7 ms·

Model 3 Mid Range Battery Available

58 points by arturogarrido 8y ago

krrrh 8y ago
Just in case anyone is wondering how this plays out pricewise, the base model is $46.2k, but they headline the price as $33.2k: Price $45,000 Incentives: -$7,500 Gasoline savings: -$4,300 Price after savings: $33,200 Destination & doc fee: $1,200 It's rather disappointing that for all the talk from Tesla about disrupting the way people buy cars they maintain nonsense practices like adding on destination and doc fees, and add new ones like working gasoline savings into the displayed price.
- benatkin 8y ago
  TCO isn't nonsense. Because they aren't comparing to the TCO of other automobiles, they have to adjust the sticker price to help buyers consider the TCO.
  - threeseed 8y ago
    Did Apple include TCO in their iPhone pricing given that they support their device longer than other OEMs ? No. Did Toyota include TCO in their hybrid car pricing given that it also reduces gas consumption? No. Did Rolex include TCO in their watch pricing given that the resale value doesn't significantly depreciate ? No. Nobody does this because it's intentionally deceptive.
    - greglindahl 8y ago
      Actually, iPhone pricing from US telcos used to only show the discounted price, with the carrier subsidy. You paid sales tax on the full price, but that number was in the fine print. These days you can buy it either way, so it's more obvious.
      - olliej 8y ago
        Back in those days I didn’t think you could buy them unlocked, which I guess makes it a more “fair” private than if you were to do it today. But yeah it was weird in other countries when you would see “Thing X costs $Y” and everyone would do the $Y * exchange rate and say “why is it so much cheaper there”. Then you come to America and discover that the advertised price excludes compulsory fees and taxes. All American companies do this, and I would argue it is unethical, and should be illegal, but I don’t have the billions of dollars needed to buy a law.
- FireBeyond 8y ago
  Only in the US would be advertising a sticker price that includes hypothetical "gas savings" be not considered misleading to the consumer. Perhaps if they want to advertise gas savings they should be forced to also add "increased home electricity costs".
  - threeseed 8y ago
    That is disgraceful behaviour. I guess bottled water then should be considered free since it's significantly healthier than drinking any else. Or maybe my laptop should be considered free since it's used to earn money.
  - imladyboy 8y ago
    They do account for electricity costs in the "gas savings": "The average person drives between 10,000 and 15,000 miles and spends between $1,000 and $1,500 on gasoline per year. In comparison, the cost of electricity to power Model 3 over the same distance is up to three times lower. Over the six year average length of car ownership, that's between $4,300 and $6,400 in gasoline savings. We've assumed a fuel economy of 28 miles per gallon for a comparable gasoline powered sedan, for example, the 2017 BMW 3 series. We've also assumed the national average of $0.13 per kilowatt-hour for electricity and $2.85 per gallon for premium gasoline over the next six years."
    - titanomachy 8y ago
      Numbers are even better in Canada where we have cheap hydro power and tax the shit out of gasoline.
      - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
        Washington state has cheap hydro also, as to a lesser extent do many of the other states in the west coast (California has lots of hydro, but they also need lots of electricity and even import from Washington). Is electricity in Canada generally cheaper than in the states?
- devy 8y ago
  Totally agree. And their full $7500 (max possible) federal tax rebate just ran out a few days ago.[1] Now it drops to $3,750 (max possible) and orders delivered after June 30 2019 will only receive an $1,875 (max possible) tax credit. [1]: http://fortune.com/2018/10/12/tax-credit-tesla-deadline/ http://fortune.com/2018/10/12/tax-credit-tesla-deadline/
  - mynameisvlad 8y ago
    If you order right now, there's a chance you'll still get the car by the end of the year (which is all that really matters with the credit), but you'd be cutting it pretty close. All Tesla claimed was that Oct 15 is the deadline for guaranteeing getting the car before the end of the year. Likely, there'll be a bit of leeway that will see people ordering within the next few days also get the car by the end of the year, especially with a 4-6 week promised turnaround for the AWD models (6-10 on the RWD one talked about here cuts it really close).
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    The full $7500 tax credit is applicable on any new, inventory, or demo vehicle previously not registered to someone until December 31st, 2018. You might have to order a Model 3 by a certain date to take delivery before then, but the tax credit is applicable until the end of the year.
    - devy 8y ago
      Source?
- zeroxfe 8y ago
  I kinda get you, but just because there's a bunch of marketing gibberish on the pricing page doesn't mean they aren't being disruptive.
  - RL_Quine 8y ago
    I think part of the point of being disruptive is that you don't need to sink that low.
    - greglindahl 8y ago
      The iPhone disrupted the phone buying process, and still showed you a discounted price, after phone carrier subsidy.
  - threeseed 8y ago
    Thank god in most places in the world that kind of disruption is illegal.
  - krrrh 8y ago
    I was specifically addressing their claims of disrupting the buying process. Under that criteria, ending price obfuscation (especially the doc fee) should be table stakes. As for the gas savings, it wouldn't be bad at all if they trumpeted the net cost after 5 years and clearly demonstrated the savings, but they lead with a made up price that no one will be paying. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
- seanmcdirmid 8y ago
  The $7500 incentive halves this month, it’s too late to get it ATM.
  - imladyboy 8y ago
    I keep seeing people saying "it's too late", but the order page literally says "All customers are eligible for the full $7,500 Federal Tax Credit if they take delivery by the end of the year."
  - njarboe 8y ago
    As long as you take delivery before Jan 1, you will get the $7500 federal tax credit. Tesla said you had to order by Oct 15th to guarantee delivery before then.
    - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
      Yes, that is what they told me.
- matahwoosh 8y ago
  Looks like they still don't have the "standard interior" option available, so that's extra $5k. Once (or if) they offer standard interior, we're talking $40k. If they're calling this battery option mid-range and it's 260mi range, then it's sounds like we're yet to see the 200+mi (maybe 210-220) $35k car. They're probably not able to produce the $35k car yet without losing money.
  - greglindahl 8y ago
    You're making a huge assumption. Tesla's past behavior is that they fill their assembly line with the highest margin cars until they run low on demand for them, then add lower margin cars. That says nothing about the profitability of the $35k car. Plus, we're talking marginal profitably: the assembly line is a sunk cost now that it's fully purchased.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- billhathaway 8y ago
  I also find the way they are listing the price annoying, but the destination fee is government mandated and has to be a separate line item per KBB. [1] https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/articles/destination-charges/ https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/articles/destination-charges/
- joyeuse6701 8y ago
  To their credit, Tesla does not inundate the masses with ads designed to incite emotional responses and associations that incentivize you to buy no matter the price.
  - justtopost 8y ago
    They don't? Different marketing channels is very different than some egalitarian no advertising model. Tesla was launched on 'incintive to buy no matter the price', their roadster was hardly practical, nor superior to supercars at the time.
asaph 8y ago
RWD base price is $33,200 (after incentives), even less than the long quoted base price of $35k, though presumably incentives on the standard battery Model 3 (not yet available) would make the after incentives price even cheaper.
- eclipxe 8y ago
  ...after tax incentives and "gas savings"
- FireBeyond 8y ago
  No. It is impossible, even with incentives to get it for under $37,500 - because that base price includes "gas savings" that are not in any way an actual discount on purchase price.
- mynameisvlad 8y ago
  Only if you get the car before December 31st. With a 6-10 week turnaround, you'd have to buy it now and hope you're lucky, but cutting it close either way. And even then, it's not 33200, it's actually $37500 because of "potential gas savings". From Jan 1 to Jun 30, it'll be $41240 and from Jul 1 to Dec 31 2019, it'll be $43125. As of Jan 1 2020, there'll be no more federal tax credit and the car will be full price at $45000.
SEJeff 8y ago
This is mostly the end game of Elon's Tesla Master plan: https://solartribune.com/master-plan/ https://solartribune.com/master-plan/
- ruytlm 8y ago
  Regarding one of the last points in that, I continue to be baffled by Elon/Tesla's focus on shared personal vehicles, instead of public transport.
  - njarboe 8y ago
    I continue to be baffled why people are baffled that most people prefer not to travel in cramped, enclosed spaces with random strangers and without the option to carry more than what you can hold in your hands. Sometimes people even have more than one small child with them. Is that really so hard to understand? The personal transport vehicle has been desirable from the beginning of time and now (almost) everyone can afford one. The big downsides are traffic congestion and space taken up with parking and roads. Those can be almost completely mitigated with cheap tunneling tech and automatic driving. Musk and friends are serious working on both of those projects also.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - ruytlm 8y ago
      >I continue to be baffled why people are baffled that most people prefer not to travel in cramped, enclosed spaces with random strangers and without the option to carry more than what you can hold in your hands. Transport is typically supply-led. For roads, more roads encourage more drivers, and more drivers congest the system, leading to marginal overall improvement - there are only so many cars that can travel a stretch of road in any given period of time. While with public transport there are also only so many buses/trains that can travel a stretch of road/rail at a time, we are typically well short of saturation - outside of some of the densest metros, there is often capacity for increasing the number of services. Investment in these forms of transport increases frequency and reliability, and simplifies connections. The 'downside' is that this increased efficiency tends to attract more users to the public transport system - which yes, means imperfect reduction of crowding, but still significantly improved throughput. Also, the people on public transport are not 'random strangers', they are members of your community. Re carrying, as a sibling comment says: backpack. Alternatively one of those granny trolleys. Plus, many buses/trains intended for longer transport (c.f. commuting) have luggage racks.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
imladyboy 8y ago
It also appears they have removed the option for purchasing the "Full Self Driving" functionality.
- teej 8y ago
  This is really interesting, I can't seem to find any reporting that has picked this detail up yet.
- tbabb 8y ago
  Quite sensibly. It seemed pretty shady to me to charge customers for a feature that wasn't delivered or legally approved or likely even finished. I suspect they're finding the shipped hardware isn't enough to accomplish what they want with the necessary reliability. Elon has already hinted that shipped 3's will need a computer upgrade to support full self-driving. They are probably wisely backing off on guaranteeing full self-driving on hardware that hasn't been proven to succeed to specification. Total speculation, but I'd bet a chocolate chip cookie that they'll find they need to make changes to the sensor array as well. (If I were designing this from scratch, I'd want a wide stereoscopic baseline between cameras for optical ranging. They have multiple cameras, but they are narrowly spaced, and may have fields of view that differ too much for stereoscopic fusion. I'd aim for "larger number of shittier/cheaper cameras.")
  - teej 8y ago
    > It seemed pretty shady to me to charge customers for a feature that wasn't delivered or legally approved or likely even finished It's still available for the Model X and Model S. The disclosure when you pay for it is very clear. They are not acting sketchy when they sell it to you. I'd guess it has more to do with not enough people ordering it, so removing the option streamlines fulfillment. > I suspect they're finding the shipped hardware isn't enough to accomplish what they want with the necessary reliability. Yeah they already admitted to this. Anyone who has paid for full self driving is getting a Hardware 3.0 (HW3) upgrade for free. They said full self driving will require HW3. > Total speculation, but I'd bet a chocolate chip cookie that they'll find they need to make changes to the sensor array as well. Yeah, as an owner I'm pretty worried that will be the case but I guess we will see. I doubt they will admit to this publicly though - they seem adamant that the sensors today should be sufficient.
elihu 8y ago
> Model 3 Mid Range Rear-Wheel Drive $45,000 > Incentives - $10,000 > Gas Savings- $4,300 > Price after Est. Savings $30,700 This is good news, but it's still not the $35,000 model. Also, what's the breakdown on the incentives? I thought the federal rebate was $7500 if they haven't run out of those yet. Are they including state rebates (which presumably aren't the same everywhere)? Including "gas savings" in the price seems more than a little disingenuous.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- mynameisvlad 8y ago
  Yes, they likely are. I only see $7500 as my incentives line. You can click "Learn more" in the Federal Tax Credit blurb to get more info on the incentives, it might include state information. I assume the 35000 model is the "Standard Battery available in 4-6 months" that's below the options.
  - elihu 8y ago
    You're right, they're including a $2,500 California rebate.
- newuser12344 8y ago
  Just to provide an alternate perspective: I would rather pay a million dollars for an electric car from Tesla than continue to enrich all the vile oil barons of the world.
- tbabb 8y ago
  Federal incentives cut in half in January. If I am not mistaken, the order deadline for a guaranteed delivery before Jan 1 passed a few days ago. It is possibly misleading to incorporate the full $7500 savings into the price, because they may not be able to deliver your car soon enough for you to claim it-- and they know this. Agree about the gas savings. That's totally low.
trizic 8y ago
It's still $45k, now we will have to wait for the non-premium interior option for the $35k price. EDIT: $40k price since it seems that there will be a smaller battery than this. Seems like a good way to make more money when people wanting the smaller range battery get tired of waiting.
codeulike 8y ago
This has 260 mile range, and the webpage says 'Standard battery available in 4 to 6 months' so this still isn't the $35k Tesla. Its a sort of in-the-middle option. Long Range > Mid Range > Standard
asaph 8y ago
This is neither the short range battery (220 miles, $35k base price) or the long range battery (310 miles, $49k base price). This is a 3rd option: mid-range battery (260 miles, $45k base price).
- gaius 8y ago
  Are these all not physically the same battery and the range is a software unlock? ISTR Tesla unlocking the additional range for free last time when there were storms in Texas.
hartator 8y ago
$6,000 for auto-pilot? When the sensors are already in all cars? Can I run my own models à la comma.ai?
- hughes 8y ago
  Do you honestly think the biggest cost associated with this program is the sensors?
  - hartator 8y ago
    If it's only a software update, when most of ML efforts are open sourced, I don't see why I can't install my own solution.
    - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
      > I don't see why I can't install my own solution You'd kill yourself and become Tesla's PR problem.
      - hartator 8y ago
        comma.ai seemed safe, technically is no different in term of softwares used. Tesla auto-pilot did kill more than 10 people now. Why pay for something that might be inferior than the free one?
shaftway 8y ago
It looks like they've removed the long range single motor option. It used to be - Long range single motor: $49,000 - Long range dual motor: $54,000 - Long range performance: $64,000 Now it's: - Mid range single motor: $45,000 - Long range dual motor: $54,000 - Long range performance: $64,000 So it looks like a savings of $4,000 off the older long range single motor.
- kennysmoothx 8y ago
  The RWD LR model 3 was my go-to and the one I was considering. With this change, they have now essentially replaced that model with one that has 50 mile less range. Now the long range version looks so much less appealing as the price is now over $60k($5,000 more for entry LR) for an AWD upgrade I have absolute no use for. reply
  - shaftway 8y ago
    I'm the opposite direction. I got a RWD LR model 3, but I hardly ever drive it. And when I do it's all local stuff, well under 100 miles per day. I'd rather have saved the $4,000 and gotten a mid-range. If someone approached me and offered to trade their mid-range + $3,500 for my long-range, I'd happily take that deal.
RivieraKid 8y ago
They've probably exhausted RWD demand backlog so I wouldn't be surprised if this was (initially)a software-limited long range battery, so that they can sell their RWD inventory.
- teej 8y ago
  Didn't they previously stop doing software-limited batteries after people got annoyed by it? Seems weird that they would start doing it again.
  - RivieraKid 8y ago
    They're doing it with performance models. Their hardware is basically identical to non-performance AWD.
- wemdyjreichert 8y ago
  That would be incredibly environmentally irresponsible, considering the impact of mining lithium, cobalt, rare earths etc. You'd basically be wasting limited resources, which would run contrary to Tesla's stated mission of creating a more sustainable future.
  - njarboe 8y ago
    My guess is that all the battery is used and the extra capacity allows for a "full" charge without really getting full. It could also let the range stay at the original level for a lot longer as the battery deteriorates. I would hope so anyway.
  - davidgould 8y ago
    Lithium batteries do not use rare earths. Tesla's specific battery chemistry uses significantly less cobalt than the other common vehicle batteries
- greglindahl 8y ago
  Given that the delivery dates are 6-10 weeks in the future, they have plenty of time to put the correct size battery packs in. The previous examples of software-limited packs were in situations where they offered a bunch of sizes, more than 2, in a much lower volume product, and didn't want to produce or keep producing all of them. This time it's only 2 sizes in a higher volume product.
borkt 8y ago
I really can't bring myself to buy a new car but this would be about the most enticing. Even if I were wealthy I would probably still buy used cars (and my hobby is racing so it is not as if I don't appreciate cars).
- nukleosome 8y ago
  at high 'racing' speeds, perhaps you should be aware that it doesn't have the best aerodynamics for road-holding (i.e. negative lift or downforce). also many people have reported some vibration issues that couldn't be resolved; https://forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/vibration-high-speeds https://forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/vibration-high-speeds
  - greglindahl 8y ago
    On the plus side, the Model 3 is much better with the cooling issues that S/X have when track racing. What cars this inexpensive have good downforce?
    - nukleosome 8y ago
      check comment below (BMW 3 series or Golf GTI)
  - r00fus 8y ago
    Can you kindly recommend a good $40k-ish car that actually generates downforce?
    - nukleosome 8y ago
      BMW 3 series or Golf GTI - tried both on max speed. super stable.
    - nukleosome 8y ago
      still, Tesla is a very good ctiy car. a larger and better-looking BMW i3 or a cheaper i8.
asaph 8y ago
Enhanced autopilot is now $5k up front or $6k later. It used to be $4k up front or $5k later.
Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
I just noticed they're now advertising the 0-60 of the performance trim as 3.3 seconds. Only a week or so ago, they were advertising 3.5 seconds. I might have to test drive one soon. My wife is strongly disapproving me getting a Roadster in a few years. If I find that 0-60 in 3.3 seconds is enough, I might settle for a Model 3. EDIT: They also removed the option to purchase full self-driving. Interesting...
- r00fus 8y ago
  3.3 is pretty dang fast. People sometimes complain about how fast my budget EV (hint: not a tesla) accelerates when I drive them around. I test drove a 90D and the acceleration off the line is heart-stopping. And that is listed at 4.7s.
  - Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
    I've been on roller coasters that launch from 0 to 120 mph in 3.8 seconds, which is quicker than a Roadster 2.0. I rode it enough times that even that kind of acceleration no longer felt mind-blowing. I'm worried that getting a car that does 0-60 in 3.3 would actually feel somewhat underwhelming considering that I'm, I guess "calibrated", for something quicker. Maybe I'd feel different though when I'm in control with the power at my command. I'll probably test drive a Model 3 next year.

58 points by arturogarrido 8y ago

Just in case anyone is wondering how this plays out pricewise, the base model is $46.2k, but they headline the price as $33.2k: Price $45,000 Incentives: -$7,500 Gasoline savings: -$4,300 Price after savings: $33,200 Destination & doc fee: $1,200 It's rather disappointing that for all the talk from Tesla about disrupting the way people buy cars they maintain nonsense practices like adding on destination and doc fees, and add new ones like working gasoline savings into the displayed price.

benatkin 8y ago
TCO isn't nonsense. Because they aren't comparing to the TCO of other automobiles, they have to adjust the sticker price to help buyers consider the TCO.
- threeseed 8y ago
  Did Apple include TCO in their iPhone pricing given that they support their device longer than other OEMs ? No. Did Toyota include TCO in their hybrid car pricing given that it also reduces gas consumption? No. Did Rolex include TCO in their watch pricing given that the resale value doesn't significantly depreciate ? No. Nobody does this because it's intentionally deceptive.
  - greglindahl 8y ago
    Actually, iPhone pricing from US telcos used to only show the discounted price, with the carrier subsidy. You paid sales tax on the full price, but that number was in the fine print. These days you can buy it either way, so it's more obvious.
    - olliej 8y ago
      Back in those days I didn’t think you could buy them unlocked, which I guess makes it a more “fair” private than if you were to do it today. But yeah it was weird in other countries when you would see “Thing X costs $Y” and everyone would do the $Y * exchange rate and say “why is it so much cheaper there”. Then you come to America and discover that the advertised price excludes compulsory fees and taxes. All American companies do this, and I would argue it is unethical, and should be illegal, but I don’t have the billions of dollars needed to buy a law.
FireBeyond 8y ago
Only in the US would be advertising a sticker price that includes hypothetical "gas savings" be not considered misleading to the consumer. Perhaps if they want to advertise gas savings they should be forced to also add "increased home electricity costs".
- threeseed 8y ago
  That is disgraceful behaviour. I guess bottled water then should be considered free since it's significantly healthier than drinking any else. Or maybe my laptop should be considered free since it's used to earn money.
- imladyboy 8y ago
  They do account for electricity costs in the "gas savings": "The average person drives between 10,000 and 15,000 miles and spends between $1,000 and $1,500 on gasoline per year. In comparison, the cost of electricity to power Model 3 over the same distance is up to three times lower. Over the six year average length of car ownership, that's between $4,300 and $6,400 in gasoline savings. We've assumed a fuel economy of 28 miles per gallon for a comparable gasoline powered sedan, for example, the 2017 BMW 3 series. We've also assumed the national average of $0.13 per kilowatt-hour for electricity and $2.85 per gallon for premium gasoline over the next six years."
  - titanomachy 8y ago
    Numbers are even better in Canada where we have cheap hydro power and tax the shit out of gasoline.
    - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
      Washington state has cheap hydro also, as to a lesser extent do many of the other states in the west coast (California has lots of hydro, but they also need lots of electricity and even import from Washington). Is electricity in Canada generally cheaper than in the states?
devy 8y ago
Totally agree. And their full $7500 (max possible) federal tax rebate just ran out a few days ago.[1] Now it drops to $3,750 (max possible) and orders delivered after June 30 2019 will only receive an $1,875 (max possible) tax credit. [1]: http://fortune.com/2018/10/12/tax-credit-tesla-deadline/ http://fortune.com/2018/10/12/tax-credit-tesla-deadline/
- mynameisvlad 8y ago
  If you order right now, there's a chance you'll still get the car by the end of the year (which is all that really matters with the credit), but you'd be cutting it pretty close. All Tesla claimed was that Oct 15 is the deadline for guaranteeing getting the car before the end of the year. Likely, there'll be a bit of leeway that will see people ordering within the next few days also get the car by the end of the year, especially with a 4-6 week promised turnaround for the AWD models (6-10 on the RWD one talked about here cuts it really close).
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  The full $7500 tax credit is applicable on any new, inventory, or demo vehicle previously not registered to someone until December 31st, 2018. You might have to order a Model 3 by a certain date to take delivery before then, but the tax credit is applicable until the end of the year.
  - devy 8y ago
    Source?
zeroxfe 8y ago
I kinda get you, but just because there's a bunch of marketing gibberish on the pricing page doesn't mean they aren't being disruptive.
- RL_Quine 8y ago
  I think part of the point of being disruptive is that you don't need to sink that low.
  - greglindahl 8y ago
    The iPhone disrupted the phone buying process, and still showed you a discounted price, after phone carrier subsidy.
- threeseed 8y ago
  Thank god in most places in the world that kind of disruption is illegal.
- krrrh 8y ago
  I was specifically addressing their claims of disrupting the buying process. Under that criteria, ending price obfuscation (especially the doc fee) should be table stakes. As for the gas savings, it wouldn't be bad at all if they trumpeted the net cost after 5 years and clearly demonstrated the savings, but they lead with a made up price that no one will be paying. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
seanmcdirmid 8y ago
The $7500 incentive halves this month, it’s too late to get it ATM.
- imladyboy 8y ago
  I keep seeing people saying "it's too late", but the order page literally says "All customers are eligible for the full $7,500 Federal Tax Credit if they take delivery by the end of the year."
- njarboe 8y ago
  As long as you take delivery before Jan 1, you will get the $7500 federal tax credit. Tesla said you had to order by Oct 15th to guarantee delivery before then.
  - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
    Yes, that is what they told me.
matahwoosh 8y ago
Looks like they still don't have the "standard interior" option available, so that's extra $5k. Once (or if) they offer standard interior, we're talking $40k. If they're calling this battery option mid-range and it's 260mi range, then it's sounds like we're yet to see the 200+mi (maybe 210-220) $35k car. They're probably not able to produce the $35k car yet without losing money.
- greglindahl 8y ago
  You're making a huge assumption. Tesla's past behavior is that they fill their assembly line with the highest margin cars until they run low on demand for them, then add lower margin cars. That says nothing about the profitability of the $35k car. Plus, we're talking marginal profitably: the assembly line is a sunk cost now that it's fully purchased.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
billhathaway 8y ago
I also find the way they are listing the price annoying, but the destination fee is government mandated and has to be a separate line item per KBB. [1] https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/articles/destination-charges/ https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/articles/destination-charges/
joyeuse6701 8y ago
To their credit, Tesla does not inundate the masses with ads designed to incite emotional responses and associations that incentivize you to buy no matter the price.
- justtopost 8y ago
  They don't? Different marketing channels is very different than some egalitarian no advertising model. Tesla was launched on 'incintive to buy no matter the price', their roadster was hardly practical, nor superior to supercars at the time.

asaph 8y ago

RWD base price is $33,200 (after incentives), even less than the long quoted base price of $35k, though presumably incentives on the standard battery Model 3 (not yet available) would make the after incentives price even cheaper.

eclipxe 8y ago
...after tax incentives and "gas savings"
FireBeyond 8y ago
No. It is impossible, even with incentives to get it for under $37,500 - because that base price includes "gas savings" that are not in any way an actual discount on purchase price.
mynameisvlad 8y ago
Only if you get the car before December 31st. With a 6-10 week turnaround, you'd have to buy it now and hope you're lucky, but cutting it close either way. And even then, it's not 33200, it's actually $37500 because of "potential gas savings". From Jan 1 to Jun 30, it'll be $41240 and from Jul 1 to Dec 31 2019, it'll be $43125. As of Jan 1 2020, there'll be no more federal tax credit and the car will be full price at $45000.

SEJeff 8y ago

This is mostly the end game of Elon's Tesla Master plan: https://solartribune.com/master-plan/ https://solartribune.com/master-plan/

ruytlm 8y ago
Regarding one of the last points in that, I continue to be baffled by Elon/Tesla's focus on shared personal vehicles, instead of public transport.
- njarboe 8y ago
  I continue to be baffled why people are baffled that most people prefer not to travel in cramped, enclosed spaces with random strangers and without the option to carry more than what you can hold in your hands. Sometimes people even have more than one small child with them. Is that really so hard to understand? The personal transport vehicle has been desirable from the beginning of time and now (almost) everyone can afford one. The big downsides are traffic congestion and space taken up with parking and roads. Those can be almost completely mitigated with cheap tunneling tech and automatic driving. Musk and friends are serious working on both of those projects also.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - ruytlm 8y ago
    >I continue to be baffled why people are baffled that most people prefer not to travel in cramped, enclosed spaces with random strangers and without the option to carry more than what you can hold in your hands. Transport is typically supply-led. For roads, more roads encourage more drivers, and more drivers congest the system, leading to marginal overall improvement - there are only so many cars that can travel a stretch of road in any given period of time. While with public transport there are also only so many buses/trains that can travel a stretch of road/rail at a time, we are typically well short of saturation - outside of some of the densest metros, there is often capacity for increasing the number of services. Investment in these forms of transport increases frequency and reliability, and simplifies connections. The 'downside' is that this increased efficiency tends to attract more users to the public transport system - which yes, means imperfect reduction of crowding, but still significantly improved throughput. Also, the people on public transport are not 'random strangers', they are members of your community. Re carrying, as a sibling comment says: backpack. Alternatively one of those granny trolleys. Plus, many buses/trains intended for longer transport (c.f. commuting) have luggage racks.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

imladyboy 8y ago

It also appears they have removed the option for purchasing the "Full Self Driving" functionality.

teej 8y ago
This is really interesting, I can't seem to find any reporting that has picked this detail up yet.
tbabb 8y ago
Quite sensibly. It seemed pretty shady to me to charge customers for a feature that wasn't delivered or legally approved or likely even finished. I suspect they're finding the shipped hardware isn't enough to accomplish what they want with the necessary reliability. Elon has already hinted that shipped 3's will need a computer upgrade to support full self-driving. They are probably wisely backing off on guaranteeing full self-driving on hardware that hasn't been proven to succeed to specification. Total speculation, but I'd bet a chocolate chip cookie that they'll find they need to make changes to the sensor array as well. (If I were designing this from scratch, I'd want a wide stereoscopic baseline between cameras for optical ranging. They have multiple cameras, but they are narrowly spaced, and may have fields of view that differ too much for stereoscopic fusion. I'd aim for "larger number of shittier/cheaper cameras.")
- teej 8y ago
  > It seemed pretty shady to me to charge customers for a feature that wasn't delivered or legally approved or likely even finished It's still available for the Model X and Model S. The disclosure when you pay for it is very clear. They are not acting sketchy when they sell it to you. I'd guess it has more to do with not enough people ordering it, so removing the option streamlines fulfillment. > I suspect they're finding the shipped hardware isn't enough to accomplish what they want with the necessary reliability. Yeah they already admitted to this. Anyone who has paid for full self driving is getting a Hardware 3.0 (HW3) upgrade for free. They said full self driving will require HW3. > Total speculation, but I'd bet a chocolate chip cookie that they'll find they need to make changes to the sensor array as well. Yeah, as an owner I'm pretty worried that will be the case but I guess we will see. I doubt they will admit to this publicly though - they seem adamant that the sensors today should be sufficient.

elihu 8y ago

> Model 3 Mid Range Rear-Wheel Drive $45,000 > Incentives - $10,000 > Gas Savings- $4,300 > Price after Est. Savings $30,700 This is good news, but it's still not the $35,000 model. Also, what's the breakdown on the incentives? I thought the federal rebate was $7500 if they haven't run out of those yet. Are they including state rebates (which presumably aren't the same everywhere)? Including "gas savings" in the price seems more than a little disingenuous.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
mynameisvlad 8y ago
Yes, they likely are. I only see $7500 as my incentives line. You can click "Learn more" in the Federal Tax Credit blurb to get more info on the incentives, it might include state information. I assume the 35000 model is the "Standard Battery available in 4-6 months" that's below the options.
- elihu 8y ago
  You're right, they're including a $2,500 California rebate.
newuser12344 8y ago
Just to provide an alternate perspective: I would rather pay a million dollars for an electric car from Tesla than continue to enrich all the vile oil barons of the world.
tbabb 8y ago
Federal incentives cut in half in January. If I am not mistaken, the order deadline for a guaranteed delivery before Jan 1 passed a few days ago. It is possibly misleading to incorporate the full $7500 savings into the price, because they may not be able to deliver your car soon enough for you to claim it-- and they know this. Agree about the gas savings. That's totally low.

trizic 8y ago

It's still $45k, now we will have to wait for the non-premium interior option for the $35k price. EDIT: $40k price since it seems that there will be a smaller battery than this. Seems like a good way to make more money when people wanting the smaller range battery get tired of waiting.

codeulike 8y ago

This has 260 mile range, and the webpage says 'Standard battery available in 4 to 6 months' so this still isn't the $35k Tesla. Its a sort of in-the-middle option. Long Range > Mid Range > Standard

asaph 8y ago

This is neither the short range battery (220 miles, $35k base price) or the long range battery (310 miles, $49k base price). This is a 3rd option: mid-range battery (260 miles, $45k base price).

gaius 8y ago
Are these all not physically the same battery and the range is a software unlock? ISTR Tesla unlocking the additional range for free last time when there were storms in Texas.

hartator 8y ago

$6,000 for auto-pilot? When the sensors are already in all cars? Can I run my own models à la comma.ai?

hughes 8y ago
Do you honestly think the biggest cost associated with this program is the sensors?
- hartator 8y ago
  If it's only a software update, when most of ML efforts are open sourced, I don't see why I can't install my own solution.
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    > I don't see why I can't install my own solution You'd kill yourself and become Tesla's PR problem.
    - hartator 8y ago
      comma.ai seemed safe, technically is no different in term of softwares used. Tesla auto-pilot did kill more than 10 people now. Why pay for something that might be inferior than the free one?

shaftway 8y ago

It looks like they've removed the long range single motor option. It used to be - Long range single motor: $49,000 - Long range dual motor: $54,000 - Long range performance: $64,000 Now it's: - Mid range single motor: $45,000 - Long range dual motor: $54,000 - Long range performance: $64,000 So it looks like a savings of $4,000 off the older long range single motor.

kennysmoothx 8y ago
The RWD LR model 3 was my go-to and the one I was considering. With this change, they have now essentially replaced that model with one that has 50 mile less range. Now the long range version looks so much less appealing as the price is now over $60k($5,000 more for entry LR) for an AWD upgrade I have absolute no use for. reply
- shaftway 8y ago
  I'm the opposite direction. I got a RWD LR model 3, but I hardly ever drive it. And when I do it's all local stuff, well under 100 miles per day. I'd rather have saved the $4,000 and gotten a mid-range. If someone approached me and offered to trade their mid-range + $3,500 for my long-range, I'd happily take that deal.

RivieraKid 8y ago

They've probably exhausted RWD demand backlog so I wouldn't be surprised if this was (initially)a software-limited long range battery, so that they can sell their RWD inventory.

teej 8y ago
Didn't they previously stop doing software-limited batteries after people got annoyed by it? Seems weird that they would start doing it again.
- RivieraKid 8y ago
  They're doing it with performance models. Their hardware is basically identical to non-performance AWD.
wemdyjreichert 8y ago
That would be incredibly environmentally irresponsible, considering the impact of mining lithium, cobalt, rare earths etc. You'd basically be wasting limited resources, which would run contrary to Tesla's stated mission of creating a more sustainable future.
- njarboe 8y ago
  My guess is that all the battery is used and the extra capacity allows for a "full" charge without really getting full. It could also let the range stay at the original level for a lot longer as the battery deteriorates. I would hope so anyway.
- davidgould 8y ago
  Lithium batteries do not use rare earths. Tesla's specific battery chemistry uses significantly less cobalt than the other common vehicle batteries
greglindahl 8y ago
Given that the delivery dates are 6-10 weeks in the future, they have plenty of time to put the correct size battery packs in. The previous examples of software-limited packs were in situations where they offered a bunch of sizes, more than 2, in a much lower volume product, and didn't want to produce or keep producing all of them. This time it's only 2 sizes in a higher volume product.

borkt 8y ago

I really can't bring myself to buy a new car but this would be about the most enticing. Even if I were wealthy I would probably still buy used cars (and my hobby is racing so it is not as if I don't appreciate cars).

nukleosome 8y ago
at high 'racing' speeds, perhaps you should be aware that it doesn't have the best aerodynamics for road-holding (i.e. negative lift or downforce). also many people have reported some vibration issues that couldn't be resolved; https://forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/vibration-high-speeds https://forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/vibration-high-speeds
- greglindahl 8y ago
  On the plus side, the Model 3 is much better with the cooling issues that S/X have when track racing. What cars this inexpensive have good downforce?
  - nukleosome 8y ago
    check comment below (BMW 3 series or Golf GTI)
- r00fus 8y ago
  Can you kindly recommend a good $40k-ish car that actually generates downforce?
  - nukleosome 8y ago
    BMW 3 series or Golf GTI - tried both on max speed. super stable.
  - nukleosome 8y ago
    still, Tesla is a very good ctiy car. a larger and better-looking BMW i3 or a cheaper i8.

asaph 8y ago

Enhanced autopilot is now $5k up front or $6k later. It used to be $4k up front or $5k later.

Sohcahtoa82 8y ago

I just noticed they're now advertising the 0-60 of the performance trim as 3.3 seconds. Only a week or so ago, they were advertising 3.5 seconds. I might have to test drive one soon. My wife is strongly disapproving me getting a Roadster in a few years. If I find that 0-60 in 3.3 seconds is enough, I might settle for a Model 3. EDIT: They also removed the option to purchase full self-driving. Interesting...

r00fus 8y ago
3.3 is pretty dang fast. People sometimes complain about how fast my budget EV (hint: not a tesla) accelerates when I drive them around. I test drove a 90D and the acceleration off the line is heart-stopping. And that is listed at 4.7s.
- Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
  I've been on roller coasters that launch from 0 to 120 mph in 3.8 seconds, which is quicker than a Roadster 2.0. I rode it enough times that even that kind of acceleration no longer felt mind-blowing. I'm worried that getting a car that does 0-60 in 3.3 would actually feel somewhat underwhelming considering that I'm, I guess "calibrated", for something quicker. Maybe I'd feel different though when I'm in control with the power at my command. I'll probably test drive a Model 3 next year.