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

[Yggdrasill]

I understand what you are saying...however you are making a few assumptions here that are running away as facts. Elon said the 2170 is better and that the M3 will be designed with them. That means - No 18650's.
I don't know about anything factual about something being "Likely or Unlikely".

I agree you won't find an 18650-cell in a production Model 3. But they will likely continue to be used in the lower range versions of the Model S and X.

Concerning range the MS hasn't blown anything away. The BMW i8's range is better than the MS. The Chevy bolt will exit the assembly line with competitive range. The MB's E-Class range is competitive. I'm talking about blowing the competition away concerning all aspects of an EV.

The i8 is a plug in hybrid. And if you meant the B-class, it has range that's comparable to the 30 kWh Leaf, not a Model S. Also the driveline is supplied by Tesla. The BEV with the closest range is the Bolt, and it's four years later than the Model S, and the Model S has almost 50% more range.

Tesla can make a super-awesome BEV that's really expensive, or they can make a pretty awesome BEV that's affordable. The latter is supposed to be the Model 3, while the former is the Model S.

 

[dsvick]

I respectfully disagree with that. I think the MS will always be the best in all variables except price. I think Elon said so already.

I agree with what others have said, that TM won't deliberately make less of a car than they can. Will the M3 have bleeding edge battery tech to improve its range as much as possible? No, probably not, but they'll give the best, proven and tested, tech that they can in order to get the best range for the price. It seems like range anxiety, whether rightly or wrongly, is seen as the biggest hurdle so TM will make every effort they can to alleviate that, especially with the vehicle that is made for a larger audience. The S and the X will always be the better class of vehicles if only for body style, the amenities, and other features.

But they are. Right now they are. When take into consideration that some estimate that the 60kWh versions accounts for 50% of total sales, and the narrow profit margin Tesla gets from it compared with higher kWh versions, then you can't say that Tesla isn't competing with Tesla.

A top-of-the-line M3 shouldn't be a direct competitor with a middle-of-the-line MS.

As every brand in the market, Tesla have to maximize profit (think economy of scale vs low volume/high margins) and should create products that don't compete directly with each other across all range.

I don't see a top of the line M3 competing with even a base version MS. You may see some competition with a used MS but not so much with the new ones.There are plenty of other factors that will make the two different enough that there will be minimal direct competition. If you think about what a fully loaded M3 will have, then compare that to a base MS, they are completely different. Which one is the "better" vehicle is an subjective judgement that can only be made on an individual basis.

 

[andrerodpt]

I understand what you are saying...however you are making a few assumptions here that are running away as facts. Elon said the 2170 is better and that the M3 will be designed with them. That means - No 18650's.
I don't know about anything factual about something being "Likely or Unlikely".

Concerning range the MS hasn't blown anything away. The BMW i8's range is better than the MS. The Chevy bolt will exit the assembly line with competitive range. The MB's E-Class range is competitive. I'm talking about blowing the competition away concerning all aspects of an EV.

Just to clarify: the i8 is an hybrid. The electric-only range is appalling.

 

[Garlan Garner]

I agree you won't find an 18650-cell in a production Model 3. But they will likely continue to be used in the lower range versions of the Model S and X.
.

Why? Without speculation. Why?

 

[andrerodpt]

I agree with what others have said, that TM won't deliberately make less of a car than they can. Will the M3 have bleeding edge battery tech to improve its range as much as possible? No, probably not, but they'll give the best, proven and tested, tech that they can in order to get the best range for the price. It seems like range anxiety, whether rightly or wrongly, is seen as the biggest hurdle so TM will make every effort they can to alleviate that, especially with the vehicle that is made for a larger audience. The S and the X will always be the better class of vehicles if only for body style, the amenities, and other features.



I don't see a top of the line M3 competing with even a base version MS. You may see some competition with a used MS but not so much with the new ones.There are plenty of other factors that will make the two different enough that there will be minimal direct competition. If you think about what a fully loaded M3 will have, then compare that to a base MS, they are completely different. Which one is the "better" vehicle is an subjective judgement that can only be made on an individual basis.

But if you say that range is the single major concern (and I agree 100%), then the M3 having more EPA range than the MS is a factor of most importance.

 

[andrerodpt]

Why? Without speculation. Why?

Inventory

 

[Ubbe]

Why? Without speculation. Why?

Until Panasonic has shifted their production in their original plant to 2170, they have to make use of the old format cells somewhere, and with the cells being specific for Tesla (no protection circuit and the rest) they would have some trouble selling them on the open market. Guessing that they (have a contract) and will coordinate with Tesla when to shift production.

 

[Yggdrasill]

Until Panasonic has shifted their production in their original plant to 2170, they have to make use of the old format cells somewhere, and with the cells being specific for Tesla (no protection circuit and the rest) they would have some trouble selling them on the open market. Guessing that they (have a contract) and will coordinate with Tesla when to shift production.

They could probably switch to standard 18650's with relative ease, which they could then sell on the open market. (Or use in their own powerwall competitor.) But it is more likely that they will switch to 21-70s.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

There's one thought process we're overlooking when it comes to keeping the S and X as "above/better than" the Model 3.

The luxury factor.

We still don't know a lot about the Model 3 interior. It's quite possible that one of the differentiating factors is the "fit and finish" in the interior cabin.

Maybe the Model 3 doesn't get Alacantra leather or "obeche wood" or "dark ash wood". Maybe the 3's interior is more austere.

But, remember, "Tesla doesn't build slow cars". So getting a "neutered" 3 to keep from cannibalizing sales is unlikely.

The three Teslas will all have their own market anyway, based on the platform.

Smaller garage or on-street parking? the 3 is probably best for you.

Family and "soccer mom"? Might want to look at the X.

Need "brand prestige" with your performance sedan? Maybe the S is what you're looking for.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Inventory

There was a guy who recorded his Gigafactory Tour. He recorded the WHOLE THING - which was great. When they got to the 2-3 story room where they store "Battery Packs" the tour guide indicated that the reason the room was empty was because Tesla does not have the opportunity to "store" any battery packs because they are being shipped out as fast as the batteries come in. She indicated that Tesla is making battery packs for many vendors as well as themselves. Tesla does not currently have inventory. From the power wall to the MX's to the MS's to the vendors...they don't have battery cells stored. There was another gentleman in the tour that told the group that he thinks that Tesla has an opportunity available to them to not store cells because as Soon as a new cell is created via the gigafactory....that they could immediately utilize it.

 

[dsvick]

But if you say that range is the single major concern (and I agree 100%), then the M3 having more EPA range than the MS is a factor of most importance.

Right, because of that they won't deliberately limit the range of the M3. There will still be plenty of other things that make the 3 and the S different enough that sales of one won't impact the sales of the other too much.

 

[andrerodpt]

Right, because of that they won't deliberately limit the range of the M3. There will still be plenty of other things that make the 3 and the S different enough that sales of one won't impact the sales of the other too much.

Hey... I just raised the concern. It looks like I'm flying solo in this question.

 

[andrerodpt]

There was a guy who recorded his Gigafactory Tour. He recorded the WHOLE THING - which was great. When they got to the 2-3 story room where they store "Battery Packs" the tour guide indicated that the reason the room was empty was because Tesla does not have the opportunity to "store" any battery packs because they are being shipped out as fast as the batteries come in. She indicated that Tesla is making battery packs for many vendors as well as themselves. Tesla does not currently have inventory. From the power wall to the MX's to the MS's to the vendors...they don't have battery cells stored. There was another gentleman in the tour that told the group that he thinks that Tesla has an opportunity available to them to not store cells because as Soon as a new cell is created via the gigafactory....that they could immediately utilize it.

That's great! Let's hope it's the same back in Japan with Panasonic. Let them produce only the "old-school" batteries needed until all range of Teslas can work with the newer versions.

 

[andrerodpt]

There's one thought process we're overlooking when it comes to keeping the S and X as "above/better than" the Model 3.

The luxury factor.

We still don't know a lot about the Model 3 interior. It's quite possible that one of the differentiating factors is the "fit and finish" in the interior cabin.

Maybe the Model 3 doesn't get Alacantra leather or "obeche wood" or "dark ash wood". Maybe the 3's interior is more austere.

But, remember, "Tesla doesn't build slow cars". So getting a "neutered" 3 to keep from cannibalizing sales is unlikely.

The three Teslas will all have their own market anyway, based on the platform.

Smaller garage or on-street parking? the 3 is probably best for you.

Family and "soccer mom"? Might want to look at the X.

Need "brand prestige" with your performance sedan? Maybe the S is what you're looking for.

I agree with your arguments. Over and out with my concern and sorry for the kinda of takeover of your thread.

 

[WarpedOne]

Right, because of that they won't deliberately limit the range of the M3. There will still be plenty of other things that make the 3 and the S different enough that sales of one won't impact the sales of the other too much

There is only one real limit: base price.

 

[jkk_]

I don't see a top of the line M3 competing with even a base version MS. You may see some competition with a used MS but not so much with the new ones.There are plenty of other factors that will make the two different enough that there will be minimal direct competition. If you think about what a fully loaded M3 will have, then compare that to a base MS, they are completely different. Which one is the "better" vehicle is an subjective judgement that can only be made on an individual basis.

Maybe I'm not getting what you are saying but to me it seems you are saying something like "even the top of the line model 3 will be [significantly] worse than even base model S" which just seems wrong to me. I don't see one being able to convert average Joes and Jills to EVs that way.

"Hey we got this cool car but if you want range you have to pay double, and here's a cheaper more range version but it's worse than any other car at the same price point"

But like I said, maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

 

[BlairC]

What use case do you have where 310 miles range isn't enough?

310 would probably be sufficient, but more Destination Chargers would be great. Here's a trip we do about 2x / year for our sons travel lacrosse.

Home (Apex NC) to Charleston SC. Distance 1-way to hotel = 288 miles. Would need stops at both Lumberton NC & Santee SC Superchargers.
Once I leave the Santee SC, get to hotel, to the fields for Sat games, back to hotel for showers, downtown for dinner, back to hotel, back to fields for Sun, games, then to Santee Supercharger on the way home, it's a minimum of 219 miles (plus whatever I lose to "vampire drain" during the day / overnight). If it's the Winter tournament, if I lose 20% of range due to cold, that would be 248 miles of range.
Not owning a Tesla yet, I'd think I'd want more than 29 miles buffer, just in case I need to make another side trip somewhere (water, gatorade, snacks, first aid supplies...). We'd also have up to 4 bodies with associated clothing for 2 days, lacrosse gear, cooler, drinks, snacks, chairs...
There is no Supercharger in Charleston.
There are 2 hotels downtown Charleston with Destination Chargers, but those say for guests only.
The hotel we stay at (with the team) is near the outlet mall, which has 8 J1772 charger stalls. I'd really rather not sit at the mall after say 9pm for a couple hours, or leave the car & walk a mile or so back to hotel, then have to walk back. Especially if it's cold or rainy in the dark.

Similar situations in Richmond VA, and Virginia Beach.

I have the Destination Charging brochures from Tesla, and on our Winter tournament trips, will be giving them to all the hotels we stay at, as well as any restaurants where we do team dinners.

 

[dsvick]

Maybe I'm not getting what you are saying but to me it seems you are saying something like "even the top of the line model 3 will be [significantly] worse than even base model S" which just seems wrong to me. I don't see one being able to convert average Joes and Jills to EVs that way.

"Hey we got this cool car but if you want range you have to pay double, and here's a cheaper more range version but it's worse than any other car at the same price point"

But like I said, maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

I didn't say "worse", I just said different. Without knowing all the options yet, a possible fully loaded M3 could have:
90KwH battery
performance mode (ludicrous speed)
all leather interior
dual motor
premium sound system
SC access
sub zero package
pano roof
21" wheels
plus others

While a base MS would have none of that (except SC access) but would still be larger, probably have a more luxurious look and feel to it and cost about the same. So which is better? It's all up to the individual, some will think one others will think the other one.

I guess, going back to the post I originally commented on, my whole point is that I don't see Tesla limiting the range on the M3 for the purpose of making the MS or MX seem like a better car. For so many people the range is the most important factor so they'll eliminate that to the extent that they can and let other features differentiate the models.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Right, because of that they won't deliberately limit the range of the M3. There will still be plenty of other things that make the 3 and the S different enough that sales of one won't impact the sales of the other too much.

Range is not an issue anymore. Listen to 34:00 - 35:00 - And I agree 10000%

Elon Musk 2016 - Bing video

 

[Garlan Garner]

I didn't say "worse", I just said different. Without knowing all the options yet, a possible fully loaded M3 could have:
90KwH battery
performance mode (ludicrous speed)
all leather interior
dual motor
premium sound system
SC access
sub zero package
pano roof
21" wheels
plus others

While a base MS would have none of that (except SC access) but would still be larger, probably have a more luxurious look and feel to it and cost about the same. So which is better? It's all up to the individual, some will think one others will think the other one.

I guess, going back to the post I originally commented on, my whole point is that I don't see Tesla limiting the range on the M3 for the purpose of making the MS or MX seem like a better car. For so many people the range is the most important factor so they'll eliminate that to the extent that they can and let other features differentiate the models.

I agree 100%. You don't limit the advancement of new technology for some kind of sentimental / emotional self served obligation.

There is no business edict that says that the MS "Has" to be better than the M≡.