EcoHeliGuy
Member
That tail light doesn't look to have a Supercharger port. Guess I'll have to search for the new location. (Unless it's in the other taillight like RHD models or behind the front quarter panel turn signal/tesla emblem)
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
How does the trunk work on the Model 3
- Thread starter AkalStation
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model 3
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Yes, but I think he is saying no one is going to spend an extra $40k when the primarily concern is the hatch. Basically the "want a hatch? get an S" is not a reasonable proposition.
perhaps they were able to lower the bottom lip and raise the upper edge and get back some usability.
Like the X, you're just looking for the wrong vehicle to do your job.
CUVs are people movers, they do not haul sofas.
Sedans are people movers, they do not haul sofas. Or tables, or chairs.
Compact sedans are people movers, they generally can't haul anything. I'd say being able to fit a 7 foot surfboard into the Model 3 already puts it as a best in class compact sedan cargo mover.
My smart car could haul plywood by dropping the front passenger seat and keeping the upper tailgate open. Different vehicle types are purpose-built for different things, and my smart (like most hatchbacks) was very tall and fat in order to eat up bulky cargo. Hatchbacks are exceptionally good cargo movers. Pick up trucks. Minivans. Full vans are even better cargo movers--in fact they're incredible cargo movers.
Hauling Sofas, though? The Leaf will be better suited for the purpose because it's designed more for that purpose.
You just can't have five comfortable adult seats while having a liftback in the compact sedan size while also having a top safety pick vehicle. It's just not physically possible. There are drawbacks and trade-offs to any design, and it seems like 250k+ people are overjoyed to have an incredible electric people mover available for pre-order.
In one of the test drive videos someone pointed to the taillight and asked is that where the charge port is and the driver said yes.
Trev Page
Member
I think the opening is bigger than you think. Pictures at this point don't do anything justice. It appears the upper lip is pushed inwards quite a bit. The fact that the hinge for the trunk is a third of the way up the rear means the trunk opens much higher than most sedan trunks that use double hinges to get the lid to open further back than a simple single hinge.
I think they did an admirable job so far. Everything in car design is a compromise, there's no perfect solution that will make everyone happy.
Yet Tesla decided to put a hatch on THE sportiest sedan in the world. But not on the more practical "car for the masses?"
A year or two ago you couldn't have a 5-seat hatchback that was safer and quicker than another "sedan" on the planet. Right now you can't have a 200 mile EV for under $40k. Five years ago it was impossible to have Quick Chargers deployed all across the country...and the world.
I have great difficulty giving up on this engineering challenge as "impossible." With everything else that Tesla has managed to do, you really don't think they could crack the nut of a 5-person mid-size car with a proper hatch? AND make it safe (as they managed with the S)? It shouldn't be possible to make a street-legal, 5-seat, 5-door, 5,000 pound vehicle reach 60 mph in under three seconds. Yet here we are.
I give them far more credit. We don't know why the decision for a trunk was made over a hatch, though I'm sure there were cost trade-offs to be made on a car that had only two specs originally: Cost and range. Clearly they have a reason to use a trunk. But I don't for a moment think that the reason is because it can't be done.
My guess is that it is cheaper to make a safer car with a trunk and permanent rear shelf bonded to the body. Not better. Not impossible. But cheaper.
igotzzoom
Active Member
Most likely. 5-doors are inherently less stiff than notchbacks, and require more engineering to have equivalent body strength. I'm sure it was a cost tradeoff to achieve the desired rigidity at a certain price point. That said, I'm sure there will be future variants with a larger cargo opening, whether a crossover (Model Y) or a Grand Touring 5-door (like the Model S).
Looks like the actual trunk is roomy. Too bad the opening is small. Large opening to a large trunk, like the S, makes it very useful. Small opening to large trunk reduces potential utility. Guess rear headroom and rear visibility was deemed more important than cargo (and probably is in most cases). Guess I'm just disappointed because the Model S was such a no-compromise vehicle. Better in basically every way to the competition. The hatch was a nice part of that equation. Sad to see it didn't make it to the Model 3.
I keep hearing this, and don't understand it.
If we pretend that the trunk/hatch decision is based ONLY on making the most people happy - is there really any argument? (removing cost/safety from the discussion for a moment) Is there anybody who wants LESS utility in their car? Assuming (as we clearly can) that the car can look the same and have either a hatch or a trunk... is there somebody who prefers a trunk for some reason? How many Model S owners complain that their cars have the amazing utility of a huge hatch? Who - outside of Tesla-knowledgeable people - even realize that the Model S is a hatch?
Probably what frustrates me the most is that there were a few things that I just KNEW the 3 would offer, and the mystery was only in the other details like range/performance options, and styling. There was no question in my mind that a car for the masses would be a hatch! Especially if the flagship, super-sedan was actually a hatch.
Why do you trunk-lovers hate my dog so much?
Trev Page
Member
I'm with you on the whole hatch thing. I would have preferred the same hatch size as Model S, matter of fact I was counting on it.
But obviously Tesla made a decision that the rear glass window size was more important and for whatever reason had to make it fixed. So Model 3 has a trunk.
Am I disappointed? Sure, but I can live with it. I have had sedans before and not being able to potentially carry a sheet of plywood or taking my pet elephant for a ride wasn't a big deal. I just rented a truck when Dumbo had a hankering for a bag a peanuts. That's a joke, not a dig at your dog. I'm sure he's very nice
But obviously Tesla made a decision that the rear glass window size was more important and for whatever reason had to make it fixed. So Model 3 has a trunk.
Am I disappointed? Sure, but I can live with it. I have had sedans before and not being able to potentially carry a sheet of plywood or taking my pet elephant for a ride wasn't a big deal. I just rented a truck when Dumbo had a hankering for a bag a peanuts. That's a joke, not a dig at your dog. I'm sure he's very nice
Last edited:
I wrote earlier, based on the first movie, that trunk's hatch was in a way and was not lifting high enough. In this pic however it looks like you can approach the trunk with ease therefore I withdraw my objection
In fact, thanks to design of the hinges, trunk opens wide and hinge mechanism does not interfere/crush items when closed which is the case with many cars:
I'm with you on the whole hatch thing. I would have preferred the same hatch size as Model S, matter of fact I was counting on it.
But obviously Tesla made a decision that the rear glass window size was more important and for whatever reason had to make it fixed. So Model 3 has a trunk.
Am I disappointed? Sure, but I can live it. I have had sedans before and not being able to potentially carry a sheet of plywood or taking my pet elephant for a ride wasn't a big deal. I just rented a truck when Dumbo had a hankering for a bag a peanuts. That's a joke, not a dig at your dog. I'm sure he's very nice
What makes you think that this design does not let you carry a sheet of plywood? I'm pretty sure that rear seats fold down otherwise surfboard would not fit
Somehow BMW has been pretty successful without a huge number of hatchbacks in their lineup.
I think was primarily it, although the desire for the visual impact of the 1-piece glass roof may have had a role too. It's a disappointment, but not a deal killer for me. I don't understand the "rent a truck" proponents - don't you realize how inconvenient that is just to transport something a little larger than ordinary?
The liftback allows for incredible flexibility and would've made the model 3 a homerun, it's a solid double for me right now.
What does the "U" stand for? Utility
Exactly. That's why they're almost universally hated here in Europe. If the Model S had been a typical sedan, it wouldn't have been much of a success over here.
You have roof racks for that sort of stuff anyway, so it's not very important. (It remains to be seen whether the Model 3 can use a roof rack, though.)
I'm not going to own a vehicle exclusively for cargo hauling, like a pickup or a van. The ideal car ownership for me is a larger vehicle that can carry 5-7 people, large cargo and tow at least 750 kg. Plus a smaller, cheaper vehicle that can carry five people, but that can also carry some cargo, like strollers, Ikea purchases, etc. Thus far none of the vehicles Tesla have produced fit either role extremely well.
That's certainly disappointing, but I can keep waiting. (Like I've done since ~2011.) At some point, if Tesla keeps designing vehicles, they'll manage to design one that suits me.
If the Leaf had 250 miles range and supercharging, I would consider one.
No offence, but that's BS. Tesla could easily have made a liftback design. *Maybe* it would have been more expensive, but I doubt even that.
Similar threads
- Question