Let's dispell some wrong assumptions about Model 3

[arnis]

We all have a hunch/information that Model 3 will be a BMW 3-series sedan sized vehicle for the same customer class.
I know a lot about 3-series and I can bring some estimations from there (what that price range customers expect).
Due to production optimization Model 3 will not offer nearly as much different options as BMW offers.
Model 3 will be RWD as standard, AWD offered as an option that will greatly increase performance.
Most likely one small motor design for the front axle and two designs for the rear, smaller same as front (different reduction gear)
It will have spring suspension, air suspension most likely will not be an option. Adjustable dampers might be an option.
As a Tesla, it will definitely have hardware for autopilot as standard. This is much more than 3-series offers as standard,
as it most likely will have a radar (expensive part) and all-around parking sensors (medium price option for BMW).
I don't think that hardware for autonomous capabilities will be on every Model 3. But retrofit might be possible later on (wiring harness ready).
Will have navigation and Heads-Up display as standard, expensive options for BMW-s. Also rear camera as standard.
It will not have powered lift-gate in the back. And no self-actuated doors nor soft close functionality.
Model 3 will not be offered with leather interior as standard. Steering wheel might be if they can't find a good synthetic alternative.
Model 3 will have climate control, most likely dual zone with no option to to extend that. Dual zone as only for temperature selection.
Model 3 will not come standard with electric seats nor electrically adjustable steering column. That will most likely be a
"premium interior" option. But seat ventilation will most likely not be offered, maybe only perforation for leather option.
Model 3 should come with standard heated front seats. Winter package should extend that to rear+steering+wipers+nozzles.
Model 3 most likely will offer better sound system as an option (similar to Model S/X, but not as powerful).
Model 3 will not have self-dimming mirrors as standard. Might be premium interior feature, not standalone.
Most likely will not have a sunroof that can be opened. This adds too much complexity and weight with minimal gains.
Model 3 will not offer bioweapon defense mode. Just an excellent micro-filter and automatic recirculation mode will be enough.
Model 3 will be offered with a towing hook rated to tow medium sized trailers (class 2 in US). Not sure will that be an option for RWD base model.


There are some other things I can not predict: standard charger, will it be 6kW or 10kW capable in US? In Europe,
will it be one phase 32A (6kW) or three phase 16A (11kW Model S/X standard). Due to different situations in different countries, both versions might be offered. Or as a cost cutting measure maybe they use S/X standard charger. Depends how much cheaper 6kW charger is.

Does Tesla consider electrically heated windshield in winter package? Do they consider heat pump functionality in that same package?
Do they consider real (thermally insulating) shade for glass roof (one of the worst design flaws for hot and cold climates, exaggerates climate consumption).
Will it come with the same plug in EU as Model S/X or they extend it to also support CCS plug. Will the passenger side tail light contain CCS plug in US?

How many main models will they have in 2017? Small battery RWD; Small battery AWD; Big battery AWD; Big battery PAWD is my guess. This will mean 4 distinguishable performance levels with only 2 pack designs and 2 motor designs.
I expect 250km/h / 155mph will only be supported with bigger battery versions. Even though Small AWD and Big AWD should have four identical motors big pack should max those both out while small pack will limit combined power in ideal traction scenarios and will not be capable to support 250km/h. PAWD model acceleration will be limited by pack. Small RWD model will definitely be limited by the motor, not pack.

Small RWD will be near 330i or 330d performance.
Small AWD will be quicker than 330i xDrive
Big AWD will be near 340i xDrive or 335d xDrive performance
Big PAWD will be quicker than M3 (4.1s 0-100km/h).
I expect Model 3 performance model (in 2017) to be around 3-sec 0-100 vehicle.
I expect (and hope) Model 3 body will be made from steel, attachable parts can be aluminum, at least some.
I assume around 55kWh for small battery and 25-35% more for the big battery, so 70-75kWh in 2017. 75kWh pack will not give out as much juice as 85/90/100 S/X, rather like 75kWh pack on S/X (300kW/400hp) but with less curb weight that translates into faster acceleration than Model S75D.
Will Tesla Model 3 fit 17" alloy wheels for RWD and non-P AWD models? Because if they don't that will be a problem.
I'm sure that due to heavy battery they will not be able to offer 16".

Ok, enough for one post.
One more thing: I wouldn't be surprised if in future we will call those cars 355, 355D, 370D, 3P70D. Almost like R2D2

Forgot to add that Model 3 will definitely have more head space compared to Model S in the rear. This is another big design flaw with Model S that will NOT be tolerated in a "small people carrier" version of Tesla. This was engineering challenge, like Musk said. There will be no rear roof crossbeam, this means rear passenger heads can get closer to roof. If I recall correctly Musk mentioned about Model 3 dashboard - it will be smaller, therefore front row will sit closer to so-called "engine bay". This will allow more leg space compared to BMW 3-series. Of course Model 3 will have smaller crumple zone. This will also mean it might not get perfect scores in every category. I expect Model 3 will have one very strong crossbeam right behind front passenger heads. What I really hope Model3 will have is rear passenger seatbelt reminder. I'm very disappointed Leaf doesn't have that.

 

[JeffK]

This will also mean it might not get perfect scores in every category.

They've said they want it to (at least for US testing) and therefore I'm sure they'll try to engineer it to succeed.

 

[dsvick]

The ROI on refining the high volume model 3 should be much better than on lower production cars. Plus, Tesla is a much bigger company now than when designing the MS.

Agreed.

As a percentage of revenue, capitalization, or whatever Tesla many be spending less on the M3, but in total dollars they are likely spending much more. Consider that they built the gigafactory for the model 3.

I'm not sure you can consider the GF as a Model 3 expense since it producing for more than just the Model 3. That would be like figuring the cost of the Freemont facility into the price of the Roadster and Model S.

 

[jbcarioca]

This is an odd thread. Unless the motivation is to create an alternate reality to help the suffering shorts, the premise makes little sense.
Several points, some of which have already been made:
1. Other things remaining equal the highest vehicle quality is closely correlated with high production volumes;
2. Other things remaining equal, the highest vehicle quality correlates closely with simplicity of manufacturing;
3. Other things remaining equal, higher deployment of robotics produces higher production quality and reduced marginal cost;
4. Several Model 3 design features are explicitly designed to permit robotic interior completions, generally the most difficult area for robotics, which will reduced assembly costs, improve quality and allow more interior options at lower production cost.
5. Quality and price are not necessarily related. That is a sad fiction. Check any brand data, frequency of repair and defects rise as the model positioning rises.
6. The learning curves others have discussed are real, Model 3 will be a marvel to behold.

Then, positioning within Mode 3:
1. We've a few threads on this already;
2. The range will certainly start at around the promised $35,000 and will extend to at, or around, $100,000.
3. The precise content of that range is one of our favorite speculations, mine too, but I'll not be repetitious.
4. Not Model 3, but, S and X will have some interesting new features soon, and not too long will probably have major redesigns to improve manufacturing, reduce costs, reduce weight and improve efficiency.
5. As manufacturing efficiency improves, Model Y appears and other new models arrive, Tesla will have industry-leading efficiency and operating margins, including Model 3 itself.

Lastly, we'll all continue to complain, sometimes bitterly, about some feature or another that comes with Hyundai, Chevrolet or somebody else. Coathooks and storage pockets will rank alone with deficient cupholders as major design flaws for our vehicles. We must have quirks!!

 

[Model 3]

That would be like figuring the cost of the Freemont facility into the price of the Roadster and Model S.

The Roadster was not build at Fremont.

 

[dsvick]

The Roadster was not build at Fremont.

Ahh, I didn't know that, thanks.

 

[Troy]

Supercharging speed is going to be different. Model 3 will supercharge faster because of higher efficiency. Imagine a scenario like this:

• A Model S 75D and a Model 3 75D arrive at the same supercharger at the same time.
• Let's assume both batteries have the same cell chemistry.
• The supercharger provides the same power to both cars.
• Both cars need to leave the supercharger with 245 miles rated range because they want to skip the next supercharger.

In this scenario, why would the Model 3 75D supercharge faster than the Model S 75D? The reason is because they will have different rated range numbers. The Model 3 75D is expected to have 305 miles rated range. In this car, 245 miles rated range equals to 245/305= 80.3%. Both cars will reach 80.3% charge at the same time but the Model S 75D has 259 miles rated range. That means at 80.3%, it would be at 208 miles. To reach 245 miles rated range, it needs to continue charging until 245/259= 94.6%.

 

[JeffK]

Supercharging speed is going to be different. Model 3 will supercharge faster because of higher efficiency. Imagine a scenario like this:

• A Model S 75D and a Model 3 75D arrive at the same supercharger at the same time.
• Let's assume both batteries have the same cell chemistry.
• The supercharger provides the same power to both cars.
• Both cars need to leave the supercharger with 245 miles rated range because they want to skip the next supercharger.

In this scenario, why would the Model 3 75D supercharge faster than the Model S 75D? The reason is because they will have different rated range numbers. The Model 3 75D is expected to have 305 miles rated range. In this car, 245 miles rated range equals to 245/305= 80.3%. Both cars will reach 80.3% charge at the same time but the Model S 75D has 259 miles rated range. That means at 80.3%, it would be at 208 miles. To reach 245 miles rated range, it needs to continue charging until 245/259= 94.6%.

That's only if you measure in miles/minute instead of measuring actual energy. You could say the same thing about filling a gas tank with different models of cars.

 

[Lloyd]

Price starts at $39,500 here in the U.S.

 

[scaesare]

That's only if you measure in miles/minute instead of measuring actual energy. You could say the same thing about filling a gas tank with different models of cars.

Agreed.

I'd actually argue if you want to look at it his way, it makes more sense to say "The model 3 will use energy at a lesser rate for a given mile."

 

[Troy]

@JeffK, I'm not following your argument. It's not an advantage to require more energy to achieve the same mileage. Here is the same example again with two cars people are more familiar with.

Model X P100D = 289 miles rated range
Model S 100D = 335 miles rated range

They want to skip the next supercharger. Therefore they need to leave this one with 280 miles rated range.

For the XP100D, 280 rated miles means = 280/289= 96.9%
For the S100D, 280 rated miles means = 280/335= 83.6%

In this scenario, the S100D would leave the supercharger much sooner, maybe 15-20 minutes sooner.

 

[JeffK]

@JeffK, I'm not following your argument. It's not an advantage to require more energy to achieve the same mileage. Here is the same example again with two cars people are more familiar with.

Model X P100D = 289 miles rated range
Model S 100D = 335 miles rated range

They want to skip the next supercharger. Therefore they need to leave this one with 280 miles rated range.

For the XP100D, 280 rated miles means = 280/289= 96.9%
For the S100D, 280 rated miles means = 280/335= 83.6%

In this scenario, the S100D would leave the supercharger much sooner, maybe 15-20 minutes sooner.

Say you have two vehicles a 70 kWh Model 3 and a 70 kWh Model S with the same battery chemistry, the same everything except amount of energy needed per mile.

How long would it take to fully charge from 0 to full capacity? ... The same amount of time.

If instead you choose to measure in miles/min then yes, the more efficient car would be "faster". Yet, we don't go around saying my Prius fills its gas tank any faster because it gets more mpg than car X. A 12 gallon gas tank is a 12 gallon gas tank.

I hope that makes sense. If you only wanted say 50 miles worth of charge then yes, the Model 3 would be quicker, but if you want 10 kWh (which in some places you are charged by the kWh) then it's the same amount of time for both cars.

I'd say most people do not partially fill a gas tank or a battery. If they set the battery to charge to 80% then it will charge to 80%.

For everyday usage people with houses wouldn't need to use the supercharger, but if travelling long distance then you'd typically charge it all the way to your set point whether 80% or 100% whatever.

Range calculations are not perfect, to charge only 100 miles because you wish to travel 100 miles might not be the smartest thing... Use kWh to measure energy (heck you could even use joules)

 

[JeffK]

Now, if Elon's 350 kW is a child's toy tweet was referring to future superchargers and if the Model 3 is built with this in mind then we might see faster charging available for all future platforms (S3X) (but not current models already on the road).

 

[Model 3]

Range calculations are not perfect, to charge only 100 miles because you wish to travel 100 miles might not be the smartest thing... Use kWh to measure energy (heck you could even use joules)

Actually, as seen on a lot of driving videos - especially Bjørn's - the fastest way to drive is to charge up what you think you need + some buffer. Lets say in your example from the quote that you need to drive 100 miles, then you charge so you have maybe 120 miles range (or more if wind/whether/topology etc. tells you that you need more...). So I think most that do a bit of long distance traveling will do something like that. Especially now that you have a limited amount of free charging.

 

[JeffK]

Actually, as seen on a lot of driving videos - especially Bjørn's - the fastest way to drive is to charge up what you think you need + some buffer. Lets say in your example from the quote that you need to drive 100 miles, then you charge so you have maybe 120 miles range (or more if wind/whether/topology etc. tells you that you need more...). So I think most that do a bit of long distance traveling will do something like that. Especially now that you have a limited amount of free charging.

At least with the new supercharger status thing maybe it's easier to make sure how much you think you need is enough. It would be bad to get to the next supercharger and find out there's a problem or it's out of service.

 

[Model 3]

It would be bad to get to the next supercharger and find out there's a problem or it's out of service.

True...

 

[SageBrush]

There are multiple cost reductions the Model 3 will enjoy compared to a Model S. Let's start from the big four compared to a 60 kWh Model 'S' that is currently being sold for USD 60k:

1. 10x the volume to amortize the fixed costs
2. 10 kWh less battery
3. 10% less profit
4. A smaller motor

I have no idea about (1) and (4) but 20% profit on a Model S is $12k and 10% on a base Model 3 is $3500, so $8500 here
Retail pricing of battery is about $300 a kWh, so $3000 here

We are now down to (60 - 11.5) = $48.5k

Can people chime in for estimates of (1) and (4) ?

 

[stopcrazypp]

There are multiple cost reductions the Model 3 will enjoy compared to a Model S. Let's start from the big four compared to a 60 kWh Model 'S' that is currently being sold for USD 60k:

1. 10x the volume to amortize the fixed costs
2. 10 kWh less battery
3. 10% less profit
4. A smaller motor

I have no idea about (1) and (4) but 20% profit on a Model S is $12k and 10% on a base Model 3 is $3500, so $8500 here
Retail pricing of battery is about $300 a kWh, so $3000 here

We are now down to (60 - 11.5) = $48.5k

Can people chime in for estimates of (1) and (4) ?

Wouldn't more use of steel and a smaller vehicle also rank high in this list? Just as an example about vehicle size, a 528i is $50,200, 328i is $38,350. Then there are also the optimizations Elon talked about to make this easier to mass produce.

 

[farzyness]

This is an odd thread. Unless the motivation is to create an alternate reality to help the suffering shorts, the premise makes little sense.

I apologize - my OP is not as eloquent or as clear as I intended it to be.

My goal from this post was to highlight the fact that I've seen quite a bit of speculation that the perceived quality and feature-set of the Model 3 would rival the Model S. All I'm saying is that there's a significantly high chance that the people holding that assumption will be severely disappointed once the car is released, unless they are willing to fork over a pretty dollar in order to spec up the car (i.e. a moderately optioned up Model 3 will not be in the same area code car-wise to a similarly optioned up Model S).

But again - all I'm doing is speculating on the speculation, which I'm guessing is what all of us have going for us until the Model 3 release, no?

 

[abelohlavek]

There are multiple cost reductions the Model 3 will enjoy compared to a Model S. Let's start from the big four compared to a 60 kWh Model 'S' that is currently being sold for USD 60k:

1. 10x the volume to amortize the fixed costs
2. 10 kWh less battery
3. 10% less profit
4. A smaller motor

I have no idea about (1) and (4) but 20% profit on a Model S is $12k and 10% on a base Model 3 is $3500, so $8500 here
Retail pricing of battery is about $300 a kWh, so $3000 here

We are now down to (60 - 11.5) = $48.5k

Can people chime in for estimates of (1) and (4) ?

Retail pricing may very well be around $300/kWh, but Tesla has already confirmed that they are under $190/kWh for their packs. With the GF ramping up, expect that to be even less.