-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Simply doing the following will reduce cost of car quite a bit:
- Reducing size 20%
- Reducing Battery to ~45-50kWh, along with the gigafactory reducing cost by 30% ( this is HUGE)
- Not using Aluminum
- Reducing motor to ~180hp
Those are really more car basics, but I think almost all of the cost problem is solved there. These are not "features" ... so features I think will be done away with or reduced are:
- Retracting door handles. Might create some flush design, but they wont have the retracting mechanism
- Premium seating / lighting
- Obviously nothing thats not stock on the S (auto pilot, auto parking, camera based stuff mostly)
- No pano roof/moon roof
- Cheaper rims, hub caps
- overall reduction in cost of materials (no expensive interior trim stuff)
I think with all that you are basically down to where you need to be price wise.
- Reducing size 20%
- Reducing Battery to ~45-50kWh, along with the gigafactory reducing cost by 30% ( this is HUGE)
- Not using Aluminum
- Reducing motor to ~180hp
Those are really more car basics, but I think almost all of the cost problem is solved there. These are not "features" ... so features I think will be done away with or reduced are:
- Retracting door handles. Might create some flush design, but they wont have the retracting mechanism
- Premium seating / lighting
- Obviously nothing thats not stock on the S (auto pilot, auto parking, camera based stuff mostly)
- No pano roof/moon roof
- Cheaper rims, hub caps
- overall reduction in cost of materials (no expensive interior trim stuff)
I think with all that you are basically down to where you need to be price wise.
Last edited:
I say wrong.
The car does not cost as much as it does because of the feature list length but because of the developement and production costs.
Shorter feature list will only shorten the length of customer queue.
Heated folding mirrors costs under $50 for tesla, they would be crazy not to offer them standard. They will have to include all standard features in 35k cars to not be laughed at as 'not-real-car'.
By far the biggest price spec item will be battery. So, the right way to do it is to optimize everything else so the car gets to 240 EPA with as few kWh as possible. But still offering seating for 5 adults (well, usual 4 + 1).
Battery will still need to be ~60kWh to get to EPA240m. What they can do is streamline the production some more and offer less variability in options.
Oh, and they will include some real aero-wheels
InTheShadows
Active Member
IMO the 17" will not be there. Probably an iPad size or possibly a 13" screen.
Autopilot will be there. Iirc Elon said all tesla cars will have it.
Slacker might not be there.
To compete with the 3 series and C class the trim will have to be available. Perhaps a no trim option that is upgradable.
I think pano needs to be an option.
AL and stainless steel body/frame is a must. That is an absolute if you want to make million mile cars. In the north eastern US when you tell someone "this car will never rust" they give you a weird look which you then have to follow up with the explanation.
Now for what I think will be removed
No auto closing charge port.
No Rear heated seats
No jump seats
No adjustable air suspension
No fancy spoiler like the MX has.
Autopilot will be there. Iirc Elon said all tesla cars will have it.
Slacker might not be there.
To compete with the 3 series and C class the trim will have to be available. Perhaps a no trim option that is upgradable.
I think pano needs to be an option.
AL and stainless steel body/frame is a must. That is an absolute if you want to make million mile cars. In the north eastern US when you tell someone "this car will never rust" they give you a weird look which you then have to follow up with the explanation.
Now for what I think will be removed
No auto closing charge port.
No Rear heated seats
No jump seats
No adjustable air suspension
No fancy spoiler like the MX has.
robatbeach
Member
Supercharger will absolutely be there. Removing it breaks the vision of EVs being able to make ICEs into fossils. The vision is a mid cost car that replaces the need to have any ICE in the typical house and proves why ICE "training wheels" in the hybrid model aren't needed. Removing supercharging sounds like a move a different mgt team would make if Tesla was bought.
I think there will be a lot of equipment available as optional extras, but the standard model will be something like this:
- 5 seats, standard textile seats in front, bench seat in back which fold flat capability.
- ~200 hp, with 0-60 mph in 6-7 seconds.
- 15" LCD touch display, with all controls except steering wheel controls
- LCD screens for power, speed, etc.
- Regular doors with regular door handles (though aerodynamic)
- 240 mile EPA range (~60 kWh)
- 10 kW charger (11 kw in europe)
- Supercharger enabled, but limited useage, 10 times per year or something similar.
- Equipped with AEB, ESP, ABS, TC, CC, seat belt warnings, etc.
The options will be more fun.
- Upgraded battery with 310 miles EPA range (~80 kWh), includes unlimited long distance use of superchargers
- Dual motor AWD with ~400 hp, possibly performance edition with ~550 hp
- Leather seats, panorama roof, other tires/rims, etc
- GPS navigation
- Autopilot
- Air suspension
- Tow package (Maybe not, but would be very popular in Norway.)
- Sound System
- Winter package
- 5 seats, standard textile seats in front, bench seat in back which fold flat capability.
- ~200 hp, with 0-60 mph in 6-7 seconds.
- 15" LCD touch display, with all controls except steering wheel controls
- LCD screens for power, speed, etc.
- Regular doors with regular door handles (though aerodynamic)
- 240 mile EPA range (~60 kWh)
- 10 kW charger (11 kw in europe)
- Supercharger enabled, but limited useage, 10 times per year or something similar.
- Equipped with AEB, ESP, ABS, TC, CC, seat belt warnings, etc.
The options will be more fun.
- Upgraded battery with 310 miles EPA range (~80 kWh), includes unlimited long distance use of superchargers
- Dual motor AWD with ~400 hp, possibly performance edition with ~550 hp
- Leather seats, panorama roof, other tires/rims, etc
- GPS navigation
- Autopilot
- Air suspension
- Tow package (Maybe not, but would be very popular in Norway.)
- Sound System
- Winter package
Last edited:
Bangor Bob
Member
27% gross margin and much less of the enormous sense of entitlement a very few S owners have?
At projected gigafactory costs, a 60kWh-ish battery will cost around $6k for the cells, plus whatever the highly-automated assembly into a pack cost/amortizes down to. That's an absolute game-changer - getting into the cost territory of a high-end ICE.
I can see cheaper base-model interior materials. I can see cooled and n-way power adjustable seats being upsell options. Likewise "premium" data connectivity (streaming audio and web access) being subscription-based.
What I don't see is Tesla excluding access to one of their major competitive advantages, being the Supercharger network. I can almost see "n kWh of Supercharging per year included, excess kWh billed at $0.0x/kWh" to prevent abuse like the Schipol taxis, but beyond that? Difficult to see is the future, always in motion... [/Yoda]
At projected gigafactory costs, a 60kWh-ish battery will cost around $6k for the cells, plus whatever the highly-automated assembly into a pack cost/amortizes down to. That's an absolute game-changer - getting into the cost territory of a high-end ICE.
I can see cheaper base-model interior materials. I can see cooled and n-way power adjustable seats being upsell options. Likewise "premium" data connectivity (streaming audio and web access) being subscription-based.
What I don't see is Tesla excluding access to one of their major competitive advantages, being the Supercharger network. I can almost see "n kWh of Supercharging per year included, excess kWh billed at $0.0x/kWh" to prevent abuse like the Schipol taxis, but beyond that? Difficult to see is the future, always in motion... [/Yoda]
ratsbew
Active Member
I think that the $35,000 base model will indeed be a "base" model. I think we'll still get the large touch screen and digital dash because those types of things aren't expensive (maybe cheaper than mechanical buttons & gauges).
$5,000 in options will get you up to a nice RWD version. Price will probably go up to $55-60,000 on the high end.
My parents will most likely be getting the base AWD car and I'm aiming for $50,000.
$5,000 in options will get you up to a nice RWD version. Price will probably go up to $55-60,000 on the high end.
My parents will most likely be getting the base AWD car and I'm aiming for $50,000.
Not using aluminum is going to increase the weight quite a bit and have a significant range impact. I don't see how they'll get above the 200 mi rated range target.
I don't think so, it was included with the 70 and 70D because the 60 just wasn't selling. It makes a lot more sense to include a reduced Supercharger access in the base price, and include unlimited access with the larger battery as well as have it as an option for those with the smaller battery.
You could have an allowance for a given number of supercharger sessions (maybe 10) or charged kWh (maybe 400 kWh) per year, and if you wish to exceed this allowance you then need to pay $1000 for the unlimited access. Something along those lines, at least. This way most people who get the smaller battery won't get the supercharger access at first, but once they realize how great it is, and wish to use it more, they pay Tesla for the access.
That's certianly a possibility. Though I think Tesla is more likely to just improve on their current charger and use that. They've probably made close to 100k of these chargers, so they have a lot of experience with them.
Didn't they drop that strategy on later Roadsters to work around the AC Propulsion patents? I think they'd be on the hook for license fees if they go back to it.
If the X comes with a single 15kW charger (as was rumored), maybe they'll use that.
MiamiNole
Member
As someone before me indicated, I'd expect the Model 3 to at least come with the same standard features as any other entry-level luxury car. I'd also expect access to the super charger network as that's one of the biggest selling and marketing points OF owning a Tesla, from what I've seen. It personally wouldn't be a deal breaker for me, but from what I've seen just from browsing the forums, let alone talk around me, lack of extended range and/or super charger network access would definitely be deal breakers for a good chunk of prospective buyers.
wallet.dat
Member
Not sure how reducing the motor to 180hp would reduce cost. All they'd have to do is diminish the power going into the motor via software. These aren't ICE powerplants we're talking about, where making a lot of power requires semi-exotic, expensive materials. I agree on most everything else you listed though.
igotzzoom
Active Member
To me, hubcaps scream "cheap." The only reason I could see them on the Model 3 or any other EV is for aerodynamic or efficiency-enhancing reasons. If they serve a justifiable purpose, then that's understandable, but if the only purpose is cost-cutting, I think that would detract from the premium image Tesla is trying to maintain. I think flush-mounted (but not power-retracting) door handles are likely. In terms of power output, I don't know how much would be saved by going with a 180 hp vs. 250 hp motor. Other than a slight difference in material costs, I don't see the big savings. The output could be modulated by software. Maybe limit to 180 hp (134 kW) in "Eco" mode, and give the full 250 hp in "Performance" mode.
