Would you pay $90-100K for a Plaid Model 3?

[Peteski]

While I understand your sentiments, Tesla chasing maximum performance creates a halo-effect for the brand, which earns it desirability. Tesla could've settled with making the next-era Prius, but aside from reaching the more practical demographic, it would fail to appeal to the performance enthusiasts or anyone else who drives for "fun". The same is true for the robust infotainment systems in the car...together, they all create an aura of desirability for the brand, which places it "above" other brands in terms of outright technology- both in software and hardware. It's the differentiator and wakeup call to the any brand in the industry.

So do they need a Plaid+? Probably not outright, but that's only because Tesla has previously established itself and made impressions in high performance. But following the logic, there's a good case to be made, that the performance aspects of the Tesla brand are the direct reason we even see so many Porsche or other fast-car comparisons, which raises the brand cachet in a positive way...and so they should continue with the underlying formula which got them here. From performance to range, the Plaid+ will eclipse most any other production car, for the time being, which will only lend to more discussion/desirability of Tesla.

I think that worked with the original Performance S because it was a world first, but don’t you think it has now become a bit of a cliche? How many times do we hear that Teslas are just a one trick pony? Of course they are not, but it’s what many people have come to believe. At what point do you think the focus should move to improving perceived quality? Where do you go from Plaid+? Yet more power again?

 

[Peteski]

The most optimistic expert numbers have EVs at 30-50% of the market by 2030.

Constrained entirely by supply, not demand.

So it appears any good EV will sell as many as the maker can build for at least another decade or more.

ICE will continue to be the competition for legacies own EVs, because when you go to a VW dealer- that's the choice you're faced with.

Currently, the dealers are heavily pushing their customers toward the ICE vehicle they're selling- because there's more profit for them both in initial sale, and future maintenance.

In a recent secret shopper type test they went to 25 VW dealers. 24 of them did not recommend an EV, even one from VW.

That'll continue to be an albatross around legacies neck for some time- one Tesla does not have to deal with.

Look I totally agree. But I just don’t think it’s a valid excuse to churn out cars with dubious build quality. Perception of brand quality tends to run very deep. Going OT now though, sorry.

 

[al503]

As some have mentioned, the S (and the taycan for that matter) is too big and too heavy for me as well.

If they can keep the 3 around the same weight, 500 miles of range, low 2's to 60, better acceleration from ~70 to ~100+mph, and, this is the most important thing for me, use a physical windshield rain sensor that actually works... I'd be in for $80-$85K.

 

[Peteski]

As some have mentioned, the S (and the taycan for that matter) is too big and too heavy for me as well.

If they can keep the 3 around the same weight, 500 miles of range, low 2's to 60, better acceleration from ~70 to ~100+mph, and, this is the most important thing for me, use a physical windshield rain sensor that actually works... I'd be in for $80-$85K.

Not a chance they can achieve all that, especially the rain sensor

 

[Phlier]

Not a chance they can achieve all that, especially the rain sensor

Unfortunately, I think you might be correct. At least, as far as the weight/range thing goes.

We'll have to wait and see exactly how much the 4680 does for us. I'd have to go back and re-watch battery day, but off the top of my bean, I seem to remember Elon saying that we can expect about a 15% improvement for the energy to weight ratio. There will be an improved amount of space taken by the battery to energy ratio, too, which is really important when you consider how little room there is in the Model 3 to put a big ole battery pack. I honestly wouldn't mind them making the car heavier if it means they could squeeze a 90+ kwh pack in it. Even using their older battery tech, they were able to squeeze a battery capable of achieving some pretty amazing numbers in the new Roadster. And the Roadster doesn't appear to be that big of a car. Maybe a bit bigger than the 3?

I *think* (I'll have to verify this) that they were able to squeeze out around 2.9 zero to sixty in the big heavy Model S with the 90 kwh pack in it. If they're able to squeeze that much energy into the space confinements of a Model 3 with the new structural battery module design combined with the new cells, I think it would be reasonable to see a 2.5 (or thereabouts) time in the smaller car.

It's true that the heavier the car gets, the worse the handling. Some of this is mitigated, however, by the fact that that weight is so low to the road.

But of course... all of this is just wishful thinking at this point. Tesla needs to grow their manufacturing capacity to the point that they can meet demand for their current lineup before they'll start thinking about adding additional options to the line. IMO, any car that adds more battery cells to produce just one vehicle is probably a non-starter at this point, being that they're so constrained by battery supply right now.

It has been nice discussing this with you, Peteski... always nice to have a civil conversation with someone whose opinion doesn't exactly match my own. Makes me question my own position, and take a fresh view on things.

 

[Let's Drive]

I think that worked with the original Performance S because it was a world first, but don’t you think it has now become a bit of a cliché? How many times do we hear that Teslas are just a one trick pony? Of course they are not, but it’s what many people have come to believe. At what point do you think the focus should move to improving perceived quality? Where do you go from Plaid+? Yet more power again?

The Plaid+ is also a world first. I think there's a definite case for better fit & finish, but I don't believe it's at conflict with their performance endeavors. In other words, unless you're talking about something like a stripped-down racer, it's not like the faster you make a car, the worse its quality gets. They can (and should) do both.

People (online) mainly focus on quality when it's pointed out and/or noticeably lacking, but once it passes the general "eye-test", they get over it and consider the vehicle for its usual pros and cons. Take the Lexus F brand, for example. The company is known for its quality...but while few complain about it, the performance division suffered into relative obscurity, because they weren't doing enough to convincingly establish or differentiate themselves from the pack. Meanwhile, brands with arguably worse quality, grow or remain, because they consistently deliver on critical performance metrics and/or have stronger brand cachet (BMW M). Tesla is as much a "performance" brand, as anything else, and they remind us regularly.

Overall, I think Tesla's core approach focuses on manufacturing capability, battery development/production, EV hardware and software (and I'm sure other areas). Lucid seems like an EV company more focused on attaching quality, fit & finish to their brand DNA, for the market they're challenging.

Not to go too far off-topic, and perhaps it deserves its own thread, but question for you: How much quality do you need and how much more would you be willing to pay for it?

 

[Black306]

Where do you go from Plaid+? Yet more power again?

New DU-in-wheel design and ultra wide tire.

 

[Peteski]

It has been nice discussing this with you, Peteski... always nice to have a civil conversation with someone whose opinion doesn't exactly match my own. Makes me question my own position, and take a fresh view on things.

Thanks Philier, that is much appreciated. Likewise I enjoy a good open debate.

 

[Sam1]

We'll have to wait and see exactly how much the 4680 does for us. I'd have to go back and re-watch battery day, but off the top of my bean, I seem to remember Elon saying that we can expect about a 15% improvement for the energy to weight ratio. There will be an improved amount of space taken by the battery to energy ratio, too, which is really important when you consider how little room there is in the Model 3 to put a big ole battery pack. I honestly wouldn't mind them making the car heavier if it means they could squeeze a 90+ kwh pack in it. Even using their older battery tech, they were able to squeeze a battery capable of achieving some pretty amazing numbers in the new Roadster. And the Roadster doesn't appear to be that big of a car. Maybe a bit bigger than the 3?

On the weight vs capacity concern; that is going to be interesting because the plaid S has more range, better battery cooling, 200hp more, and weighs almost 200 pounds less, without even relying on the 4860's over the 2020 MSP. The part we don't know yet is where the weight was cut off at.

I am 100% certain the engineering geniuses at the company could (if they haven't already), add capacity, more power and at the same time keep the weight the same at a minimum to the M3P using our existing cells.

Heck, just turning up the juice on the top end on the existing M3P motors would put the cars into the 10's on the 1/4 as-is. But then we get into cooling issues quickly, probably similar to what the previous MSP's suffered from.

 

[Peteski]

On the weight vs capacity concern; that is going to be interesting because the plaid S has more range, better battery cooling, 200hp more, and weighs almost 200 pounds less, without even relying on the 4860's over the 2020 MSP. The part we don't know yet is where the weight was cut off at.

I am 100% certain the engineering geniuses at the company could (if they haven't already), add capacity, more power and at the same time keep the weight the same at a minimum to the M3P using our existing cells.

While impressive that the Plaid S appears to be lighter, I would actually prefer it to be even lighter with the same power and range as the previous gen S. Regardless of how much the battery density improves there is always a compromise to be made between weight and power/range. At the moment these cars (the Taycan too) are still very much heavyweights in the ultimate performance world.

Imagine for example a performance focused Model 3 that was actually lighter than its direct ICE rivals. That really would be the final nail in the coffin for ICE. I know weight doesn't appeal to the marketeers as much as power and range, but it is a very real primary parameter for handling. I never did find out the weight of the new Roadster prototypes, but that would be very interesting to know. I wouldn't put a deposit down on one without knowing its weight up front. Yet it was hardly discussed on the forums, eclipsed by the headline straight line performance.

 

[Peteski]

Not to go too far off-topic, and perhaps it deserves its own thread, but question for you: How much quality do you need and how much more would you be willing to pay for it?

For me it's really the basic bread and butter stuff like doors and trunks that actually fit properly. A bit more attention to NVH and vehicle dynamics would be nice too. I love the tech and style and I like their choice of interior materials. But the fit and finish is decidedly average, actually well below average for the class. How much would I pay for it? Ideally not that much as it probably costs them more in warranty and service costs at the moment. Obviously I would be willing to pay for upgrades like active damping. Off the top of my head let's say another $10-15k for a Tesla M3 with "German" levels of build quality and refinement. To me that's worth more than a power hike on a car that already has supercar acceleration.

 

[valaeyron]

You're describing the AWD to P on the model 3. Same vehicle other than the power delivery. And of the people who get the P, half of them seem to want the stealth because the 20" rims have a harsher ride and also are heavier which negatively affects performance.

Kinda. Even over the SR+... if we’re talking just speed here, on normal roads at “within the law” speeds, the P saves...3 secs every time we go 0-60? Sure, ambient lighting, extra speakers...fog lights... and 3 seconds for each launch, assuming you floor it every light (and are the front car).

I can find better uses for my money...to each their own of course.

 

[valaeyron]

For me it's really the basic bread and butter stuff like doors and trunks that actually fit properly.

bread and butter should come at bread and butter prices... just sayin’...

 

[smokin'joeblow]

I would be interested in a higher performance model 3. Personally, while I would appreciate a quicker accelerating vehicle, I'd be more interested in a lighter more nimble vehicle that retains or slightly improves the acceleration. I'm hoping that EVs can go down this route as battery tech gets better--same range--300 miles is enough for me, but lighter (and quicker due to this) as opposed to just increasing range, but staying porky. How much I'd be willing to pay would depend in part on how good the car is. Like some others have mentioned, I'm also not interested in a larger car even with the increased range/tech/acceleration/luxury it may provide.

 

[TMThree]

Kinda. Even over the SR+... if we’re talking just speed here, on normal roads at “within the law” speeds, the P saves...3 secs every time we go 0-60? Sure, ambient lighting, extra speakers...fog lights... and 3 seconds for each launch, assuming you floor it every light (and are the front car).

I can find better uses for my money...to each their own of course.

Using this logic, everyone would own something like a Prius. Because I Can take your current logic and say that you can go with an EV with a 0-60 of 9 seconds and it would be more efficient than yours with everything else being equal. Then we'd end up with 11 second 0-60 speeds.

 

[MagnusMako]

On the weight vs capacity concern; that is going to be interesting because the plaid S has more range, better battery cooling, 200hp more, and weighs almost 200 pounds less, without even relying on the 4860's over the 2020 MSP. The part we don't know yet is where the weight was cut off at.

I am 100% certain the engineering geniuses at the company could (if they haven't already), add capacity, more power and at the same time keep the weight the same at a minimum to the M3P using our existing cells.

Heck, just turning up the juice on the top end on the existing M3P motors would put the cars into the 10's on the 1/4 as-is. But then we get into cooling issues quickly, probably similar to what the previous MSP's suffered from.

I think the weight savings is possibly in part due to megacasting ? And in the Plaid+ probably moreso without the pack modules. I thought I recall something about this mentioned in the BD presentation.

As much as the Plaid+ S is attractive to me, the notion of a 75-80k Plaid 3 that hits all the right spots is even more attractive and I certainly think there'd be a strong demand for it - especially as it really wins out as an autocross car and nimble daily driver over the boat-like S. Give me 400+ miles of range, a cabin with creature comforts, supreme cooling, more weight savings, tri-motor so it's running in the low 10's or high 9's and I'm in. Just look at how bmw M2's sold like hot cakes last year and it's hard to ignore an opportunity that Tesla should take advantage of as soon as they reasonably can. I know Elon said Plaid was only for S/X/Roadster and not 3 or Y but I fully expect that could and should change. It only makes complete sense to do so for profiteering.

Let's be honest, I think at some point next year Tesla will probably be offering a 4680 model 3, which will surely bump the performance up while saving them money, while giving them an opportunity to ask for more money with the 3rd highest tier option like the S now has. As to how much is theoretically possible with 4680's extrapolating from the model S Plaid+ numbers would be an interesting discussion.

I'd love to see what announcements or news trickles out about the future planned updates to the Model 3.

 

[Peteski]

Using this logic, everyone would own something like a Prius. Because I Can take your current logic and say that you can go with an EV with a 0-60 of 9 seconds and it would be more efficient than yours with everything else being equal. Then we'd end up with 11 second 0-60 speeds.

Again for me power simply comes down to the law of diminishing returns. Just been out in my standard LR AWD on a damp road. It's a nice twisty rural road with some great corners and rises. Average speed around 50-60 mph, max around 70 mph in these conditions (limit is actually 60 mph). No traffic lights and very little traffic, a great driver's road (think Nurburgring on a smaller scale with traffic coming the other way of course!). So how much full throttle do you think I used? None, not even close. I wasn't power limited in any way, shape or form on this drive. Do I ever use full throttle? Yes of course, in a straight line for a few seconds when I'm in the mood, perhaps the odd time exiting a slow corner in the dry. The occasional pointless traffic light GP if, by chance, I'm lined up against something interesting.

Would more power make it more fun? No not really. Sure it would give even more of a kick off the line at full gas, but IME the novelty soon wears off. 450 hp in a reasonably compact road car is quite enough. The 3P with 550 hp really should be enough for anyone, road or track. To put it in perspective, BTCC works race cars I worked with in the mid-late 90s had around 300 hp (2 litre n/a engines) and weighed around 1000 kg. So that's 0.3 hp/kg. The 3P is I think around 550 hp at 1847 kg, so also 0.3 hp/kg. Exactly the same power to weight ratio, but a LOT heavier. IMHO what would really make the Model 3 more fun is taking out a few hundred kg of mass. If you could get it down to say 1500 kg, you would naturally get better handling and acceleration. The car would become an amazing track weapon rather than merely a good one. A Porsche GT3 RS has "only" 513 hp, but weighs in at 1430 kg. Those are the basic parameters Tesla should be chasing for a true "performance" car. Not just adding more and more power for the sake of it. The final hurdle for EVs to beat ICE hands down across the board is weight.

So how about a 1500 kg RWD Model 3 lightweight performance?

 

[Peteski]

I think the weight savings is possibly in part due to megacasting ? And in the Plaid+ probably moreso without the pack modules. I thought I recall something about this mentioned in the BD presentation.

As much as the Plaid+ S is attractive to me, the notion of a 75-80k Plaid 3 that hits all the right spots is even more attractive and I certainly think there'd be a strong demand for it - especially as it really wins out as an autocross car and nimble daily driver over the boat-like S. Give me 400+ miles of range, a cabin with creature comforts, supreme cooling, more weight savings, tri-motor so it's running in the low 10's or high 9's and I'm in. Just look at how bmw M2's sold like hot cakes last year and it's hard to ignore an opportunity that Tesla should take advantage of as soon as they reasonably can. I know Elon said Plaid was only for S/X/Roadster and not 3 or Y but I fully expect that could and should change. It only makes complete sense to do so for profiteering.

Let's be honest, I think at some point next year Tesla will probably be offering a 4680 model 3, which will surely bump the performance up while saving them money, while giving them an opportunity to ask for more money with the 3rd highest tier option like the S now has. As to how much is theoretically possible with 4680's extrapolating from the model S Plaid+ numbers would be an interesting discussion.

I'd love to see what announcements or news trickles out about the future planned updates to the Model 3.

You would probably like my idea of a lightweight performance RWD Model 3 too! The BMW M2 CS has around 440 hp and weighs around 1500 kg.

 

[GreenHokie]

... IMHO what would really make the Model 3 more fun is taking out a few hundred kg of mass. If you could get it down to say 1500 kg, you would naturally get better handling and acceleration. The car would become an amazing track weapon rather than merely a good one. A Porsche GT3 RS has "only" 513 hp, but weighs in at 1430 kg. Those are the basic parameters Tesla should be chasing for a true "performance" car. Not just adding more and more power for the sake of it. The final hurdle for EVs to beat ICE hands down across the board is weight.

So how about a 1500 kg RWD Model 3 lightweight performance?

Of course, these are good points. But, don’t you think Tesla is already trying hard to reduce the overall weight as much as they can?

This is extremely difficult to do in a full EV vehicle, especially with the current battery technology. A battery pack/array is heavy... and that’s not going to change significantly for a long time. The battery weight will continue to drop in the coming years, but only incrementally. So, I just don’t think the weight numbers you are suggesting are even realistic, especially in a mid-size EV like the Model 3. If you’re talking about a much smaller EV like a Bolt or Leaf, then yes your weight numbers are realistic.

Changes to the vehicle chassis/frame and interior components can also save a little weight. However, those types of weight-saving changes (using the methods/materials that are available today) tend to make a vehicle more expensive, which is opposite of what most consumers (like yourself) want. Also, while not always true, I think using more premium materials on the interior to boost the overall finish (to satisfy those who think a more “premium” interior is needed) will in general add weight to a vehicle.

Finally, I certainly do not think Tesla has been or will add more power, just for the sake of it. Increased power is certainly a major benefit of the new advancements/technologies that are coming along. However, let’s not forget the other side (perhaps primary) benefits: increased range, reduced weight, etc...

I don’t think it’s fair to suggest that Tesla is not working hard to reduce the overall weight or that it is simply not a priority. It may look easy for folks like you and me, who have no clue what is involved in engineering and building a vehicle from the ground-up. However, it is obviously not easy. Tesla certainly deserves some criticism. But, let’s also give credit where credit is due. Tesla has done an absolutely amazing job with their EV’s (there is a reason why they are far & away the market leaders). And, they continue to make significant developments/improvements to their EV line. One might even say the performance numbers and increased range with their upcoming Plaid+ Model S are truly “revolutionary” for these times.

 

[AdamVIP]

I'm not at the point where I would spend that kind of money for any daily driver. That much money requires a lot more effort into the car than I can afford one that I have to drive every day. Id rather keep my current Performance 3 and get a second car for the weekends.