Tesla announced the new Model 3 pure electric car. This is designed to be the "affordable" Tesla at $32,000 (projected to be $42k when it actually is built)
Over 198,000 people have placed reservations for the car as of today.
Per Motor Trend:
http://www.motortrend.com/news/tesla-model-3-first-ride-review/ (http://www.motortrend.com/news/tesla-model-3-first-ride-review/)
(http://www.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2016/03/Tesla-Model-3-on-stage-in-red.jpg?interpolation=lanczos-none&fit=around%7C660%3A438&crop=660%3A438%3B%2A%2C%2A)
After the Roadster put Tesla in the minds of car enthusiasts and hearts of environmentalists, the Model S, which was our 2013 Car of the Year, put it on the map. The recently released Model X SUV is important too, but it's the Tesla Model 3 that'll make or break the company. Musk didn't share any hard Model 3 facts at the car's March 31 debut, he did promise the base model will hit 60 mph in less than six seconds, get 215 miles on a charge, and start at $35,000. Tesla offered rides in a Model 3 prototype to crowds of assembled journalists and customers, and we were lucky enough to score the very first one.
The new Tesla Model 3 is actually quite striking in person. The sleek car looks taut, like it's ready to pounce. Yanking on the lever-actuated door handle (gone are the Model S' electronically recessing units) opens the door to a welcoming cabin that feels futuristic and immediately familiar. You'll find the two-spoke steering wheel and center console in the usual place, but otherwise the Tesla signature cabin has been reshuffled for the Model 3.
(http://www.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2016/03/Tesla-Model-3-interior-1.jpg?interpolation=lanczos-none&fit=around%7C660%3A439&crop=660%3A439%3B%2A%2C%2A)
A 15-inch screen mounted in a landscape format on the center stack is the only option in the Model 3. It's perfectly located to allow driver and passenger use, and it also appears to offer a newer version of Tesla's infotainment software. Driver information including speed, range, and Autopilot status is located on the left side of the display, so it's only a glance away from the road. It'll probably take some getting used to, but the Model 3 also features a speedometer display on that enormous screen.
The front seats feel as if they're mounted farther forward than one would expect in a BMW 3 Series-sized car, and that's because they are—Musk said during the presentation that he and the Tesla team wanted the Model 3 to be capable of comfortably seating five, and given the lack of an engine up front, Tesla boosted cabin space by sliding the firewall forward. Another key to passenger volume is above your head—a one-piece, full-length glass roof that stretches from the top of the windshield all the way back to the trunk lid gives the cabin an open, airy feel not only because of the illusion of space, but because glass is much thinner than the steel and aluminum that the rest of the car is made from. The roofline has a Porsche Panamera-like look, further boosting rear passenger headroom.
But I digress—you want to read about what it's like to ride in a Model 3. In short, it feels like a Tesla. Our Model 3, which was a fairly well-equipped dual-motor version with air suspension and what we think could be a 70 kWh battery pack, shot effortlessly forward when our Tesla minder flattened the accelerator. Despite the fact that our car was loaded down with five people, acceleration was quick, smooth, and quiet. Typical Tesla. While the Model 3 won't throw you back in your seat like a Model S P90D will, it's not going to leave drivers wanting for more oomph. Think of the difference in acceleration compared to a Model S like a BMW 328i versus an M3; both are quick, but one feels a bit more so. Handling from the passenger seat felt solid, too. With the center of gravity kept low by the floor-mounted battery pack, there was little if any body roll detectable during our mini-slalom course, but count on Motor Trend for a full, instrumented track test once we can get our hands on a production-spec model.
First impressions are promising. Mr. Musk is "fairly confident" that the first few Model 3s will be reaching a handful of customers toward the end of 2017. I, too, am fairly confident that the hundreds of thousands of hardcore Tesla fans who have reserved Model 3s (137,500 $1,000 deposits at last count) will enjoy their new, more affordable Teslas.
Meh. If I was in the market for an electric car I'd rather get the Chevy Bolt (yeah, I know, I'm biased). It gets about the same miles, has an interior (with Buttons!), has more usable interior space instead of that sorry excuse for a trunk in the 3, and is backed by one of the largest engineering companies with many years experience bringing a car to market. Though the Tesla is cheaper after tax incentives, they're on track to run out of their allotted 200k incentives here soon after which it will be more expensive. Not to mention their quality issues have been bad enough that Consumer Reports dropped their recommendation on buying a Tesla.
But Tesla will still win because of their image. If GM had tried any of their stunts (delays, quality issues) they would have been shunned. Eh, people are weird...
But overall its good to have the competition and someone to shake up the industry. I'm still surprised PHEV cars like the Chevy Volt haven't taken off ($25k and it has an engine!).
Honestly though, electric motorcycles, that's where its at, I kinda want one for my 4 mile drive to work.
"Not to mention their quality issues have been bad enough that Consumer Reports dropped their recommendation on buying a Tesla."
Right.
From Car and Driver: "The ingenious Tesla Model S is one of the very best cars in America."
Autotrader: "The Tesla Model S is a fully electric luxury sedan and one of the most impressive new cars on the market today."
Edmunds.com:"The 2015 Tesla Model S isn't just one of the most desirable electric cars available today, it's also one of the best luxury sedans, too. .."
CNET :" With ridiculous acceleration, the 2015 Tesla Model S P85D serves as an excellent example of the potential for electric cars and boasts updates that make it compare well feature-for-feature with competitive luxury cars."
http://www.consumerreports.org/cars/tesla-reliability-doesnt-match-its-high-performance/ (http://www.consumerreports.org/cars/tesla-reliability-doesnt-match-its-high-performance/)
QuoteIt also means the Model S does not receive Consumer Reports' recommended designation.
Quote from: Sonic101 on April 03, 2016, 12:20:38 PM
http://www.consumerreports.org/cars/tesla-reliability-doesnt-match-its-high-performance/ (http://www.consumerreports.org/cars/tesla-reliability-doesnt-match-its-high-performance/)
QuoteIt also means the Model S does not receive Consumer Reports' recommended designation.
There were issues that Consumer Reports uncovered in the model they received. Tesla fixed them all.
The issue is that CS hasnt tested anything more current off the production line. Tesla has offered them cars but their policy isnt to accept them because they want to see what owners are faced with directly and so the manufacturer doesnt give them a "shiner".
Because CS doesnt go out and test $100k cars regularly and they have alot of cars to assess every year, they arent compelled to keep setting aside $100k to go purchase another one.
While Tesla has overtly worked with the press to make sure they get product to review, they have had some run ins with some of them for basically embellishing some negative aspects of the vehicle.
In one case they called out the NY Times review as a balded face lie as they check the cars computer after their poor review and found out none of things they claimed ever happened.
I am not an apologist for Tesla as I have seen first hand that the first year models definitely had teething issues.
But you do have to adjust your driving behaviors due to its recharge cycles.
QuoteAs part of our Annual Auto Reliability Survey, we received about 1,400 survey responses from Model S owners who chronicled an array of detailed and complicated maladies.
This wasn't determined from just their own car. J.D. Power hasn't gotten a large enough pool yet to give the vehicle a score, but it's starting to not look good.
Tesla fixed the issues under warranty like other manufacturers would have. Having a car in the shop is nonetheless an inconvenience and contributes to a manufacturer's reliability score even if its done under warranty.
Tesla's largest impact seems to be on the buying experience via not having dealers and keeping it simple.
A Nissan Leaf is significantly more reliable and many times more affordable. Even a Chevy Volt, with a more complex PHEV powertrain, would yield less trips to the shop and fewer dollars out of pocket.
http://www.truedelta.com/Nissan-LEAF/reliability-968 (http://www.truedelta.com/Nissan-LEAF/reliability-968)
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2015/06/want-a-cheap-reliable-car-consider-a-used-nissan-leaf/index.htm (http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2015/06/want-a-cheap-reliable-car-consider-a-used-nissan-leaf/index.htm)
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/chevrolet-volt-reliability.htm (http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/chevrolet-volt-reliability.htm)
Tesla is now up to 275,000 reservations at $1000 deposit each for the Model 3.
http://www.techspot.com/news/64315-tesla-model-3-reservations-swell-nearly-300000-three.html (http://www.techspot.com/news/64315-tesla-model-3-reservations-swell-nearly-300000-three.html)
The only problem is going from limited market (Model S) to mass market (Model 3) is it brings mass market issues you won't see at the upper end. Elon isn't going to be able to Tweet a response to every negative social media event.
Also Tesla's capital structure doesn't permit a rapid scale up of production facilities. Hence his "we are going to have to rethink production" remark.
GM can easily sell bonds or use an existing facility that has excess capacity. Tesla has only one facility (Fremont) that is underutilized, but may not have space to take on another production line as it already is handling Model S, Model X, and now a Model 3. Since they are already heavily leveraged, aren't making money currently, its going to be tough for him to raise capital for not just additional tooling, but also additional floor space to assemble.
Since a reservation requires a $1000 deposit, that is $275 Million he just took in to help him find a way.
He may have to make another pitch to his friends in Silicon Valley, or offer more shares in SpaceX to make it work.
Look for an national appeal (similar to his Gigafactory) where Tesla shops around the country looking for an incentive deal to perform assembly
It would have been nice to have seen the Giga Factory built here. Even if it failed it would have given Jax some publicity and given Saft a nice cross town rival. But the Nevada location works best for them, being nearby, and the state or the city would probably never have made an incentive package that large.
It seems Tesla has a little problem with the Model 3 and the tax credits. US Government sez you can only claim the $7500 fed tax credit for up to the first 200,000 sold. After that nada. Tesla has way more reservations than that.
Per Automotive News:
http://www.autonews.com/article/20160411/OEM11/304119915/tesla-faces-tax-credit-puzzle (http://www.autonews.com/article/20160411/OEM11/304119915/tesla-faces-tax-credit-puzzle)
Tesla faces tax credit puzzle
SAN FRANCISCO -- Tesla Motors, facing a likely shortage of U.S. tax credits for the Model 3, its first mass-market electric vehicle, may consider a clever production strategy to squeeze more money out of the program for its buyers.
But that would add to the logistical challenges for a company that has struggled in the past to deliver products on time.
Tesla said last week that 325,000 people had placed refundable $1,000 deposits on the Model 3, a sedan starting at $35,000 with a range of 215 miles and up, in its first week of orders.
Because of a limit on the number of Tesla customers who can claim a $7,500 federal tax credit on electric-drive vehicles, it seemed some Model 3 buyers would come up empty-handed.
Yet eagle-eyed customers and analysts noticed a loophole in the IRS rules for the credit: The $7,500 credit for electric-drive vehicles isn't cut until the end of the quarter after the one in which a company hits its limit of 200,000 cars delivered in the United States.
So, the reasoning goes, Tesla could intentionally hit its limit on the first day of a quarter, then deliver a wave of vehicles to American customers over the next six months before the credit begins to disappear.
Asked about this gambit on Twitter, Musk seemed to acknowledge it.
"We always try to maximize customer happiness even if that means a revenue shortfall in a quarter," Musk replied in an April 3 post on Twitter.
When asked whether owners of Tesla's Model S sedan and Model X crossover EVs, who go to the front of the reservation queue, would exhaust the remaining credits, Musk added: "Our production ramp plan should enable large numbers of [new customers] to receive the credit."
$14 billion order backlog
But executing a sly tax strategy would add an extra layer of complexity to the already-tricky equation facing Tesla, which must weigh its desire to clear an estimated $14 billion backlog of orders against the risk of hastily delivering cars with quality glitches.
Managing deliveries to squeeze out more credits may be difficult to achieve while Tesla is ramping up to mass production, given the company's long track record of struggling to meet its manufacturing timelines, said Jessica Caldwell, a senior analyst at Edmunds. She said Tesla must solve other pressing challenges to satisfy mass-market customers, such as bulking up its lease and finance options.
"It would be great to maximize credits as well as possible, but that takes some orchestration," Caldwell said. "There are so many logistics challenges alone in the task of producing more than 300,000 vehicles for customers."
All early producers of electric-drive cars, including General Motors with its Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid and Nissan with its Leaf EV, eventually will run out of credits under the U.S. program, created by an economic stimulus bill in 2008.
The plug-in vehicle tax credit, which has played a key role in enticing Americans to buy electric-drive vehicles, starts at $2,500 and maxes out at $7,500, depending on the size of the battery inside the car. Because of their large lithium ion battery packs, Tesla's vehicles all qualify for the maximum $7,500 credit.
Gradual phase-out
Once an automaker sells 200,000 vehicles in the United States, a phase-out begins. At the end of the fiscal quarter after the one in which the company hits the 200,000 mark, the IRS cuts the credit in half for the next two quarters to a maximum of $3,750. Then the IRS slashes the credit in half again for another two quarters -- after which the credit drops to zero.
Analysts expect Tesla to cross the 200,000 threshold as soon as 2018, once deliveries of the Model 3 begin. These are merely estimates, though, because Tesla does not break out its sales reports by country. According to estimates by the website InsideEVs.com, Tesla has delivered 68,500 Model S sedans and 2,900 Model X crossovers in the U.S. since 2012.
Tesla, which has vowed to start delivering the Model 3 in late 2017, said it will inform Model 3 customers about the availability of tax credits when they buy their cars.
"We are committed to providing customers with up-to-date information about current incentives at the time of purchase," Tesla spokeswoman Alexis Georgeson wrote in an email. "We'll do the same when it's time for customers to confirm their Model 3 orders."
It is still possible that Congress could solve Tesla's puzzle before the Model 3 arrives by re-upping the EV tax credit, as a National Academy of Sciences panel recommended in a 2015 report on the challenges for adoption of electric cars.
"Because the cap won't be hit for a few years, there doesn't seem any urgency yet to push for extension," said Roland Hwang, transportation director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, who worked on the National Academy of Sciences report. "I'm optimistic that we can get these credits extended before Tesla and other manufacturers hit the cap."
The car looks great except for the nose. Reminds me of The Matrix when Agent Smith makes Neo's mouth disappear.... :)
(http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/The_Matrix__DivX__110_0001_1769.jpg)
Quote from: Jason on April 13, 2016, 01:31:26 PM
The car looks great except for the nose. Reminds me of The Matrix when Agent Smith makes Neo's mouth disappear.... :)
(http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/The_Matrix__DivX__110_0001_1769.jpg)
Hahahaha... Now that I've seen it.
I never really thought about it, but I guess electric motors don't need a lot of forced air to run.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on April 13, 2016, 01:39:09 PM
Quote from: Jason on April 13, 2016, 01:31:26 PM
The car looks great except for the nose. Reminds me of The Matrix when Agent Smith makes Neo's mouth disappear.... :)
(http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/The_Matrix__DivX__110_0001_1769.jpg)
Hahahaha... Now that I've seen it.
I never really thought about it, but I guess electric motors don't need a lot of forced air to run.
They don't. In addition, grills add a lot to the drag coefficient of a vehicle (newer cars even have active shutters in the grill that close at speed), and sleek aerodynamics are a huge factor in EV design.
EV's do reduce pollution in transportation.
But they dont reduce pollution overall.
The electric motors produce ozone.
The lithium in the batteries is toxic and the mining of is environmentally destructive.
The cobalt in the cathodes can be cancerous if exposed to the public.
The coolant used (HFC-134) is 1400 times more deadly to the atmosphere than traditional CFC's. DuPont has developed a replacement, but it requires 10% more energy to cool with it.
Anyone who plugs in with power from a coal fired power plant will create more residual soot than they saved by not using gasoline.
So the mass purchase of Teslas is simply shifting the burden to other areas.
Quote from: spuwho on April 13, 2016, 02:52:09 PM
EV's do reduce pollution in transportation.
But they dont reduce pollution overall.
The electric motors produce ozone.
The lithium in the batteries is toxic and the mining of is environmentally destructive.
The cobalt in the cathodes can be cancerous if exposed to the public.
The coolant used (HFC-134) is 1400 times more deadly to the atmosphere than traditional CFC's. DuPont has developed a replacement, but it requires 10% more energy to cool with it.
Anyone who plugs in with power from a coal fired power plant will create more residual soot than they saved by not using gasoline.
So the mass purchase of Teslas is simply shifting the burden to other areas.
Eh, not exactly.
Tesla and Prius use brushless motors, to the best of my knowledge all other hybrids and EV's from major manufacturers are also brushless. These motors emit 0 ozone.
It's more environmentally friendly to mass produce energy than it is for every car to use gas. Also, EV vehicles are naturally more efficient than their gas counterparts. They don't need to run rich when cold started, they use virtually no energy when stopped and the key is in the on position and can be designed much more aerodynamically efficient since very little circulating air is needed.
As for coal plants. When more people begin to shift to electric it'll put more load onto the grid. Plants will be forced to go nuclear at some point to meet capacity. This will reduce air pollution as well, though it'll take significantly longer to implement.
The initial switch to electric will be dirty, but as mining and manufacturing becomes more efficient we'll see results. It'll be costly, but in the long run it'll benefit everyone.
The point I was making is that the pollution generated in support of production and operation will never be made up by the economics of the vehicle itself.
I asked a Toyota engineer if the last gen Prius was carbon neutral and the answer was no.
At a conference a PhD was speaking on alternative energy sources and he noted that it takes a Prius 42 years to make up for the carbon required to produce it.
I agree that nuke sources, hydro, solar, fuel cell will reduce the footprint, but we are still a long way before EV's will bring a net benefit.
Selling 300,000 Teslas will expose some of those external issues that are not visible today.
And don't forget that Tesla isn't the only one who's making a large factory in NV. I have my (serious) doubts about Faraday Future, but they are moving ahead:
http://jalopnik.com/luxury-resort-or-automotive-factory-1770860730 (http://jalopnik.com/luxury-resort-or-automotive-factory-1770860730)
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on April 13, 2016, 01:39:09 PM
Quote from: Jason on April 13, 2016, 01:31:26 PM
The car looks great except for the nose. Reminds me of The Matrix when Agent Smith makes Neo's mouth disappear.... :)
(http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/The_Matrix__DivX__110_0001_1769.jpg)
Hahahaha... Now that I've seen it.
I never really thought about it, but I guess electric motors don't need a lot of forced air to run.
Yup yup yup, they'll still need some kinda of grill or air ducts for the A/C system and any liquid cooled components like the transmission or electric motors, but those aren't putting out the massive amount of heat an ICE does.
Quote from: spuwho on April 13, 2016, 05:59:42 PM
The point I was making is that the pollution generated in support of production and operation will never be made up by the economics of the vehicle itself.
I asked a Toyota engineer if the last gen Prius was carbon neutral and the answer was no.
At a conference a PhD was speaking on alternative energy sources and he noted that it takes a Prius 42 years to make up for the carbon required to produce it.
I agree that nuke sources, hydro, solar, fuel cell will reduce the footprint, but we are still a long way before EV's will bring a net benefit.
Selling 300,000 Teslas will expose some of those external issues that are not visible today.
+1
I also think that the poorer countries are gonna need a lot of help and investment to reach that point, or even to get on the US's level.
I stand corrected on the ozone output of the electric motors. It is zero.
However, Teslas and EV's do emit ozone from the battery charging/regeneration system. But the amounts are less an issue than the use of HFC-134 refrigerant for the AC/battery cooling system.
Quote from: spuwho on April 14, 2016, 12:29:05 PM
I stand corrected on the ozone output of the electric motors. It is zero.
However, Teslas and EV's do emit ozone from the battery charging/regeneration system. But the amounts are less an issue than the use of HFC-134 refrigerant for the AC/battery cooling system.
Manufacturers don't use HFC-134a anymore, they've moved on to HFO-1234yf. R-134a replaced Freon (R-12) because of its ozone destruction. 134a is being phased out because it is over 1,000 times more powerful than CO2 as a greenhouse gas.
Though there are no federal regulations banning the use of 134a, the EPA offers fuel economy credits to automakers who use 1234yf, thus incentivizing its adoption. This is also why you can still buy R-134a at the auto parts store for older vehicles.
Quote from: Sonic101 on April 14, 2016, 04:23:43 PM
Quote from: spuwho on April 14, 2016, 12:29:05 PM
I stand corrected on the ozone output of the electric motors. It is zero.
However, Teslas and EV's do emit ozone from the battery charging/regeneration system. But the amounts are less an issue than the use of HFC-134 refrigerant for the AC/battery cooling system.
Manufacturers don't use HFC-134a anymore, they've moved on to HFO-1234yf. R-134a replaced Freon (R-12) because of its ozone destruction. 134a is being phased out because it is over 1,000 times more powerful than CO2 as a greenhouse gas.
Though there are no federal regulations banning the use of 134a, the EPA offers fuel economy credits to automakers who use 1234yf, thus incentivizing its adoption. This is also why you can still buy R-134a at the auto parts store for older vehicles.
I had read that DuPont had come out with the yf formulation, but it only has 90% of the capacity of 134. It wasn't clear who/when the migration had started or was complete.
Quote from: spuwho on April 14, 2016, 09:36:06 PM
Quote from: Sonic101 on April 14, 2016, 04:23:43 PM
Quote from: spuwho on April 14, 2016, 12:29:05 PM
I stand corrected on the ozone output of the electric motors. It is zero.
However, Teslas and EV's do emit ozone from the battery charging/regeneration system. But the amounts are less an issue than the use of HFC-134 refrigerant for the AC/battery cooling system.
Manufacturers don't use HFC-134a anymore, they've moved on to HFO-1234yf. R-134a replaced Freon (R-12) because of its ozone destruction. 134a is being phased out because it is over 1,000 times more powerful than CO2 as a greenhouse gas.
Though there are no federal regulations banning the use of 134a, the EPA offers fuel economy credits to automakers who use 1234yf, thus incentivizing its adoption. This is also why you can still buy R-134a at the auto parts store for older vehicles.
I had read that DuPont had come out with the yf formulation, but it only has 90% of the capacity of 134. It wasn't clear who/when the migration had started or was complete.
Almost invariably the migrations start right about the time dupont's prior refrigerant loses patent protection and enough competitors have tooled up to produce it that it is seriously cutting into their sales. Then magically they realize how much better another substance they've patented is for the ozone layer and go running to the EPA to ban their own former product.