Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Model 3' started by Brad_NC, Feb 25, 2016.
I've posted my guesses several times, but I thought a poll would be fun and informative!
I voted the first option, but I do think there is an outside chance that the BASE $35k model 3 might come in less than 200 (similar to the model S release where the 40kw seemed to be there just so they could say you COULD buy one for $49,900).
I am am just trying to manage my expectations this time based on past experience with Tesla (I really thought I was going to be able to buy a $50k-ish 200 mile Model S in the run up to the reveal years ago. Then the actual prices and configurations were released and I was sorely disappointed at how much higher they ended up being).
If they exceed my expectations this time, then that is awesome, I will be very happy.
I disagree based on the fact that Elon Musk said that the Model 3 will have 200 real world miles range. There's no way that Tesla will have a range of less than 200 miles, just to keep the cost down. "You promised a 200 mile range and now it's less than that!" That'd be a PR disaster, and the stock would collapse.
None of the above. Base car will have ~160 EPA, imho.
That characterization does not match the lead up to the Model S concept unveiling, so I think your memory is inaccurate.
The statements Tesla indicated to the press in 2008 were $60k and 160 or 240 miles (depending on which report you read).
The actual concept unveiling was $50k and 160 miles for the base. Options for 230 and 300 mile packs, but no promises on prices. Keep in mind back then the numbers matched with the 2-cycle EPA test (Model S production happened in 2012 right when EPA switched to 5-cycle).
The production versions matched all initial projections $50k (after tax credit) for 40kWh ("160 mile" version), $60k (after tax credit) for 60kWh ("230/240" version).
Based on past history, if Elon is adamant Model 3 will get 200 miles minimum, it will get EPA 200 miles for the base model, even if that base model is only available briefly (back then 40kWh was cancelled on unexpectedly low demand; not sure if same will happen with base Model 3).
I think it will be around 240 miles EPA.
300 easily, its going to be smaller and lighter, the roadster can do 400miles.
1. EM clarified that the base Model 3 will have a real world range of >200
2. He also clarified that Model 3 will be 80% the size of Model S -- Let's assume a linear translation to 80% weight as well, for simplicity.
3. The Model S-70 has an EPA rating of 240 miles -- 80% of 70 is about 56
So, 55kWh pack on Model 3 should get us 240 miles (EPA) and over 200 miles (real world), assuming the 20% reduction in weight and drag translates to about 20% reduction in power consumption.
We can see that Model S-90 has an EPA range of 280 miles, or so. So, using the same math as above, we can see 80% of 90 is about 72, which implies a 70kWh pack should get the Model 3 around 280 EPA miles, or easily over 250 real world miles.
Model 3-55 -- 240 mi EPA
Model 3-55D -- 250 mi EPA
Model 3-70 -- 280 mi EPA
Model 3-70D -- 290 mi EPA
Model 3-P70D -- 270 mi EPA
Well, apart from the speculative math based on a heavy set of assumptions, I also am unsure if Tesla will even have RWD options (could just be AWD) given how they did away with it with the current models (S&X).
I remember correctly. There were ACTUAL press releases from Tesla in the run up that said things like this:
"Model S is Tesla’s zero-emission, five-passenger luxury sedan powered by a lithium-ion battery pack. It is expected to have a base price of about $60,000 and get about 240 miles per charge with exceptional performance. The first sedans will likely roll off the assembly line in late 2010. " https://web.archive.org/web/20081205105846/http://www.teslamotors.com/media/press_room.php?id=974
i didn't follow the forums back then, only the news outlets on the Model S, and I wasn't the only one who was confused when the actual models were released: Model S on Tesla website
there was even a whole discussion here on Tesla's "doublespeak" with their advertising.
Model S Specifications, Teases and Leaks
Tesla broke my my heart back then. I was soooooo excited for the affordable Model S after the roadster was so spendy, so when it turned out there was no way I could get one, I was very sad.
I havent seen Elons quote about the BASE model 3 and 200 miles, I didn't think he had been that specific. If someone can dig that one up, that would be good info
Tesla Model ≡ anticipated driving range (non-upgraded, base level battery)
Elon Musk recently:
“200 miles is a minimum threshold for an electric car,” Musk said in a Q&A session on Transport Evolved. “We need 200-plus miles in real world. Not 200 miles in ‘AC off, driving on flat road’ mode.
“Anything below 200 miles isn’t passing grade. Most people are looking for 20 percent more than that.”
Elon's math therefore indicates they're shooting for 240 miles of range EPA rated. That would be the base battery in the $35K car with and option for a bigger battery. Totally doable with slightly lager cells (20700 have 33% more density and only 10% larger than the 18650) and a slightly smaller physical size pack than a Model S given the car will be smaller and lighter. Both JB and Elon have said many times that Model 3 is all-new technology, from the cells up, so everything from density to features and manufacturability is taken into account for this mass market car.
I have no inside knowledge, but wonder if the model 3 could have a new drivetrain design that places a direct drive smaller motor in each wheel assembly. This could reduce weight and improve range. I heard a BEV concept car with this design, but don't recall who made the concept car or if it ever made it to production.
You are thinking about Rimac Consept_One (link)
As you see the motors is not "in the wheels". And same is true for Mercedes SLC AMG:
60kWh 235 miles EPA
I can think (read: "have thought a lot) of a number of situations wherein it makes all the sense in the world to have four smaller motors in each corner, and if I have done so then I hope to the heavens above TM has, too.
to have them inside the wheel assembly, as written, would raise any vehicle's unsprung mass so horribly that comfort, handling and fuel economy would set any such vehicle right there with a CAT 797 or Terex 6300AC. Prolly not where Tesla wants to be.
You didn't read your actual quote. That says $60,000 and 240 miles, not "$50k-ish 200 mile Model S" as you characterized previously (which would have been a broken promise). And Tesla did match that promise (60kWh pack was $60k after tax credit). So I don't see any evidence supporting your point that Tesla did not match what they indicated leading up to the Model S unveiling.
Elon has been consistently quoted that the Model 3 will get 200 miles in the real world. I thought this was already common knowledge. Others have dug up the links.
Was sure it was $49,900 after tax credit? Do I have so bad memory?
Well, look - there were lots and lots of misleading headlines and news articles back then. Things like "Tesla Model S: $50,000 EV sedan seats seven, 300-mile range, 0-60 in 5.5s" from Autoblog, etc etc. It was very easy to come to the conclusion that I might be able to buy a decent range Model S for in the 50k range. Elon said the Model S would be $50,000 himself. Sure, he met that promise at the release, technically. I didn't really consider the 160-mile range S that was $49,900 AFTER tax credits to be in the spirit though. So, sure, no officially broken promises.
Right now, he has promised a Model 3 that will be $35k (clarified later as 1/2 the cost of a Model S) and he has promised a Model 3 that goes 200 miles. But he has NOT promised that those two things will be true on the same car. So I propose that it is POSSIBLE they won't be based on past Tesla history.
Trust me, I will be very happy if the battery does start at 200 miles. That means I might be able to afford a battery upgrade and still end up with a nicely optioned car in the mid-50s
Edit: Found an interview with Musk on NPR that was probably the source of most of the confusion:
FLATOW: Uh-huh. Well, let's talk about something more that you do know about, your car company. When do we expect to see a Tesla that's come down, your second-generation car?
MUSK: So that's all looking really good. We're planning to deliver the Model S to the customers in the middle of next year. And then on October 1, we're going to have a big customer ride event and factory tour, so - it's exclusively for customers that have put down a deposit on our Model S sedan. And I think they'll be really blown away by the capabilities of the car. It's, yeah, I think it's really going to be - really going to love it when they see what it's like.
You know, the Model S sedan has a range of up to 300 miles, pure electric. It's got - and there's a performance version that's as - (unintelligible) beat a BMW M5 around a track. So it's got great, great performance handling. I think the styling is great. We're also aiming for it to be the safest car in the world in terms of being five star in every single category, which - that there isn't - no car is five star in every category.
FLATOW: And what's the price you're asking for this car?
MUSK: It starts at $50,000.
MUSK: It's kind of like a, you know, priced similar to a BMW 5 series.
SpaceX Craft To Head To Space Station : NPR
$49,900 was the 40kWh ("160 mile" pack). The $60k is referring to the 60kWh ("220/230/240 mile" pack).
- - - Updated - - -
The problem with your comparison with the 300 mile claim for Model S was the claim was always "up to". Tesla had clarified many times before the Model S unveiling that the base model will have significantly lower range. None of this was a surprise in the run-up to the Model S unveiling and on paper they met all the promises.
For the Model 3 however, Elon claims a *minimum* of 200 miles of range. I see absolutely no way they can meet that promise if they come out with a base model that has lower range than 200 miles EPA.
As much as I want to be wrong I feel like the base model will unfortunately come in just shy of 200, probably 180-190.
Based on Tesla's history of over-promising and under-delivering, I completely agree with you.