-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
[Spoiler Alert + Mild Speculation] Tesla has created a monster!
- Thread starter omgwtfbyobbq
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model 3
9erDog
Member
KHAN!!!!!!!!!!!
Which type of motor will your M3 have?
I wonder how long Tesla will keep building permanent magnet motors for their EveryDay EV. I bet they are busy developing a 'switched reluctance' motor which would eliminate the rare earth magnets altogether and offer the best efficiency possible for an EV. Producing the special control circuitry required for these motors is exactly what Tesla does best. We have to ask ourselves: how can Elon resist this challenge??
--
I wonder how long Tesla will keep building permanent magnet motors for their EveryDay EV. I bet they are busy developing a 'switched reluctance' motor which would eliminate the rare earth magnets altogether and offer the best efficiency possible for an EV. Producing the special control circuitry required for these motors is exactly what Tesla does best. We have to ask ourselves: how can Elon resist this challenge??
--
Callahan
Member
Hey all. Long time listener, first time caller. I've been following Troy / Teslike's insightful posts re: the potential sandbagging of the LR 3's range ("The 310 miles number is not real. It is a made up number."), in which he pegs the "real" range somewhere between 334 - 352. His research and results were incredibly thorough and made complete sense to me.
Jason Calacanis recently posted some additional photos of his Model 3 via his Twitter account. I would love to know Troy's thoughts about the below image specifically. Does he believe that Tesla is artificially altering / restricting the Model 3's software to display a false number until the real number is revealed publicly? Thanks for your time, and I appreciate any and all responses!
Jason Calacanis recently posted some additional photos of his Model 3 via his Twitter account. I would love to know Troy's thoughts about the below image specifically. Does he believe that Tesla is artificially altering / restricting the Model 3's software to display a false number until the real number is revealed publicly? Thanks for your time, and I appreciate any and all responses!
JeffK
Well-Known Member
The range predicted is based on a Wh/mile constant that Tesla puts in the software, and since they have sold it as a 310 mile car I would fully expect that the constant was picked to make it report close to that number. (Some cars show a little over other cars show a little under depending on the condition of the battery.)
But that doesn't really mean anything about how many miles you can drive it. What would be interesting is if someone with a Model 3 drove it ~70 MPH until it went to ~20 miles and reported how many miles they got. (Until someone does that we really won't know more than Tesla is telling us.)
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Callahan
Member
@SageBrush, I agree that it does not make sense for Tesla to do this. For the record, I don't think they are. However, I'm curious to understand how this number squares with Troy's research and findings. Also, it should be noted that in Tesla's press release, only the Model 3 SR's range is labeled as EPA Estimated, while the LR's range is not.
Would love to hear more of your thoughts. Thank you!
3Victoria
Active Member
I presume that most of Tesla's profits will come from 3 sales in the not too distant future. So Tesla may be most concerned with the window until that happens. Some will always want the bigger and more 'prestigous' S and X, and they will continue to get the latest tech.
If Tesla got better range from M3 AWD LR than a P100DL, Tesla would just shrink the M3 battery, or jack the higher end M3 margins higher.
There's wayyy too much wishful thinking driving the conclusions on this thread.
But, anyhow, once Tesla is actually building 2x as many M3 as MS+MX, I would have ZERO concern about M3 sales cannibalizing MS/MX demand, what they can't do is to down convert MS/MX sales into M3 reservations, that would be really bad business, aka the Osbourne effect.
This wouldn't be the first time people that can't afford/won't buy a MS/MX create a massive expectation for the M3 so they later can be seriously be disappointed, remember its your fault for your own frustration.
Spot on. While its possible MS/MX demand could dip temporarily the indirect marketing effect of hundreds of millions worldwide finding out about a M3 can produce lots of new MS/MX sales. Hollywood and other very rich people will continue to buy MS/MXs for as long as its the hip car to have.
There's wayyy too much wishful thinking driving the conclusions on this thread.
But, anyhow, once Tesla is actually building 2x as many M3 as MS+MX, I would have ZERO concern about M3 sales cannibalizing MS/MX demand, what they can't do is to down convert MS/MX sales into M3 reservations, that would be really bad business, aka the Osbourne effect.
This wouldn't be the first time people that can't afford/won't buy a MS/MX create a massive expectation for the M3 so they later can be seriously be disappointed, remember its your fault for your own frustration.
Spot on. While its possible MS/MX demand could dip temporarily the indirect marketing effect of hundreds of millions worldwide finding out about a M3 can produce lots of new MS/MX sales. Hollywood and other very rich people will continue to buy MS/MXs for as long as its the hip car to have.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
What are you agreeing to ?
I think it is perfectly reasonable for Tesla to use the EPA rating in the display calculation
Callahan
Member
Hey @SageBrush. I appreciate the reply. I was agreeing with your statement that it's an "idiotic conspiracy theory" that Tesla would artificially suppress the LR Model 3's official range.
I agree with you that it's perfectly reasonable for Tesla to use the EPA rating in the display calculation. I will add, however, that Tesla has not officially confirmed that 310 is the official EPA estimate. Only the SR's 220 mile range has been confirmed as an EPA estimate.
@Troy, any thoughts? Big fan of all your research.
shrspeedblade
Rideshare Monkey
How quickly on this board do we forget that just a few short months ago, many (myself included) thought the range would be less than 300 miles. I'm so pleased as punch with the 310 number it seems nothing but counterproductive to speculate/wish for more!
Now where is my Advanced HUD-equipped, 0-60 is 4 seconds, 350 mile range, AWD, $35,000 Model 3 again?
Now where is my Advanced HUD-equipped, 0-60 is 4 seconds, 350 mile range, AWD, $35,000 Model 3 again?
Callahan
Member
@shrspeedblade, I agree that the 310 number is fantastic, and I couldn't be happier! I'll be getting the $49,000 bundle sometime between November and January, and I can't wait. My questions stem not from a lack of gratitude about the current reported range, but from an intellectual curiosity borne out of following Troy's research.
insaneoctane
Well-Known Member
Maybe I'm not reading the above posts very well, but unless a current owner wants to correct me, the range gauge in the Tesla vehicles is NOT an EPA estimate. It is Tesla's own calculations and not the same algorithim that EPA uses. I suspect it is related to real world range as best as possible. On the other hand, Tesla follows the rules dictated by EPA to provide their EPA estimates and the EPA allows quite a bit of latitude when calculating these numbers. I think @Troy has successfully shown that if the LR M3 used the same calculations and methods that they used to calculate the EPA range for the Model S, that the LR would have an EPA range of 334 miles (Link) I think the LR range *IS* being artificially lowered at this time, but that's just my opinion (although reasonably supported by many indicators).
Last edited:
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Your link to the Tesla press release says range of 220 mile for the SR model and 310 miles for the LR model.
Are you questioning whether Tesla is quoting the EPA range for the SR but not for the LR ? The chance of that is right about zero
Underrating power/ mileage ratings is actually quite common among conservative car companies. For example, BMW engines often are underrated 20-30 hp when dynoed. Some Prius. Models exceed their published mileage ratings considerably and Bolts appear to be doing the same. Tesla has always overpromised and I, for one, would applaud Tesla under promising for a change.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
I don't own a Tesla to confirm, but my understanding is that Tesla lets the owner pick one of two calcs: EPA, or some Tesla calc.
Callahan
Member
Hey @SageBrush. I am not questioning it; I am pointing out that in the document linked, Tesla only lists one of those two ranges (specifically, SR) as an EPA Estimate.
I'll admit that I'm slightly phased by your hostility, but I appreciate your replies nonetheless. I've been a fan of your posts on this forum for some time.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
You are right, I never noticed the difference.
I'll chalk it up to less than stellar proof-reading by the Tesla people but you have a point that it could mean a non-EPA value. However, using the ratio of battery sizes (54/78) between the SR and LR batteries implies that the number is going to very close to 310 if not exact.
220*78/54 = 317, not corrected for the LR higher weight.
Sorry for my previous tone
Similar threads
