Tesla Model 3 brief review

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Good review, if you took photos try and post them.


Sorry, no photos. I took a short video but due to some "improper" driving and the resulting "explicit" language, it's not appropriate to post.

From a practical point of view, ultimate battery life and range will be factors that affect long term owners. I suspect that battery life is a factor of both time and distance (years and miles) . Data so far shows Tesla Model S batteries will retain over 90% of their original range at 150,000 miles. Of course, people claim the original "new" range is software limited in the Model S, so the battery pack is sandbagged a little.... Put another way, it may only have 70% of it's original capacity, but the car can still go 93% of it's original range after 150,000 miles.

Keep in mind the Model 3 uses the 2170 (form factor) cell for it's battery. That cell is far more robust than the 18650's used in the Model S. Charge and discharge cycles are said to be considerably less stressful on this type of cell.

I'm sure time will tell.

The one thing we should know, this is no longer "in it's infancy" as claimed above. We know how to make and control these powerful and efficient electric motors. The rest of the car is just like any other quality car. The only issue is the battery, and for those who can accept the batteries limitations, they get to enjoy fantastic performance.
 
This sounds like way too much car for the coin.
Could the very limited delivery rate have anything to do with the amount of money Tesla loses on each car built?
Sounds really nice, but can Tesla actually build these cheaply enough to avoid losing money on each one built?
It sure doesn't look like it.
Meanwhile, those who paid high trim Accord V-6 level prices for one of the few delivered should be grinning broadly.
Sounds nice, sounds fun and seems unsustainable.
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
This sounds like way too much car for the coin.
Could the very limited delivery rate have anything to do with the amount of money Tesla loses on each car built?
Sounds really nice, but can Tesla actually build these cheaply enough to avoid losing money on each one built?
It sure doesn't look like it.
Meanwhile, those who paid high trim Accord V-6 level prices for one of the few delivered should be grinning broadly.
Sounds nice, sounds fun and seems unsustainable.

I wonder how much Tesla saves with the electric motor and 1 speed "transmission" vs. a conventional gas DI and/or turbo motor and new million speed auto trans?
I guess they save lots in development costs as their motor and trans are very efficient already, no fuel or exhaust system either.
 
How long before the last gasoline powered car rolls off the assembly line?

How long before the last gasoline station gets turned into a used electric car lot?

Will we all still be alive by then?
 
Originally Posted By: das_peikko
How long before the last gasoline powered car rolls off the assembly line?

How long before the last gasoline station gets turned into a used electric car lot?

Will we all still be alive by then?

I think gas is here to stay for quite a while in some applications, unless there are some big big advances in battery capacity or solar panel efficiency.
 
Quote:
This sounds like way too much car for the coin.

If my calculations are correct, the car Cu drove retailed at $55K+ Do you consider that chump change?
 
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
I wonder how much Tesla saves with the electric motor and 1 speed "transmission" vs. a conventional gas DI and/or turbo motor and new million speed auto trans? I guess they save lots in development costs as their motor and trans are very efficient already, no fuel or exhaust system either.

So true about the 1-speed tranny. funny story, I recently talked to a Ford service dept rep about a recall on the differential unit on my Focus Electric, and Ford was calling the 1 spur gear and differential the "transmission", which is technically correct, but the rep said I really had a "CVT" as he called it, since "every car must" have multiple gears!!!! I guess this electric technology is too new and unusual for the old ICE crowd.

But forget the savings from having a 1-speed transmission. The battery cost overwhelms everything else. The battery alone in a Tesla Model 3 is probably $27,000, seriously.
 
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Quote:
This sounds like way too much car for the coin.

If my calculations are correct, the car Cu drove retailed at $55K+ Do you consider that chump change?


Correct, it was about $57k
 
Model 3 owners do not receive free charging at Supercharger stations like S and X owners do.

The interior is very much a Tesla product, in both good and bad ways. But it does represent progress and reflect lessons learned since the S and X.

I found tire roar to be average, but did notice some wind noise.

The vehicle dynamics are tuned for the sportier side of the spectrum for the class, so it is fun to drive.

It will be successful one they resolve the production issues and are able to build them in volume. Any suggestion that Tesla is investing in building its Gigafactories, as well as adding lines to the Fremont plant to build the 3, only to artificially limit production is nonsensical. It is a key part of their strategy for growth, and very likely to be a make or break product for the company.
 
Originally Posted By: Cujet
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Quote:
This sounds like way too much car for the coin.

If my calculations are correct, the car Cu drove retailed at $55K+ Do you consider that chump change?


Correct, it was about $57k


You get a lot of car for the money.
 
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Quote:
This sounds like way too much car for the coin.

If my calculations are correct, the car Cu drove retailed at $55K+ Do you consider that chump change?


Check the advertised starting price of this car and then consider how many of the paid deposits were for the cheapie. Consider also that the base model has all of the expensive parts that the toyed up one does, especially the battery pack.
Even at 57K, this car appears to offer exceptional performance as compared to anything else you'd get for that kind of coin.
If all of the numbers pencil out for Tesla, then how come so few of these cars have been delivered?
Lord knows that they have enough factory space to play with.
What's the hold-up?
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Quote:
This sounds like way too much car for the coin.

If my calculations are correct, the car Cu drove retailed at $55K+ Do you consider that chump change?


Check the advertised starting price of this car and then consider how many of the paid deposits were for the cheapie. Consider also that the base model has all of the expensive parts that the toyed up one does, especially the battery pack.
Even at 57K, this car appears to offer exceptional performance as compared to anything else you'd get for that kind of coin.
If all of the numbers pencil out for Tesla, then how come so few of these cars have been delivered?
Lord knows that they have enough factory space to play with.
What's the hold-up?

Something must not have quite been working out in the production process, and its far cheaper to sort out problems before producing a car than it is to recall it, so waiting to get it right is the smart thing to do since no one else seems to be building anything similar yet.
 
Originally Posted By: Pajero
Sounds awesome. But, no one know the long term longevity of the batteries? Five year warranty? My friend had a Prius and after six years it was cheaper for her to buy another Prius than to replace the batteries. I don't mean to be negative. It's just uncharted territory, as to state.

Thanks for posting Cujet



Respectfully,

Pajero!


If it is a leaf I'd believe it. Prius? Those battery should have 15 years warranty at least in California and typically last that long in non commercial operation. And a replacement (usually Toyota will help out if you are below 150k) is only around $3k.

Leaf has a known problem with battery cooling so their wear is quick and leads to their quick depreciation in value.
 
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
I wonder how much Tesla saves with the electric motor and 1 speed "transmission" vs. a conventional gas DI and/or turbo motor and new million speed auto trans?
I guess they save lots in development costs as their motor and trans are very efficient already, no fuel or exhaust system either.


Technically, Tesla is now a "battery company" that also sell cars. Based on the way they "give away their patents for free" and they also "solve the renewable energy problems" in Australia, they don't mind, but rather would enjoy, other companies buying their setup and slap on their own logos.

There is an arm race going on for EV development, and it is really like the unicorn startup approach that you either go big (Facebook, Netflix) or go home (Snapchat), at least that's what the investors hope.

The interest rate is way too low, and the wealth is taking chances with risky investments.
 
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Quote:
This sounds like way too much car for the coin.

If my calculations are correct, the car Cu drove retailed at $55K+ Do you consider that chump change?


Check the advertised starting price of this car and then consider how many of the paid deposits were for the cheapie. Consider also that the base model has all of the expensive parts that the toyed up one does, especially the battery pack.
Even at 57K, this car appears to offer exceptional performance as compared to anything else you'd get for that kind of coin.
If all of the numbers pencil out for Tesla, then how come so few of these cars have been delivered?
Lord knows that they have enough factory space to play with.
What's the hold-up?

Something must not have quite been working out in the production process, and its far cheaper to sort out problems before producing a car than it is to recall it, so waiting to get it right is the smart thing to do since no one else seems to be building anything similar yet.


Okay, then why did Tesla take cash deposits on a car not yet ready for prime time and why have a handful of cars been built and delivered to paying customers?
Does anyone believe that this comic opera would be going on with Honda, Toyota or even GM, Ford or FCA?
I don't know what Tesla's problems are with building and delivering these cars, but there are obviously some.
A little more transparency in disclosing any issues might help Tesla's reputation.
Pretending that everything is just fine and that there are only minor hiccups does nothing to add to Tesla's credibility as a manufacturer of motor vehicles.
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Okay, then why did Tesla take cash deposits on a car not yet ready for prime time and why have a handful of cars been built and delivered to paying customers?


If you have to ask that question, then I say..."look over there at their electric semi trailer".
 
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Originally Posted By: Cujet
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Quote:
This sounds like way too much car for the coin.

If my calculations are correct, the car Cu drove retailed at $55K+ Do you consider that chump change?


Correct, it was about $57k


You get a lot of car for the money.

I would probably get my invitation to configure it very soon and at this stage I believe I will go for it.

BUT, I am not sure I completely agree with you that this is the best choice for $57K. At least, it is NOT slam and dunk for me. For example, heck even Mercedes S-class CPO might be in that ballpark! Or a Tesla S CPO etc. If I am willing to take CPO, I bet I could name few desirable cars in that price bracket. I am not convinced that new Model 3 trumps all of them.

Convince me!
 
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Convince me!
The Tesla Model 3 has similar size and dynamics to a BMW 340i, and you can get a base 340i for $45k. About the same price as a Tesla Model 3 which starts at $35k, leaving $10k options to equal BMW's price.
(Note: The $7,500 tax rebate is running out very quickly on Tesla right now. Most buyers won't have it.)
 
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Something must not have quite been working out in the production process, and its far cheaper to sort out problems before producing a car than it is to recall it, so waiting to get it right is the smart thing to do since no one else seems to be building anything similar yet.


Musk is a smart, and successful, dude, but has always had a chip on his shoulder in thinking that applying a high-tech mindset to durable goods manufacturing would somehow yield a breakthrough that none of the traditional OEMs have discovered in building cars and refining that process over 100 years. Sometimes he's right, but in this case, he's not.

With the Model 3, Tesla thought it could skip a major step, by skipping the final development and pilot production process, and jumping straight to production tooling to crank them out in volume. All of the initial faults would be stomped out in the design phase.

Needless to say, it hasn't worked out that way, and there was even a tacit acknowledgment that such a strategy would be risky because the initial deliveries were restricted to Tesla employees, who would presumably be more tolerant of issues, and help do the final testing. The stated ramp was also very ambitious, and yet again, there was tacit acknowledgement that it would be steep hill to climb out of "production hades."

Given its history of delays, nobody outside of the Tesla Cult (including investors) realistically expected the company to fulfill its stated goals with the Model 3.

And it hasn't. It built ~2500 cars last quarter and delivered ~1500 of them. The new goals are to achieve 2500/week in the 1st quarter and 5000 in the 2nd quarter. With a backlog of a half million deposits, it will take some time to work though that, even accounting the for cancellations resulting from those who end up sick of waiting, or those who counted on the subsidies they will not get, and therefore won't be able to afford the car.

Production engineering a vehicle is as big of a job as its design engineering. Setting up a new line in Fremont, and building a factory in Nevada to produce the batteries would not be a task to be underestimated for an established OEM, never mind a relative small company with limited capital and tremendous cash burn.

Tesla deserves a lot of credit for even getting to where it is, but it hasn't been an easy road. And it won't get any easier when more and more serious competitors come to market. Its window of opportunity is shrinking rapidly.

The company still has the lead in terms of battery supply, and mindshare/image, but it has to deliver on the Model 3.

For the most part, it has, in terms of the product. It just needs to execute.

It's difficult enough for CEOs who split their time between multiple companies when they have the support of seasoned people in the executive suite. What Tesla lacks is a COO who can handle the mundane task of running the company smoothly, and allow Musk to dream and plot strategy for both SpaceX and Tesla. Apple's success would never had come if Tim Cook hadn't taken that pressure off Steve Jobs.

It's puzzling why the investors haven't demanded he find one, but that's the cult of personality that surrounds him, and the overvalued stock also helps, of course.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top