Musk: I really want the Model III to be different, not just a smaller Model S (video)

I think the 35k model will have a few bells and whistles, and go 200 miles without pushing it. But yes, I agree it'll get pricey when optioned out and I think a majority of people will option it out (as in greater than 50%).

Tesla is not going to build a low range car.

Look at what happened when Chrysler tried a 4/5 scale Chrysler 300.

The proportions are inherently part of the sexiness.

My guesstimates?

The base Model 3 will have at least as good acceleration as any $35k sedan.

It will have class leading low center of gravity and therefore slot car handling.

It will have a large touchscreen infotainment system/HVAC control.

A no shift 1 speed transmission.

Textile seats, my guess manually adjusted.

Power windows,power locks,keyless entry,heat and air conditioning.

Hopefully coat hooks,grab handles,storage cubbies, tie down rings in the liftgate area, front cup holders big enough for a Big Gulp and rear cup holders too.:wink:

16" steel wheels with Aerodynamic disc wheel covers.

And at least 200 miles EPA range.


And a fully loaded 85 kWh all wheel drive performance version for $85k.

And a well equipped AWD 85 kWh with two small motors for $70k

I like the last comment about opening a factory in Detroit. "Maybe Michigan should stop prohibiting us from selling cars here. That would be a nice first gesture" LOL nice and polite dig as a closing comment.

RobStark said:

And at least 200 miles EPA range.

And a fully loaded 85 kWh all wheel drive performance version for $85k.

And a well equipped AWD 85 kWh with two small motors for $70k

Click to expand...

45-50 kWh is enough for 200 EPA miles in a Model 3, due to lower weight and drag area.
a 370 is to 348 what a S85 is to a S60

ScepticMatt said:

45-50 kWh is enough for 200 EPA miles in a Model 3, due to lower weight and drag area.
a 370 is to 348 what a S85 is to a S60

Click to expand...

200 EPA miles for the base $35k Model 3 with what I think will be a 48 kWh battery.

Musk said on reddit of the model 3 "it won't look like other cars". To me 'other cars' includes i3, Bolt, MiEv, Smart Car, all those other crappy cars in that segment. I have no idea what he has in mind but I am super excited. I think if the production Model X is a hit we can rely on TM to make a great 3rd gen.

If I were them I would just sell a stripper Model S - with regular door handles, no air suspension, no sunroof, textile seats, steel rims (great aftermarket options) - kinda like the early 240 SX and build them in Korea for half the cost of Cally...

You are probably right - but I don't see how California could be cheaper than a place like Tennessee or South-West Virginia... maybe a factory there could yield costs savings per unit... the unemployment rate in Southwestern Virginia is extremely high and other companies build down there for that exact reason. If the stats below are accurate - this is where I would put a plant.

In 2003, Appalachian Virginia— which included most of Southwestern Virginia— had a three-year average unemployment rate of 5.7%, compared with 3.8% statewide and 5.5% nationwide. In 2002, Appalachian Virginia had a per capita market income of $16,901, compared with $29,279 statewide and $26,420 nationwide. In 2000, Appalachian Virginia had a poverty rate of 15.7%, compared to 9.6% statewide and 12.4% nationwide. Only one Virginia county— Dickenson— was designated "Distressed," while eight— Buchanan, Carroll (includes Galax), Craig, Grayson, Lee, Montgomery (includes Radford), Smyth, and Wise (includes Norton)— were designated "at-risk." Botetourt County was the only county given the "attainment" designation, and Bath was the only county designated "competitive." Most Appalachian Virginia counties were designated "transitional," meaning they lagged behind the national average on one of the three key indicators. Montgomery County had Appalachian Virginia's highest poverty rating, with 24.5% of its residents living below the poverty line. Botetourt had Appalachian Virginia's highest per capita income ($27,835) and lowest unemployment rate (2.7%).[SUP][2][/SUP]

Investment in the workforce can be quite expensive. Elon has said several times that California was the place to start because that's where the engineers are located. There's a huge talent pool to draw from. Remember too, that Tesla will be investing in the Nevada education system as well they'll be doing a lot of on site training for their Gigafactory employees. Location desirability (where people want to live and would enjoy living) plays a role, along with of course cost of living, schooling system, crime rate etc... I'm just saying that there's a lot of factors to consider when choosing the next factory location beyond just 'this is a less expensive (taxes, wages) place to do business'.

Tesla chose Fremont for the first Factory after almost signing a deal in New Mexico.

Because it became available for $50M. No one other that Tesla wanted it as an industrial site.

Toyota would need to invest $500M to $1B and perhaps decades to clean up the environmental damage to rezone Fremont for commercial or residential use when the property was worth $1B. Toyota decided to get rid of the headache for $50M

Since then business taxes in CA have increased ~50% and Elon has said if he had to do it again today he might choose another site.

Nissan and VW chose Tennessee. Mercedes chose Alabama. BMW chose South Carolina and Audi Puebla Mexico.

My guess is the Next Tesla plant goes to Texas for primarily political reasons or somewhere else in the South for primarily economic ones.

And a nearby state for the 2nd US Gigafactory for the same political reasons like maybe Oklahoma. Not only to secure the right to sell in State like Tesla did in Nevada.


But like Boeing or GM, you spread the jobs around the several states and you pick up key Senate and House support in Washington.

i agree that the south is the likeliest for the next GF. it would make sense on a number of levels.

as long as they dont go to mexico, should be fine.

igotzzoom said:

Korea is no longer the low-cost manufacturing spot. I read somewhere the cost to produce cars there is nearly on par with Japan. Wages have risen so fast that now it's cheaper to build models in the U.S. than Korea for Hyundai and Kia. Mexico has lately also become a manufacturing hot spot. As long as Tesla can stay non-union, I think they can keep their manufacturing costs in check.

Click to expand...

yeah, the day that tesla becomes unionized is the day we can kiss tesla work ethic/rebellious innovation good bye.

igotzzoom said:

My hunch is: $35,000 will get a low-range, de-contented entry-level model. Any model with a 200+ mile range/compelling dynamic performance, etc. will be $45-50,000, with the top trim models going for much higher, like $60-70,000. Convince me I'm wrong...Go.

Click to expand...

Tesla Motors will never again release a vehicle with an EPA rated range of less than 200 miles. The Model ≡ will have no less than a 60 kWh battery pack and 300 HP at the base trim level. The base version will be similar to the base trim for BMW 320i and 328i. Which means it will be appointed about as well as a Toyota Camry LE. There will not be a 'de-contented', substandard, tin can, empty, loss leader, bottom-of-the-barrel, slowpoke, economy version along the lines of a 1981 Chevrolet Chevette or 1976 Ford Pinto.

igotzzoom said:

Korea is no longer the low-cost manufacturing spot. I read somewhere the cost to produce cars there is nearly on par with Japan. Wages have risen so fast that now it's cheaper to build models in the U.S. than Korea for Hyundai and Kia. Mexico has lately also become a manufacturing hot spot. As long as Tesla can stay non-union, I think they can keep their manufacturing costs in check.

Click to expand...

Lot's of spots to hide soon-to-be-illegal-immigrants! Stuff em in and ship it over the border!

/joke

No. Not optimistic. Realistic.

Elon Musk said that Tesla Motors cannot get away with building something that is like other cars. They can't just be about the same. They must be demonstrably better -- of there would be no reason to buy them.

Look at the Model S 40. Its horsepower rating, upon release, was higher than initially expected because the battery pack was actually a software limited 60 kWh capacity. A greater capacity allows for a higher throughput of energy in an electric drivetrain. Essentially, a higher HP rating comes 'for free' with the efficiency of electric motors paired with higher capacity batteries -- this is what puts the ICE paradigm to shame.

Please look at what the competition is offering at that price point. No, not the crappy EVs, offered by traditional automobile manufacturers in an attempt to discredit electrified transportation... Those are compliance cars, with 24 kWh battery packs at best, so the power output is matched to that limitation. Look instead at the ICE vehicles offered by companies that are similarly attempting, without much success, to topple the BMW 335i at a lower price point.

Everyone offers more than the laughable 180 HP of the BMW 320i in this price range. Acura, Lexus, Infiniti, AUDI, Mercedes-Benz, Cadillac... Chevrolet, Toyota, Honda, Volkswagen... Of these, only BMW is given a pass, allowed to offer such anemic ICE vehicles for a premium. This has been true for decades and has always peeved me.

Look back also to the origins of Lexus LS 400 and Infiniti Q45... They struck deep at the heart of performance as compared to European sports sedans because the test drives were immediately impressive... And they cost about $10,000 to $15,000 less than the BMW and Mercedes-Benz cars they targeted in the marketplace.

That strategy will serve Tesla Motors well, again. After all, even the Model S P85D is considered 'a steal' because of its price point compared to Germanic AMG and M contemporaries. Not to mention Aston Martin and Maserati offerings.

When people test drive a Model ≡ their eyes will be opened. 300 HP with electric drive is an altogether different beast than it is with ICE. The instantaneous response combined with seemingly endless reserves of power within pseudo legal street speeds will make a firm impression. And really, assuming a 60 kWh capacity, a standard 300 HP rating is still a lowball figure.