3 ms·

Be double as good in almost every metric, range, speed, acceleration, comfort, brand recognition, design. Not sure what you see as revolutionary, but 10% impro

Be double as good in almost every metric, range, speed, acceleration, comfort, brand recognition, design. Not sure what you see as revolutionary, but 10% improvement is evolutionary, maybe 30%, but 100% improvement is a new level.

gamblor956 8y ago
range, speed, acceleration, comfort, brand recognition, design. On range, Tesla Model 3 only has a slight advantage over the Chevy Bolt, 20 miles based on third party test. Tesla isn't remotely close to 2x on range unless you're comparing the Model 3 to a first generation Nissan Leaf. Speed? Definitely not 2x, unless you're actually claiming Model 3 can do >180 mph (Bolt is rated a 91 mph max speed, and the first generation Nissan Leaf had a max speed of 93 mph. Model 3 is rated at 140mph max speed). Acceleration? Chevy Bolt is 7 seconds 0-60, while the Tesla Model 3 is 4.6 seconds. Not 2x. Comfort? Almost tied. Advantage? Bolt, considering that the most expensive Bolt (with all options) is still several thousand $$$ cheaper than the cheapest Model 3 available for the foreseeable future. Brand recognition? Depends on where you are. Everyone has heard of Chevrolet. Not everyone has heard of Tesla. Design? Depends on what you're looking at. If you mean just the lines of the vehicle as they were intended, sure, the Tesla wins. If you mean the lines of the vehicle as put into production, the Bolt wins, hands down. The Model 3 is already infamous for misaligned panels, large gaps in the exterior between panels, misaligned window panes, misaligned handles, etc, and these are all signs of poor design failing to account for manufacturing tolerances. You won't find a Bolt with any of those problems. So...basically what it boils down to is that Tesla is evolutionary at best in some categories and a step backwards in others.
- fumar 8y ago
  I agree with you the Bolt is a good value. I am concerned with your comparisons. A car that accelerates 0-60 in 4.6 seconds is in a different league than a car that does it in 7 seconds. Sure it is not a 2x increase, but these aren't computer specs. Using 2x as a baseline of comparison is unfair given these machines are used for transportation. Perhaps only in range would it be fair. Tesla's branding tactics are no different than the other auto manufacturers. I don't think you can ding them on that. They all play to an audience or niche, it can be heavy handed. It can be GM talking about trucks and ruggedness or BMW talking about performance machines. Tesla focuses on "innovation." It can all be a bit cheesy. I am waiting for the rest of the autos to catch up and deliver their flagship electric cars. I think consumers will wise up and choose the car that provides the right value for their $. Porsche will price their upcoming electric sports car cheaper than the Tesla roadster...I would take the Porsche.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
    I read recently that (intended) sudden acceleration is a risk factor in automotive crashes. Can't find reference right now, but if that's true then faster acceleration isn't necessarily a feature. But anyway, how often does the average driver drive around with their foot flat on the accelerator? I don't understand the obsession with getting to 100k/hr right now. In these parts, most people seem to be quite content with a car that will get to 60m/hr in 15 seconds, as evidenced by all the Toyota Yaris and vehicles optimised for off-road four wheel driving. I imagine a Yaris owner would think it'd be nice if their tiny little car could do that, but it ain't happening without a set of tyres the defeats the purpose of owning a subcompact.

gamblor956 8y ago

range, speed, acceleration, comfort, brand recognition, design. On range, Tesla Model 3 only has a slight advantage over the Chevy Bolt, 20 miles based on third party test. Tesla isn't remotely close to 2x on range unless you're comparing the Model 3 to a first generation Nissan Leaf. Speed? Definitely not 2x, unless you're actually claiming Model 3 can do >180 mph (Bolt is rated a 91 mph max speed, and the first generation Nissan Leaf had a max speed of 93 mph. Model 3 is rated at 140mph max speed). Acceleration? Chevy Bolt is 7 seconds 0-60, while the Tesla Model 3 is 4.6 seconds. Not 2x. Comfort? Almost tied. Advantage? Bolt, considering that the most expensive Bolt (with all options) is still several thousand $$$ cheaper than the cheapest Model 3 available for the foreseeable future. Brand recognition? Depends on where you are. Everyone has heard of Chevrolet. Not everyone has heard of Tesla. Design? Depends on what you're looking at. If you mean just the lines of the vehicle as they were intended, sure, the Tesla wins. If you mean the lines of the vehicle as put into production, the Bolt wins, hands down. The Model 3 is already infamous for misaligned panels, large gaps in the exterior between panels, misaligned window panes, misaligned handles, etc, and these are all signs of poor design failing to account for manufacturing tolerances. You won't find a Bolt with any of those problems. So...basically what it boils down to is that Tesla is evolutionary at best in some categories and a step backwards in others.

fumar 8y ago
I agree with you the Bolt is a good value. I am concerned with your comparisons. A car that accelerates 0-60 in 4.6 seconds is in a different league than a car that does it in 7 seconds. Sure it is not a 2x increase, but these aren't computer specs. Using 2x as a baseline of comparison is unfair given these machines are used for transportation. Perhaps only in range would it be fair. Tesla's branding tactics are no different than the other auto manufacturers. I don't think you can ding them on that. They all play to an audience or niche, it can be heavy handed. It can be GM talking about trucks and ruggedness or BMW talking about performance machines. Tesla focuses on "innovation." It can all be a bit cheesy. I am waiting for the rest of the autos to catch up and deliver their flagship electric cars. I think consumers will wise up and choose the car that provides the right value for their $. Porsche will price their upcoming electric sports car cheaper than the Tesla roadster...I would take the Porsche.
- TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
  I read recently that (intended) sudden acceleration is a risk factor in automotive crashes. Can't find reference right now, but if that's true then faster acceleration isn't necessarily a feature. But anyway, how often does the average driver drive around with their foot flat on the accelerator? I don't understand the obsession with getting to 100k/hr right now. In these parts, most people seem to be quite content with a car that will get to 60m/hr in 15 seconds, as evidenced by all the Toyota Yaris and vehicles optimised for off-road four wheel driving. I imagine a Yaris owner would think it'd be nice if their tiny little car could do that, but it ain't happening without a set of tyres the defeats the purpose of owning a subcompact.