TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

Model 3 will have less features than the S. Which one would not make it?

Discussion in 'Model 3' started by Ronist, Sep 3, 2015.

  1. Ronist

    Ronist Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    49
    Location:
    British Columbia
    To make Model 3 less expensive, one of the cost savings is less features. Which features do you think won'tt make it to the Model 3?

    Here's my list:
    - Heated folding mirrors
    - Supercharging
     
  2. Lonnie123

    Lonnie123 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2015
    Messages:
    167
    Location:
    cathedral city, ca
    #2 Lonnie123, Sep 4, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2015
    Simply doing the following will reduce cost of car quite a bit:

    - Reducing size 20%
    - Reducing Battery to ~45-50kWh, along with the gigafactory reducing cost by 30% ( this is HUGE)
    - Not using Aluminum
    - Reducing motor to ~180hp

    Those are really more car basics, but I think almost all of the cost problem is solved there. These are not "features" ... so features I think will be done away with or reduced are:

    - Retracting door handles. Might create some flush design, but they wont have the retracting mechanism
    - Premium seating / lighting
    - Obviously nothing thats not stock on the S (auto pilot, auto parking, camera based stuff mostly)
    - No pano roof/moon roof
    - Cheaper rims, hub caps
    - overall reduction in cost of materials (no expensive interior trim stuff)

    I think with all that you are basically down to where you need to be price wise.
     
  3. WarpedOne

    WarpedOne Supreme Premier

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,660
    Location:
    Slovenia, Europe
    I say wrong.

    The car does not cost as much as it does because of the feature list length but because of the developement and production costs.
    Shorter feature list will only shorten the length of customer queue.
    Heated folding mirrors costs under $50 for tesla, they would be crazy not to offer them standard. They will have to include all standard features in 35k cars to not be laughed at as 'not-real-car'.
    By far the biggest price spec item will be battery. So, the right way to do it is to optimize everything else so the car gets to 240 EPA with as few kWh as possible. But still offering seating for 5 adults (well, usual 4 + 1).
    Battery will still need to be ~60kWh to get to EPA240m. What they can do is streamline the production some more and offer less variability in options.

    Oh, and they will include some real aero-wheels:)
     
  4. Theshadows

    Theshadows Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2013
    Messages:
    1,896
    Location:
    PA
    IMO the 17" will not be there. Probably an iPad size or possibly a 13" screen.

    Autopilot will be there. Iirc Elon said all tesla cars will have it.

    Slacker might not be there.

    To compete with the 3 series and C class the trim will have to be available. Perhaps a no trim option that is upgradable.

    I think pano needs to be an option.

    AL and stainless steel body/frame is a must. That is an absolute if you want to make million mile cars. In the north eastern US when you tell someone "this car will never rust" they give you a weird look which you then have to follow up with the explanation.

    Now for what I think will be removed

    No auto closing charge port.

    No Rear heated seats

    No jump seats

    No adjustable air suspension

    No fancy spoiler like the MX has.
     
  5. robatbeach

    robatbeach Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2013
    Messages:
    53
    Location:
    Maryland
    Supercharger will absolutely be there. Removing it breaks the vision of EVs being able to make ICEs into fossils. The vision is a mid cost car that replaces the need to have any ICE in the typical house and proves why ICE "training wheels" in the hybrid model aren't needed. Removing supercharging sounds like a move a different mgt team would make if Tesla was bought.
     
  6. Yggdrasill

    Yggdrasill Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    Location:
    Kongsberg, Norway
    #6 Yggdrasill, Sep 4, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2015
    I think there will be a lot of equipment available as optional extras, but the standard model will be something like this:

    - 5 seats, standard textile seats in front, bench seat in back which fold flat capability.
    - ~200 hp, with 0-60 mph in 6-7 seconds.
    - 15" LCD touch display, with all controls except steering wheel controls
    - LCD screens for power, speed, etc.
    - Regular doors with regular door handles (though aerodynamic)
    - 240 mile EPA range (~60 kWh)
    - 10 kW charger (11 kw in europe)
    - Supercharger enabled, but limited useage, 10 times per year or something similar.
    - Equipped with AEB, ESP, ABS, TC, CC, seat belt warnings, etc.

    The options will be more fun.

    - Upgraded battery with 310 miles EPA range (~80 kWh), includes unlimited long distance use of superchargers
    - Dual motor AWD with ~400 hp, possibly performance edition with ~550 hp
    - Leather seats, panorama roof, other tires/rims, etc
    - GPS navigation
    - Autopilot
    - Air suspension
    - Tow package (Maybe not, but would be very popular in Norway.)
    - Sound System
    - Winter package
     
  7. Bangor Bob

    Bangor Bob Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2015
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    Bangor, ME
    27% gross margin and much less of the enormous sense of entitlement a very few S owners have?

    At projected gigafactory costs, a 60kWh-ish battery will cost around $6k for the cells, plus whatever the highly-automated assembly into a pack cost/amortizes down to. That's an absolute game-changer - getting into the cost territory of a high-end ICE.

    I can see cheaper base-model interior materials. I can see cooled and n-way power adjustable seats being upsell options. Likewise "premium" data connectivity (streaming audio and web access) being subscription-based.

    What I don't see is Tesla excluding access to one of their major competitive advantages, being the Supercharger network. I can almost see "n kWh of Supercharging per year included, excess kWh billed at $0.0x/kWh" to prevent abuse like the Schipol taxis, but beyond that? Difficult to see is the future, always in motion... [/Yoda]
     
  8. djplong

    djplong Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2013
    Messages:
    248
    Location:
    NH
    Why is it that people keep thinking supercharger access won't be there? Elon has said, time and time again, that it WILL be there for everything they're making now and in the future.
     
  9. ratsbew

    ratsbew Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2012
    Messages:
    371
    I think that the $35,000 base model will indeed be a "base" model. I think we'll still get the large touch screen and digital dash because those types of things aren't expensive (maybe cheaper than mechanical buttons & gauges).
    $5,000 in options will get you up to a nice RWD version. Price will probably go up to $55-60,000 on the high end.

    My parents will most likely be getting the base AWD car and I'm aiming for $50,000.
     
  10. WarpedOne

    WarpedOne Supreme Premier

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,660
    Location:
    Slovenia, Europe
    It wont be included in the base price, it will be an option as it was with S60.
     
  11. apacheguy

    apacheguy Sig 255, VIN 320

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    3,727
    Location:
    So Cal
    Not using aluminum is going to increase the weight quite a bit and have a significant range impact. I don't see how they'll get above the 200 mi rated range target.
     
  12. Yggdrasill

    Yggdrasill Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    Location:
    Kongsberg, Norway
    I don't think so, it was included with the 70 and 70D because the 60 just wasn't selling. It makes a lot more sense to include a reduced Supercharger access in the base price, and include unlimited access with the larger battery as well as have it as an option for those with the smaller battery.

    You could have an allowance for a given number of supercharger sessions (maybe 10) or charged kWh (maybe 400 kWh) per year, and if you wish to exceed this allowance you then need to pay $1000 for the unlimited access. Something along those lines, at least. This way most people who get the smaller battery won't get the supercharger access at first, but once they realize how great it is, and wish to use it more, they pay Tesla for the access.
     
  13. Yggdrasill

    Yggdrasill Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    Location:
    Kongsberg, Norway
    Or a solution that's even easier to manage: Included unlimited supercharger access for 3 years, then you need to pay $1000 for access.
     
  14. GregRF

    GregRF Squirrel Power

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2014
    Messages:
    99
    Location:
    CA
    Get rid of charger all together, use rear motor PEM for charging duties.
     
  15. Yggdrasill

    Yggdrasill Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    Location:
    Kongsberg, Norway
    That's certianly a possibility. Though I think Tesla is more likely to just improve on their current charger and use that. They've probably made close to 100k of these chargers, so they have a lot of experience with them.
     
  16. tga

    tga Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,217
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    Didn't they drop that strategy on later Roadsters to work around the AC Propulsion patents? I think they'd be on the hook for license fees if they go back to it.

    If the X comes with a single 15kW charger (as was rumored), maybe they'll use that.
     
  17. apacheguy

    apacheguy Sig 255, VIN 320

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    3,727
    Location:
    So Cal
    Can you explain what you mean by this?
     
  18. MiamiNole

    MiamiNole Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2015
    Messages:
    298
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    As someone before me indicated, I'd expect the Model 3 to at least come with the same standard features as any other entry-level luxury car. I'd also expect access to the super charger network as that's one of the biggest selling and marketing points OF owning a Tesla, from what I've seen. It personally wouldn't be a deal breaker for me, but from what I've seen just from browsing the forums, let alone talk around me, lack of extended range and/or super charger network access would definitely be deal breakers for a good chunk of prospective buyers.
     
  19. wallet.dat

    wallet.dat Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2013
    Messages:
    446
    Location:
    SW
    Not sure how reducing the motor to 180hp would reduce cost. All they'd have to do is diminish the power going into the motor via software. These aren't ICE powerplants we're talking about, where making a lot of power requires semi-exotic, expensive materials. I agree on most everything else you listed though.
     
  20. igotzzoom

    igotzzoom Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    838
    Location:
    Laguna Hills, CA
    To me, hubcaps scream "cheap." The only reason I could see them on the Model 3 or any other EV is for aerodynamic or efficiency-enhancing reasons. If they serve a justifiable purpose, then that's understandable, but if the only purpose is cost-cutting, I think that would detract from the premium image Tesla is trying to maintain. I think flush-mounted (but not power-retracting) door handles are likely. In terms of power output, I don't know how much would be saved by going with a 180 hp vs. 250 hp motor. Other than a slight difference in material costs, I don't see the big savings. The output could be modulated by software. Maybe limit to 180 hp (134 kW) in "Eco" mode, and give the full 250 hp in "Performance" mode.
     

Share This Page