Not all of them! I for one want the P85D version of the Model 3. I think most will go the middle of the road which will probably be a D version. Few will go higher and even fewer will go more base model. Just my opinion of course.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Not all of them! I for one want the P85D version of the Model 3. I think most will go the middle of the road which will probably be a D version. Few will go higher and even fewer will go more base model. Just my opinion of course.
igotzzoom
Active Member
No disrespect, but the purported advantages of front-wheel-drive is ICE legacy thinking. If packaging is similar to the Model S, there would be little advantage to going front-drive in the Model 3. In fact, there would be a lot of drawbacks, including losing the "frunk" which seems to be one of the favorite features among Model S owners. Yes, you might be able to retain a nominal frunk even with a front motor, but I think the drawbacks outweigh the positives. The only reason FWD is so popular for ICE-powered cars is it allows the entire powertrain module (engine, transmission, etc) to be installed in a single module. The integrated rear motor/transmission module in the Model S has all the same advantages, minus the steering hardware, which I think would be inconsequential from a cost standpoint. I believe the Model 3 will be standard single-motor rear drive, and optional dual motor AWD.
Agree with this except.... By the time Model 3 comes out the Model S85 will probably be no more. All Teslas will be AWD. But if not the AWD will be standard and the RWD will be optional removal like the Model S is now. I think those cards have already been laid on the table.
I thought the efficiency gain was having the two motors geared differently, so that one provides more of the power at highway speeds and the other around town.
igotzzoom
Active Member
Sorry. I'm still not drinking the Kool-Aid of AWD inevitability standard across the lineup. Guess we'll find out March '16. :smile:
I am with ya! I think there is about a 60/40 shot right now that you are right. Question is just when it will happen in my mind. I think it will be standard AWD with the option to remove it if you want.
gavine
Petrol Head turned EV Enthusiast
They will notice (and care) with all of that electric motor torque driving the front wheels. The torque steer would be unbearable. As much as I would be happy with AWD, RWD is a close second. FWD is a definite NO in my book for Tesla.
A big component of torque steer on an ICE is due to uneven half shaft lengths. Because of the simplicity of the motor and gearbox packaging/positioning, there is really no need for this to occur in a FWD Tesla.
People need to remember that there is one reason, and one reason only, that automakers pushed FWD configurations - they are cheaper to manufacture. Period.
ICE manufacturers did not switch to FWD because it is better in snow, increases understeer (which most people find less scary), etc. They did it to save money. Everything else was a side benefit.
People want FWD in snow because years of ICE marketing have taught them to want it. If Tesla produces a FWD Model 3, it'll be because they decided it's to hard to educate the sheep who have years of "FWD is better in snow" drilled into their heads by ICE marketing departments.
People need to remember that there is one reason, and one reason only, that automakers pushed FWD configurations - they are cheaper to manufacture. Period.
ICE manufacturers did not switch to FWD because it is better in snow, increases understeer (which most people find less scary), etc. They did it to save money. Everything else was a side benefit.
People want FWD in snow because years of ICE marketing have taught them to want it. If Tesla produces a FWD Model 3, it'll be because they decided it's to hard to educate the sheep who have years of "FWD is better in snow" drilled into their heads by ICE marketing departments.
igotzzoom
Active Member
It seems to me it would be a lot easier to modulate wheelspin with electric motors than with ICE powertrains, so I think the FWD/RWD issue is largely moot, but for the consumer conditioning reason noted above, I believe there will probably be an AWD variant. But I'm NOT of the belief that it will be the default offering.
I think that Tesla will be struggling to hit the $35K price point just as they did trying to hit $60K with the short-lived Model S 40's. For this reason, I think that the base model 3 will be either front or rear wheel drive with AWD available as an option. There will also most likely be a Tech Package option to boost the average sales price closer to $40K.
Averages sales price of $40k is just wishful thinking. It will be much closer to $50k or more.
igotzzoom
Active Member
For better or worse, I've resigned myself to the fact that the Model 3 configured the way I'd want will probably be closer to $50k than $35k.
You should feel lucky. I have resigned that it will be closer to $70K for me. See signature below. But that is OK since I spent $65K on my current car.
The Model S owners here are tech savvy and for the most part not constrained on money. The fact that almost all Model S sold are 85 and have plenty of options shows that the typical Model S buyer is all about features and technology. They don't worry about cost much. That does not apply to the market the Model 3 is aiming for. Those buyers are different. Price and range will be their priority. While I see a lot of very good points made here, the average car buyer is not thinking in the same way because they struggle to pay for it. For the majority of Model S owners it's nothing to add $20k in options to their car and pay cash for it. That's more than the majority of people can afford to pay for a car at all. Applying 'Model S logic' doesn't translate to the Model 3 market directly.
That all depends on what you consider to be the Model 3 market. The fact is that getting the car with interesting options is almost certainly going to cost more than 40K, so the market is people willing and able to pay that much for a car. Basically the same sort of market that currently buys Audi A4s and BMW 3 series.
igotzzoom
Active Member
Do I have enough assets to buy a Model S outright? Yes. But it would require liquidating most of my stock portfolio, a good portion of which I'm planning to retire on. If I were impulsive and irresponsible, I could go out and buy a MS today. But yes, I am like the 99% in that "value" is a factor in my carbuying decision. Also, assuming most 3 Series and A4 buyers are wealthy is a fallacy. The majority of 3 Series are leased, and I would guess a similar proportion of A4 and C-Classes are as well. If it weren't for favorable lease terms, BMW and Audi wouldn't be doing nearly as well as they are.
The Model 3 by necessity will need to appeal to a wider audience than the Model S. True, a lot of well-equipped mainstream trucks and SUVs are in the $50-70,000 range, but most are in the $35-50k range. I am going on record here and now that if a reasonably-equipped Model 3 is going to be $70k, it's off my shopping list.
Agreed. But I am not looking at reasonably equipped when I say I am going to spend $70K. I am looking at Top of the Line. I think the average price of a Model 3 will be $50-55K.
Nowhere did I say that I assumed BMW 3 series and Audi A4 owners are wealthy. However, there are a lot of expensive options on both cars that have a lot of takeup, and the ASP for both cars is well over the base price. The thing about leases may very well be true, but it could be true for the Model 3 as well. I just react to posts that seem to indicate that the Model 3 market will somehow be budget shoppers. It will be an expensive car with expensive options, and I'm pretty sure the ASP will be well above the base price (but certainly not 70K).
Similar threads
- Locked
- Marketplace listing
- Marketplace listing