Model 3: the true S killer?

[malcolm]

No... it will be an "S" killer. It think it will be an "S" enhancer.

Long term, yes. Just as the S and the 3 will eventually enhance the Roadster.

But if you are a current S or X owner it isn't going to feel like that. You will feel that Tesla has killed your car in terms of value.

Will there be a new battery/inverter/motor for the S? Yes, but not necessarily at a price/in a timeframe that will suit.

Will you feel undervalued/abandoned as a loyal customer by this? You will have to decide that.

I'm trying to flag up that everything Tesla is doing is Version 1.0. There will ALWAYS be something better every so often - with software it's every few months. With hardware, not so much. And this is the nub of the problem.


Tesla have been working flat out on, let's be honest, low volume vehicles. Makes total sense to do it that way.


This is my point:

We haven't seen Tesla make an Electric Vehicle. Not one.
Not one that truly exploits the full potential of what this technology represents in a mass manufacturing context uninhibited by other models/mindsets. Kudos to Nissan for the Leaf but it's hobbled by old-auto thinking.


Model 3 is the first move in that direction. Taking everything they've learned and all the mistakes they've made and starting to run with it.


This is why Model 3 is going to kill (your) Model X or S. Because it's their first real EV. And therefore, because it has to.

 

[techmaven]

Model 3 is smaller... meaning there is less space for the battery pack. Likely we'll see something like 55-60 kWh and something 65-70 kWh. At 70 kWh, 5.3C discharge is 370 kW, or 500 hp. A P90D+L can do 475 kW, or 636 hp. Given the likely materials differences due to cost, the 3 is unlikely to have substantial weight savings over the S, so the top line performance crown is therefore remain with the S over the 3.

 

[roblab]

This is my point:

We haven't seen Tesla make an Electric Vehicle. Not one.
Not one that truly exploits the full potential of what this technology represents in a mass manufacturing context uninhibited by other models/mindsets. Kudos to Nissan for the Leaf but it's hobbled by old-auto thinking.


Model 3 is the first move in that direction. Taking everything they've learned and all the mistakes they've made and starting to run with it.


This is why Model 3 is going to kill (your) Model X or S. Because it's their first real EV. And therefore, because it has to.

I'm sure you understand what you're trying to say, but after reading all the comments, it sounds like you are having some other issue that is making you irritated.

My Model S, I realize, will improve, and newer ones will be improved. How a cheap S will ruin owning a Premium Performance Sedan doesn't make sense to me.

And your comment that Tesla hasn't built an electric car makes absolutely no sense. If I read into that statement that Tesla hasn't buile a CHEAP electric, well, maybe that's what you're after.

I just drove a couple thousand miles this weekend in a comfortable, quiet, smooth car. This car is able to beat (racing) every car that I saw on the whole trip, has more storage space, makes far less pollution, has very little maintenance, needs little service. And I fill up in minutes while I grab a sandwich. You know all that. It also looks luxurious, sexy, gorgeous, unlike most cars on the road.

I personally believe you are wrong, or maybe just have a headache. Model III will not kill, or damage, or lessen my joyful experience at all. And Model III is not, will not be, Tesla's first EV. That's ridiculous. Or maybe Ludicrous. But you have your dream. I have mine. And I drive it. :smile:

 

[McRat]

Model 3 is smaller... meaning there is less space for the battery pack. Likely we'll see something like 55-60 kWh and something 65-70 kWh. At 70 kWh, 5.3C discharge is 370 kW, or 500 hp. A P90D+L can do 475 kW, or 636 hp. Given the likely materials differences due to cost, the 3 is unlikely to have substantial weight savings over the S, so the top line performance crown is therefore remain with the S over the 3.

Current (har) proven EV batteries can discharge at >6.5C at both full charge and depleted charge. So it isn't unreasonable to create a car with a 50kWh battery, that weighs under 4000lb with driver, that will push 435HP at all charge states, but could perhaps touch 475HP on top charge.

This could run door to door with a P90DL according to Tesla specs, which are 532HP in a 5000lb rolling weight including driver.

 

[malcolm]

No not irritated in the slightest. I'm just trying to get my own head around what disruption means. I love the S, the X has some great ideas and I'm really looking forward to the 3 launch.

What I'm trying to get at is that the true meaning of disruption is a base model 3 which is $35,000 and which out accelerates a P90DL and has equal if not better range.

What madness is this? This is the full implication of Teslas business plan. Leverage the tech. Drive down costs.

Now everyone says the car will be 20% smaller and automatically assumes that means a 20% smaller battery. Not if you just shrink the Frunk. Will the 3 have a battery physically as big as the S? Yes it could be done. Will Tesla be able to fill it with more than 50-60kWh-worth of batteries from the outset? That depends on the Gigafactory.

Everyone will point to Musk's statement about 200 miles. True, but if costs can be driven lower, more range will be provided. Musk's comment was actually about people's expectations of acceptability not necessarily about what is possible. (plus model s owners would be upset - just look what happened when they announced the D)

Do Tesla have a 3 which can out perform a P90DL? Of course they have. Two years ago they had an S with a claimed 500 mile range.

Do they have a 3 which can outperform a P90DL that they can sell for $35,000? I have no idea. But if they do, they're going to launch it.

But that makes no business sense! If you are trying to copy Mercedes or whoever, no it doesn't. It's like the accepted wisdom quoted earlier that top of the range models provide >80% of the line value. Only true in Big Auto.

Tesla aren't trying to copy Big Auto. They are trying to drive the adoption of EVs by making each model the very best it can be. Hence we have the S which can out accelerate cars which cost twice as much. Each model is aiming to be best in class, and not necessarily fit within a model roster where the S is always at the top. (Usually it will be, at least until the Roadster gets Maximum Plaid)

I appreciate all my posts may not actually be making this clear.

 

[techmaven]

Current (har) proven EV batteries can discharge at >6.5C at both full charge and depleted charge. So it isn't unreasonable to create a car with a 50kWh battery, that weighs under 4000lb with driver, that will push 435HP at all charge states, but could perhaps touch 475HP on top charge.

This could run door to door with a P90DL according to Tesla specs, which are 532HP in a 5000lb rolling weight including driver.

While there are LiFePO4 and NMC batteries with higher discharge c-rates, the specific energy levels are far lower for those chemistries. It is unlikely that the Model 3 has lower specific energy... much more likely that they increase another notch in specific energy with more silicon in the anode, but that also likely limits the tolerable c-rate. The Model 3 battery chemistry likely has to optimize specific energy (Wh/kg) over volumetric energy density (Wh/l) - PHEV's have much higher volumetric energy density but much worse specific energy.

 

[GoTslaGo]

Model 3 will no more kill Model S than C Class kills S Class or 3 Series kills 7 Series.

Some current Model S owners prefer a smaller car and will switch.

But there will also be a 7 Series ,A8, Lexus LS or S Class owner that will take his place because he has been sitting on the sideline waiting for Tesla to prove its long term viability, to increase the size of the Supercharger Network to fit his needs, or to cross 300 EPA range barrier. Or any number of reasons why people feel comfortable switching from old tech to new tech.

This is the target that Tesla is aiming for. Tesla wants to roll out adoption for EVs, but you make it with a compelling, desirable brand. Build it as a BMW/MB premium brand. For comparison (my thoughts):

Model 3 (base) = 328xi
Model 3 (up battery) = 335xi
Model 3 (PxxD) = M3 (or no equivalent as Techmaven noted above)
Model S (70/70D) = 535i or xi
Model S (90D) = 7 series
Model S (P90D) = no equivalent

The newer interior refinements of Model X will trickle down to the newer S's. This will bring in the sideline 7/S/A7/A8 owners, who all exclaim that the insides of the S feels cheap in comparison.

The 3 will decimate the 3 series/A4/C classes. This is the target. Not Chevy, Ford, Toyota, Lexus even. Goal is to prove that EVs are compelling. Generate buzz, create an upscale, desirable vehicle that is attainable. Then the other car makers will start to take EVs more seriously and bring out more affordable models. If by 2025-2030 the other makers don't, then Tesla will have the market size and staying power to create a more affordable and desirable vehicle for the masses, if they want.

So no, 3 is not an S killer. It rounds out the fleet options. Direct comparison is BMW.

PS--that'll be fun, to see an 3-PxxDL shoot out vs. S-P90DL vs. X-P90DL (latter two having been done):biggrin:

 

[malcolm]

Tesla wants to roll out adoption for EVs, but you make it with a compelling, desirable brand. Build it as a BMW/MB premium brand.:

But in the short term it will be uncomfortable as new Tesla models outperform yet undercut older models.

This isn't Toyota building Lexus. This is Spacex tossing a limpet mine into ULA's swimming pool.

 

[GoTslaGo]

Nice analogy! :biggrin:

But it will be 1.5-2 years before 3 comes out. S will be further refined by the time 3 rolls out.

 

[malcolm]

In terms of software, absolutely. As will the X. But the next big leap forward is lower hardware costs which is what Model 3 brings to the table. I think Musk will keep the true capabilities of the 3 under wraps until the S and X upgrade paths/costs are clearer.

The implications to existing customers at the D launch and the fun with P85DL wasn't anticipated.

 

[Fallenone]

I think high end model 3 would be base version model S killer. They can make the high end model 3 faster, longer range, and potentially more luxury features than the base version of Model S. All of these make the high end model 3 about the same price with base version model S at about $70k: 35k base + supercharger 2.5k + autopilot 2.5k + dual motors 5k + bigger battery 10k + ludicrous mode 10k + premium features 5k~10k. In this way, as long as they keep high end model S more competitive (maybe bigger battery that pushes range over 300 miles, even better luxury features, etc.), high end model 3 would more or less cannibalize base version of model S. But this is a good thing for the company. Options like bigger batteries, better motors, luxury features always carry much higher profit margins. In this way they are effectively increasing their gross margin.

 

[Lex]

So for me, there is certainly the size thing -- I need a car about the size of the Model S. Model S is a "full-sized" car. Model 3 will not be this. Optimistic people are expecting the capacity of a full-sized car without a "freakmobile" appearance but there's no such thing really.

But then there is the tech and novelty thing. I genuinely fear not having Elon's attention. It's scary with Model X already and I know it will just grow worse with the Model 3 pre-launch and for a year or so after. But then I just hope as a bigger guy, and by then an older guy, Elon will be back around to the Model S. After a quick launch of a totally new and totally innovative Roadster that is ... with first owners getting their hovercars while Elon is on his way to Mars #SpaceX

 

[vinnie97]

Musk already talked about a possible 500 miles Model S two years ago. I personally think that the 3 will get the 250 miles range, and the S will jump up to a 120kWh or something with 450+ mile range in two years, for the price a 90 is now

So you're proposing that the Model 3 will only have one battery option or is this just your base model prediction?

 

[malcolm]

I realise that the analogy with Spacex isn't quite correct. Rocket engines haven't been significantly redesigned since the sixties. Spacex have had scope for considerable cost reductions even before they got to first stage landings, which are an astonishing leap forward.

I have been hoping for a similar great leap forward at Tesla but I'm guessing that there aren't the same opportunities for cost reductions in the traditional auto fields of body in white and fitting out.

So it's all down to the battery and the drivetrain and Musk's unique ability and opportunity to migrate ideas from aerospace.

The Falcon doors taught Tesla that suppliers aren't necessarily innovators in engineering. And if Tesla has had to bring a lot more of the 3 in-house then this would tie in nicely with rumors that the 3 will be a smaller S. There just isn't time for anything more ambitious if costs are going to stay down.

I've still got my fingers crossed for something extraordinary in terms of price/range/performance on the 31st but then just a smaller/cheaper Model 60S would still be pretty darn impressive.

Plus this would be Tesla's best chance ever of launching a car on time!

 

[ModelNforNerd]

It will not kill the S, because 2 forces will (potentially) be at work.

1. S owners may want to downsize/take advantage of the new tech being put in the 3.

2. 1st time Tesla owners who start in the 3, may end up in better financial situations in a few years, and buy an S or an X (or a Y), as the new tech that they've become accustomed to, moves "up" the lineup.


Not to mention: with S owners who want to downsize, the Model S CPO market is about to help welcome a lot of new drivers into the brand who may not have made the jump a year or 2 ago.

In the short term, 3-6 months post 3 launch, the Model S owners will take a hit, but if they have some TSLA stock, it won't hurt as bad. :wink:

 

[aronth5]

I think high end model 3 would be base version model S killer. They can make the high end model 3 faster, longer range, and potentially more luxury features than the base version of Model S. .

Your assuming they won't also upgrade the Model S batteries so to assume the high end model 3 has longer range is conjecture at best.

 

[Canuck]

S and X owners naturally want to protect the value of their investment...

You lost me there. I've invested in many things but I've never looked at buying any vehicle as an "investment", or something whose value needing "protecting". I know that driving a new car off the lot is instant depreciation, and it continues daily after that. I also knew with my Tesla and Leaf that depreciation would likely be worse than a traditional car, given the high costs of batteries that will come down significantly with mass production, and also with advancements in technology.

But I also know with electric vehicles, like any product, ICE or electric, there will always be a premium paid for a higher grade product. That will continue with Tesla. I can see the Model 3 easily becoming more appealing than the current Model S, but that's assuming the Model S stays the same. There's so much room for improvement, and advancement in technology, that those with the means will always be able to buy a better product than the masses. That's just the nature of technology combined with the nature of capitalism. The Model 3 won't change any of that.

 

[malcolm]

You lost me there. I've invested in many things but I've never looked at buying any vehicle as an "investment", or something whose value needing "protecting".

Yes but we're not talking "normal" here :biggrin:

2014 P85D Owners... hindsight? regrets?

Ludicrous Upgrade Scheduling?

 

[IsellCisco]

If the 3 is anything like what we hope that it is; there is no way it will not "disrupt" the S. Here are my thoughts on what could happen:

1. As Malcolm has laid out: Model 3 with be next gen tech, perform as well as an S, and nicer overall. This will disrupt the S, no logical way around it.
2. The 3 will be neuterd. 0-60 in no less than 5.4 seconds. No larger battery option. No AP.
3. Model S will have a significant redesign / upgrades.

Or some combination of 2 and 3.

 

[Max*]

If the 3 is anything like what we hope that it is; there is no way it will not "disrupt" the S. Here are my thoughts on what could happen:

1. As Malcolm has laid out: Model 3 with be next gen tech, perform as well as an S, and nicer overall. This will disrupt the S, no logical way around it.
2. The 3 will be neuterd. 0-60 in no less than 5.4 seconds. No larger battery option. No AP.
3. Model S will have a significant redesign / upgrades.

Or some combination of 2 and 3.

That is outside the realm of possibilities (on the bolded). EM has stated that Model 3 will likely ship autonomous ready.