Model 3 Supercharging Capable Discussion

[ModelNforNerd]

I'm in Florida and it's typical rain here. The media want pizza to think you are going to float away. Lol

we're in a pretty deep drought here. if we were to get too much rain at once, it could get messy.


I wonder if the Model 3 will be able to float like the Model S.........

 

[MiamiNole]

Actually, miles travelled is a stat that skews in favor of the long distance side (longer trips are given more weight). If you count trips by frequency, long trips are even less common.

I decided to dig up the source again (I was going by memory). In terms of miles, according to the 2009 US National Household Travel Survey, 357,366.43 million out of 2,245,111.45 million miles (15.9%) are on trips over 100 miles.

In terms trips, 1,658.09 million out of 233,849.36 million trips (0.7%) are on trips over 100 miles.
NHTS Data Extraction Tool

I use the miles figure because that is what is relevant for Tesla in terms of determining how many lifetime supercharger miles they can expect per car.

I think you missed my overall point. I'm throwing out comparisons to overall driving miles entirely. It doesn't matter if I drive 10,000 miles in a year or 1,000,000 miles in a year if I need to use a super charger 40 times for long distance travel within that given year. The amount of miles you drive locally is irrelevant to this point. Someone is trying to point that taking long distance road trips is uncommon. Sure, if you compare it to overall driving. But we aren't talking about percentage of overall driving here. Or at least I'm not.

I agree that the "trips over 100 miles" isn't exactly the right stat, but I think it's close. The thing it misses is charging at the destination, assuming there's no charging available there. Otherwise, how is it off? Even trips over 100 miles might be doable round-trip without Supercharging. I do those now without visiting a single Supercharger. I sometimes do 200 mile road trips without visiting a Supercharger - I either stay somewhere with destination charging, or I rent a house that has a dryer outlet and use that.

I don't think your anecdotal evidence necessarily outweighs the statistical evidence.

I think you're changing what I am talking about here. Again, the whole discussion that I am making reference to is the notion that road trips are uncommon and that people would be better served with a PPU option or something similar. I've pointed out plenty of examples for which people would commonly make use of superchargers for long distance travel. Enough that having unlimited SC baked into an option or available as a separate option would be viable to plenty of Model 3 owners. That IS what we are discussing here, right?

 

[jkk_]

a 100 miles trips doesn't need supercharging

That's true. But I don't mean that one is travelling only 100 miles. What I mean that one has to travel from home to point B via supercharger C and back again without the possibility to charge in between. That means that one has to use the supercharger C in both directions. And some have suggested that this use case isn't legit because that supercharger C happens to be within a 100 mile radius from one's home and as such, should never be used.

 

[Garlan Garner]

That's true. But I don't mean that one is travelling only 100 miles. What I mean that one has to travel from home to point B via supercharger C and back again without the possibility to charge in between. That means that one has to use the supercharger C in both directions. And some have suggested that this use case isn't legit because that supercharger C happens to be within a 100 mile radius from one's home and as such, should never be used.

If the M3 SC option is the same as the M6 SC option. I will continue to SC as I currently am. There is a SC in my area that I've never seen anyone buy myself use. I'm going to keep SC'ing.

I travel 49 miles each way to work. Depending on the route I take....it could result in over a 100 mile trip.

Now - (not that I really care what anyone else things, but for the sake of conversation). Is my 100+mile a day trip to work local?

 

[ohmman]

Now - (not that I really care what anyone else things, but for the sake of conversation). Is my 100+mile a day trip to work local?

Yes.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I think you missed my overall point. I'm throwing out comparisons to overall driving miles entirely. It doesn't matter if I drive 10,000 miles in a year or 1,000,000 miles in a year if I need to use a super charger 40 times for long distance travel within that given year. The amount of miles you drive locally is irrelevant to this point. Someone is trying to point that taking long distance road trips is uncommon. Sure, if you compare it to overall driving. But we aren't talking about percentage of overall driving here. Or at least I'm not.

The post you were responding to was pretty obviously taking about the average out of a fleet, not about your individual travel (or the existence of some people who travel on long distance trips a lot, which is just anecdotal evidence). I think the comparison to total fleet miles is what makes sense, since that scales directly to overall population travel trends and a 15.9% mileage rate (0.07% trip rate) pretty much shows it's going to be uncommon even if you use another method.

From the same dataset, I can extract (page 42):
1) (page 42 numbered, ) 10,088 average annual miles per vehicle, so 15.9% of that is about 1604 miles per vehicle annually are of 100+ mile trips.

2) (page 15 numbered, 21 actual) 21,187 average annual vehicle miles per household, so 15.9% of that is 3369 miles per household annually are of 100+ mile trips.

3) (page 15 numbered, 21 actual) 2171 average annual vehicle trips per household, so 0.07% of that is 15 trips per household annually are of 100+ mile trips.
http://nhts.ornl.gov/2009/pub/stt.pdf

The data doesn't support long distance vehicle travel being common, no matter what metric you use. The 2016 survey is being done, so it'll be interesting to see changes in the trends, but travel had been dropping historically in recent years (perhaps because of recession).

 

[Neohippy]

Pay per use is good because everyone's situation it different. Some need supercharging and some don't. I rarely would use it but would like the option if needed to pay for it. Hopefully they will satisfy everyone and you can buy it as a lifetime use or pay per use.

 

[garsh]

If Supercharging is more expensive than gasoline, you wouldn't have two Teslas because... you only take one on road trips? The math still works out in your favor if you're charging at home most of the time. That seems like a really odd prioritization, unless one car is always reserved for road trips.

I currently have a Leaf and an Odyssey. I try to use the Leaf for most things, including commuting to work. The Honda is for the wife's local running running around while I'm at work, and for longer trips. It doesn't get a lot of use, and with a Tesla as my main car, it would get even less use.

But my particular situation and set of priorities is kind of moot. If supercharging costs more than gas, then Tesla vehicles will lose a selling point in the eyes of the public. The math won't matter They'll just see the headlines about supercharging being more expensive.

 

[dsvick]

I just hope that they continue to allow unlimited supercharging to be baked into an option (larger battery) or being purchasable outright.
I doubt they would be limiting that option to the Model S and X. With so much more sales of Model 3 expected, wouldn't it make sense for them to leverage as much of those Model 3 sales as possible to get as much revenue up front as possible to continue to build out the SC network?

IIRC, when it was revealed that the M3 would not come with SC one of Elon's comments was something like "unless you get that package". Now a lot can change and may well have done so, but it certainly seemed like there will be an option to buy it separately or as part of a package. I'd actually be surprised if it weren't.

 

[garsh]

I think we're all getting worked up over nothing at this point.
We're letting speculation run wild...

You pretty much described the entire model 3 subforum.

 

[callmesam]

IIRC, when it was revealed that the M3 would not come with SC one of Elon's comments was something like "unless you get that package". Now a lot can change and may well have done so, but it certainly seemed like there will be an option to buy it separately or as part of a package. I'd actually be surprised if it weren't.

And I'd be surprised if this was ever called PAY PER USE.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

If supercharging costs more than gas, then Tesla vehicles will lose a selling point in the eyes of the public. The math won't matter They'll just see the headlines about supercharging being more expensive.

THIS. Because why give Big Oil easy talking points for their next run of commercials?

 

[dsvick]

I thought Tesla was making money for the SC's through the sales ( SC option) of the MS or MX. Is there a thought that funding SC's will start to come from energy sales?

There will, in all likelyhood, still be the option to pay an upfront amount (either by itself or as part of a package) for "free for life" and that would go to funding future SC build out.

 

[dsvick]

I think we're all getting worked up over nothing at this point.

We're letting speculation run wild on source code that didn't link to any live functionality.

You pretty much described the entire model 3 subforum.

And the entire internet.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

There will, in all likelyhood, still be the option to pay an upfront amount (either by itself or as part of a package) for "free for life" and that would go to funding future SC build out.

The existence of the source code at least points to a PPU model of some kind. But they need to get the pricing right, or Big Oil will jump all over it.

Remember, this car (the Model 3) is for the MASS MARKET, so the cost to operate has to be at least equal to ICE ownership, or less.

Not everyone in a 3 will have the income levels of S/X owners.

And if you want mass adoption of something, you have to make it economically viable to the largest amount of potential consumers as you can.

 

[Garlan Garner]

There will, in all likelyhood, still be the option to pay an upfront amount (either by itself or as part of a package) for "free for life" and that would go to funding future SC build out.

Sooooo. In a nutshell - everything is BAU? After all of this rig-a-ma-roll - the M≡ SC option will probably be purchased the same way as the MS and MX. wow.

This horse has been beaten a billion times.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Not everyone in a 3 will have the income levels of S/X owners.

.

I would go so far as to say that the mass majority of M≡ owners won't have the same income levels as S/X owners.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Pay per use is good because everyone's situation it different. Some need supercharging and some don't. I rarely would use it but would like the option if needed to pay for it. Hopefully they will satisfy everyone and you can buy it as a lifetime use or pay per use.

Vendors know that pay per use is worrisome and does not sell as well as a one time fee.

That's why you have so many
All-you-can-eat restaurants
unlimited voice / text / data cellular plans
Tesla MS SC options
- too many more to mention.

 

[Garlan Garner]

I don't have any data to support this...but

I can imagine that there are a whole lot of Tesla MS/X owners who have purchased the SC option that have never ever used it. That's free money for Tesla.

If Tesla goes exclusively with pay-per-use - they can kiss the free money goodbye.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

I would go so far as to say that the mass majority of M≡ owners won't have the same income levels as S/X owners.

I didn't want to toss out broad assumptions, but yes, I think in this case, it may be safe to say AT LEAST 50.1% of the reservation holders for Model 3 could not splurge on a Model S or X....sadly, myself included.

(ok, I could get a barely-optioned S60....but why?)