E90alex
Active Member
They’re probably banking on that fact because the 3P and Y are higher profit for them. So the more people that buy one of those instead of a 3LR the more profit they make.
-
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 LR not currently available to order (USA) [posted 08.12.2022 --Its back! 05.02.2023]
- Thread starter michael805
- Start date
There's that end, and there's the making more than the income limit. All in all, there's at least a small population that can't get the credit.
There are people that own their home, are retired or otherwise living off investments, and don't pay a lot of taxes.
I understand what you are intending here, but there are likely plenty of people who can pay cash for a 50k car yet dont have that much tax liability for one reason or another.
Well that is a bit judgmental of you, there are various reasons why someone can financially get the LR 3 and not have an income tax of 7,500 or more. Plus if what some people are speculating is true, and it comes with an LFP battery, being able to charge to 100% all the time could also be a big advantage for many.
Well I suspect the people who buy the Performance 3 want the sedan vs the SUV. And the people who buy the base are very price conscious and perhaps as some have said do not qualify for the full tax credit which would make the price difference $7k on the base models. But for the LR I suggest it makes no sense to buy a more expensive 3 with less range vs the Y.
Simple work around - lease the vehicle and you will get the full $7500 tax credit. (Or the lessor will who should then pass on the savings)
E90alex
Active Member
It doesn’t seem like Tesla is. They don’t detail the leasing numbers like cap cost or money factor.
Im not sure where you get "they should". Some do, some dont and there is no entitlement at all to the person leasing if the owner (the person they are leasing from) doesnt choose to pass it on to everyone.
Tesla has not historically given the entire credit, either so "lease and you will get it" is not the answer.
Well then it will be interesting to see what the demand is for the LR 3 given it may be more expensive for a lot of people vs the LR Y.
The kicker is the Y likely costs less to build given manufacturing improvements . I still feel like a piece of the puzzle is missing , Tesla doesn’t typically list a car it doesn’t want to actively sell. Maybe there’s more people that don’t qualify for the tax credit than we think - ppl for who 3k would motivate switching to a sedan ?
BigNick
Infamous Fat Sweaty Guy
I don't think we'll know the answer to the LFP question until someone buys one and checks to see if the "Daily" and "Trip" labels appear on the charging screen.
My GUESS is that it is LFP due to the reduced range being advertised.
An LR with 19s now has "310+" range and "325+" with the Aeros. We don't know what the "+" is (possibly allowing for a 310/325 minimum and a maximum of a few more miles due to battery manufacturing variances?) but technically the M3P now has more range than the LR with the 19" Sport wheels...
E90alex
Active Member
In order to be LFP, there needs to be like a 25% improvement in energy density compared to the current RWD LFP pack, which seems unlikely for such a big jump in just 1-2 years.
yikes... 325+ miles for $47k ? that's a big step back from the "old" Model 3 AWD which was rated 350+ miles in the last 2022 version with the aerowheels.
also bizarre that the Model Y AWD - with more range - is only $3k more than the Model 3 AWD and the Model 3 AWD is now a whopping $7k above the SR+.
I don't qualify for the tax rebate but if someone does... the Model Y AWD is actually cheaper than the 3. stupid. My guess is Tesla ain't selling much of those anyway with the facelift/ highland version coming soon... a fair price would be around $45k (tops).... Range is certainly disappointing for "long range" in the year 2023 (and we all know that 325 miles in Tesla world are more like 300 miles with other OEMs)
also bizarre that the Model Y AWD - with more range - is only $3k more than the Model 3 AWD and the Model 3 AWD is now a whopping $7k above the SR+.
I don't qualify for the tax rebate but if someone does... the Model Y AWD is actually cheaper than the 3. stupid. My guess is Tesla ain't selling much of those anyway with the facelift/ highland version coming soon... a fair price would be around $45k (tops).... Range is certainly disappointing for "long range" in the year 2023 (and we all know that 325 miles in Tesla world are more like 300 miles with other OEMs)
sorry... LFP batteries have a huge advantage and that is that they are cheap. They currently don't belong in $47k+ vehicles due to slower charging when cold and heavier weight/ less payload. if Tesla wants to do a Model 3 AWD with LFP... fine... then charge $44k max for it....
GenSao
Member
I agree, likely LFP batteries. The new Model 3 LR-AWD variant is listed as 310+/325+ pending formal EPA Certification. It will likely be higher.
Historically Tesla has improved the range of the Model 3 LR-AWD over time. Hopefully with further refinement the range will improve.
- 05/20/18: 310 mi.
- 11/01/19: 322 mi.
- 10/15/20: 353 mi
- 11/01/21: 358 mi. w/18" (334 mi. w/19")
E90alex
Active Member
In order for it to be LFP, the energy density would need to have improved by like 25+% compared to the current RWD LFP pack. Not realistic.
I agree that this is likely to be a temporary offering for the LR version, pending a more thorough overhaul with the coming Highland version. Or at least I I hope so. I would expect that the Highland overhaul, which reportedly will include design changes making it cheaper to produce, will also be accompanied by a further price drop for a LR version, making much of the current price discrepancy go away.
I noticed that the new ‘LR’ version is not available on the Tesla Canada site. I wonder if that is because LFP batteries do not perform as well in the cold. Albeit there are plenty of places in the northern U.S., where it would be available, where it is also pretty frosty. Maybe Tesla has simply not had time to update the Canada site as well. Anyway, I don’t think that it is confirmed yet that this new version actually uses LFP.
could be true. I just fear for the buyers of the $47k LR version when the Highland version with updated looks/ tech and presumably better range hits the market. to me this 325+ miles "long range" AWD version has to be the most underwhelming of all more recent Model 3 AWD builds... heck my nearly 4yr old Model 3 AWD was rated 310 miles EPA ... just (5%) less than the latest AWD LR version years later...
You think Tesla is has no idea what they're doing?
I think they're likely abundantly aware of the pricing dynamics at play here. Usually when Tesla prices something unexpectedly high it's because they have limited supply. The 4680 standard range AWD Model Y comes to mind - it was (is) only modestly cheaper than the long range version but sacrifices range (and battery capacity) and a little bit of 0-60mph time. They had a pretty limited supply of 4680 cells but it's useful to get real world testing of the 4680 cells and make some revenue from the limited cell supply. Thus, price it unreasonably high to match demand (at that price) to the limited supply. Economics!
This new LR Model 3 feels similar. Maybe they're using a limited 2170 cell supply from another supplier or this is the Highland refresh and they expect low production numbers. Or it's LFP and they also have low supply of those packs.
I'm not sure, but this situation has lots of signs of production limitations.
It doesn't make sense to me that Tesla would halt production of the LR for months, only to bring it back temporarily with batteries that don't qualify for the full federal tax credit, then take the line down again later this year to implement Highland updates. Obviously there are a lot of factors we can only speculate about, but just from a production standpoint it is a bizarre move to schedule multiple halts within a short time period in lieu of bundling work to minimize downtime.
If the LR trim was indeed the best selling M3 before they removed the ability to order it, it makes sense that it would be updated first. The battery downgrade and pricing inconsistency would be offset (to a point) by the refresh.
All hypothetical guesswork of course. For all we know, perhaps it's just as likely that Highland is pushed out and it just took them this long to figure out a solution to the battery shortage that didn't impact MY production.
If the LR trim was indeed the best selling M3 before they removed the ability to order it, it makes sense that it would be updated first. The battery downgrade and pricing inconsistency would be offset (to a point) by the refresh.
All hypothetical guesswork of course. For all we know, perhaps it's just as likely that Highland is pushed out and it just took them this long to figure out a solution to the battery shortage that didn't impact MY production.
Similar threads
- Poll
