Octopus Overlords

News on the Model 3 - the $35k version Tesla is planning for 2017.

The Model 3 will be priced starting at $35,000, or half the starting price of Tesla's first mass-market car, the Model S sedan.

Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk has said the new car will have a driving range of about 200 miles on a full charge. Musk has also said the new vehicle will be about the same size as the BMW 3 Series.The smaller car is the third generation of Tesla vehicles, following the Roadster sports car which had limited production and two vehicles built on the same underpinning architecture: the Model S, introduced in mid-2012, and the Model X. The latter is expected to go on sale in 2015.

It is mine.

Is that price today dollars or 2017 dollars?

Carpet_pissr wrote:It is mine.

Is that price today dollars or 2017 dollars?

2017! Think of the discount you're getting!

Here's a bit more/the same from Ars.

2017 sounds like about when I'll need another car. $35,000 may be doable by then. Do we get tax credits? 200 Miles isn't a whole lot but it ought to be enough for me if my house can take charging it... I've got about three years to learn. How far do I have to go to test drive one? We had one here in the office a few months ago and no one told me until it was gone. x:

$35k is more than I've paid for a car before by more than double, but I could absolutely see myself doing it for one of these. Yeah, the 200 mile range will probably be a bit limiting for long trips, but since my wife will probably still have a regular petrol car, that should cover us for those.

There's a $7500 tax credit for the car that will most likely still be in effect. It is unclear if the $35k price is before or after the credit. If it is with the credit, that is amazing.

Carpet_pissr wrote:It is mine.

Is that price today dollars or 2017 dollars?

I don't know how it will be on the Model III, but you can easily add $10k in options to the Model S, so a $35k starting point may not work out that well. Things like Homelink being included in a $3750 package full of "nice to have, but not really necessary" items. Leather seats? Another $1500. Hey look, we're over $40k.

Same thing applies to BMW and Mercedes, but if you haven't shopped luxury brands before, you should be aware before you head to the dealer... err... wherever you buy a Tesla.

stessier wrote:There's a $7500 tax credit for the car that will most likely still be in effect. It is unclear if the $35k price is before or after the credit. If it is with the credit, that is amazing.

Musk has said prior that the target is $35k in today's dollars without any subsidies. If all goes to plan, Tesla will be close to selling their 200,000th car in America around when the III debuts, which means the credit should still be in full effect for early III buyers. For those not familiar with the credit, it will remain $7500 (barring congress nuking it) until the 2nd quarter after Tesla sells their 200,000th vehicle in America. After that point, it gets cut in half for six months, then again for 6 more, and then it's gone.

Also keep in mind that if it does come in at $35k, you really need to compare it to a $30k car with great gas mileage or a $20k-$25k car with mediocre gas mileage. (Unless you live in Hawaii or somewhere else where electricity is super-pricey)

coopasonic wrote:

Carpet_pissr wrote:It is mine.

Is that price today dollars or 2017 dollars?

I don't know how it will be on the Model III, but you can easily add $10k in options to the Model S, so a $35k starting point may not work out that well. Things like Homelink being included in a $3750 package full of "nice to have, but not really necessary" items. Leather seats? Another $1500. Hey look, we're over $40k.

Same thing applies to BMW and Mercedes, but if you haven't shopped luxury brands before, you should be aware before you head to the dealer... err... wherever you buy a Tesla.

This is definitely true. The S starts at about $70k, but the average selling price is right around $100k. It won't be that wide a gap on the III, but I fully expect ASP to clock in around $50k. That said, I've driven the base S, and aside from the all-but-necessary $3750 tech package I think it's just dandy as-is.

I don't think the $1,500 extra for leather is unique to the upper end of the car market (or other options for that matter). I think I paid more for that to get leather in our humble Mazda CX-9. IMO, one of the best upgrades to get (in any car, especially if you have kids, and/or a dog).

Chaz wrote:$35k is more than I've paid for a car before by more than double

Almost triple for me. If you put all of my 28 years of driving together $35,000 is about (Does the math... $300+$250+$250+$500+$200+$1000+$800+$13,000+$13,000) $7000 more than all of my other cars combined.

If it is like S but smaller and slightly cheaper and I can get it for $27,500 after a credit spread out over five years in 2017 then it won't even be debated.

If starting $35,000 really means what still looks like bare bones car for $45,000 then, we're still at yeah, no.

Currently, they'd be looking at competing with the Fusion on my dad's A Plan. Internet says, around $18,000 normal car or $23,000 for Hybrid. Cars have been going up in price though, so I count on them being more before I buy.

Yeah, I am not trying to be a party pooper, but I am trying to temper my own excitement. My car is a 2012, so 2017 will be just about right for me (if a bit late, but I could hold out for this). I would have a hard time spending more than $40k... though my kids will both be a couple years out of daycare by then... hmm.

Also keep in mind that the $7500 is not likely the only incentive. In Colorado, for example, there's another $6k from the state. See here for more info. I know we've talked about the overall savings potential earlier in the thread, but it can be big. For example, here's a rough read of the Tesla Model S/X vs a Toyota Highlander Hybrid:

125,000 miles of fuel: $5k vs $20,500 ($4.50/gal average) = $15,500
Tax credits: $13,500 savings
Insurance: Surprisingly close. About $800 more for the X over 8 years
Maintenance: $3,800 for pre-paid Tesla annual service for 8 years, vs $5,750 Edmunds estimate for HiHy. $1,900 savings.
Resale: A bit of an unknown for Tesla, but Roadsters are holding up fairly well. This should place the Tesla higher than a traditional car after 8 years due to its higher initial price. How much higher is a crapshoot. Conservative, safe assumption should be around $5k more.

$15,500 + $13,500 - $800 + $1,900 + $5,000 = $35,000 in savings. The Hihy costs about $45k-$50k, vs an approximate $75k start for the S/X. So it's quite doable to get an S/X for ballpark same lifetime cost as a much less expensive-looking traditional vehicle. And in the meantime, you're driving an electric cruise-beast magical space car.

The cost comparison will be different for a Tesla III vs the Camrys of the world, but I think the end result will be similarly competitive--and you'll be driving a much more fun vehicle than a Camry. Even assuming the III is less nimble and slower than the S (which aren't necessarily safe assumptions given smaller size/lighter weight/newer battery tech), the instant torque will still be super-fun.

</fanboy>

Zaxxon wrote:Resale: A bit of an unknown for Tesla, but Roadsters are holding up fairly well. This should place the Tesla higher than a traditional car after 8 years due to its higher initial price. How much higher is a crapshoot. Conservative, safe assumption should be around $5k more.

Resale means nothing to me. Lifespan before driving becomes impractically expensive is very important. If the car gets to be 10 years old and I have to put $2000 of maintenance into every year vs it still runs like a charm is very important to me. Essentially I drive a car until it becomes more financially reasonable to buy a new one based on reliability. At that point I can't sell the car in good conscience. I give it away caveat emptor or sell it to junk yard.

You'd be looking at competing with a Fusion Hyrbid in my book and we'll do the math of EV versus Hybrid versus Guzzler in 2017 probably over about 200,000 miles when then. If I weren't getting older and hurting more I'd still go with cheaper subcompact but I don't think I'll be able to take a cheaper car as I head into my 50s.

LordMortis wrote:You'd be looking at competing with a Fusion Hyrbid in my book and we'll do the math of EV versus Hybrid versus Guzzler in 2017 probably over about 200,000 miles when then. If I weren't getting older and hurting more I'd still go with cheaper subcompact but I don't think I'll be able to take a cheaper car as I head into my 50s.

Tesla reliability will be interesting to see. There have been some growing pains thus far in the form of lots of minor issues (creaking sunroofs, inverters replaced for noise, door handle issues), but Tesla has taken care of folks and hopefully they've got things worked out. As the S is the first car they've actually made from scratch, I'm not surprised by these growing pains. If they do manage to get them under control, reliability should be incredible. The number of moving parts in the drive train can be counted with your fingers. The battery pack can be replaced in a few minutes if it goes out down the line (conceivably with one much better years down the road). The frame is aluminum, so no rust risk.

No one yet knows whether Tesla will execute on that possibility. But at least on a theoretical level, an EV is fundamentally less prone to breaking down than a complex internal-combustion engine-based car, and should be capable of performing as new for a very long time.

Zaxxon wrote:No one yet knows whether Tesla will execute on that possibility. But at least on a theoretical level, an EV is fundamentally less prone to breaking down than a complex internal-combustion engine-based car, and should be capable of performing as new for a very long time.

I find mechanical failures (short of GM's ignition problem, that one was fucked up, even is small in scale) easier to deal with than electronic failures but again, we'll see where the technophobe in me is in 2017.

If your tesla computer fails you, big brother tesla will connect and fix it on the spot!

LordMortis wrote:I find mechanical failures (short of GM's ignition problem, that one was fucked up, even is small in scale) easier to deal with than electronic failures but again, we'll see where the technophobe in me is in 2017.

Keep in mind that in Michigan winters that thing ain't getting 200 miles out of a charge.

LordMortis wrote:

Zaxxon wrote:No one yet knows whether Tesla will execute on that possibility. But at least on a theoretical level, an EV is fundamentally less prone to breaking down than a complex internal-combustion engine-based car, and should be capable of performing as new for a very long time.

I find mechanical failures (short of GM's ignition problem, that one was fucked up, even is small in scale) easier to deal with than electronic failures but again, we'll see where the technophobe in me is in 2017.

But it's not like the average consumer can deal with modern "mechanical" engine failures unless they have electronic diagnostics and a computer linkup at home anyway. That ship sailed a while ago. Everything is drive by wire now.

Consumer Reports' post-honeymoon update of their Model S is up:

A revolutionary car from an innovative automaker, the Tesla Model S has garnered much attention for its accomplishments as a ground-breaking, 21st-century car. For its impressive performance in our tests, strong safety marks, and decent reliability so far, the Model S earned Consumer Reports’ recommendation. But over the last 15,743 miles, our test car has developed many minor problems that merit some reflection.

...

Based on last year’s big auto-reliability survey, we gave the Tesla Model S a score of average, based on input from 637 owners of 2012 and 2013 models. By September, Consumer Reports will be analyzing this year’s reliability survey, which will also include the 2014 models. It will be interesting to see how the Model S will score after we tabulate the new data.

Given the number of bits and pieces Tesla has replaced on our car, it might be tempting to guess that its reliability score will go down. The reality is, it might—depending on the frequency and severity of problems reported by our subscribers and whether they show that reliability is below average.

Bear in mind that the experiences with our test cars are purely anecdotal and never factor into our reliability ratings. After all, it's a sample size of one.

I've seen a lot of similar sentiment on various forums--a lot of folks with more-than-usual minor problems, some with serious issues up to multiple drive train replacements. Not really unexpected since the S is Tesla's first from-scratch vehicle, but it'd concern me if I were buying a Tesla today. The positive side of the coin is that most people I've seen seem to mirror CR's positivity. Lots of comments on how the car has been in the shop more than their other cars, but that Tesla service has been head-and-shoulders better than other brands' and that the folks affected would not go back to another brand for their next vehicle. Tesla also seems to be learning from the S's issues--the door handles, for example, are on their 4th or 5th iteration.

I am expecting the 2014 CR reliability rating for the S to be the same or worse than the 2013, but I would be surprised if the initial Model X rating isn't an improvement since they are incorporating these improvements from day 1 of production.

It's Nevada:

Later today, Tesla will make official that its $5 billion battery Gigafactory will be constructed outside Reno. That makes Nevada the winner of a five-state bake-off that pitted the Silver State against Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. But the reality is, despite months of negotiating for the best possible deal among the states, Tesla was almost certainly destined to end up selecting Nevada anyway. The company gave a strong indication it knew that was the case back in July when it broke ground there and prepared the site that now appears to be the location for the Gigafactory. Nevada’s win is certainly good news for the state, which ultimately will get up to 6,500 new jobs, according to Tesla’s projections.
...
Central to Tesla’s affinity for Nevada is the geography, especially as concerns the Reno-Sparks area. The Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center can tout its multiple links to Interstate 80, which puts it about 5 hours by truck from Tesla’s factory in Fremont, Calif. Better still, the Union Pacific rail line isn’t far away, either. There’s an airfield nearby to boot.
...
Of the four states Tesla didn’t pick, it had a fundamental issue with two of them that made it nearly impossible to invest billions there. Texas and Arizona both prohibit Tesla from selling cars at its company-owned stores there. That turns the few locations Tesla does have (1 in Arizona, 3 in Texas) into “galleries” where staff can talk generally about the car, but can’t help people buy one.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/517486950589014016

Interesting...

When you think about it, it's pretty awesome that his "something else" could be anything, from the mundane to a damn rocket.

Yup. My off the wall guess for D is a dual-motor S. Anyone else?

Elon Musk wants to sell you his D.

It'll never sell here in Chicago. We've forgotten what "D" is.

Zaxxon wrote:Yup. My off the wall guess for D is a dual-motor S. Anyone else?

It's an S that runs on D-cell batteries.

That or the diesel version.

Tesla Death Star

cheeba wrote:When you think about it, it's pretty awesome that his "something else" could be anything, from the mundane to a damn rocket.

Musk is by far the best advertising tool Tesla has. Just a Tweet from him does more than most commercials could ever hope for. I have to admit I read any news story with his name in the headline just to see what he's up to. I just wish I could afford one of his cars.

cheeba wrote:When you think about it, it's pretty awesome that his "something else" could be anything, from the mundane to a damn rocket.

It's probably not a rocket though, since the tease showed the front of a car. Unless it's a rocket with a grill and tires.

Rocket car!

Zaxxon wrote:That or the diesel version.

Combustion FTW! Er...

LawBeefaroni wrote:

cheeba wrote:When you think about it, it's pretty awesome that his "something else" could be anything, from the mundane to a damn rocket.

It's probably not a rocket though, since the tease showed the front of a car. Unless it's a rocket with a grill and tires.

The thing in the garage is his D *snicker*.

About time to unveil the D and something else

coopasonic wrote:

LawBeefaroni wrote:

cheeba wrote:When you think about it, it's pretty awesome that his "something else" could be anything, from the mundane to a damn rocket.

It's probably not a rocket though, since the tease showed the front of a car. Unless it's a rocket with a grill and tires.

The thing in the garage is his D *snicker*.

About time to unveil the D and something else

Ah, I see it now. Yeah, it could be anything I guess.

Probably his vacation plans though.

I assume it is a watch that interfaces with the car... and offers remote control. "Bat(tery)mobile, come here!"

The car in the photo is clearly the Model S, so nobody get too excited about a new model. The only other models they're working on are the X and 3, and I would imagine the production X will get its own reveal event.

My money's on dual-motor S and the 'something else' is probably an overview of the new driver assist features that just started showing up on cars in the past two weeks (lane departure warning, camera-assisted speed limit overlay on the spedometer, ACC).

Zaxxon wrote:My money's on dual-motor S

Because the current 0-60 in 5 secs just isn't fast enough?

For some people with $100k+ to burn, no. But mainly because 1) they have already developed AWD for the Model X which is the same platform as the S, so why not add some margin to the S? and 2) because folks in snowier climes have asked for it. While the S is a heavy RWD car, it's still an RWD car--not the best in snow and ice.