortcoming, even silly from a common-sense point of view, that the system can't properly handle. What will probably happen as this tech evolves is that a much more qualified set of capabilities (i.e. test-case scenarios) will be cited as being met for a particular version of the driving system. The capabilities will become some kind of standard.

Elon Musk has publicly compared the Model 3 to the Audi A4, so that is a valid comparison from both Tesla's point of view as well as from the $35,00 price-point.

Here are some things that an Audi A4 features in Germany:

- Graphical instrument cluster (similar to Model S)
- Heads-up display
- Plus of course a separate media screen
- Ventilated seats (not available in any Tesla at the moment)
- Television
- Two different OEM rear-seat entertainment systems
- Apple Car Play, Android Auto
- 360 surround camera view
- 19 speaker Bang & Olufsen audio system (in comparison the Audi A6/A7 class Model S UHFS is 12 speakers)
- Far more numerous leather/Alcantara/trim/paint etc. options that can be picked individually
- More radars, superior to AP1 and current AP2 blind-spot and cross-traffic warnings (AP2 will eventually meet/surpass this using cameras)

There are of course notable omissions as well:

- Audi A4 is, of course, not a big battery EV, with all that entails

- Audi's 12.3" instrument cluster and 8.3" main screen are smaller than Tesla Model 3's 15" (though in total you can also get two more Audi screen for rear passengers, all nicely integrated, so Audi does have more pixels)

- Autonomous-wise, Audi A4 has overall a feature-set below AP1 - so a nice adaptive cruise, auto-parking, emergency breaking, basic lane keeping, but of course without the upgrade potential an AP2 Model 2 will have

- No (major) software updates, though historically Audi MMI systems have received some notable updates via maintenance visits (e.g. my Audi A6 got 3D navigation view or Audi A8 got Google Street View and Internet Radio through such updates few years into ownership)

 

[Yggdrasill]

A Tesla will definitely have less bells and whistles than an equivalent ICE car. You have to remember that this is really all the traditional car companies have been able to focus on for the past 100+ years. They're still using basically the same drivetrain as when they started making cars.

This is one situation where I do think the iPhone comparison is valid. When the iPhone came out, it was really basic - it didn't even have text messaging, much less a feature list rivaling pretty much any smartphone on the market. Yet, it was better, and Apple thrived.

The Model 3 won't even try to rival the feature lists of the competition, yet it will be better. Electric drive is superior (when range and charging limitations are sufficiently mitigated), and soon it will become affordable.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

This is one situation where I do think the iPhone comparison is valid. When the iPhone came out, it was really basic - it didn't even have text messaging, much less a feature list rivaling pretty much any smartphone on the market. Yet, it was better, and Apple thrived.

The Model 3 won't even try to rival the feature lists of the competition, yet it will be better. Electric drive is superior (when range and charging limitations are sufficiently mitigated), and soon it will become affordable.

iPhone is a fair point. Not everyone loved the fact that it was (and still is, can you even now send images over Bluetooth?) missing so many things for so long, but it did thrive because its fundamental operation was so vastly improved. The competition got there eventually in many shapes and forms (though not without carnage) and IMO even surpassed what Apple does, but Apple retains the major profits and a healthy chunk of the market.

If all goes well, this is of course the Tesla story. I can see the temptation in making the comparison. But still remains to be seen if what Tesla does is received as similar to what iPhone does (does Model 3 offer such a compelling functionality and usability that people will leave the other brands) and, if so, will Tesla be able to grab some Apple-like market before the competition gets there.

It is possible, of course. Tesla is building a very compelling story, overall. No doubt they disrupted a stagnant market already.

It is also possible the market does not see Model 3 as an iPhone. Will the super-spartan interior receive wide acceptance beyond tech-heads? Is the BEV ready to replace ICE for the masses, given its inherent (even with Supercharging) limitations on long-range driving and for apartment dwellers?

And if it does work out, it is still not guaranteed that Tesla would be able to capture similar market position as Apple did due to differences in the market type or how things play out. For example, in the case of iPhone, what played into Apple's hand was then-predominant brands (e.g. Nokia, BB) inability to adapt. If e.g. Volkswagen group can adapt better and faster than them, relatively speaking, their brand presence is a formidable thing. Samsung with Android had to grow out of nowhere in many ways... (Of course I know how big Samsung was overall, but for mobile phones they were globally a bit player.)

Also there is the question of price. iPhone was and still is super-expensive, but in the end not too expensive as a subsidized phone for the masses in the western world. In the end, it is - even in unsubsidized form - just a three-figure amount of money that you can finance through your operator. Why Tesla Model S has not already "done the iPhone" is because it is five, six figures of money, out of the reach of the masses even when financed. Model 3 will still be a prohibitively expensive car for the masses, not something you can get by paying a tenner or few monthly.

So, a tempting comparison, but likely a premature one. There are tons of great technologies in history that should have won the day like iPhone did, but did not. And there are many differences in the circumstances.

p.s. I believe iPhone did have text messaging from the start. It did not have multimedia messaging.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Elon Musk has publicly compared the Model 3 to the Audi A4, so that is a valid comparison from both Tesla's point of view as well as from the $35,00 price-point.

Here are some things that an Audi A4 features in Germany:

- Graphical instrument cluster (similar to Model S)
- Heads-up display
- Plus of course a separate media screen
- Ventilated seats (not available in any Tesla at the moment)
- Television
- Two different OEM rear-seat entertainment systems
- Apple Car Play, Android Auto
- 360 surround camera view
- 19 speaker Bang & Olufsen audio system (in comparison the Audi A6/A7 class Model S UHFS is 12 speakers)
- Far more numerous leather/Alcantara/trim/paint etc. options that can be picked individually
- More radars, superior to AP1 and current AP2 blind-spot and cross-traffic warnings (AP2 will eventually meet/surpass this using cameras)

There are of course notable omissions as well:

- Audi A4 is, of course, not a big battery EV, with all that entails

- Audi's 12.3" instrument cluster and 8.3" main screen are smaller than Tesla Model 3's 15" (though in total you can also get two more Audi screen for rear passengers, all nicely integrated, so Audi does have more pixels)

- Autonomous-wise, Audi A4 has overall a feature-set below AP1 - so a nice adaptive cruise, auto-parking, emergency breaking, basic lane keeping, but of course without the upgrade potential an AP2 Model 2 will have

- No (major) software updates, though historically Audi MMI systems have received some notable updates via maintenance visits (e.g. my Audi A6 got 3D navigation view or Audi A8 got Google Street View and Internet Radio through such updates few years into ownership)

I think we can cross out anything that the Model S doesn't have. The Model S is aimed at the same ICE price class as it is priced (not lower, unlike other EVs) and is missing a lot of features that ICE cars priced lower have. Yet the "market" does not seem to miss those features in terms of valuing the car.

The biggest sticking point between the Model S and 3 seems to be the missing second screen. We'll see how much it really matters. I think it'll all go down on execution. If Tesla can implement a good single screen UI and optimal screen positioning, I don't think the single screen will be a bit deal.

It's similar to the touchscreen in the Model S. There was initial concern about it being a distraction and missing the feedback of a button, but that turned out ultimately not to be an issue given a good implementation. However, if it was badly implemented, it could have easily gone the other way.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

I think we can cross out anything that the Model S doesn't have.

Agreed. Though there is still some chance that something new appears for both Model S/X and Model 3.

The Model S is aimed at the same ICE price class as it is priced (not lower, unlike other EVs) and is missing a lot of features that ICE cars priced lower have. Yet the "market" does not seem to miss those features in terms of valuing the car.

But can we really conclude that? I get it that Tesla has grabbed an impressive portion of the high-end market in some places, especially if the comparison is the Audi A8/7 Series level, though as Musk says the comparison really is one step below that (Elon said 5/6 Series). The competition sells a heck of a lot more BMW 5s and Audi A6s than Tesla sells the Model S. Regionally speaking, Tesla is really struggling in some markets to create demand. They have been shown to having to pull all kinds of demand levers in past quarters to grow this. It is not impossible the spartan nature of the car is slowing down adoption in some of these places. That, plus other negatives Tesla has compared to the competition.

What Tesla has done, is offered the first large-battery EV and some people have been shown to be willing to make significant sacrifices in other areas of the car to get that, including not just features but also e.g. price, by buying up from the Priuses etc. of the world. There is no argument that there was (and still is) an untapped EV market that Tesla is the first party to offer a compelling choice to. This will continue to sell the Model 3 as well, no doubt. The first sort of future-proofed autonomous driving car will also gain them some additional customers.

The bigger question is, once that initial demand is exhausted, what will the rest of the market be willing to overlook after that? And more importantly, what will the market be willing to overlook once competition - that quite possibly has these other features - arrives with choices? It is no wonder I-Pace and Audi e-tron quattro are generating interest even Tesla owners here on TMC, because people expect them to do certain things better than Tesla. It shows that as much as we like the EV experience, those pains of what else we are missing do not quite go away.

The biggest sticking point between the Model S and 3 seems to be the missing second screen. We'll see how much it really matters. I think it'll all go down on execution. If Tesla can implement a good single screen UI and optimal screen positioning, I don't think the single screen will be a bit deal.

It is true this can be a particular sore spot, the lack of an instrument cluster. We shall see. It is of a rather more fundamental nature than many of the convenience things I listed in the post above.

It's similar to the touchscreen in the Model S. There was initial concern about it being a distraction and missing the feedback of a button, but that turned out ultimately not to be an issue given a good implementation. However, if it was badly implemented, it could have easily gone the other way.

I agree the touch screen will not be an issue overall - and that a poor implementation still could have made it an issue. The 15" screen in itself will not be a problem for Model 3, though its capability to replace the instrument cluster is a question mark as said.

 

[Mark Z]

With the recent $329 price for an Apple iPad, Tesla should give drivers the option of using one as the driver display. If attached to the Model 3, the vehicle could charge it and set the appropriate level of brightness to match the center touchscreen.

Looking back at the thread, I see that this has been suggested by Reciprocity and smak as a second screen. I second the motion! Here is the link:

Elon Tweet: No 'significantly new consumer-facing technology' in Model 3