Thoughts on Model 3 Design

[MiamiNole]

View attachment 93743

I actually think this rendering is awesome. Styling is definitely a dealbreaker for me. The closer it looks to a Model S, the better. I've had the philosophy since college for car buying that if I'm going to spend thousands of dollars buying a car, it has to be something that I really want. No settling. If the Model 3 isn't styled in a way that's appealing to me, then I will just wait for a styling that I like, or just continue saving and buying a Model S eventually.

 

[wdolson]

JRP3 - most people have legs so it isn't only headroom. As the seats go down so the legs go out (with most bodies). If the seats are lower then there is also less space under the front seats to stuff your legs.

Hence the advantage of a longer wheelbase (as well as more battery space; especially if the M3 is appreciably narrower than the MS).

But giving more legroom at the rear now intrudes into rear storage space so the car may have to longer than intended. It ain't a simple 'Drop the seats to give headroom'.....

Also it is far more awkward extracting oneself from a car with your legs out in front rather than under - just watch F1 drivers crawling out!!!

do we want to limit the 'normal' M3 to the young and agile? To this end Tesla could be wise to
release the CUV/SUV version concurrently with the sedan (as long as they share most components and basic styling) so that both the practical and the sporty are serviced and no one walks away from a Tesla M3 because 'I can't get in and out easily.....'/'Oh it isn't sporty enough for me!' (Delete as applicable)

Lower seats also mean less effective legroom for those sitting in them. The taller the seat, the more leg extent is taken up with vertical space which requires less horizontal space. I have very long legs, so I'm very sensitive to this. A lot of cars that are advertised with lots of front seat legroom are a tighter fit than those with less advertised legroom because of the height of the seats.

My regular car is going to be a Model S which does have enough legroom for me on long trips, but my SO wants a Model 3. It better have decent front seat legroom. It's very uncomfortable driving with my knees straddling the steering column.

 

[MassModel3]

My regular car is going to be a Model S which does have enough legroom for me on long trips, but my SO wants a Model 3. It better have decent front seat legroom. It's very uncomfortable driving with my knees straddling the steering column.

Wait a minute... If it's your SO's Model 3, doesn't that mean that you just need to glove box to be out of the way of your knees? :tongue:

 

[art]

My 2011 Camry front seats measure front of the seats where your thighs are 11.5 inches off the floor and where your but sits, the back of the seat is 7.5 inches off the floor. I suspect the model is similar? That's low enough don't you think? I hope the auto industry doesn't go the way of the airline industry.

 

[EVNow]

I think probably an inch (57.5") is still acceptable. Although it'll be taller than all the premium sedans in the same segment (which are all around the same as the 3 series), the economy versions like Mazda 3 and Corolla are within this range.

The way Tesla makes the skate board - to maintain the same headroom would require a taller car (and higher seat).

Finally it is going to be a balancing act between looks, ease of ingress/egress, legroom & headroom. An emphasis on any one aspect would alienate a section of likely buyers.

 

[wdolson]

Wait a minute... If it's your SO's Model 3, doesn't that mean that you just need to glove box to be out of the way of your knees? :tongue:

I might need to drive it once in a while, but if we have a Model S too, I would expect we'd usually be taking that on trips.

 

[Bomboana]

Any idea about the range? Smaller base, smaller room for batteries...

 

[ProphetM]

Any idea about the range? Smaller base, smaller room for batteries...

... but also less weight to carry around, and improved battery tech. I am optimistically hoping for a range around 300 for the highest-capacity model. (Dual motor, non-performance.) That's 300 EPA. If they're very close, they will refine it to get there because hitting 300 will give them a monstrous perception boost.

 

[JRP3]

Or it's possible with improved cell density that the area under the rear foot well would not have any cells, so the top of the pack would dip down there.

Obviously Porsche is reading this thread, hopefully Tesla as well :wink:

 

[stopcrazypp]

Obviously Porsche is reading this thread, hopefully Tesla as well :wink:

Got to give you a thumbs up for that. What Porsche did was exactly what you described.

 

[Trev Page]

Obviously Porsche is reading this thread, hopefully Tesla as well :wink:

I love how Porsche, and Audi apparently, have finally seen the light about the Tesla battery in the floor and the motors between the wheels design is the correct and only way to do an EV properly.

Those headlights however won't pass muster in the aerodynamics field if you want to have good range. Those scoops are like air-brakes.

 

[MassModel3]

I love how Porsche, and Audi apparently, have finally seen the light about the Tesla battery in the floor and the motors between the wheels design is the correct and only way to do an EV properly.

Those headlights however won't pass muster in the aerodynamics field if you want to have good range. Those scoops are like air-brakes.

Yes, but it looks cool!

I like the way they built the rear foot-well into the battery. On the up side, more comfortable passengers. On the down side, less battery. Maybe it'll be an option -- comfortable back-seaters or more range. Man, those rear seats look like they're sitting right on the floor of the car, too.

 

[JRP3]

Man, those rear seats look like they're sitting right on the floor of the car, too.

As they should :biggrin:

 

[sub]

that Porsche is a nice looking car, I'm sure the cost will be 200k+ and with no charging infrastructure it's no competition to Tesla. However, it would look nice sitting in the garage next to a couple of Tesla's for weekend play duty.

 

[EVNow]

Obviously Porsche is reading this thread, hopefully Tesla as well :wink:

Now I get it - you guys want a low flung sports car for mass market $35k price.

LOL./ Not gonna happen. You guys are vastly, I mean vastly outnumbered - like 100x. Just look at Nissan's Z successor.

 

[MassModel3]

that Porsche is a nice looking car, I'm sure the cost will be 200k+ and with no charging infrastructure it's no competition to Tesla. However, it would look nice sitting in the garage next to a couple of Tesla's for weekend play duty.

Certainly it won't be a cheap vehicle. If Porsche is smart, they'll work with Tesla to share in the Supercharger network. I fully expect that the number of Porsche Mission E electrics will be relatively small compared to the number of Teslas on the road, and manufacturers who share in the Supercharger network will only pay based on the proportion of cars that will use it.

It might be a better win for companies with only a few high end electrics to work with Tesla on sharing instead of creating their own standard, or forcing them to use the J1772 network. If you can find a J1772 nearby, it might be offline, might be pay per use, might be ICEd. But if you're going to pay $150-$200K for a car, you're going to expect a large coast-to-coast high-speed charging infrastructure be available, not be forced to deal with Leafs, Volts, or even I3's on slow chargers (no offense anyone).

 

[JRP3]

Now I get it - you guys want a low flung sports car for mass market $35k price.

No, but we don't want a bubble top LEAF or similar just to get some rear seat headroom.

 

[EVNow]

No, but we don't want a bubble top LEAF or similar just to get some rear seat headroom.

Neither do I. These extremes are not the only choices - as I wrote earlier Tesla will have to balance the various needs. They are not going to err on the side of low flung sports car.

 

[wdolson]

Neither do I. These extremes are not the only choices - as I wrote earlier Tesla will have to balance the various needs. They are not going to err on the side of low flung sports car.

Elon Musk has the same ability Steve Jobs had to know what the public wants before they know it. He also is a father and drove the Model X to support well heeled families with small kids. The Model 3 has been said to have both a sedan and a CUV model and it aimed at the middle of the car buying public. I am 99.9% sure that both will be good family cars, so no sports car.

Musk has also said the next car after the Model 3 will be a new Roadster, which will be the low slung sports car. They don't want the new Roadster to compete in any way with the Model 3.

If you want a Tesla sports car, you will have to wait until 2020 or so when the Roadster 2 comes out.

 

[Model 3]

The Model 3 has been said to have both a sedan and a CUV model ...

Just a bit nit-picking: This comes form an error in one of the slides that JB displayed under a speech. It has since then been corrected to "Gen-III will have both a sedan and a CUV model". Model 3 is the sedan, and the CUV model will have another name on it. (My guess is Model Y - that Tesla has a trademark on.)

When the Gen-III CUV will get to the marked no-one outside of Tesla knows. Maybe it will be rolled out in parallel with the Model 3? Or a year or two after... Anyway before the Roadster NG (Next Generation) - Roadster 2 pre-dates Model S