US/World ready for a Model 3 station wagon (= Model Y) ?

[Laban]

Summary:

The SUV's/crossovers are getting lower. The I-Pace (SUV according to Jaguar) is only 1.56 m high, only 2 cm higher then the Volvo V90 cross country station wagon. So, why not make the Model Y a cross country version of the Model 3, would the US/world be ready for that type of vehicle ?

Ramblings:

Europeans love station wagons, that much we know. The rest of the world buys sedans or crossovers. But i wonder if this could change when it comes to electric vehicles. The poll here (Model S Wagon?) gives a hint that it would work, even though the (ICE) market says something else.

There's some interesting things going on with some of the crossovers that's being released now. They're getting lower. Take the Jaguar I-Pace f.e. It's an "SUV" (by name at least) and only 1.56m high. The 2017 VW Tiguan is 1.63 cm.

So, would a Volvo V90 cross country type of station wagon Model 3 = Model Y work ? It's 1.54 m high, only 2 cm lower then the I-Pace:

Lowering the height is VERY important for EV's, just look at the Model S vs Model X energy consumption:

There are some Cd related drawbacks with a station wagon but they are far from as prominent as the height, or the CdA to be precise. The Audi A4 station wagon (Avant) has a Cd of 0.26 as an example, Sedan 0.23. And the highway fuel consumption difference between the sedan and the station wagon is only 4.5%, NEDC though so perhaps a bit on the low
side.

Combine the much lower energy consumption (smaller battery, lower price) with the fact that going from a Model 3 sedan to a "cross country" station wagon would be a very easy thing to do compared with making a full size crossover/SUV. Reusing a lot of parts between the 3 and the Y is a good thing, for production/logistics, cost (Tesla), price (customer).

So, what do you think ?

 

[NeverFollow]

In general, station wagon are longer that the based car,
which is why to get more room while getting the same foot print,
for easy parking, small SUV are more and more popular.

Making an M3 hatchback like the MS would have been more practical
and more popular for all the markets.

 

[igotzzoom]

Uhh...Yeah! If there was a Model 3 wagon option, I'd take it in a heartbeat! Sadly, I think the direction things are going bodes better for the Model Y crossover. There's simply more universal appeal. Europeans like wagons or "grand tourer" 5-doors, Americans like SUVs. Crossovers are the perfect compromise that's popular in all markets.

 

[tchockie]

I'm a fan. Its a shame this body style isn't as easy to find in the US from any maker. Pretty much all the german sedans I've owned, I would have LOVED to have that in a wagon form instead. Makers claim there's no demand here in the US, while the customers complain the fact they're not as available here. I'm particularly fond of the design of the new volvo V90, although personally not the cross country version. But even the V90 isn't going to be found easily in showrooms, and will be more of a special order type of deal.

I would love to see that shape in a Tesla, and IMO i think it would sell very well. Business wise, it would be risky though, considering the historic trend here in the US.

 

[SwTslaGrl]

I think many are looking for more ground clearance and higher seating position when choosing a new car. I currently have around 5" ground clearance and it scrapes the front almost every day going into an underground parking space..

 

[Laban]

I think many are looking for more ground clearance and higher seating position when choosing a new car. I currently have around 5" ground clearance and it scrapes the front almost every day going into an underground parking space..

True, but you get that with the cross-country type of station wagon.

As i mentioned in the first post, Jaguar calls the I-Pace a SUV and it's 1.56m/61.4in.:

Here's the V60 cross country, 1.545m/60.8in.:

Pretty much the same type of vehicle in my opinion. And the I-Pace seems to be pretty popular among the potential Y customers from what i have read here and in the teslaclubsweden.se forums.

It's of course semantics but there's a reason for the low height of the I-Pace, and why they still insist on calling it a SUV.

 

[Johann Koeber]

The ageing population loves the higher seats for easier ingress. Electricity is getting cheaper, so fuel economy is not the main point.

 

[Laban]

The ageing population loves the higher seats for easier ingress. Electricity is getting cheaper, so fuel economy is not the main point.

The price of the electricity is almost irrelevant in an BEV, but the range and cost of the batteries isn't. And i'm guessing that this will be the case for the next 8-10 years.

Look at the Model S vs X numbers from Björns test that i linked to above, 309 vs 415 Wh/mi at 75 mph. 233 vs 311 Wh/mi at 56 mph. That's like going from a 55 to a 75 kWh battery pack (%).

So i'm guessing that the Model Y will be more on the low side for a SUV, just like the I-Pace.

 

[Laban]

Crossovers are the perfect compromise that's popular in all markets.

True, but what's the definition of a crossover, or SUV for that matter. Is it the shape of the car, some minimum height required.. ? I'll use another example, the Subaru Outback. It's a crossover or SUV depending on who you ask. But the first thing that comes into my mind when i see it is "station wagon":

 

[BerTX]

Historically in the US, an SUV was a station wagon made on a truck frame. The term "station wagon" has a stigma in the US, so a station wagon made on a car frame is called a crossover, or CUV. I think he minivan has taken over where the station wagon once held court -- and now is developing the same stigma.

We have owned SUVs since the early 90's and love the utility. If designers can indeed make a station wagon more efficient aerodynamically without losing all of he "utility", we'd definitely go for it.

 

[Laban]

If designers can indeed make a station wagon more efficient aerodynamically without losing all of he "utility", we'd definitely go for it.

See my post above about the Audi A4 sedan vs Avant (station wagon). The Avant has a 0.26 Cd vs 0.23 for the Sedan.

Not saying that you get the same "utility" as with a full blown SUV but everything in life is a compromise

 

[ecarfan]

Europeans love station wagons, that much we know. The rest of the world buys sedans or crossovers.

And the distinction between a station wagon and a crossover is becoming increasingly blurred.

what's the definition of a crossover, or SUV for that matter. Is it the shape of the car, some minimum height required.. ? I'll use another example, the Subaru Outback. It's a crossover or SUV depending on who you ask.

Exactly.

These categories are rapidly losing their meaning. When I see a Mercedes GLA I really don't know what label to apply to it! Hatch, wagon, CUV, SUV, it's a bit of everything. All I know is that it isn't a sedan.

 

[KJD]

True, but what's the definition of a crossover, or SUV for that matter. Is it the shape of the car, some minimum height required.. ? I'll use another example, the Subaru Outback. It's a crossover or SUV depending on who you ask. But the first thing that comes into my mind when i see it is "station wagon":

I really do not care if you call it a station wagon or SUV. Just build one Tesla.

My wife and I drove Subaru's for years before we bought the Tesla. If Tesla did not exist I would still be looking at an Outback for a next car. As it is, I hope the Model Y gets built soon.

 

[BerTX]

See my post above about the Audi A4 sedan vs Avant (station wagon). The Avant has a 0.26 Cd vs 0.23 for the Sedan.

Not saying that you get the same "utility" as with a full blown SUV but everything in life is a compromise

If the Model X had been THAT (and with no $#&@*%! falcon wing doors) -- sold sold sold. I hope the Model Y will be just that. But no, He has to have the FFWD, now that they have worked out the bugs.

 

[Laban]

I really do not care if you call it a station wagon or SUV. Just build one Tesla.

I agree But it seems to be important for a lot of people, Jaguar wouldn't have called the I-Pace an SUV otherwise.

Now, Volvo already calls their cross-country models crossovers so i think that Tesla can get away with that for a cross-countryish version of the Model 3 rather a higher more SUV like car. Reuse 95% of the parts from the Model 3, save a huge amount of development costs/time and gain ~10 kWh of battery "for free" just by having a lower car. That's what i call a win-win situation.

 

[KJD]

If the Model X had been THAT (and with no $#&@*%! falcon wing doors) -- sold sold sold. I hope the Model Y will be just that. But no, He has to have the FFWD, now that they have worked out the bugs.

I agree with you. I would much prefer conventional doors please.

 

[BerTX]

I agree But it seems to be important for a lot of people, Jaguar wouldn't have called the I-Pace an SUV otherwise.

Now, Volvo already calls their cross-country models crossovers so i think that Tesla can get away with that for a cross-countryish version of the Model 3 rather a higher more SUV like car. Reuse 95% of the parts from the Model 3, save a huge amount of development costs/time and gain ~10 kWh of battery "for free" just by having a lower car. That's what i call a win-win situation.

That was the original plan with the Model X, to re-use all of the MS hardware. Then scope-creep set in, and we ended up with 95% new and 5% like MS.

 

[Laban]

That was the original plan with the Model X, to re-use all of the MS hardware. Then scope-creep set in, and we ended up with 95% new and 5% like MS.

I remember reading about that but the stakes are higher now with the Model 3/Y since the margins are lower. So i don't think that they want to repeat that mistake. And what better way to achieve this then to do a station wagon "crossover". Might not be the Model Y, just call it Model 3 C, Model 3 W (mainly for Europe) and so forth. Just like f.e BMW and Audi does with the the 3 series, A4.

 

[11thIndian]

If the Model X had been THAT (and with no $#&@*%! falcon wing doors) -- sold sold sold. I hope the Model Y will be just that. But no, He has to have the FFWD, now that they have worked out the bugs.

I'm not going to give any credence to that tweet from Elon at this point. It was deleted fast- and if the recent Model 3 reveals have told us anything it's that Tesla is looking for ways to not only simplify for mass production, but also differentiate their high end offerings of the S and X from the mid-range 3 and Y. I think FWD is the easiest "gimme" to take away from the Model Y as a differentiator from the X.

 

[smac]

@Laban In the UK, stuff like the Kia Sportage and Nissan Juke are the huge sellers.

Nowadays it's quite a rarity to see the latest Avant/Touring/Estate versions of the premium 3 series rivals, especially compared to the GLC's, X3 and Q3. People like the higher more forward seating position, the easy access into the trunk, etc. which is why the crossover SUV-lite stuff is so popular.

FWIW I think Jag have gone the right route with the I-Pace, making it a Q5 rival (albeit with a slightly lower roof line, for the sake of EV friendly aero), rather than making say an electrified XF wagon style car.

Tesla won't have a direct rival for the IPace (forget all the press about it being an X competitor, it's a segment below IMHO), until 2019. It's actually a very interesting car, sort of half way between sedan / hatchback / SUV.

It's a crying shame it's not wearing a T on the bonnet. Lack of Supercharger network is going to be a big objection*, but otherwise it looks to tick all the boxes for something in the "mid-size crossover" space.

(*I don't supercharge, so for me the decision to put a deposit down on the IPace was fairly easy, I see it as getting a Model Y early).