Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Model 3' started by aglose, May 5, 2016.
What does everything think? With the battery upgrade that is.
Rumour has it 300 miles.
Tesla Model 3 exclusive leaked specs: 0-60 under 4 sec fast and 300+ mile range options (Update: Base 6 sec 0-60 and 215 mile range)
That would be fantastic. I was considering a Model S for the 300 miles range, but if the model 3 comes in close to that, I will get one of those instead.
I'm guessing base is 55kWh and upgraded is 80kWh. So with 215 miles base, maybe upgraded pack with 290-295 miles. Mind that the upgraded pack probably includes AWD, so there is some more efficiency with dual motors but that may be offset by being a P model. Here's a question to Tesla: will the larger battery option be tied to the performance upgrade?
Part of what allows the higher performance is a greater discharge rate from the batteries. Since the bursts you need for the added performance come from a parallel drain across the battery pack, you will necessarily need the larger battery option for higher performance. If they follow what they have done with previous models, you will not need the performance model to get the larger battery. Some of us just want the range and will be satisfied with a 0-60 launch of around 5 seconds instead of below 4.
I said 260-290. More of a wild guess on my part. I will be getting the battery upgrade. Performance model may depend on getting the $7500 credit
I think breaking that 300-mile mental barrier is imporant. So I think the top-of-the-line model will be 300 or more. That way they can claim 200+ miles for the base 300+ miles for the loaded version.
I am trying to decide if I want the performance model as well. I think it would be a cool upgrade, but not terribly useful in real life. I mean, it would always be nice to take people for a ride and pop into ludicrous mode for a laugh, but outside of that scenario or beating my friend's audi S4 in a race (not a good idea, since he's willing to get a ticket and I'd prefer not to) it would be a waste of money. Of course, I am in Colorado so we get an extra 6k on top of the federal incentive, so there is always that money to throw around. And if interest rates stay around 1.49% for a 60 month loan, its practically free money.
It never has been before, and I doubt they would start now. There are people that want maximum performance and people that want maximum range. Tesla had always catered to both.
What do you think the chances are that the 3 battery comes in 3 flavors, say 55, 75, 95. With the S and X starting at ~$80k and quickly going up from there, the a $13k upgrade makes is less of a financial burden to many of those buyers than potential 3 buyers. It might make sense to offer smaller jumps of $5k-7k.
I would think that they would offer just two battery capacities to keep manufacturing simple.
I voted 260-290 as I can't imagine Tesla would want to announce an equivalent or higher range for their mass-market Model 3 than for their flagship Model S... at least not initially.
Here are the estimated range estimates based on estimated base battery sizes, ignoring extra weight differences between batteries. I've color coded them to the poll options. There are no scenarios containing the first poll option.
Personally I'm thinking they'll go with 55 and 70 kWh battery sizes.
I too am struggling with this! I have read a couple of other views that it really isn't practical, and that there are so few times where it can be practically used, but then again... being able to dust anything else on the road, at any time, sure is enticing!
When I first starting catching up on Tesla in advance of the M3 reveal, I thought the Performance upgrade was a few thousand, which I would be OK with, and then I found out it was 30k for the Model S, and reality set in, as I can't afford that. If its 14k or so, maybe I can find a way to stomach it, but otherwise, Im not so sure!
but.. 90D already gets 300 miles and Model 3 will be out in about a yr from now, and there is a possibiliyt that by then, there will be larger pack batteries. So its not completely out of realm of possibility
Performance is nice for a top model S, but for a large selling less expensive car like the 3 it would be more logical to go for range.
At least I would love range freedom and would be happy with normal-fast performance.
As fast as possible supercharging would be very very nice though. Because when the model 3 hits the road, there will be plenty of them, needing an as fast as fast possible turnover time at supercharge stations.
Let's consider for a moment the roadster 3.0 upgrade where with a 70 kWh battery the roadster could travel nearly 400mi per charge with a Cd of 0.31...
I assume this is with 'old' 18700(? not sure if its the size for the existing cell) battery cells?
18650's are in the Roadster 3.0 battery and the Model S/X batteries yeah
Smaller 220miles and bigger 330miles. Any smaller increment is just basically worthless and makes no sense. Couple ten miles hardly ever makes the difference how you can use the car. 2 totally different range choises is what is needed. Period.
55KWh and 85KWh. Bigger battery $10 000 option.