-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
How will Tesla make their next-gen sedan even cheaper?
- Thread starter ZeApelido
- Start date
bhtooefr
Active Member
So I'll go back to this thread to reply to a comment from the investor thread:
One thing that helps for a city car is that they're doing more city driving, and therefore the aero is less important.
That said, there are ways to get the aero where it needs to be in a subcompact's length - the Audi A2 1.2 TDI was just over 3.8 meters long, and hit a 0.25 Cd. It was very much considered a weirdmobile, admittedly, but that's even with a front-engine ICE design - the flexibility that an EV gives you might make it easier to make something more normal-looking. (Or, given the Cybertruck, leaning into the weirdmobileness may work too.) It does have large frontal area from its additional height over conventional subcompacts, but additional height is something that people are buying at the expense of efficiency.
And the #2 best selling car in Europe right now is the Renault Clio, which is just over 4.0 meters long, so there's another 20 cm to play with and get something even better streamlined. (#1 is the Golf, which is just under 4.3 meters long. However, that's a whole size class larger, and aero gets a lot easier (that class goes out to 4.4 meters long, and that gets you into Prius aero). It's a class smaller than the Model 3, though.)
One thing that helps for a city car is that they're doing more city driving, and therefore the aero is less important.
That said, there are ways to get the aero where it needs to be in a subcompact's length - the Audi A2 1.2 TDI was just over 3.8 meters long, and hit a 0.25 Cd. It was very much considered a weirdmobile, admittedly, but that's even with a front-engine ICE design - the flexibility that an EV gives you might make it easier to make something more normal-looking. (Or, given the Cybertruck, leaning into the weirdmobileness may work too.) It does have large frontal area from its additional height over conventional subcompacts, but additional height is something that people are buying at the expense of efficiency.
And the #2 best selling car in Europe right now is the Renault Clio, which is just over 4.0 meters long, so there's another 20 cm to play with and get something even better streamlined. (#1 is the Golf, which is just under 4.3 meters long. However, that's a whole size class larger, and aero gets a lot easier (that class goes out to 4.4 meters long, and that gets you into Prius aero). It's a class smaller than the Model 3, though.)
In theory. In practice, people in Europe drive small cars for just as long distance as they drive longer ones. Regardless, the testing numbers ruins your perception of being a range (relative to price) and efficiency leader. How would it look if Tesla put out a smaller car than the Model 3, for the same price, with the same battery size, and it only went 85% as far?
Don't get me wrong - I think Tesla will do so eventually. They need to keep expanding, and that's an untapped niche for them, and one that gets increasingly easier to fill as batteries improve. But for now, they seem more than content to let others fill the niche and look bad, while they utilize the technically-superior solution (the one that gives more range, faster charging (mph/kph), longer life (fewer cycles per mi/km), less stress on their charging infrastructure, etc). And this strategy has resoundingly worked for them.
Most automakers BS about their drag coefficients, because you can get away with it with no penalties. Tesla is unusual for not doing so. Independent testing consistently shows this. Examples:
Aerodynamic Tesla Model S Electric Car Wins The Wind-Tunnel Wars
Model S: Claimed 0,24, actual 0,24
Volt: Claimed 0,28, actual 0,28
Leaf: Claimed 0,28, actual 0,32
Insight: Claimed 0,25, actual 0,30
CLA 250: Claimed 0,23, actual 0,30
I've seen lots of testing studies like this, and they all come back with the same answer: most automakers BS about their drag coefficients (some badly). Tesla doesn't.
But it's obvious to anyone who's ever even messed with CFD when an automaker is blatantly lying about their drag coefficient. Just look at the rear taper. A significant amount of gentle** rear taper is utterly key to getting a good drag coefficient.
Or to put it another way: ever seen a mass-market truncated airplane fuselage, or truncated airfoil taper?
** - I can't stress the word "gentle" enough. A steep taper is worse than an outright truncation.
Replace the seats with bean bags have 2170 cells with a 25kw battery, only one sliding door, no trunk only a frunk. So should carry about 3 people and be about the same size as an i3.
Lasairfion
Member
A new answer to the original question might be: "design and build it in China"
bhtooefr
Active Member
No big disagreements from me about the semantics: a "liftback" is an angled hatch in essence, a "hatchback" is a near vertical hatch. Zero chance that Tesla would do anything non-aerodynamic, so zero chance for a classic hatchback.
Anyway, the important distinction is that it's an apparently small, short city car with no boot hanging out the back of the car.
But that's the drawing, and that's not what's necessarily going to production. In fact, it's almost certainly not what's going to production.
As I suggested in this thread, something Audi A2-inspired in form factor might work. Or, for something more concepty... how about the Mercedes-Benz Bionic, claimed at 0.19 Cd?
(Yes, I know, manufacturer Cd numbers are optimistic. But I don't see anything fundamentally extremely wrong with the design, it's almost certainly nowhere near the ~0.30 of typical hatchbacks.)
The hatch opening on that car does extend into the roof, admittedly.
Also, I think you'd want to make it a bit lower to reduce frontal area, and maybe take out some length (so basically make it 6% smaller in every dimension - that gets it down to 4 m long, 1.5 m tall, and a touch over 1.7 m wide).
Also, you could either shrink the nose and streamline it in better on an EV, or just use that area as a frunk and push the front seat occupants forward. (That concept was a diesel ICE.)
Most of the cost is in the batteries, is it not? A Chinese designed and built Tesla would still be quite the cost, bar significant drops in battery price (who knows?).
To be quite honest I expect the Fremont factory to eventually close its doors for good. California, much less the San Francisco Bay Area isn't the best place to be operating a factory. Whether that future will be a move to a more business-friendly state or even out of the country is up in the air, but part of the appeal of Tesla right now is being built domestically.
Brando
Active Member
freight over seas also see extra costs
- transport damage
- added time to collect money on sale
- currency exchange
- tariff taxes
- different regs. require special designs in other countries
So long term Elon is correct - factories on each continent, right?
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
M2 to be designed and engineered in Berlin:
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1281632660075319298
I thought that China were going to design this one?
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1281632660075319298
I thought that China were going to design this one?
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
3D printing could be part of the puzzle:
Tesla (TSLA) looks to 'rapidly grow' 3D printing manufacturing - Electrek
Tesla (TSLA) looks to 'rapidly grow' 3D printing manufacturing - Electrek
Brando
Active Member
@Buckminster read my solution
<a href="Sandy Munro Says Tesla Shouldn't Build A $25,000 Electric Car">Sandy Munro Says Tesla Shouldn't Build A $25,000 Electric Car</a>
<a href="Sandy Munro Says Tesla Shouldn't Build A $25,000 Electric Car">Sandy Munro Says Tesla Shouldn't Build A $25,000 Electric Car</a>
Last edited:
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
I think this discussion is fairly irrelevant. Elon has pretty much confirmed 2 smaller cars to come.
If FSD becomes real - Tesla won't be able to build enough M3s. M2 might have an edge if it can be scaled faster.
Brando
Active Member
shipping (cost/risk damage/time) & import taxes a main concern
make them where you sell them (save time/shipping cost/damage risk/import taxes)
Tesla inventory time goal <30 days
US auto dealer 90 days and more inventory time - look up flooring plans.
Tesla often gets paid before the supplier bills are due = better cash flow and no need to borrow, no flooring plan.
I look for Tesla to offer CyberTruck inspired exoskeleton stainless steel $25,000 vehicle. I think buyers would love no paint/wax/no chips. Easy to build factories around the world.
Last edited:
I think a Tesla Model 2, for Europe, Asia, and Australia, with the same outside dimensions of the VW ID3, OR a Hyundai i30 5 door hatch (4.245m Long * 1.775m wide * 1.48 m high), with hatchback, 16" 65 aspect tyres, McPherson front struts for tighter turning circle, Model 3 rear PMSR 147 Kw motor, and same rear suspension as the Model3/Y, Steel Roof, 4680 battery pack of 50 Kw.hr, so MUCH smaller and lighter, Full cast front and rear Aluminium castings, same heat pump and valving as Mod Y, same seats, dash display as Mod Y, Same FSD Ver 3.0 hardware as Mod Y, Tow bar option with 500 kg unbraked trailer capacity!!!!
I.E. Try to fit as many standard components from a Model 3 into a car 100 mm narrower, 400 mm shorter, wheelbase 200 mm shorter and the same height!
1 year later, came out with a Model 2 3 door Sports hatch, using the same chassis, but 200 mm lower, more sloped front windscreen, and only kids in the back, with the full powered (188 Kw) Mod 3 rear motor!
I am dreaming of the Model 2 5 door hatch!!!! to replace my i30!!!
What keeps Teslas expensive is the gamble that FSD will be a valuable asset for Tesla one day. So they insist on fitting all the hardware to every vehicle, jacking the price up.
There are cars that can do better range for 25% less, cars that can do almost as good as certainly very adequate range for 50% less. And they have all the stuff you need like autopilot, and some stuff Tesla doesn't have like rear cross traffic detection.
It's that insistence on adding expensive hardware that might one day pay off that keeps their prices from getting too competitive.
Which is fine, they can be a luxury car manufacturer. They have probably come too late to the game to really make much headway in the affordable end of the market anyway. Prices are falling rapidly and if they start now would probably need to be targeting in the region of £15k for a base model by the time of release.
There are cars that can do better range for 25% less, cars that can do almost as good as certainly very adequate range for 50% less. And they have all the stuff you need like autopilot, and some stuff Tesla doesn't have like rear cross traffic detection.
It's that insistence on adding expensive hardware that might one day pay off that keeps their prices from getting too competitive.
Which is fine, they can be a luxury car manufacturer. They have probably come too late to the game to really make much headway in the affordable end of the market anyway. Prices are falling rapidly and if they start now would probably need to be targeting in the region of £15k for a base model by the time of release.
Curious which cars can do better range for 25% less? Are mfgrs making money on those cars?
