-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
That is true for Model S and Model X. On of the reasons (the primary reason?) is that this cars have a great part of aluminum in their body. It will be less aluminum in the Model 3, and I think I have heard that the Bolt also will have a good part aluminum? So this may not be a big difference between Model 3 and Bolt, and may even be the opposite difference from what you are expecting.
Elon have said they have modified this on the TM3, but we do not know how big a difference this is. And I'm fully with you on the hatchback, and this may be one of the reasons even I may end up with an Bolt/Ampera-e.
Well, if she would leave you for getting a Leaf, I think getting an Bolt would be playing with fire
For what it's worth, I have a 2014 Model S, which I love, and is my car (I bought it, and I drive it, not my husband). In the 2.5 years I've had it, my husband has driven it probably 10 times because he does not like driving a "fancy" car (he drives a 2011 Prius). I put down a deposit for the Model 3 for him, presuming that by the time it comes out, Teslas will be more commonplace and the Model 3 won't stand out as being a fancy brand/car. Last night he said, "I like the new Chevy electric car." I replied, "the Volt, it's hideous"? No, he said, the smaller, new one [meaning the Bolt (which I hadn't heard of)]. So of course I had to look up the Bolt. For those who say the the Bolt and Model 3 are after different consumers, I disagree. Not everyone wants the best electric car out there (a Tesla). Some people, like my husband, just want an electric car that has four wheels and good range for commuting to work. He doesn't need autopilot or other features the Model 3 will have. He may not even need supercharging because he won't road trip with it (that's what my car is for). For him, the Bolt may be just fine, and a good less flashy alternative to a Model 3. Now, personally I would never get the Bolt, as I'm just too attached to my Model S, and if he doesn't want the 3 I reserved for him, I may sell my S and take his new 3 since his will have autopilot and other features that my 2014 car doesn't have. The more EV adopters out there (like my husband), the better. If he wants a Bolt, great. He may be kicking himself a year in after he realizes he hates it, but at least he had the choice.
Tesla employees have said on more than one occasion that most of the Model 3 will be steel vs the Model S which is almost entirely aluminum. It isn't clear yet how much aluminum the TM3 will have and where it will be used.
The Bolt EV uses a steel body cage but all major exterior surfaces and panels are aluminum such as the hood, hatch, fenders, and doors.
That raises the issue about the expense of body repairs. I suspect there are two things which are changing to bring down repair costs for the Bolt (and perhaps TM3) vs the Model S/X.
First, the S/X carry the aura of expensive lux cars which probably tends to magically raise the cost of repairs just as ordinary maintenance and non-body repair on a BMW or Jaguar is probably for expensive than similar work on a Chevy.
Second, aluminum body parts are becoming a lot more common. One of the top selling vehicles, the Ford F-150 is now all aluminum and other higher volume cars besides the Prius are more commonly using aluminum hoods and other panels. So, aluminum is quickly becoming less of a novelty and more body shops will have the tools and experience to deal with it thus bringing more competition and lower prices.
garsh
Re Member
If the prototypes are any indication, then all of the body panels will be aluminum, with some steel used in the chassis.
Tesla Model 3 - Car and Driver
"...we quietly touched a small magnet to various outer panels, the inner doors, and the structural pillar between the doors and got not a single quiver of attraction. A Tesla engineer told us the car is a mix of steel and aluminum but refused to elaborate. Unless the prototypes we sat in were made from nonproduction materials, there’s not much steel in that body."
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Well said, and I imagine that I am far from alone in being a two car family that is ready to swap one ICE for an EV so road-tripping range is not a concern.
OTOH, the Bolt and M3 are in the same price neighborhood. 'Fancy' in my world means expensive, so if I was willing to buy a Bolt, I would surely be willing to buy a better car for the same price from a vastly superior company. The Volt was always a good car, but a rotten value. The Bolt appears to be heading towards the same fate. This week (!) I am leaning towards an inexpensive LEAF* rather than an expensive (albeit much better) Tesla. The Bolt is in the bad middle ground of not being anywhere near as good as a Tesla, but vastly more expensive than a LEAF yet still a commuter car**.
*I've received offers of $15,500 (not including TTL, delivery or doc fees) for a new 2016 LEAF SV 30 kWh before tax credit. Lease offers work out too, with some haggling.
**One exception: Used, off lease 3 year old Volts are $15,000 - $17,000. That is something to consider if you can stomach GM.
Last edited:
Name a car that will normally have a full tank each morning, normally runs purely on electricity, yet still has unlimited range to anywhere, even areas lacking EV infrastructure, that has acceptable performance in both acceleration and cornering.
We paid $25k OTD after all taxes, fees, and incentives for each of our two Volts. Both are nearly all EV miles over 3 years later.
Which other $25k cars are doing this? The luxury of instant response at all times, even when cold, without the tragically poor handling, throttle response, and acceleration of some cars in this price range.
Granted, just like ALL Government Mandated Save The Whales cars, lots of taxpayer bucks go into each Volt. But saying it's a "rotten" value is crazy.
The kids love their Volts, and whenever mom or dad get a chance, they are our favorite urban vehicles.
The same idea that none of the upcoming 200 mile class EVs will have to sacrifice some amenities to keep the price under control is absurd.
"Who Killed The EV?" It might be finally proven what many have said the whole time. WE killed the EV. We wanted the Superior EV Drivetrain and performance, but we also demand it have all the amenities of ICE cars. We want a free premium drivetrain.
If anything kills the Model 3, it will be unrealistic expectations of what it costs to make EVs. You've read it on this board. People want the Model 3 to have everything the Model S does, but at a total OTD cost that is 50% of the Model S.
I want my Model 3 to be RWD, good acceleration, and snappy handling. Screw everything else. I don't care if they omit AC and power windows if they have to. I don't care if the finished product is 180 miles EPA range. I want a fun little EV to blast around in that I don't worry about not using Automatic Car Washes, parking next to other cars, and navigates congested areas like hot knife through butter. But most EV buyers aren't as understanding about costs.
We have 2 "Garage Queens" already. Cars that get hand washed, and haul ass. A third Garage Queen with Tesla badging does not make me drool.
By the summer of 2017, our 4 drivers in our family will be driving on electricity for most our duties. And we will never have to worry about EV infrastructure at all. One maximum luxury EREV, one 200 mi class BEV, and two runabout EREV's. Virtually all our miles will be electric because the Interstate Flyer will be very large, comfy, with night vision, and Supercruise. But it will be EREV because Wifey does not want a BEV, she doesn't trust the concept at this point. I
Last edited:
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Then you used the Volt cars for duties easily covered by a LEAF, but (at least today) the LEAF is $14k + TTL.
I get that you are a GM fan, but try not to confuse fandom with rational EV choices.
The Leaf is slow, sluggish handling, and had about 80 miles range with battery problems when we decided on the Volt. And it wasn't $14k OTD either. The price was the same at the time. Everyone liked the Volt so much, that when it was time to add a car again, we opted for a second, improved Volt.
How would you feel with your teen driver going 40 miles to the beach in a 2013 Leaf?
EDIT - If somebody was making a small 200 mile EV at the time for the price of the Volt, then things probably would have been different.
Last edited:
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
A new one today is 101 EPA rated miles range, neither slow or sluggish, and a lot, lot cheaper. And not GM.
The actual power output of the 2016 Volt is 120kW not the 111 in the brochure, and they put it on a diet. It was quicker and better handling than the Leaf before the changes though. It is "peppy" for a small car in an urban setting, and with good tires, laps AutoX tracks much quicker than you'd think it would. EV power is deceptive.
The Leaf is 80kW. The Volt is almost 3 seconds quicker 0-60mph.
Chevrolet Volt - Car and Driver
Nissan Leaf - Car and Driver
Chevrolet Volt - Car and Driver
Nissan Leaf - Car and Driver
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
If your beach is 40 miles one way, I'm pretty sure that your Volt will be consuming petrol. Around a gallon per trip. And then your statement that your non-interstate driving is virtually all electric is .... suspect unless you charge at the beach and then any short range EV works fine.
That is the problem with fanbois. A fair reporting is just not in the cards.
A lot cheaper? I'm assuming you mean used resale values? Of course it is, because of the inferior build quality and battery degradation issues.
You get what you pay for. A Leaf? It's pretty much a throw-away car.
garsh
Re Member
The one that doesn't require oil changes, transmission fluid changes, emissions inspections, and a muffler.
Red Sage
The Cybernetic Samurai
I think it more likely that the attitude that one must accept an electric car cannot be 'a real car' without the sort of compromises that traditional automobile manufacturers impose on compliance cars will destroy the electric vehicle movement. Elon Musk is correct in that it typically takes around three iterations of a concept before the best versions of it appear. I believe it is his goal to give Tesla Customers a product in the Model ☰ that requires no apologies or explanations as to why standard issue components, accessories, and features are mysteriously 'missing'.
The problem with your position is that people with similar attitudes to yours have argued the opposite about the Model S in years past. That is, they claimed the fit, finish, materials, and features were not 'up to snuff' for what they termed a '$100,000 car'. They went on to say they were 'no better than' what one could find in a car that cost 'under $40,000'. They have insisted with great fervor over the course of the past four years that what you get in a Model S is substandard compared to its contemporaries.
If one is to believe that, then they must believe the exact same quality of components and features could be offered in a car that costs half as much and is built at a 10:1 ratio, thereby improving economies of scale by a wide, wide margin. What I have argued, time and again, is that the 'features' they speak of are all window dressing. They never actually cost very much to put into any car. What drives up the price on the feature list is exclusivity -- not quality -- of materials used.
If the Toyota Camry LE were sold at around 75,000 units per year, instead of 750,000 worldwide, the materials used in the car would be the exact same, but the car would cost around $50,000 more for each one. The only real difference between a Camry LE and a BMW 320i is that the BMW is rear wheel drive, slightly smaller, and costs around $10,000 more. But their actual feature sets are almost identical to each other. The BMW is manufactured at a lower rate though -- around 330,000 to 370,000 per year -- just under half as many units as the Toyota. Hence, the difference in price point.
So, yes... The Tesla Model ☰ will be a decent car for $35,000. It will not be substandard, 'cheap', or empty feeling. It won't be a tin-can, rattling, echoing piece of junk. It won't be as 'luxurious' in base trim as a Cadillac ATS or Lexus IS might aim to be, but it will not be an embarrassment by any stretch of the imagination. I expect the Model ☰ will be at least as good as a Camry LE -- just like the 320i -- and maybe just a bit better.
So, NO... You won't have to give up power windows and power locks... You won't have rear drum brakes... You won't have 14" steel wheels with hubcaps optional... The Model ☰ will not be a 100% a la carte platform with a monophonic AM receiver as an option. It isn't as if Elon Musk announced years ago that he was looking forward to building a direct successor to the 1984 Chevrolet Chevette, after all.
You want to be realistic? Cool. Just don't be ridiculous.
Last edited:
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Thanks for the interesting counter-point. McRat lives in a GM world of incremental steps. The moniker of his preferred cars should be IncEV rather than ErEV. His POV can be interpreted to be pessimism that enough people will pay extra to quickly scale up to your happy scenario. Reality for now is an expected jump from 30k to 300k annual Tesla sales so cautious optimism seems reasonable that the down-payment by those willing to pay more or make compromises is done and paid.
And of course McRat is hobbled by his GM fanBoi-ism. If GM was coming out with the M3 in ~ 12 months I'm sure he would be more upbeat.
Sounds like a good case to get the Bolt to me
You can get a Tesla later when more service centers open up.
Red Sage
The Cybernetic Samurai
I have a good Buddy, Sixth Man/VIofIX, who absolutely despises Elon Musk. He is undoubtedly a GM Fanboi, which is OK, because so am I, really. It's just that I am a sorely disappointed one while he remains an extreme apologist. There are a whole lot of well reasoned arguments in favor of the VOLT. The problem is that all those paths of reasoning are nevertheless incorrect. There are a whole lot of well reasoned arguments in favor of the BOLT. The problem is that all those paths of reasoning are nevertheless incorrect.
I have no doubt that if the Model S was branded as a Cadillac, Sixth Man would love the hell out of it. You would not be able to shut him up over how awesome the car is, and how much butt it has kicked. But since it is from a company headed by Elon Musk, whom he considers to be incredibly disrespectful of the Detroit Big Three, and none of the businesses he operates are unionized, Sixth Man cannot stand it.
He uses many of the standard issue Naysayer comments, heavily laced with rhetoric, that make no sense whatsoever when he attempts to berate Tesla... He says that 'anyone' can make a low volume long range fully electric car -- there's nothing special about the Model S at all -- it just has a big battery. He says he would have some respect for Tesla if their FIRST CAR had been less than $25,000 -- that would PROVE that they were a REAL manufacturer if they were willing to compete in that space. He says that GM could make a car like that 'anytime they wanted to' but they are in the business of making money, not throwing it down the drain like Elon. He says that the big center screen is just 'lazy design' and that the interior is not up to par with 'real luxury cars' and so on...
It's been eight years since the Tesla Roadster debut and still no answer to it -- beyond the Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG Electric Drive which has half the range (with around 50% more battery capacity), costs four times as much, and posts the same 0-60 MPH time -- from any of the major automobile manufacturers. It's been four years since the Model S release and we have a plug-in hybrid Mercedes S-Class with like, 14 miles of fully electric drive... Porsche Panamera S E-Hybrid with 16... AUDI A3 e-tron with 16... and BMW i8 with 15 miles of fully electric drive. Seriously? And the least expensive of these, the AUDI, still costs more than the expected base price of the Model ☰.
I've not discussed the Chevrolet BOLT with Sixth Man... Though I'm sure he would have some specific reason why GM, a company that builds around 10,000,000 vehicles per year, cannot offer that car at his own benchmark price point of $25,000... Or why it will actually cost more than the Model ☰. Keep in mind this is a guy who told me years ago that the Acura NSX wasn't worth the money because the Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 had so much more technology for less money... But I'm sure he would claim the BOLT was better 'in every way' than the Model ☰ even though it contains less technology, is less capable, and costs more. Please note that for all his support of unions, Sixth Man drives a Saturn, a car from the sole GM division that was not unionized at all. If somehow Saturn had survived The PURGE of 2009 at GM and the upcoming Model ☰ was going to wear that badge instead of Tesla's...? He would be all over it!
Heh. I wonder if he'll be trading in his Saturn for a BOLT this Fall...?
