Will the model 3 have a hybrid battery?

[stopcrazypp]

Not sure I understand. The base Model S is absolutely loaded with standard features. Honestly, there were no options that I felt I had to have. How is it a "stripper?"

I'm using the more relative definition as appropriate in the premium segment, not talking about a true stripper model as in the old days (no air conditioning, no power anything; which practically doesn't really exist except very rarely nowadays).

In respect to a $75k premium large sedan the base Model S really isn't that loaded. It doesn't come with navigation, leather, adaptive LED headlights, moon roof, which are typically included in base models in cars of the same class (not a big premium car buyer, but that was what I was able to come up with in a basic search).

So I think people expecting the $35k base model to match a $35k 3 series in some of the creature comforts is setting themselves up for disappointment.

 

[JRP3]

I expect the base model to be fairly bare bones, and I'm fine with that. Whatever level it comes out at it's because that's what Tesla has to do at this point in time for continued success as a company. If that means more $60K Model 3's are sold than $35K Model 3's, and that makes the company stronger in the long term, I don't see a problem. This is a long term play.
On topic, no, the Model 3 will not have a hybrid battery, there is no need to do so. The smaller lighter car can have excellent performance from a smaller battery pack using existing chemistry.

 

[BriansTesla]

What this means is that every single NiftyKeen-O $50 or $60 or $70K Model 3 means one fewer $35,000 vehicle (realistically from a manufacturing standpoint, probably more like 1.1-1.3 fewer). And it is that $35K price point (more reasonably, price cloud: let's say $32-37K) that needs be maintained in order to populate the markets of NoAm, Europe, Australia, Japan and even China with at least a half-million EVs each year so that the Real Message finally is spread loud and clear.

I really hope that whether you want a $35,000 or a $70,000 M3 that you are allowed an equal opportunity to purchase. I think the segment that wants to buy a $35K car is lightly represented on TMC.

 

[JRP3]

I'm in the $35K segment but I don't expect to get a car in the same time frame as higher priced purchasers. History has shown that Tesla prioritizes higher priced models, I don't expect that to change any time soon. Happy to be wrong of course.

 

[BriansTesla]

I'm in the $35K segment but I don't expect to get a car in the same time frame as higher priced purchasers. History has shown that Tesla prioritizes higher priced models, I don't expect that to change any time soon. Happy to be wrong of course.

I believe that because of Tesla's stated goal of a mass market car, Elon would not want the press saying "Another rich persons car, you can't buy anything else unless you get in a very long line".

 

[JRP3]

I expect Elon to do what is needed for the long term health of the company. If that means getting out more of the higher margin vehicles for the first year or two, while suffering a few barbs from certain segments of the press, (who will likely be critical no matter what), I think that's what he'll do. A few more years of "rich man's toy" nonsense will only be a mild annoyance, especially if it means profitability comes that much sooner.

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

I expect the base model to be fairly bare bones, and I'm fine with that. Whatever level it comes out at it's because that's what Tesla has to do at this point in time for continued success as a company. If that means more $60K Model 3's are sold than $35K Model 3's, and that makes the company stronger in the long term, I don't see a problem. This is a long term play.
On topic, no, the Model 3 will not have a hybrid battery, there is no need to do so. The smaller lighter car can have excellent performance from a smaller battery pack using existing chemistry.

In terms of performance, your thoughts reflect my own. The purpose of this thread is to hash out whether a Al-Air battery would fit on the model 3 or model S.

I started with the recognition that a 55kwh battery would be just big enough to provide a model 3 with real-world-most-seasons 200 mile range (~240 EPA miles).

A battery of that size with the same discharge rate that the model S enjoys can still provide ~250KW of power to the motors. That's a significant amount of power for a compact/mid-size sedan. At the time of the gigafactory announcement, Tesla's rumored pack costs were ~$250/kwh (JB's statement about the pack costing only 1/4 the car costs). Dropping the pack costs down by 30-50% still yields costs of $125-$175/kwh. At 55kwh, that's still a $6875-$9625 battery pack. A 20kwh on the other hand would only provide 91KW of power to the motors but cost only 36% as much as well, while still providing enough range for a daily commute of ~70 miles.

I was thinking that Tesla could mix the use of a more energy-dense (and cheaper) battery with the Li-Ion one to produce an even cheaper powertrain. But stopcrazypp reminded me that Tesla's patent was indeed for a rechargable metal-air battery, so that does put Al-Air out of the running.

 

[RobStark]

A Model 3 with an ASP of $60k gets us to GF #2 and AP #2 much quicker than if the Model 3 ASP is $38k.

That gets us closer to 800k Model 3 per year than 350k Model 3.

That is all good.

Until Tesla has a Spark EV competitor there will be charges of elitism.

Who cares?

Can't worry about those emotionally and ideologically vested in Tesla's failure.

And no to a hybrid battery for Model 3.

You want something like that in small volume vehicle.

Like the new Tesla roadster.

Get 2500 out there with radically new battery tech.

If it proves itself in the real world then offer it down the line.