Model 3 superchargeable?

[GKwey]

What's your perspective on Model 3's access to supercharger stations for cross country road trips? Such is a big bonus for owning a Tesla. But imagine this: if too many Model 3 are competing to use supercharger, isn't it that every supercharger station will be congested with long line? What will happen to gas stations, going out of business or converting to EV charging services? Big change is coming with mid-level Tesla accessable to mass market. It's hard to imagine what our world will morph into if Model 3 is a success. Will we as tax payers bail out our big auto maker that is considered too big to fall again if any of them failed to compete?

 

[dgpcolorado]

The question of how the Model 3 will have Supercharger access has been much discussed in this forum. Single fee, then free? Pay per use? Some hybrid of the two? We really don't know. Tesla's chief technology guy, JB Straubel, has suggested that it was easier and cheaper to go with the free model early on, because the actual electricity cost was small compared to the hassle of setting up a billing system. But he also suggested that they would have to revisit the issue when they get to a million cars or so.

As for the transition from fossil fueled ICE cars to EVs, I expect that it will be gradual and slow. I'd be pretty surprised if there is any significant dislocation in the next decade. And I would expect that gas station convenience stores will add quick charge stations to their pumps if EVs catch on. They make their money mostly from the stores, not gas sales. Same could be true with quick charge outlets, although most charging will be at home.

And, if EVs catch on, you can expect every major car manufacturer to jump on the bandwagon. The technology isn't that difficult to adopt for the latecomers. Hard to see any bankruptcies caused by EVs, (although there may be some for other reasons, as has happened in the past).

 

[ratsbew]

Model 3 will certainly have supercharging. There is a decent chance that with low enough Wh/mile that it will actually gain range faster than the Model S.

As for the business model...I'm strongly in favor of pay per use through the touch screen. It would be automated (credit card on file, automatic VIN based billing), but the touch screen would let you confirm payment. I think that pay per use should be nearly profit neutral, but with a small profit for Supercharger network maintenance and expansion.

 

[Red Sage]

The business model is already in place. Buy a car. Use Superchargers Free (of additional fees) for Life (the life of the car). Sorted.

There is no reason for Tesla Motors to sell you electricity. It is way more trouble than it's worth. Just buy a car. They'll be fine.

 

[R3D-83]

There is a decent chance that with low enough Wh/mile that it will actually gain range faster than the Model S.

I don't think (actually I'm pretty sure) it won't have a much lower consumption. Both the chassis and battery will be smaller but the chassis will be steel instead of aluminum. The AWD version will be around 1.8-2 tonnes IMO. And even if it consumes a bit less, the batteries C rate is fixed so you can charge a smaller battery with lower power (lower amps).

 

[JER]

Model 3 supercharable?

Only at Brokelandsheia.

Well, I predict supercharger compatibility on all examples, supercharger access as a paid extra on most variants and (probably) a pay per use model for ongoing revenue and to discourage abuse; I doubt the "all you can eat" model is going to work well on a mass-market vehicle.

I don't think (actually I'm pretty sure) it won't have a much lower consumption. Both the chassis and battery will be smaller but the chassis will be steel instead of aluminum. The AWD version will be around 1.8-2 tonnes IMO. And even if it consumes a bit less, the batteries C rate is fixed so you can charge a smaller battery with lower power (lower amps).

Agreed it won't have much lower consumption, but not because of mass - which only affects rolling resistance (a small factor) and energy required to accelerate. By far the largest factor is aerodynamic drag area; if Model 3 is both a little smaller and slipperier, it will have proportionally lower consumption.

Small packs will indeed charge at lower power, all other things being equal. Might not be much worse than an "A" pack in a Model S, though.

 

[tga]

Both the chassis and battery will be smaller but the chassis will be steel instead of aluminum.

We really don't know anything about what the chassis will be made of. You can argue for steel (cheaper), or Al (already have in-house knowledge).

Well, I predict supercharger compatibility on all examples, supercharger access as a paid extra on most variants and (probably) a pay per use model for ongoing revenue and to discourage abuse; I doubt the "all you can eat" model is going to work well on a mass-market vehicle.

The problem with a pay-per-use model is it's illegal in many US states, which require you to be a licensed utility to sell electricity.

 

[gregincal]

The problem with a pay-per-use model is it's illegal in many US states, which require you to be a licensed utility to sell electricity.

No, only pay per kW is illegal. ChargePoint, Blink, etc use pay per minute or pay per use.

 

[dhanson865]

The question of how the Model 3 will have Supercharger access has been much discussed in this forum. Single fee, then free? Pay per use? Some hybrid of the two? We really don't know. Tesla's chief technology guy, JB Straubel, has suggested that it was easier and cheaper to go with the free model early on, because the actual electricity cost was small compared to the hassle of setting up a billing system. But he also suggested that they would have to revisit the issue when they get to a million cars or so.

and for an idea of when they'll get to 1,000,000 cars or so

The Fremont facility has produced over 500,000 cars a year in the past and can easily be tooled up to do 500,000 a year again. Tesla will ramp it up as much as possible between now and the end of 2017 so it isn't impossible for them to hit my numbers. It's just uncertain.

And lets talk about Tesla's track record for a second.

2012 2,600 cars
2013 25,000 cars total (22,400 cars in 2013 + prior year)
2014 57,000 cars total (32,000 cars in 2014 + prior years)
2015 107,000 cars total (50,000 cars in 2015 + prior years)

2016 forecast in the last earning call is 80,000 to 90,000 cars.

2017 could take it up to 125,000
2018 could take it up to 190,000

It might be less but their "track record" is that they increased production by 56% comparing 2015 to 2014. So I have no reason to believe they won't increase it like they plan to.

It might be 2020 or later before they hit 1,000,000 cars. So they likely won't monetize the supercharger network within the next few years.

- - - Updated - - -

No, only pay per kW is illegal. ChargePoint, Blink, etc use pay per minute or pay per use.

which is ironic for Leaf owners with a 3.6 KW charger on board. Any L1 or L2 charge station that bills by time over bills those early adopter leaf owners. Any charge station that charges per use likely over bills them unless they can afford to leave the car there all day.

If the on board chargers are in three main classes

3.6 KW
6.6/7.2 KW
9.x/10 KW

and you set the price per time or price per use based on the average the people with faster chargers get a deal and the people with slower chargers get ripped off.

 

[R3D-83]

We really don't know anything about what the chassis will be made of. You can argue for steel (cheaper), or Al (already have in-house knowledge).

Chris Porritt (Tesla’s vice-president of engineering) has already said:
"We’ve got to be cost-effective. We can’t use aluminum for all the components.”
So it's gonna be mostly steel. They may use aluminum for some components, but steel is the most cost efficient material in car industry.

To Cut Costs, Tesla Gen 3 Wont Be All Aluminum Like Model S

 

[tga]

No, only pay per kW is illegal. ChargePoint, Blink, etc use pay per minute or pay per use.

That's what I meant. I'm going to blame the cold medicine for not being specific and typing kWh.:wink:

I suppose Tesla could charge per minute of charge time, but that violates Elon's "free for life, all future cars" mantra.

- - - Updated - - -

Chris Porritt (Tesla’s vice-president of engineering) has already said:
"We’ve got to be cost-effective. We can’t use aluminum for all the components.”
So it's gonna be mostly steel. They may use aluminum for some components, but steel is the most cost efficient material in car industry.

To Cut Costs, Tesla Gen 3 Wont Be All Aluminum Like Model S

Alright, I'm just going to take some more Nyquil, go back to bed, and stop posting while I'm home sick...

 

[Red Sage]

JER wrote, "I doubt the 'all you can eat' model is going to work well on a mass-market vehicle."

Why?

dhanson865 wrote, "It might be 2020 or later before they hit 1,000,000 cars. So they likely won't monetize the supercharger network within the next few years."

I believe that when they 'examine' the situation, around 2020 or so, they'll learn that they can continue doing things the way they always have. Then they'll schedule another milestone to examine it once more. I still don't believe they will go to a pay up front, subscription, or pay-at-the-pump solution -- EVER. Most likely they will remove the 'for the life of the car' provision, and charge a nominal, one-time fee ($500-$800) for the next owner of a used car to take advantage of Supercharging, or not, if they choose.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

No, only pay per kW is illegal. ChargePoint, Blink, etc use pay per minute or pay per use.

And then the pricing is either inflated or can't be guaranteed to cover the cost of the electricity.
But I think such issues will be resolved and eventually all states will have laws that allow regulate reselling of electricity for EV charging.

I prefer Tesla's model though.
- Simple: cheaper equipment, no account management, no ongoing financial transactions and payments
- Reliable: card scanners, Internet connection, alternative method of payment or account management to cause problems
- Fast: plug in and walk away; no fishing for or scanning cards
- Well-financed: Tesla gets the money up front to pay for required infrastructure, so the network can be sized per car

The challenge for Tesla is to make the savings outweigh the cost of being free at the point of use. I hope they can come up with a solution that works to ensure "fair use".

 

[RDoc]

From what Elon has said about the cost of electricity for Supercharging being trivial for Tesla, I don't see how pay per use makes any sense. The real issue for funding the Supercharger network is the capital cost, so it almost has to be an up front fee. I guess I could see an optional $2K fee to participate though.

 

[Twiglett]

biggest reason that pay per charge will not happen is that not one of the superchargers is configured to do that.
Same for paying for electrons - the other issue with this model is that none of the main charging networks do it either. Charge point came out and said there is no money in billing electrons.
The choice is either free with car or fee as an option. Most of the others are none starters.

 

[Red Sage]

NOTE: What follows was a reply to a thread in the Tesla Motors forums. I believe I was unable to post it there, thanks to the Mollom software there. I haven't proofread it, but I did edit out the quotes of someone else, so parts of it may not make sense. But I hope it illuminates my reasoning as to why there should not be a separate fee to activate Supercharging for the Tesla Model ≡.



Here the thing is... The added cost when placing an order for a Model S 60 was $2,000 to enable Supercharging. It was $2,500 to activate it after Delivery, if you had not chosen the option while ordering. Further, the cost was originally for installation of the hardware that allows DC charging. Two things happened: 1) Customers were confused during ordering by having both an option of adding a DC charger, and another for a second AC charger; and 2) Tesla Motors learned it was easier to just put the DC charger in EVERY car, thereby streamlining the manufacturing process. Supercharger access was always meant to be free of additional charge to all enabled cars.

Originally, the idea was that if you had the DC charger hardware installed, it would be enabled by default. Tesla knew they would be installing the DC charger on every Model S 85 from the start, that's why Supercharging was always included. So the activation fee became a software change for Model S 60 instead of a hardware addition. At no point has Tesla Motors ever intended for there to be a fee for electricity.

Most people who buy a Ford F-150 or Toyota Prius in Alcoa TN will never use a gas station in Happy Camp CA. That doesn't mean they don't appreciate the possibility of doing so. There is no 'tough nut', because the Supercharger network is, can, and will be continually financed by Generation II vehicles, Model S and Model X without any additional contribution from Model ≡.

If we assume that $2,000 from the sale of a $70,000 car allows for Supercharger access... And that sale amount represents a 25% profit margin... Then the $2,000 is only ~11.43% ($17,500) to ~14.29% ($14,000) of the profit, dependent upon how you count it.

Chances are the profit margin for Model ≡ will be between 10% and 15% instead, let's call it 12% -- or, roughly half what the Model S manages. So, the proportional 'cost' of Supercharger access, included in the price of the car, would be around $600-to-$800. A nominal sum, that could easily be borne without asking for additional fees beyond base purchase price.

 

[gregincal]

biggest reason that pay per charge will not happen is that not one of the superchargers is configured to do that.
Same for paying for electrons - the other issue with this model is that none of the main charging networks do it either. Charge point came out and said there is no money in billing electrons.
The choice is either free with car or fee as an option. Most of the others are none starters.

Not to say that they will do this, but I disagree that the superchargers are not configured to do this. I think we have pretty good evidence that the superchargers report the details of every charge (including what car charged) back to a central database. Easy enough to bill based on that.

 

[jeffro01]

Not to say that they will do this, but I disagree that the superchargers are not configured to do this. I think we have pretty good evidence that the superchargers report the details of every charge (including what car charged) back to a central database. Easy enough to bill based on that.

Only it's not nearly as simple as you seem to think it would be. There would be significant initial costs, both financially, and potentially politically depending on what model Tesla decided to go with, to get such a system going. Doable sure, but I wouldn't expect Tesla to seriously look at it until they could generate enough revenue from such a system to pay for it's setup and continued operation.

Jeff

 

[Red Sage]

jreffro01: Correct.

• The Great State of Missouri (under the influence of 'independent franchised dealerships') actually tried to sneak past legislation that would have suspended 100% of Tesla Motors' operations, from sales, to service, and potentially including operation of Superchargers, back in 2014.
• The Great State of Michigan prevents all sales and service operations by Tesla Motors, except those that would be in support of 'independent franchised dealerships'.
• The Great State of Texas has somehow run out of time in the legislature both in 2013 and 2015, and has failed to put through a vote on whether or not Tesla Motors will be allowed to actually sell cars there. They only meet once every two years, so the 2017 session is the last chance before the release of Tesla Model ≡.

People forget how tough the political situation can be for Tesla Motors.

 

[igotzzoom]

Supercharger would be make-it-or-break it for me on the Model 3. I have to think it will at least be offered as an option. As mentioned...not something you'd necessarily use every day, but the peace of mind knowing it's there when you need it is worth it.