Something along these lines would be great. Just a shallower nose + roof line up a bit more at the back for the passengers. Nice.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think Elon should troll Fisker and bring out a Karma onstage with Tesla badging. He can then say "April Fools! It is April 1st in Australia, right?'
If you were to make a chart about Battery Physics, Power Density and Energy Density would be your X & Y axis. As the Power Density goes up, Energy Density goes down. It does pose the possibility that the battery may have more energy and less power than the current Model S Batteries have (or vice versa); if it does have more energy and less power, then we will see a battery with a longer driving range.
However, due to all of the things that we don't know with certainty (like the vehicle weight, CD, CDA, tires, etc) there is no way for any of us to make an educated assessment of the Model 3's actual Power.
Since we all like to compare stuff...
BMW 7 (base): 3.0L - 315 hp - 330 torque - 23 combined mpg - 21.1gal - 0-60 4.4 seconds
BMW 3 (base): 2.0L - 180 hp - 200 torque - 28 combined mpg - 15.8gal - 0-60 5.2 seconds
If Tesla mimics BMW's model comparisons...
Model S (base): 382 hp - 325 torque - 230 miles range - 70 KWH - 0-60 5.5 seconds
Model 3 (base): 218 hp - 197 torque - 280 miles range - 52 KWH - 0-60 6.5 seconds
This is all pure speculation, obviously, and it is just an apples to apples comparison. Check my math, please.
I want a Model 3 with a 0-60 in the 4 second range and 300 miles. I'm willing to pay 50-60k for it
Not sure where you got your BMW data?
No. Please go back to Post #829, where this has already been explained. On second thought? Here, just look at it:I saw this image posted on LinkedIn. Looks legitimate and has noticeable differences from Model S - front bumper. Could this be it?
View attachment 114387
Here are a couple of comparative drawings I did to show the differences between the Model S Prototypes and the Production version:
View attachment 113992
View attachment 113993
I believe it was mainly the Real World intruding upon design. Intake of air for the cooling systems along with setting up crumple zones for crash tests influenced the final engineering to good effect. And let's face it, the car still looks very much like a relative of Jaguar, Aston-Martin, and Maserati vehicles anyway.I wonder why they went with something different in the end. It looks a bit "Jaguar-y" so maybe thats why they changed the hood design.
Possibly, but I rather disagree.I read this as the 3 won't be able to draw power from its batteries as fast as the S/X, but will store more kwh/pound then then S/X.
There is no significant improvement in range in an electric vehicle that comes from limiting ultimate performance potential. This isn't the same as with a gas guzzling ICE mobile. Consider the lineup for the 2016 Dodge Challenger as an example. The 305 HP version of the car has a 426 mile range with an 18.5 gallon fuel tank. The 705 HP version has a 296 mile range, per the EPA, using the same fuel capacity. That's a loss of 30.5% in range by going to the more powerful setup. But when you compare the Model S 70 to the Model S P90D the more powerful car has an 8.1% improvement in range. Even if you adjust to the same relative capacity, the more powerful car only 'loses' 18.9% range compared to the less powerful one. And that advantage is lessened further when comparing the top-of-the-line dual motor AWD to the lowest level of the 'D' cars. Hence, why the Model S 70D is the current efficiency champion in the Tesla Motors lineup. What matters is how you drive, not the potential beneath your right foot.This makes sense, giving more range/$ and providing a performance differentiation between the 3 and the more expensive S/X.
Once again, I disagree. Less power does not equate to greater range. At a particular rate of consumption, a minimal amount of energy must be expended to travel a given distance, at a precise speed. Whether that is done in five seconds or 35 seconds, the same amount of work is done.If you were to make a chart about Battery Physics, Power Density and Energy Density would be your X & Y axis. As the Power Density goes up, Energy Density goes down. It does pose the possibility that the battery may have more energy and less power than the current Model S Batteries have (or vice versa); if it does have more energy and less power, then we will see a battery with a longer driving range.
Years ago now, Elon Musk clarified that the baseline minimum target was the BMW 3-Series. He pointed out that the BMW 325i/328i had been the perennial 'bread and butter' seller for the company. He emphasized that Tesla Motors must offer vehicles that were compelling, otherwise no one would want to buy them. Their cars could not be simply 'just as good' as competitors. They had to be BETTER. He believes in enforcing this principle across the entire Tesla Motors vehicle lineup.However, due to all of the things that we don't know with certainty (like the vehicle weight, CD, CDA, tires, etc) there is no way for any of us to make an educated assessment of the Model 3's actual Power.
Since we all like to compare stuff...
If Tesla mimics BMW's model comparisons...
YEAH, SIGN ME UP!
Why isn't there a larger post of JRP3's snowy 'Model 3'? Obviously he's been doing testing on it for years!Can we please stick to vehicles that at least have a remote chance of looking something like what the Model 3 may be?
There's more, you just have to know where to look.Why isn't there a larger post of JRP3's snowy 'Model 3'? Obviously he's been doing testing on it for years!
Thats a good point - assuming they are at alpha stage right now, would the just be one car or would there be more?Most likely the Model 3 has not left the Tesla Design Studio. Leaks usually come out through the supply chains.
Thats a good point - assuming they are at alpha stage right now, would the just be one car or would there be more?
Maybe a couple?
Can we please stick to vehicles that at least have a remote chance of looking something like what the Model 3 may be?
I would think there has to be at least two. What would they do if the only one they made had some type of failure that incapacitated it? I guess they could put it behind a curtain so they could open to reveal it and not have it actually drive but that would be very disappointing.Thats a good point - assuming they are at alpha stage right now, would the just be one car or would there be more?
Maybe a couple?