6 ms·

Wow, I don't really know how bmw or mercedes are going to compete with model 3. Tesla does not look worse than 3 series and C class, is faster and is almost fre

by usaphp 11y ago

Wow, I don't really know how bmw or mercedes are going to compete with model 3. Tesla does not look worse than 3 series and C class, is faster and is almost free to run. And the base bmw 3 series starts at $33,200 and it is almost empty inside...It will be an interesting couple years for auto industry for sure.

kec 11y ago
The same way they're currently competing with the model S at the mid to high end: they provide a more luxurious experience at the same price point.
- rsync 11y ago
  "they provide a more luxurious experience at the same price point." A much, much, much more luxurious experience. The highest end, max-optioned Model S you can buy does not have as nice an interior as a decent 3 series or C class mercedes. It doesn't even beat out their low end. Never mind the cars in its price range (A8/S class/7series). They're not even remotely comparable in terms of interior or luxury appointment. I find it odd, actually ... of all the things you have to do to make a car, sourcing some decent highly adjustable seats and some nice leather appointments, etc., has to be the easiest. Further, you can just add a "luxury package" and option it at $9950 and call it a day ... and lots of people would buy it.
  - gozur88 11y ago
    I suspect it's at least partially a marketing decision. When a car interior gets too plush people start to think about grandpa's Cadillac.
    - superuser2 11y ago
      There is a pretty big difference between the German luxury aesthetic and the Detroit luxury aesthetic. It's clear why they're not imitating Cadillac, but why not take some cues from Audi or BMW?
UnoriginalGuy 11y ago
> almost free to run Legit question: How much does a Tesla cost to recharge? I mean assuming you do it in your home and not at a free charging station. Are we talking $1/charge? $5? 50c? I just want a frame of reference. I'm talking raw electricity only (and obviously based on some average rate).
- dangrossman 11y ago
  The average electric price in the US is 10-15 cents per kWh for most regions. A 60 kWh battery would cost $6 to $9 to fully charge, then. With gas at just ~$2 per gallon, it's only a ~50% discount compared to the fuel a gas car with decent MPG would need for the same distance travelled. The economics were better when gas cost twice as much.
  - booleanbetrayal 11y ago
    Still a great savings at that vehicle class. Especially compelling is home charging with solar. Why not close the circle with a Tesla PowerWall and some Solar City panels? =P
- andersen1488 11y ago
  The Model S comes with a standard 60 kwH battery, which at an average rate of $0.20/kwH for electricity in the US, that's about $12.00 to fill it up for 250 miles range.
  - FullyFunctional 11y ago
    60 kWh was phased out long ago. Minimal is 70 kWh now with 90 kWh being the high end.
- mikeyouse 11y ago
  The average battery size for the Model S is probably 85kWh (they sell them from 70 - 90), and average residential power rates in the US are ~$0.15/kWh. So the easy answer is, a Model S will cost ~$12.75 to "fill up". However, some places have residential rates closer to $0.08/kWh, or $7/tank. That's for 300mi range. They do sell lower capacity battery versions and the entry level Model 3 will likely have a 50kWh battery for a 215mi range, so that would cost $7.50 to fill. Most areas have night-time plans from the utilities to level demand where they charge a lot less for power, the Supercharging stations are free to use for Tesla owners, so the average cost will probably be quite a bit lower.
WrkInProgress 11y ago
A couple of counter points 1.) Design is subjective. I for one think while the Model S looks great, the X and 3 do not look that attractive. 2.) I really don't think "faster" really means much when are you talking about the majority of the mainstream automobile market. Top speed is low on the list of priorities for the average consumer. 3.) Cheaper is not free. I would save about $70 (based on today's gas prices in Ontario, Canada) per month in gasoline costs, but it would still cost me about $60 a month in electricity costs to do an average of 20,000 km a year. 4.) Production capability, supply chain and support network can not be overlooked. Tesla struggled to get 50,000 cars out last year. BMW sold north of 2 million cars in 2015. I recognize Tesla is growing day by day, but 50,000 to 2 million is a big jump.
- dragontamer 11y ago
  To be fair, acceleration speed is most important, and zero-to-sixty in 6 seconds is competitive against $30k cars. (The fastest cars in this price range... like Ford Focus RS... is zero-to-sixty in 4.7 seconds. $35,900 for the RS.) Everyone appreciates a speedy acceleration, when merging into highways or getting out of the way. Its far more important to be quick on acceleration than to have a top-speed.
  - sgeisenh 11y ago
    6 seconds is fast for a luxury sedan, but there are plenty of cars for less than $30k that will do zero-to-sixty in under 6 seconds. The Subaru WRX does 0-60 in under 5 seconds and costs ~$26k. That's the only 4 door car I can think of that's quite that quick, but there are plenty of performance oriented cars in that price range that are very quick.
    - 11402101 11y ago
      0-60 in 6 seconds is really not all that fast anymore. Source: https://www.0-60specs.com/0-60-times/ https://www.0-60specs.com/0-60-times/ Even the Volvo XC90 managed to slide under the bar at exactly 6 seconds. You really have to work hard to move downmarket enough to still be over 6. Sorry Kia owners.
Cookingboy 11y ago
Design is pretty subjective, personally I think this is far more attractive and looks way more premium: http://images.car.bauercdn.com/upload/32029/images/1040x585/001mercedescclasscarreview.jpg?mode=pad http://images.car.bauercdn.com/upload/32029/images/1040x585/... Interior: http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/547435/2015-mercedes-benz-c-class-interior-photo-547437-s-986x603.jpg http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/547435/2015-merce... http://preview.netcarshow.com/Mercedes-Benz-C-Class-2015-1600-55.jpg http://preview.netcarshow.com/Mercedes-Benz-C-Class-2015-160...
- usaphp 11y ago
  The C Class you've linked starts at 40,000$ and featurewise it's empty inside, you will need to add an extra $10K to get all the features basic model 3 has.
- erikpukinskis 11y ago
  I find peoples' car aesthetics opinions totally incomprehensible. Ask 10 people what they like and you'll basically get 10 mutually incompatible answers. Personally, I like futuristic looking stuff (I think it goes back to the Lamborgini Countach when I was growing up). Other people hate that, hate the Prius, etc. I'm always shocked how many people think a car has to have a traditional shape or it's ugly. Some people love Ferraris, I think they look like a woman's shoe. It's just a mess. I think luxury cars look totally silly. I actually think the Toyota Previa is a gorgeous car and I'd have way more fun in that than in a Mercedes, which would make me feel totally ridiculous. I doubt there's another person on the planet who feels the same. I don't know why car aesthetics are so personal. I guess clothing is the same, only no one expects clothes to be one size fits all.
  - brusch64 11y ago
    Yeah this is really funny. Somewhere in this thread somebody said that he finds the 3s design superior to the Model S and that he really likes the Porsche Panamera. My taste in cars is completely the opposite. But I don't care too much about asthetics in cars, I value practical considerations much higher.

by usaphp 11y ago

kec 11y ago

The same way they're currently competing with the model S at the mid to high end: they provide a more luxurious experience at the same price point.

rsync 11y ago
"they provide a more luxurious experience at the same price point." A much, much, much more luxurious experience. The highest end, max-optioned Model S you can buy does not have as nice an interior as a decent 3 series or C class mercedes. It doesn't even beat out their low end. Never mind the cars in its price range (A8/S class/7series). They're not even remotely comparable in terms of interior or luxury appointment. I find it odd, actually ... of all the things you have to do to make a car, sourcing some decent highly adjustable seats and some nice leather appointments, etc., has to be the easiest. Further, you can just add a "luxury package" and option it at $9950 and call it a day ... and lots of people would buy it.
- gozur88 11y ago
  I suspect it's at least partially a marketing decision. When a car interior gets too plush people start to think about grandpa's Cadillac.
  - superuser2 11y ago
    There is a pretty big difference between the German luxury aesthetic and the Detroit luxury aesthetic. It's clear why they're not imitating Cadillac, but why not take some cues from Audi or BMW?

UnoriginalGuy 11y ago

> almost free to run Legit question: How much does a Tesla cost to recharge? I mean assuming you do it in your home and not at a free charging station. Are we talking $1/charge? $5? 50c? I just want a frame of reference. I'm talking raw electricity only (and obviously based on some average rate).

dangrossman 11y ago
The average electric price in the US is 10-15 cents per kWh for most regions. A 60 kWh battery would cost $6 to $9 to fully charge, then. With gas at just ~$2 per gallon, it's only a ~50% discount compared to the fuel a gas car with decent MPG would need for the same distance travelled. The economics were better when gas cost twice as much.
- booleanbetrayal 11y ago
  Still a great savings at that vehicle class. Especially compelling is home charging with solar. Why not close the circle with a Tesla PowerWall and some Solar City panels? =P
andersen1488 11y ago
The Model S comes with a standard 60 kwH battery, which at an average rate of $0.20/kwH for electricity in the US, that's about $12.00 to fill it up for 250 miles range.
- FullyFunctional 11y ago
  60 kWh was phased out long ago. Minimal is 70 kWh now with 90 kWh being the high end.
mikeyouse 11y ago
The average battery size for the Model S is probably 85kWh (they sell them from 70 - 90), and average residential power rates in the US are ~$0.15/kWh. So the easy answer is, a Model S will cost ~$12.75 to "fill up". However, some places have residential rates closer to $0.08/kWh, or $7/tank. That's for 300mi range. They do sell lower capacity battery versions and the entry level Model 3 will likely have a 50kWh battery for a 215mi range, so that would cost $7.50 to fill. Most areas have night-time plans from the utilities to level demand where they charge a lot less for power, the Supercharging stations are free to use for Tesla owners, so the average cost will probably be quite a bit lower.

WrkInProgress 11y ago

A couple of counter points 1.) Design is subjective. I for one think while the Model S looks great, the X and 3 do not look that attractive. 2.) I really don't think "faster" really means much when are you talking about the majority of the mainstream automobile market. Top speed is low on the list of priorities for the average consumer. 3.) Cheaper is not free. I would save about $70 (based on today's gas prices in Ontario, Canada) per month in gasoline costs, but it would still cost me about $60 a month in electricity costs to do an average of 20,000 km a year. 4.) Production capability, supply chain and support network can not be overlooked. Tesla struggled to get 50,000 cars out last year. BMW sold north of 2 million cars in 2015. I recognize Tesla is growing day by day, but 50,000 to 2 million is a big jump.

dragontamer 11y ago
To be fair, acceleration speed is most important, and zero-to-sixty in 6 seconds is competitive against $30k cars. (The fastest cars in this price range... like Ford Focus RS... is zero-to-sixty in 4.7 seconds. $35,900 for the RS.) Everyone appreciates a speedy acceleration, when merging into highways or getting out of the way. Its far more important to be quick on acceleration than to have a top-speed.
- sgeisenh 11y ago
  6 seconds is fast for a luxury sedan, but there are plenty of cars for less than $30k that will do zero-to-sixty in under 6 seconds. The Subaru WRX does 0-60 in under 5 seconds and costs ~$26k. That's the only 4 door car I can think of that's quite that quick, but there are plenty of performance oriented cars in that price range that are very quick.
  - 11402101 11y ago
    0-60 in 6 seconds is really not all that fast anymore. Source: https://www.0-60specs.com/0-60-times/ https://www.0-60specs.com/0-60-times/ Even the Volvo XC90 managed to slide under the bar at exactly 6 seconds. You really have to work hard to move downmarket enough to still be over 6. Sorry Kia owners.

Cookingboy 11y ago

Design is pretty subjective, personally I think this is far more attractive and looks way more premium: http://images.car.bauercdn.com/upload/32029/images/1040x585/001mercedescclasscarreview.jpg?mode=pad http://images.car.bauercdn.com/upload/32029/images/1040x585/... Interior: http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/547435/2015-mercedes-benz-c-class-interior-photo-547437-s-986x603.jpg http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/547435/2015-merce... http://preview.netcarshow.com/Mercedes-Benz-C-Class-2015-1600-55.jpg http://preview.netcarshow.com/Mercedes-Benz-C-Class-2015-160...

usaphp 11y ago
The C Class you've linked starts at 40,000$ and featurewise it's empty inside, you will need to add an extra $10K to get all the features basic model 3 has.
erikpukinskis 11y ago
I find peoples' car aesthetics opinions totally incomprehensible. Ask 10 people what they like and you'll basically get 10 mutually incompatible answers. Personally, I like futuristic looking stuff (I think it goes back to the Lamborgini Countach when I was growing up). Other people hate that, hate the Prius, etc. I'm always shocked how many people think a car has to have a traditional shape or it's ugly. Some people love Ferraris, I think they look like a woman's shoe. It's just a mess. I think luxury cars look totally silly. I actually think the Toyota Previa is a gorgeous car and I'd have way more fun in that than in a Mercedes, which would make me feel totally ridiculous. I doubt there's another person on the planet who feels the same. I don't know why car aesthetics are so personal. I guess clothing is the same, only no one expects clothes to be one size fits all.
- brusch64 11y ago
  Yeah this is really funny. Somewhere in this thread somebody said that he finds the 3s design superior to the Model S and that he really likes the Porsche Panamera. My taste in cars is completely the opposite. But I don't care too much about asthetics in cars, I value practical considerations much higher.