I posted this in the 125+ page Range Anxiety thread, but thought it deserved more identity and opportunity for discussion from an interested and focused audience. At one point in the Q&A Elon Musk made the following statements regarding EV range expectations by the public: Transport Evolved Live Blog: Teslas Press Conference to End Range Anxiety in Electric Cars - Transport Evolved "Musk: 200 miles is minimum threshold for an electric car. We need 200+ miles in real world. Not 200 miles in 'AC off, driving on flat road' mode. " then added: "Musk: anything below 200 miles isn't passing grade. Most people looking for 20% more than that." So it sounds like maybe 240 miles targeted in the Model 3?!! That would be amazing at the target price point! Is this realistic? It would be hard for Tesla to put out anything much lower than that after a statement of this sort acknowledging what the public expectations for real world range are.

I think that's more of a marketing statement. No other EV other than the Tesla has a real world 200+ mile range. It's a verbal slap in the face to the competition. The average annual miles on a car are 15k which equals to 40 miles a day. Even if you double that for those that have a little more to drive, we are not even at 100 miles. The 200 mile minimum has no real world data to back it up. He is kind of saying, 'yeah don't even look at any other EV but Tesla'.

Market positioning vis a vis new entrants? +1. I'd like to believe it as a future model 3 owner, but before getting my hopes up, I'd like to hear an actual recording of the conference call, as often the nuance is lost in the live blog transcriptions. Still, just to build on your inference, do you suppose he is doing some preliminary market positioning partly in response to the GM Bolt and similar Ford announcements? Namely, they have both put a stake in the ground at 200 miles, so a premium brand needs to start at 240 of real-world driving.

You can't assume annual miles are evenly distributed every day. A 20 mile round trip commute, plus 200 mile round trips every weekend gives you 15k miles/year If I wanted a <100 mile EV, I'll buy an eGolf now instead of waiting 3 years for a Model 3.

I went overboard on that thread with math, so I'll repost it here where it's more appropriate. My numbers are extremely simplified. I recall an estimate of 350,000 Gen 3 and 150,000 Gen 2. From Gigafactory PDFs, we know that 35 gWh/yr and 500,000 packs are to be dedicated to vehicles at full capacity. Making a huge assumption that all Gen 2 are 85 kWh, and Gen 3 are 60 kWh, we get 500,000 vehicles with total of 33.75 gWh a year. This huge assumption passes a sanity check so far. Next, from countless threads, it is found that 5 to 10 kWh is not available in the Model S due to antibricking, HVAC, misc, etc. So this means that of a potential 60 kWh battery, maybe 50 or 55 kWh can be used for travel. Using Elon's 200 miles, I get the following numbers. 50 kWh = 50,000 Wh 50,000 Wh / 200 mi = 250 Wh/mi 55 kWh = 55,000 Wh 55,000 Wh / 200 mi = 275 Wh/mi If the Model S uses an amount of energy per mile that is more than 35% or so than my predicted values at 10 degrees Fahrenheit at highway speeds, my calculations show a larger than 60 kWh battery will be required. I would then follow up with a 65 kWh Gen 3 battery and see what number of Gen 2 vehicles will be able to have 85 kWh packs, but I would assume most if not all will get the maximum. 65 kWh - 5 kWh = 60 kWh usable (likely too optimistic) 60 KWh = 60,000 Wh 60,000 Wh / 200 mi = 300 Wh/mi This is easily achieved with a smaller, more efficient vehicle. We're seeing this with Model S under ideal conditions already. (350,000 × 65 kWh Gen 3) + (100,000 × 85 kWh Gen 2) + (50,000 × 60 kWh Gen 2) = 34.25 gWh This leaves only 2.14 % of the Gigafactory pack output unaccompanied. I can't see 1/3 of S and X being the 60 kWh. Here is another one. (350,000 × 60 kWh Model 3) + (100,000 × 95 kWh Model X) + (50,000 × 85 kWh Model S) = 34.75 gWh That's 0.74% unaccounted for.

I would expect there to be two battery pack options for the Model 3. A small one with an EPA range in the 220 mile area, and a big one with an EPA range in the 300 mile area.

And don't worry, I do not look at any other EV but Tesla, as what he was saying is just as he had read my mind... Yes, I will NOT look at any EV with a real world (not"AC off, driving on flat road") range of less then about 200 miles. 240+ miles real word range? Yes please! - - - Updated - - - I do expect this to. But if the smallest pack gets something like 245-265 miles range, maybe they will go with this one pack only - at least in the beginning? It starts to be comparable to the MS85 already.

Maybe, but it could certainly come back to bite him in the butt if the Model 3 comes out with less than ~220 miles real-world range. I think he's setting the bar high for the competition (marketing piece), but doing so as a tease of what he thinks the 3 may be capable of. This all also makes me wonder just how far along the 3 might be. Perhaps this is all computer based estimates at this point based upon anticipated weight, Cd, future battery capacity improvements, etc. But I'd love to believe there is some sort of working prototype out there giving them some realistic numbers to work from.

I'm assuming that the M3 will not have the same bias to performance as the MS. Also assuming that the M3 would be lighter and more economical than the MS. Maybe that will help achieve a 200+ real world range.

If Model 3 is 20 % more efficient than Model S, a 60 kWh battery could give 200 miles of range, assuming 340 Wh/mi in the S (338 Wh/mi in "Bjørn's Tesla Model S #2: 375 km/233 mi on a single charge in Norwegian winter"). It will likely be a bit more efficient than that. Unless the quote is wrong, I think Elon meant exactly what it looks like. The model S exists to fund the Model 3, and gain knowledge, the model 3 needs to be a viable only car. Tesla Motors must have a 200 mile Model 3 in realistic conditions, without special techniques. I would not be surprised if the Model 3 gets better range than the base S or X. I can't wait to get mine.

If they're hoping to have it in showrooms by 2017 (even late 2017) I'd have a hard time believing they don't have a few test mules running around out there now.

Elon's recent comments to the effect that they hadn't even decided what direction they should take in terms of design makes me worried they won't be able to meet that time frame. Early last year while in Germany he said they expected to have a clay model by mid 2014 then prototype by the end of 2014. Looks like they're probably slipped like usual. Elon said recently they expect to show the prototype next year. Unless it's all misdirection... I have a feeling that Tesla has learned a *LOT* from Model S and X in terms of how to build cars but also what *NOT* to do: show to car too early. They were kind of forced to show Model S early due to the financial crisis at the time and Model S honestly was shown wayy to early. They would have unveiled that last year instead of 3 years ago.

If I have a 20 mile range and there are chargers every 15 miles then yes, my range is infinite. But at the cost of a certain utility. There's a minimum range number that crosses a threshold from PITA to acceptable which will differ based on driver circumstances. Musk has pegged that number at 200 miles.

and we already know they are looking for supercharger about every 60-70 miles therefore range will be unlimited.

wasn't there some speculation that the M3 would save developing yet another motor use one of the motor used in the S85D?

Not sure how that would work, revealing the car in 2014 after it had been on sale since 2012... :wink: Regarding Elon's minimum range statement, he essentially said the Model S 60 doesn't have enough range, since it certainly does not get 200 miles in all conditions.

thats the look of the car Elon was talking about, there is still plenty of other work that could be done by now, pack size, pack design, motor size ect, the external look of the car is the last thing that gets finished work has started and may well be finished for many parts of model 3

Sorry, typo. I meant Model X - - - Updated - - - True enough. I'm sure the battery pack design governs the overall size of the platform. Motor would be either a new design or they could use the new front motor from the D. Well know in time. The rest of the packaging though is still a huge amount of work.