Superchargers for Model 3

[cpa]

It is too easy to game the system for local use by focusing distance from an owner's registered address. Tesla knows our Supercharger usage each time we plug in. (I know; I received the dread email last month even though the nearest Supercharger to me is 60 miles distant on the way to nowhere from our house.) I would assume that it would be relatively easy to compose a computer program that tracked Supercharger usage by vehicle by Supercharger location. It would track number of charges and amount of electricity received.

Once a certain threshold is attained, the owner receives a more nicely-worded email from Tesla listing the dates and times and quantity of kWh delivered. No threatening construction. No condescending tone about "the convenience of charging at home." Just a simple advisory message stating that we have noticed that you have charged your car at the X Supercharger Z times in the past 30/60/90 days, or whatever. Include a contact telephone number to a real human being in case the owner wants to talk about the message for whatever reason.

"Free" Supercharging is a very delicate position for Tesla. It is an extremely popular subject and a novel concept to sell cars. On the one hand, they want us to be able to travel virtually anywhere, for free. On the other hand, they open themselves up for misuse and abuse from a small percentage of people, thereby inconveniencing another group of people who are traveling and need the charge. (I am not talking about individuals who do not have home or work charging.)

 

[doubeld]

If they include free-for-life SuperCharging on every model 3 and the base price is $37k USD, I don't think anyone would panic.
The reason Tesla is set apart from ANY other EV, is the SuperCharging access, and is the primary method Tesla can shoot down any ICE vs BEV argument. To not include it is absolutely ridiculous. If they make it an option, fine, but the resale value hit on such models will be noticeable, so why would a customer go for it?

At the current rate of ~0.6 (conservative) SuperCharger locations being built per day, let's say optimistically (ha!) the Model 3 is released this time in 2017. That is 438 more stations worldwide. That more than covers pretty much all urban/semi-rural primary highway gaps.

As has been said in shareholder reports, the cost of the SC electricity is NEGLIGIBLE. The cost of building the stations is easy. Sell a hundred cars with SC cost built-in, you've bought one SC station. If they sell 100,000 Model X/S in the next two years, that funds 2000 SC stations.

As for being too busy with all the Model 3s coming out, that issue will sort itself out socially. The busier they are, the more awareness there will be amongst owners/ICErs and Tesla perhaps putting software in cars/mobile devices to start chirping at the owners if they are plugged in and no longer charging when there are people waiting. Too many people are making too big of a deal out of this.

 

[nwdiver]

As for being too busy with all the Model 3s coming out, that issue will sort itself out socially. The busier they are, the more awareness there will be amongst owners/ICErs and Tesla perhaps putting software in cars/mobile devices to start chirping at the owners if they are plugged in and no longer charging when there are people waiting. Too many people are making too big of a deal out of this.

That's already kinda started... I get a text that I have enough charge to make it to the next charger then another text when my car is almost full if I ignore the first text.

 

[bwa]

I bet Tesla needs a lot of ways to lower Model 3's cost, and one way will be moving the cost of Supercharging from car purchase to SC usage.

 

[model3fan]

I'd rather have the Model 3 a few grand cheaper than having free super charging. I would like the option to use it rarely during road trips somehow, though.

 

[purplewalt]

I'd rather have the Model 3 a few grand cheaper than having free super charging. I would like the option to use it rarely during road trips somehow, though.

Your scenario of having the option of using it rarely only for road trips is not in the current play book.

People who bought S60s needed to pay an additional $2,000 at the time of purchase or $2,500 if the car were to be Supercharge enabled at a later date.
But once the car is enabled, it does give one full access to any Supercharger (at least on your continent).

So, you either have a great city car without access to supercharging, or you pay for the opportunity and would be all in.
===>> At least if TM continues to implement its current rules.

 

[KJD]

300 miles each way: three SCs to get there and four SCs to get home. Specifics:

Outbound: Grand Junction, Glenwood Springs, Silverthorne
Denver Service Center visit
Going home: Denver, Silverthorne, Glenwood Springs, Grand Junction

Go west young man.
Grand Junction, Green River, SLC service center

 

[Lonnie123]

I'd rather have the Model 3 a few grand cheaper than having free super charging. I would like the option to use it rarely during road trips somehow, though.

Yeah, as much as I like the idea of Free Super Charging for every Tesla, I dont think they are going to make it standard on the most basic model. $35k for base and somewhere between $1,500 and $2,000 to add it on. It was an add on for their $60,000 version... seems very likely it will be an add on for their car at half that price. Plus as you said it immediately adds $2k of "profit" onto the vehicle. Super Charger access + Auto Pilot features = $5,000 onto a large percentage of Model 3's. Add premium interior and lighting, some people getting the Sub Zero package and bam, they are making nice profits on this car.

Even at "only" 200 miles it is going to be the most impressive, longest range EV on the market that offers round trips for people making 2 hour commutes (unless the Bolt manages to amaze and come out on time). LOTS of destination chargers popping up places. In 3 years that will sky rocket too.

 

[eye.surgeon]

Are you aware of a law that prohibits monitoring of charger use and billing accordingly? I'm not.

 

[RDoc]

The issues for Tesla building superchargers, as I understand it, are the time it takes to get approvals, schedule everything, and do the construction, and the capital to do the build out. These are all very heavily front end loaded so I don't see how making supercharging optional with occasional use allowed is viable. When a Tesla shows up at a supercharger stall, either the stall was approved, built out, and paid for in the months before arrival, or it doesn't exist, so I don't see how any scheme not involving an up front payment, subscription, or something similar would work. Otherwise, on the most heavily traveled days the system wouldn't be sized for that much usage, so everyone would have to wait.

 

[viperboy]

I agree with most of the points in this thread, and while my opinions below ae purse speculation, here is what I think:

- Model 3 will have Supercharging access for an initial fee (just like Model S used to have). This helps build out SC network as well as "limits" the use for people who intended to buy it for city use (i.e. Leaf competitor)
- Supercharging will expand, but with more stations, and more frequent stops. As in people driving from LA to Vegas will have more options than just Barstow. I predict that Tesla will partner with states with Travel Plazas and rest stops to add many more stations.
- The issue with adding chargers to today's gas stations is what do you have people doing for 30 mins while at a gas station? You go inside and buy a drink, that's 4 mins spent and you still have to wait 26 more. I think along with home chargers, we will see Supercharging primarily on the interstate network.

To be honest, if the Model 3 doesnt have Supercharger access, I'm headed for a CPO model S.

 

[physicsfita]

One aspect that I think is worth exploring is the marketing side of supercharger access. IIRC, Tesla has stated that the supercharger network buildout comes from their marketing budget. Making supercharging an option (which may be necessary to hit the price point, I will concede) has the problem that it opens Tesla to hit-piece articles that have phrases like: "... the Model 3, which does not have a charging solution for long-distance travel, ..."

Of course, the author of such a hit-piece would be conveniently neglecting that it is a (say) $2K option, but we've already seen reporting like that successfully convince many people that the Model S starts at about $100K, when, in fact, that's already a well-optioned vehicle, or that the Model X starts for even higher than that, when, in fact, it's a signature trim. At least in my neck of the woods, if you tell someone that you can get a Model S for less than $100K, they will most likely assume that it's used.

From Tesla's perspective, it may make more sense to make supercharging standard for all trims of the Model 3 than to have to try to fight the misinformation that almost certainly will come out otherwise. Not being a marketing person, I don't know how much those costs would be, but it seems to me to be something to consider.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Are you aware of a law that prohibits monitoring of charger use and billing accordingly? I'm not.

In many states, companies are not allowed to sell electricity by the kWh unless they are a utility. However, the practicality of that is not the main question, rather it is if it makes sense to use that as a billing scheme vs the prepaid option.

Making supercharging an option (which may be necessary to hit the price point, I will concede) has the problem that it opens Tesla to hit-piece articles that have phrases like: "... the Model 3, which does not have a charging solution for long-distance travel, ..."

I highly doubt making the supercharger an option will have any hit pieces. The 60kWh Model S had it but no hit pieces about that. In general the people writing hit pieces don't go into details enough for them to notice.

However, if Tesla didn't offer supercharging or if they made a pay per use fee, that might have hit pieces.

 

[SW2Fiddler]

I agree with most of the points in this thread, and while my opinions below ae purse speculation, here is what I think:

- Model 3 will have Supercharging access for an initial fee (just like Model S used to have).

Here is where JB Straubel tells us what he thinks:

JB Straubel. "The Future Of Transportation" panel. Gives us his thoughts on when pay-for-Supercharge will start to be considered. Watch at around 13 minutes if the link doesn't put you there.
On YouTube
"We offer these free to our customers. We thought about this for a long time, and it turns out, the energy cost is very low, it's more about the cost of the convenience of having access to the infrastructure. A full charge or even 50% charge in a Model S is less than $10.... it's really not entirely worth the hassle of dealing with a whole separate billing structure. And in the future, of course, it will make sense to figure out how we phase in some kind of financial transaction here, but it's going to take time. And for the beginning, a million cars, this is a viable way to do it."

 

[dgpcolorado]

Go west young man.
Grand Junction, Green River, SLC service center

(Actually it's GJ, Green River, Price, SLC Service Center...) :wink:

Interesting that you mention that, because I did give it some thought. SLC is farther (368 miles) than Denver (329 miles); the closest Service Center is likely to be Albuquerque (305 miles), once that one gets built. But once ABQ is up and running, I wonder if they will have as much experience as Denver and will that affect service quality?

Anyway, I have lots of friends in the Boulder area, so a Denver service visit provides other benefits as well as free lodging. And I have friends in Albuquerque and Santa Fe, so going that way has some benefits as well.

But, yes, the drive to SLC is easy — only one minor mountain pass — if longer, and is a good possibility for Tesla service.

 

[physicsfita]

I highly doubt making the supercharger an option will have any hit pieces. The 60kWh Model S had it but no hit pieces about that. In general the people writing hit pieces don't go into details enough for them to notice.

However, if Tesla didn't offer supercharging or if they made a pay per use fee, that might have hit pieces.

I really hope your doubts are correctly placed. Where I think this situation is different is that the Model 3 will be much more affordable than the Model S. I expect that the coalition of big oil and the legacy auto manufacturers will be much more aggressive trying to smear the Model 3. The Model S is a low-volume car that not many can afford -- it's easier to play up the affordability side of things -- thus, the frequent claims that the Model S costs over $100K. I suspect that since the Model 3 is in a segment where it will be many people's only car that there will be lines of attack (rightly or wrongly) portraying the Model 3 as a car that can't meet all of a customer's needs. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not betting on it.

 

[shokunin]

To be honest, if the Model 3 doesnt have Supercharger access, I'm headed for a CPO model S.

I can't imagine why the Model 3 won't have supercharger access, it's has to be an option if they want to sell 300,000+ cars ON A YEARLY basis. It's just a matter of how much extra. There's barely enough stations in busy corridors for just the Model S, add the X and it'll get even worse. They'll need the capital and some breathing room to keep expanding.

SC may be an extra $2000 on the base model, and included if you upgrade to the larger pack. Supercharger access was an extra $2K on the S60, but included if you upgraded to the S85.

 

[sitter_k]

If elon was smart he'd keep supercharging free for the model 3, it would be a PR snag otherwise, as anti Tesla regime would jump all over this "tesla cancels free supercharging" and elon would be seen as reneging. However, even if the model 3 includes supercharging I don't think anyone should be naive to think they got a deal, the profit margins on the car would probably remain the same with options just costing more or standard items now being options. Things like non ugly colours, rust proofing, keys....

 

[Kevin Harney]

If elon was smart he'd keep supercharging free for the model 3, it would be a PR snag otherwise, as anti Tesla regime would jump all over this "tesla cancels free supercharging" and elon would be seen as reneging. However, even if the model 3 includes supercharging I don't think anyone should be naive to think they got a deal, the profit margins on the car would probably remain the same with options just costing more or standard items now being options. Things like non ugly colours, rust proofing, keys....

I can't even count the number of ways this post is offensive but let me start with a few.

1. Elon is EXTREMELY smart.
2. All Tesla's (with the exception of the first few Model S 60's and the Roadsters) already have supercharging built into the price
3. You think that the cost of supercharging would cause other things to move from standard to optional ?
4. No idea where you are even trying to go with the last sentence about non- ugly colors, rust proofing and keys ....

 

[MassModel3]

2. All Tesla's (with the exception of the first few Model S 60's and the Roadsters) already have supercharging built into the price

Make that all 70's and above have had supercharging built into the price. I'm pretty sure that right up until the 60 was discontinued it was still a $2,000 option.