Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Superchargers for Model 3

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I, for one, really hope that they answer this question at the reveal next week.

People on both sides of the argument make good points. My personal hope is that it will be just like it is for the Model S/X, where it's free for the life of the car (possibly with an up-front additional cost as an option like it used to be with the S60). If it turns into a pay-per-use system, I'll most likely pass on the Model 3 and wait for an EV that is priced in the Toyota Corolla range (~$20K).

I might be able to be talked into reasonable restrictions on local supercharging. Key word - reasonable. I don't want to be prohibited from ever using the Colorado Springs supercharger just because I live in town, though I don't plan on using it often. What about Park Meadows? That supercharger is just inside the 50 mile distance that some people say define it as local to me, but I do not consider it to be local and would be seriously disappointed if I were restricted from using it.
 
I would have no problem at all paying $2 to activate SC access. ;)

..... GROVER!!... give it back...

il_fullxfull.95413426.jpg
 
  • Funny
Reactions: Jaff and MrBoylan
Unlimited long distance is fully sustainable by the $2k/car set-aside.

Unlimited local charging is definitely far from sustainable by the $2k/car set-aside.

It's a well-known fact that any time something is unlimited, it's abused. No different than how the top 1% of ISP users eat up 50% of the bandwidth at home and on unlimited data cell carriers. If you accommodate unlimited local, you'd need to charge people a lot more to support that top 1% of users which doesn't make anyone happy and encourage even further abuse to help on ROI of the vehicle.

Unlimited long distance, limited local is the perfect model. If people can only charge 2-4 times per month at stations within 50 miles, you no longer have Uber drivers charging twice a day, you no longer have people replacing home charging every other day, you no longer have the crazy 200 mile commute person charging twice a day.

For these people who truly have a need with no home charging available, they can pay a reasonable monthly fee for additional local access. People who suddenly take a long-distance trip and forget to charge before leaving (for the fifth time that month...) could pay a one-day access fee or something like that for local stations.

Charging a $2k option for superchargers is just silly. 95% of drivers aren't going to get a good ROI on this at all. Sure, people will do it--but it'll greatly harm the adoption of EVs if you have to pay a ton of money to drive it like a gas car. You can be sure that free long distance supercharging will be standard, and part of the car's $35k purchase price. (Setting up a billing system just to handle rare, roadtrip-only supercharging would be more costly than keeping it free).

Unlimited or prepaid upfront for life local charging is just a very silly, short-sighted and unsustainable idea. Unlimited free long distance will still kill range anxiety, make Tesla far better than competitors, and the restrictions won't be noticed by 95%+ of Tesla owners. Those who buy the local plans still pay far less than paying for gas so they're still winning out, especially the Uber drivers and other high-mileage drivers.

Eventually, in a couple decades, this will not be a problem. But for now it's a huge issue. If you put 500k+ cars a year out on the road, Supercharger locations would need 50-100+ stalls each to avoid lines/queues if local cars clog up the queues.

Totally agree. Elon knows this is the key selling point of Tesla's and viability of EV's going forward. They will be willing to take a loss on this if necessary.

Tesla would go bankrupt if it's taking losses on production vehicles. I'd rather Tesla not go bankrupt just because a hundred thousand Uber drivers can save $300 a month on fuel by exclusively using superchargers locally.
 
Last edited:
For these people who truly have a need with no home charging available, they can pay a reasonable monthly fee for additional local access. People who suddenly take a long-distance trip and forget to charge before leaving (for the fifth time that month...) could pay a one-day access fee or something like that for local stations.
As other have pointed out, there are two problems with this. First is that it means Tesla needs to add a complicated logistical process to the otherwise easy "either you get it or you don't get it" system they nave now. I'm pretty sure a new and complex logistical process is not going to happen. Second is that if Tesla starts charging the customer per use, they're essentially acting as a provider of electricity. They are not a utility provider, they don't want to be in the business of being a utility provider, and most states will probably have a major problem with a car manufacturer acting as a utility provider.

Instead, Tesla charges for the hardware and a one time flat fee for the convenience (my word, not theirs) of using the SC network. They're not selling you electricity, per se.
 
Why would you buy one if they didn't?
I read the OP as a concern that the the SC's will be over - subscribed by the wave of new users.

I read that a SC station costs about 300k US$ to build. If a subscription is $2k, then 150 new owners 'pay' for a station.
Presuming that the SC is not abused by car owners, who continue to charge at home for ~ 90% of their driving miles then the equivalent of 15 cars that only charge at the SC will use that station. Even if these cars fill up every other day, that implies 7 cars a day.

That leaves a lot of open space.

IF abuse is avoided.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MiamiNole
I read the OP as a concern that the the SC's will be over - subscribed by the wave of new users.

I read that a SC station costs about 300k US$ to build. If a subscription is $2k, then 150 new owners 'pay' for a station.
Presuming that the SC is not abused by car owners, who continue to charge at home for ~ 90% of their driving miles then the equivalent of 15 cars that only charge at the SC will use that station. Even if these cars fill up every other day, that implies 7 cars a day.

That leaves a lot of open space.

IF abuse is avoided.
My concern is not the station installation. That can be written off as advertising expense (as it currently is). The problem is with ongoing electricity and maintenance costs. Even after the network is "established" (and Tesla doesn't add any more new ones), those costs will keep on going.

But, I do agree that if owners continue to charge on average ~90% of driving miles at home (or any other non-supercharger option), then that Tesla's network is sustainable forever regardless of annual sales volume.
 
Tesla has two problems to solve:
  • Local use abuse (in the current system)
  • Regulatory restrictions related to being an electricity reseller
I'm confident that whatever solution Tesla comes up with will work for 95%++ of Tesla owners, and be bitterly hated by the remainder. <<shrug>>

Perhaps a tier pricing can be offered, along these lines:
Every day: X dollars
Up to 10 times a month: Y dollars
Up to 5 times a month: Z dollars

Use a 3 month rolling average to accommodate long trips.

That, or sell packets of SC access.
 
It was told to them up front that Supercharging was built into the cost of the car. So it is fair to an extent.
Being 'fair' is like being 'just'. All you have to do is what you said you were going to do. If you do what you said, and the other guy agreed to it, then you are being both fair and just.

Overall, the whole point of the Supercharger network is to show that an EV can be nearly as convenient as a gas car for travelling long distances. Tesla is paying for this entire network themselves to make sure it gets done properly. Other companies would have gotten the government to cover the costs. There is $500 million study being done by the government just to DECIDE what national system might work. That study will be done in a few years.
The money is still there, in a $25,000,000,000 allotment that was made during the Bush Administration for what was called the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing (ATVM) loan program. Ford got just under 6 billion bucks, Nissan around 3 billion, and Tesla Motors less than half a billion bucks (which they already paid back). So, around 16 billion bucks is available to either design new cars, or build them, or research their development. And no one from Chrysler, General Motors, or Toyota is willing to touch it.

Tesla is being pro-active. Just because their initial idea said that they would cover all the costs through sales of cars doesn't mean that after a few years they've learned there are better ways to do this.
Nothing at all wrong with identifying a goal, then determining that the best way to reach it is to do everything yourself. It saves time, and allows you to make progress that Naysayers would claim was 'impossible' to achieve. And, it is merely prudent to reevaluate something that has been working to determine if there is another means to accomplish the same goal at a later date in a better way.

In modern times, I don't see any reason there couldn't be different programs based on a consumers needs.

1. An overall buy in to the network with unlimited charges at unlimited stations. This is similar to the current system. A top of the line car might get this thrown in as a thank you for buying all the extras.

2. A yearly or monthly buy in based on need. Some of us don't take long distance trips regularly.

3. A "pay as you go" plan. Tesla keeps a credit card number on file and charges it when you use a Supercharger. It can be done by an app.

4. Each car comes with an allotment of time for Supercharger use on a monthly basis. You pay for the amount you exceed that amount of time. So you get some use free but pay for any excessive use.

As long as the prices aren't too crazy then I think this is reasonably fair. It also controls the usage to an extent.
Yeah. All that offers a whole bunch of 'choice'. Here the problem is... The reality is that most people are entirely incapable of determining which 'choice' is the best one for them. They refuse to accept any liability for their own decisions, even as they make demands. Even a simple binary choice, yes or no, yea or nay, black or white, HMO or PPO, is incredibly stressful for people to figure out in the real world. So, offering a potential of five different choices will absolutely blow their minds.

What they will DEMAND is that YOU make things EASY for them. That's why it is best to do things one, particular way that you determine yourself is the singular best choice for the grand majority of your potential Customer base. Then, as a significant portion of your existing Customers demand another solution, perhaps 20% of them, you can consider expanding the offerings to cover their needs. Until such a predetermined threshold is reached, the phrase 'My Way or the Highway', softened somewhat to 'We Are So Sorry We Are Currently Unable to Fulfill Your Needs', is an appropriate response. Followed, of course, by a hasty 'Have a Nice Day!'

Besides, for all the potential 'solutions' that are bandied about, none is as simple, straightforward, direct, and to-the-point as saying...

  • Just buy a car. Use Superchargers for free. For the life of the car. As often as you like. Wherever you like. Period.
  • But, pretty please, with sugar on top, don't be a [DONKEY] about it, taking up a parking space all day or all night when you don't need to... Be courteous and considerate of the charging needs of others. Because you are not the only Tesla owner in the world. Thanks.

Once Tesla has reached a certain point where they have built a large solar farm to cover the entire usage of the system they can switch it over to a completely free system. Their intent is there but it certainly hasn't happened yet and they have a lot of other things to do for the next decade before they can afford to do something like that.
Meh. Other companies can build the solar farms. Tesla Motors can simply buy the electricity from them. Regions with geothermal, hydroelectric, and nuclear sources of electricity might be so incredibly inexpensive that using solar was unnecessary. Don't worry about it.
 
Yeah. All that offers a whole bunch of 'choice'. Here the problem is... The reality is that most people are entirely incapable of determining which 'choice' is the best one for them. They refuse to accept any liability for their own decisions, even as they make demands. Even a simple binary choice, yes or no, yea or nay, black or white, HMO or PPO, is incredibly stressful for people to figure out in the real world. So, offering a potential of five different choices will absolutely blow their minds.

What they will DEMAND is that YOU make things EASY for them. That's why it is best to do things one, particular way that you determine yourself is the singular best choice for the grand majority of your potential Customer base. Then, as a significant portion of your existing Customers demand another solution, perhaps 20% of them, you can consider expanding the offerings to cover their needs. Until such a predetermined threshold is reached, the phrase 'My Way or the Highway', softened somewhat to 'We Are So Sorry We Are Currently Unable to Fulfill Your Needs', is an appropriate response. Followed, of course, by a hasty 'Have a Nice Day!'

:)
This is an awesome post, and I don't even agree with it very much LOL
 
We don't travel a whole lot, but for the few times that we do, I would love to be able to take the M3. Long distance EV travel is all but impossible without SC's, I think. That might change over time (hopefully), but for now, SC access is a must, and I'm willing to pay up to $2500 (maybe) to get it. Heck, we might even start travelling more once we get the M3 with SC access. I just never liked burning all the gas to travel. Would also enjoy the trip as much as the destination if we have to stop a little more. Would plan the journey around SC's instead of just picking the shortest/fastest route. Might choose the most scenic route instead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red Sage
Heck, we might even start travelling more once we get the M3 with SC access. I just never liked burning all the gas to travel. Would also enjoy the trip as much as the destination if we have to stop a little more.
Please do! I have long predicted that Tesla Motors will be responsible for the revitalization of the Great American Road Trip! I believe that having fun-to-drive cars, an unmatched driving experience, and the allure of 'free fuel' on the road will all have the positive side effect of getting more people and their families out of the house to experience the world together. Crybabies need not apply, of course.

;)
 
Great thread. Lots of good arguments on both sides and hardly any snippiness. :) I think most of us would agree on a few points:
  • It would be great for Model 3 sales (and for Tesla in general) if Supercharger access can be offered for "free" as part of the base $35K price
  • Supercharger use will go up roughly commensurate with the number of new Teslas on the road (e.g., if 10X as many Teslas are on the road, we'll need roughly 10X as many Supercharger stations to maintain the current level of service).
  • More Superchargers will need to be built, at a fairly brisk pace, in order to keep up with growing demand.
  • Superchargers cost money to build and have residual maintenance and operating costs that must be paid for from somewhere
What we don't know (for sure) keeps us from being able to definitively predict whether Tesla will charge for SC access on the Model 3
  • How much is the average per-vehicle cost for building and maintaining the Supercharger network over time? This has to include the cost of building the superchargers and operating the superchargers over the lifetime of each car. Is it $1,000? $2,000? More? Less?
  • How much will it cost Tesla (in parts, and service) to build a Model 3? If the materials and labor cost of building a Model 3 and transporting it to its owner is $31,000 and the estimated cost of Supercharger access is $2,000 per car (cost, not price), then maybe they can afford to sell the Model 3 with SC access for $35K. That would give them a base car at about 6% profitability (while still having $2K to contribute toward the "Supercharger fund"). But if it costs Tesla $34,000 in raw materials and service to build a base Model 3, then I think it's less likely that they will include lifetime free Supercharger access in the base Model 3 and will charge for it instead.
I agree with @Red Sage that free unlimited SC access on every Tesla (save the Roadster) is the simplest solution, easiest to explain and most likely to put a nail in the ICE coffin with wide-scale EV adoption (and specifically wide-scale Tesla adoption).

I also agree with @stopcrazypp that the money to pay for this access has to come from somewhere, not just building the Supercharger stations themselves, but ongoing maintenance and electricity. (Personally, I don't think new SC stations should be itemized under "advertising" - these are necessary infrastructure investments that vary based on the number of Tesla cars on the road). And I like that @SureValla is keeping the little guys (pizza delivery guys) in mind. :) But we just don't have enough information to know whether Tesla will indeed offer SC access for free on the Model 3.

As a customer, I'd be willing to pay extra for it, because I know I'll use it, and I know it has significant value. But I (and most other forum folks) are probably a lot more savvy in the ways of EV than the general public. If someone who knows nothing about EVs comes into a Tesla store and asks about road trips and they're told, "Yeah, that's free for life, right in the base model" then the ICE establishment is in for a world of hurt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red Sage
Some square things are just not that easy to put into a round amortization hole.
A spare tyre, e.g.

Consider the costs involved in the car's engineering, design, and space loss, even before we count the cost of the tyre. How often does it get used ? The cost per mile is atrocious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red Sage
As long as people understand that the primary reason for SC is for long distance travel then I think the current infrastructure being scaled will be just fine. Prospective buyers just need to generally be more educated on the expectations of having a long-range EV. The range of a Tesla should be more than enough for local travel as long as users understand that they are responsible for their own destination charging. The SC network as it stands should not be looked at for solutions for local charging. Nor should they be used for local drivers looking for a "quick charge" (Fleet vehicles, Uber, etc.). Yes, it currently sucks for people that don't have access to home charging, but that's not necessarily Tesla's problem to solve. As more and more people adopt EVs (through Model 3 sales since they are going to be AWESOME!), then the local infrastructure will follow. Or at least I'm confident in it happening.

That being said, I agree with what plankeye and Red Sage have said about SC use for long distance travel. I'm <I>so</I> looking forward to taking road trips in the M3 (with AP hopefully). My wife is from Tennessee, so as I our family grows, I definitely plan on making trips there road trips in my M3 versus spending an arm and a leg flying. I'm hoping the SC network with the combination of AP makes driving that much more an enjoyable experience. As more and more people become aware of how much better long distance travel can be, as Red Sage said, the American Road Trip certainly will be "revitalized".

Can't wait to buy my SC-enabled RV in 30 years! (One can hope, heh)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red Sage
...Supercharger use will go up roughly commensurate with the number of new Teslas on the road (e.g., if 10X as many Teslas are on the road, we'll need roughly 10X as many Supercharger stations to maintain the current level of service)...
On the surface this seems like an obvious thing to say, but it isn't really true. A large majority of Supercharger locations can be considered "underutilized" at present. They won't need to be increased 10X, to use your example. Other locations near dense population areas may well need more than a 10X increase, but the average density needed to allow the network to continue to function adequately wouldn't be anything close to a 10X increase over the current or near future levels of locations and chargers, for a 10X increase in cars. A lot of the network locations in remote areas that allow interstate travel will be fine even with a huge increase in numbers of Teslas on the road.

There are well-accepted ways to model this problem that have been discussed in other threads. It is likely that new Supercharger resources can be focused on problem areas and, perhaps, alternatives for those without home charging — as is being done overseas in places like China — while much of the existing intercity/interstate infrastructure will be adequate for years to come. Overall, the needed increase in the network won't come close to a need for a 10X increase in Superchargers to accomodate a 10X increase in cars. It just doesn't work that way.