How many kWh can they squeeze into the Model 3...?

[ModelNforNerd]

I see now.... you are being patronizing. I'm done.

Because you're playing semantics-Nazi just so you can be "right".


Major point: you're eating 1.5%

You: OMG, you meant credit, I know you meant credit, we all agree on your major point, but I'm the only one who can be correct because you used the wrong word in the part of the statement that wasn't even the point of the post.

 

[jbcarioca]

That's exactly what I'm posting. I'm not sure where a refund enters the picture.

This has been bizarre. We all agree on the point. I cannot understand how anybody has disagreed. Anyway, so long as CA does not pass the "Tesla exemption" to allow tax-free delivery of cars destined for other jurisdictions we'll end out paying a bit extra. That this is not permitted in CA surprises me. Even in France one can have temporary tax-free tags that will allow driving until the car is exported, and they allow a year. Many US states allow that too. With some luck CA will do it soon.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

This has been bizarre. We all agree on the point. I cannot understand how anybody has disagreed. Anyway, so long as CA does not pass the "Tesla exemption" to allow tax-free delivery of cars destined for other jurisdictions we'll end out paying a bit extra. That this is not permitted in CA surprises me. Even in France one can have temporary tax-free tags that will allow driving until the car is exported, and they allow a year. Many US states allow that too. With some luck CA will do it soon.

I misspoke one word regarding an ancillary point, and apparently that negated the entire premise.

Whatever, be "right" on the forum, and account for that 1.5% you're giving to CA for their warmth and hospitality.

 

[ohmman]

Mod note: one post moved to snippiness.

 

[Neohippy]

I love Internet arguments. I don't care who is right but what I do care is how much is a Ludicrous M3 going to cost me

 

[jbcarioca]

I love Internet arguments. I don't care who is right but what I do care is how much is a Ludicrous M3 going to cost me

Given your avatar, what does rationality have to do with it? Oops, nothing Ludicrous is rational! Should I be worried? Luckily my SO is an exemplar of enablement. Thus, I must remember that I'm a boomer so whatever I do is not self-indulgent, it's my right! ...And anyway I can be self-righteous (another prized boomer characteristic) because I'm being really Green while I smoke Ferraris and Lamborghinis. (your choice). Further, Elon Musk himself is doing a wonderful job of maintaining my self-righteousness because he assures me that my money is helping to produce cost-effective, easy-to-buy vehicles for the mass market.

 

[DameDePiques]

Further, Elon Musk himself is doing a wonderful job of maintaining my self-righteousness because he assures me that my money is helping to produce cost-effective, easy-to-buy vehicles for the mass market.

And we of the mass-market kindly thank you for it.

 

[Red Sage]

I'm not sure the post was clear........

You're willing to pay the $35,000 base price.

And $50,000 for the battery pack....

and nothing else? $85,000 for a base model RWD w/a bigger battery?

If Elon could find more like you, they'd have been cash-flow-positive a long time ago.

I sincerely doubt the highest capacity battery pack for a Model ☰ will ever cost $50,000 as an upgrade option. After all, this Tesla Generation III platform is meant to be 'affordable'. And really? As noted here in your clarified example, it would still be a bargain. Do you have any idea how much a BMW M4 Convertible costs when fully loaded? Even if you added another $15,000 in options to your hypothetical stripped Model ☰ car, you'd still end up ahead.

 

[Red Sage]

In practice yes, but that wasn't the spirit of the thread and conversation. You're all adding on what you WANT to get, but the topic was:

CAR+Pack=$85,000

no other options at all. no AP, no AWD, no winter package, no Premiuim Interior package, no Performance or Ludicrous Mode, nothing.

Just a base model RWD w/biggest pack for $85,000.

Still in, knowing that as soon as you start checking boxes you're going to easily blow away $100K?

You'd be willing to pay > $500/kWH for your battery pack?

Man.....Elon would LOVE to sit in a room with a few of you and your checkbooks.

Once again, I feel you are assuming facts not in evidence. There is no way in bloody [HECK] that Elon would offer a battery pack as a lone option of $50,000 -- for the Model ☰. He has already resisted countless requests for a '500 mile battery pack' for Model S, because he said it would be 'too expensive' -- for their flagship car.

 

[Red Sage]

I don't think in my posts I was setting it up as a competition between the 2 models, but more of a comparison, because, what would be a more apt comparison to make?

Simple. A fully loaded Model S costs far less than a fully loaded Panamera Turbo S, a fully loaded Alpina B7, or a fully loaded Mercedes-AMG S-Class. Look at the ratio of difference for each of those. Then take a look at the fully loaded price points for AUDI S4, BMW M3, and Mercedes-AMG C-Class. Apply a similar percentage discount, and that is how much you would save over those ICE vehicles by getting a fully loaded Model ☰ instead. Sorted. Fairly. Done.

 

[Garlan Garner]

I'd be OK with that. I think I'd start having to reevaluate the situation at $90K.

$35K X 2 is not $90K.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

$35K X 2 is not $90K.

correct. I was stating I'm good up till around $90K

 

[diamond.g]

$35K X 2 is not $90K.

I wouldn't be surprised if the top end Model 3 was ~100K. The base S is only 68K with fully loaded being 160K, so it is possible.

 

[WileyTheMan]

I wouldn't be surprised if the top end Model 3 was ~100K. The base S is only 68K with fully loaded being 160K, so it is possible.

Possible, but I'm betting on a Ludicrous configuration topping out at the $75k range. This being generally classified as an entry-level luxury sedan, it's aimed at those that have limits to expenses, unlike the Model S category. But I guess we will see when the first batch of configuration invites goes out.

 

[diamond.g]

Possible, but I'm betting on a Ludicrous configuration topping out at the $75k range. This being generally classified as an entry-level luxury sedan, it's aimed at those that have limits to expenses, unlike the Model S category. But I guess we will see when the first batch of configuration invites goes out.

Closer to the base BMW M3/M4 price, then add options. That is what I am expecting. Easier to make sure I don't price myself out of a car that way, lol. Told the wife to expect 45-50K on the vehicle. I may choose to get all of the non upgradable (non performance related) options. Sigh...

 

[JeffK]

I wouldn't be surprised if the top end Model 3 was ~100K. The base S is only 68K with fully loaded being 160K, so it is possible.

I can't see it.

For the 60 to 60D spec'd out without the rear seats or special paint is a delta of $23.5k now we already know that features available to the Model 3 must be able to be mass produced so therefore would command a lower price so let's look at 23.5k as a very high end.

The delta between that and the P100D is $62K but what do you actually get... extra 40 kWh and a larger rear motor. We know drivetrain costs are going to come down and we know battery pack prices are also going to come down. The target is $100/kWh but lets say it's only $120/kWh: 40 * 120 = $4800 Let's add a healthy 30% profit margin and we get $6240. We will call the delta price of the larger rear motor vs the standard motor as $X.

So if they really wanted to, assuming the prices of all other options stayed the same, they could sell the fully spec'd out version of a Model 3 for $35k + $23.5k + ~$6.3k + $X = around $65k + $X

This is just napkin math, but I can easily see a fully spec'd out version for under $70K if they desired and they could still have the highest margins in the industry. Everything hinges on battery pack prices.

 

[Trev Page]

I can't see it.

For the 60 to 60D spec'd out without the rear seats or special paint is a delta of $23.5k now we already know that features available to the Model 3 must be able to be mass produced so therefore would command a lower price so let's look at 23.5k as a very high end.

The delta between that and the P100D is $62K but what do you actually get... extra 40 kWh and a larger rear motor. We know drivetrain costs are going to come down and we know battery pack prices are also going to come down. The target is $100/kWh but lets say it's only $120/kWh: 40 * 120 = $4800 Let's add a healthy 30% profit margin and we get $6240. We will call the delta price of the larger rear motor vs the standard motor as $X.

So if they really wanted to, assuming the prices of all other options stayed the same, they could sell the fully spec'd out version of a Model 3 for $35k + $23.5k + ~$6.3k + $X = around $65k + $X

This is just napkin math, but I can easily see a fully spec'd out version for under $70K if they desired and they could still have the highest margins in the industry. Everything hinges on battery pack prices.

All possible, *if* Tesla does indeed seek the same profit margins on options as the Model S on a "mass market" car. I seriously doubt they will do that because they need to price options in such a way as to incentivize customers to have an uptake rate. If you want profit margins you need uptake on the options but you can't price it out of context of the car. Tesla can get away with it on the Model S because the base price is basically double the Model 3 (priced in line with the car's market) and they're pretty transparent about the fact that the Model S and X with high profit margins are paying for all the R&D etc...

A basic example is that you can't really charge $2000 for basic metallic paint on a car with a base price of $35K!!! Who would buy that?? If they indeed kept the current colour selection and pricing as the Model S we're going to see a hell of a lot of black Model 3s around...

Besides, if you take Elon's comment of dual motor options would be "less" than Model S one could extrapolate the rest of the options would be in line with that thinking.

Elon said at the last financial call that a few things on the Model 3 cost more than a Model S but most of them were half the cost... To me it seems at this stage that they have their cost projections under control.

So the short answer is it possible that Tesla will price options on the Model 3 to basically double the car's base price? Sure.

But would Tesla really chance a massive amount of reservation cancellations if they priced the Model 3 out of the intended market with even a modicum of options? That's something we'll know for sure when the configurator goes online sometime next year.

 

[diamond.g]

All possible, *if* Tesla does indeed seek the same profit margins on options as the Model S on a "mass market" car. I seriously doubt they will do that because they need to price options in such a way as to incentivize customers to have an uptake rate. If you want profit margins you need uptake on the options but you can't price it out of context of the car. Tesla can get away with it on the Model S because the base price is basically double the Model 3 (priced in line with the car's market) and they're pretty transparent about the fact that the Model S and X with high profit margins are paying for all the R&D etc...

A basic example is that you can't really charge $2000 for basic metallic paint on a car with a base price of $35K!!! Who would buy that?? If they indeed kept the current colour selection and pricing as the Model S we're going to see a hell of a lot of black Model 3s around...

Besides, if you take Elon's comment of dual motor options would be "less" than Model S one could extrapolate the rest of the options would be in line with that thinking.

Elon said at the last financial call that a few things on the Model 3 cost more than a Model S but most of them were half the cost... To me it seems at this stage that they have their cost projections under control.

So the short answer is it possible that Tesla will price options on the Model 3 to basically double the car's base price? Sure.

But would Tesla really chance a massive amount of reservation cancellations if they priced the Model 3 out of the intended market with even a modicum of options? That's something we'll know for sure when the configurator goes online sometime next year.

I do get that point. I guess the question that needs to be answered is what is the market they are going after. If it is the Honda Civic market then they have already priced themselves on the high end.I thought that BMW/Mercedes/Audi were the target market, where 35K is the entry price. The performance models of those brands for the entry cars all start at like 60K then you get to add options. I actually think the Audi is the cheapest one of the 3 for the version that they sell in the States.

 

[Trev Page]

I do get that point. I guess the question that needs to be answered is what is the market they are going after. If it is the Honda Civic market then they have already priced themselves on the high end.I thought that BMW/Mercedes/Audi were the target market, where 35K is the entry price. The performance models of those brands for the entry cars all start at like 60K then you get to add options. I actually think the Audi is the cheapest one of the 3 for the version that they sell in the States.

The target market is indeed the BMW 3 series, Audi A4 etc... If Tesla was targeting the Camry they would have said "The Model 3 is about the same size as a Toyota Camry or a Mazda 6", but they didn't, they've always said the size is about the same as the aforementioned. That's the indicator for the target audience.

If they want to penetrate that market the Model 3 needs to be a "conquer" car which means customers have to have a reason chose it over the incumbents whether that's performance, styling, technology and in some cases better prices. Go ask Kia why they're doing so well

 

[diamond.g]

The target market is indeed the BMW 3 series, Audi A4 etc... If Tesla was targeting the Camry they would have said "The Model 3 is about the same size as a Toyota Camry or a Mazda 6", but they didn't, they've always said the size is about the same as the aforementioned. That's the indicator for the target audience.

If they want to penetrate that market the Model 3 needs to be a "conquer" car which means customers have to have a reason chose it over the incumbents whether that's performance, styling, technology and in some cases better prices. Go ask Kia why they're doing so well

I agree. I totally am hoping options are tons cheaper for the 3, but if they are not I understand the circle they are playing in and won't be too upset.