SSonnentag
埃隆•馬斯克
I only see the iPace competing with the Model 3. The iPace is just too small to compete with the S or X.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Performance Model 3 is too cheap - about to drop some truth bombs.
- Thread starter MXWing
- Start date
I only see the iPace competing with the Model 3. The iPace is just too small to compete with the S or X.
I find it laughable that iPace focuses its winning points on a different vehicle class:
It's cheaper than the Model X
It's faster than the Model X
Can you imagine how ridiculous it would be to make a comparison between the 3 and the X?
I haven't driven one, so I can't say. Nor do I know if they will actually be available since fleets are buying them, and the Euro market needs to be satisfied. If there is any saving grace, the iPace will make more $ in California and other CARB states, so California could get some.
The value is the 90kWh, AWD, 400HP, and more luxury features. Sizing is probably better than the Model 3, but who knows? Different car companies measure seating differently. You can have 2 cars with identical specs, but one is bigger than the other when you sit in it.
I'm actually wondering if we can trust those specs, since many say RWD already beats the specs at 4.5, but P numbers never exceed the specs. So, is AWD matching RWD in performance or beats posted specs encroaching upon the P territory, going closer to 3.5?
Lhshockey24
Member
2017 BMW 5-series sales: 40,658
Hard to find M3 sales data, but in 2017 the M2 sold 12,293 and that was a record year for M sales overall.
BMW 5-series US car sales figures
BMW M sets record sales year in 2017
In case you can't tell, I'm so sick and tired of people comparing the model 3 to the S. If you're in the market for a compact sports sedan, the Model 3 is hands-down the winner - unless of course you care more about quality, fit+finish, long-term reliability, and tracking the car more than two laps :/
All told, when the time comes I'll have legitimately a hard time deciding between a Telsa P-M3, the new BMW M3, or perhaps even the Tesla P-MY vs BMW X3M or even BMW iX3! So many wonderful choices coming our way. It's an embarrassment of riches.
I couldn't agree more, its a ridiculous comparison. It seems well understood in the rest of the car world that automakers make cars in small, medium and large and yet with Tesla that somehow gets lost.
Destiny1701
22’ M3LR ‘DrkNite’/ 22’ MYP BliueRocket
100D S specs say 4.2 sec but closer to 3.6/3.7.
Wouldn’t be unreasonable to assume M3D may be quicker then spec 4.5. Tesla will never spec a non P car in the 3 sec range to avoid cannibilizing it’s P lineup.
There is also the point of Tesla using 1 foot roll out numbers for their P models and actual 0-60 for non P.
The M3D may actually be the sweet spot here between value, performance and range.
Uncle Paul
Well-Known Member
Interesting debate.
The consumer has spoken, and Tesla cannot build cars fast enough to meet the demand.
The driving experience is vastly different between the S and 3. While consumers will cross shop these two, both offer compelling packages.
The 3 is the new kid on the block, with a more urban theme. Lighter and more nimble, it offers good value and will appeal to the younger city dwellers. Offers a more secure trunk and better for parking on the street.
The S is the larger, more comfortable, road car. Hatch back design provides double the versatility. Seating for 7 (if 2 are kids) and the most beautiful of all designs. Highest levels of power for exceptional authority on the road. Power doors and hatch, bigger displays and a quieter and smoother ride. Better air filtration available. Larger battery, brakes and air suspension. Best pulling up to the curb presence.
The consumer has spoken, and Tesla cannot build cars fast enough to meet the demand.
The driving experience is vastly different between the S and 3. While consumers will cross shop these two, both offer compelling packages.
The 3 is the new kid on the block, with a more urban theme. Lighter and more nimble, it offers good value and will appeal to the younger city dwellers. Offers a more secure trunk and better for parking on the street.
The S is the larger, more comfortable, road car. Hatch back design provides double the versatility. Seating for 7 (if 2 are kids) and the most beautiful of all designs. Highest levels of power for exceptional authority on the road. Power doors and hatch, bigger displays and a quieter and smoother ride. Better air filtration available. Larger battery, brakes and air suspension. Best pulling up to the curb presence.
The best overall value proposition is the awd none P Model 3.
The P3 has enough perks that it might monopolize enough of the awd production to push non P out of maximum tax credits.
That’s a key consideration.
Yes it’s completely obvious that you need a 100D to match the range of the Model 3 but you have so much butthurt they can’t accept how much better “value” any version of the 3 is over the S.
It really depends on the use case. If people value the greater utility of space and comfort of an entry level S over the superior range of a ER Model 3, then they may disagree with you. Model S feels a lot bigger and has more storage capability. Some folks like that, some don't, but irrespective of preference it's undeniably a differentiation. Interiors are quite different, some people clearly put a lot of value on having the separate instrument cluster and larger main screen. Doesn't matter if they are right or wrong, it's valuable to them, and it's another point of differentiation. I have a feeling that over time, Model S and Model X will probably get the newest technology first before it trickles down. That may be of value to some people as well. This is a very similar discussion you could have with any luxury line-up, especially the German ones.
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
Define "value".
I don't need a car that can go more than 250 miles on a charge, and have never placed additional value on an ICE car with a larger gas tank.
Ignoring for a moment that anyone buying a Tesla with "value" as their major motivator is hugely misguided.
SSonnentag
埃隆•馬斯克
It doesn't matter how much you think the 3 out-values the S if the 3 can't physically perform the tasks required by the owner. Carrying capacity of the 3 just doesn't work for some. Your perception of value is irrelevant.
skitown
Member
Exactly. Putting muddy dogs in our Model 3 backseat is going to suck. Our Model S's trunk is perfect for this by comparison.
SSonnentag
埃隆•馬斯克
A small car can definitely be a benefit for commuting in an urban area where roads and parking spaces are narrow and/or short. A smaller car is more nimble and can squeeze through areas that a larger car just can't handle as easily or as quickly. So there can be an advantage, it just doesn't fit all situations as is being presented, and it certainly isn't a universal benefit.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
and they're not their small cars either.
Which was your original claim I disproved with specific facts.
Their smallest cars are in fact way cheaper than their most expensive cars.
So your point appears to...not be one.
... what?
The only reason I mentioned any convertible is that it happens to be one of those "most expensive cars" for a brand you mentioned.
it's weird you keep making claims about things and then making clear you don't know anything about those things.
Spelling Police is a cool job. I meant smaller not smallest. It's pretty obvious that a Spark is not the most expensive car Chevrolet sells. My 2010 ZR1 was $129,000 MSRP, not sure that's the most expensive corrected for 2018 dollars, but it's up there. It is not a big car. In fact it lacks helmet clearance, and no, it's not a convertible. It has less room inside than a Spark BTW. The GT2 RS is over $345,000 loaded, and it's not exactly huge either.
Convertible sports cars have a natural hinge in the middle, so they must add weight to beef up the chassis. Kind of pointless to spend the big bucks for handling then order a "please make it handle worse and weigh more, thanks in advance" option. And some tracks will make you install a rollbar. But you buy them because you want to be seen. Other than that, they suck.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
That's not spelling, that's meaning.
I didn't correct your mistaken claim because you left a letter out from what you said, I corrected it because it was factually wrong.
I mean, it is now that I pointed it out I guess
It's not all that small either though- which was your original claim.
And most of GMs next most expensive cars are caddys, which also aren't among their smaller cars.
Nor is it exactly small among Porsche cars... as I pointed out several other models of theirs are smaller.
That's actually relevant to why Porsche invented the Targa- they couldn't engineer a "real" convertible that worked properly at the time to both their, and safety standards, requirements.
Sure, like they Macan, or the Cayman, or the Panemera, you know their whole lineup besides for the boxster/cayman (which isn't even that much smaller)
You seem to be trying to use a exceptions to disprove the point that frequently fancy performance versions of small cars frequently cost more than large cars.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I mean... not really.
The original claim was that for all 3 companies their most expensive car is their smallest.
That's not even remotely true.
GM has numerous models smaller than their most expensive car
Ford has numerous models smaller than their most expensive car
Porsche has only 2 models smaller than their most expensive car- but then again they don't have that many total models in the first place.
And there's quite a few other car companies out there too besides those 3... I can't think of any where their smallest car is their most expensive... (in lots of cases the larger ones tend to be- things like GM are more the exception where they happen to sell one Halo model in relatively small numbers that's not an especially large car (but still larger than many others they sell).
