Thứ Bảy, 28 tháng 1, 2017

Model S vs BMW 5 Series part 1

  • Jul 29, 2012
    CapitalistOppressor
    I did a thread about Model S Performance vs BMW M5 to marshal arguments against folks who were dissing MSP. But I suspect that most people are like me and will end up purchasing one of the base models. This thread will attempt a comparison between Model S and the BMW 5 series which, along with the Mercedes E-Class, is the primary competition for the Model S.

    • All 5 Series numbers are based on the 2012 model year.
    • All prices for Model S assume a $7,500 Federal rebate, but do not take into account possible state and local incentives.
    • All prices assume the entry level version of the car.
    • If you want options you can shop for yourself, but the depreciation scales so these prices give a good sense of relative value regardless of which options you choose (BMW does offer more goodies than Tesla does if you want to pay for them. That's at least partially responsible for the sense that the 5 series has a "better" interior).

    Abbreviations -
    MSP - Model S Performance
    MS85 - Model S with the 85kWh battery
    MS60 - Model S with the 60kWh battery
    MS40 - Model S with the 40kWh battery

    TCO - 5 year True Cost of Ownership
    • I am limiting this to depreciation, fuel and maintenance. This number is the cost to own and operate the vehicle for 5 years and assumes you sell it to recoup its residual value. Edmunds includes more items in their calculation that I link to, but those are extremely variable and depend on individual circumstance.
    • Model S info is based off of figures provided at Teslanomics: The Economics of owning a Tesla Motors Automobile. Their estimated depreciation is based on how the Leaf is performing, which is a super conservative methodology IMHO. If you click through the links, they also have individual model comparisons and are also based on the Edmunds data.

    BMW 5 Series

    The BMW 5 Series is without a doubt the top dog in the Midsize Luxury Performance Sedan segment that the Model S is competing in. There are three basic trim levels, which also correspond to your engine choice. They are the 528i, 535i and 550i.

    528i
    • Entry level model
    • MSRP from $46,900
    • TCO from $49,300 (again this is the total out of pocket 5 year expense AFTER you sell the car and get back the residual value. Essentially this is the actual cost to you to own the car without including taxes, financing or insurance because they vary. 2012 BMW 5 Series 2.0L 4-cyl. Turbo 8-speed Automatic True Cost to Own)
    • 2.0L 4 cylinder engine. 240 hp @ 5000 rpm and 255 lb-ft @ 1250 rpm
    • Automatic Transmission
    • 23/34 MPG (cty/hwy) w/RWD. 22/32 w/AWD
    • Bluetooth and iPod hookup
    • Stability/Traction Control
    • Optional Navigation
    • 0-60 in 6.3 seconds (Edmunds since they don't roll the car on launch. Factory reports 6.4 which is a "true" number while C/D got a 5.9 with a shallow stage roll. Drag racing primer which explains the difference - Modern Racer - Driving Tips - Drag Racing Basics)
    • 5-60 in 6.8 seconds (this is a much more accurate real life acceleration number which can't be gamed like a launch. Yes it's slower despite the fact that the car is already moving. This is because of the narrow torque band and the large mechanical delay of an ICE vehicle.)
    • 17" tires standard. 18" with Sport Package
    • Range - Gasoline

    Detailed list of features - 2012 BMW 5 Series 528i Sedan 2.0L 4-cyl. Turbo 8-speed Automatic Features and Specs

    List of options and pricing - 2012 BMW 5-Series 528i Sedan Options - 2012 BMW 5-Series 528i Sedan Packages - Motor Trend Magazine


    Reviews -
    2012 BMW 528i Test - Review - Car and Driver
    2012 BMW 528i Arrival - Motor Trend


    538i - short comparison

    Detailed list of features - 2012 BMW 5 Series 535i Sedan 3.0L 6-cyl. Turbo 6-speed Manual Features and Specs

    List of options and pricing - 2012 BMW 5 Series 535i Price With Options

    Reviews - Couldn't find any in a quick check. It's basically the 528i but faster.

    MS40
    • Entry level trim
    • MSRP from $49,900
    • TCO from $31,817 (Teslanomics-BMW: Economic car comparison between the Tesla Model S and all BMW Vehicles)
    • Performance dictated by 40kWh battery output. A/C Induction motor standard. HP and Torque unknown.
    • No transmission. Single gear differential, direct drive.
    • 91/89 (cty/hwy MPGe. Number based on EPA measurements for MS85. It seems likely to be better on MS40. MS40 is presumably hundreds of pounds lighter thanks to the smaller battery, which could affect MPGe numbers substantially).
    • Bluetooth connectivity, class leading 17" touchscreen control.
    • Stability/Traction Control
    • Optional Navigation. Included Google navigation in coverage area.
    • 0-60 in 6.5 seconds (Factory "true" number. Magazine reviews will likely be quicker depending on staging techniques)
    • 5-60 ... Unknown (Because of the nature of the drivetrain, MS should substantially outperform an ICE vehicle. Throttle response is near instant and mechanical lag is miniscule, especially compared to an automatic transmission. Therefor, until I see a measurement showing otherwise, I believe this number would actually be LOWER than the 0-60 number. Feel free to discuss).
    • Range - est. 160 miles of highway range @55mph (Model S Efficiency and Range | Blog | Tesla Motors)
    • Charging - ~4 hours w/included charger and appropriate home outlet. ~2 hours with optional charger. Tesla Supercharging not available (help me out here. I extrapolated these numbers based on the smaller battery size. They could be wildly wrong, as I've mainly researched the 85kWh charging options that I expect to own. Anyone have solid data?).
    • 19" tires standard.

    MS60
    • Entry level trim
    • MSRP from $59,900
    • TCO from $37,617 (Teslanomics-BMW: Economic car comparison between the Tesla Model S and all BMW Vehicles I'd like to point out that you actually get a better warranty with the 60kWh battery in comparison to the 40kWh which should help its depreciation number. Teslanomics is very conservative and is not capturing the kinds of distinctions that should help lower the TCO even more)
    • Performance dictated by 60kWh battery output. A/C Induction motor standard. HP and Torque unknown.
    • No transmission. Single gear differential, direct drive.
    • 91/89 (cty/hwy MPGe. Number based on EPA measurements for MS85. It seems likely to be better on MS60. MS60 is presumably hundreds of pounds lighter thanks to the smaller battery, which could affect MPGe numbers substantially).
    • Bluetooth connectivity, class leading 17" touchscreen control.
    • Stability/Traction Control
    • Optional Navigation. Included Google navigation in coverage area.
    • 0-60 in 5.9 seconds (Factory "true" number. Magazine reviews will likely be quicker depending on staging techniques)
    • 5-60 ... Unknown (Because of the nature of the drivetrain, MS should substantially outperform an ICE vehicle. Throttle response is near instant and mechanical lag is miniscule, especially compared to an automatic transmission. Therefor, until I see a measurement showing otherwise, I believe this number would actually be LOWER than the 0-60 number. Feel free to discuss).
    • Range - est. 230 miles of highway range @55mph (Model S Efficiency and Range | Blog | Tesla Motors).
    • Charging - ~6 hours w/included charger and appropriate home outlet. ~3 hours with optional charger. ~45 minute Tesla Supercharging is an optional upgrade (help me out here. I extrapolated these numbers based on the smaller battery size. They could be wildly wrong, as I've mainly researched the 85kWh charging options that I expect to own. Anyone have solid data?).
    • 19" tires standard.

    MS85
    • Entry level trim
    • MSRP from $69,900
    • TCO from $43,417 (Teslanomics-BMW: Economic car comparison between the Tesla Model S and all BMW Vehicles I'd like to point out that you actually get a better warranty with the 85kWh battery in comparison to the 40kWh or 60kWh batteries, which should help its depreciation number. Teslanomics is very conservative and is not capturing the kinds of distinctions that should help lower the TCO even more)
    • A/C Induction motor standard. 362HP @ 6,000-9,500 RPM and 325 lb-ft @ 0-5,800 RPM
    • No transmission. Single gear differential, direct drive.
    • 91/89 (cty/hwy MPGe).
    • Bluetooth connectivity, class leading 17" touchscreen control.
    • Stability/Traction Control
    • Optional Navigation. Included Google navigation in coverage area.
    • 0-60 in 5.6 seconds (Factory "true" number. Magazine reviews will likely be quicker depending on staging techniques)
    • 5-60 ... Unknown (Because of the nature of the drivetrain, MS should substantially outperform an ICE vehicle. Throttle response is near instant and mechanical lag is miniscule, especially compared to an automatic transmission. Therefor, until I see a measurement showing otherwise, I believe this number would actually be LOWER than the 0-60 number. Feel free to discuss).
    • Range - est. 300 miles of highway range @55mph (Model S Efficiency and Range | Blog | Tesla Motors).
    • Charging - ~8 hours w/included charger and appropriate home outlet. ~4 hours with optional charger. ~1 hour Tesla Supercharging is included.
    • 19" tires standard.

    Reviews - Model S First Drive Reviews

    Options and pricing - Model S Options and Pricing | Tesla Motors

    Notes: TCO calculations are the best way to compare cars. The numbers included above are accurate to the extent that the depreciation calculations are accurate (these are not really known for MS and Teslanomics numbers are open for debate). Based on these numbers even the MS85 compares favorably to the entry level 528i. However, while the baseline numbers are accurate, leaving out taxes, insurance and financing charges understates the cost comparisons of the MS60 and MS85 thanks to the simple fact that you pay tax on the initial sale price rather than on the TCO.

    With the higher MSRP you will pay more in taxes, interest and likely insurance as well. The correct comparison can only be made by taking the base values shown here and adding the actual tax, insurance and financing charges you will personally incur (everyone is different). Make sure to research state and local incentives for purchasing Model S. I know some states have additional tax credits, while others waive the sales tax or provide other incentives.

    But even with additional taxes and financing costs, the MS85 is a lot more car than the 528i and the $4,000-$6,000 extra you pay isn't a huge hit. And when compared to its performance peer, the 535i, the comparison is quite favorable.

    550i
    • Not really worth mentioning in the context of MS85. MSP trounces it in every way including a decisive TCO beatdown. TCO for 550i is ~$73,000 vs a MSP TCO that is ~$54,000. The 550i has a 5 year operating cost in excess of $30,000 vs only $6,000 for MSP, which accounts for much of the difference. 0-60 in 5 seconds for 550i vs 4.4 seconds for MSP. It's a joke really.


    Bottom line. Model S is a flippin bargain at every trim level and most of that savings comes from the extremely low cost to operate. Discuss.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    Kevin Sharpe
    IMO for this to be meaningful we need a way of valuing the fit and finish of the vehicles... a lot of buyers in this class will rate the BMW very highly and that has 'value'.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    CapitalistOppressor
    Sure. Except we don't know the fit and finish of Model S yet. Elon Musk just spent an hour explaining to his investors that he stopped production to perfect fit and finish. For all intents and purposes, the test cars and 10 delivered Sigs are pre-production examples.

    EDIT: By "stopped production" I mean stopped deliveries. Production has continued, but the cars are being used for test drives, and likely will be sent to the stores after the Get Amped events are over. Essentially they are all practice cars.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    Kevin Sharpe
    Agreed... so for the purposes of this discussion are you assuming that the Model S fit and finish will be compatible to the BMW 5 Series in the minds of potential purchasers?
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    jerry33
    Or at least 80% of the way there (assume that the current crop is about 50%). I don't expect 100% during the first year--that would be asking a lot.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    Kevin Sharpe
    Agreed... IMO matching BMW quality in the first year is never going to happen (whatever Elon might say)... so how do we put a value on this difference to make this comparison meaningful?
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    dennis
    He was talking about finish details, not wholesale replacement of the interior materials:

    Not big things. Ridiculously silly things. Piece of carpet. Piece of molding on the dash doesn't intersect properly with another piece.
    Little things that are extremely annoying.
    Almost all of them are interior, soft trimmish.
    Keep refining to make sure that the gaps and fit are as close to perfection as physics will allow.
    Beefed up our interior trim engineering group.

    The gaps. How well things shut. Want to set a new industry standard how things fit.

    IMO it is the quality, look and feel of the interior materials that are substandard to Mercedes/BMW/Audi. You have to get past that to start looking at the gaps between the interior parts, and those of us who aren't happy with the interior aren't complaining about gaps. On the other hand, Elon appears to be satisfied with those materials since he is not talking about them.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    JRP3
    You can't, because it will have different importance to each individual. I think for many people even if the S has lower quality compared to a BMW it would not outweigh the other positives. I'd rather drive a Model S while seated on a milk crate than a BMW with a seat :biggrin:
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    vfx
    Yes, just like exterior styling, color choices and driver amenities.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    EVNow
    TCO of EVs is purely speculative at this point. We just don't know how much a 5 year old EV will go for in 2017.

    (OTOH, if we had lease numbers it would be much easier to compare TCO.)
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    William13
    I believe that the TCO needs to be based on the 8 years of battery warranty, expected driving per year and give ranges for multiple possibilities. Far more than the OP or Teslanomics but in the same spirit. Depending on driving habits I believe that the Tesla is competitive or cheaper...

    Maybe someone is skilled enough and has the time to do a TCO engine with multiple variables that people can input themselves about driving habits and choices which would produce personalized TCO comparisons.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    stopcrazypp
    I'm not sure if you have been following the same threads as me, but the interior materials have been replaced before (the banana leaf with Obeche Wood, the lacewood with a different type and some of the carbon fiber trim is being replaced because it is not durable enough).

    From what I can tell, the biggest gripes with the Model S is not with the interior materials, but rather with the lack of certain amenities: enclosed interior storage, rear fold down cupholder/armrests, the badly designed armrest in the front, electric folding mirrors, seat memory, etc. There are also fit and finish issues (like the rear trunk and some interior panels in the cars being used for test drives). We have whole threads dedicated to these issues:
    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/8864-Opportunity-Console-New-Photos-Poll
    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/8960-Build-quality-alignment-of-trunk
    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/9440-Fit-amp-Finish-of-the-test-drive-event-cars

    I have yet to hear/read complaints about the material choices; in general, the reception to them is quite good (even for the microfiber cloth seats).
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    jerry33
    In that case, shouldn't ICE cars be based on the 36 - 48 months of engine warranty?

    Sorry, but batteries in EVs and hybrids don't fail at the end of the warranty. They are good for a considerable time thereafter, just like ICE engines.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    artsci
    Couldn't agree more. I do not care one bit about vanity mirrors, map lights, or all those other minor amenities that seem to bend some people totally out of shape. IMHO that's all fluff in light of what this car is really all about.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    jerry33
    That's pretty much it along with certain option choices (like the 21" wheel being standard and no rebate if you choose the less expensive wheels, or no carbon fiber interior on the non-performance cars) and colour choices.


    Which appear to be taken care of. At least the latest production numbers don't have these fitting problem (or they are much less noticeable).
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    Norbert
    How about $500? So far I always was very comfortable in the S, and experienced both exterior and interior as very pleasing. For example, the availability of a large sunroof is much more important to me than any fit and finish issues I'd expect, assuming that any "annoying" production imperfections will mostly be fixed even for signature cars. The air suspension, and cornering, is well received and much more decisive for subjective ride comfort IMHO.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    jerry33
    I think this is a good example of why we can't really put a price on it. I'd pay extra to not have the sunroof (I'm very happy I will not have to purchase it and even happier it will cost less without it).
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    Jason S
    I got it: whatever the gap may be, the cost is what it would cost to replace the deficient piece with a custom sufficient or comparable piece.

    For instance: the problem is that the Model S is a 4 door sedan that seats 5, I want a 3 door that seats 14 midgets and a horse. Therefore just figure out what it would take to craft such a thing starting with the base BMW or Tesla vehicle. (In other words, you can't really start with one or other vehicle being perfect if you are going to play this game. Start with what car would be perfect for you.)
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    Kevin Sharpe
    The problem IMO is that we need a way to value the difference in quality between a BMW and the Model S if this thread is to have any meaning... the challenge is the fact that it's primarily Tesla fans who post here not the target audience suggested by the OP.

    Do we want a serious debate about how we close the gap for the mainstream market?
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    STxTesla
    I disagree with you about the degree of satisfaction that Elon Musk has with the interior of the Model S. He made a VERY strong statement about his dedication to putting out The Best Car in the World by halting production to tweak the fine points in the final product in his search for perfection. The car may not be perfect this first round, but I bet that it will be very close to the quality of Mercedes, BMW, etc. because he is not content with mediocrity. I feel that we have the best response team that any automotive company has ever had and the dedication to the customer/end user is phenomenal.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    Norbert
    Actually I think that debate is *too* serious already. We have lots of threads spelling the doom of Tesla because of cup holders and things that Elon already said they want to fix/improve, and "beefed up" the group of interior engineers for. Don't forget that your own personal impression was based on a beta prototype with hand-built interior, used for european exhibitions.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    stopcrazypp
    I think the bias in enthusiast forums goes both ways. There's also a lot more complainers and argument over small details here than might exist in the "mainstream market" (which might not notice these things at all). Overall, it's very difficult to get a representative sample of the "mainstream".
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    Kevin Sharpe
    Not at all... that simply confirmed that the Model S is not the car for me (nor would I ever buy a BMW 5 Series)... shall we stay OT and try to answer the question "Model S vs BMW 5 Series"?
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    CapitalistOppressor
    Yes. Or at least that it will not be a dominant issue, and certainly not something we can quantify until Tesla restarts deliveries.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    CapitalistOppressor
    For me it's not exactly fluff. But on balance I think Tesla has built a competitive car. They just need to get in the ballpark with the interior. The rest of the car can win the game.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    Jaff
    Same here JRP....:biggrin:
    (wait a minute...would the milk crate colour match the body colour?) :confused::wink:

    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    jerry33
    Sure. Brown should harmonize with the milk crate just fine.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    dennis
    But the things that Elon is talking about fixing fall in the realm of engineering: how two pieces of trim fit together, panel gaps, how well things shut, etc.

    The complaints about the interior seem to all be about design: lack of storage [since fixed], cupholder placement, vanity mirror lights, spartan feel compared to BMW/Mercedes, etc.

    This is consistent with Elon's view of Tesla as an engineering company. I'm not saying that's bad. We just have to accept that design will never get as much attention at Tesla as engineering does.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    jerry33
    Those who can recall the early BMWs might note that they had very spartan interiors as well. Didn't seem to hurt sales any.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    stopcrazypp
    Design is Franz von Holzhausen's responsibility, and I don't think the Model S necessarily lacks design (mainly just amenities/features). Google images of concept car interiors, there's a clearly move toward less/no buttons, more digitized interfaces, and a more open/airy feel like in the Model S.

    And on cupholder placement/design, the Germans have placed last consistently (even in very recent models, mainly because their home market doesn't care about cupholders), so the Model S isn't exactly bucking any trend there.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    dennis
    You're right, I forgot, the Model S is perfect. My bad. :wink:
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    dsm363
    I just went home and drove up and back to the Chicago event. I went in my parent's Lexus RX400 SUV. It is a fairly big car but has a center console with a tiny center compartment and two cup holders. Granted the cup holders aren't where your forearm rests but there wasn't much storage there either. It did have side door pockets for maps but no one really needs maps anymore with GPS. Not all cars have an amazing center console.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    JRP3
    Not really, because there is no need at this point, or for the near future. Since it's sold out into next year the general public isn't a real concern with these early units. I figure once they get a few hundred under their belt Tesla will have it all dialed in. They've already shown an ability to address customer concerns, though I don't expect them to make everyone happy. No manufacturer can do that.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    stopcrazypp
    That's not even close to what I'm saying. I just completely disagree where the weak points of the Model S are: I feel it's mainly the lack of certain amenities that buyers in this market expect, which I think falls not to the design but more to the bean counters (which dictate what features to include and exclude, and designers have to fit them into the car). What you are saying is interior materials and design. I'm not saying the Model S has no weak points AKA "is perfect".

    And I feel my comment on German cup holders is completely valid. Since this is about the 5-series, the main description I have seen about the E39 and E60's cup holders are that they are flimsy/cheap/badly designed (mainly because they are not stationary: the E39's was made of cheap black plastic that easily snapped, it was also too small and would easily spill a drink; the E60's were an improvement, but the main complaint is they always got in the way because they were no longer in the console, plus it was still a flimsy pop-out version that would easily break). The F10's have also been described as cheap, although they are now stationary/integrated like on the Model S, and admittedly the placement of it is better than on the Model S (it's at the front of the console, kind of like a recent Opportunity Console cup holder). Overall, the German competition do not have a good reputation for cup holders (so if Tesla was looking at them as a benchmark cup holder design, it would be a bad idea).
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    pguerra
    It ought to be higher than a comparable ICE vehicle (but maybe not by much) assuming minimal battery degradation. Cinergi told me his Roadster in 2 yrs with 17k miles has dropped about 3-4 miles total in its max range. That seems okay to me.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    CapitalistOppressor
    I think the key issue with depreciation on any vehicle is reliability and cost of operation. Japanese cars didn't get higher resale values because they were cute, warm OR fuzzy. They got a higher resale value because they were reliable and fuel efficient. "Reliable" is code for "low cost" (because you don't have to repair it) and "fuel efficient" is the same. Fundamentally a higher cost to operate cannibalizes your resale value. People don't want to pay a premium for a car that costs thousands to operate, and whose repair costs are rapidly escalating.

    Pure electric vehicles have an extremely low cost to operate and are potentially very reliable. Batteries degrade as opposed to breaking. If after 10 years you've lost 30% of your battery capacity/performance you can live with it, or replace it. If you replace it your battery still has value. Your nominal 85kWh battery is still like a 60kWh battery in terms of its notional value (albeit no longer under warranty and with a possibly shorter lifespan).

    In terms of the value of the car, it is now a used Model S with a 60kWh battery instead of an 85kWh and it will still have an extremely low cost to operate compared to an ICE vehicle. So I think there is a real case to be made that the Model S will depreciate quite well, and especially so with the bigger batteries.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    dennis
    We are all entitled to our own opinions of what we do and don't like about the Model S. I've sat in the car half a dozen times, and each time came away with the same impression: The look and feel of the interior (design and materials) are inferior to the following cars I have owned, all of which cost $90K-$115K with options (my Model S Performance cost $108K): 2000 750iL, E39 M5, E60 M5, Lexus LS600hL, Fisker Karma). And you are correct, the M5 cupholders are the worst.

    We're still happy with our intended purchase of the Model S, for the same reasons given by most everyone on this forum. But once the market moves past the early adopter phase and you need to appeal to buyers who are not solely comparing against other BEV/PHEV vehicles in order to meet volume targets, the cars from Tesla/Fisker/etc. will need to be competitive across the spectrum of features that buyers evaluate. Fortunately, there is a little time for the startup manufactures to mature their capabilities.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    CapitalistOppressor
    Sure, all of those vehicles cost you $90k-$115k out the door. But is that a fair comparison? Setting aside the Karma (because it is something of a special case) the 5 year cost for fuel, maintenance and repairs for a BMW M5 are ~$36,000. Both the 2012 BMW 750i and 2012 Lexus LS600hLwill have a 5 year cost of ~$28,000. The majority of those costs are for gasoline, while the energy costs for your MSSP will be ~$2,000 for equivalent use (maintenance is harder to calculate because the vast majority of that cost will be from frequent tire replacement).

    I'm prepared to stipulate that the interior of all of those vehicles is better than what you get with your MSSP. Are they $18,000-$25,000 better (or more, depending on the actual difference between maintenance costs)? $18-$25k is likely at the extreme low end of the premium you are paying for those vehicles, especially in the case of the M5. And that is completely aside from depreciation expenses.

    While being firmly open to debate, I feel a strong argument can be made that your MSSP will depreciate much more gracefully than any BMW. The Lexus is extremely reliable in comparison to the BMW so I'll give it a partial pass, but even that is mitigated by a substantial yearly operational cost which works to cannibalize its value.

    2012 Lexus LS 600h L 5.0L V8 Hybrid AWD CVT Automatic True Cost to Own
    2012 BMW 7 Series 3.0L 6-cyl. Twin-turbo 6-speed Automatic True Cost to Own
    2010 BMW M5 5.0L V10 7-speed Automated Manual True Cost to Own
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    STxTesla
    I had a BMW 545i that had cupholders that would eject a styrofoam cup of coffee towards the end of the cup. The weight of the coffee in the cup became light enough that the spring action on the cupholder would vault the cup up into the air and the remaining contents, 1-2 oz would end up on the passenger. I hated that feature flaw in a vehicle that you would think is refined enough not to have crappy problems like that. I owned that car around 2005.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    stopcrazypp
    Certainly, we are entitled to our own opinions and I think your experience with previous vehicles and opinion from your seat time in the Model S are very relevant context and your opinion is completely valid given that context.

    However, my initial response to your comment was in the context of general (the biggest/loudest/most discussed) complaints about the Model S, and the interior materials and the overall interior design (although there are some specific design issues like the front armrest/cupholder) seems to fall low on the list. The biggest complaint by far was the lack of interior storage, then it's the lack of certain features (mainly amenities for rear passengers, but also luxury car features like electric folding mirrors, adaptive cruise control, adaptive headlights, etc.), and then fit and finish (mainly the rear trunk). There's also been gripes of about how Tesla designed the options pricing (related to their choice of a 21" wheel).

    Again, finding the "general" opinion, falls to the difficulty of finding a representative sample of "mainstream" buyers.

    I think the major plus of Tesla is they have shown a willingness to listen to customers and make immediate changes to their car based on feedback (I have not seen this in other car companies to date). The downfall is this closeness to the customer means sometimes misinformed reps may give out incorrect facts that spread quickly.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    dennis
    It would be interesting to know how many consumers base their purchase decision on 5 year cost of ownership vs. what they can afford to spend now (0.9% financing, $0 down, etc.).

    I'll admit that as an avowed car nut since I was about age 7, my purchase decisions have been much more based on the emotional feeling the car generates, coupled with what I could currently afford, rather than an antiseptic analysis of 5 year cost of ownership, likely depreciation, et al. This is also true of the decision to buy the Model S (and the Karma, which has turned out to be 1/2 the cost per mile of the M5, even with $.20/kwh gouging from PG&E).

    I'll also stipulate that I have gotten tons of enjoyment out of driving each of those cars, and would not have chosen a lower cost of ownership car unless it had the same emotional grab.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    Norbert
    TCO calculations may help when what you call the "emotional grab" is in fact there, but also a worry that it might be too expensive from a rational point of view, as that might not be actually the case.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    brianman
    I do find it somewhat amusing that the comparisons are very cherry-picked. Please want CoG lower than a Ferrari, cupholders matching the best (Lexus?), pricetag competing with a Civic, etc.

    Nobody says "Telsa should match German cupholders".

    I think the "Best car" talk is what brought some of this on, but it's amusing nonetheless.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    CapitalistOppressor
    I actually think folks rarely if ever look at the true cost of ownership of a car. In many ways, thats the point of this thread. Tesla has a huge advantage here and they need to find a way to educate the buying public.

    As a practical matter, TCO is the most accurate way to make a purchase decision, and people have used a bastardized version by looking at MPG numbers and consumer reliability reports. That works well enough when every car is an ICE vehicle and people have life experiences to make an informed choice. But folks don't have experience with electric vehicles which means someone needs to sit them down and actually educate them about what is involved in a formal TCO calculation, then point out the actual numbers for Model S vs the competition.

    Keep in mind that there is a widespread view that electric cars are "more expensive" than gas powered cars. That prejudice is widespread even among folks in these forums who are Tesla supporters and who support EV's for a variety of reasons. There is a constant undercurrent on here that some aspects of the Model S might be inferior compared to some competitors. All fine and good, and possibly true.

    But how valid are those concerns if the Model S is in fact significantly less expensive than those competitors? Shouldn't you expect to get what you pay for? In terms of actual money coming out of your pocket the 2012 Lexus LS600hL likely costs 50% more than your Model S Signature Performance does based on realistic depreciation expectations for your Sig. A 2013 BMW M5 is likely in similar territory if it has similar TCO numbers to the earlier versions. Personally, if one car costs 50% more than another car, thats information I take into account when comparing features between those two cars.
    �
  • Jul 29, 2012
    dennis
    Agreed, so long as the lower cost of ownership car meets the minimum required feature set. Scenario:

    Spouse 1: Honey, this Model S doesn't have a vanity mirror light or parking sensors.

    Spouse 2: But honey, the Model S is going to cost us 1/2 as much to operate over the next 5 years as the BMW and Lexus cars we looked at this morning.

    Spouse 1: I don't care, it doesn't have a vanity mirror light and parking sensors. We're NOT going to buy it.
    �
  • Jul 30, 2012
    smorgasbord
    If you're really talking 1/2 the TCO, adding a vanity mirror light and adding parking sensors in the aftermarket seems a financial no-brainer.

    I wish it were that easy: for what I'd want to do, I think I'm looking at $20K, probably more, in the aftermarket:

    1) Rework door insides to provide pockets.
    2) Design and build new center console (not the full dash to back of seat thing others here like, btw). Have cup holders on the back of the console for the rear seat passengers.
    3) Replace front seats with BMW Comfort seats.
    4) Rework rear bench seat to have fold-down armrest in the middle.
    5) Replace headliner with darker material
    6) Reduce sunroof crossing bar cover to its minimum dimension and cover it with headliner material.
    7) Replace most of the brushed aluminum trim and and door handles.
    8) Add park distance sensors.
    9) Add light duty tow hitch (for bicycle rack).
    10) Add heat to the steering wheel, if possible.
    11) Add motors for side mirrors, if possible.
    12) Add an LED light to passenger side vanity mirror.

    And then there are some style things, like redoing the front nose in CF, replacing as much of the chrome as possible with CF, or something to make it look like the car was styled in the 21st century, not in 1990's chrome.
    �
  • Jul 30, 2012
    CapitalistOppressor
    Ya, I don't think all of that will get done anytime soon. Best to move on.
    �
  • Jul 30, 2012
    VolkerP
    +1. Sign me in. Can we get a quote for a group by at Al & Ed? :biggrin:
    �
  • Jul 30, 2012
    Johann Koeber
    I'll buy that too.
    �
  • Jul 30, 2012
    jerry33
    I'd suggest none because consumers have been used to purchasing ICE cars, and traditional ICE cars of a given price range have about the same operating costs so there was no need to do any detailed TCO calculations (the few that had much higher operating costs than average stopped selling quickly--think Edsel).

    With the introduction of hybrids and BEVs, the five and ten year TCO cost comparisons become important but the average consumer will require a long education process before they get it.
    �
  • Jul 30, 2012
    Robert.Boston
    I drive a BMW 535 X-drive Sportswagon (2010). Some observations:
    • Front seats very similar. Adjustable headrests in BMW look bulky/sloppy. Base Dakota leather in BMW is "coarse" and stiff; Tesla's nappa has a softer hand (but how will it wear?). Tesla's lack of grab-handles makes the Model S challenging for older passengers.
    • Front storage: BMW center console storage is nearly useless, heavily subdivided; but door storage is useful. Tesla's under-screen shelf + "kangaroo pouch" on seats will be fine for most needs. Open space will be appreciated by both me (briefcase) and my wife (purse).
    • Rear seat: BMW seats are better for 2 passengers, but worse for middle passenger. BMW provides rear passengers 2 x 12v charging, cupholders and storage in flip-down console, door storage, and back-of-front-seat pockets -- which is more than we ever use, but some amount of storage is needed for longer drives. Headroom in BMW (wagon) is far better than Tesla. Tesla's lack of grab-handles makes the Model S challenging for older passengers.
    • Rear cargo: 12v charger in BMW is useful. BMW power lift-gate has broken several times.
    • Drive and suspension: Tesla wins hands-down in both categories (at least with Tesla's air suspension). The BMW engine is great, of course, but doesn't have the low-end torque for great driving at low speeds (rush hour). BMW suspension doesn't handle rough gravel roads well.
    • Maintenance: our 535i has been an on-going source of extended visits with BMW service. This is a known issue with this engine. My wife has put BMW on the "no buy" list for future cars based on this experience (it's her car, so she deals with the service center).
    Generally, the BMW 5 (and 7, and Audi A6 and A8) pay more attention to rear-seat passengers than Tesla does. Audi does this best, which is why the A8L is the dominant car in the European diplomatic community.
    �
  • Jul 30, 2012
    unclfuzzy
    I would posit that there will continue to be a significant number of people buying a Model S for whom it will be 2x - 4x the price of any car they have ever owned, at least until there are other real options for PEVs out there. I don't have the luxury of comparing the Model S interior to a fleet of previously owned BMWs, Audis, Aston Matins, etc. Compared to the Korean and Japanese cars I've owned most recently it's lovely. Compared to any American car I've been in in the past 30 years it's spectacular. We may not all do a rational TCO evaluation, but the gut desire to go completely gas-free for economic, personal, and political reasons puts many of us over the line in favor of stretching to buy the Model S. And I guarantee there are enough people like me out there to meet the sales targets Tesla has set for the S until Bluestar is imminent.

    Oh, and at least if it had milk crates for seats people might stop complaining about the lack of console storage. ;-)
    �
  • Jul 30, 2012
    CapitalistOppressor

    I think that is a fair description of the 535i sedan as well, only with less interior room. The center console is annoying and makes me feel boxed in with it being up so high. I really like the center space in the Model S because it's a natural spot for my laptop, which currently gets dumped behind the driver seat or in front of the front passenger seat.

    As to storage in the door panels, I have never in my life used it for anything. I've used the behind the seat pouches on occasion, and the lack of a 12v plug in the Model S is an oversight. But overall, the uncluttered interior of the Model S appeals to me.

    Interior knickynacks aside, my biggest problem with the 535i is that it's just kinda boring anymore. Sure, it's the class leader, has decent performance in comparison to its peers, etc. But it just seems so stale to me. Kinda like the 2 year old cracker fragment I recently found in my door pouch.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    chrisn
    Hi folks. I read most of this thread on the M5 specific one. I have an E60 M5 (among other guzzlers) and have struggled with whether to go for a Model S Perf or the new F10 M5. I really wanted to go for the Model S, by I ultimately decided to get one more ICE performance sedan, and ordered an M5. The issues discussed here were all on my mind.

    In terms of TCO, I worried about three main issues:

    1. Viability risk. For Roadster buyers, the Company's survival must feel like a "sure thing," but it really isn't. Even Elon speaks frequently about the multiple ways that they might fail. What will an X% of a Y% step-function decline in value do to your TCO if the company goes bust? (Hint: X%*Y%*Price).

    2. Beta tester hassle/risk. We don't know what we don't know. Assembly line production models are not hand-built prototypes. We should expect numerous design and manufacturing defects to reveal themselves in the coming months/years. Most will be merely annoying, but some may be significant. How many trips to the dealer do you expect in the first three years? Seeing this, what will the next guy want to pay for the car (warranty or not)?

    3. Obsolescence risk. The depreciation curve could accelerate if future technology / scale economies reduce reduce the relative value of the Model S.

    I am not saying that any of these by itself is a decisive factor or that, collectively, they should sway early adopters (God bless them), but the OP's TOC calculations and analysis disregard these factors entirely. Even if you think the chance of serious issues is <30% and, therefore, you ignore the risk, doesn't mean that it doesn't "cost" you to bear the risk. It's like life insurance or fire insurance. You still get full value even if, in a given month, you don't die and your house doesn't burn down.

    As an aside, my DD is a Chevy Volt that I charge off of solar panels, so don't think I am anti-EV or am ignoring consumables.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    NEWDL
    Chrisn,
    You have to have some faith... Be a bit crazy... and want it bad! None of those enter into your mathematical equations...
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    Doug_G
    That risk also applies to the M5, since it's not electric...
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    ckessel
    Indeed, I'm not overly worried about the obsolesce risk hurting TCO. Normal depreciation is so bad today that it can't get much worse. The Model S batteries are built to be replaceable, so it may have a leg up in upgrading to avoid obsolescence.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    mnx
    Chris, I just can't imagine owning another ICE car with a lousy transmission getting in the way of driving... Have you driven the Model S Perf?
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    Robert.Boston
    Another strategy, @chrisn, would be to keep your E60 M5 (which is, after all, a great car) and have the MSP. Diversify your portfolio and your fun.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    rcc
    Timing is everything. There's early adopters and bleeding edge adopters. The Model S is the "bet the company" product. And people buying the Model S in the first 9 months are bleeding edge. People buying now are taking a real risk although I think it's good one. People buying 9 months now should have a much clearer view into the crystal ball.

    Viability: In 9 months, we should know if Telsa can ramp production. We'll also know a lot more about the Model S (extended reviews and quality) and should have some insight into whether the demand will sustain itself. Given all that, we should be able to guage whether Tesla will survive in the short-run (a year or two) and have some insight into their odds of surviving in the long run. It looks like Telsa can be profitable if the Model S does even reasonably well. So as long as they manage the financials so that future vehicles don't turn into "bet the company" investments, things should be ok for at least a few years.

    Quality: In 9 months, we should know about most if not all the serious bugs that don't show up until you scale up production including stuff that triggers recalls.

    Obsolescence: the question is will market forces and technology trends will drive the cost of a Model-S-like car down to the point where the S has near zero resale value? Think computers.

    This is where it gets complicated because you've got market forces, technology trends and have to think mid-term (2-3 years) and long-term. Long-term is all about technology trends. Short/mid-term is all about competition (market forces).

    From a competitive standpoint, I don't think anyone is going to bring a Model S-like car out in 2-3 years at competitive prices. They can't do it without battery management tech like Telsa has. And if they had that, we'd be hearing about it.

    From a technology trends standpoint, the major thing that can change in EV-space is battery and battery management technology (charging, etc.).

    What is very very unlikely to change significantly is the chassis design fundamentals, manufacturing with aluminum, electric motor technology, brakes, tires, wheels, etc. In other words, almost everything else about the car.

    Elon says that battery density is improving at 7% a year. In 5 years, that means batteries will be 40% more energy-dense than they are today. So 5 years from now, I'm expecting that EVs will have 40% more range at today's cost. In 3 years, that number would be 23%.

    That doesn't sound like a game-changer to me. It should cause Model S to lose some of its value faster than normal. On the other hand, the Model S could hold value better than normal because of the fewer # of moving parts that can wear out. Who knows? Take your best guess.

    However, the 40KwH model will be most vulnerable to this over the next 3 years because a 23% increase in battery density could increase the range of non-Tesla EV's to be roughly comparable to the Model S. But I don't see anyone matching the range of the 85KwH model in <3 years. Except Tesla. And I expect Tesla will use the density improvements to drive cost down on the GenIII first before they increase range above the current Model S. But again, who knows? That all depends on how successful Tesla is at holding down costs everywhere else in the GenIII.

    How well will the Model S hold value over 5 years? Beats me. The car itself will not be obsolete. The battery tech could be outdated enough to drive value down. On the other hand, if Tesla is still around and viable, a Model S owner (or used car buyer) could just wait until batteries get "cheap enough" and buy a new pack. That gives you an N year car with battery density and cost to the new cars at that time. With far fewer mechanical systems that are aging and have to be repaired/replaced. Not as good as new but lots better than buying say, an 8 year old conventional car.

    The tech trend that could wipe out Tesla's current technology advantage is if future batteries don't need significant management. Or someone develops another compelling power source for cars. We're probably at least 5 years away from that assuming it ever happens at all. And if Tesla is still around when that happens, hopefully they'll have developed enough other advantages that they can stay in business.

    Summary: if you're locking in now, yes, you're a bleeding edge adopter taking a significant risk. That's why you have the option of choosing "Signature Red" :biggrin:. If you can wait a while longer (or have no choice because you have a >9000 P#), you'll still be an early adopter but I think we'll have a pretty good view into what kind of car the Model S truly is and Tesla's viability over the next few years.

    Disclaimer: in addition to being in line for a Model S, after I did the above analysis and thought hard about Elon's track record, I went long on Tesla.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    smorgasbord
    Nice comparison. We have a 2005 X5 4.4i. My wife loves this car, except for the gas consumption. Along the same comparison lines then:

    - Front "Comfort" seats on X5 are more adjustable (back has a pivot point so that shoulders are adjustable separately from back angle). For short drives, we were comfortable in Model S, but obviously don't know about long drives. Some seat positions on Model S have the driver's head too close to the headliner, which is a really claustrophobic feeling.
    - Rear seat on Model S is too low so your knees stick up uncomfortably even on short drives; headroom is marginally OK. Agree with Robert that center seat in Model S is better than center in BMW, but that's the least used seat of all.
    - Rear of X5 has slide out cupholders for passengers. Model S has none.
    - All 4 doors of X5 have deep, very usable pockets. Model S has none.
    - It's shocking that the gas car has more power ports than the electric car. Tesla should be ashamed. There is no excuse for Model S not having 110 volt outlets in the back, and there should be power available in the frunk and/or rear cargo area to run a cooler.
    - X5 has a true panoramic sunroof that makes Tesla's claims about Model S's laughable. And the X5 shade is powered. And vent mode pops rear of both glass plates.
    - Rear cargo on Model S is better than X5. Frunk is huge bonus.
    - Suspension & driving: Model S wins big (the most important aspect for many).
    - Maintenance: This is our second X5. Our first had some weird engine (6 cyl 3.0L) problem that BMW couldn't solve. Heard that BMW was going iDrive, so when we got a good price for it we ordered the 8 cyl version (last without iDrive) with the specific options we wanted to replace it. The new one had software transmission issues that took BMW months to solve. It's still a little jerky if the road slope and car speed are just so. Unknown what Model S will be. I have some concern over PEM repair costs years down the road.
    - Options: When we got our second X5, we optioned it exactly as we wanted. Heated steering wheel & rear seats. Dark headliner, burl wood and black leather. Sport suspension & steering wheel, but with Comfort seats. The interior is subtle and comfortable and is high quality (has held up very well over 7 years and 105K miles) without feeling overly luxurious, if you know what I mean. My wife loves this car and feels extremely comfortable driving it, including its high driver position to see over traffic.
    - Model S is going to be a mixed bag with options/technology/luxury: The touchscreen is outstanding and revolutionary, it has a rear view camera whose view is large enough to actually use, yet it lacks rudimentary park distance sensors and for such a wide car to not have electric folding mirrors is going to be a little scary at times. I appreciate the spartan, open interior of Model S, but on the test drive my wife insisted on putting her big pursebag in the back seat, even after I suggested otherwise! That you can only get the headliner in beige is disappointing, especially with the black bar across the sunroof, which ruins the effect for rear passengers. I'd rather save money and just have a normal sunroof that slides inside the roof so has less drag, less exposure when open. Tech package has some cool things, the ambient lighting inside should be very nice during night drives, but the exterior handles are just silly and impractical. Hopefully the tech package will make them not annoying, but this is an area of concern for us.
    - Steering wheel & controls. The BMW just nails it here. The Mercedes-derived Model S controls are lame in comparison and swapped turn/cruise control stalks are simply inexcusable: I used to think Mercedes drivers were not courteous, but now I know it's that they've given up trying to find the turn stalk.

    It's fair to say that if Model S wasn't electric, we wouldn't be buying it. Tesla's electric drive and air suspension are huge pluses, and are the reason we're willing to overlook its shortcomings in other areas, but to be honest, the decision to buy/not buy in the end was close (I started a thread on Second Thoughts to explore it). If we needed rear seats on a regular basis for adults we would have cancelled/change to Model X. I do expect Tesla to continuously improve Model S. We are likely to either retrofit whatever new things are available and/or trade in for V2 when it comes out (like some Roadster owners did with their 1.5s when 2.5 came out). I agree with Tesla's decision to concentrate on the drivetrain, since that has to be right for them to be successful (look at Fisker's decision the other way for comparison), but that doesn't mean I'm going to cut them continual slack on making MSP worth $100K or Musk's claim that it's the best sedan in the world.

    While I'm on the soapbox, Tesla needs to think about what is the best form factor for electric cars. Making cars that look like they have engines up front may be what people want today, but that's like early automobiles looking like carriages without the horse - something that won't last. Tesla needs to think about what losing 5-6" of height to batteries in the chassis does to occupant comfort. My personal view is that they should have laid the batteries on their side in the chassis so that the height loss might only be an inch instead of 4-5, and for the batteries that wouldn't fit they could put some in the back part of the frunk and the rest in a normal center console.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    contaygious
    I agree with some of that feedback, but not sure it's fair to compare an SUV to the S. A much better comparison would be the X5 to the X. I personally am not a fan of the X5 in terms of how it drives and it doesn't really have a lot more room for how big it is on the outside. I think everything the S offers in terms of performance and innovation easily make up for it's shortcomings in convenience when compared to family SUVs; yet it's not really a fair comparison either way anyhow.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    Norbert
    That would make for a worse center of gravity, and mess with cargo and other space. So I think that would be a bad move. I think you are too much speaking from a very specific X5-fan (even a SUV) angle. It seems there are quite a few here who have reservations about the Mercedes steering wheel stalks, but Mercedes is in general considered among the best in class (even if not by BMW fans), (and their sales are similar), so even if you consider that a mistake, it's still a mistake also made by the best in class. Besides the "best sedan" rhetoric is getting old. They didn't claim to have everything the best, including the best cupholders, or so. Take a step back and take a look at the larger picture
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    smorgasbord
    I guess it depends on whether you want more room for people or more room for stuff. Right now, Model S has too much cargo space and not enough people space.

    As for center of gravity, I'm not talking about putting batteries in the roof. Putting them in the back of the frunk or in a center console will not raise the COG very much, yet result in a much more people accommodating environment. So, even if handling at the hairy edge isn't as good it's a better tradeoff for how the vast majority of people will use and drive the car.

    The Mercedes stalks are a poor design, and everyone knows it. You'd have an easier time defending Apple's dragging of disks to the trash to eject them, not to erase them - and that's pretty indefensible.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    JRP3
    Not sure of the comparison here. The Tesla has no transmission, just a gear reduction, so there will be no shifting issues, and the PEM is not equivalent to a transmission, it's electronics with no moving parts, which if properly designed and cooled, should last the life of the vehicle.

    - - - Updated - - -

    For you.
    The vast majority of people use a car with a single or maybe two people in it most of the time. Having a monolithic pack under the floor makes design and temperature management much easier. Also it seems to me that building modules with vertical cells is a better design than laying them end to end from a structural and assembly standpoint.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    smorgasbord
    Then Tes;a should warranty it for the life of the vehicle. We've read about PEM failures in Roadster, and while Model S might be better due to newer technology and better cooling, it's also something that when it fails will be expensive to fix. Do you want to sell me a 10 year PEM warranty?


    Indeed, everything gets the optimal space it needs on Model S - except the passengers.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    Norbert
    By which measure? That's a question of preferences.

    I felt more than comfortable enough in the second row, and I'm above 6 feet.

    I didn't defend it, I just pointed out that this is would be a difference among the best in class (BMW and Mercedes). I didn't test drive yet myself, but I heard that most are quite OK with the steering and got used to the turn signal position quickly. However I'd expect that sooner or later Tesla will have its own steering wheel and stalks, yet not this year.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    Jeeps17
    While I agree that the comparison to a large SUV is not ideal, this point has irked me for a while, and was made worse by the loss of the rear USB ports.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    CapitalistOppressor
    I ignore a lot of relevant factors in the TCO numbers I posted. Frankly, I welcome discussion and debate on them because even putting aside the other risks you mentioned (like Tesla dying) the economics of TCO for an electric vehicle just aren't fully understood at this point.

    But in terms of whether Tesla will exist in a few years, I don't know of any way to easily model that without making arbitrary assumptions. It seems to me that a large portion of that risk will be retired in the next few months when Tesla either succeeds or fails in ramping up production and increasing their gross margins. There will be relatively few Model S's on the road by then and many of them have already signed their contracts and are beyond caring about comparisons with other cars.

    If Tesla manages to get through the next year or so and hits the benchmarks they say they are going to hit, I personally am much less concerned about their long term prospects. But again, I don't see a way to model that in TCO, and considering that we are just 3 years removed from a near liquidation of GM and Chrysler, I don't feel a burning desire to sell Tesla short with unjustified unfavorable comparisons.

    In terms of the #2 beta test risk, again I don't see a way to model that for TCO. Unlike Fisker, Tesla actually has millions of miles of experience with the basic (albeit less advanced) drivetrain of the Roadster. Model S is certainly a riskier proposition than a BMW in terms of recall risk, but I again don't see a way to easily price that risk without making unjustified assumptions. It's possible that Model S can be riddled with problems and it's possible that it is nearly perfect. I tend towards thinking it will fall somewhere in the middle, but that's a judgement call and if most problems are fixed in recalls and under the warranty then I'm not even sure it will substantially impact cost of ownership.

    #3 is certainly a risk in the long term. I'm not certain it is in the short or medium term. The vast majority of the market is dominated by ICE vehicles right now. And at the moment at least, Model S isn't much more expensive than equivalent cars even on an MSRP basis. That would tend to put a floor under how much new technology can undercut Model S, because future Model S's wont be much cheaper or cost much less to operate.

    They'll weigh slightly less and have a longer range for the entry level cars. But I don't see anyone mass-producing 500 mile cars because there just wont be demand for that. 300 miles is fine if you have access to a decent SuperCharger network for the occasional long trip. Even in 10-15 years a degraded 85kWh pack will probably get you 200+ miles which is still enough to be a primary car (again assuming SuperChargers). Like any car, the number of miles driven will dominate value calculations because the number of charge cycles is likely more important than battery age in terms of degradation.

    Bottom line, in 10 years it's likely that the $50,000 Model S will be a 300 mile car, but by then most of the value of a current Model S is eroded anyways and probably isn't much affected. You'll be able to buy an old luxury car for cheap, and unlike an old ICE car it will cost almost nothing to operate. My suspicion is that the lower cost to operate will dominate and tend to leave old Model S's with a higher resale value than an old ICE vehicle.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    CapitalistOppressor
    I fully expect Tesla to eliminate the 40kWh option in the next 5 years and make the 60kWh option standard. But in terms of longer range, I don't see a huge market for 500 mile cars if you can reliably recharge 300 miles (i.e. reliably have chargers available) in an hour. That's longer than what an ICE vehicle takes to refuel, but with an electric car it's only relevant on 300 mile trips, which are fairly rare in real life. Not many people are going to spend thousands of dollars more to save an hour a few times a year.

    As a result, I think that the vast majority of EV's will top out between 200-300 miles until battery costs are an order of magnitude smaller. The real sweet spot is a 200-300 mile EV with an easily accessed charging network that can charge it in under an hour. With MS60 and MS85 Tesla is already in the sweet spot and the missing ingredient is building out their charging network.

    Personally, I expect improved batteries in the next few years to be used to reduce the weight of Model S. This will marginally improve range and performance all by itself, while also somewhat reducing cost. But I actually expect Tesla to capture a larger portion of the reductions and increase their margins on the product.

    Even at the current $70k it's not terribly more expensive than equivalent cars, so why should it drive the MSRP much lower when it's customers will experience five figure reductions in gas costs alone over 5 years? I think Tesla will position itself as a premium product with clear value advantages over its competitors and just become more profitable as the cost of its batteries fall. At some point viable EV competitors will emerge which will force Tesla to include more features or create downmarket versions, but the basic price points we see now won't fall much in the next 5 years.
    �
  • Aug 22, 2012
    KenEE
    I live in Texas and would jump on 600 miles of range. Until charging is as quick as refilling a gas tank, then range, range, and more range is the only answer. Of course I can say from experience that having a range extender in my Volt is the best of both worlds. (95%+ days I drive 100% electrice, but if I want to take my kids to see their aunt in Fort Worth - no worries!)
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    Brian H
    Only because it's so demmed uncomfortable. When the tunnel-lump is gone, it offers the best sight-lines (out the front window) and will become the most-used seat.
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    brianman
    2012 Tesla Model S First Drive - Motor Trend

    I can't find the quote, but I recall the official Tesla characterization being qualified with "in the sedan category". Is the X5 a sedan?

    And is Motor Trend off their rocker?

    I'm unclear on what's "laughable" about Tesla's claims here.
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    jkirkebo
    Surely not. But neither is the Model S ;)
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    chrisn
    I think there is zero risk that the existence of next-gen EV cars in 3-5 years will impact the resale value of cars like the BMW M5 or MB E63. The market for used ICE cars is too big to be meaningfully moved by the tiny number of EV cars that would be sold in that timeframe. The 10-year risk is higher, but at that point residual value of a luxury sedan is <20% so the absolute value of the "hit" can't, by definition, be that significant....

    Honestly, if you want to pursue that line of thinking, try this on for size: the crop of >500HP cars hitting the market now were all green-lighted before the Great Recession. I think the current crop of "halo" sports sedans may just be a highwater point for ICE platforms. I would gladly take the bet that the absolute delta in terms of utility/features between a 2013 Model S and a 2018 Model S (assuming company existed) will be a TON bigger than the delta between a 2013 M5 and 2018 M5. There are simply fewer engineering dials to turn and the pace of change in the underlying tech ecosystem is slower. And this assume constant price. I think the Model S in 5 years will be 20% cheaper (while still being better).

    Again, the Model S seems awesome. I an NOT knocking it. I just think you guys are "spending" more than you may realize--- which is also fine.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I like the way you think, but garage space is scarce. I sent the check in for the F10 M5 yesterday and am off to Munich next week to pick her up. She'll be back in U.S. in Oct, in case anyone in the SF Bay Area wants to meet up and swap test drives.
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    chrisn
    I didn't mean to criticize, and I know the stuff I mention is hard/impossible to quantify-- but I do think it is real.

    - - - Updated - - -

    We will know in 9 months whether they will stumble out of the gate, but we won't know for 2-3 years whether they are on a long term path to viability. For a single product company like this, we can't extrapolate the early adopter demand/sales into high quality forecasts about sustained sales growth. You need to get through the backlog of folks who have been "waiting for" the car, some have already bought, some are waiting the 9 months you described before buying. You don't really know until you get a sense of steady-state organic demand from people who weren't paying much attention before but are prepared to spend $50-$100K on a new luxury car.
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    smorgasbord
    1) The entire roof may be glass, but light doesn't come through the whole roof. As with the rear window, the blacked out portions are significant.
    2) I don't know what Tesla's definition of "sedan" is, but for me the cross bar in the middle limits the amount that the sunroof can open, not to mention its overall effect.
    3) That big black bar across the sunroof effectively turns the thing into two sunroofs, one that opens.
    4) Thanks to the steep sloping windshield, the front end of the sunroof is too far back to really enjoy the view.

    Go sit in an X5 and play with the panoramic sunroof. ,Go back to Model S and play with its sunroof. Then come back here and try to wax poetic about Model S's sunroof.
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    Kevin Harney
    You may not be sure what Tesla's definition of a Sedan is but the rest of the world is pretty clear what a sedan is. And the X5 does not fit that definition at all. You are comparing 2 completely different things here and there really is no question of that fact.

    Edit: Sedan Definition
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    rcc
    Agreed. We won't know about long-term viability for years.

    I think the first key question that must be answered is whether Tesla can make a car that appeals to people who want to buy a car. As opposed to people who are eager or determined to buy an electric car. If they've built the latter, I agree they'll run out of buyers. If they've built the former, I think they've got a good chance of long-term success. This is why Elon's goal for Tesla is to build the car in the world. He wants everyone in the company focused on designing and building a great car. Period. Dot.

    I think we'll have a pretty good feel for whether or not they've succeeded in 9 months. And I think we'll have a pretty good feel for whether their sales approach works too.

    Can they sustain that success over the long-haul? That depends on long-term quality, ownership experience, high quality management, etc. We won't know that for sure for years. But we should have a significantly better idea 9 months from now than we do today.

    And if that's not enough to make you comfortable, don't buy. Seriously. One of the issues with buying from a small new company is that it's small and new so they have less margin for error. You have to be comfortable with that risk if you buy. And if you're not, don't.
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    Jaff
    I'm not sure I agree with this.

    I think TMC would run out of prospects due to the current price of the car rather than running out of folks who want a (feasible) electric car...(outside of gearheads and those whose livelyhood depend on ICE vehicles of course...)


    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    smorgasbord
    By that definition ("a passenger car in a three-box configuration with A, B & C-pillars and principal volumes articulated in separate compartments for engine, passenger and cargo."), Model S is not a sedan, either.
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    Kevin Harney
    How so ?
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    donauker
  • Aug 23, 2012
    pete8314
    That's true, I'm fairly sure they would never want to market it as a '5-door hatch', becuase that sounds cheap/non-premium, but that's what it is. FWIW, Audi market the A7 as a sedan, so there's a difference, as always, between the marketing spiel and technical definitions.
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    contaygious
    Yeah I never got the difference between hatch and sedan. They use it pretty interchangeably these days.
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    jkirkebo
    My distinction: If the rear window opens with the trunk lid, it's a hatchback (or station wagon, SUV etc, many possibilities here). If the window stay in place, it's a sedan.
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    Robert.Boston
    TMC is our forum, so we're surely not going to sell anybody a car!:wink:

    If you look at the sale volumes for MB, BMW, and Audi, it's clear that the global market for $50k+ cars exceeds 1 million vehicles/year. So Tesla Motors is not at risk for running out of people who are willing to plunk down enough money to buy a Model S; the question is whether the Model S can compete head-to-head with other premium sedans (rather than competing for market share in the EV space).
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    stopcrazypp
    That's exactly the technical difference between hatchback and sedan. However, some hatchbacks look exactly the same as a sedan, so they blur the line (the Model S is an example, another good one is the Mazda 6 hatchback that is identical to the sedan in looks).

    But that's off topic. The X5 isn't in the same class as the Model S simply because it's an SUV. The roof is flat/long and rear window is vertical (like most SUVs), so it's easier to make the panoramic roof open wider.

    The Model S on the other hand is a "sedan-like" hatchback, with a sloped roof and a horizontal rear window. The roof is going to be more similar to the one you find the Mustang or MKZ glass roof.
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    Jaff
    Yes, that is a large market Robert, but is it as large as the world-wide market for all of those folks who would buy a feasible electric car?

    I do agree TMC is not at risk of running out of prospects...


    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    Norbert
    Depending on how the gas price develops, it may very well have an effect on the 5 year value. Especially if people change their minds about the impact of oil dependence, which many still don't take serious. At some point, things may change quickly.

    We don't really know that for any car company. The 2008 crisis (with sudden high gas prices) caught the largest and oldest manufacturers cold.
    �
  • Aug 23, 2012
    goyogi
  • Aug 23, 2012
    chrisn
    I think gas prices could have an impact via making the Model S resale value slightly higher, but no one is paying attention to the gas milage of the M5. Honestly, I think few early adopters of the Model S Sig Perf worry much about the price of kWh's either.

    Even if Tesla and GM/Volt ran at full tilt for the next 3-5 years, the inventory of used EVs would be an insignificant rounding error in terms of impact on resale value of ICE cars.
    �
  • Aug 24, 2012
    rcc
    Why? The only technology that I see developing that will affect a Model S vs. a future Model S vs. an M5 is battery technology. I don't see major improvements coming in way of electric motors, regen braking, etc. And the rest of the Model S is "car stuff" that any manufacturer can apply to their car.

    Assuming battery density improves at 7% per year, in 5 years, you should be able to buy an 85Kwh battery for the price of a 60Kwh battery today. So yes, people lining up today are paying $10K (+ future value of money etc etc etc) more. Plus whatever typical improvements get driven into cars in general.

    That $10K is one of the prices of being an early adopter. However, if the current Model S meets your needs and you can afford to buy it, well, that sounds like a personal decision to me. How do you like to spend your money.

    For me, that extra $10K means I get EV instant-acceleration and quiet now (well, in the spring) instead of in 5 years.
    �
  • Aug 24, 2012
    CapitalistOppressor
    Like I said in a previous post, I don't think the consumer will necessarily see all of those savings in 5 years. Elon's new options package specifies 30% gross margins as one of the goals. There is a real floor to the price of the Model S that is a result of how much it currently costs to purchase a luxury vehicle.

    At $70,000 the MS85 is already nearly price competitive with the 550i GT ($65k base cost) which is the closest ICE analogue in terms of performance and features. That is leaving aside the huge savings in operating costs you get with Model S.

    In the not too distant future, Tesla will no longer qualify for the $7,500 rebate and I expect that Tesla will be in a position to lower the MSRP to match the current price point thanks to savings on the battery. But it's not obvious to me that they will lower the price much more than that.

    The 550i GT falls short of the MS85 in many important respects (again, even leaving aside operation costs). I think it's in Tesla's interest to position themselves as a premium product and gratuitously undercutting your competitors prices while offering a better product doesn't make much business sense unless you are having problems with demand. If your competitor under those circumstances is selling an inferior product, it makes more sense to invest in more marketing rather than lowering your prices.
    �
    • Người đăng: vào lúc

    Không có nhận xét nào:

    Đăng nhận xét

    Đăng ký: Đăng Nhận xét (Atom)