Glass rear window and sedan/liftback discussion

[Sonny Daze]

If you put the beam further back without changing the slope, such that it is out of the way of the rear heads, then you lose all rear visibility, in exactly the same space where your rear view mirror would typically be facing.

That's why in pretty much all the designs you see either them change the slope or have the beam going across the rear heads. The floor battery Tesla uses just makes things even harder to design for. This car isn't a sports coupe, so rear visibility still matters.

As for the current design, they have a cross beam in the rear parcel shelf area. That's one of the advantages of going with a trunk and a fixed parcel shelf.

That's why you display the image from the rear camera on the rear view mirror.

 

[N5329K]

I'll counter your list of "ugly" crossovers with some that perhaps are more to your liking:

Audi Allroad:

Mercedes all-terrain:

Volvo V90 CC

By any rational reckoning, these are all fine station wagons. Unfortunately, in the US, you can't sell a car by being entirely rational. You have to use the magician's tricks of sleight of hand and misdirection. Thus, the boring old station wagon becomes - hey presto - the adventurous, trail-blazing SUV. As a fan of station wagons, the litter of "crossovers" and such is vindication for what great, useful cars station wagons always were.
Robin

 

[garsh]

Overall, I'm reminded of attempts during the 1980s to build a new armored personnel carrier for U.S. armed forces. It failed miserably, with vehicles that looked like tanks, moved like tanks, but were just as likely to kill their occupants as was enemy fire. Eventually, after several years of failures, and gozillions of buckadollars over budget, the project was scrapped.

<offtopic>
The picture you posted is of an M113 armored personnel carrier (developed in the 1960s), which was mostly replaced by the Bradley Fighting Vehicle (developed in the 1980s), which is the vehicle you're referring to.

They were only ever designed to resist small-arms fire. They weren't designed to survive heavy weapons. They're better than a truck with benches and a canvas top, which is what these vehicles were replacing - these are personnel carriers, not front-line weapons. But the use of IEDs in Iraq showed that such "supply-line" vehicles required additional armor when such guerilla tactics would be employed.

The MRAP was developed as a replacement (for HUMVEES) that was able to withstand IEDs and other high-explosives. Interestingly, I believe Bradleys are still being made, while the MRAP program has now been cancelled.
</offtopic>

 

[alseTrick]

Let me give some examples...
The best selling European car is the Ford Focus. It's a hatchback - all versions.
All of its competitors are hatchbacks. eg. Vauxhall (GM) Astra. Toyota's - all are hatchbacks
Going to the continent - in France you see no SUV's (apart from a few British and German tourists). They buy Renault's and Citroen's. These are all hatchbacks - and generally they have smaller / older cars. The type of people who'd be buying a 3. They can have narrow streets in cities - same as us Brits.
BMW / Audis - most are hatchbacks. I think one model at the top-end has a long "boot". Generally these are bought as taxis or by execs who aren't going to be moving their own stuff.
A few 4x4s have a mid-split boot with the bottom bit folding down for shopping - letting a dog jump in - but the top is a hatchback opening.
Hard to look in a carpark here and find any sedan cars. A couple of top-end Merc's and BMW's.
Lots of "Estate" cars. Basically a hatchback with a squared off back-end. These are all hatchbacks.
Very very rare to find any American saloons here.

Well, duh. It's Europe. It makes sense that most of the bars/pubs in Europe are European.

Anyways, I know hatchbacks are popular in Europe, because the Europeans on here frequently make that point. I wasn't disagreeing with you or anyone else.

 

[stopcrazypp]

That's why you display the image from the rear camera on the rear view mirror.

NHTSA approved that based on redundancy, the Bolt (and CT6) still has a usable rear view even without the camera. According to Bolt owners image quality falls drastically at night, and eye focusing takes longer versus an actual mirror.

 

[EV-lutioin]

Seems to be some widening of the trunk in the release candidate.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Seems to be some widening of the trunk in the release candidate. View attachment 222264 View attachment 222265

Discussed already way up thread. This is just a mirroring of the same charging port cut line already present in the alpha (picture of the same silver car from another angle):

 

[Topher]

This car isn't a sports coupe, so rear visibility still matters.

Thank you kindly.

 

[Red Sage]

I'll counter your list of "ugly" crossovers with some that perhaps are more to your liking:

Audi Allroad:

Mercedes all-terrain:

Volvo V90 CC

To my eye, all of those are simply wagons. Not offensive to my eye at all. The BMW 3-Series Gran Turismo and Honda Crosstour are almost equally [FARGIN] ugly, though. The Acura ZDX is worse than both:

I think I'd rather have one of these, with a Tesla drivetrain, of course...

 

[Red Sage]

This is where Steve Jobs and Elon Musk differ.
I recall a quote from Jobs saying. Never be afraid to cannibalise your own products. When people asked "why are you including a music player in your iphone" (people were afraid including one would canibalise Apple's best selling product - the iPod. His reasoning was that your competitor will make what you don't. He was right of course and IPhone sales are about 1billion. Of course the IPhone cost more than the IPod - but you get the analogy.
Now on the contrary - Elon has stated in recent tweets. You want more storage, range, 2 screens, more performance - buy a Model S.
Elon - make the best dam model 3 - not a compromise. You've compromised the trunk and the screens IMHO for fear of cannibalising S / X sales.

I mostly agree with your point, after all, I regularly recommend the OVERKILL PRINCIPAL as the course of action for Tesla. But when it comes to the Model ☰ it only has to fulfill the promise of Tesla Generation III vehicles. That is to prove it is possible to profitably build an affordable long range fully electric vehicle for mass market sales that is a compelling purchase because it is able to beat the supposed best in the world among widely sold ICE vehicles -- the BMW 3-Series. It turns out that despite its longstanding reputation, the BMW 3-Series has already been beaten, by other ICE vehicles released since 2006, in the very category it was the benchmark for over so much time. Yet, until 2016 when sales of the 3-Series dropped 25.5% compared to 2015 in the wake of the Model ☰ Unveiling, it had led sales in the 'entry level luxury' market for pretty much decades.

The Model ☰ is designed to reveal the compromises that the 3-Series endures. Primarily the handicap of being tied to ICE technology. The Model ☰ does not have to be 'better than' the Model S to be vastly better than the 3-Series. And it will be by default better than the Giulia, A4, ATS, XE, Q50, LS, and C-Class, among others. It will destroy those cars when it comes to instrumented testing, and lap times, and in Sales. It will become the new benchmark for automotive excellence, hands down.

 

[Sonny Daze]

It will destroy those cars when it comes to instrumented testing...

That would be nice but I'm not betting on it. Maybe I've been reading too many of Elon's recent tweets.

--------------------328i-------------------------------------------------340i----------------------------------------335i xDrive (2015)

 

[stopcrazypp]

That would be nice but I'm not betting on it. Maybe I've been reading too many of Elon's recent tweets.

--------------------328i-------------------------------------------------340i----------------------------------------335i xDrive (2015)
View attachment 222447View attachment 222448View attachment 222449

The oldest 2013 S60 easily beats the 328i time (5.1 0-60 and 13.7 1/4 mile) with the newer version (either S60 or S75) likely even faster. So even if some artificial handicapping happens, I don't see how it would interfere with that.

Also the BMW lineup has changed. Base is 320i at ~$35k, 328i is changed to 330i which is now ~$40k.
A quick google only found an older test of the 320i, but 0-60 is 6.5 and 1/4 mile is 15.1. Shouldn't be too tough to beat.
2013 BMW 320i - Instrumented Test

 

[Red Sage]

That would be nice but I'm not betting on it. Maybe I've been reading too many of Elon's recent tweets.

--------------------328i-------------------------------------------------340i----------------------------------------335i xDrive (2015)
View attachment 222447View attachment 222448View attachment 222449

I look forward to seeing all those numbers fall to the base Tesla Model ☰. I've said all along that Tesla should target the performance profile of the 340i with their base car. The Performance version will be another half second quicker. And the Ludicrous version will be another half second or more quicker than that. Long before the recent tweets, Elon noted that Tesla's cars have to be better than all of the other cars, or no one will have a reason to buy them. And he wants to sell a whole bunch of them, by making sure they are 'compelling'. The Model ☰ doesn't have to be less quick than every iteration of Model S -- that would be a mistake. Do not be surprised when the Performance Model ☰ leaves the segment's current champion, the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio, in its rear view mirror. Watch.

 

[Red Sage]

<offtopic>
The picture you posted is of an M113 armored personnel carrier (developed in the 1960s), which was mostly replaced by the Bradley Fighting Vehicle (developed in the 1980s), which is the vehicle you're referring to.

They were only ever designed to resist small-arms fire. They weren't designed to survive heavy weapons. They're better than a truck with benches and a canvas top, which is what these vehicles were replacing - these are personnel carriers, not front-line weapons. But the use of IEDs in Iraq showed that such "supply-line" vehicles required additional armor when such guerilla tactics would be employed.

The MRAP was developed as a replacement (for HUMVEES) that was able to withstand IEDs and other high-explosives. Interestingly, I believe Bradleys are still being made, while the MRAP program has now been cancelled.
</offtopic>

Pardon me, my bad. I also found pictures of the M2A2 and M3A3. I mistakenly thought they were all part of the same line, due to the trapdoor ramp at the rear. My Friends that were in the U.S. Army back then say that the Bradley Fighting Machine was fun to drive while on maneuvers, goofing around. But they all knew full well it was a deathtrap too. Especially when configured to look as much like a tank as possible. A really bad idea.

 

[Red Sage]

Seems to be some widening of the trunk in the release candidate. View attachment 222264 View attachment 222265

No. It is in the exact same place. Please check Trev Page's comments on the issue:

OFFICIAL Model 3 BETA Watch Thread

OFFICIAL Model 3 BETA Watch Thread

OFFICIAL Model 3 BETA Watch Thread

 

[Laban]

A sporty hatchback like Model S is the perfect compromise between a sedan and a station wagon, if only one of the three alternatives can be offered. Model S nailed it perfectly.

I "moved" my answer to this thread:

The most likely scenario is that the Model 3 will be production limited until the Y is released. That means that there's no need to make a compromise between a sedan and a wagon.

 

[AssortedBread]

To me it just looks like they aimed to beat the BMW 3 Series Trunk (Same model you saw in the spy shots)

The white line is 3 series trunk.

 

[T34ME]

But no way to utilize it unless the largest thing you're loading is a case of beer.

You have interacted with one of the release candidates? This is indeed a major development! Please tell us more! Has the trunk opening changed? What did the lining of the trunk consist of? What was the liftover height? Is there a light in the trunk? Did the rear seats fold down and did they fold flat? What brand of beer (I prefer George Schneider Hefeweissen - please leave it in the trunk for me)? Was it a case of cans or bottles? 12 or 16oz? Did you try a case of water (I like water better than beer)? did you drink too much of the beer when you had this out of body experience? Would it be possible for me to put an adult human in the trunk in case I want to kidnap someone (nothing personal understand)?

Inquiring minds want to know!

 

[eisbock]

A great many people load up their trunks with groceries without difficulty or luggage, etc. Are you suggesting the Model 3 will have less cargo space than an equal BMW or Audi?

Not at all. I'm saying you'll have a ton of storage room, but it won't be practically accessible. Model S has a ton of storage room and a huge access point so you can fill up that huge space with huge things. Model 3 has huge space and a tiny access point, so you're limited to lots of tiny things. I can't think of what I'd be able to load up a Model 3 with to max out and take advantage of that storage capacity. Can you?

 

[JeffK]

but it's still not there yet.

We all know the software isn't there, but how do you know the hardware isn't there?

Not at all. I'm saying you'll have a ton of storage room, but it won't be practically accessible. Model S has a ton of storage room and a huge access point so you can fill up that huge space with huge things. Model 3 has huge space and a tiny access point, so you're limited to lots of tiny things. I can't think of what I'd be able to load up a Model 3 with to max out and take advantage of that storage capacity. Can you?

You are simply making an argument of trunk vs hatchback.... nothing new here. As far as cars with trunks go, Model 3 will be superior, end of story.