Model 3 will have less features than the S. Which one would not make it?

[EVNow]

I am very unsure that Tesla's Supercharging network will be able to sustain free long-distance travel when the company is shipping hundreds of thousands of units/year. I believe that at a certain point, Tesla will have to collect a small parking fee per unit time at a Supercharger stall for vehicles manufactured after a certain date.

Musk has already stated 3 will have "free for life" SC. It is possible the base 3 will not have SC access - which can be purchased for $2k or so.

But, what Tesla will do is put terms into SC that limits excessive use (just like broadband providers do today).

 

[Skotty]

Supercharging is a must, but it's reasonable to consider it not being free for Model 3. First, with the greater quantity of Model 3s there will likely be, there may need to be additional incentive for owners not to leech off of Superchargers when they don't have to. Second, everyone says the Superchargers aren't free, and that the cost is built into the price of the Model S. Well then there's a super easy opportunity to bring the base purchase price down -- stop building in extra cost for expected Supercharger use. Ideally, there would be an option to be billed for what you use; this would keep the upfront purchase price down while still allowing Supercharger use.

 

[LargeHamCollider]

You may be, but I'm not paying 35-45K for a Corolla, electric or not, and I'm sure I'm not alone. The Model 3 has to be able to compete with other 35-45K cars.

I don't think the feature set of the 3 should be compared to other 35-45k cars, the figure of merit wrt vehicle "class" should be total cost of ownership. M3 should be compared to 25-35k cars. I understand most won't see it this way but they are mistaken. Total cost is what counts (or to be exact net present value of all expected costs is what counts), not just up front cost.

 

[EVNow]

I understand most won't see it this way but they are mistaken. Total cost is what counts, not just up front cost.

You are assuming time has no value. Atleast use NPV when comparing.

In anycase, 3 can't be compared to Corolla. Musk has repeatedly said the target is BMW 3 (class) buyers. So, 3 should compete with BMW 3 series on features.

On topic, 3 I think will have most of the features of S - but base 3 may not have all features of base S.

 

[LargeHamCollider]

I actually edited my post to reflect this before I saw your reply, as an example a 70k MS shouldn't be shopped against a 70k BMW but against a 60k BMW because these represent roughly equal financial commitments.

 

[anticitizen13.7]

I don't think the feature set of the 3 should be compared to other 35-45k cars, the figure of merit wrt vehicle "class" should be total cost of ownership. M3 should be compared to 25-35k cars. I understand most won't see it this way but they are mistaken. Total cost is what counts (or to be exact net present value of all expected costs is what counts), not just up front cost.

This is actually a good point.

Many Model S owners were willing to pay substantially more $ for a Model S than any ICE, because of low energy costs (as well as the newest and best technology). I have believed for some time that Model 3 has the potential to steal not just BMW 3 and Mercedes C-class sales, but Honda Accord and Toyota Camry sales as well.

That being said, even a mainstream vehicle like the Honda Accord can come with a pretty serious level of equipment in higher trim levels. As a general trend, there's actually a convergence between mainstream and luxury vehicles as far as tech toys. For example, Hondas and Acuras (Acura being Honda Motor Co's luxury division) have less and less difference in features and electronics with each successive generation. The differentiation between mainstream and luxury is more IMO about things like paint quality, interior materials & design, chassis tuning, and sound dampening (noise, vibration, harshness).

 

[LargeHamCollider]

That being said, even a mainstream vehicle like the Honda Accord can come with a pretty serious level of equipment in higher trim levels. As a general trend, there's actually a convergence between mainstream and luxury vehicles as far as tech toys. For example, Hondas and Acuras (Acura being Honda Motor Co's luxury division) have less and less difference in features and electronics with each successive generation. The differentiation between mainstream and luxury is more IMO about things like paint quality, interior materials & design, chassis tuning, and sound dampening (noise, vibration, harshness).

Agreed, but we can take this even further for the first purchasers (who I believe will qualify for the 7.5k tax credit)

35k - 10k fuel savings -7.5k tax credit = 17.5k ICE equivalent.


Pardon me for shouting but THIS IS AN INSANE VALUE PROPOSITION!!

Which is why I will be mashing F5 during the March event and reserving an M3 or two as soon as possible.

 

[Bangor Bob]

Alloy wheels generally save a couple pounds per wheel vs. steel. That's unsprung weight which makes a big difference in your suspension tuning and actually lets you use smaller dampers and softer springs, which offsets some of the cost.

Alloys at retail aren't that expensive - "crap" ones can be purchased for $400 a set. An order of 100,000 sets per year will see a significant discount from that, or a quality upgrade at the same price.

They're also standard equipment on cars at a $35k price point. Perhaps some of you guys are designing the $20k or $15k model?

 

[Ronist]

The Model 3 will be designed to compete with the BMW 3-series, Mercedes C Class, and the Audi A4. Ever been in one of those cars lately? We recently had a brand new C Class loaner when one of our cars went in for service and I was really impressed with the interior along with all the features in the car.

The sad reality is the interior of Model S today can't compete very well with other ICE car of its class, such as the Audi A7 or Mercedes S. Tesla is cutting edge in terms of technology but craftsmanship still has room to go.


Also check out this interview with Elon at 2:56 where he pretty said Model 3 will not have as many features:
Elon Musk on smart roads, Tesla and much more (2014) - YouTube

 

[vinnie97]

Based on previous model purchasing, I assume the design studio choices are strictly modular (i.e. if the only advanced feature you want is the biggest battery pack, you can choose it and bypass all the other additional features)? I don't really have particularly demanding winter driving needs, and I suspect AWD/RWD won't represent a huge difference in range.

Can anyone help out a Tesla noob?

 

[stopcrazypp]

On the whole topic of competitors. The fit and finish of the S does not quite get to cars of the same price level, however, it looks the part and is clearly in the "premium" segment. While the Model 3 will likely not match the 3 series everywhere, it'll fit well in the segment.

It will not just be a "Corolla" in terms of its market. Hubcap steel wheels stand out as something decidedly not premium and is unlikely to make an appearance. Even the cheapest premium car on the market today, the Buick Verano at $21k comes with 17 inch aluminum wheels.

 

[WarpedOne]

Can anyone help out a Tesla noob?

Regarding what exactly?
AWD range will be ~same as RWD range (maybe even a bit higher or a tiny bit lower).
Option bundling is up to time to disclose but expect bundling and only the most expensive options will be there as singletons (bigger battery, front motor, maybe glass roof).

Regarding 17" display, I expect a smaller screen, not because of price (it is cheap) but because of space. M3 will be narrower and 17" could eat away to much space. A wide aspect ratio 15" screen is about and inch narrower and thus better suited. I don't expect tesla would go with even smaller screen, it is their hallmark of interior design so they will use as big screen as they can fit.

 

[Yggdrasill]

Can anyone help out a Tesla noob?

I would be very surprised if Tesla changed this. They will probably bundle some options into various packages, but in all likelihood, Tesla will still configure cars to order. My expectation is that Tesla will probably try to keep the options list to a minimum, though, something like this:

Versions:

- 60 kWh RWD Model 3: 34,900 USD
- 60 kWh AWD Model 3: 38,900 USD
- 80 kWh RWD Model 3: 39,900 USD
- 80 kWh AWD Model 3: 43,900 USD
- 80 kWh AWD performance Model 3: 53,900 USD (might not be introduced at launch)

Options:

- Upgraded tires/rims: 1,000 USD
- Panorama roof: 1,000 USD
- Metallic paint: 750 USD
- Premium interior (includes free choice of trim, better seats with leather and memory, automatic extending door handles, etc.): 4,000 USD
- For 60 kWh versions, unlimited supercharger access: 1,000 USD
- Premium Sound System: 1,500 USD
- Tech package (autopilot, GPS navigation, etc): 2,500 USD
- Air suspension: 1,500 USD
- Winter package: 750 USD

Something like this means that you can get a very reasonable Model 3 for 34,900 USD, where Tesla makes almost no (<5%) profit, but a well optioned Model 3 can cost 66,900 USD, where Tesla can have a 25% profit.

 

[vinnie97]

Thank, Ygg. Warped, it seems the RWD/AWD mileage will indeed be negligible as far as differences (and handling will be the biggest benefactor for AWD...correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the AWD option affords slightly more range on the Model S?), but my main question was how we might expect the options to be bundled. Ygg's hypothetical itemization makes sense. That 80 kWh RWD option is screaming at me.

 

[Yggdrasill]

AWD will also increase performance significantly. I'm thinking it will be something like this:

- 60 kWh RWD Model 3, ~200 hp, 0-60 mph in ~6 seconds
- 60 kWh AWD Model 3, ~400 hp, 0-60 mph in ~4 seconds
- 80 kWh RWD Model 3, ~200 hp, 0-60 mph in ~7 seconds (more weight, motor limited)
- 80 kWh AWD Model 3, ~400 hp, 0-60 mph in ~3.5 seconds
- 80 kWh AWD performance Model 3, ~550 hp, 0-60 mph in ~2.7 seconds

 

[InTheShadows]

I know that this is a speculation thread. However I'm not sure we can even begin to speculate what the pack sizes will be.

This is 2-3 years from now and Tesla will have an factory that isn't operational today. We already have had one density increase, another one is probably not too far away. I feel that the gigafactory will also offer a density increase.

The form factor will also have to be different. The 3 can not be a car that is so wide that when parallel parked 1/4" from the curb the outside wheels extend over the parking lines.

I think with these factors it is pretty difficult to assume what the pack sizes will be.

 

[Yggdrasill]

We know the approximate target range and the rough size of the Model 3. These are the only two things needed to make a somewhat accurate battery size estimate. I think 60/80 won't be far off, but obviously we won't know the exact battery sizes until Tesla releases this information.

 

[ratsbew]

I firmly believe that Model 3 should be pay per kWh when supercharging. There is too much room for abuse of the supercharger system if it is free. I also believe that there should be something like 12-24 free (1-2MWh/year) supercharges per year which is enough to cover several road trips per year and thus keep Supercharging "free".

 

[78Lion]

I firmly believe that Model 3 should be pay per kWh when supercharging. There is too much room for abuse of the supercharger system if it is free. I also believe that there should be something like 12-24 free (1-2MWh/year) supercharges per year which is enough to cover several road trips per year and thus keep Supercharging "free".

Software can most definitely turn off or charge a fee for supercharging for those that abuse. While the letter sent already didn't use very good logic to determine distribution, big brother knows every time you charge. Rather than just not allow or charge for access based on class, it's much better to target abusers. Tesla gets the benefit of marketing free access which overcomes a huge obstacle, yet not pay for everybody's juice.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

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

Yes, the Model 3 and Y will lack conventional looks in order to improve aerodynamics so that the power and battery capacity can be lowered on the base model. Some will call it a weirdmobile, but many will not care, and lots will love it.