Model 3 2023 updates? Or what would you guys like to see?

[Perscitus]

At this point (given a 2016 reveal so a 2014-2015 era design) we need a 2nd gen car, perhaps dubbed as Model 4/Z twins.

Continual improvements and build refreshes haven't done much for the 3/Y or the S/X - which are getting even longer in the tooth (tri-motor plaids or not).

We don't need Camcord or Hyundai/Kia level body/chassis/interior changes, but with Teslas now as common and perhaps even more of an appliance, the fleet is starting to show its age, feels dated.

 

[BogStandard]

At this point (given a 2016 reveal so a 2014-2015 era design) we need a 2nd gen car, perhaps dubbed as Model 4/Z twins.

Continual improvements and build refreshes haven't done much for the 3/Y or the S/X - which are getting even longer in the tooth (tri-motor plaids or not).

We don't need Camcord or Hyundai/Kia level body/chassis/interior changes, but with Teslas now as common and perhaps even more of an appliance, the fleet is starting to show its age, feels dated.

I still think the new S looks good, it's kind of a timeless design. I like my 3, but yeah looks wise it's not great.

 

[jackmott]

I want a gigacast chassis with structural pack that actually pulls some mass out of the car. Then I want the P edition to get serious. Dual rear motor package from a plaid, no front motor. Composite roof inside of glass, carbon fiber body panels to replace all the steel ones, aluminum trunk lid. Suspension with adjustable camber from the factory.

 

[NCDAG's M3P]

I really want better bolstered seats for the P models. I feel my seat doesn’t hold me well while I’m cornering. Oh and ventilation in the seats

 

[M3 2018]

Step #1 for safety: Manual control of the Wiper speeds. Been waiting 4.5 years for this fix. Can someone tweet Elon.

 

[The Other Dan]

I just want to see a proper “Drag Mode” that allows us to precondition the Performance models for maximum acceleration. I have seen a 10%+ increase in Horsepower at higher speeds with a properly preconditioned car vs. one that is not preconditioned.

I don’t even need a boost pack for the Performance cars. There is a ton of extra horsepower that most people don’t take advantage of already. I just want an easy way to access it.

That and I want the “Stealth/Sleeper” model to come back. I hate the 20” UberHeavy wheels and Pirelli tires. Give use 235/45/18 PS4S tires on the Aero wheels. I don’t even need the bigger brakes either.

Para1, agreed. A drag mode would be simple and nice.

Para2, I've seen the other threads you've brought this up in and think it's a little off base. Most people don't care about this " extra power that they don't take advantage of", because of what you have to do to obtain it. It's only good for drag racing. It's completely worthless for everyday stoplight to stoplight acceleration. Which is what most people want. Bring on the PAB! (Performance Acceleration Boost)

Para3, 110% in agreement. The full P is a waste of money for most people. It's $8k/$6k of stuff most don't want. Most swap out the wheels & tires ($2500+, upgrade the suspension ($1500). The brakes for most, don't even matter. For those that do, the aftermarket is there with much better stuff for cheaper. $$
Give me a Stealth for $2k over a LR like it was, and with $6k I can build a better car than a P.

 

[BogStandard]

I want a gigacast chassis with structural pack that actually pulls some mass out of the car. Then I want the P edition to get serious. Dual rear motor package from a plaid, no front motor. Composite roof inside of glass, carbon fiber body panels to replace all the steel ones, aluminum trunk lid. Suspension with adjustable camber from the factory.

That's a cool idea. Like a high performance saloon. Might not be as fast 0-60 as regular P3 without AWD, but 0-60 wouldn't be sole point of it. Just for hooning around in, and being a fun drivers car. I think there'd be a market for that.
You know, Ford had a great opportunity to make the mach-e closer to what your're describing, but no, they wanted to try and compete with the Y for some reason and make it a big pig. Well, I know the reason, but it's a lame one.

 

[ElectricNerd]

I’d like to see an option similar to a hatchback where the area in the trunk can be accessed from the backseat. Not like the Y but something similar to how a hatchback is.

 

[jjrandorin]

Well, I know the reason, but it's a lame one.

I believe we feel the same way, that the reason is:



(lol)

So that I am on thread topic...

1. a real Heads up display (projected onto the windshield, not a device mounted in vents or something). I really miss that from my BMWs

2. Existing wheel size options for the regular model 3s available for the performance, from the factory

3. Actual rain sensors, like just about every other vehicle has used successfully for years, rather than this !@#$!@ "neural net senses the raindrop" @$%@. Its gotten better, and worse over the 4 years I have had my model 3, but its ridiculous that its even a discussion, when the reason seems to be "we didnt want to buy the sensor".

4. 400+ mile rated range

5. A tri motor / plaid option (probably wont ever happen but one can wish)

Note, I am not wishing for "mega castings" or 4680 or something for batteries, unless and until those are proven to be something more than "makes tesla more money by lowering production costs". I havent seen that yet, even though all sorts of people have been "assuming" that will be good for the model 3 and Y from a performance perspective. It hasnt been that way yet, and I have serious doubts any switch to "mega casting" or "4680" is anything more in the short to medium term than tesla cutting costs.

 

[johnnycnote]

After a couple of near misses today, the only thing I want from my list are rear traffic alert sensors

 

[P-Lo801]

Make sense. Thanks for the info. Hopefully there will be some exterior changes. Have been debating when to get a new m3 but don't want to buy before any big refresh.

There will definitely be exterior changes, as that would make it a refresh.

 

[BogStandard]

3. Actual rain sensors, like just about every other vehicle has used successfully for years, rather than this !@#$!@ "neural net senses the raindrop" @$%@. Its gotten better, and worse over the 4 years I have had my model 3, but its ridiculous that its even a discussion, when the reason seems to be "we didnt want to buy the sensor".


Note, I am not wishing for "mega castings" or 4680 or something for batteries, unless and until those are proven to be something more than "makes tesla more money by lowering production costs". I havent seen that yet, even though all sorts of people have been "assuming" that will be good for the model 3 and Y from a performance perspective. It hasnt been that way yet, and I have serious doubts any switch to "mega casting" or "4680" is anything more in the short to medium term than tesla cutting costs.

Yes, I forgot about that. The rain and auto high beam sensing via cameras is terrible. Meanwhile, my friends 2021 F150 wipers and auto high beams work really well. The worst part is, driving at higher speeds, the top half of my windshield gets far less rain than the bottom half, making matters worse. Always have to turn on the wipers manually. Which I'd be fine with if I could just rotate the stalk or something like every other vehicle.

I don't like the idea of the structural battery either mainly for the reason that if it does go faulty or part of it does, it looks nearly impossible to get at based on Munro's teardown. Reparability usually means sustainability. Someone mentioned it's easier from the bottom, but still difficult to get at anything. Maybe if the battery had a transferrable warranty for 500K miles I'd be ok with it. It'd be on their dime to tear all that apart for basically the useful life of most vehicles.

 

[johnnycnote]

Yes, I forgot about that. The rain and auto high beam sensing via cameras is terrible. Meanwhile, my friends 2021 F150 wipers and auto high beams work really well. The worst part is, driving at higher speeds, the top half of my windshield gets far less rain than the bottom half, making matters worse. Always have to turn on the wipers manually. Which I'd be fine with if I could just rotate the stalk or something like every other vehicle.

I don't like the idea of the structural battery either mainly for the reason that if it does go faulty or part of it does, it looks nearly impossible to get at based on Munro's teardown. Reparability usually means sustainability. Someone mentioned it's easier from the bottom, but still difficult to get at anything. Maybe if the battery had a transferrable warranty for 500K miles I'd be ok with it. It'd be on their dime to tear all that apart for basically the useful life of most vehicles.

Most likely the structural battery packs will be removed and replaced with another pack in the event of a failure. With damaged pack batt elements then recycled into another new pack. With a 120k mi/8 yr batt pack warranty on the M3LR, I'm ok with that

 

[jackmott]

That's a cool idea. Like a high performance saloon. Might not be as fast 0-60 as regular P3 without AWD, but 0-60 wouldn't be sole point of it. Just for hooning around in, and being a fun drivers car. I think there'd be a market for that.
You know, Ford had a great opportunity to make the mach-e closer to what your're describing, but no, they wanted to try and compete with the Y for some reason and make it a big pig. Well, I know the reason, but it's a lame one.

Yep and think about some of the subtleties of this:

• You have like 700hp potentially from the 2 motors
• Since you can't launch hard anyway, you can adjust the gearing so power doesn't decline at high speed as much
• You save the mass of two open diffs, and two half shafts that you can delete, and simpler front strut design
• Bigger frunk maybe?
• More efficient with the diffs deleted?

 

[MP3Mike]

I don't like the idea of the structural battery either mainly for the reason that if it does go faulty or part of it does, it looks nearly impossible to get at based on Munro's teardown.

The structural pack isn't really any harder to get to than the non-structural pack. Interesting that you mention the Munro video, as I thought they commented on how easy it was to remove.

 

[johnnycnote]

The structural pack isn't really any harder to get to than the non-structural pack. Interesting that you mention the Munro video, as I thought they commented on how easy it was to remove.

Correct. Removing the pack itself is relatively easy. Getting to the individual batteries is nearly impossible

 

[MP3Mike]

Correct. Removing the pack itself is relatively easy. Getting to the individual batteries is nearly impossible

But there is no reason to get to the individual batteries. They aren't serviceable. Not in the structural pack, or the non-structural pack. If a cell fails you need a new pack, and the old pack gets recycled.

 

[Sam1]

I want a gigacast chassis with structural pack that actually pulls some mass out of the car. Then I want the P edition to get serious. Dual rear motor package from a plaid, no front motor. Composite roof inside of glass, carbon fiber body panels to replace all the steel ones, aluminum trunk lid. Suspension with adjustable camber from the factory.

Car isn't wide enough to hold two model 3 motors like the plaid on the rear.

 

[Sam1]

5. A tri motor / plaid option (probably wont ever happen but one can wish)

Elon said a few weeks ago absolutely not an option for a plaid M3, the cost of manufacturing changes defeated the purpose of making the model 3 (a somewhat affordable car).

 

[RG129]

They need to get rid of the rear seat folding latches and make something more secure. The quarter window break-ins should have prompted that re-design after the first year. Unsecure latches exist in hatchbacks and SUVs since the cargo area is exposed due to the car design, but a sedan should have a secure trunk/cargo area. Even in the 90's, sedans had a latch in the trunk to release or to stick your key in the rear deck to drop the seats (but I guess that wouldn't work since we don't have a key...)