-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
-
On today's TMC Podcast, we ask the question "What is the Tesla Cybercab?". Join us on YouTube live at 1PM and participate in the chat.
Gen III - summary
- Thread starter DuncanWatson
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model 3
I also believe that the size was pegged at about 80% of the model S (a slightly more specific size than we have in this thread already), although I can't find an original source.... but I believe it was a Tesla rep. There's some discussion about it (including my take on it) in the "Gen III for $35K" thread...
I think we will know more about the size when the clay model is finished. At this point it is probably not set in stone. Regarding other manufacturers, I think we have to be very careful. Other manufacturers have a tendency to make wild claims during concept stages and then produce some weakened spec car since the engineers can't get a real commitment from their bosses. I find that it is often a source of misinformation and pollutes discussion of what a committed company like Tesla can do.
Even though Tesla is making the drivetrain for this car, it isn't getting 125 miles on a 28 kWh pack. I'll bet about 90 miles for that size. I'm sure that Mercedes is driving it at a low speed with little energy fluctuation to achieve 125 miles.
As Elon said, the Model E/Gen III will have a realistic 200 miles. Probably a 50 kWh pack or slightly more.
The only way to achieve better is with a much lighter weight or a very aerodynamic shape. Tesla is not trying to go to extreme measures to gain either. For those type of cars you have to look at Aptera, Edison2's VLCe, and VW's XL1. The Model E is going to be a mass market car and will avoid the odd shapes and expensive ultra light materials.
Rifleman
Now owns 2 Model S's!!!
While the official word is a 28 kWh pack in the b class, I have a gut feeling that when the first production model rolls off a dealer lot , it will be just a bit bigger. The prototype had a 28 kWh pack, but Mercedes and Tesla have been real quiet on the pack size since then. The reported range numbers just don't add up to a 28 kWh pack, and there was one report of a Mercedes employee who hit up a guy on plugshare to charge a RC B-Class saying that it has a 30 kWh usable pack. I think Mercedes did not want to tip their hand to their competition, to make sure that nobody else comes out with a mid priced EV with more range. I guess time will tell if my speculation on this one is right.
The Leaf has a 24 kWh pack along with the FFE, Spark, and the Zoe. They all seem to get around 75 miles on a charge. You think that an extra 4 kWh gets you 25+ more miles? I'd bet that it doesn't with everyday mixed driving.
I think that Rifleman has it right.
Elon had it right when he talked about a car with less than 200 mile range being 'compromised'. That doesn't mean useless as many people can use a 70 mile range car for work or daily commute but to sell an exciting EV to the masses it needs to be better. Even if it is 200 ideal Tesla miles, that should give an EPA range in the 160s hopefully.
Rifleman
Now owns 2 Model S's!!!
I completely agree with this. If you want to declare an EV "uncompromised" than you need to be able to drive it every day without even thinking about range. I cant think of a day where I have driven more than 150 miles without knowing at the start of the day that I was going to drive that far. If you know in advance, you can plan your charging, and an EV is still viable, but unless the driver has confidence that their car will complete their daily driving chores 100% of the time without a charge, the driver will always feel like they are constrained by their EV.
I would like to purchase a "bluestar" in 2016, here's my wishlist:
1. 3600 pounds or less (probably 3800 is more realistic, as we all know, batteries are heavy)
2. optional stiff, high performance sports suspension (1 G in the corners with sticky tires would be nice)
3. zero to sixty in 5 seconds or less
4. rear wheel drive (this is more fun than AWD or FWD)
5. 200+ mile range
6. 176-182 inch length (the current car is way too big for my tastes)
This model isn't competing with Leafs or Volts, it's going to compete with the BMW 3 series, which is a performance sedan, so this better have some performance! I can't wait.
1. 3600 pounds or less (probably 3800 is more realistic, as we all know, batteries are heavy)
2. optional stiff, high performance sports suspension (1 G in the corners with sticky tires would be nice)
3. zero to sixty in 5 seconds or less
4. rear wheel drive (this is more fun than AWD or FWD)
5. 200+ mile range
6. 176-182 inch length (the current car is way too big for my tastes)
This model isn't competing with Leafs or Volts, it's going to compete with the BMW 3 series, which is a performance sedan, so this better have some performance! I can't wait.
If we wish for lowest price possible, it should be FWD using front motor from AWD ModelX and ~50kWh battery.
I'm by no means loaded, but I really don't want the cheapest Tesla possible. If I wanted that, I would already have bought a leaf, electric focus, or volt. Tesla has been making cars that are actually worth driving and I'd like that at a lower price in a smaller car without sacrificing performance. Also, I don't think with electric motors, which are easier to package, FWD vs. RWD cost is that different.
There is much more wiggle room for manufacturers of expensive cars. What Tesla is doing, market-wise, is obvious now. First they went after 70-100k super sedans, the BIG BMWs, Mercs, Audis, etc. With that high of a price, they could afford to make an electric car that I'd rather have than a big BMW. Said again, it's expensive enough that they can make an excellent car. Next, with the model X, they are going after the Cayenne market, in other words, luxury SUVs. I hate SUVs, so I'm not interested, but, that's clearly what they are doing.
Next on their hit list isn't the mini cooper, or the civic, it's the BMW 3 series. A small performance luxury sedan that can be had for 30-50k. I just hope when they make the electric version, it's more fun/fast than the equivalently priced BMW. Otherwise, I'd get the BMW. Fuel cost factored in, of course.
After driving Model S for more than 15K miles, I love it more everyday, but the things that wear on me the most that I'd like updated for GenIII
1. More digital feel to putting the car into reverse and drive. I feel that putting Model S into Park feels pretty digital. Wish it was more so for the other driving modes. Maybe TM will address on Model X
2. Always on rear view camera instead of the rear view mirror that obscures the windshield. Would also be fine with side view cameras to improve visibility and allow for future software advances.
3. "A" pillar blind spots both driver and passenger side. I'd like cameras pointed in these areas at low speeds or at stop when in forward gear. Great safety feature IMHO.
4. This might be controversial, but I'd really like to see falcon doors on GenIII. And the car should only have two doors and they should both be falcon. This tech looks to be game changing for ingress and egress into automobiles. I hope TM can make this work.
1. More digital feel to putting the car into reverse and drive. I feel that putting Model S into Park feels pretty digital. Wish it was more so for the other driving modes. Maybe TM will address on Model X
2. Always on rear view camera instead of the rear view mirror that obscures the windshield. Would also be fine with side view cameras to improve visibility and allow for future software advances.
3. "A" pillar blind spots both driver and passenger side. I'd like cameras pointed in these areas at low speeds or at stop when in forward gear. Great safety feature IMHO.
4. This might be controversial, but I'd really like to see falcon doors on GenIII. And the car should only have two doors and they should both be falcon. This tech looks to be game changing for ingress and egress into automobiles. I hope TM can make this work.
Discoducky
Interesting idea. The reasoning for Falcon wings on the Model X has always been stated as improved access to the 3rd row seating. That makes sense to me but for GenIII less so. Obviously there will not be a 3rd row and with the goal of keeping the cost down doubtful it would happen. Would you mind elaborating on the ingress and egress problem you're trying to address?
PokerBroker
Member
Sounds to me like he is saying a mid-size sedan that only requires two gullwing doors rather than four standard doors
I think falcon doors will fix ingress/egress to the row behind the row that the door is for to alleviate having to tilt the seat forward. If the falcon door is for the front and second row it could make for a very interesting options to access seats.
My main gripe is with the pointy-ness of the rear doors on Model S. The sharp end of the door sticks out quite far when opening the door in a tight space which makes it even harder to get out. With falcon doors this problem would be greatly improved. Can't wait to experience it with Model X.
Similar threads
