Feb 18, 2016
Reeler The Bolt and Leaf are Front Wheel Drive (FWD) and the Model 3 is cheaper than the Bolt at least. Everyone presumes that the Model 3 will be Rear Wheel Drive (RWD) like the Model S started out as. Also, Elon has said this car will compete with the 3 series BMW that is RWD.
I predict it will be FWD with a D option for those that want more horsepower. The econobox segment that the low-end Model 3 is targeting is all FWD.�
Feb 18, 2016
ModelNforNerd
FWD is more of a function of the technology available in the "econobox" segment.
Tesla doesn't have to worry about a driveshaft.�
Feb 18, 2016
gavine FWD ICE cars are cheaper to manufacture which is why most are. You typically only find RWD in luxury and/or high performance ICE cars.�
Feb 18, 2016
Reeler FWD is far better with occasional snow/ice. In my neighborhood, the BMWs are parked for the winter and winters in Denver are mild.�
Feb 18, 2016
ModelNforNerd
Not sure why everyone seems to be hung up on the 3 being "economy". Yes, I get that they're naturally competing with the Bolt. But EM has already said to think of it more as a 3-series/A4 competitor.
The 3 series is RWD, the A4 in its most basic form is FWD.
So who knows what Tesla is going to do here.............�
Feb 18, 2016
Reeler The Model 3 is cheaper than a Bolt. You can hope/dream that the Model 3 is high performance or whatever, but that is contrary to the few details we have from Tesla. If you want performance, Elon will tell you to buy a Model S.
- - - Updated - - -
Though not a poll option, I predict FWD standard with a AWD option. The AWD version will beat the 3-series/A4 in performance by a large margin, but the stock FWD will only need to beat the Bolt/Leaf.�
Feb 18, 2016
Mad Hungarian I'm thinking they're leaning towards the RWD side of the equation.
See last paragraph here
Hardly conclusive, but I believe they'll stick with it as RWD as:
- A designed-from-scratch RWD EV layout doesn't suffer the same weight bias issues as front-engine-RWD ICE vehicles
- A 50/50 balanced RWD chassis actually offers better traction as the rearward weight transfer under acceleration favors the rear wheels
- Driving dynamics are generally superior as the front wheels don't get overloaded when asked to steer and accelerate at the same time
- Traction control and stability control systems are so good now - especially when coupled to an instantly responsive EV drivetrain - that even novice drivers can easily handle RWD in bad conditions
In fact I'm actually driving a BMW i3 we have at work for the next few days and this thing is positively glued to the road and couldn't be easier to drive on snow and ice. And note that my frame of reference is an A4 Quattro with studded Nokians.
9�
Feb 18, 2016
sms_327 A product specialist told me that AWD with be a $5,000 option�making it $40,000.�
Feb 18, 2016
dhanson865 FWD is better in snow if you have a gas engine in the front because it helps the F/R weight distribution vs the drive wheels and there is a half second or more delay for power request changes.
RWD with a Tesla doesn't care because the frunk is empty and the drive controller can increase/decrease torque at ms resolution, literally on the order of 100 times better control. Traction control and ABS on a Tesla are instantaneous at a practical level they happen quicker than you can even sense as a human.
No reason to care about FWD vs RWD on a modern EV. It just isn't an issue.�
Feb 18, 2016
stopcrazypp This is what the "FWD is better for snow" crowd is missing. Modern traction and stability control (which is federally mandated now, unlike before) is so good now that you don't have to worry so much about oversteer in a RWD car anymore, and is especially true when coupled with an EV drivetrain that can make instant adjustments to power and with even weight balance of an EV (vs front loaded in an ICE).
Plus, the original premise doesn't really apply, as a vast majority of FWD EVs aren't being sold in snowy areas either. The main reason for going with FWD is when the chassis the car was based on started out like that (Leaf used an evolved Versa platform, and Bolt is likely based on the next gen platform for the Trax).
Also more food for thought, two of the cheapest EVs out there are RWD: iMIEV and Smart Electric Drive.�
Feb 18, 2016
Reeler I live in an upper middle class neighborhood where new BMWs are more the norm than the exception. Most are parked for the winter despite having ABS and traction control. With even more torque, I would think it a mistake to go with RWD. Myself, the only RWD car I drive is a classic VW.�
Feb 18, 2016
McRat Do Smart Cars even have rear tires? I thought they were so short they were like Segways.�
Feb 18, 2016
gregincal But you can always buy AWD, which probably will be most of the Model 3 sales anyway.�
Feb 18, 2016
rcarpen22 RWD Tesla would be fine for the same reason Bugs are... drive unit over the drive wheels. This is also why fwd is fairly good in snow. Fwd still has the added safety bonus (for the average driver) of massive understeer, but that can be tuned into the suspension.�
Feb 18, 2016
ImEric I really don't think that's the case. Without performance, how will the Model 3 possibly compete with the top seller in its segment (BMW 3 series), which has become synonymous with "sports sedan?" Even the "Poverty pack" 3 series has respectable performance. Also, this is presumably the same platform that the 2019/2020 Roadster will be built upon. I'm certain that it will be highly capable. So maybe he tells you to spend more for performance, but not "buy a different car." He's always said that he wants to make the best cars, not just the best electric cars. And since he loves performance, the M3 will perform. In fact, I would venture to guess that the Fully optioned, performance version of the M3 will outpace the MS in several categories. Stopping time, for sure. But also acceleration, handling and maybe top speed as well.�
Feb 18, 2016
Gizmotoy Hopefully RWD with optional AWD. Since AWD increases cost, it seems likely to me that the base model will be 2WD.�
Feb 18, 2016
santana338 I don't have the citation but Elon has said two things that I recall that are relevant to this discussion:
1. Teslas will always be RWD because torque steer on a F(ront)WD vehicle would make steering under hard acceleration difficult (I hear there are some Ford EVs with this issue)
2. Tesla won't dumb down the performance for a cheaper car�
Feb 18, 2016
dhanson865 and you live in a world were you don't even read the replies people type to you that tell you how those BMWs have gas engines that dont respond to ABS and traction control in a timely fashion but EVs do.�
Feb 18, 2016
Snow Drift FWD sucks in the snow, RWD is worse but at least it lets you have fun. AWD is the hands down champion, especially with snow tires. I've owned a FWD Acura RSX and three AWD Subaru WRX. The RSX couldn't get up my snowy steep driveway, the WRX claw their way up with ease.
Elon is a car guy. Everyone knows that there's nothing right about asking the front tires to steer and drive. You don't pull a shopping cart, you push it from behind. Wrong Wheels Drive is horrible from a driving stand point. He won't ruin the car with it.
Plus, the competition is RWD or AWD in the entry level luxury sport sedan segment.
AWD, Dual Motor, will be an option just like on the MS.�
Feb 18, 2016
Twiglett After all, those VW Bugs are renowned for the awesome handling and are in no way affected by that huge lump of engine hanging out over the rear wheels.
There is as much chance of the base Model 3 being a convertible as there is of it being FWD.�
Feb 18, 2016
aronth5 There have been many threads from existing owners discussing their experiences with FWD and RWD and the consistent theme is that Tesla's RWD equaled or in many cases exceeded the ICE FWD cars they have owned.
The results of the poll are pretty compelling don't you think?�
Feb 18, 2016
Reeler Kool-Aid is a potent elixir. I will let you know at the reveal what the true answer is.
I think with FWD standard, most performance folks will get the AWD option. But if RWD is standard, many will not go for the AWD. Tesla makes more money with the FWD standard option.
I know everyone wants it to be RWD, but if Tesla is smart, they should go with the option that will force more upgrades.�
Feb 18, 2016
tracksyde So, by that logic, if Tesla is smart, the base Model 3 should come standard with:
Roll-up windows
15" steel wheels with hub caps
No floor mats
AM only radio
Etc, etc...
You know, to force more upgrades so they can make more money.�
Feb 19, 2016
djplong There IS one thing FWD has going for it that is totally unrelated to where the engine is or weight distribution.
It is more efficient to pull a car than to push it. Look at a horse-drawn carriage. Do you put the carriage or wagon in front? No. Is it easier to push a wagon or pull it? Pulling it. (We measured this stuff in a high-school physics class)
Why? Because, when you are pushing from behind, you are also fighting the friction of the front wheels trying to dig into the ground. In FWD, the drag from the rear wheels is a LOT less than the drag of the front wheels on a RWD car.�
Feb 19, 2016
Reeler The Bolt, which costs more at base price, will probably have steel wheels and no floor mats. To expect Tesla to ignore the basic economics of what is expected for a $27.5K car makes no sense. I know we all want a Model S for a Chevy econobox price, but it is not going to happen.�
Feb 19, 2016
docherf The profit margin is in competing for BMW/Mercedes type of customers. I think most of them appreciate the driving dynamics of RWD. Suspect tesla will be RWD with AWD option like model s.
If they do an econobox in the future, FWD may make sense for those that need to get around in poor conditions at times. These customers generally don't have extra cars to drive in bad weather nor are they likely to swap snow tires twice a year. (which is a PITA & expensive)
We currently have RWD(no snow tires) , AWD, & FWD cars . The rear drive is the one we will not drive in snow despite traction control - because it sucks. All the others are fine.�
Feb 19, 2016
McRat The Volt is alum rims, and the stock mats are thin.�
Feb 19, 2016
Snow Drift 
Turning and driving with only one set of wheels does not make sense. Does your bicycle power the front wheels? Nope.
The M3 will have four wheels, use them all. Either two steer, two power, or two steer and four power.�
Feb 19, 2016
ModelNforNerd
It is not a $27.5K car. Stop getting caught up in the shell game mathematics.
The vast majority of Model 3's will be delivered well after the Tax Credits expire.
And even if you DO get one w/Tax Credit, you don't get the money back until tax season. You're still going to have to fork over full price at sale time.
And stop using words like econobox.
This is still going to be a Tesla. I've noticed that people who have listed their current Teslas in their signature line love to make the Model 3 sound like it's going to be a cheap POS. Is it because you don't want to have "commoners" associated with "your" brand? The smug level on this board is enough to make me not want to associate with fellow Tesla drivers when my 3 is delivered.
I'll be able to spot the type though, they always have the smug license plates.�
Feb 19, 2016
wallet.dat It's not going to be FWD. Tesla is all about 0-60, and you're not going to get a tweet-worthy time by going FWD.�
Feb 19, 2016
MiamiNole Dude, R-E-L-A-X! I think this is the second time I've seen you take a post on here (relatively) personal this week! I've lurked on this board for quite sometime before becoming a member and I think its safe to say that there's a pretty diverse demographic on this board, especially now that the Model 3 unveil date has been announced. Yes, there are a lot of Model S owners and enthusiasts who are looking at the Model 3 just because they want a smaller version of their S. There are just as many who are new to Tesla and are awaiting the Model 3 release to be able to have a Tesla of their own (myself included).
EM has already stated that he expects the Model 3 to compete with the BMW 3-series, and has already given the starting price, so I wouldn't put too much stock into people calling it an econobox or trying to make it sound "cheaper". The goal has been to produce a "compelling" EV at that price, and based on that I'm going to believe that the Model 3 will be compelling until I see otherwise. The Model 3 will be the most owned Tesla vehicle in a few years, so I wouldn't let the perceived smugness of a few users affect me being able to enjoy being a part of the growing Telsa community.
If someone is being smug enough on this board for it to upset you, just ignore them! I'm confident there are plenty of other users on this board and future users that you will enjoy interacting with!�
Feb 19, 2016
Tedkidd If there is a 4wd option, the base level is mute to many. If it only comes with one engine I want it in the back. If it's fwd I'll be deeply disappointed. RWD is a vastly better driving experience than fwd.
I don't agree that fwd is "better in snow". My TDI needed snow tires. On my Smart I've only put snows on the rear, thing can plow snow. Much more fun than my TDI to drive.�
Feb 19, 2016
ModelNforNerd
the smugness isn't perceived, it's there.
unless these people are secret "plants" sent here by EM to toss around absurdities to gauge our reaction, no one KNOWS any of this.
But just as i think there are a few smug people on here, and i've run with that notion, there are others that are stuck on the post-tax credit price, and are treating that number as the sticker price...or the notion that this is an entry level vehicle, conveniently leaving out the word luxury.
Every automaker has a "floor" to their lineup. Some makers' "floor" starts a little higher. I'd much rather have an entry Audi or Benz compared to an entry GM.
The Model 3 is not, will not be, and will not compete against econoboxes. saying that it is most similar to a Leaf or a Bolt because of their drivetrain is like saying that a CLA, an A3, and a Ford Focus are essentially the same car because they all come with 2.0L w/turbos.
think before you type.�
Feb 19, 2016
Snow Drift All cars need snow tires. AWD with snow tires is the best in snow.
FWD is only "better" than RWD in snow because the engine weight upfront pushes down the front tires, giving better traction.
However, your TDI's engine is most likely transversely located in the engine bay 0[]--0 vs 0-[]-0 and therefore it unevenly distributes weight. One tire is pushed down, while the other isn't, so the car will waddle up front due to being uneven. Inline and Flat (Subaru/Porsche) allow for an even distribution of weight over both wheels under the engine.
Front Engine, RWD cars have light rear ends, which is why people put sand bags in the trunk to help push down the rear tires for more traction. Porsche has a Rear Engine, RWD set up to place more weight over the rear tires that power their cars. RWD is by far more "fun" in the snow than FWD as you can get the light rear to slide easier, assuming you get enough traction to drive out of your parking space.
Off Topic, for your RWD Smart Car, you should change all four tires to snows. Cars primarily stop via the front brakes and braking distance is directly related to tires. Snow tire braking distance is much shorter than other tires on snow/slush.
For an AWD car it is required to change all four as the difference in size (even if same #/#/#, the wear on the tire) because the difference will cause the center differential to compensate for the different speed of the front/rear axles and you will wear-out or eventually destroy the differential.�
Feb 19, 2016
Reeler On your first point, Bolt specifies their price after tax breaks as $30K as does Tesla on their web site in the configuration tool. Tesla further puts in a gas savings in their pricing. The Model 3 is stated as $35K before tax breaks. There are two ways to state Apples-to-Apples, either the Bolt is $37.5K and the Model 3 is $35K. Or, to say the Bolt is $30K and the Model 3 is $27.5K.
If your second point is directed at me, I drive a Nissan Leaf and old VWs. My wife has a Model S with a Model X arriving any day. Expect one or two of our Teslas to be for sale once she decides what she wants to drive. Don't tell her, but I hate driving the Model S and expect the Model X will be worse with its falcons. I enjoy econoboxes.
It seems most here would love to drive a Model S and are hopeful that the Model 3 is just like it, but I want an econobox. I expect the Bolt will be added to my side of the garage soon.�
Feb 19, 2016
ModelNforNerd For people who can afford the difference, the wording may not matter, but if people perpetuate these numbers, sooner or later, we'll all be led to believe them.
It's misleading, and semi-irresponsible of those of us who know better to keep feeding into it.
The Bolt is $37.5K. The Model 3 is $35K.
Look at it this way.....on the day you take the keys, what are you paying tax on/financing/cutting the check for?
I get that you're going to be saving money on gas, but even those estimates (on the Tesla website) are already misleading.
The average person drives between 10,000 and 15,000 miles and spends between $1,500 and $2,500 on gasoline per year. In comparison, the cost of electricity to power Model S over the same distance is four times lower. Over the five year average length of car ownership, thats between $6,000 and $10,000 in gasoline savings. We've assumed a fuel economy of 20 miles per gallon for a comparable gasoline powered premium sedan, for example the Mercedes-Benz S550. We've also assumed the national average of $0.12 per kilowatt-hour for electricity, 10% charging on Tesla's Supercharger network enabling free long distance travel and $2.90 per gallon for premium gasoline over the next five years.
I hope the re-write this piece for the Model 3....but....
1. The S550 won't be used as a comparison to the Model 3.
2. The price for gas where I live (MA) is down to around $2.15/gal right now.
3. I currently get 24/27/33.
So these numbers don't work for me.
We should all be speaking realistically about what this car will do, and what Tesla's numbers mean to you.
For example, if you're in something dependable and get great mileage, and the M3 and associated charging equipment is going to be a stretch for you....
you should REALLY be considering things like:
cost of having 240v run to your parking space/garage, or IF you can even do it (condo/apartment)
the financing rate you'll get on the M3
the insurance you'll have to pay
what your monthly payment will be
etc etc etc. and a lot of these things are what you'd consider when buying ANY car.
But, IMHO, it would be irresponsible for those of us who CAN afford to jump into a Model 3 to keep pushing these pie-in-the-sky numbers out there.
For me, the 1st year cost of a Model 3 will be:
~$1200 HPWC+install
~$55K (?) fully loaded, almost loaded Model 3
$1200 delivery fee
$3437.5 (6.25% MA Sales tax, based on 55K sticker)
$125 title and reg fee
~$20 in actual electricity costs to charge the car
That's $60,982.50
And the Tax Credits? If I get in early and get the full Fed credit:
$7500 Fed EV Tax Credit
$2500 State EV Tax credit
$360 State Tax credit for installing charging equipment
or $10,360 off my tax burden
Of course, a base model won't be as steep....but there are definitely some "start-up costs" we're not taking into account for 1st time EV owners.
It will take a while to realize the "savings" Tesla promises.�
Feb 19, 2016
Max* That's per month, right? Or do you have solar? Or do you not drive much?
I don't know how the state incentive works, but most people wont qualify for the federal incentive in the same year they take the $7,500 federal EV rebate.�
Feb 19, 2016
ModelNforNerd
I'm assuming .13/kWH, and only needing to charge up every other week. I drive 160 miles/week for my commute. So yes, I was probably way low on this.
I broke out the State tax credits. In MA, you get one for the vehicle, as well as a rebate of 30% of the cost of installing charging equipment, and as far as I know, you can take all of those in the same tax year. If not, that further proves my point that we shouldn't be drawn in by the magical numbers of what it will cost after tax rebates and after gas savings.�
Feb 19, 2016
MP3Mike I think you are way underestimating the options... I would guess that there will be $50k+ of options, so a fully loaded Model 3 will be around $85k. (Essentially figure that you can get a really nice Model 3 for the price of a stripped Model S70.)�
Feb 19, 2016
Reeler Everyone has a different number based on tax credits. Tesla includes the credit in the "price" so I will choose that convention here. Including the gas savings is a level of dishonesty that I will not even touch.
Me personally, I will put down a deposit at the reveal or in a store, whichever comes first. I want a base model with AWD and winter package, maybe a sunroof. I don't like leather or options that will break. I like econoboxes.
If the federal tax break is gone, I might bail if there is another AWD EV available cheap. I have the charging equipment and solar electricity. Colorado gives a $6K tax break.
The Model 3 will cost me no more than an econobox and if it is nicer, BONUS. But, I really don't care as I have simple tastes. Most here don't want it to be an econobox so to each her own.�
Feb 19, 2016
Max* From my ballpark, that's probably about $25/month
I understand that, and I know some states offer incentives on chargers.
What I was saying is that I don't know how the MA rebate for charging (the 30%, not the $2,500) is structured, as the fed also offers incentives on charging equipment (I think 30% back also), but due to the way it's structured, if you file for the $7,500 you need to be making more than $600k a year to qualify for BOTH the $7,500 rebate and the 30% back on charging equipment.
Link to someone smarter than me explaining why: IRS form 8911 - ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLE REFUELING PROPERTY CREDIT 2015
Again, it depends on the how the state rebate is structured, people might run into the same brick wall, or they might not. Just something to think about (for whomever is going to read this later)�
Feb 19, 2016
MP3Mike So far for the Model 3 all Tesla has said is $35k, before incentives. So that isn't true at least not yet. Also, Tesla puts a fairly large disclaimer next to the price when they do include them: "After Incentives & Gas Savings". So if you aren't going to post the actual price, $35k, then you should make sure you always include the (after incentives) disclaimer.
I suspect that a lot of people that want to buy the Model 3 won't qualify for the full incentives, and you aren't doing anyone a service by including them.�
Feb 19, 2016
Reeler OK. The Model 3 is $35K with no incentives available (since the Federal incentives will likely be gone anyway for all of Tesla). The Bolt is $37.5K and will likely have some incentives so it could be as little as $30K. Ignore the Tesla site, that quotes prices differently. Ignore all the press on the Bolt what also gets it wrong too.�
Feb 19, 2016
MP3Mike While I am no CPA it looks like you could setup your electrical infrastructure the year before you get your EV, so you can claim the federal 30%. Of course that means you have to know what you need in advance. But if you need to upgrade your panel you could do that and install a 14-50 where you will park/charge your car, and that should get you most of the way there.
Also, does anyone know if the 8911 credit can be used multiple years? Say year 1 you upgrade your panel/service and put a 14-50 in and get the entire $1,000. Then in year two you replace the 14-50 with a HPWC. Can you get 30% back from the cost of the HPWC and installation?�
Feb 19, 2016
Reeler I do know that the 8911 credit is not available if you pay AMT. Unlike the EV car rebate, which is not subject to AMT. I don't know if it carries over since I am AMT.�
Feb 19, 2016
miimura I drive a car that has a Tesla motor and Front Wheel Drive. Let me tell you, with all that EV torque, it is far too easy to overpower and spin the front tires because the weight transfer under acceleration is reducing available traction. I would prefer RWD any day, but this is what you get when engineers have to fit parts into whatever existing space is available. A clean slate design would obviously use RWD if only one axle is driven. On the Model 3, dual motor AWD will almost certainly be optional.
Edit: I'm talking about the RAV4 EV in case people don't know...�
Mar 2, 2016
Brad_NC FWD, RWD, AWD: You choose on this poll!
If you could choose from all options what would you get? FWD, RWD, AWD�
Mar 2, 2016
Max* I'd chose to search!
Will the Model 3 be Standard with Front / Rear / All Wheel Drive?�
Mar 2, 2016
chance1117 I think this poll would be more interesting for RWD vs FWD. I would guess most people would choose AWD > FWD or RWD.
Personally this is my ranking AWD>FWD>RWD since I live in Minnesota where we have snow 6 months of the year.�
Mar 2, 2016
mknoebel I'm in Colorado so I will need an AWD - especially for winter trips to the mountains!�
Mar 2, 2016
Model 3 And my ranking is AWD>RWD>FWD since I live in Norway where we have snow 6 months of the year.
�
Mar 2, 2016
chance1117 It still comes down to personal preference. My Wife's works involved driving over 150 miles in the middle of the night. We are used to FWD and I feel like FWD offers us the safest drive. I really hope AWD is offered that would be well worth the upgrade!�
Mar 2, 2016
IsellCisco I would want AWD if it did not cost extra. Since it will likely be extra, I voted for RWD.�
Mar 2, 2016
vinnie97 The difference in range between AWD and RWD would have to be significant for me not to go with the cheaper option.�
Mar 2, 2016
Model 3 Yes, it does comes down to personal preferences. I'm used to both FWD and RWD and I see no differences in safety (ok, it is different, but not more or less for anyone of them), but better navigability - especially uphill - with RWD - if you got enough weight over the rear wheels...�
Mar 2, 2016
raysspl RWD with AWD option�
Mar 3, 2016
MiamiNole Living in Florida, my answer would be that it depends on how much extra power and range would be added going to AWD vs RWD, and whether the extra cost would be worth it. I think I've mentioned before that even the RWD Model 3 will most likely be the most powerful car I've owned (currently driving a Nissan Altima 2.5SL), so the extra power would most likely be me just being greedy. Though, if it means getting my car earlier and the performance difference IS that significant, then I'd definitely be up to getting AWD.�
Mar 6, 2016
Snow Drift Have you driven an AWD car in an Orlando rain storm? Try it. The added grip will make you ignore FWD and curse RWD. Not even considering the added power of a dual motor.�
Mar 6, 2016
Trev Page AWD for me living in Ontario. Snow is the bane of my existence.�
Mar 6, 2016
S3XY I'm in Buffalo, so yeah.�
Mar 7, 2016
Trev Page Just across the lake but you guys get it a lot worse. I feel for ya.�
Mar 7, 2016
J1mbo I voted FWD, for the following reasons:
* The current D cars are all FWD-biased in Range Mode (this thread has some very cool graphs showing this)
* As with ICE cars, a FWD solution can be packaged very efficiently, which will help in manufacture. Not having to drop the battery to get to the motor would reduce servicing costs
* The space taken by the rear motor could be used for stacking battery modules. This is easier than using the front for the same purpose, because the front will always have the power steering system in the way. If the battery footprint is really 30% smaller than the MS, then Tesla will need to be creative about battery packaging, and this could provide some much-needed space.
* AWD customers will have the MS and MX to choose from, and by the time the M3 comes out there are sure to be AWD CPO cars in the same price range.
Only a few weeks left before we all find out!�
Mar 7, 2016
jbcarioca As a Miami-based D driver I confirm your view. Driving in the very heavy rainstorms the D does give much greater stability. My personal comparison is between my P85D and an 85 loaner, both of which I drive in the same rainstorm on I95 between Miami and West Palm Beach. Until then I really did not appreciate how much more stable the Teska D's are. BTW, both cars had 19" Michelin's with plenty of tread.�
Mar 7, 2016
MiamiNole I forgot I had even posted in this thread, heh. I've actually never driven an AWD car to my knowledge, so I wouldn't have any basis to compare it to. I can't even recall if I've even driven any RWD cars, and if I have it probably was not to my knowledge. BUT, all the more reason to lean towards getting the D. I was just saying that it isn't a necessity for me if getting AWD becomes a major price factor for me.�
Mar 7, 2016
Reeler I am predicting FWD with no frunk. With loss of width, it will be easier to put some stuff where the frunk is located. That will leave more room for the batteries too.�
Mar 7, 2016
Red Sage Elon Musk already announced, around the middle of 2015, that the base Model ? would be rear wheel drive.
Reeler: No. There will never be a Front Wheel Drive version of Model ?. With electric drive you gain exactly ZERO of the advantages that FWD offers an ICE.�
Mar 8, 2016
favo I accidentally voted AWD, since that is what I plan to get, but I think Elon has already said base version will be RWD, so that is what I expect. [Mods: If possible, you can change my vote to RWD.]�
Mar 8, 2016
Model 3 I know he has said it would be single-motor/2WD in base version, and I really do think it will be RWD, but do you have a source that he actually have said it will be RWD?�
Mar 8, 2016
McRat In the snow, dirt, or sand, a FWD is a better engineering design than RWD. In these situations, tirespin creates oversteer in RWD (not good mixed with cars/trees/poles) but FWD creates understeer or neutral. Chains on the nose of a FWD cars kick the crap out of chains on a RWD. If you get stuck in a FWD, you can saw the wheel and try 4 directions both forward and reverse as well as rocking. RWD gives you only rocking, and it is not at good at it. To get up an icy driveway, you back a FWD up it, which gives you more control if it decides to slide. RWD, you are just along for the ride if it slides.
Note, most my vehicles are RWD or 4x4. But I have a lot of practice in snow, sand, and dirt in all three designs. RWD is my favorite around a track, but I can acknowledge that renting a Civic is way smarter than renting a Camaro for snow duty.
A phillips screwdriver is better than a flat blade by design. However, the right tool for the application is always better.
Those who think there is torque steer and massive understeer on modern FWD cars need to actually drive one.
I'm guessing the Model 3 will be RWD since it appears to be aimed at the BMW 3xx cars. But I would not rent a 3xx for skiing or desert use anyhow. And I certainly wouldn't buy a 3xx. Econobox with badging slower than it's RWD competitors? Meh, badges don't add HP.�
Mar 8, 2016
trinites1a Thank you it's freaking annoying people calling the car economy with no basis at ALL... Mass Market does not mean economy.. Mass Market means the Model 3 will be in the most popular luxury segment which includes, C Class, A4, 3 Series, 4 Series, Q50 and so on where the most cars are sold.. This is the largest luxury market by far...�
Mar 8, 2016
favo Looks like he only said 2WD on the shareholders call, so I misremembered. I highly expect RWD, as you say, but we should find out on the 31st.�
Mar 8, 2016
ModelNforNerd
The elitism on this board is starting to show through. Everyone who is looking at the Model 3 from Model S and X-colored glasses sees an "econobox", yet they want priority on putting down deposits on them.
So is it a POS, or not? Are you ashamed that "your brand" will have an affordable model? and if so....why do you want one?�
Mar 8, 2016
Max* <--- Not everyone�
Mar 8, 2016
ModelNforNerd
Touche....fair enough.
But....while not every person on this board who owns an S/X has called the 3 an econobox, everyone who has owns an S or an X, or more than one, according to their signatures.�
Mar 8, 2016
Max* Again, not everyone
|
|
|
V�
Mar 8, 2016
ModelNforNerd
:wink: I just find it funny that the ones who are doing it don't even realize they are contradicting themselves.......
or maybe they do realize it. They're trying to get "the unwashed" to believe it will be a terrible "econobox" POS, so they can get in line and get reservations for it.
When, if you look at the big picture, Tesla needs this car. They're still leaking red ink all over their financial statements, even after people have paid over $120K for vehicles. The Model 3 not only brings EV to the masses, it keeps Tesla afloat with much needed capital, which they (will hopefully) use to make technological improvements throughout the lineup.
Elon has had this plan all along. It wasn't just an elaborate Pokemon game (gotta catch 'em all!) for the wealthy.
So again, embrace your incoming Tesla brothers and sisters, you'll thank them when your Roadster reaches "Maximum Plaid", or you're driving a refreshed Model S or X or even a new Model Y in a few years.�
Mar 8, 2016
Model 3 Thanks for replaying�
Mar 8, 2016
Max* O crap... let me go look through my posts now�
Mar 8, 2016
ModelNforNerd
I think the worst offenders were in this thread: Attn Tesla! Preorders for those who already own or have on order!�
Mar 8, 2016
stopcrazypp A large majority of entry level luxury sedan buyers will never see those conditions or will see them so rarely it does not matter. While torque steer can happen in all road conditions.
The same goes for those who have not tried a modern RWD EV (like the S). I have yet to seen any complaints about its snow performance despite being a RWD car. This had been argued ad infinitum: an RWD EV eliminates most of the advantages of FWD in poor road conditions because of a balanced weight bias (more weight over rear wheels), immediate and precise torque adjustment, and modern traction/stability control. At any rate, having the right tires is far more important than the drive wheel.
On the other hand, torque steer is very much alive in FWD cars once you reach past a certain amount of torque/power. Look at cars like the Mazdaspeed 3, Focus ST/RS, Golf GTi. The Mazdaspeed 3/Focus ST handles torque steer by limiting torque. The Focus RS uses a special RevoKnuckle suspension (expensive and heavier). None of these eliminate torque steer. Golf GTi uses an electronic LSD that can send 100% torque to either front wheel (the best solution) but is also expensive. And the weight balance of an EV actually makes things worse for FWD as it shifts the weight away from the drive wheels.�
Mar 8, 2016
Reeler Your bias presumes an econobox is a put down. My wife has a Model S and will likely be getting a Model X in a couple weeks. We had to buy another Model S to burn off my referral credits (long story). I dislike all of these cars. Call me crazy, but I want a sunglass holder, pocket in the door and other storage, a coat hook, grab handles, etc. that are standard in the electric econobox class. I couldn't wait any longer and bought a Nissan Leaf last week and that is my favorite ride at the moment. The extreme minimalism design philosophy of the Model X/S annoys the crap out of me. I am no Tesla fan boy as is the norm on this site.
If Tesla chooses to compete with the other electric econoboxes in their price class with the Model 3, I will go through with my purchase. If they choose to make the Model 3 as impractical for daily use as the Model S/X, I will not. I will be a little torn if the others don't offer AWD.
Cost not being an issue, I prefer econoboxes and the convenience that comes standard in the electric $30K'ish price range.�
Mar 8, 2016
ModelNforNerd
e�con�o�box
i?k�n??b�ks/
noun NORTH AMERICAN informal
noun: econobox; plural noun: econoboxes; noun: econo-box; plural noun: econo-boxes
- a car that is small and economical rather than luxurious or stylish.
Sounds semi-pejorative, or at least inaccurate, to me.
Econobox- Focus, Scion, Corolla.....NOT Model 3 territory.- NOT Econobox- A4, 3-Series, Acura, Lexus, etc.
�
Mar 8, 2016
Reeler Electric cars are certainly economical. It is a matter of debate whether it will be luxurious, but cannot be so much so in that price class and minimalist design is not luxurious. The Model S/X are not luxurious as compared to other $100K cars in their class. Knowing Tesla, it will likely be stylish.
I would say with two of the three being certainly true . . . . the Model 3 is an econobox. Get over it. The term econobox doesn't sound pejorative to me and is just an indication the driver values economy over luxury and style.
I am proud to leave a light footprint on this world despite having the means to do otherwise. I hate being pampered and wasteful. In green circles there is no shame in this. In gearhead or elitist circles there is as I am mocked shamelessly. I am the former and perhaps others are the latter--to each their own.�
Mar 8, 2016
ModelNforNerd kthxbye
�
Mar 8, 2016
Reeler If green is smug so be it. As Kermit would say, "it is tough being green."
You can drive your stylish and luxurious whatever and I will drive my econobox. Both may be a Model 3. :wink:�
Mar 8, 2016
ModelNforNerd some do see it as a pejorative term, so maybe just don't buy one.
Econobox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia�
Mar 8, 2016
Reeler The green crowd drive econoboxes as a badge of honor. Driving up to valet at events I frequent in a Prius is more respected than a Lambo.
Like I have said, if it competes with the electric econoboxes in its price segment, I will buy one.�
Mar 8, 2016
ModelNforNerd
old habits are hard to break. even though there are plenty around me with Priuses (Prii?), I wouldn't consider myself in their circle. Also, the Model S and X are still in the price range where the owners of Lambos and Teslas are more likely to hang out than they'd be likely to hang out with me.
I'm in that bracket where I can spend up to $65-70K on the Model 3, because it will likely be well-optioned, but I wouldn't spend that on a Model S, as it would be a base model.
And I want AP....AP/CPO Model S's haven't really hit the market yet. But I assume they will when the 3 comes out. People in cities have sometimes complained about the size of the S, so I'm assuming some of them will downsize for convenience.�
Mar 8, 2016
gregincal You have this illusion that Model S owners thing of the Model 3 as an econobox, but I have seen absolutely zero evidence for this. As I have stated before, in general the existing owners expect the Model 3 to be awesome and have all sorts of features. Generally the people I see arguing for econobox are non-owners. Owners do not think the brand will be diluted by an affordable model, that is entirely in your head. Instead they think the Model 3 will have all sorts of awesome (but expensive) options.�
Mar 8, 2016
McRat Not to hurt your feelings but both the A4 and 3xx BMW's are about 10% smaller than a Civic. And the A4 is FWD.
Don't confuse badge shape with function and size.�
Mar 8, 2016
ModelNforNerd
If you check no boxes when you buy an A4, you're still paying $37K, for FWD............
maybe we have differing opinions on what "econo" means.�
Mar 8, 2016
Max* The A4 also comes with leather seats standard, unlike the Model S...�
Mar 8, 2016
McRat Paying too much for a car doesn't make it better. It's not a $37k car if you remove the badging. A Fusion is much bigger and can be decked out, and appears to be more stylish.�
Mar 8, 2016
ModelNforNerd
OK, when discussing manufacturers' entry-level vehicles....Tesla's "floor", even with the 3, will admittedly be higher than say, Ford, GM, Chrysler, Hyundai, Honda, Nissan, and many others. simple economics. a $35K car should be a more quality vehicle than a $15K car
- - - Updated - - -
but now you're getting into personal preference. I would rather have a stripped Audi than a loaded Fusion.
But again, personal preference.�
Mar 8, 2016
stopcrazypp Consider this: VW Jetta vs Audi A4 and Honda Civic vs Acura ILX.
You can argue until you are blue in the face about how a optioned up VW Jetta or Honda Civic is much better value than a Audi A4 or Acura ILX, but the Jetta and Civic will be labeled econobox and the A4 and ILX will be entry-level luxury/premium.
For the record, I don't think the Model 3 will be an econobox as that goes against Tesla's long running design principle. Tesla isn't trying to design a $25k car with a $10k EV premium (as is the strategy of cars like the Leaf), but rather a $35k car that will fit well with other ~$35k entry level luxury/premium cars.
A lot of this may be perceptive (plenty of people are of the opinion the S does not have the interior quality and equipment of a $70k premium car), but that difference is what leads to Tesla's success.�
Mar 8, 2016
PTADO Agree, Tesla knows as much as we do what is riding on the Model 3's success. The last thing they're going to do is release an electric Chevrolet Spark, with black textured plastic traditional door handles and non-power mirrors, etc. This is as big a deal to them as it is to us, and I'm sure they're reading these forums daily to see what the buzz is and what the hopes are. I know many companies who have full-time social media jobs just to monitor these sorts of things. I have faith. I feel when it's finally revealed, the car won't disappoint.
But to stay on-topic, I'm hoping for RWD base build with an AWD option. If it came AWD out the gate that would be amazing, but I won't get my hopes up.�
Mar 8, 2016
Red Sage Tesla Motors uses a skateboard design to locate the battery packs on their cars between the front and rear axles, underneath the passenger compartment. Most front wheel drive cars feature an iron, steel, or aluminum block engine, along with a transaxle, and a wealth of accessories, that sit over the front axle, under the hood. That weight increases traction on the front tires, allowing for the handling characteristics you describe during inclement weather or course conditions. Since a Tesla Motors vehicle does not benefit from a bunch of heavy useless ancient technology that pumps out smoke and belches fumes to drive its wheels, it will not have the sort of traction up front that makes front wheel drive a good idea in an ICE vehicle. The electric motor and drive unit are combined, much lighter than an ICE -- so you'd have to abandon the skateboard principle, put the power control electronics and batteries under the hood too -- thereby eliminating the benefit of having a frunk. You know, the way that traditional automobile manufacturers do it when converting an ICE to fully electric. It sort of defeats the purpose, just to have a familiar layout. Completely unnecessary. Especially since an entirely drive-by-wire fully electric rear wheel drive system has been proven to work just fine in a myriad of driving conditions over the past three-and-a-half years by the Model S. Besides, I'm pretty sure that Tesla Motors expects the grand majority of Model ? to be sold in places where concrete and asphalt are the primary components of road construction... As opposed to ice, snow, sand, dirt, and mud.�
Mar 8, 2016
Red Sage It is highly unlikely you will get your wish this decade, and likely not before 2024 or so. Tesla Motors has no need whatsoever to go after the sub-compact market prior to having a manufacturing capacity that numbers into the millions. Even then, its targets would probably be the Corolla, Civic, Sentra, Golf, Focus, and Elantra... Not the Yaris, Fit, Versa, Fiesta, and Accent. Enjoy your BOLT.�
Mar 8, 2016
MiamiNole This. I always associated the term "econobox" to the subcompact class that Red just mentioned. I would think of the Corolla, Civic, Sentra, Focus, etc. as simply compact cars, meaning not mid-sized sedans.�
Mar 8, 2016
Red Sage Thanks. There are those who sincerely protest Tesla Motors means of bringing electric vehicles to market. They would suggest the exact opposite strategy: Build extremely inexpensive small cars, with little utility, limited cargo and passenger space, short range, minimal performance, and bare necessities as creature comforts. They honestly believe that is the proper philosophical path toward electrifying personal transportation. They are wrong, of course. God bless their little hearts. ;-)
�
Mar 8, 2016
Tedkidd Boy I hope so! Stuff that Bolt up GM's backside!
Apples/oranges I think. S is an early adopter car, as such some sacrifices were expected.
3 (hopefully) bridges to early majority. Early majority doesn't want sacrifices. So it needs to outcompete in it's space - and hopefully stay supply constrained to 500k per year.
I expecting it will. Can't wait!!!�
Mar 8, 2016
stopcrazypp What I'm making with that point is that Tesla doesn't have to check all the boxes in terms of that segment, but it'll have enough to make it fit into the premium category. The S does this with the touchscreen, minimalist design (which makes less equipment into an advantage), high power/torque, and overall great driving experience (road noise, ride quality, handling etc all on par with the class).�
Mar 8, 2016
Tedkidd I think you nailed it.
Bolt is building only 35,000 cars a year, and it sounds like an $18,000 car with a $19,000 ev premium - not that 35,000 copies a year moves the EV needle.
The reason I really hope your description is correct (besides that I'm buying one) is I think there aren't enough early adopters to buy 500,000 cars a year. Even if the "EV premium" is small - I don't think it moves early majority. They want "better" without caveats. For Musk to win, and realize his vision this car has to start slicing into the mainstream.�
Mar 9, 2016
butchmank9
The cost should be cut in half for an AWD M3 unless you are going to get the same performance as the MS then it would think it would fair to charge the same price. I don't believe that Tesla will have a P Model M3 that out performed an MS at a lower price. That would be dream land. This would set off the MS buyers. Just mine opinion.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét