Wall Street Journal reviews M3 Performance

[CarlK]

I wonder why people took this first M3P test review so lightly. Dan Neil, a Pulitzer prize winner, is one of the most experienced and respected auto writers out there and known to be very hard to please. Not to mention him and WSJ have mostly been very critical of Tesla. Tesla must have done a lot of things right on the M3P to impress him enough for him to describe it as "a thrilling, modern marvel".

Here is a video interview of him on the test review which is nothing but praise on the car and Tesla. Again put this into the perspective that it is from Dan Neil of WSJ and not your average auto blogger.
Behind The Wheel of the Tesla Model 3 Performance Vehicle

Quote: The car will "definitely outrun" an average Porsche on an average road course.

 

[WarpedOne]

Thanks, that did it.

Yes, that article was light on actual content, but long on enthusiasm and praise. Also, some inaccuracies. For example, this statement “...the deep-draft aluminum body panels... ”

My understanding is the Model 3 has steel body panel, not aluminum. But I don’t work for Tesla, so I could be wrong...

 

[30seconds]

Anyone know why Tesla is very slowly metering these reviews? It’s clear that they have put some sort of embargo. Other than WSJ all we have are a couple of teases that more reviews are coming.

 

[Dan Detweiler]

Anyone know why Tesla is very slowly metering these reviews? It’s clear that they have put some sort of embargo. Other than WSJ all we have are a couple of teases that more reviews are coming.

They make the cars available, then the reviewers do their thing. Don't think Tesla has anything else to do with it really. Perhaps the reviewers can't really find much wrong with it so many chose to hold their reviews? Maybe? No, that would show a bias. Can't have that. LOL!

Dan

 

[Knightshade]

I wonder why people took this first M3P test review so lightly. Dan Neil, a Pulitzer prize winner, is one of the most experienced and respected auto writers out there and known to be very hard to please. Not to mention him and WSJ have mostly been very critical of Tesla. Tesla must have done a lot of things right on the M3P to impress him enough for him to describe it as "a thrilling, modern marvel".

Probably because the story had almost nothing specific, had numerous errors of fact, and at times it seemed to describe a RWD model 3 not the P...

Also, which one is the "average" porsche, and what average course did he run the model 3 on to tell?

I don't doubt it's a great car- but I doubt his review contained much useful to let someone know that besides "take my word for it"

 

[CarlK]

I don't doubt it's a great car- but I doubt his review contained much useful to let someone know that besides "take my word for it"

Again you need to know this guy's background. If you don't take his words for it you should not take anyone's words for anything. He has a reputation way above your average auto bloggers although I'm sure similar reviews will soon be coming.

 

[Knightshade]

Again you need to know this guy's background. If you don't take his words for it you should not take anyone's words for anything. He has a reputation way above your average auto bloggers although I'm sure similar reviews will soon be coming.

If he's that knowledgeable you'd think he would have so many basic errors of fact in his review, eh?

Like him telling us about the woodgrain in the white interior P he "drove" (spoiler- the white interior has no wood grain)

Or how he lists the AWD EPA HP numbers, not the #s for the P.

Or how he describes the P having a 5 star rollover crash rating when no rating at all has been issued yet.


He might know more about cars than any 10 other people, but that review sure doesn't read he knows much about the model 3 he's reviewing.