• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Tesla Model 3 will be revealed on March 31st

Status
Not open for further replies.

twinturbo2

butthurt Heat fan
The bolt is an ugly car that is slower, has smaller range, and costs more than the model 3. Why do you keep defending it? It needs to be 15k cheaper to have a chance.

The Bolt isn't that bad on the styling front.
It still has 200 miles of range.
It's still $30K after tax breaks, and if you think you'll get a Model 3 under $45K with options, I don't know what to say.

Peter M. DeLorenzo, who worked as an auto ad guy for 30 years and operates Autoextremist.com since 1999, has a cold dose of reality here.

BEHOLD THE CAR THAT PROMISES ETERNAL LIFE.
Date MONDAY, APRIL 4, 2016 AT 10:20AM
By Peter M. De Lorenzo

Detroit. The latest “show” from Elon “P.T.” Musk last week – the intro of the sacrosanct Tesla Model 3 – was an incredible hype-happening, for any number of reasons.

First of all, the car seems like a solid concept, and let me be perfectly clear here, after the disastrous “launch” of the Model X and the subsequent fumbling of that product, the Model 3 can only be viewed as a concept at this point.

Why? Because when some of the key auto industry veterans who helped Musk and his crew bring out the Model S - many of whom were toiling away on the project right here in the Motor City (the dirty little secret Musk and his minions would like everyone to forget) – left the company not long after the Model S emerged, suddenly Tesla was left to its own devices, which meant that Musk’s “blue-skying” was allowed to rattle around unimpeded, without the counterbalance of realistic expectations, and crucial design and engineering mistakes were made on the company’s next project, the cumbersome and ungainly Model X.

The result? Unbeknownst to the average misinformed consumer - thanks to the Fog of War generated by the slobbering media - the mediocre Model X, when you step back from the ridiculous hype, can only be considered to be an unmitigated disaster. The Model X was years late, not months, but years due to some fundamental design and engineering issues, not the least of which was its giant doors that proved to be a complete pain in the ass and cost the program immeasurably. Oh, you weren’t aware of that? No, of course you weren’t. Why? The “media” was too busy cowering at the feet of Musk, basking in his brilliance, furiously doing his bidding by turning his thought balloons into pure, unfettered PR gold.

So to even think that the volume-aimed Model 3 will see the light of day “by the end of 2017,” as Musk suggested last Thursday night, is a complete and utter fantasy, indicating a level of delusion and hubris that is simply mind-boggling to behold. Just the level of tooling and scale required – not to mention the cash alone – to pull this off is a daunting mountain to climb, especially for what heretofore has been a “boutique” auto manufacturer.

One analyst had the cojones to say that the Model 3 would be lucky to see the light of day by 2020. I concur.

That didn’t stop the assembled multitudes in the media from absolutely gushing over the Model 3, however, while glossing over that little unpleasantness about the timing of its intro. In fact, you would have thought that they had never attended a car introduction before and that they had all been given special VR goggles that completely erased the last shred of rational thought.

I have never read such a disgusting display of “work” by so-called professional journalists in my life. By the time the collective media stumblebums were finished gushing over Musk and the Model 3, and regurgitating their “reports” in various media platforms, one could deduce the following: 1. This car was not only the greatest thing since sliced bread; it would change the world as we know it, turning it into a wondrous place of bunny rabbits and rainbows devoid of wars, poverty and suffering. 2. It would immediately humble cars costing twice as much due to its undeniable, all-encompassing brilliance. And 3. The car represents such a fundamental shift in the Autosphere that it could conceivably put all of the existing “poseur” car companies, some of which have been accumulating transportation knowledge for well over 100 years, immediately out of business.

One esteemed member of the media - and an over-the-top, electric car zealot to boot (tediously so, I might add) - even went so far as to explain that the Model 3 was such a breakthrough because, lo and behold, it had been designed from the beginning to be an electric car! As if this had never been thought of, or done, by anybody before. At which point I knew that the whole thing had turned into a circus of irrational thinking and an orchestrated – and ugly - cessation of reality.

But then again, maybe a third of the “media” in attendance were actual working members of the automotive media. The rest were card-carrying Musk acolytes, “lifestyle” reporters who wouldn’t understand the first thing about the car business even if you spotted them the “c” and the “r,” assorted Silicon Valley shmoes and enough vacuous hangers-on to populate an air-selling convention. It’s no wonder that Musk had this motley assemblage cheering at his every utterance.

And I haven’t even mentioned the rise of the pitchfork-wielding consumer zombies, the some 276,000-plus who blithely plunked down deposits of $1,000 each for the Model 3, a car they may see in three-and-one-half years' time, if they’re lucky, based simply on the overheated hype generated by the media who have relentlessly portrayed Elon Musk as the Patron Saint of All that is Good and Virtuous in the New World.

I once wrote that this nation could not exist in the global economy as a Starbucks Nation of consumer zombies, that consumerism in and of itself could never replace or eclipse the fundamental importance of the production of real goods and services and its contribution to America’s industrial fabric, or there would be dire consequences.

Well, it’s too late for that.

The quaint notion of the importance of America’s industrial fabric is being regularly dismissed by the consumer zombies as being boring or even worse, irrelevant. We have had irrational consumers lining up for the newest “thing” with no rhyme, or reason, or rational explanation for doing so for years now, whether it’s the latest and greatest “hot” phone of the moment or, as of last week, an electric car that seemingly promises eternal life, for all intents and purposes.

The frenzy over the Model 3, which has been fueled by irresponsible members of the automotive media who steadfastly refuse to do their job, while acting as P.T. Musk’s lapdogs, is simply inexcusable. And the hype generated by reckless social media provocateurs masquerading as enlightened consumers has only compounded the situation, relegating rational discourse to the dustbin of a forgotten reality that existed in a galaxy far, far away.

Will the Model 3 ever see the light of day? Sure, but when it finally arrives is another consideration altogether, and what its place will be in the automotive world at that juncture remains to be seen.

In the meantime we will have to endure more of this reprehensible and irresponsible hype, while other oh-so-not-hip manufacturers like Audi, with an all-electric crossover coming in 2018, and GM, with its fully electric Bolt coming at the end of this year, and all of the other global manufacturers who are hard at work reinventing the automobile, go about their business.

And that’s the High-Octane Truth for this week.
 

giga

Member
The Bolt isn't that bad on the styling front.
why-you-always-lying-feat.jpg
 

Nafai1123

Banned
The Bolt isn't that bad on the styling front.
It still has 200 miles of range.
It's still $30K after tax breaks, and if you think you'll get a Model 3 under $45K with options, I don't know what to say.

Peter M. DeLorenzo, who worked as an auto ad guy for 30 years and operates Autoextremist.com since 1999, has a cold dose of reality here.

For someone that certainly seems to be an automotive enthusiast, you sure like to gloss over the clear difference in desirability between the Bolt and the Model 3.

Quick question: Would you buy a Focus if it cost the same as a 3 series?
 

giga

Member
How does it even make sense to compare it to a $45k model 3 with options? Not even adding AWD (<5k) and autopilot convenience (2.5k in the model s) would put it at 45k.
 

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
The result? Unbeknownst to the average misinformed consumer - thanks to the Fog of War generated by the slobbering media - the mediocre Model X, when you step back from the ridiculous hype, can only be considered to be an unmitigated disaster. The Model X was years late, not months, but years due to some fundamental design and engineering issues, not the least of which was its giant doors that proved to be a complete pain in the ass and cost the program immeasurably. Oh, you weren’t aware of that? No, of course you weren’t. Why? The “media” was too busy cowering at the feet of Musk, basking in his brilliance, furiously doing his bidding by turning his thought balloons into pure, unfettered PR gold.
with unbiased quotes like this its no wonder Twinturbo likes this guys opinion.
 
The Bolt isn't that bad on the styling front.
It still has 200 miles of range.
It's still $30K after tax breaks, and if you think you'll get a Model 3 under $45K with options, I don't know what to say.

Peter M. DeLorenzo, who worked as an auto ad guy for 30 years and operates Autoextremist.com since 1999, has a cold dose of reality here.

The idea that you, or anyone else, read that barely coherent pile of invective and thought that it was, in any way, a credible take is troubling.
 

duderon

rollin' in the gutter
"The mediocre Model X". Ignoring all the other innovations, the quickest and most efficient SUV ever made. Keep posting twinturbo, you'll only look sillier as time goes on.
 

Jasoneyu

Member
The Bolt isn't that bad on the styling front.
It still has 200 miles of range.
It's still $30K after tax breaks, and if you think you'll get a Model 3 under $45K with options, I don't know what to say.

Peter M. DeLorenzo, who worked as an auto ad guy for 30 years and operates Autoextremist.com since 1999, has a cold dose of reality here.

The article goes through long stretches of bashing people's enthusiasm of the thing but he doesnt really provide any facts to why the model 3 can be produced in the timeline musk provided.
 
my prediction:

The $35k model 3 will cause a lot of cancels: cloth trim, 17" alloys, metal roof, 2wd, 6 seconds to 60mph, autopilot is DLC, supercharger subscription fees. Mark my words.

Without federal incentives a 2019 Golf GTI - and other cars including plug in hybrids - will be in many ways a better choice..
 

stufte

Member
my prediction:

The $35k model 3 will cause a lot of cancels: cloth trim, 17" alloys, metal roof, 2wd, 7 seconds to 60mph, autopilot is DLC, supercharger subscription fees. Mark my words.

Without federal incentives a 2019 Golf GTI - and other cars including plug in hybrids - will be in many ways a better choice..

Anyone who has done any research at all will know that the base 35k model is just the basic features. Autopilot is said to be standard and I'm not sure how they would implement subscription fees on the thousands of existing Superchargers.

Me personally? I'm definitely upgrading to panoramic glass and the 4wd at very least. After that I'll have to see how much more money I have to work with. the 42k estimate that Musk made about what an average person would pay with a few options seems reasonable to me.
 

strata8

Member
my prediction:

The $35k model 3 will cause a lot of cancels: cloth trim, 17" alloys, metal roof, 2wd, 7 seconds to 60mph, autopilot is DLC, supercharger subscription fees. Mark my words.

Without federal incentives a 2019 Golf GTI - and other cars including plug in hybrids - will be in many ways a better choice..

They've already said the base model will do 0-60 in under 6s and come with autopilot safety features. The others are a bit of given apart from maybe the supercharger access. It's unclear whether that will require a fee or not.
 

gwarm01

Member
Autopilot is not quite what you seem to be thinking it is. It's pretty much automated cruise control with lane keeping. It won't follow a gps path & make turns onto other roads & such -- it just follows the road you're on and won't crash into cars in front of you.

I wonder if the model 3 will ship with sufficient technology to allow autonomous driving via OTA update once the software and legal side is fleshed out? As it is, autopilot will be great for my daily commute. Today I had a 40 minute drive to another town, 90% of that was on a freeway with minimal traffic. I was trying to imagine what it would be like to let the car take control for the majority of that drive. I'd probably be uncomfortable at first, but hopefully the tech is solid enough to win me over.

The Bolt isn't that bad on the styling front.
It still has 200 miles of range.
It's still $30K after tax breaks, and if you think you'll get a Model 3 under $45K with options, I don't know what to say.

Peter M. DeLorenzo, who worked as an auto ad guy for 30 years and operates Autoextremist.com since 1999, has a cold dose of reality here.

I'm trying to figure out why this car bothers you so much. I know there are a lot of people that praise Elon like the second coming and act like everything he does is revolutionary, and I get why that is annoying, but this is just a cool looking car that should be fun to drive. I'm looking forward to driving a sport sedan with that electric motor instant power.
 

nomster

Member
my prediction:

The $35k model 3 will cause a lot of cancels: cloth trim, 17" alloys, metal roof, 2wd, 7 seconds to 60mph, autopilot is DLC, supercharger subscription fees. Mark my words.

Without federal incentives a 2019 Golf GTI - and other cars including plug in hybrids - will be in many ways a better choice..

Does the base Beemer 3 series have leather? My guess is that's where they're starting, given the promise of it being the best standard equip in class.
 
Anyone who has done any research at all will know that the base 35k model is just the basic features. Autopilot is said to be standard and I'm not sure how they would implement subscription fees on the thousands of existing Superchargers.

Me personally? I'm definitely upgrading to panoramic glass and the 4wd at very least. After that I'll have to see how much more money I have to work with. the 42k estimate that Musk made about what an average person would pay with a few options seems reasonable to me.

Yes, I know, however the car shown off and drooled over was not the base model.

As for autopilot, note they said it has the HARDWARE but clearly is not going to be enabled for the stripper model. Just like the Model S it will come as a plus option either at sale or after sale.

I was wrong on the 7 seconds, less than 6 was promised, yes. But a 2015 VW GTI does it in 5.6 so I'm not sure that - by 2018 - sub 6 seconds is particularly special.

You gotta look at whether its a knock out of the park thing that deserves advance reservations or not. Many people are reserving based on a no-lose proposition however I think within a year it will be obvious that to get the desirable Model 3 they have signed up for a $50k USD automobile - will it be outstandingly better than the competition at that price point to deserve such a long wait?
 

GTI Guy

Member
Anyone who has done any research at all will know that the base 35k model is just the basic features. Autopilot is said to be standard and I'm not sure how they would implement subscription fees on the thousands of existing Superchargers.

Me personally? I'm definitely upgrading to panoramic glass and the 4wd at very least. After that I'll have to see how much more money I have to work with. the 42k estimate that Musk made about what an average person would pay with a few options seems reasonable to me.

Autopilot is not included in the base price model.
 

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
I'd prefer them to gradually phase it out vs. the abrupt finish we're getting now, eg maybe extend the credit, but reduce it to $5000, then eventually reduce that to $2500. Just seems like it would be more politically tenable.
They extended the solar tax credits to 2020 no reason they can't extend the EV credit.
 
I'd prefer them to gradually phase it out vs. the abrupt finish we're getting now, eg maybe extend the credit, but reduce it to $5000, then eventually reduce that to $2500. Just seems like it would be more politically tenable.

I believe this is what they are doing after 200k hits. It's getting cut in half for 6 months after the company sells 200k
 
my prediction:

The $35k model 3 will cause a lot of cancels: cloth trim, 17" alloys, metal roof, 2wd, 7 seconds to 60mph, autopilot is DLC, supercharger subscription fees. Mark my words.

Without federal incentives a 2019 Golf GTI - and other cars including plug in hybrids - will be in many ways a better choice..

Cloth trim: Sure and personally I prefer quality cloth to leather.

17" alloys: Probably

Metal roof: seems unlikely

2wd: They already said that

0-60: I would bet that the base model actually does it in under 6 seconds

Autopilot is DLC: the hardware will be in the base model as will the safety features this was made very clear in the event

Supercharger subscriptions: That seems extremely unlikely. The Supercharger network is really their primary advantage and you don't squander that when you are making your big play.
 

duderon

rollin' in the gutter
Yes, I know, however the car shown off and drooled over was not the base model.

As for autopilot, note they said it has the HARDWARE but clearly is not going to be enabled for the stripper model. Just like the Model S it will come as a plus option either at sale or after sale.

I was wrong on the 7 seconds, less than 6 was promised, yes. But a 2015 VW GTI does it in 5.6 so I'm not sure that - by 2018 - sub 6 seconds is particularly special.

You gotta look at whether its a knock out of the park thing that deserves advance reservations or not. Many people are reserving based on a no-lose proposition however I think within a year it will be obvious that to get the desirable Model 3 they have signed up for a $50k USD automobile - will it be outstandingly better than the competition at that price point to deserve such a long wait?

One key factor you are missing. The GTI isn't an EV. So even if the 0-60 times are equal or favor the GTI, the Model 3 will be many times more efficient and will likely have much more storage space. Not to mention instantaneous acceleration (you won't understand until you drive one).
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
Autopilot is not included in the base price model.
Correct. Autopilot hardware is included, the feature is not. So no hardware upgrades and it is probably add-able after purchase.

The "autopilot safety features" are standard which I assume is things like lane departure warnings and auto-braking to avoid causing a rear end collision.

Autopilot is DLC: the hardware will be in the base model as will the safety features this was made very clear in the event
Heh, DLC is a much better way to describe it, while simultaneously being super hilarious. "I downloaded the autopilot DLC and got a free Mountain Dew HUD theme!"
 

Ty4on

Member
One key factor you are missing. The GTI isn't an EV. So even if the 0-60 times are equal or favor the GTI, the Model 3 will be many times more efficient and will likely have much more storage space. Not to mention instantaneous acceleration (you won't understand until you drive one).

The GTI is a completely different car. The BMW 3 series is a much better comparison and it's faster than the base 320i (which is 33,000$, does it in 7.1s).
 

DrEvil

not a medical professional
The Bolt isn't that bad on the styling front.
It still has 200 miles of range.
It's still $30K after tax breaks, and if you think you'll get a Model 3 under $45K with options, I don't know what to say.

Peter M. DeLorenzo, who worked as an auto ad guy for 30 years and operates Autoextremist.com since 1999, has a cold dose of reality here.

Maybe twinturbo2 is on some strange crusade to try and get people to cancel their Model 3 orders so he can get his sooner?
 

giga

Member
Leather seats, AWD, and autopilot convenience features aren't on the base S. No one should have expected them on the base 3. I definitely don't see them skipping the glass roof though since they made such a big about it at the event and it seems core to the design.
 

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
$37.5k Bolt vs. $35k Model 3

"Model 3 is more expensive!"

ok...
The Bolt is 30k after tax incentive..... the Model 3 um doesnt get that same tax incentive! - twinturbo

Leather seats, AWD, and autopilot convenience features aren't on the base S. No one should have expected them on the base 3. I definitely don't see them skipping the glass roof though since they made such a big about it at the event and it seems core to the design.

is there any car sub 50k who's base model comes with leather?
 

h1nch

Member
The Bolt isn't that bad on the styling front.
It still has 200 miles of range.
It's still $30K after tax breaks, and if you think you'll get a Model 3 under $45K with options, I don't know what to say.

Peter M. DeLorenzo, who worked as an auto ad guy for 30 years and operates Autoextremist.com since 1999, has a cold dose of reality here.

That blog post is hilarious. He's sooo salty!
 

pj

Banned
Supercharger subscriptions: That seems extremely unlikely. The Supercharger network is really their primary advantage and you don't squander that when you are making your big play.

I'd bet money on subscriptions for supercharger access. Maybe a one time fee. There are 600 charging stations (3,600 super chargers) for the 120,000 teslas currently on the road. Tesla aims to make 500,000 model 3s per year. Are they going to add 2,400 charging stations (14,000 chargers) every year? Who's paying for the electricity for the 5-10 years you keep that 35k car? What happens in areas like NYC and SF where there's no hope of ever having enough slots for all the cars that will be around? How do you not alienate buyers of far more expensive S and X models who will have to wait in line behind the hoards of gross middle class people?

I admire the optimism but it's really just not practical.
 

Damaniel

Banned
my prediction:

The $35k model 3 will cause a lot of cancels: cloth trim, 17" alloys, metal roof, 2wd, 6 seconds to 60mph, autopilot is DLC, supercharger subscription fees. Mark my words.

Without federal incentives a 2019 Golf GTI - and other cars including plug in hybrids - will be in many ways a better choice..

I don't care how much 'better' a Golf GTI is - I'm buying an EV, not yet another gas-powered car, so comparisons to them makes no sense. If I have to make a few sacrifices in fit and finish to get 200+ mile range in an EV, then so be it - especially if I can get all that without having to buy GM (sorry, I just can't get behind the Bolt).
 
I'd bet money on subscriptions for supercharger access. Maybe a one time fee. There are 600 charging stations (3,600 super chargers) for the 120,000 teslas currently on the road. Tesla aims to make 500,000 model 3s per year. Are they going to add 2,400 charging stations (14,000 chargers) every year? Who's paying for the electricity for the 5-10 years you keep that 35k car? What happens in areas like NYC and SF where there's no hope of ever having enough slots for all the cars that will be around? How do you not alienate buyers of far more expensive S and X models who will have to wait in line behind the hoards of gross middle class people?

I admire the optimism but it's really just not practical.

Why have a separate one time fee and not just build the cost into the price of the car in the first place? The Supercharger network is Tesla's big ticket to success. Other companies can build compelling electric cars, but nobody else is going to build out infrastructure like Tesla is. I don't see them gating access to it until well after they are established in the mass market.

Your concerns are valid and Tesla is going to have to deliver, but it's the bet that they made and I think they are going to stick with it.
 

h1nch

Member
I'd bet money on subscriptions for supercharger access. Maybe a one time fee. There are 600 charging stations (3,600 super chargers) for the 120,000 teslas currently on the road. Tesla aims to make 500,000 model 3s per year. Are they going to add 2,400 charging stations (14,000 chargers) every year? Who's paying for the electricity for the 5-10 years you keep that 35k car? What happens in areas like NYC and SF where there's no hope of ever having enough slots for all the cars that will be around? How do you not alienate buyers of far more expensive S and X models who will have to wait in line behind the hoards of gross middle class people?

I admire the optimism but it's really just not practical.


I could have sworn that Tesla has publicly stated in the past that the supercharger stations will be free forever. I suppose there's nothing stopping them from going back on that down the road, but that's a bold claim to make and then later renege on.

Also, I'm not sure the supercharger network really needs to scale at the rate you suggest. Consider that a key differentiator of an EV is the fact that it can be charged overnight when parked in a home garage or carport. Most local commuters won't need to use a nearby supercharging station for their everyday commutes. I don't think I would ever use a supercharger in my city, barring some atypical circumstance. The supercharger network exists mostly to solve the roadtrip problem.

Plus, is there anything stopping a 3rd party company from setting up their own supercharger-caliber charging stations?

EDIT: I was mistaken. From the FAQ: "Supercharging is free for the life of Model S, once the Supercharger option is enabled."
 

pj

Banned
Why have a separate one time fee and not just build the cost into the price of the car in the first place? The Supercharger network is Tesla's big ticket to success. Other companies can build compelling electric cars, but nobody else is going to build out infrastructure like Tesla is. I don't see them gating access to it until well after they are established in the mass market.

Your concerns are valid and Tesla is going to have to deliver, but it's the bet that they made and I think they are going to stick with it.

Because not everyone needs or wants it. It's pretty easy to spin it as a positive. Giving people a choice, etc. It's the same reason they are giving everyone the autopilot hardware but not the software.

I plan to buy an EV for my next car and supercharger is almost irrelevant to me. For 99% of my driving I wouldn't use it, and for the 1% of the time I could, it's still too slow to really be practical.

On a 200 mile range car, 0-80% (160 miles) will probably take 30 mins on a supercharger. Even if you time it perfectly, you're still charging for 30 mins for every 2.3 hours of driving.
 

pj

Banned
I could have sworn that Tesla has publicly stated in the past that the supercharger stations will be free forever. I suppose there's nothing stopping them from going back on that down the road, but that's a bold claim to make and then later renege on.

Also, I'm not sure the supercharger network really needs to scale at the rate you suggest. Consider that a key differentiator of an EV is the fact that it can be charged overnight when parked in a home garage or carport. Most local commuters won't need to use a nearby supercharging station for their everyday commutes. I don't think I would ever use a supercharger in my city, barring some atypical circumstance. The supercharger network exists mostly to solve the roadtrip problem.

Plus, is there anything stopping a 3rd party company from setting up their own supercharger-caliber charging stations?

I'd be thrilled if I'm wrong. I guess we will see.

I only suggested that rate of expansion because tesla presumably knows what they are doing in regards to ratio of cars to chargers. Model 3's will on average have far less range and likely be used more than a lot of the babied $90k+ model s's that exist now.
 
One key factor you are missing. The GTI isn't an EV. So even if the 0-60 times are equal or favor the GTI, the Model 3 will be many times more efficient and will likely have much more storage space. Not to mention instantaneous acceleration (you won't understand until you drive one).

Yes I've driven the Model S, the instant right foot is definitely a plus feature.

However people are putting deposits down by cross-shopping a *premium* Model 3 (assuming super charger access, assuming autopilot, assuming full glass roof etc) against vehicles they see and read about today, that are available today.

I think that is two mistakes. One is to think, well, what else is out there for $35k? instead of what is out there for $45k+, and the other mistake is to think that by 2018 things will be much the same in the $30-$50k range, as they are today.
 
I could have sworn that Tesla has publicly stated in the past that the supercharger stations will be free forever. I suppose there's nothing stopping them from going back on that down the road, but that's a bold claim to make and then later renege on.

Also, I'm not sure the supercharger network really needs to scale at the rate you suggest. Consider that a key differentiator of an EV is the fact that it can be charged overnight when parked in a home garage or carport. Most local commuters won't need to use a nearby supercharging station for their everyday commutes. I don't think I would ever use a supercharger in my city, barring some atypical circumstance. The supercharger network exists mostly to solve the roadtrip problem.

Plus, is there anything stopping a 3rd party company from setting up their own supercharger-caliber charging stations?

EDIT: I was mistaken. From the FAQ: "Supercharging is free for the life of Model S, once the Supercharger option is enabled."
Other manufacturers' EVs would get owned if you plugged them into a supercharger, right? I know that Tesla released all their patents, but I don't think anyone else actually used them.
 

giga

Member
Yes I've driven the Model S, the instant right foot is definitely a plus feature.

However people are putting deposits down by cross-shopping a *premium* Model 3 (assuming super charger access, assuming autopilot, assuming full glass roof etc) against vehicles they see and read about today, that are available today.

I think that is two mistakes. One is to think, well, what else is out there for $35k? instead of what is out there for $45k+, and the other mistake is to think that by 2018 things will be much the same in the $30-$50k range, as they are today.

this is why only part 1 of the model 3 has been unveiled. elon knows this.
 
Because not everyone needs or wants it. It's pretty easy to spin it as a positive. Giving people a choice, etc. It's the same reason they are giving everyone the autopilot hardware but not the software.

I plan to buy an EV for my next car and supercharger is almost irrelevant to me. For 99% of my driving I wouldn't use it, and for the 1% of the time I could, it's still too slow to really be practical.

On a 200 mile range car, 0-80% (160 miles) will probably take 30 mins on a supercharger. Even if you time it perfectly, you're still charging for 30 mins for every 2.3 hours of driving.

I am not arguing whether or not Tesla's strategy is the best one for you or even in general.

I am just saying that a huge network of free Superchargers is the bet that they have made and I don't see them moving away from that any time soon. Range anxiety is the main dragon that Tesla needs to slay to find mainstream success and a large free Supercharger network is how they are going to try to slay it. When you are selling an expensive car, being able to throw the word "free" around liberally has a lot of value.

It's a simple compelling message that would be lost if you started adding caveats, options and costs.
 

h1nch

Member
Other manufacturers' EVs would get owned if you plugged them into a supercharger, right? I know that Tesla released all their patents, but I don't think anyone else actually used them.

Yeah I believe Tesla's charging port is proprietary, so other EVs would not work.

I was suggesting that in the event that we have so many Teslas on the road that supercharger stations are unable to keep up w/ demand, 3rd party companies could fill the gap with pay-to-charge stations. These exist today already, however I'm not sure if any of them can charge at the same rate as a supercharger.

I know nothing about the Supercharger tech itself or how much of the charging time is due to proprietary design vs just available power output. But it would seem to be in Tesla's best interests (namely, EV adoption) to not discourage the establishment of supporting ecosystems.
 

Abounder

Banned
...and the other mistake is to think that by 2018 things will be much the same in the $30-$50k range, as they are today.

By the end of 2018 its competition includes the Bolt, new Leaf, Hyundai Ioniq, and the new BMW 3series. Tesla looks like the best mix out of those options, it's a generation or two ahead of its competition
 

pj

Banned
I am not arguing whether or not Tesla's strategy is the best one for you or even in general.

I am just saying that a huge network of free Superchargers is the bet that they have made and I don't see them moving away from that any time soon. Range anxiety is the main dragon that Tesla needs to slay to find mainstream success and a large free Supercharger network is how they are going to try to slay it. When you are selling an expensive car, being able to throw the word "free" around liberally has a lot of value.

It's a simple compelling message that would be lost if you started adding caveats, options and costs.

I really don't see why it's that compelling. No amount of superchargers will make a 215 mile range good enough for all the cross-country trips the "range anxiety" folks are so worried that they'll miss out on. I think a lot of people who think practically would want to save a grand or two by opting out of a system they'll never use. That shit ain't free

There are always excuses for why EVs aren't good enough. Naysayers want 400 miles of range with 5 minute charge times. Nothing short of that will be good enough.
 

gwarm01

Member
Yes I've driven the Model S, the instant right foot is definitely a plus feature.

However people are putting deposits down by cross-shopping a *premium* Model 3 (assuming super charger access, assuming autopilot, assuming full glass roof etc) against vehicles they see and read about today, that are available today.

I think that is two mistakes. One is to think, well, what else is out there for $35k? instead of what is out there for $45k+, and the other mistake is to think that by 2018 things will be much the same in the $30-$50k range, as they are today.

This is something I have considered while putting down my reservation. I'm comfortable with putting $1000 down now since it is fully refundable. I was very impressed with the car the showed, but if the final product turns out to be lacking I am willing to switch. Hell, before this I was seriously considering buying a Jaguar XE when it launched in the states. I may still be depending on how this shakes out. I like the idea of owning an EV, but I'm not married to it.

I really don't see why it's that compelling. No amount of superchargers will make a 215 mile range good enough for all the cross-country trips the "range anxiety" folks are so worried that they'll miss out on. I think a lot of people who think practically would want to save a grand or two by opting out of a system they'll never use. That shit ain't free

There are always excuses for why EVs aren't good enough. Naysayers want 400 miles of range with 5 minute charge times. Nothing short of that will be good enough.

Good point. Everyone I know who is opposed to the idea of an EV has that mindset. To me, I know that 90% of the time I drive about 30 miles on any given day. Periodically I make a few trips that are a bit longer than that, but not that often. For the one or two times a year I actually make such a long trip, I don't mind charging my car while I eat a snack and drink some coffee. Hell, if it's that big of a deal I will just rent a car. At least that way I don't put tons of extra miles on my own vehicle.
 
I really don't see why it's that compelling. No amount of superchargers will make a 215 mile range good enough for all the cross-country trips the "range anxiety" folks are so worried that they'll miss out on. I think a lot of people who think practically would want to save a grand or two by opting out of a system they'll never use. That shit ain't free

There are always excuses for why EVs aren't good enough. Naysayers want 400 miles of range with 5 minute charge times. Nothing short of that will be good enough.
It's compelling because it's miles ahead of other EVs in terms of viability. It's not ideal to take a Tesla on a cross-country trip, but it's not as bad an experience as it would be another EV, as long as supercharger stations are around. You'd just have to plan your route better and take a half-hour break after every four hours or so of driving. It's not as good as what you would get with a gas car or hybrid, but other EVs--or even any alternative fuel vehicles--wouldn't even be able to make the trip at all.

But, realistically, how often are you going to be taking trips like that? For most of your commutes, the range should be plenty, and you never have to go out of your way to "fuel up" because you can just plug in your car once you're home.
 
I really don't see why it's that compelling. No amount of superchargers will make a 215 mile range good enough for all the cross-country trips the "range anxiety" folks are so worried that they'll miss out on. I think a lot of people who think practically would want to save a grand or two by opting out of a system they'll never use. That shit ain't free

There are always excuses for why EVs aren't good enough. Naysayers want 400 miles of range with 5 minute charge times. Nothing short of that will be good enough.

Tesla is betting that people like you (who will rarely use the superchargers) will still buy the car at the end of the day. Tesla doesn't need to win over all of the naysayers out of the gate, they just need to pick some off at the margins and they obviously believe that free supercharging is the way to do it.

It will be interesting to watch it play out.
 

pj

Banned
It's compelling because it's miles ahead of other EVs in terms of viability. It's not ideal to take a Tesla on a cross-country trip, but it's not as bad an experience as it would be another EV, as long as supercharger stations are around. You'd just have to plan your route better and take a half-hour break after every four hours or so of driving. It's not as good as what you would get with a gas car or hybrid, but other EVs--or even any alternative fuel vehicles--wouldn't even be able to make the trip at all.

But, realistically, how often are you going to be taking trips like that? For most of your commutes, the range should be plenty, and you never have to go out of your way to "fuel up" because you can just plug in your car once you're home.

4 hours? In a 35k tesla it will be 30 mins every 2.5 hours if you do it perfectly. 20% of your travel time will be refueling.

My point is exactly that people never really take trips like that, so supercharging isn't that big of a deal. When you do need to drive very far you will either take your other car or rent a car. And to the people who make a big deal of range (people who probably aren't actually interested in an EV), supercharging isn't good enough. The range of the cars isn't good enough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom