Tesla Model 3 in Australia

[Munka]

Closest comparison in my mind is when AMD used to lock some of its AMD Phenom 955 Quad Core CPUs down to Dual core and sell them as Phenom 550s. There was then a way for consumers to unlock the two cores to get a full 955 (albeit with less overclocking capability as only the lower quality chips ended up getting binned as 550s)

Amd have often done this with graphics cards as well. In the early days of a graphics card/cpu launch they would repurpose cards with failures on them to a lower spec sku. Most cards that had this done failed qa in some regards. As yields improved your chances of getting a full spec card that could be unlocked with a bios flash improved, but the original intent was a manage a faulty process. This happened as recent as the Vega 56 / 64 (a current product launched last year).

Agreed it's similar but the motivations are very different.

 

[Priit]

Software locking hardware has been part of the computer businesses for decades. Often you can purchase an extra license to unlock the features but sometimes the unlocking can only be done by forcing a different firmware on the device and thus voiding warranty. If Tesla is using that, it is most likely cheaper for them than the changes needed in their production to make the lesser version of hardware. Also considering that the SR+ version is considerably better than the SR, I suspect they may even sell the locked version and enable the + features for a free trial of a couple of weeks, so the users may get used to them and then happily pay the extra to get them unlocked permanently. This trial software has been in computer world also for decades as it is a good way to upsell things.

 

[Shock-On-T]

Tesla does some strange things. They would produce a car and then deliberately make it worse than what it could be by "software locking" it. Does this happen in the computer world or anywhere else?
I guess if it helps to save some taxes then it makes sense.

Yes, it happens in every industry, including automotive, cameras, computing etc. Deliberately hobbling products is established business practice.
For example, some vehicles are released with a lower power state of tune, then a new model is released with the same engine but it better tune with slightly more power. Canon used to make a single CCD for its entire camera range, then disable parts for the cheaper cameras. The list goes on...

 

[Shock-On-T]

I just want them to remove the luxury car tax. Given that Australian manufacturing has ended, how is it still there? Better question, what can we do to go about pushing for its removal?

The thinking is that the rich should pay more.
But the LCT is not the way to do this.
The rich already pay more, that's why there are tax brackets.
LCT simply penalises someone who wants a nice car, but that person is not necessarily rich, they may have saved a lifetime for that special car of their dreams.

LCT is a bad tax.

 

[Shock-On-T]

We don't see Apple making two physically identical iPhones with different pricing, but one is slower and has less battery storage because it's been hampered by a software lock, and it can be upgraded for a fee. Anyway, I don't want to start an argument, just finding some of Tesla's practices a bit strange.

If you have an older Apple phone your performance has already been downgraded, ostensibly to reduce the chance of a reboot if the battery can't supply sufficient power.
This is a hidden "feature" and the cynical amongst us might infer that Apple does this so your old phone feels old and you get the urge to buy a new one.

PSA: You can restore your iPhone's original performance by going to Settings - Battery - Battery Health - Peak Performance Capability - then click "disable".

 

[Shock-On-T]

The obvious thing at least to my naive mind for Tesla to do, is to sell a SW locked car for under the LCT threshold, you buy it, and then pay a bit more to unlock the features, thus avoiding the LCT. But I bet there are clauses in the legislation that prevents a new car seller from doing this sort of thing, otherwise it would be all over the place. Does anyone know if this is true?

Frowned upon, if not outright illegal.
There was briefly a loophole when buying new Tesla cars that the after purchase upgrades (autopilot, battery unlock) were barely more expensive than when buying with the original purchase. This meant that you could save thousands by buying the car as bare as possible, then buying the extras after.
They quickly changed this so that the after-purchases were about the same cost as original+tax.

 

[Brissienew]

Frowned upon, if not outright illegal.

What about the following scenario:

Let’s say the M3 performance is priced above the LCT threshold, and the SR+ is not. If they share some of the same optional extras such as larger wheels, and other software upgrades, should these extras be priced the same for the M3P and SR+ if they are purchased after delivery?

In the past I had bought upgraded wheels and other extras after delivery to avoid paying LCT.

Last few years I have been doing my best to avoid buying any car that is above the LCT threshold.

 

[Munka]

Tax minimisation is about arranging your finances within the written law to minimise your tax. Choosing to buy a cheaper car fits within those rules so is totally fine.

I'm not a lawyer but as I understand it establishing or using a scheme to minimise the cost of a car is also legal provided it's primary purpose is not too avoid the tax. So if you couldn't afford the option at the time or changed your mind later it's probably fine, but if you're genuinely considering it speak to an accountant.

 

[SR22pilot]

Intel locks down their processors all the time. You run one mask set. You test and bin out the best for your most elite parts but are left with a lot of the next speed grade down. To maximize return you set fuses that either slow the part down or disable functionality such as processing cores. That way you can sell to people who are price sensitive but maintain the high margins of your premium product. Making separate mask sets and doing separate production runs would be too expensive.

 

[SR22pilot]

What I hate to see is the relegation of the LR RWD to off menu. I drive an AWD with 19" rims but my partner drives the LR RWD. I think it is the sweet spot. Traction control on it is awesome so you only need AWD in extremes. The steering feels a little closer to a sports car and the car is quieter since there is no front motor whine. Oh yeah, she gets about 80 km more on a charge than I do. Her car is still plenty quick in the mountains. Yeah, my AWD is a LOT quicker but the LR RWD has never been lacking in real world use.

 

[Brissienew]

I would have preferred LR RWD over AWD too. I have never felt the need for an AWD car, besides, RWD is much more fun to drive. It is hard to wheels spin in an AWD car ：）.

 

[Shock-On-T]

I would have preferred LR RWD over AWD too. I have never felt the need for an AWD car, besides, RWD is much more fun to drive. It is hard to wheels spin in an AWD car ：）.

I used to disagree, but after driving a loaner for 75 (non-D) I have to say I was impressed.
So much quieter too.

 

[alexeiw123]

They quickly changed this so that the after-purchases were about the same cost as original+tax.

I'd still opt to do that as I know that the money goes to a cause I believe in.
There may be a portion of my tax money goes to things I believe in, nothing close to what Tesla is investing in though.

 

[Candleflame]

I used to disagree, but after driving a loaner for 75 (non-D) I have to say I was impressed.
So much quieter too.

afaik there's a lot of fans of the P85. Usually non-americans who don't care that much about 0 - 60.
Apparently the P85 has a completely different feel to the P90D/P100D. A lot more sporty.

 

[Shock-On-T]

afaik there's a lot of fans of the P85. Usually non-americans who don't care that much about 0 - 60.
Apparently the P85 has a completely different feel to the P90D/P100D. A lot more sporty.

The first Tesla I ever drove was a P85+. Great car, I was hooked from that day, poor fool that I am...

 

[aegidius]

Used to AWD from Audi quattro experience. Tesla fits right in.

 

[SR22pilot]

I would have preferred LR RWD over AWD too. I have never felt the need for an AWD car, besides, RWD is much more fun to drive. It is hard to wheels spin in an AWD car ：）.

It is nearly impossible to wheel spin on any Model 3 including RWD. The exception is a Performance in track mode.

 

[Brissienew]

It is nearly impossible to wheel spin on any Model 3 including RWD.

Not even with traction control off?

 

[Shock-On-T]

Not even with traction control off?

They don't really have a mode for turning off traction control (except M3P in track mode).
They have a mode called Slip Start which lets you spin the wheels when trying to get out of snow or whatever, but it's not the same.

 

[Brissienew]

They don't really have a mode for turning off traction control (except M3P in track mode).

I see...
I suppose Tesla buyers are not the same as Mustang buyers, no burnout mode for Tesla.