ModelNforNerd
Active Member
If you read all of my wall of text post, I did account for the extra $1,000 you'll pay later.
But remember, it's not just the annual personal property tax, it's the initial 6.25% sales tax on the purchase of the vehicle.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
If you read all of my wall of text post, I did account for the extra $1,000 you'll pay later.
But remember, it's not just the annual personal property tax, it's the initial 6.25% sales tax on the purchase of the vehicle.
Let's not forget that at 35K, Model 3 will probably lose out on a thick 4-digit figure worth of lifetime supercharging. The entry level Model S sould be reduced by $5K or so for comparison. Of course only a part of the miles driven will be SUC powered, but these cars are not to have a short life. And electricity can almost only become more expensive.
ModelNforNerd
Active Member
I've decided not to speculate too much on that yet....
all we know is that "supercharger credits" will be ONE option.
we don't yet know if "lifetime supercharging" will be A: included in the upgraded pack B: a separate add-on, regardless of pack size or C: entirely unavailable to Model 3 owners (highly doubtful...almost slim to no chance)
Garlan Garner
Banned
I believe the price of each car should be compared to cars in their class - not to each other.
The price of the MS has nothing to do with the price of the M3.
More importantly - a portion of the price of the M3 is built into the MS. The MS is funding the M3.
But the tech in the MS, MX, and more than likely the M3 will be very closely related. More so than comparing them to other manufacturers just because they are in the same class. Also, there are a number of things that have no comparables in other vehicles so there is no basis for even guessing at a price other than using other Tesla vehicles.
That's not what they mean when they say that. What they are referring to is that the development of the technology, the cash flow, the proof of concept, and being a continuing development platform are what contributed to the development of the M3. They are not taking a certain amount from the sale of each MS and MX and discounting a M3 the same amount.
Zaphod
Galaxy President (former)
But I would rather have a fully loaded performance 3 with every option for $80K (hypothetical) versus a non-performance lightly optioned S or X. Mostly because I want a smaller car. I'm sure even a lower spec S or X is still an amazing car, but it's not what I want.
Model S M.D.
Ludicrous Radiologist
Agree with you there. And I bet an S would be a b*&^% to park in downtown Atx. Its hard enough to parking in Houston with all of the pickup trucks and large SUVs in the parking lot. I may decide to trade my S in for a fully loaded PxxDL Model 3.
JeffK
Well-Known Member
See won't it be nice if/when a car could just drop you off and go park itself.
xmetal
Member
i would be beyond stunned if you could option a Model 3 to $100k, as that would logically bypass the entire point of the car and go against the master plan (step 3, "Use that money to create an affordable, high volume car." Unless you are very well off, $70-100k is nowhere near affordable).
I do not think that the options cost will be comparable to what we see on the Model S/X and should be much lower. The economies of scale that Tesla is working with will be very different and their deals with suppliers will no doubt result in substantial price reductions. If Tesla had to pay $XX for something because they only needed 10,000, the cost of that same part at the scale of 100,000 or more will simply have to be much lower. Heck even in my tiny little side business if I increase production from 500 units to 1000 it can sometimes cut the per-unit cost in half.
Elon said at the start that the selling price with "average options" would be around $42k. Taking $35k as the known low end, that would not seem to indicate something like $80-100k as the top end, but perhaps $50-60k. We'll see, and maybe I'm wrong but having another model in the Tesla lineup that options up to near 6-figures seems like a really stupid move.
I do not think that the options cost will be comparable to what we see on the Model S/X and should be much lower. The economies of scale that Tesla is working with will be very different and their deals with suppliers will no doubt result in substantial price reductions. If Tesla had to pay $XX for something because they only needed 10,000, the cost of that same part at the scale of 100,000 or more will simply have to be much lower. Heck even in my tiny little side business if I increase production from 500 units to 1000 it can sometimes cut the per-unit cost in half.
Elon said at the start that the selling price with "average options" would be around $42k. Taking $35k as the known low end, that would not seem to indicate something like $80-100k as the top end, but perhaps $50-60k. We'll see, and maybe I'm wrong but having another model in the Tesla lineup that options up to near 6-figures seems like a really stupid move.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
I agree, a $100k M3 seems quite unlikely but I don't know why it would be "stupid." Just not likely to sell many copies.
Perhaps a few with Elon along for the inaugural ride ?
habanero69
I Dont Need Cialis. I Drive an EV.
This may have been discussed in this thread already, but I skimmed the few pages I skipped and didn't see. It probably IS discussed elsewhere. BUT, my question is, and would apply to the S/X as well, why don't they assemble cars WITHOUT the necessary components for AP to save some hardware costs? I know making every car of each model exactly the same may make the assembly process easier if you don't have to omit/altersome steps, but some items such as PUP/suspension are not included with each car. I know being able to just software enable features is great for the customer, but the ones that never will turn on, that hardware is wasted. The costs of the computer/cameras/sensors, etc., I would assume is not negligible? Inquiring mind(s) want to know. 
Well, it's also possible that if a 3 owner who didn't enable AP trades in the car to Tesla, they can just enable AP and instantly have a car they can sell for extra profit.This may have been discussed in this thread already, but I skimmed the few pages I skipped and didn't see. It probably IS discussed elsewhere. BUT, my question is, and would apply to the S/X as well, why don't they assemble cars WITHOUT the necessary components for AP to save some hardware costs? I know making every car of each model exactly the same may make the assembly process easier if you don't have to omit/altersome steps, but some items such as PUP/suspension are not included with each car. I know being able to just software enable features is great for the customer, but the ones that never will turn on, that hardware is wasted. The costs of the computer/cameras/sensors, etc., I would assume is not negligible? Inquiring mind(s) want to know.
habanero69
I Dont Need Cialis. I Drive an EV.
I thought of that and basically agree, but I still wonder if there is much cost difference doing w or w/out the hardware. Guess Tesla's crunched the numbers and I have my answer before I asked .
You're right, the cost probably isn't negligible but it is probably pretty low. Consider that they're ordering in the area of half a million cars worth just for the next couple of years production.This may have been discussed in this thread already, but I skimmed the few pages I skipped and didn't see. It probably IS discussed elsewhere. BUT, my question is, and would apply to the S/X as well, why don't they assemble cars WITHOUT the necessary components for AP to save some hardware costs? I know making every car of each model exactly the same may make the assembly process easier if you don't have to omit/altersome steps, but some items such as PUP/suspension are not included with each car. I know being able to just software enable features is great for the customer, but the ones that never will turn on, that hardware is wasted. The costs of the computer/cameras/sensors, etc., I would assume is not negligible? Inquiring mind(s) want to know.
Also, keep in mind that even in the cars that don't enable the advanced features those cars will still be collecting data to be processed and used to further refine the software. So, while they may not get any immediate material gain from including them in all the cars they are getting something that will make future versions of the software better, safer, and more likely to be purchased.
Zaphod
Galaxy President (former)
But that is why they are called options. No one is forcing someone to buy them. You can easily option an S or X to beyond double the base price, so why wouldn't that apply to the 3 as well.
Elon said average price, not median price. We already know there will be a performance version and we know Ludicrous will be an option. Factor in all the bells and whistles, I think it would be highly likely to be in the mid-$80K for price. One can imagine there will not be a lot of those sold equipped like that, so they won't skew the average price that high. With the majority being sold at base $35K to hypothetically mid-$50K, that still gives average selling price of right around $42K like he said.
There have been tons of other threads going on about options and what prices are estimated to be so I won't rehash that all again here. I'm sticking to my prediction for top of the line, all option 3 to be in the mid-$80Ks I guess we will find out some day.
ModelNforNerd
Active Member
^^this. After AutoPilot 1.0, Tesla understands that in order to receive regulatory approval on something as complex as Full Autonomy, they need data, and lots of it. Google's little egg cars are nice, but there are only a handful of them, and they're not collecting the amounts of real world, full speed data that is needed to prove Autonomy can work. Tesla has decided to "eat" the hardware cost in order to further their mission of making autonomy work safely.
Don't forget that the AP2 hardware will still be there fully capable as a comprehensive safety feature. Just to let the driver kick back, let alone stay at home. Having the safety tech on board and active is going to make Model 3 the safest $35K car on the market.
Like Elon says it would be stupid not to offer AP when it's clearly safer. For the same reason, they'll not force the owner to pay for safety. The AP2 software you pay for is for the convenience features, not the safety. The latter comes with the car, and that's significant.
Like Elon says it would be stupid not to offer AP when it's clearly safer. For the same reason, they'll not force the owner to pay for safety. The AP2 software you pay for is for the convenience features, not the safety. The latter comes with the car, and that's significant.
We're speculating here the top of the line M3 will be in the 80-85k range comparable performance as CLA45
so over 8 years maybe a 5-10K difference. I was just giving examples. I'm a Tesla guy
I've owned quite a few performance sedans over the years AMG and M cars and wouldn't go back.
I was just making a point there are a number of ICE sedans that provide performance numbers that are quite impressive in the 55-65k range.
Yes, that is my point.
The numbers we are talking here in the OP are beyond Audi S5 and are into BMW M3 and MB AMG type $$$. Those are good vehicles and proven. If the equivalent Model 3 is the same price, I'll have to think twice. First generation, unknown quality/quirks, unknown depreciation......I really want an EV but it may be a little too much risk for me.
The Model S provided more value than the equivalent BMW, MB, Porsche...I want the same in the Model 3.
I may be willing to pay the same price for generation 2 or 3 but not generation 1. Heck there is so much technology in the car that I am worried that a buyer like me (owns cars for 10 years) is a fool for even thinking about it. Who wants to own a 5-10 year old computer.
ccutrer
Active Member
Model 3 is the third gen car. Model S and X were second gen. Roadster was first.
For the AP portion, it will be second gen
I can totally understand for being apprehensive about the initial production run of any vehicle. And I recommend that you wait 6 months to a year out. Of course, with the current reservation list, you're already there
.
