Bokonon
Title-customizing Member
That's what I'm expecting to see. As I understand it, that's how it worked if you had a Model X reservation and wanted, say, the five-seat configuration.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
That's what I'm expecting to see. As I understand it, that's how it worked if you had a Model X reservation and wanted, say, the five-seat configuration.
What other performance EV did you have in mind?
Model 3 is supposed to be EV for the masses, not for people who want to go to the track. Non-P Teslas still have great acceleration. Good they're trying to keep it simple at first to maximize production, then additional features or options may be added. It shows they learn from their mistakes.
I was on the fence for AWD; I would have loved the extra performance that it brings, but I never would have needed the traction. This makes my decision a lot easier - RWD, AP, and larger battery, and get it ASAP. I made a second reservation back in October, I guess I can obsess over AWD when that one comes up.
It does surprise me a bit; they know how to build AWD, so building those first would have kept average price up, would have been sellable to everyone (desert to snow) who could afford it, and would have kept the Tesla rep for power/performance up. Of course, shipping RWD first might push quite a number of performance-first people over to the S.
It does surprise me a bit; they know how to build AWD, so building those first would have kept average price up, would have been sellable to everyone (desert to snow) who could afford it, and would have kept the Tesla rep for power/performance up. Of course, shipping RWD first might push quite a number of performance-first people over to the S.
This is my first time seeing that a Colorado Senator is proposing to repeal the State EV tax incentive, though I'm not surprised. Given that the legislature is split, with the Reps barely having a majority in the Senate and the Dems having a stronger hold in the House, and the Dems having the governor, do you think it is that likely that such a bill will pass? I have to think its not that likely...hmm..
My budget math does not count much or any of the federal tax credit, but I have been relying on the State credit. :/
It takes time to engineer, tool, mfr, and document any feature. And it takes money before 1 car ships. So RWD only will save initial unit cost and get it to market quicker.
Yeah, that was me. I found it laughable that the release of an AWD version would drop the value of a RWD version
Big difference being that the S was launched without any confirmation there'd ever be an AWD option available. If you're in the market for a performance vehicle, why would you buy the RWD option believing the better performing AWD will be right around the corner? The X was launched with AWD and both the X and S don't offer a performance version without AWD currently. Likely because the demand is not there for a P with no D.
So if the goal is streamlining production, I don't see why they'd offer a P version at launch.
Sky. Not Falling.
Not a disaster. A smart move as part of the focus on simplifying production and maximizing production ramp up. Dual Motors will come in 2018. Life will go on.
Ookami
Member
I want to believe it will not pass but given the current state of politics I feel anything is possible.
Zaphod
Galaxy President (former)
Just because someone wants a P-version doesn't necessarily mean they want to go to the track. It's still a sedan, not a track car. If I want to go the track, I'll take my Porsche. I know even non-performance S's offer good acceleration (I've driven a few), but I'm accustomed to even better and if I can afford it, why not. Major driving force is wife wants to finally get something with 4 doors and usable rear seats instead of 2 doors. But still want the performance I'm accustomed too.
As far as alternatives, about the only one I am considering is the Jaguar I-pace, possible the Lucid Air. But those would be even longer wait. Most likely I would get a CPO S or X if the 3 turns out to not fit my needs.
Fair enough. Better to keep expectations low I suppose. Fortunately, the state of politics here seems to be more balanced, if not slightly leaning the other way than what is going on at the federal level. We will see. Thanks for the heads up though. I'll be working on adjusting my expectations for the potential of no credits available.
The difference in range is marginal, isn't it, something like a few percentage points?
An even longer wait, and much higher prices. Those cars (if they are ever built) will compete with the Model S, not the Model 3. Sounds like what you really want is the Model S P100D. The Model 3 is intended as a mass market car, not for those whose other car is a Porsche.
wilhelmspencer
Model 3 Reserved 3/31/16 In Store 10:20 PST
Its only about 10 miles increase for the S and X I think. But I would consider it a secondary minor benefit to having better traction, and a little quicker.
arjay
member
so i am seeing a mixed bag here.. FIrst off, I am about to pick up my CPO next week or week after. I will then reserve a model 3.
I live in Iowa, where we get snow, etc... However, when I had trucks, or AWD or any car (ive had a LOT) I never cared. In my truck, i used 4x4 or AWD for a truck 2x a year. 90% of the time the snow falls, it sucks for a day, and its plowed and streets are fine a day later.
The actual days per year that I would really need AWD may be 5 total.
I realize that is different in places like BUffalo or Colorado etc.
To me, ill probably still go early if I can, and the range is good. I will NOT get in early if there isnt a big battery option with at least 275 miles of range.
If they plan to limp out with the equiv of a S60 barebones config with 1 battery option, No P or D, then thats a HUGE mistake
I live in Iowa, where we get snow, etc... However, when I had trucks, or AWD or any car (ive had a LOT) I never cared. In my truck, i used 4x4 or AWD for a truck 2x a year. 90% of the time the snow falls, it sucks for a day, and its plowed and streets are fine a day later.
The actual days per year that I would really need AWD may be 5 total.
I realize that is different in places like BUffalo or Colorado etc.
To me, ill probably still go early if I can, and the range is good. I will NOT get in early if there isnt a big battery option with at least 275 miles of range.
If they plan to limp out with the equiv of a S60 barebones config with 1 battery option, No P or D, then thats a HUGE mistake
This being a commuter car for me, I don't really need AWD. We have an AWD CUV that we use for road trips with the corgi (which I hope we will eventually replace with the Y). I've been going back and forth about AWD but this cements it for me. It makes sense that they are doing this to streamline production in the beginning. It can be easy to miss the fact that a lot of people who signed up may already be stretching to afford this car and therefore not be interested in shelling out additional $$ for AWD/Performance. If going this route will get the car in to more people's hands as fast as possible, I'm all for it.
The one thing I'm concerned about is missing out on other features (other than EAP/FSD) that maybe introduced along with AWD. Will there also be tech that is omitted in the beginning that will show up after a few months? That would really suck. But then again, it may be impossible to "keep up" as well.
The one thing I'm concerned about is missing out on other features (other than EAP/FSD) that maybe introduced along with AWD. Will there also be tech that is omitted in the beginning that will show up after a few months? That would really suck. But then again, it may be impossible to "keep up" as well.
Zaphod
Galaxy President (former)
Want P100D, yes, but not going to spend $160K for it. I'll spend $80K for performance version 3. I rather prefer a smaller car over an S. Not going to lose any sleep over it and get wrapped up in all the commotion from the latest revelations. Will see what really pans out come launch and configuration time.
Where do you suggest they shave $80,000 off the car?
It will be hard to get a MS60 down by $30k to make a base M3, but where to shave $50,000 more off the car will be harder.
I find this news quite disappointing yet understandable.
For those who regularly drive in California's higher mountains, AWD is generally considered a must-have. Our authorities are very quick to require snow chains, and the only way to mostly avoid this requirement is to have AWD. It doesn't matter how good one's snow driving skills may be, or how good one's tires are - without AWD, you'll be getting down in the road grime and installing chains to satisfy the authorities. And I hate having to drive with chains on roads that may actually be mostly free of snow.
At present, our vehicles are 2WD, as we chose to purchase a pre-owned 2012 Model S rather than spending tens of thousands more for a newer Model S with AWD. We figured we'd get through a winter season or two installing chains as needed until we're able to replace our family's Prius with a Model 3. (We previously had an ICE car with AWD, but it was getting pretty old and we sold it when we got the Model S.)
So, I guess our biggest concern would be missing the $7500 tax credit on a Model 3 with AWD. This is less of a concern than whether Tesla is able to successfully ramp up Model 3 production for the mass market. But it does hurt on a personal level.
I suppose that before next winter kicks in, we could sell our 2012 Model S and replace it with a late model, used (or discounted inventory) Model S or X that has AWD and maybe AP2. Then forget about AWD on the Model 3. That would cost more, but we'd have a nicer fleet of cars.
On the other hand, if our tax credit only drops from $7500 to $3750 on a Model 3 with AWD, that's probably not worth agonizing over.
For those who regularly drive in California's higher mountains, AWD is generally considered a must-have. Our authorities are very quick to require snow chains, and the only way to mostly avoid this requirement is to have AWD. It doesn't matter how good one's snow driving skills may be, or how good one's tires are - without AWD, you'll be getting down in the road grime and installing chains to satisfy the authorities. And I hate having to drive with chains on roads that may actually be mostly free of snow.
At present, our vehicles are 2WD, as we chose to purchase a pre-owned 2012 Model S rather than spending tens of thousands more for a newer Model S with AWD. We figured we'd get through a winter season or two installing chains as needed until we're able to replace our family's Prius with a Model 3. (We previously had an ICE car with AWD, but it was getting pretty old and we sold it when we got the Model S.)
So, I guess our biggest concern would be missing the $7500 tax credit on a Model 3 with AWD. This is less of a concern than whether Tesla is able to successfully ramp up Model 3 production for the mass market. But it does hurt on a personal level.
I suppose that before next winter kicks in, we could sell our 2012 Model S and replace it with a late model, used (or discounted inventory) Model S or X that has AWD and maybe AP2. Then forget about AWD on the Model 3. That would cost more, but we'd have a nicer fleet of cars.
On the other hand, if our tax credit only drops from $7500 to $3750 on a Model 3 with AWD, that's probably not worth agonizing over.
Similar threads
