4 ms·

I think the answer is simpler than that; minivans aren't sexy. Tesla is focused on gobbling up potential BMW and Audi buyers who have the budget for a fully loa

I think the answer is simpler than that; minivans aren't sexy. Tesla is focused on gobbling up potential BMW and Audi buyers who have the budget for a fully loaded X5 or Q7 and aren't willing to give up the sex appeal (at least until kids 2-3 come along). A Ford Transit van is a pretty big leap for someone who wants a vehicle to cart around kids, pets and their associated gear. The 2017 Chrysler Pacifica offers a drag coefficient of 0.30 vs. 0.24 for the Model X. Given Tesla's aggressive reduction in drag and frontal area on the Model X (with respect to other SUVs) I expect they could get away with a much more modest bump in battery capacity if minivans became the next hot ticket.

semi-extrinsic 9y ago
You're right that minivans aren't sexy. And that the Model X has significantly better aerodynamics than a X5 or a Q7. But it doesn't match the carrying capacity of either. I mean, with a Q7 you can carry your three kids with just two seat rows, so you can still fit two strollers and enough luggage for a three week holiday in the trunk. With a Model X, not so much. And thanks to the fancy doors, forget about compensating with a roofbox. It's more comparable to a BMW X4 or a Mercedes GLC Coupe. And even then, the Model X is almost 90 inches wide, same as a H1 Hummer, as opposed to 77 inches for the "bigger" Q7.