-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Why ditch the Model 3 with the longest range?
- Thread starter ishabazz
- Start date
Leafdriver333
Somewhat Active Member
Do you have a source at Tesla that can confirm that the V3 Hardware will offer no current of future benefit to the performance of Auto Emergency Braking, Blind Spot Detection, Lane Departure Warning, Forward Collision Warning, and any future safety features potentially under development. Or that V3 won’t provide any benefit to the Dancing Cars problem that V2.5 is currently exhibiting? Did Tesla warn AP V2 users that if they did not wait for V2.5 they would not have access to Dashcam or Sentry Mode?
Has Tesla confirmed in writing that if you do not want FSD but want to take advance of any of the above features you can purchase just the HW3 hardware for $1,200?
Tesla was charging $4k for the front motor. If the math holds true an sr awd would only go 140 miles and the pack isn’t designed for it anyway so they probably won’t build it.
My opinion: Tesla wants as many Model 3’s built and on the road as possible. Selling a cheap Model 3 at slim margins gets their cars on the street. They can subsidize the cheap cars by selling more expensive ones. The SR+ is more than adequate for most people and perfect for city ride sharing. When FSD goes full autonomy in less than 2 years, people will pay $10,000 all day for the upgrade. Tesla will then make profit on all the cars they sold at cost. Tesla can buy up used cars with a trade in program and add FSD. They then put all these cars in service for ride sharing.
The awd and performance are the same car so only one production line is needed for both. Anyone who has enough for an LR RWD can also afford $4k extra for a front motor. They are separating the bargain ride share version of their car from the consumer more performance version is my guess.
The awd and performance are the same car so only one production line is needed for both. Anyone who has enough for an LR RWD can also afford $4k extra for a front motor. They are separating the bargain ride share version of their car from the consumer more performance version is my guess.
SalisburySam
Active Member
@ishabazz, welcome to this forum! I see you joined last month.
I echo your question, and I find the discussion on this very interesting. I have no idea as to why Tesla would abandon the LR RWD, but I understand it might be available off-line. Regardless, let me add another wrinkle: since we are all speculating here, how about a 400-mile range vehicle, say, 110kwh battery or so for the Model 3? Achieving a 300-mile range is huge, and pushed me to get the Tesla. Even though I no longer have a commute, I very much appreciate the range on trips, and it makes Tesla a vehicle that can mostly replace an ICEV with the exception of built-in towing ability, at least factory-optional on many 4-door sedans. With Rivian’s longer range, the upcoming Roadster’s range double that of the LR RWD, the 500-mile Semi, and other brands edging to 300 miles, I think my next vehicle’s range will far exceed that of any ICE today. I don’t need or wish to pay for all-wheel drive, the performance of my RWD is much more than adequate for me, but I do like my range. Probably a result of the frightening and getting worse range anxiety I have with my 2012 Nissan LEAF purchased new and now capable of only about 35 miles from a 100% charge. Love me my June 2018 LR RWD!
Thanks! The RWD is still available off-line for the moment but I don't expect that to be the case for very long. I was on the fence between the AWD the RWD. The AWD seems like more fun, but I don't want the Aero wheels, plan on driving it for about 400,000 miles, and the majority of my driving is at under 35 mph. Given that combination, the RWD seems like a better choice after factoring in battery degradation, the limited opportunity to enjoy the additional performance and the lower cost of ownership over time. I would be very interested in even longer range batteries.
My biggest issue here is more money for less range. I'm not sure what advantages the AWD has in ride sharing in areas that don't get much rain or snow like Southern California.
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
It's not just money, go back and read that again. Panasonic isn't making as many cells as Tesla wants to use. That's the primary factor, money is a secondary factor.
LR uses more cells than SR+, SR+ is less profitable than LR.
If the supply of cells were unlimited they'd be happy to sell more LR instead of hiding it off menu / secret menu option style.
Pushing LR buyers to AWD isn't just more money, it's also a deterrent that pushes some down to SR+ instead. Whether that makes Tesla more money or not depends on the fraction that go for the higher price choice instead of the lower price choice and the overall demand vs supply of cells. They'll tweak prices to keep the mix as profitable as possible but to also use every single cell they can while also using every single car they make to go with the cells.
* more cars made than cells = time to increase prices of LR, LR AWD, and Performance (and even hide LR off menu to push buyers to another config)
* less cars made than cells = time to reduce prices of LR, LR AWD, and performance (and maybe bring back the LR config on the website)
It's a multivariable equation with dozens of configs they can play around with. Not a simple it's all about the LR trim only decision.
Last edited:
You're right. I was focusing more on the suggested remedies than the stated problem. Now that I read it again, I get it. That's a tough spot to be in and I see why deemphasizing the LR makes sense for now.
SammichLover
Banned
In fact this already has happened once. When the LEMR "hack" was release last year they too LR off the menu and then it went away for a while. The LEMR was explicitly made to sell more cars with the same number of cells, because they were constrained by their cell supply.
Last edited:
srs5694
Active Member
IMHO, there's a point of diminishing return on range increases, and it's somewhere in the 200-300 mile area (probably closer to 300 miles than 200). This is especially true with faster DC fast charging; with Tesla's announced 250kW Superchargers, it's possible to add 200 miles of range in a ridiculously short period of time, which means that you won't be slowed down on road trips, even in an SR Model 3. On my last long road trip in a plug-in hybrid (from Rhode Island to Cincinnati and back again, using the gas engine most of the way), I took notes on how long I spent driving vs. stopped, and it turned out to be about what I expected: For every ten hours on the road, with wheels turning, I spent two hours stopped -- mostly using the bathroom and eating. At that rate, even a 120kW SuperCharger and SR Model 3 would be plenty to not slow me down.
There is a caveat, though: EVs suffer from range losses and, frequently, degraded charging speed, in cold or very hot weather. Other real-world problems, like a SuperCharger site with 100% stall occupancy, can cause delays. Factoring in such problems, you'd need faster SuperChargers and/or longer range than an SR Model 3 to keep up with my personal road trip driving habits. Of course, not everybody likes to drive in the same way on road trips, either. If you're the type who likes to drive for five hours, stop to go to the bathroom, and hit the road again with a burger in your hand, then bigger batteries and/or faster SuperCharging will be desirable. I suspect that this type of usage is on the extreme end, though.
I suppose another use case for EVs with longer ranges is people who can't charge every day, such as apartment dwellers. As EVs become more common, though, I expect public charging infrastructure to improve, so I'm not sure that these people will really need cars with ranges of over 300 miles, at least not in the long term.
Adding bigger batteries has at least two significant downsides, too: They add weight (therefore reducing efficiency) and they add cost (both in terms of money and in terms of environmental problems associated with battery production). Today's EVs aren't much less expensive to buy than were the ~100-mile compliance cars of a few years ago, in large part because the dropping price of batteries has been compensated for by putting larger batteries in the cars. If manufacturers stick to 200-300-mile EVs for the next few years, then they'll be able to reduce prices, thus enabling the vehicles to compete with otherwise similar ICE cars on price, even after government incentives end. Personally, I'd rather see that happen, along with improvements in DC fast charging infrastructure, than see 400- or 500-mile EVs.
omgwtfbyobbq
Active Member
I believe HW3 is required for FSD features, but can still provide benefits for AP features after Tesla has hashed out the larger NNs for V3 to take advantage of. With the current/smaller NNs, I've read HW3 performs about the same as HW2.5.
omgwtfbyobbq
Active Member
My guess is that Tesla will offer the LR RWD when their supply of front motors drops enough and they have a sufficient volume of batteries compared to cars. Bringing down the S/X lines for upgrades (another guess) in Fremont may also free up production capacity for the 3 front motor in Sparks. If my assumptions are accurate, they may also bring back the LR RWD in volume after they've finished any upgrades to the S/X lines and/or cars. To further complicate things, production of components and cars may also be constrained by the parts availability of their suppliers.
suwaneedad
Member
Bingo. This is all the evidence that is needed to know that Tesla has a demand problem for Model 3 currently.
omgwtfbyobbq
Active Member
It's possible. Tesla may also be aggressively reducing prices to put pressure on competing EVs, and to some degree on ICE sales in general.
The lower Tesla prices the 3, the more EV/PHEV/ICE sales they take away from other manufacturers. And the more sales they take away, the more other manufacturers need to discount their current EV/PHEV offerings to continue to get GHG/ZEV/emissions credits in various markets.
Those discounts put pressure on their competing ICE sales and may also increase the value of the emissions credits Tesla gets from their own sales because every 3 Tesla sells is to some extent a PHEV/EV another manufacturer didn't sell, which means those manufacturers either have to discount their own PHEVs/EVs further to goose sales, which can take away sales from their ICEs, or buy emissions credits from Tesla (eg FCA) to make up for lower PHEV/EV sales.
It's also consistent with Elon's position that if someone doesn't buy an EV from Tesla, he thinks they should buy one from GM, Nissan, Kia, and so on...
SammichLover
Banned
Only then they wouldn't need to be dropping the LR RWD to conserve cell supply. It isn't as simple as that, at all. They are still able to overall sell all they can build within their cell constraints.
Rather they probably have some issues with certain versions, some are just more popular than others. Fragmentation of your line creates logistic difficulties in production and sales. We saw a variation on this with paint colours, and Tesla there again just dropped the less popular versions to keep their job of getting things out the door easier, and thus faster.
Further, the software up-sells are near pure margin, especially in the short-term. So taking a price cut on them but bundling still nets them bigger margins.
Finally, they have constantly been working on improving production costs. They weren't really in a financial position to sell at a per vehicle loss to start with, on hopes they'd be able to hit specific cost reductions on a specific timeline. However once they do successfully reduce costs they are able to reduce prices.
Sure there's a "demand problem" in the theoretical way that every business ultimately has some sort of customer demand limit. And as the Fed Tax Credit winds down the price pressure will ratchet up on Tesla, but it isn't an issue that they aren't able to move product rather quickly.
Last edited:
Your sales guy is a sales guy and therefore their words mean nothing.
Similar threads
