Model 3: the true S killer?

[Max*]

Did EM/JB/Tesla every say that the base model 3 will be able to do 200 miles?

I know he said the Model 3 will be able to do 200 real world miles, and $35k base price, but I don't recall is he ever stated that the base Model 3 will do 200 miles... anyone have a link?

 

[EcoHeliGuy]

Did EM/JB/Tesla every say that the base model 3 will be able to do 200 miles?

I know he said the Model 3 will be able to do 200 real world miles, and $35k base price, but I don't recall is he ever stated that the base Model 3 will do 200 miles... anyone have a link?

I'm not Sure what your asking, Tesla has been quoting EPA range (real world miles) since the Model S got an EPA rating.

 

[Max*]

I'm not Sure what your asking, Tesla has been quoting EPA range (real world miles) since the Model S got an EPA rating.

They said that the Model 3 will have 200 real world miles. They said the Model 3 will start at $35k. Did they ever say that the Model 3 will have 200 real world miles AT a price point of $35k?

Does that help?

 

[Model 3]

Did EM/JB/Tesla every say that the base model 3 will be able to do 200 miles?

I know he said the Model 3 will be able to do 200 real world miles, and $35k base price, but I don't recall is he ever stated that the base Model 3 will do 200 miles... anyone have a link?

It is said - from Elon - that Model 3 will have a minimum of 200 real world miles. In my book this tells me that no version of the Model 3 will have less.

http://cleantechnica.com/2015/03/23/musk-tesla-model-iii-must-200-miles-real-world/

Musk: Tesla Model 3 Must Have 200 Miles Or More “In Real World”

...

Musk made the following comment in reference to a question about the range of the more-affordable Tesla Model 3.
“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.”



The Tesla CEO then went on to say;

“Anything below 200 miles isn’t passing grade. Most people looking for 20% more than that.”



So what’s he mean by “in the real world?” More than just an MTV reality show, the “real world” phrase is often tossed around in reference to the driving range of electric vehicles. The EPA-rated range of electric cars is generally attainable, but only in what even automakers must admit are ideal conditions — flat roads, minimal air conditioning use, and optimal battery temperature. Cold weather, steep hills, and cranking the A/C can all reduce battery life by anywhere from 10% to 50%.


When Musk says the Model 3 must be able to travel 200 miles in the real world, he is implying that more range might actually be built into the pack by the EPA’s standards.

 

[EcoHeliGuy]

Oh, yes I'll find it

Someone beat me too it, see above

 

[mikevbf]

Once again, the most popular car in the intended market segment has been the BMW 3-Series. For several years the 3-Series used the same motors as 5-Series and 7-Series cars. Each time that was done, acceleration was better in the smaller, lighter 3-Series vehicles. BMW chose to 'protect' the 5-Series and 7-Series by limiting most trim levels of 3-Series to 130 MPH maximum speed, instead of 155 MPH. Further protection was offered by giving the 3-Series a much smaller fuel tank than its siblings, limiting its maximum range. I do not believe that Tesla Motors will resort to any such arbitrary limitations to Model ≡. Because it will be smaller and lighter, for a given battery pack capacity, the Model ≡ will have a greater range and better overall performance than a Model S. It must. Otherwise, no one will have a reason to buy it.

The Model 3 might weigh more becasue to save money it will not have the weight saving aluminum in the S and X. But batteries weigh a lot and I bet the S and X will have more of them which brings me to my next speculation...

However, being larger cars the Model X and S will always be able to physically fit larger battery packs. So overall they still may end up having the best range (or at least equivalent range).

I am going to go out on a limb here and suggest that at the same time the Model 3 is announced with over 200 miles of range and what ever pack is needed to accomplish that, Tesla Motors will announce the 100 kWh for the S and X which will not be available on the 3 for the exact reason gregincal mentions above. This way the excitement and hence demand for the X and S will be sustained while waiting for the 3. The only problem is how pissed this will make the high end signature and other early Model X buyers who could really use the larger battery for things like towing.

 

[malcolm]

However, being larger cars the Model X and S will always be able to physically fit larger battery packs. So overall they still may end up having the best range (or at least equivalent range).

If they can use the same packaging with little modification, that's true (different cell chemistry and/or different cell diameter).

However the battery pack is a key structural component of the car and any significant change to that would have a knock on effect on crash testing for different markets etc. This is costly.

There comes a point where the re-engineering the S (or the X) becomes significant and what seems a trivial upgrade (to us) involves a lot of time and engineering effort from Tesla.

Now they're all enthusiastic engineers and would love the opportunity but Model 3 is a mammoth undertaking.

But I hope/wish they can keep Model S with an equivalent range to the 3 rather than letting it fall too far behind.

However, there may be many Model S owners who may be surprised by announcements on 31st and baffled about the gradual lack of significant hardware upgrades for the S and confused as to why Tesla don't want to go through a re-run of something as seemingly straightforward as P85DL.

 

[Max*]

It is said - from Elon - that Model 3 will have a minimum of 200 real world miles. In my book this tells me that no version of the Model 3 will have less.

http://cleantechnica.com/2015/03/23/musk-tesla-model-iii-must-200-miles-real-world/

Oh, yes I'll find it

Someone beat me too it, see above

Thanks.

I forgot which site I was reading this weekend (I want to say CleanElectra, but from the wording of the article it may have been Seeking Alpha, heh), that the Model 3 will only come with 200 miles as an upgraded battery pack, that the base $35k will be way way less; just wanted to see if their theory/speculation has any basis.

 

[vinnie97]

If "way less" were true, the Nissan Leaf aside from looks would already have won.

 

[malcolm]

Unfortunately the thing holding back the full potential of the Leaf is the word Nissan :-(

 

[jbcarioca]

Thanks.

I forgot which site I was reading this weekend (I want to say CleanElectra, but from the wording of the article it may have been Seeking Alpha, heh), that the Model 3 will only come with 200 miles as an upgraded battery pack, that the base $35k will be way way less; just wanted to see if their theory/speculation has any basis.

as Model 3 just posted I believe the promised 200 mile EPA rated range will be the base Model 3. The higher spec models will be more. We may be confident that Model S ranges will be higher except for, perhaps, the highest spec versions that might end out comparable with those of S. We all need to remember that the highest spec Model 3 will probably be about the maxed out BMW M3, or about $100,000. I'll wager that with have range and performance galore.

 

[Red Sage]

However, being larger cars the Model X and S will always be able to physically fit larger battery packs. So overall they still may end up having the best range (or at least equivalent range).

I did include the qualifying phrase "for a given battery pack capacity" above. You even quoted it. A 60 kWh Model ≡ will have a greater range than a 60 kWh Model S. The same will be true of 70 kWh, 85 kWh, or 90 kWh versions as well, should they come to pass. But indeed, Tesla Motors may well choose to debut 120 kWh, 135 kWh, or 170 kWh battery pack capacities on larger Generation II vehicles first. By now, Tesla Motors should have noticed that highest capacity battery packs sell the best for Model S, and presumably Model X as well. Trust that should a 90 kWh or 100 kWh version of the Model ≡ be available, it will undoubtedly have more range than a Model S 70 -- for less money.

- - - Updated - - -

We all need to remember that the highest spec Model 3 will probably be about the maxed out BMW M3, or about $100,000. I'll wager that with have range and performance galore.

No it won't. The highest specification for Model X costs quite a bit less than Porsche Cayenne Turbo S. The Mercedes-AMG S-Class costs nearly $100,000 more than a maxed out Model S. The Porsche Panamera Exclusive Series starts at over $260,000. Trust that the Tesla Model ≡ Performance editions will represent a relative bargain in its class of vehicles, just as Performance versions of Tesla Generation II vehicles do. Expect a fully loaded everything and the kitchen sink version of a Model ≡ Performance to be available for roughly twice its base price... Or ~$70,000. Then watch sales of BMW 3-Series ANYTHING dry up in the wind.

 

[Red Sage]

The Model 3 might weigh more becasue to save money it will not have the weight saving aluminum in the S and X. But batteries weigh a lot and I bet the S and X will have more of them which brings me to my next speculation...

For the sake of safety and durability, the casing that surrounds a battery pack is made of thick metal, and even in aluminum will weigh several hundred pounds. If one presumes that a smaller pack, with a new formulation of battery cells that weigh less individually, would require fewer cells for a given overall capacity... That means the raw weight of the batteries themselves would be lower as well. Let's say a 60 kWh battery pack that would have weighed 1,300 lbs in a Model S, would only weigh 800-to-1,000 lbs instead. So, in a Model ≡ 60 with a curb weight of 3,700 lbs, its weight without the battery pack would be perhaps 2,700-to-2,900 lbs. Now imagine adding the weight of a 15-to-17 gallon tank of fuel to the car... And you have a relative curb weight of 2,815-to-3,015 lbs or so. Compare that to the lightest current BMW 3-Series at 3,295 lbs, and you are in good shape. Don't worry about it.

I am going to go out on a limb here and suggest that at the same time the Model 3 is announced with over 200 miles of range and what ever pack is needed to accomplish that, Tesla Motors will announce the 100 kWh for the S and X which will not be available on the 3 for the exact reason gregincal mentions above.

Pardon me while I climb a limb or three higher so as to [PEE] on your parade... What if the base version of the Model ≡ is announced with a 100 kWh battery pack, just to further emphasize the superiority of Tesla Motors technology over EVERYONE else on the market? Most other EVs under $40,000 don't even have 25% that capacity. And GM's Chevrolet BOLT would have its 60 kWh battery pack announcement soundly blown out of the water. The 100 kWh battery pack could be the sole offering for Model ≡, have Supercharger access included, and greatly simply the options for ordering and manufacturing. Color, creature comforts, RWD or AWD -- that's it. Meanwhile, it would solidify my position that Tesla Motors does not give one whit about Model ≡ sales encroaching upon future Customers of the Model S or Model X. People will buy what they want and can afford. Period. Oh, then... Around 18-to-24 months later, they could introduce a 60 kWh version for $25,000 and shut up the entire world once again. Just for the fun of it.

 

[aronth5]

If they can use the same packaging with little modification, that's true (different cell chemistry and/or different cell diameter).

However the battery pack is a key structural component of the car and any significant change to that would have a knock on effect on crash testing for different markets etc. This is costly.

There comes a point where the re-engineering the S (or the X) becomes significant and what seems a trivial upgrade (to us) involves a lot of time and engineering effort from Tesla.

Now they're all enthusiastic engineers and would love the opportunity but Model 3 is a mammoth undertaking.

But I hope/wish they can keep Model S with an equivalent range to the 3 rather than letting it fall too far behind.

However, there may be many Model S owners who may be surprised by announcements on 31st and baffled about the gradual lack of significant hardware upgrades for the S and confused as to why Tesla don't want to go through a re-run of something as seemingly straightforward as P85DL.

Malcom do you actually think that Tesla will have the Model S/X fall behind the Model 3? Not a chance but you can certainly continue to think that:smile:
First, the unveiling on the 31st will be devoted to the Model 3. The last thing Tesla will do is tell everyone they are going to slow down hardware upgrades of the S and X.
Second, car makers earn their highest profits on the their high end models. Just look at Audi, BMW and Mercedes. Why do you think Tesla delivers fully loaded cars first? Tesla is not about to do what you propose knowing they make the most profit on the high end models.
Third, you keep mentioning crash testing. Why? Do you have a source that says continued enhancements, for example improved AP hardware sensors will require crash testing? Didn't think so. What about folding second row seats? Not saying that is going to happen but do you think they would require crash tests? Didn't think so.
Please come up with some reason, any reason, why the Model S and Model X are at their end of development life.
thanks

 

[Darryl]

Malcom do you actually think that Tesla will have the Model S/X fall behind the Model 3? Not a chance but you can certainly continue to think that:smile:
First, the unveiling on the 31st will be devoted to the Model 3. The last thing Tesla will do is tell everyone they are going to slow down hardware upgrades of the S and X.
Second, car makers earn their highest profits on the their high end models. Just look at Audi, BMW and Mercedes. Why do you think Tesla delivers fully loaded cars first? Tesla is not about to do what you propose knowing they make the most profit on the high end models.
Third, you keep mentioning crash testing. Why? Do you have a source that says continued enhancements, for example improved AP hardware sensors will require crash testing? Didn't think so. What about folding second row seats? Not saying that is going to happen but do you think they would require crash tests? Didn't think so.
Please come up with some reason, any reason, why the Model S and Model X are at their end of development life.
thanks

Elon has already said the Model 3 is going to be 20% smaller than the Model S. He said it will go 200 miles on a charge. He has also said it is not going to be made of aluminum not at this price point. Which means it will be heavier than the S Since Model 3 is going to be the car that has to make Tesla profitable it has to have high margins. If Model X has a high demand and Model S continue to sell well very few if any will qualify for the 7500 rebate. Since they are targeting people who are interested in a $35k car they may not earn enough to qualify for the Model 3 $7500 rebate anyway. Take all of this into consideration the options is probably where the margins will be high. Even though the Model 3 is suppose to be a descently equipped car, you will have a car which has air-conditioners, electric Windows, and have decent exceleratin unlike other all electric cars but not in comparison with the Model S and X. The premium and autopilot options will be options not part of base model. There may be a 14 inch screen which is bigger than most cars in this range and probably right for a compact cars. Probably no navigation without upgrade. 3G/4G probably an upgrade You will get a decent car that is small, probably a compact (not subcompact) for a descent price which will go 200 miles on a charge. What you won't get is a downsized Model S. Model S will need to stay on the market as a luxury electric car with probably a 300 mile range. The use of the supercharger Network will not be a free and not part of base model. Either one time option or use as you go. Probably a three year warranty longer om battery.

This is all supposition based on the information we already know. Elon has said there will NOT be a prototype ready by March only high level conceptual drawings with more frequent updates than prior cars.

Again in this is my take on how you will make a base level all electric car at a $35,000 price point and still make money.

 

[EcoHeliGuy]

Elon has already said the Model 3 is going to be 20% smaller than the Model S. He said it will go 200 miles on a charge. He has also said it is not going to be made of aluminum not at this price point. Which means it will be heavier than the S Since Model 3 is going to be the car that has to make Tesla profitable it has to have high margins. If Model X has a high demand and Model S continue to sell well very few if any will qualify for the 7500 rebate. Since they are targeting people who are interested in a $35k car they may not earn enough to qualify for the Model 3 $7500 rebate anyway. Take all of this into consideration the options is probably where the margins will be high. Even though the Model 3 is suppose to be a descently equipped car, you will have a car which has air-conditioners, electric Windows, and have decent exceleratin unlike other all electric cars but not in comparison with the Model S and X. The premium and autopilot options will be options not part of base model. There may be a 14 inch screen which is bigger than most cars in this range and probably right for a compact cars. Probably no navigation without upgrade. 3G/4G probably an upgrade You will get a decent car that is small, probably a compact (not subcompact) for a descent price which will go 200 miles on a charge. What you won't get is a downsized Model S. Model S will need to stay on the market as a luxury electric car with probably a 300 mile range. The use of the supercharger Network will not be a free and not part of base model. Either one time option or use as you go. Probably a three year warranty longer om battery.

This is all supposition based on the information we already know. Elon has said there will NOT be a prototype ready by March only high level conceptual drawings with more frequent updates than prior cars.

Again in this is my take on how you will make a base level all electric car at a $35,000 price point and still make money.

You don't follow tesla much based on 80% of your predictions.

I invite you to submit your predictions below

Model 3 Reveal Bingo
Model 3 Reveal Bingo

 

[malcolm]

Malcom do you actually think that Tesla will have the Model S/X fall behind the Model 3? Not a chance but you can certainly continue to think that:smile:

Hi aronth

The S and the X just have to be better vehicles than the ICEs in their class - they don't actually need to be better than the Model 3, not once the deliveries start.

Tesla will hold off on major hardware upgrades until the Model S refresh due sometime around 2020-22 I think (otherwise - if changes can be made every year, why identify a "refresh"?).

I agree, they're not going to announce this on the 31st because, as you say, they still need money coming in from X and S sales - it could be one of the items that Elon intends to reveal closer to the 3's delivery dates.

Minor hardware upgrades for the S and X - maybe an energy density improvement, but keeping the same cell size - could still be done (and should be done) without major structural changes.

I agree that existing car makers only make profits from the high-end models. But the Model 3 is not another mass market ICE. Conventional wisdom doesn't apply. There is nothing else that comes close to the 3 - true even for the entry level version with at least a 200 mile range. :smile:

Elon is confident that he can hit $35k for the base model and it will be interesting to see what levels of tech Tesla bundles with the base model to draw people in, as well as their markup for the options (and how many people go for those).

They have the market pretty much to themselves - they can do what they like. I think we will see the Model 3 overturn this industry truism that only high-end cars bring home the bacon. :smile:

Your third point: yup, I'm only talking about expensive hardware changes. Obviously the S, X and 3 can have software improvements. I was using the example of crash testing to illustrate the idea that even something as simple as a battery pack redesign can have larger implications and may have to wait until a scheduled refresh.

The S and X will continue to be sold, but I think we will see performance differences between them narrow considerably over time. People who need a larger vehicle will buy them. But that will mean adjustments to the numbers produced and owner residuals.

Think of it as a normal vehicle life-cycle, just distorted because of the industry disruption that Tesla is doing.

 

[Red Sage]

Those who believe the Tesla Model ≡ when amount to no more than an electrified 1988 Toyota Camry as a base model, and maybe a 2008 Corolla in top trim are woefully mistaken. The Model ≡ will be at least on par with its direct competitors: AUDI A4, Acura TLX, BMW 3-Series, Cadillac ATS, Infiniti Q50, Jaguar XE, Lexus IS, and Mercedes-Benz C-Class. Please disband the League of Lowered Expectations.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

Malcom do you actually think that Tesla will have the Model S/X fall behind the Model 3? Not a chance but you can certainly continue to think that:smile:

Second, car makers earn their highest profits on the their high end models. Just look at Audi, BMW and Mercedes. Why do you think Tesla delivers fully loaded cars first? Tesla is not about to do what you propose knowing they make the most profit on the high end models.

Not always true. Because of where Audi was in their lineup refreshes, they made the decision 2 years ago to debut 4G/LTE and their new MMI/Nav, as well as lane-assist and distance keeping cruise control upgrades in their entry-level car (A3 sedan).

Then, as other models were due for their updates, they've moved that technology up through the lineup.

I would not be shocked in the least to see Tesla pull a similar tactic here, especially because, unlike the Audis, BMWs, and Merecedes of the world, Tesla still needs cash. They are going to hype up all of the cool tech you CAN get in a Model 3 (if you check a bunch of boxes on your order, and many will). It's an approach that has been tried before, and worked out just fine.

As far as announcing things for the Model S and X (like the rumored 100kwH battery), they won't do that on the 31st, because they do have to maintain some demand for the current models available.

But...since it's Tesla, it wouldn't surprise me if they said all S/X built after ___ date will come with the 100-pack installed, and available to unlock via software upgrade, while making it available to current owners as a retro-fit.

 

[EcoHeliGuy]

Those who believe the Tesla Model ≡ when amount to no more than an electrified 1988 Toyota Camry as a base model, and maybe a 2008 Corolla in top trim are woefully mistaken. The Model ≡ will be at least on par with its direct competitors: AUDI A4, Acura TLX, BMW 3-Series, Cadillac ATS, Infiniti Q50, Jaguar XE, Lexus IS, and Mercedes-Benz C-Class. Please disband the League of Lowered Expectations.

I know, seems to be a reoccurring theme.