We want some Model 3 Leaks, renders, sketches !

[Chris TX]

As pointed out by others, FWD makes absolutely no sense in this case esp. given Tesla's past history. If it's going to be a 3 series competitor, it'll be RWD.

With a single axle drivetrain, you're limited to one gear. With that one gear, you get either quick acceleration or high range. Which one would you pick when you order the car?

Developing, producing, implementation, and warranty of a two-speed gearbox to accomplish both goals with a single motor costs MORE than just putting two motors in the car; each having different gear ratios to accomplish both goals. The third goal is the safety of AWD which is a welcomed byproduct of the two previous goals.

The Model ≡ will have the range, acceleration, and safety accomplished by dual motor AWD.

 

[aronth5]

Release history of the S and the X are completely irrelevant with the Model 3. EM has gone on record that only limited information will be initially available, and ongoing leaks will occur as he sees fit. The release process is completely different for the 3 -- new ground. With prior models, Elon said to much to soon and not everything was doable. He won't make that mistake again. He might give vague info, statements that start with things like "at least", but don't expect too much until much closer to final production of the Model 3 and the associated battery units from the Gigafactory.
.

Well said.

 

[gregincal]

+1 Elon keeps referencing 3-series and A4, so RWD and AWD.

The A4 is front wheel drive (or all wheel drive). I do believe the the Model 3 will be rear wheel drive and all wheel drive just like the S.

 

[Red Sage]

These sketches seem pretty reasonable, and I don't think they've been posted before.

All of those look like stylized renderings of the Model X, with 'regular' rear doors instead of Falcon Wing Doors. Basically, as if someone wanted to make a Tesla Macan as opposed to a Tesla Cayenne.

The stats for this mythical Model ≡ seem to have been adopted/modified from early expectations for the Model S 40 and Model S 60... Cars Tesla originally thought would have ranges of 180 and 230 miles, respectively.

The 435 HP rating is completely wrong for a 60 kWh capacity. I expect that a Model ≡ 60 would make 300+ HP and 300+ lb-ft torque for the base vehicle. Anything over 85 kWh capacity would allow 400+ HP and 400+ lb-ft torque. And a dual motor all wheel drive PERFORMANCE edition would have... A lot more.

 

[pr0teu5]

All of those look like stylized renderings of the Model X, with 'regular' rear doors instead of Falcon Wing Doors. Basically, as if someone wanted to make a Tesla Macan as opposed to a Tesla Cayenne.

I can see why you would think so. When I look at the sketches though the only resemblance I see to the Model X is the slope of the roof at the rear. However, this does not indicate that the car is meant to be an SUV. The best example I can give of the difference is the BMW X4 and the BMW 3 series GT. Both have similar rooflines and relatively high driving positions, but the driving position of the X4 is still so much higher that it's obvious that it is meant to be an SUV while the 3 series GT is not. All in all I rather like the 3 series Gt and would not be disappointed if the Model ≡ was the same type of car.

3 Series Gt

BMW X4

The stats for this mythical Model ≡ seem to have been adopted/modified from early expectations for the Model S 40 and Model S 60... Cars Tesla originally thought would have ranges of 180 and 230 miles, respectively.

The 435 HP rating is completely wrong for a 60 kWh capacity. I expect that a Model ≡ 60 would make 300+ HP and 300+ lb-ft torque for the base vehicle. Anything over 85 kWh capacity would allow 400+ HP and 400+ lb-ft torque. And a dual motor all wheel drive PERFORMANCE edition would have... A lot more.

I agree that the stats really don't make much sense. I would expect something more like a Model ≡ 50 and a Model ≡ 65D with around 210 and 270 miles of range respectively.

As for the horsepower I could see Tesla trying to simplify lines by reusing motors where they can. So I would expect the base Model ≡ 50 to just use the rear motor, 259 hp, from the current non performance. For the non performance AWD models we might have a new motor at around 160 for both the front and rear, with less horsepower available for the smaller battery. This would give something like 290 hp for the smaller battery and 315 for the larger.

And finally for the Model ≡ P65D they could probably just couple the 382hp motor from the RWD S70 with the new 160hp motor and then just tune it down to 430hp or so.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

I can see why you would think so. When I look at the sketches though the only resemblance I see to the Model X is the slope of the roof at the rear. However, this does not indicate that the car is meant to be an SUV. The best example I can give of the difference is the BMW X4 and the BMW 3 series GT. Both have similar rooflines and relatively high driving positions, but the driving position of the X4 is still so much higher that it's obvious that it is meant to be an SUV while the 3 series GT is not. All in all I rather like the 3 series Gt and would not be disappointed if the Model ≡ was the same type of car.

View attachment 111719
3 Series Gt

View attachment 111720
BMW X4



I agree that the stats really don't make much sense. I would expect something more like a Model ≡ 50 and a Model ≡ 65D with around 210 and 270 miles of range respectively.

As for the horsepower I could see Tesla trying to simplify lines by reusing motors where they can. So I would expect the base Model ≡ 50 to just use the rear motor, 259 hp, from the current non performance. For the non performance AWD models we might have a new motor at around 160 for both the front and rear, with less horsepower available for the smaller battery. This would give something like 290 hp for the smaller battery and 315 for the larger.

And finally for the Model ≡ P65D they could probably just couple the 382hp motor from the RWD S70 with the new 160hp motor and then just tune it down to 430hp or so.

All reasonable stats, but the wildcard here is the Gigafactory. Do we know the advances that TSLA has made in maximizing energy storage in a smaller space yet? I'm hoping they squeeze every last electron they can out of these packs. When you consider the "weight loss" between an S and a 3, we should be looking at a significant range boost by the time "late 2017" rolls around.

TL;DR a 60kWH S battery will be < a 60kWH Model 3 battery. the 3 battery will be smaller and lighter, allowing for more weight savings between the 2 vehicles. and that ".20 drag coefficient" we've been teased with will play a huge part in that at 65+mph.

 

[Zapped]

435 HP for a $35,000 car. I don't think so.

 

[Reeler]

As pointed out by others, FWD makes absolutely no sense in this case esp. given Tesla's past history. If it's going to be a 3 series competitor, it'll be RWD.

Elon has to compete with the Bolt and Leaf, both FWD. The Model 3 base will be less than the Bolt so I predict FWD. For you folks that want a 3 series competitor, there will be a D and P versions. For the vastly larger market that Chevy and Nissan are targeting, they prefer FWD which works fine in occasional snow/ice. A RWD Tesla would not be competitive in the FWD econobox segment that Bolt and Leaf are targeting.

 

[Snow Drift]

Elon has to compete with the Bolt and Leaf, both FWD. The Model 3 base will be less than the Bolt so I predict FWD. For you folks that want a 3 series competitor, there will be a D and P versions. For the vastly larger market that Chevy and Nissan are targeting, they prefer FWD which works fine in occasional snow/ice. A RWD Tesla would not be competitive in the FWD econobox segment that Bolt and Leaf are targeting.

The M3 is not a Bolt or Leaf competitor. They are smaller C-segment appliance cars, similar to the Honda Fit and Toyota Prius. The Bolt and Leaf, being FWD, are really spec'd to compete in the $25k range...they are just overpriced.

The M3 is D-segment, mid-sized sport sedan, entry level luxury, $35k starting but really will be $50k+ with all options, that puts it in 3-series/A4 category. That category needs to be RWD or AWD to be competitive (BMW 3, MB C, Lexus IS, Audi A4/A3, Infiniti Q50). The entry level luxury brands with FWD, Lincoln and Oldsmobile, have not been successful.

Is FWD cheaper or less complicated than RWD? I don't know if it is for an EV since the motor is directly over the axle...they don't need to run a driveshaft to the rear differential like an ICE RWD.

 

[gregincal]

The M3 is D-segment, mid-sized sport sedan, entry level luxury, $35k starting but really will be $50k+ with all options, that puts it in 3-series/A4 category. That category needs to be RWD or AWD to be competitive (BMW 3, MB C, Lexus IS, Audi A4/A3, Infiniti Q50). The entry level luxury brands with FWD, Lincoln and Oldsmobile, have not been successful.

The Audi's are front wheel drive, although I don't necessarily expect the Model 3 to be.

 

[McRat]

The M3 is not a Bolt or Leaf competitor. They are smaller C-segment appliance cars, similar to the Honda Fit and Toyota Prius. The Bolt and Leaf, being FWD, are really spec'd to compete in the $25k range...they are just overpriced.

The M3 is D-segment, mid-sized sport sedan, entry level luxury, $35k starting but really will be $50k+ with all options, that puts it in 3-series/A4 category. That category needs to be RWD or AWD to be competitive (BMW 3, MB C, Lexus IS, Audi A4/A3, Infiniti Q50). The entry level luxury brands with FWD, Lincoln and Oldsmobile, have not been successful.

Is FWD cheaper or less complicated than RWD? I don't know if it is for an EV since the motor is directly over the axle...they don't need to run a driveshaft to the rear differential like an ICE RWD.

First, at least initial press review and performance put the Bolt a bit higher in the foodchain than a Fit or Prius. Sure, perhaps a Leaf fits there, but the Bolt is most likely going to accelerate like a $35k V6 sedan or CUV, with similar room. Yes, you pay for HP. As Tesla Owners know, about 1 HP of EV behaves like >1.5 HP of ICE power up to any legal US speed limit.

The Model 3 will have to do something to drop the price in 1/2 from the S70 model. That's a huge jump. Everyone is expecting a comfy 5 seater with huge range and all the goodies for 1/2 price. It might happen, but I don't think so.

One way to drop price, increase regen (city range), reduce weight, is a FWD layout. The chassis does not have to be as heavy for the same RWD stiffness, and with 70% of braking traction on the nose, it can regen harder. Regen'g with only the rear is going to be limited since excessive rear brake force causes dangerous oversteer, where excess braking in the front causes safer understeer. The brakes have to be heavier on a RWD EV, since it will need real full sized brakes in the nose.

Example, at max brake effort, a FWD can safely recover 50% the car's energy with a large safety factor. A RWD with a 50/50 bias is only going to recover about 20% safely.

 

[LargeHamCollider]

I'd bet money that M3 single motor will be RWD (any takers?), unlike ICE cars, there's no cost savings to going with FWD, and there are performance advantages in RWD.

 

[gregincal]

Example, at max brake effort, a FWD can safely recover 50% the car's energy with a large safety factor. A RWD with a 50/50 bias is only going to recover about 20% safely.

There has never been and probably won't be any time soon a regenerative braking system that can exert anything close to max brake effort. At the amount of braking a regen system provides it doesn't make much difference front or rear wheel drive.

- - - Updated - - -

The Model 3 will have to do something to drop the price in 1/2 from the S70 model. That's a huge jump. Everyone is expecting a comfy 5 seater with huge range and all the goodies for 1/2 price. It might happen, but I don't think so.

No, I'm expecting all that for 50-60K. I expect at 35K it will be completely stripped like the base BMW 3 series.

 

[Kevin Harney]

- - - Updated - - -



No, I'm expecting all that for 50-60K. I expect at 35K it will be completely stripped like the base BMW 3 series.

+1 Point right on ... What McRat seems to be forgetting is that the base Model 3 will be half the base Model S and the loaded Model 3 will be half the loaded Model S which makes it about the same cost as a base Model S.

 

[Snow Drift]

The Audi's are front wheel drive, although I don't necessarily expect the Model 3 to be.

Only the base A3/A4 is FWD and honestly, I've never heard of anyone buying it...but I live where we have changing weather, so AWD is preferred.

- - - Updated - - -

First, at least initial press review and performance put the Bolt a bit higher in the foodchain than a Fit or Prius. Sure, perhaps a Leaf fits there, but the Bolt is most likely going to accelerate like a $35k V6 sedan or CUV, with similar room. Yes, you pay for HP. As Tesla Owners know, about 1 HP of EV behaves like >1.5 HP of ICE power up to any legal US speed limit.

The Model 3 will have to do something to drop the price in 1/2 from the S70 model. That's a huge jump. Everyone is expecting a comfy 5 seater with huge range and all the goodies for 1/2 price. It might happen, but I don't think so.

One way to drop price, increase regen (city range), reduce weight, is a FWD layout. The chassis does not have to be as heavy for the same RWD stiffness, and with 70% of braking traction on the nose, it can regen harder. Regen'g with only the rear is going to be limited since excessive rear brake force causes dangerous oversteer, where excess braking in the front causes safer understeer. The brakes have to be heavier on a RWD EV, since it will need real full sized brakes in the nose.

Example, at max brake effort, a FWD can safely recover 50% the car's energy with a large safety factor. A RWD with a 50/50 bias is only going to recover about 20% safely.

Have you looked at the Interior of the Bolt? It has the cheapest molded plastic dash and center console for drinks. It looks like a rental car inside. That will not get the same demographic as the M3, A4 or 3-Series.

The price drop is from less-aluminum, less tech toys, smaller battery and economies of scale. The $35k price is for a stripper version. Just like BMW, the 3-series starts at $33,150 for a base model, then start adding bells and whistles and you jump to $44k (only adding paint, leather, packages and options). That doesn't even include moving up to a bigger engine or AWD. So again, this is not a Bolt and Leaf competitor.

I won't argue regen engineering of FWD vs RWD, but the fact that Tesla has never made a FWD would mean that they would have to reengineer their platform. I guess the D has a Front motor, but the driving dynamics, the front traction control system, etc would all have to be reworked vs just using RWD/AWD as is and put it into a smaller package.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Elon has to compete with the Bolt and Leaf, both FWD. The Model 3 base will be less than the Bolt so I predict FWD. For you folks that want a 3 series competitor, there will be a D and P versions. For the vastly larger market that Chevy and Nissan are targeting, they prefer FWD which works fine in occasional snow/ice. A RWD Tesla would not be competitive in the FWD econobox segment that Bolt and Leaf are targeting.

There are practically no cost savings and minimal advantage for going to a FWD layout in an EV (no middle drive shaft required). The 3 series market is actually vastly larger than you think: 100+k sales annually in US alone (vs ~30k Leaf sold). In terms of snow traction, that is largely irrelevant in the largest markets for the Leaf currently in the first place (although I still disagree with your assessment of target segment), plus with modern traction control and EV motor response, there is also close to no advantage there either to an FWD layout.

In the premium sedan market, RWD is seen as an advantage (that's why i3 is RWD, even though they could have went FWD also). There is an acceleration advantage (and eliminates torque steer issues). The only FWD car in that segment that does ok is the A4/A3 and it sells drastically less than the 3 series and C Class (plus a good portion of A4/A3 sales is AWD).

- - - Updated - - -

One way to drop price, increase regen (city range), reduce weight, is a FWD layout. The chassis does not have to be as heavy for the same RWD stiffness, and with 70% of braking traction on the nose, it can regen harder. Regen'g with only the rear is going to be limited since excessive rear brake force causes dangerous oversteer, where excess braking in the front causes safer understeer. The brakes have to be heavier on a RWD EV, since it will need real full sized brakes in the nose.

Example, at max brake effort, a FWD can safely recover 50% the car's energy with a large safety factor. A RWD with a 50/50 bias is only going to recover about 20% safely.

The EPA cycle currently does not give much advantage to regen (that is why automakers have been wary of releasing micro-hybrids here). Plus, all that does is help city range, when the highway driving is when you care about range.

Also as others point out, currently the amount of regen being done (60kW max for Model S) is well under the limits of where RWD and FWD will make much of a difference. Leaf for example has even lower at 30kW.

 

[Reeler]

First, at least initial press review and performance put the Bolt a bit higher in the foodchain than a Fit or Prius. Sure, perhaps a Leaf fits there, but the Bolt is most likely going to accelerate like a $35k V6 sedan or CUV, with similar room. Yes, you pay for HP. As Tesla Owners know, about 1 HP of EV behaves like >1.5 HP of ICE power up to any legal US speed limit.

The Model 3 will have to do something to drop the price in 1/2 from the S70 model. That's a huge jump. Everyone is expecting a comfy 5 seater with huge range and all the goodies for 1/2 price. It might happen, but I don't think so.

One way to drop price, increase regen (city range), reduce weight, is a FWD layout. The chassis does not have to be as heavy for the same RWD stiffness, and with 70% of braking traction on the nose, it can regen harder. Regen'g with only the rear is going to be limited since excessive rear brake force causes dangerous oversteer, where excess braking in the front causes safer understeer. The brakes have to be heavier on a RWD EV, since it will need real full sized brakes in the nose.

Example, at max brake effort, a FWD can safely recover 50% the car's energy with a large safety factor. A RWD with a 50/50 bias is only going to recover about 20% safely.

Very well said. FWD standard, AWD for $5K more. The FWD will outperform a Leaf/Bolt and the AWD will outperform a 3-series. Everyone is happy.

- - - Updated - - -

Have you looked at the Interior of the Bolt? It has the cheapest molded plastic dash and center console for drinks. It looks like a rental car inside. That will not get the same demographic as the M3, A4 or 3-Series.

The price drop is from less-aluminum, less tech toys, smaller battery and economies of scale. The $35k price is for a stripper version. Just like BMW, the 3-series starts at $33,150 for a base model, then start adding bells and whistles and you jump to $44k (only adding paint, leather, packages and options). That doesn't even include moving up to a bigger engine or AWD. So again, this is not a Bolt and Leaf competitor.

Everyone wants a Model S for a price less than a Bolt. Not going to happen. Chevy has part supplier advantage over Tesla because of their volume. With higher component cost and a lower price, the Model 3 is going to be an econobox with better styling.

- - - Updated - - -

There are practically no cost savings and minimal advantage for going to a FWD layout in an EV (no middle drive shaft required). The 3 series market is actually vastly larger than you think: 100+k sales annually in US alone (vs ~30k Leaf sold). In terms of snow traction, that is largely irrelevant in the largest markets for the Leaf currently in the first place (although I still disagree with your assessment of target segment), plus with modern traction control and EV motor response, there is also close to no advantage there either to an FWD layout.

Apples to Oranges. You compare the ICE sales to EV sales. A fairer comparison would be to the millions of ICE econoboxes in the $27.5K (with tax break) segment. In Colorado, I get another $6K back in taxes. The Model S is a base $21.5K car to me and I think it will compete with those in that same price range.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Very well said. FWD standard, AWD for $5K more. The FWD will outperform a Leaf/Bolt and the AWD will outperform a 3-series. Everyone is happy.

Disagree. I don't get why you insist on the Model 3 competing with the Leaf and Bolt. Tesla has never said they targeted the car at the Leaf segment.

A FWD base Model 3 will be at a disadvantage vs a base 3 series. Tesla has said explicitly they are aiming the car at the 3 series. So no, everyone will not be happy with a base model FWD Model 3.

- - - Updated - - -

Apples to Oranges. You compare the ICE sales to EV sales.

This goes to the issue with people not seeing things the way Tesla is seeing. Tesla is not aiming at beating "EV sales". Tesla is aiming at beating "car sales" (a much larger market). That is why Tesla is always comparing to ICE competitors and not restricting themselves to EVs. Elon's recent comments:

Asked straight out by Dee-Ann Durbin from the Associated Press if the huge head start of the 200-mile hatchback from GM had taken any of the winds out of their sails, Musk countered by bringing up the success of the Model S against its established upmarket competitors, where it outsold them all in the US and, he added, grew its sales by 51 percent while other luxury models saw declines. "If Model 3 is similar at all in its market segment, it doesn't seem like we're going to be demand constrained," he finished.

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/02/11/tesla-not-afraid-chevy-bolt-model-3-orders-march/

 

[Twiglett]

Disagree. I don't get why you insist on the Model 3 competing with the Leaf and Bolt. Tesla has never said they targeted the car at the Leaf segment.

A FWD base Model 3 will be at a disadvantage vs a base 3 series. Tesla has said explicitly they are aiming the car at the 3 series. So no, everyone will not be happy with a base model FWD Model 3.

Exactly - a car that does 0-60 in 6-7 seconds should always be FWD - said nobody ever.
This is supposed to be compelling, not a hot hatch with torque-steer to match.
If I wanted FWD I can go get a Bolt.

 

[gregincal]

Everyone wants a Model S for a price less than a Bolt. Not going to happen. Chevy has part supplier advantage over Tesla because of their volume. With higher component cost and a lower price, the Model 3 is going to be an econobox with better styling.

You are just focussing on the base price. As I keep saying over and over, the other alternative is that the Model 3 is not an econobox, but the average selling price is far higher than the average selling price of the Bolt.