Feb 11, 2016
Tam Would you please help me to prepare for what a worst barebone $35,000 Model ? features would be like?
1) No aluminum body?
2) No Supercharger Enabled?
3) No interior leather?
4) Smaller Tires? How small could small be?
5) No Pano-roof?
6) No LED lights?
7) No Navigation?
8) No auto-presenting/auto-door like features?
9) No motorized hatchback?
10) No Autopilot enabled?
11) Optional Homelink?
12) No AM radio?
13) Optional Roadside Assistance?
14) Smaller RWD motor?
15) Smaller main battery pack?
Any more worse things that you can think of?�
Feb 11, 2016
gregincal Without going any further, I think we can safely assume that anything not standard on the $75K base model S will likewise not be standard on the Model 3. This would be the following from your list.
�
Feb 11, 2016
TitanP85D The central console is going to be there so navigation should come with it at no cost.
Smaller than 70kWh battery, battery made by them, economy of scale, less powerful motor, less complex parts (automatic handles, hatchback, side mirrors), cheaper materials...
In my opinion is easy for them to go for $35000 and have a great car.
And in no time we will start to see electric cars cheaper than gasoline, as these are much less complex. The only problems are battery, infrastructure and research right now.�
Feb 11, 2016
omarsultan I would say $35K gets you the following:
1) Aluminum+Steel body (confirmed in prior exec comments)
2) ~45kWh battery
3) RWD
4) Solid black or white
5) Solid roof
6) 19" wheels - already stock them for MS, so simplifies supply chain
7) Spring suspension
8) Textile seats
9) Non-wood trim, and basic headliner
10) 17" display - again simplified supply chain and SW development
11) Navigation - they need navigation to have the trip planner otherwise they are going to have a ton of newbie EV owners running out of juice
12) SC capable
13) 48A charger
I think the major upgrades will be
- Bigger battery
- AWD
- Performance edition
- Pano roof
- Autopilot
- Sub-Zero
- Air suspension
- Bigger wheels, maybe 20", since they have those in stock too
- Leather
- Wood and CF trim options
- Premium interior with leather, alcantara, lighting, etc
- Convenience features like power liftgate, homelink, etc
- Supercharging
- 72A charger�
Feb 11, 2016
RobStark The base Model 3 will not have less kWh battery pack than the Chevy Bolt. That would be a marketing disaster.
Even with superior aerodynamics you don't get to 200 miles real world range with less than 60 kWh.
In the past I thought they might be ok with 200 EPA miles and a 48-55 kWh pack but not anymore.
By the time Model 3 hits the streets I expect base Model S to have at least 80 kWh battery pack. And much more standard equipment.
The BMW 320i gets 17" cast aluminum wheels.
I expect the same for Model 3.
I don't think it adds much complexity to call supplier and ask for their 17" instead of 19".
Cheaper plus cheaper tires.
Plus Tesla can get more takers for premium priced tire packages.
Otherwise agree with emerging consensus on this thread.�
Feb 11, 2016
Drucifer 55 or 60 kWh battery standard, upgrade battery probably 75 or 80
regular doorhandles
regular wipers that don't have sensors
regular mirrors that don't retract
seats/mirrors that don't remember people
base - vinyl lined frunk
EVSE that does only 110/120 with no L2
Base L2 does 6.6 kW or maybe low 7's
probably more base stuff
Think of it as a base Nissan Leaf with better style, better rims, bigger battery and you are on your way.�
Feb 11, 2016
vdiv LED lights are kind of cheap these days, it will probably have them. I don't see Tesla stamping out steel either so aluminum is likely. AM radio will be a super premium option along with 8-track
I can see them removing the power seats and going with a single zone HVAC with no heat recuperation from the drivetrain to heat the battery. No chrome accents (so 20th century).�
Feb 11, 2016
vinnie97 Base with 80?! That's quite the prediction. That would mean the upgrade would have to be at least 90 and possibly even 100?�
Feb 11, 2016
gregincal He said base S with 80, base 3 with 60.�
Feb 11, 2016
vinnie97 Oops, I read too quickly and missed a crucial consonant.:redface:�
Feb 11, 2016
StapleGun Autopilot is an interesting one. Not having autopilot will severely affect the resale value of the car as the software gets better and better. At the same time, the camera and sensor hardware will have a non-trivial impact on margins with the lower priced car. I'm guessing it will be an upgrade to get all the hardware, but I'm hoping that every car is prepared for it so the hardware can be retrofitted easily in the future.�
Feb 11, 2016
Muaddid Well since they need part of the autopilot sensors to have emergency breaking which is required for high safety rating, I would not be surprised if they go the same way as the Model S, included on all cars but not activated if you don't pay for it.�
Feb 11, 2016
Trev Page Tesla is positioning themselves as the leader for semi and full autonomy. Over the next couple of years they will push hard to perfect it on Model S and X so it's ready for Model 3. To this end expect the hardware to be fully included (next gen hardware I might add) and enabled via at first purchase and optional software upgrade after purchase. Autopilot is a huge deal and Model 3 will be the real catalyst to take it to the masses.�
Feb 11, 2016
omarsultan Fair point, although if they can hit the range number with a smaller battery (maybe not 45kWh), why not--few buyers ever check the capacity of the gas tank when they buy an ICE. I get what you are saying, but the pack is also the single most expensive part in the car, so its an obvious place to gain cost savings.�
Feb 12, 2016
GKwey I can't figure out how Tesla can cut down cost by half from basic S70 model, except it should be a bona ride bare bone: a body with a battery and a motor and 4 wheels, every thing else would cost extra, starting with AC. Definitely no free super charger access.�
Feb 12, 2016
Twiglett In the earnings call Elon said that the Model S was the first car they built themselves so designed to fit.
He went on to say that the Model 3 is designed to be manufactured with the manufacturing process in mind.
Which means they are expecting that they will get quite a lot of the cost savings just by designing it correctly to simplify the build process.
Followed by scale economies etc
I would suspect that Model 3 options will be in option packs to reduce the cost of manufacturing as well.
But as others have said, there is also a good chance that several hardware option will be included for the same reason - but have software enablement as the option.�
Feb 12, 2016
jonnyg Though it's from June 2015, there was a decent Seeking Alpha article about pricing, versions, profit, etc. Will Teslas Model 3 Compete? - Tesla Motors (NASDAQ:TSLA) | Seeking Alpha�
Feb 12, 2016
rcarpen22 I know this can only be purely speculative, but at the time of launch, what will be more desirable, a current gen MS 70D with AP and whatever options you like, or a high spec M3? Only looking for opinions, nothing objective.�
Feb 12, 2016
ratsbew I'm normally a fan of fully specced "lower" cars than entry level "upper" cars. I think a same price Model 3 will outperform and out-feature a 70D (0-60 in 5.2, no premium interior, no autopilot, etc.).�
Feb 12, 2016
AudubonB I think the most fascinating conundrum for Tesla concerns SpC access, as well as it demonstrably being the most contentious topic on this forum. The sides are easy to describe:
*on the one, there is the cost of including a DC-direct charger, cost of life-of-vehicle electricity provided by Tesla, cost of buildout of the SpC network to service a Model 3-enhanced fleet.
*on the other, there is the ever-repeated goal of EV-ing the planet, with the less-announced but obvious corollary of reducing the elitist image - and reality - of the high-priced Models S&X fleet.
I don't know the answer, but I certainly hope and expect Messrs Musk & Co. to have penciled out in responsible fashion the cost-benefit analysis and annual CapEx needed to effect the "Do Include" option; to state the obvious, the highest cost there would be the needed site build-out but on the other hand, would that also raise the cost of each car by $100? $1,000? $10,000?
Now, to demonstrate what this consumer considers to be a base Model 3....I wonder how much cost and manufacturing complexity including A/C adds to a vehicle. That is an unnecessary for an Alaskan vehicle, although those living in the 'hot' plains of Fairbanks would grizzle at how it would discomfit them for about six weeks out of a year. I also am old enough to remember the jokes told about "those Floridians" who would drive about Miami summers with their windows rolled up just so their fellow drivers wouldn't know they didn't opt for that "expensive" add-on...
...'course, if y'allz moved up to Alaska to avoid the heat...well, I guess I'd have to move on over to Siberia. Or Antarctica....�
Feb 12, 2016
docherf Will the base model be front or rear wheel drive?�
Feb 12, 2016
vjason I assume the AC does more than just cool the passengers; it is crucial to battery temperature management (and as a result the car design).
I get what you are saying, but I think the equivalent of the AC in a Tesla is the radiator in an ICE vehicle. Passive cooling isn't enough, even if it never climbed above 50 where you live. And those radiators often cool the transmission as well.
�
Feb 12, 2016
gregincal You'll find out on March 31st. I think a majority of people on this forum believe it will be rear wheel drive.�
Feb 12, 2016
ModelNforNerd Stock wheels will likely be smaller than 19. An A4 (which EM mentioned as a competitor, and likely a good comparison size-wise) comes with 17's, and you can upgrade to 18's and 19's.
Smaller wheels=lighter=will help the smallest-battery variant hit that magical "200" that is being promised.�
Feb 12, 2016
rcarpen22 I tend to agree. I'm going to reserve one and see how I feel about it closer to production. Also, my wife's lease runs out pretty close to when the M3 is supposed to arrive. Might go ahead and double up.�
Feb 12, 2016
4SUPER9 I found two more:
16) No heated seats
17) No internet radio (slacker, spotify, tunein)�
Feb 12, 2016
tga Heated seats are pretty cheap, and help improve range (heating your seat uses a lot less energy than heating the cabin). I've installed aftermarket seat heaters in the past, and they only drew ~35W.
I expect the base car won't include free internet. There will be an LTE radio, but you'll have to pay for service. Wifi will be included for updates in your garage, or pairing with your phone for internet access on the road.�
Feb 12, 2016
AudubonB I think, vjason, that you are conflating the battery management system with that of the cab/occupants. They are, of course, both heating/cooling, but there's no reason to link them. For reality's make, however, I'd be the first to be astonished if a 21st century vehicle didn't have a/c as standard.
It has been quite a revelation, however, to learn tga's point: how far much more efficient it is to convey "warmth" to a passenger by using conductive seat heating than it is via convective air heating. Right there is one incredible and (for me....and I'll bet 99.9% of the rest of those who gave it a thought) unanticipated difference between EVs and ICEd cars, which have all that waste heat that must be conveyed away from those terribly inefficient engines.�
Feb 12, 2016
GregRF Trying to cut down costs makes it harder to see. I think it is easier to compare with other large volume cars. I think its a pretty close comparison to say
$ ICE Components = $ EV Components - $ Battery
So for now an EV will cost roughly the battery pack more than an equivalent ICE. From the rough estimates we've seen for battery costs I assume the model 3 battery pack will be ~$10k.
So the base model 3 will be the equivalent to $25k ICE cars in rough quality of interior and finish.
But on top of these we have a few extra things going for the Model 3:
- EVs with large batteries have inherent higher performance potential
- Skateboard allows more radical design
- Skateboard allows more available volume (storage/passenger)
- Skateboard has low center of gravity for better handling
- Good designer who isn't trying to protect other model lines with crappier design
- Mostly electronic controls gives more features for same money
- Trickle down tech from S and X (versus legacy components from other cheap cars)
So as you can guess from my thoughts above, I think we'll see a pretty compelling car for $35k. But parts that aren't inherently superior in EV will add equivalent costs in options (leather, paint, sound, trim, sun roof, wheels)�
Feb 12, 2016
Red Sage If you compare the specifications for a base Toyota Camry LE to a base BMW 320i, they are relatively similar. Expect the base Tesla Model ? to be equipped in a manner that falls in line with those cars. There will be options, options packages, and trim levels for certain. But none of them will turn it into a Buick, Cadillac, Lexus, or Mercedes-Benz luxoboat. It will be... a Tesla. Hence, beautiful, sporty, with utility, cargo space, in a spartan, but not substandard interior environment that befits a modern Premium vehicle.�
Feb 12, 2016
Tam That depends on which would cut the cost and also which would be better functionally.
For ICE, FWD does cut the cost because you don't have to connect a front engine to a long driveshaft to the rear-axle gears.
For Tesla, you don't have a driveshaft either way so I don't see how FWD would be more cost efficient.
- - - Updated - - -
Thanks, 4Super9.
That makes sense for cost containment.
It's possible to start to charge for monthly internet service too.�
Feb 12, 2016
ModelNforNerd
Monthly internet service: My instinct here is that Tesla signs a deal with a mobile carrier and let's them handle the data subscription piece.
My A3 has an AT+T SIM card and I pay them for my internet. I can see Tesla cutting a similar deal, especially for the volume they're anticipating.
My guess is that the Model 3 will have AT+T or T-Mobile. (Verizon's network technology is different and would make modems in cars not very cost effective).�
Feb 12, 2016
Tam True! Cooling for battery pack is included, but Tesla can charge extra to enable the cooling for human, can't it
�
Feb 12, 2016
tga How is Verizon's LTE different than T-mobile or AT&T's?
Personally, I'd prefer Big Red. Pink and blue are pretty much non-existent in most of NH. Verizon can hold a call on all of i89. Nobody else can.�
Feb 12, 2016
4SUPER9 Different radios. Vz and Sprint are CDMA. AT&T is GSM.�
Feb 12, 2016
ModelNforNerd
Verizon uses CDMA. It's a more complex setup, modem/data-wise, which is why their phone selection isn't always the best.
I have a Verizon phone and AT+T data in the car.
I'd prefer Verizon, but I don't think they've ever done a data partnership with a car company.
The 2 major 4G/LTE offering car companies right now (Audi and GM) use AT&T.�
Feb 12, 2016
1208 In order to get that price way down got to go beyond what is suggested. Here...
16) No Alloy wheels, steel with hubcaps instead. ?
17) Unfoldable rear seats ?
18) No aircon. ?
19) No dashboard. Driving visuals to appear on touchscreen. ?
20) Touchscreen to be 5ins. ?
21) Body half the size of the S to reduce costs.?
22) Body made out of plastic as its cheaper than Aluminium and steel. ?
23) 2 doors (excluding trunk).?
24) 14ins wheels.?�
Feb 12, 2016
GregRF I'm hoping for the option of simple phone tethering.�
Feb 12, 2016
vinnie97 Even cheap subcompacts have this.
Great Britain is one thing, that would be a nonstarter in the states.
Many of these omissions/reductions will destroy the appeal even if it is "only" a $35k base product.�
Feb 12, 2016
gregincal Sorry, but we are talking about a car starting at 35K meant to compete with other cars starting around 35K like the BMW 3 series and Audi A4. They are not trying to make a budget sub-compact.�
Feb 12, 2016
igotzzoom Verizon's new LTE network is an evolution of GSM. They still have a legacy CDMA network that they will probably have for the next decade, but going forward, they're going to use a version of GSM. Also, I just read somewhere that Ford will be using the AT&T network for its future built-in mobile & telematics services. The only reason I'd like to see VZW is to be able to add a car as an add-on to my monthly data plan. Then again, AT&T customers could say the same thing about GM, Tesla, etc.�
Feb 12, 2016
rEVhappy I actually had to laugh out loud after reading every item on this list. Tesla is not making a poverty spec model here.
They will not spend $10-15k on batteries and power train only to skimp a few hundred dollars on steel wheels w/ hubcaps vs. alloy wheels.
Unfoldable seats in a 5 door hatchback, not the best idea. Cost savings will be minimal
No aircon will be an absolute non-starter here in the US.
No dashboard.. Whaaaa?!?
5 inch touchscreen will be unusable and Tesla is focused on the user experience, and again they will not skimp on $100 over screen size.
Body half the size=half the materials=half the cost? Sorry, it doesn't work that way even if it seems rational.
Made of plastic, no.. they have big automated metal stamping machines, they will not invest in mfg again just to use a slightly cheaper material.
2 doors to save cost on handles and locks? That's some serious Soviet era penny pinching.
14 inch wheels w/ narrow tires will not work for anything over 140hp and EV torque.
As a general idea of what would be offered on the 35k model, take a look at whats on its target competitor, a 320i:
BMW 320i Sedan - Features & Specs - Standard Features - BMW North America
Add in internet connectivity for OTA updates, web browsing, multimedia, etc. and a $2500-$4k upgrade on 2nd gen autonomy activation.
A well optioned dual motor 60D will be in the mid 40's..(think 335i-340i pricing) 70D? will be close to $50K-55k depending on options and A fully specified P70D? will ring in close to $60k upto $65k, these will be the high-margin cars to recoup costs, whereas the base will be somewhat of a loss leader or one with very low margins.�
Feb 12, 2016
ModelNforNerd
Yea. I got the 2 mixed up.
I would love to be able to add my car to my data plan too.
I'm hoping the option to use VZW will be a pleasant surprise, but certainly not a dealbreaker�
Feb 12, 2016
vinnie97 I'm a cheapskate who uses Straight Talk (over the VZW network). I switched out of protest when they decided they wouldn't honor my $100 enrollment credit. Straight Talk don't allow tethering unless you have a proprietary device, I'm betting that won't work on a proprietary vehicle.�
Feb 12, 2016
coco81 You are missing two key differences...
1 - The price of the drivetrain. A 2.0 4 cilinder petrol engine and the 8 gear automatic transmission cost a lot of money, is much more expensive than a simple electric motor.
2 - The dealer piece of cake... around 10% of the sale value. Tesla sells directly to the customer and saves that money.
Considering the manufacturing cost of engine and transmission (at least 5000$) and 3500$ (more or less) for the dealer... it's almost the same Price of the battery. Even more if Tesla reach the 100$/KWh target.
$ ICE components - engine and transmission = $ EV - battery
35000$ Model 3 will be the equivalent to 35000$ ICE in quality of interior and finish. A real BMW 3-series/Audi A4/Benz C-class equivalent.�
Feb 12, 2016
tga I had to look it up to be sure, but Verizon and Sprint used CDMA up to/including 3G, but 4G is LTE/GSM.
Verizon's long term plan is to switch to VoIP based voice-over-LTE ("Advanced calling", "HD voice"), but I think they've committed to leave CDMA active for another 5 years.
OnStar was originally on the Verizon network (I got an offer to add it to my family plan), but I just read they switched to AT&T for the 2015 model year.
I suspect it's not that hard to build a device that works on most/all networks. I think the latest Qualcomm radio chips are pretty much universal; the latest Nexus phones work on pretty much every network (including Verizon & Sprint):
The Nexus 6P and 5X are compatible with major carriers in the U.S. — here are the full radio band listings | Android Central�
Feb 12, 2016
ModelNforNerd
Yea, I have a Nexus 6P (love it). It works on VZW, but isn't "approved", so I had to use an activated SIM out of another phone. The bigger problem of getting all these cars on VZW....is how locked down they keep their network. Unless EM is ponying up cash to increase capacity, I'm not sure VZW signs on.
Stranger things have happened.�
Feb 12, 2016
CHG-ON Canvas bucket seats and roof, and a hole in the floor to start the car Fred Flintstone style!�
Feb 12, 2016
MiamiNole ++. It'd be nice to see Tesla stop waste their time going after the luxury and entry-level luxury segment and go after their TRUE competitor. The Smart Car. Taking down the Smart Car empire is definitely EM's long term goal!
(My sarcasm senses are always tingling. Surprised so many people gave actual responses to this. Great job!)�
Feb 12, 2016
Twiglett Assuming the structural capacity is elsewhere, using plastic body panels is probably not a bad idea.
Certainly way cheaper to replace when its gets dinged.
You could 3D-print them locally as well
And if the body is a streamliner with wheel covers, using 14inch steel wheels would be fine!�
Feb 12, 2016
Tam There's no question that Tesla has been making great cars but so far with higher prices.
I believe that there's a niche who would just love to be able to afford a decent range and practical EV and they won't mind a lack of features/conveniences like basic A/C which is standard in comparable barebone pricing in other cars.
Thus, this thread has been very educational to me so I won't freak out if Tesla might indeed make a barebone really bare!�
Feb 12, 2016
Transepoch Tesla Model 3, the fremium EV? Interesting way of thinking about it.
As to the internet coverage, didn't Tesla party-up with AT&T for service for the Model S? That would probably indicate which way they would lean for providing service to the newer models in their fleet.�
Feb 13, 2016
1208 25) Canvas bucket seats and roof. ?�
Feb 13, 2016
docherf Just use a golf cart body. You'd get more cup holders than MS. [emoji4]�
Feb 13, 2016
Pollux A very interesting point!
Other thoughts:
+ Tesla may have a signifiant cost advantage due to not having accrued overheads from pensions, union-related benefits, fees, who-knows-what-else.
+ With Model 3, Tesla might have enough volume (or the prospect thereof) to start its own MVNO, which it would then also incorporate for S and X. They would keep control of the customer relationship and the customer experience, plus add a (decent?) revenue stream.
+ They could add WiFi hotspots to the Superchargers, opening up another benefit and maybe another revenue stream. Should other EV vendors start using Tesla SC infrastructure, WiFi would also be a benefit that those customers would appreciate.
I personally hope that Tesla is aggressively exploring offering Supercharging for free on the $35K base Model 3. The 3 will be coming out in an environment of radically lower gasoline cost than did the S. The SC network is a strategic advantage over all other EVs *and* the "free" aspect is very appealing versus ICEs. Of course, the numbers may not make this path affordable for Tesla. But the car's onboard SC-related hardware is probably pretty cheap and will be included in every vehicle going forward, so the significant expense for Tesla will be in continuing SC build-out and SC opex.
Alan
�
Feb 13, 2016
S3XY While you misunderstood what he was saying I actually was thinking the Model ? might come with an 80 kWh pack with an option for 100 kWh. I know it sounds crazy now but will it two years from now? My thinking is that of economies of scale. It would be much more cost effective if they put the same battery pack in all of their models. The big question is whether they could fit them in the smaller sled. But with technological/chemical advances maybe it would be possible. One can dream...�
Feb 13, 2016
CaptainKirk In terms of features, keep in mind that Tesla will likely keep the centre console and dash (imo). This feature of having a connected car that can provide navigation is a HUGE feature and overlooked. Lexus.ca configurator charges $8900 CDN for a Luxury package that includes this and other items for an IS300. Simply having a navigation and infotainment in a base Tesla adds a lot of value.�
Feb 13, 2016
omarsultan While a game changer, burying $2K of cost in a $35K car is tough, but maybe not any tougher than landing spaceships on boats.�
Feb 13, 2016
Model 3 I don't know about Alaska, but here in Norway we use the A/C in wintertime to dry the air in the cabin to avoid dew on the inside of the windows.�
Feb 13, 2016
Tam In cheap car models, A/C is optional and cost more. Can you dry the air in winter with included heater with no extra cost?�
Feb 13, 2016
pmadflyer Nope! In my experience, trying to do so makes it worse. That's why the AC automatically comes on when the windshield defroster is activated, even on full heat.�
Feb 13, 2016
Model 3 No. You can warm the air, and that helps, but it works faster/better when you can remove the moisture. Especially when you sit warm and/or sweating in the cold car after a ski trip (or round of dogsledding�
Feb 13, 2016
trinites1a This I agree with!
I actually agree with your estimation but I do think the battery might be 50kWh. If these options are not available I personally would go with the S70D. Mid to Late 2017 works perfectly for my purchase time frame! I'm excited to see what the Model 3 has to offer.
- - - Updated - - -
Someone on the Tesla Motors Reddit forum that works for Panasonic at the GF said that Tesla is actually using a pretty nice interior for the Model 3! I really doubt this is going to be the "Cheap Tesla" Tesla knows very well the market the Model 3 will be competing in and i have no doubt it would be a compelling car even if some of those features come at additional add ons.. I guess we all won't know the answer until unveiling.�
Feb 13, 2016
houdini Heated seats are very cheap for manufacturers but sell as an expensive option on all cars. I remember reading it cost $8 to the manufacturers but was usually part of a package upgrade for cars I.e. BMW i3 which adds them as part of a $1500 package.
I expect the model 3 to have package options like the S, sound upgrade, premium interior upgrade etc. So no heated seats in the base.
Also the 3 will have to have level 2 charging built in as it'll sell overseas and we have 240 volt so it wouldn't make sense to ship a 110 volt car only.�
Feb 13, 2016
tga 120V-only wouldn't happen, even if the car was US only. The battery will be too big to charge at 1.5kW - it would take days to charge at 3-4 mph. 120V only makes sense for plug-in hybrids (and conversions) with tiny batteries. I have a friend who never installed a 240V EVSE for her Volt, because she can charge overnight on a regular 120V outlet.�
Feb 13, 2016
stealthology IMO no way the Model 3 will have greater range than the Model S. My guess is that there will definitely be more than 1 battery pack option, but the base will be much less than 80 kWh.
Is it really that crazy to think A/C will be included in the base model?�
Feb 13, 2016
AudubonB Valid point that yes, a/c can be useful in the winter. I also conceded that it is unlikely to be other than standard in any non-Yugo introduced in this era. Nonetheless, it would be interesting to see the Model 3 come with it as an option....and even more interesting to learn how much choosing that option would set one back.�
Feb 13, 2016
Tam I know it's kind of crazy but is there any scenario that the barebone version would come with manually operated wind-up windows as a cost saving item?
�
Feb 13, 2016
gregincal The cheapest new car sold in America, the Nissan Versa Note at 12.6K, comes with A/C standard (along with Bluetooth and a 5" touchscreen).
- - - Updated - - -
No, not on a 35K car. The few least expensive cars in the US have power windows as an option, but once you get up to about 15K they are standard.�
Feb 13, 2016
xG35 Based on the assumptions, which is 200miles and 35K starting.. & not to take sales away from Model S.. i think the likely thing is...
#1 Slower 0-60 time.
#2 Smaller battery
#3 Safety sensors but no autopilot
#4 Smaller screen
#5 Non-aluminum body
#6 FWD or RWD�
Feb 13, 2016
stealthology The amount of sarcasm being used in this thread is hilarious.
Steelies ftw.�
Feb 13, 2016
Red Sage Both Model S and Model X, Tesla Generation II vehicles, have higher range than the Tesla Roadster, from Generation I. I submit that due to improved power electronics, improved battery chemistry, improved aerodynamics, and greatly decreased weight that for a given battery pack capacity, the Tesla Model ? will have a greater range than either Model S or Model X. Thus, a Model ? 60 would have a range of ~230-to-250 miles. A Model ? 90D would have a ~320-to-345 mile range. Should a mythical, highly hoped for, 120 kWh battery pack arrive for it, you may expect a nice, cool 460 mile range.
- - - Updated - - -
Yeah... But sarcasm only works when you are correct. Try it when you are dead wrong, and it just looks like you are an [@$$].�
Feb 14, 2016
coco81 Sometimes I think there are people who will buy a Model 3 with no doors and optional steering wheel (you can use your old car steering wheel and save money!).�
Feb 14, 2016
S3XY Why would you need a steering wheel if it has AP?�
Feb 14, 2016
tga Because, sometimes, like Rodney, you need to take control from the (auto-)pilot. You know, when you "want to go over there!" :biggrin:
�
Feb 14, 2016
S3XY You might also need it if this happens (crappy video but it's the only one out there)
�
Feb 14, 2016
Tam It is not far-fetched that smaller, lighter cars would have more range than Model S.
For example, Roadster 3.0 equipped with 70kWh battery has a range of 400 miles, which is much longer than 240 miles for 70kWh Model S-D.�
Feb 14, 2016
ModelNforNerd Considering the roadster can now do 400 miles, and weighs ~2700lbs....the range of the 70D is 240 miles at ~4650lbs....I don't think a car weighing ~3700 lbs with a 70D getting 300+ would be considered far fetched.�
Feb 14, 2016
ecarfan That has not been established. You need to review more carefully what Tesla has said about the Roadster 3.0 upgrade package.
See Roadster 3.0 | Tesla Motors
Quote: "Combining all of these improvements we can achieve a predicted 40-50% improvement on range between the original Roadster and Roadster 3.0. There is a set of speeds and driving conditions where we can confidently drive the Roadster 3.0 over 400 miles. We will be demonstrating this in the real world during a non-stop drive from San Francisco to Los Angeles in the early weeks of 2015."
Then see Roadster Road Trip Update: San Jose to Los Angeles on a Single Charge | Tesla Motors
Quote: "For our first test outing, we evaluated the prototype package on a historic route down the I-5... a distance of approximately 340 miles... And less than six hours from leaving San Jose, we pulled into the Santa Monica Pier, with 20 miles remaining in the battery pack."
So that test drive resulted in an estimated 360 mile range for a Roadster that had the entire 3.0 upgrade package installed, which is much more than just the battery. Since that second blog post, which was a year ago, Tesla has not made any other statements about the 3.0 upgrade range.
So Tesla has yet to demonstrate that the 3.0 Roadster has a real world range of 400 miles. And Tesla has yet to release any part of the 3.0 upgrade package except for the battery, which by itself will definitely not come anywhere close to a 400 mile real world driving range.�
Feb 14, 2016
Cebe Manually adjustable seats. No power, no memory.
Also, I imagine the $35k version would have less margin on it. Last I heard, at least before X came out, Model S 70D had the highest margin in the line-up, percentage wise, and I imagine they would have the $35k version with minimal margin. So, in a way, you don't have to cut the cost of making it in half, just the price of selling it...�
Feb 14, 2016
EVNow Sure, if Tesla doesn't want to compete with BMW 3-series. More importantly, if it wants to be the target of late night comedy shows ...�
Feb 14, 2016
Airx In an earlier post I read where the Model ? will have the 60Kwh battery and will get ~230 to 250 miles per charge. I concur, Tesla will be much better off putting a 60Kwh battery then the M ? will easily make the magical 200 miles per charge.
In my opinion the car needs to be Supercharger ready and have all the sensors needed for Auto Pilot, even if the first owner does not want to enable these the second owner can and I think this is where Tesla can distinguish itself from its competitors.
The car should be easily competitive with BMW 3 and Audi A4 as a base model for base model.�
Feb 16, 2016
GregRF 1. The ICE drivetrain has years of manufacturing expertise driving down its cost. EVs have a ways to go to match that refinement. You are also disregarding the costs of the inverter and charger that have costly electronic components. Additionally many of the cheap accessories are powered by the ICE (water pump, fan, alternator, AC, power assist steering/braking, free heat) that now need more expensive replacements.
2. They may have a cost saving here, but its not free to run your own sales/service/refueling stations.
So at this point in EV production I maintain that ($ ICE Components = $ EV Components - $ Battery) is a good approximation. I do believe over the next decade the tides will turn and EVs will be cheaper to produce in total than an equivalent ICE, but we are not there yet.�
Feb 16, 2016
coco81 So you think that an ICE engine and transmisi�n cost is 0... Ok�
Feb 17, 2016
Red Sage My feeling is that a complete Tesla Model ? with everything except the battery pack, will cost the same, or slightly less than a BMW 3-Series without motor, transmission, or exhaust installed. Hence, why Tesla Motors' focus is, and should be, on lowering the cost of the battery pack. Because, if the complete cost of a Model ? with a 60 kWh battery pack is equivalent to the build cost of a BMW 320i, the entire ICE world is in serious trouble.�
Feb 17, 2016
WarpedOne The cost of M3 in 2017 will be above the production cost of b3.
During production there is always some optimization and tesla would sure shoot themselves in the foot by forcing production cost to be that low in '17 already. M3 production will run for 7 years. Battery cost will start somewhere around $150/kWh and end around 100 or below.
Expect to be blown out of the water. Anything less is sure sign of tesla end.�
Feb 17, 2016
GregRF
Where did I say that? I said they equal the cost of the EV components minus the battery.�
Feb 17, 2016
JoRey My bet is that the Model III with come as standard with, heated seats, supercharger (built in), Auto-pilot (built in), AC and infotainment system ala Tesla. Navigation is likely to be optional (even tough the hardware is there) and the base car will come with alloy wheels. Personally since im buying on a budget, if i can activate supercharging and autopilot at a later time i'll go that direction. The Model III will have a 60KWh battery, for the simple reason that the Bolt has a 60Kwh battery. As for telecommunications, i hope they use the same system they have in the current Model S. A simple LTE gsm modem, that you can swap out the sim card. With said system the car can have it's own telephone number, allowing for text, calls and data communication. My current tablet plan from T-mobile cost me 10 and has 3 gigs + unlimited music and video streaming.�
Feb 17, 2016
MP3Mike I agree with most of what you said, but I can almost guarantee that Auto-Pilot will be an extra cost option and navigation will be standard, like it is on the Model S/X. (The Auto-Pilot hardware will be installed for AEB, but you won't get to use TACC or AutoSteer without paying.) Navigation will be standard because it, and the trip planner function, is part of their plan to help eliminate range anxiety.
I highly doubt that they will make the SIM swappable, and the car won't get a phone number that you can call. That is all supposed to be handled by your phone linking to the car via BT.�
Feb 17, 2016
cokata The car will as barebones as they can make it. Not so much because they it would save them so much money, but because car manufactures make the most killing on the options (the profit margins are insane). The base car will be bad enough to force most people to spend at least 5k more to make it good enough. At 35k they just won't make money from the car.
And about the battery don't expect the base car to have more than 50kwh. Not only will the bigger battery cost more, but the call will get heavier, therefore require larger brakes, tires, stronger suspension, etc. It all adds up. I would guess that the base car will have ~50kwh battery with around 220mile EPA range, and they will offer a ~70kwh for 8-10k more.�
Feb 17, 2016
ModelNforNerd
So, a theoretical range of ~308 miles on a 70kwh pack?
YES, PLEASE!!!!�
Feb 17, 2016
cokata It won't scale linearly, since the weight will go up, most likely the pricier versions will have wider tires and/or stickier compound. But i expect that for around 50k $ you will be able to get a Model 3 with range that tops any current model s variant.�
Feb 17, 2016
Tam Historically, some owners reported that Navigation was not upgrade-able if you didn't choose the factory option.�
Feb 17, 2016
ModelNforNerd
Considering that to go from RWD 70 (lowest range S currently available for sale, as of last week) up to AWD 90D (max range), it costs $18000, I would think that the production cost of batteries at the Gigafactory, as well as an economy of scale Tesla has never before experienced, will make the difference between minimum range and maximum range configurations around $13000-15000. So, aside from any other optional equipment, you should be able to get max range for around $48-50K�
Feb 17, 2016
JoRey I find that hard to belief, Tesla's are basically computers on wheels. I guess you might need a sd card or perhaps different module for Nav. But all tesla's have a gps antenna and a giant screen.�
Feb 17, 2016
MP3Mike I think originally navigation was an option on the Model S, but it is standard now. And I will expect it to be on the Model 3 since the trip planner is part of their plan to avoid range anxiety.�
Feb 17, 2016
Tam It's possible that Garmin software company charged for each installation and Tesla didn't want the hassle to retroactively push that software in for those early Model S owners who wanted to pay for the option after delivery.
It's possible that Garmin Navigation software is cheap enough to be standard for Model ? .�
Feb 18, 2016
Spidy With the early buyers Tesla won't care about range anxiety. The probably will have sold out production for 1-2 years.
Having Navigation as an option is and easy way to get another $1-3k on top of the 35k car.
Same with heated seats. Exactly because they are great on electric cars they make a great option.�
Feb 18, 2016
ModelNforNerd
Google Maps is a much cheaper option, which is why Audi/VW and a few others have turned to them in their cars. Tesla will offer Nav because of "range anxiety" and the Trip Planner. Of course, if they make Supercharging an option you pay for, they could bundle Nav/Trip Planner in with Supercharging.
Front heated seats will be standard. As has been discussed in this thread and others, for efficiency's sake, it's easier to warm the front seat passengers w/seat warmers than HVAC, and it's a smaller draw from your battery pack. Remember, Musk has to beat the Bolt at all costs. If he has to eat the cost of 2 heat coils in every single Model S made, he'll get that money back in volume, and of course, nickel-and-diming us on other options.�
Feb 18, 2016
Spidy You don't get the point. It's not just about the cost for Tesla, it about how they make money.
And if the Model 3 is going to compete with a 3-Series in quality and premium factor it won't beat the Bolt on options at the same price point. That's simply not possible.�
Feb 18, 2016
Reeler 50KW battery with option for 75
FWD with D option
15" screen
Center console with normal cup holders
Door storage pockets
Steel body
No falcon wing doors
Seating for 5
Heated front seats with winter option
Sedan (not hatchback)�
Feb 18, 2016
bigbear I was really counting on falcon wing doors too.�
Feb 18, 2016
Reeler I think there will be a tease for the crossover on the same platform with 3rd row seating and falcons. I think the falcons are mostly for access to the 3rd row. I predict the Model 3 will be a sedan so falcons are out.�
Feb 18, 2016
Max* I don't see how you can have a 3rd row on a car that will be 20% smaller than the Model S. The Model S "third row" is for the RFS only, and it's tight back there, I don't think you'd comfortable fit 2 adults shoulder-to-shoulder (let's forget the height issue).
Make the platform 20% smaller, and... no way.�
Feb 18, 2016
Model 3 Includes my comment in red:
�
Feb 18, 2016
physicsfita With the number of public charge points increasing, would it be possible that the UMC would not be bundled with the Model 3?�
Feb 18, 2016
Max* No. You still gotta charge at home. That's one of the big selling points of an EV, to charge overnight at home.�
Feb 18, 2016
physicsfita But isn't that what the HPWC is for?�
Feb 18, 2016
Reeler The RAV4 comes with a third row option. I think the Tesla crossover might do falcons for that sort of car, but it is plain stupid for a econobox Model 3.�
Feb 18, 2016
MP3Mike So you are thinking that instead of providing the cheaper UMC with the Model 3 that they are going to give you a HPWC?
The car has to come with a way to charge it, and the UMC is currently the cheapest option.�
Feb 18, 2016
Max* So you're suggesting including a HPWC with the Model 3, instead of a UMC, with the HPWC costing more than a UMC, to reduce the cost of the Model 3? I'm confused.
You have to include a way for the person to charge, I just don't see Tesla selling the car without a UMC. That's like selling you an ICE with a key on the gas tank, and saying that in order to get the key you have to pay an extra $650 on top of the price of the car.
- - - Updated - - -
RAV4 is about 10% bigger than the projected Model 3 (length x width, height aside)
Model S is 196"x77" = 15,092 sq inches
Model 3 is 20% smaller = 12,073 sq inches
Rav 4 is 181"x73" = 13,213 sq inches
I still don't see how you can have a 3rd row in a car that's 20% smaller than the S, even in a CUV style car. I'm not saying it wont happen, I'm saying I don't see it.�
Feb 18, 2016
sms_327 The base model Model ? is going to be on par with the BMW 320i. AWD will be a $5,000 option (this I know from a credible source�everything that follows is my own speculation). Adding supercharging will likely add $1,500-$2,500. Same goes for a leather interior. 17-inch wheels standard. Expect a non-panoramic sunroof for an additional $1,500. If Toyota can give their $25,000 2016 Prius base model LED headlights standard, I can't imagine why Tesla couldn't follow suit. Navigation will likely require smartphone integration�no complimentary 3G service. Streamlined, albeit conventional door handles. A premium package that includes a power liftgate and heated seats for $1,500. The Autopilot hardware is unlikely going to be standard, making it even more expensive than on the Model S (just for fun, let's say $3,500). As for the battery pack, I'm assuming Tesla has eked out every mile�from the smallest pack possible�at the cost of performace. Just to give myself a sense of hope, I'll say the AWD model includes a larger battery pack. 45 and 60kWh are the figures that I see thrown around the most. This leaves us with a base model with a 45kWh battery for the advertised $35,000 that will *nearly* meet the promised 200-mile range in EPA testing. Fully loaded, by my estimates, the Model ? 60D will be $48,000-$50,000.�
Feb 18, 2016
MP3Mike The Auto-Pilot hardware will be standard, I think it is necessary for the AEB feature. (Which is required isn't it?)
3G/4G will be standard, that is how Tesla sends updates, gets status/error information, and how the Auto-Pilot fleet-learning works.
Expect the power liftgate to be included in a premium interior package that costs ~$3,000. (Just like the Model S)
Don't expect to be able to nickel and dime your options, there are likely to be just a handful of option packages. (This will be part of the cost savings, as it is easier/cheaper/faster to build them if every car isn't different.)�
Feb 18, 2016
coco81 You said ICE car cost = EV cost - battery.
So a full 4 cilinder turbo engine with an automatic transmission cost the same than a simple electric motor (in your world)
And remember the money Tesla saves with direct sales.�
Feb 18, 2016
ModelNforNerd
Agree with the Autopilot hardware being standard. They are going for ease of assembly, as well as AEB feature, so why would they have a run of cars with the HW and without it?
4G will be standard. You can get it on lower GM models these days. Remember, this is the 1st Tesla "dipping into" other makers' markets, they're going to have to play ball here and there.�
Feb 18, 2016
Max* Leather seats are NOT included in the premium package in the Model S.�
Feb 18, 2016
Twiglett It's not too much of a stretch actually, although I think physicalfita is confusing UMC and HPWC.
Most of the other EVs do not come with 220/240V charge option, most come with a 110V EVSE and requiring the owner to install an L2 EVSE for faster charges.
The UMC is way more complex than a basic 110V only device.
Making a cheaper version that was just for emergencies/trickle charge may be an option.
Face it, getting the 220/240 40amp line run is a much more significant cost than the EVSE itself.�
Feb 18, 2016
MP3Mike Thanks for the correction, I seem to have forgotten that...�
Feb 18, 2016
physicsfita I'm guessing that it might come with neither -- sort of like how no car ever seems to come with floor mats standard. It would be a way to reduce the sticker price. I don't know if Tesla would try something like that, but it was a thought that occurred to me.
EDIT: Twiglett beat me to it, and summarized my thinking much better:
�
Feb 18, 2016
gregincal But you don't really need floor mats. You absolutely need a way to charge. It's more like selling a car without tires included.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét