-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Model 3 Highland Performance/Plaid Speculation [Car announced 04.23.2024]
- Thread starter Daniel L
- Start date
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
We don't actually know it's a fleet average on the 3.
There's several ways to calculate the average, fleet is only one of them.
Quoting from the link provided by another poster-
So they could average over model, over plant, over class, or a combo thereof.
Thus there's MANY ways they could keep the $7500 on say a US-cell P but not an LFP RWD 3.
Since we have no details about how they ACTUALLY did it this year-- and none about how they plan to handle it next year-- anybody saying the credit is halving for all 3s is guessing and Tesla has lots of options to avoid that issue.
Even Tesla only says "Reductions likely"- which suggests even THEY know better than to say they're going away for sure for all trims as some posters seem to want to do, but they're remaining vague on details to encourage more buyers before Jan 1.
Leave room for the Roadster to be a performance king?
Listen. Everything else will have to get out of the way. I mean....
I mean..... just look at this thing. Are you kidding me? It's performing just sitting there.
Except you know… it doesn’t exist
Only some cars can get the acceleration boost, it matters which motors it came with that you as the buyer had no control over. Some normal AWD buyers got 980 P motors so Tesla could just do software. But they couldn't compete with the P or they'd piss off real P owners, and whenever they could they put in cheaper non-P motors.
You're cross shopping a $300k plus concept car with unknown performance and whose marketed numbers violate either physics or noise ordinances against a $60k four door?
Dang it, we're back to looks mattering more than actual performance.
At least "some" of the people complaining / wishing )whatever you want to call it) in this thread, are complaining that there isnt enough visible differentiation in the look of the performance vehicle vs the non performance variant... or.. "it doesnt look different /
If I want to pay $300k for a car - just to look at it parked in my garage...then....
What's the problem?
So what? That doesn't mean that Tesla couldn't put a higher end motor is either all of the P models or specific P models and then offer the boost as a software upgrade. That is really the only point I am making and you seem intent on pointing out these technicalities like my elementary school age child does when they are getting scolded LOL. I am just saying they could, in response to government incentives, develop a price structure that allows for certain people to purchase faster cars that can only become faster with a software unlock. And that unlock could be purchased after the fact, making it independent of the MSRP price at time of sale. Given that qualification for the tax credit is determined by sales price, not any items purchased later, this would allow them to take advantage of the tax credit and still sell "ludicrious" P models at an inflated price.
The risk Tesla would take with this (beyond potentially pissing off the government) is that there’s probably a subset of buyers who just wouldn’t bother with the software unlock and they would therefore miss out on that revenue.
For sure, that is a risk and I don't know if Elon would be willing to take that risk. It is less of a risk if you just equip certain models with the upgraded motor and charge more for that model. There would be no incentive to buy that more expensive model unless you intended to follow through with the unlock. I am just pointing out that it is an option.
The government already seems pissed off at Tesla for various reasons (non-union, culture war issues,etc...) despite the fact that the current EV market really only exists because of Tesla. As far as I am concerned, being creative to comply with government regulations is kind of par for the course in any industry and it seems to me that the way the tax credit was structured targeted the model 3 anyways. Why have an $80k limit for SUVs but only a $55k limit for sedans? It is pretty arbitrary. The Model 3 and Model Y are almost the same vehicle but one is considered an SUV for tax credit purposes while the other is not. It is almost like it was an image thing... they don't want to subsidize wealthy men in their performance sedans but wealthy families in a Cadillac Lyric is fine apparently.
A lot of people are also pissed off at the government pushing all those things to people, companies, organization, etc.
Absolutely, but that discussion is not where this thread needs to go. I just responded to another poster saying that creatively skirting the EV price limits for the tax credit might piss of the government by pointing out that the government already seems to be going after Tesla so I am not sure it matters.
I was wrong about this. I believe you are correct now. I dug into this a little deeper and the older Model S cars were a whole lot quicker and faster than I realized. Pre refresh 2020 Model S Performance cars were doing actual 0-60 mph times of 2.38(2.18 w/ 1 ft rollout) with weight reductions.
I found a 2016 Model S P100D doing 0-60 mph in 2.63(2.44 w/ 1 ft rollout). Now, that is with a bigger 100 kwh battery so maybe that isn't possible with only 82 kwh. However, I found a 2016 P90D doing 0-60 mph in 2.87(2.68 w/ 1 ft rollout). Now, I don't see any reason why a much lighter Model 3 couldn't match or even beat that time.
For the 1/4 mile I found a 2019 Model S Raven doing it in 10.44 @ 127 mph but I think that was with weight reductions. That car had an extremely quick 1.56 60' time. I am not certain a Model 3 would do that time but I do believe something like 1.6x for 60' would be possible. I am doing low 1.7s in mine currently.
I also found a 2021 Model S LR Refresh that did the 1/4 mile in 10.8 seconds. That isn't really that much quicker than the quickest Model 3s. However, the trap speed was over 130 mph. It really seems like the latest motors even in the Model S LR are capable of holding max power to much higher rpms.
If they simply put both motors from the newest Model S LR in a Model 3 and gave it a true launch control I would expect it to run 10.4-10.5 for the 1/4 mile. However, there may be some battery limitations that would appear then? It certainly does seem like 0-60 mph in 2.5 seconds would be possible though.
Lots of people here want the M3P to be a very different car. Different body, different wheels, different suspension, different interior. It looks from what we've seen that we'll be getting a lot of that with all the leaks we have seen of different wheels, bumpers, spring and shock PN's, seats, etc.
We've also heard many people say they actually don't care that much about performance.
So the M3P will be a lot of things that actually cost Tesla a lot of money in hardware. They flat out can't afford to sell this very different car with a software limited acceleration option and hope most people will buy the option. Tons of people will want it for the show part, not the go part, and if you can get the show cheap, that's what will happen. Nobody can tell if you ponied up the extra $10K+ unless you actually drag race them. Which is why BMW sells more M-line cars than actual M cars.
The only way I could see this working: The M3P costs $54,999. It comes with the seats, the suspension, the bodywork, the upgraded motors, the upgraded battery, etc.
It's software limited to 1kWh of energy, about 3 miles, and 100 HP. Whatever minimum makes it a legal car that can be sold under the MVSS.
Oh, and it has no warranty, that comes with the option you can buy in the app.
It has no autopilot functionality, no music, no navigation. No air conditioning either, only the legally required heat.
It can only be unlocked and locked via the key card.
No, Tesla will not deliver this to your house.
No, Tesla will not help you figure out how to get it home.
No, it does not come with that 1kWh charged, and no, you can't charge it onsite.
You have to make the car completely useless at $54,999 so that 100% of people buy your $10K+ software unlock via the app while they are standing at the delivery center.
Of course, any EV maker could do this. Most Rivians and Lucids don't get the EV credit today, but they could do the same thing. Here's a $79K SUV that has one mile of range, you can buy more range in the app.
But then the issue here is that it's completely transparent what is going on, and that's how you get lawmakers to pay attention and change one simple line in the laws that makes your process not work, and while there in there, maybe they'll add something punitive like "EV tax credit does not apply to any manufacturer that has made more than 2M EV's as of January 1st 2024".
It flat out isn't worth it for Tesla to mess with the feds over pricing for a premium car that goes faster than any car has a real reason to. It's bad politics.
Last edited:
Y’all act like the current performance model isn’t $50,990. It’s already $4k below the threshold. Tesla literally does this already with the dual motor performance boost. They already have a motor they could toss in the rear of the P. The snarkiness on this forum is the reason I rarely contribute anymore… enjoy your sarcastic diatribes I’m really not interested in this conversation anymore.
I don't think it's even an "IF" people are willing to buy the upgrade. It's more "can" they buy the upgrade. There is a vast difference in buying it at time of purchase and rolling it into the financing vs afterwards and what? Pay cash? Personal loan? Credit card? I think the take rate would be very limited.
And you're acting like:
1) We don't already know the highland will cost more than the current cars (Highland went up about 10% in China and Australia)
2) People aren't asking for much more performance and differentiation than currently exists between an AWD and a M3P
3) The current pricing is a historic low, despite inflation and interest rates, and it's likely tied to people knowing highland is coming and sales are slowing.
Which motor is this? The rear Model S Plaid motor is two motors, not one and MS front motors don't drop into the Model 3 rear end. Did you mean "rotor"?
What about the 320V battery architecture on the M3 vs the 400 on the MS? Can they just drop that in?
There's no snarkiness here. You're the one that suggested the method of using a software unlock to deal with the tax credit, and you're just annoyed you're getting factual pushback on the idea that it's trivial for them to do when it's not.
Plus, 120 posts this year alone isn't "rarely contributing"
I thought the Model 3 Performance was 400 Volts? It says 399.75 Volts when I look at the CANBUS data when stopped. However, it goes down to a low of 335.48 Volts at full tilt and at 51 mph before rising slightly for speeds above that.
