Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Model 3 curb weight?

I think the Model 3 curb weight will be...

  • 4,500-5,000 lbs (similar to Model S)

    Votes: 2 1.5%
  • 4,000-4,500 lbs

    Votes: 41 31.3%
  • 3,500-4,000 lbs (BMW 5-Series, MB E-class)

    Votes: 75 57.3%
  • 3,000-3,500 lbs (BMW 3-Series, MB C-class)

    Votes: 12 9.2%
  • Under 3,000 lbs

    Votes: 1 0.8%

  • Total voters
    131
This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
The BMW 3-Series has indeed been defeated by multiple competitors in the segment in each and every aspect of Performance. Yet, until 2016, the 3-Series handily defeated all the rest in actual Sales in the United States. And even after losing 25.5% of its sales compared to 2015, the 3-Series still came in at #2 behind the Mercedes-Benz C-Class in the U.S. (which similarly showed a 10.4% decrease in sales). There is a 'new' 3-Series for 2017, and so far it also is getting its butt whipped something sore in comparison tests head-to-head. It is no longer the benchmark for Performance in the segment, and may not be in Sales going forward (it is still 19.8% behind YTD figures from 2015 this year).

The 3-Series is lauded for a lot that it does not deserve. In particular, it has not been especially 'lightweight' for a very long time. I looked it up once, found the curb weights for their cars going back over 35 years. Lemme see if I can find that list...

OK, the lightest version of the 3-Series for U.S. Distribution I found was the 1981 BMW 320i curb weight 1,130 kg / 2,491 lbs -- that may have been a Two-Door Sedan initially. The 2012 BMW 328i Sedan was 3,410 lbs -- nearly 1,000 lbs heavier. Today's 2017 BMW 320i is shown with a 3,295 lbs curb weight, while the 340i is at 3,555 lbs, instead.

If we presume that Tesla is somehow able to introduce a Model ☰ with at/about a 60 kWh battery pack that weighs 80% as much as the original Model S 60, which was 1,961 kg (4,323 lbs)... Then one might hope for a Model ☰ in base trim to arrive at around 1,569 kg / 3,458 lbs. And, since a Model S 75D is shown at 2,090 kg (4,608 lbs) ... A Model ☰ 75D might be as little as 1,672 kg / 3,686 lbs. Considering the heft of modern cars (thanks to all the very necessary safety equipment), that would not be especially porky.

Let's face facts here... We will never again see a street legal mass produced analog to the original Honda CR-X at around 1,700 lbs. And the BMW 3-Series will never again weigh under even 2,800 lbs, let alone under 2,500 lbs, no matter how much carbon fiber you throw at the problem. In the real world, even 'small' cars are much larger than they used to be, both for comfort & convenience, as well as life & safety reasons. That increased weight has an effect on fuel economy and performance. That plays into the hands of electric vehicles, by reducing the obvious effects of battery pack weight.

Since the Tesla Model ☰ will have a larger cabin, bigger cargo volume, and longer wheelbase than BMW 3-Series, I have no problem with the notion it may weigh a bit more than the estimates above. I figure a range of 3,700 lbs to 4,100 lbs will be fine. And you know what? That happens to be the exact same range as the 3-Series from a couple of generations ago, once you include the wagon and convertible configurations.

Yet, somehow... The enhanced porkocity of German vehicles is never, ever a problem for automotive journalists. They sing their praises by rote, speaking of their predictability, and road holding at the limit, and communication through the steering wheel, and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah... [FIDDLESTIX]. I'm sick of the excuses. Really.

I strongly suspect for a lot of them, they are unwilling to simply admit they like driving affordable, approachable, accessible cars with German badges more than anything else. They can never quite put their finger on what exactly it is they prefer, it is and remains undefined. That's why for over 25 years I have been frustrated by their final 'Verdict' having nothing whatsoever to do with 'The NUMBERS' generated on the test track -- the very place where they claim the 3-Series shines best. Because the 3-Series has been getting its butt handed to it by The NUMBERS for a very long time. It has only been recently that they have begun to lose on the 'undefined' nature of driving as well. And it has nothing whatsoever to do with their move to an electric steering setup instead of pure mechanical -- because the cars that beat them have electric steering too.

When it comes to weight, the copious amounts of torque generated instantly by electric motors makes such concerns pretty much moot in the grand majority of driving situations. Stop and go 25 MPH to 45 MPH city traffic, or 65 MPH to 85 MPH highway traffic. Almost no one takes their daily driver to the track. A few more may break out a map and trace a route through the mountainous twisties, where guard rails are trees and boulders. And if anyone actually enjoys driving at all, I'm sure the experience of being behind the wheel of a Tesla Model ☰ will make them smile, grin, and laugh aloud far more often than they will scowl, frown, and curse to the heavens -- no matter the course before them.

COMPETITORS WEIGHTS
3,295 ___ BMW 320i
3,320 ___ Jaguar XE
3,360 ___ Alfa Romeo Giulia*
3,373 ___ Cadillac ATS
3,483 ___ AUDI A4
3,583 ___ Lexus IS
3,594 ___ Mercedes-Benz C300
3,748 ___ Acura TLX
3,748 ___ Infiniti Q50*
* Midsize

I am certain that Tesla has done their due diligence, to determine the best handling characteristics of all these vehicles, to balance and evaluate them against each other, and especially against the BMW 3-Series, in order to determine the best possible 'feel' behind the wheel. I expect there will be selectable modes for handling to suit the preference of the driver. Hopefully this will be enough to satisfy gearheads everywhere. If not ? Well, screw 'em. ;-)
Because lots of BMW owners are "sheep" and flock (pun intended) towards the 3 series even though it really hasn't been that spectacular for many years. I've said it before, 3-series hasn't been great since the E36/E46 days, in my opinion of course. E92 was the beginning of the fat, bloated 3 -series.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red Sage
I thought he said 20% in regards to dimension. I don't recall him referencing specifically towards the weight.
It was Q4 2015 financial call from February 2016 just before the first reveal

In the topic of margins:

Elon Reeve Musk - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
Yeah, I think the way to think of the customers is really that the Model 3, being a sedan, is about 20% lighter than – and actually quite a bit less complex to manufacture, than the Model S. Model S was really the first car we ever made ourselves. So, it was – we were designing to make it work, as opposed to designing it from ease of manufacturing, whereas the Model 3 is really designed for ease of manufacturing.
 
So, the lightest version of the Model S was 1,961 kg (4,323 lb), so if the Model ☰ ends up being 80% of that amount, it would be... 1,569 kg (3,458 lbs) or so. Assuming this carries through to the largest version of Model S at 2,250 kg (4,960 lb)... That would make the heaviest Model ☰ about 1,800 kg (3,968 lbs). That ain't none too bad. So, if they hit a range of 3,700 to 4,100 lbs, that would be close enough for government work.
 
My prediction for the Model 3 weight (smaller battery) is 3457lbs.

According to the 10/28/2015 edition of the Model S Manual S60 weigh 4407lbs, S70 - 4555lbs. So S60 was 148lbs lighter than S70.

According to the 10/20/2016 edition of the Model S Manual 60/70/75 weighs 4469lbs. Since this weight is for Model S with a software limited 75kWh battery, the corresponding weight of Model S with physical 60kWh battery would be less than 4469 - 148 = 4321lbs.

I interpret Musk's reference to Model 3 being 20% smaller than Model S as a reference to the amount of substance in each car, i.e. to the weight. 4321 x 0.8 = 3457lbs.

So, my prediction is that Model 3 will have the same weight as comparable premium compact sedans:

Model 3 3457lbs 5.6s 0 to 60mph
BMW 330i 3541lbs 5.6s 0 to 60mph
Audi A4 2.0 TFSI 3582lbs 5.7s 0 to 60mph
Mercedes C330 3417lbs 6.0s 0 to 60mph

This, btw, means that Model 3 will be lighter than Chevy Bolt, a much smaller car, which weighs 3580lbs

EDIT: Ha, just noticed that my prediction is within 1 pound of the one made by @Red Sage!
 
  • Informative
Reactions: EinSV
EDIT: Ha, just noticed that my prediction is within 1 pound of the one made by @Red Sage!
I'll go out on a limb and disagree with both of you for three reasons:

1. I'm pretty sure the 20% reference was to volume and not mass
2. I suspect that the 2170 cells will have a lower energy density than the 1680 cells in the Model S
3. The Model 3 will have more fractional use of steel instead of the lighter Alu

I'll be pleasantly surprised if the base car comes in under 4,000 lbs curb weight
 
  • Like
Reactions: zenmaster
I interpret Musk's reference to Model 3 being 20% smaller than Model S as a reference to the amount of substance in each car, i.e. to the weight. 4321 x 0.8 = 3457lbs.
- You simply can't take 20% of the whole Model S mass, as half the mass of the car is in the 60kWh battery and motor components alone. Make sense?

If you can only take 20% from half of the car's weight then you get something closer to 3892 pounds, if the battery was a 60 and wh/kg was same

- Since they're using a lot of steel in the body, the savings will be mostly from the interior. If it turns out that the frame is all aluminum, take 20% from that weight which is about 17% of the 4321, otherwise the car will be even heavier than 3892.

- Body panels are steel so no real savings there.

- Battery pack density seems to be 130 Wh/kg so if it's a 55 then 5000/130 = 38kg or 84lbs lighter.

Tesla Model S Weight Distribution
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: SageBrush
I'll go out on a limb and disagree with both of you for three reasons:

1. I'm pretty sure the 20% reference was to volume and not mass
2. I suspect that the 2170 cells will have a lower energy density than the 1680 cells in the Model S
3. The Model 3 will have more fractional use of steel instead of the lighter Alu

I'll be pleasantly surprised if the base car comes in under 4,000 lbs curb weight

1. The 20% reference was made discussing the cost, so linking it to volume is not logical, as cost is linked better to the weight rather than volume.

2. This is definitely not true. Going from 18650 based Powerpack 1 to 2170 based Powerpack 2 lead to two fold increase in energy density. Similar results could be expected for auto chemistry packs.

3. This is immaterial, as it already included/accounted for in 20% reduction.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JeffK
- You simply can't take 20% of the whole Model S mass, as half the mass of the car is in the 60kWh battery and motor components alone. Make sense?

If you can only take 20% from half of the car's weight then you get something closer to 3892 pounds, if the battery was a 60.

- Since they're using a lot of steel in the body, the savings will be mostly from the interior. If it turns out that the frame is all aluminum, take 20% from that weight which is about 17% of the 4321, otherwise the car will be even heavier than 3892.

- Body panels are steel so no real savings there.

- Battery pack density seems to be 130 Wh/kg so if it's a 55 then 5000/130 = 38kg or 84lbs lighter.

Tesla Model S Weight Distribution

Perhaps you are forgetting that 20% smaller comment was made by Elon, not me, and it clearly was in reference to the whole car...

So no, your comment does not make sense to me.
 
Hi. Only a few days to go now until the following poll closes. If you think you have the correct idea, submit your number in the following poll. At the end, we will find out how accurate each participant was. Many people who wrote here have already submitted their estimate.

Poll 6 What will be the curb weight of the base Model 3 (in lb)?

The difference between Poll 6 and the poll you have here is that in Poll 6 you can enter any number you want. After we find the correct answer, an accuracy percentage will be calculated.
 
Your circular reasoning is circular. See how that works ?

No I don't. Repeating "circular" twice is not making it so. Here is the definition:

"Circular references can appear in computer programming when one piece of code requires the result from another, but that code needs the result from the first."

(3) refers to (1), and logic is clearly explained, but (1) **does not** refer to (3). So my reasoning is not circular at all.
 
Last edited:
  • Funny
Reactions: SageBrush