Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-30-2017, 11:19 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664

Tesla Model 3 anticipation thread


Well, the Tesla Model 3 has been officially launched, even if the only people currently getting them are Tesla employees or big investors.

To get non-Tesla fans up to speed: the Model 3 has been Tesla's highly anticipated midrange model, starting at $35k, and with >215 miles range. In terms of price segment, it's supposed to be competition for vehicles like the BMW 3-series and Audi A4. Not quite cheap, but within financial range for an average American. Especially considering the $7.5k Federal rebate and possible state rebates.

I've had a $1k deposit down for the Model 3 for over a year now (as a replacement for my 14-year-old 330i) and it looks like it's going to happen within several months.

They announced the starting options packages, and opinions are somewhat mixed, but personally I think they sound pretty good. Basic rundown:

$35k base price (220 miles, 0-60 in 5.8 s, 15" main console, fabric seats, autopilot hardware (but not software), supercharging)
+$9k for large battery (310 miles, 0-60 in 5.1 s)
+$1k for metallic/multicoat paint
+$1.5k 19" wheels
+$5k premium package (synthetic leather seats, glass roof, etc.)
+$5k enhanced autopilot
+$3k full self-driving (not yet enabled)

More detailed specs here. The $9k for the big battery is steep, but man, 310 miles... that's great. The cheapest Model S that beats that is >$100k. And no other electric on the road comes close.

I'll have to think about the other options--one thing they've said is that they're keeping the options bundled for now to simplify the manufacturing. So I may have to accept a few things I don't care about to get the other things I do. But that's not hugely atypical in this segment.

The delivery sate predictor says Nov 2017 - Jan 2018. I got in pretty early so I suspect this is about as quick as it gets for non-employees and non-owners. Current Model S/X may get theirs a month or two sooner.

I know a few others here have a deposit on a Model 3... thoughts on the latest?
  #2  
Old 07-31-2017, 01:43 AM
FoieGrasIsEvil's Avatar
FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 17,944
Sounds like a winner to me: http://www.motortrend.com/cars/tesla...-drive-review/
  #3  
Old 07-31-2017, 02:12 AM
jz78817 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,776
The first 30 going to employees/associates is their beta/prototype test. Despite their claims to the contrary.

They can't make 20,000 cars/year at $60-130k a pop with any semblance of quality, I've no confidence they can try to make 500,000 which are any good.
  #4  
Old 07-31-2017, 02:20 AM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664
I'll let you know in a few months .

They say they've learned their lesson with the S and the X. Neither of them had a focus on manufacturability. The Model 3--they claim--is simpler and easier to build. There are a few respects in which that's obviously true: it's made from steel instead of aluminum; it's missing a lot of gimmicky features like the Falcon Wing doors and auto-presenting door handles; it has simplified, bundled options; the initial versions will simply not have certain features like all-wheel drive; and so on.

They aren't going to 500k/yr instantly, anyway. They expect ~100 in August; ~1000 in September, and perhaps 20k in December. They won't hit 40k/mo until next year sometime.
  #5  
Old 07-31-2017, 03:17 AM
jz78817 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,776
you realize Tesla is not the first company in the world to start designing and building cars, right?

When they ship garbage like this to customers on their expensive cars, I'm not confident in their ability to deliver anything resembling quality to a $35k price point. Sure, the Elon Musk Adoration Society will gladly take whatever they shovel out, but what happens when they get someone out of their Accord or Camry?

Quote:
it's made from steel instead of aluminum;
There's a company right now making 3/4 of a million pickup trucks out of aluminum every year. Cop out.

Last edited by jz78817; 07-31-2017 at 03:22 AM.
  #6  
Old 07-31-2017, 04:33 AM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by jz78817 View Post
Sure, the Elon Musk Adoration Society will gladly take whatever they shovel out, but what happens when they get someone out of their Accord or Camry?
I actually agree with this criticism. The Model 3 competes with entry-level European sedans, not Camrys. The Euro sedans cost more for what you get than the Asian vehicles. Already I've seen some complaints in this direction, such as that their Kia Shitbox has heated seats at $20k while the Model 3 does not at $35k; while true, it indicates that they've never tried to price out a 3-series with a decent options package. That's not to dismiss their complaints, but there may be some adjustment of expectations that Tesla will need to manage. $35k is a hell of a deal, but only if you value the advantages that come with an electric and the general Tesla design aesthetic.

Personally, after test driving a Model S, I had a hard time going back to my gas car. It just feels so... janky.

Quote:
There's a company right now making 3/4 of a million pickup trucks out of aluminum every year. Cop out.
Yeah, and they're a century older than Tesla, so they have a bit more experience with manufacturing. The transition to aluminum for the F150 was still fairly painful as I understand it. The point is that steel is cheaper, has a longer history and even now is better understood than aluminum. It's just one less obstacle that Tesla has to face when ramping up production.

As for that photo... well, that's certainly bad, but then I've never heard of a manufacturer that's never produced a lemon before. I hope they've fixed whatever defect they had in their QC process.

I do wish there were better competition for the Model 3. The Bolt is the only one that comes close in terms of range, but it's inferior to the Tesla in basically every other way except those factors you get with buying from a more well-established brand. Not even close to worth it, IMO.

Everyone I know with a Tesla loves theirs. Call them fanboys if you want but I'm pretty sure the reason they put up with the annoyances is because the electric driving experience is so fantastic.
  #7  
Old 07-31-2017, 11:46 AM
scr4 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Alabama
Posts: 15,700
When car magazine reviewers say a car is "firm", doesn't that mean harsh and uncomfortable? Most people don't want cars that rides like sports cars.
  #8  
Old 07-31-2017, 06:04 PM
Wesley Clark is online now
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,855
$9000 is pretty steep for an extra 90 miles in range.

Personally I make less than half a dozen road trips a year that are longer than 220 miles. Evenso, with all the Tesla supercharge stations near the interstate now, is the larger battery pack worth it? My road trip is in the midwest, is about 360 miles but even with that there are 6 Tesla superchargers on the interstate along the drive I make. The bigger battery doesn't seem appealing.

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 07-31-2017 at 06:08 PM.
  #9  
Old 07-31-2017, 06:55 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
$9000 is pretty steep for an extra 90 miles in range.
It is pretty steep, but if you look at total dollars per mile, it's a decrease from the base cost. For whatever that's worth.

I don't strictly need the range myself. My longest regular drive is to my parents and back, which is 240 miles. I could charge there if I wanted, but I'd prefer not to be a leech; plus I'd have to install some charging infrastructure for shorter (overnight) trips, since the 3-4 mph from standard plugs isn't really enough.
  #10  
Old 07-31-2017, 07:54 PM
Wesley Clark is online now
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
It is pretty steep, but if you look at total dollars per mile, it's a decrease from the base cost. For whatever that's worth.
I'm confused by what that means, do you mean because the battery will undergo fewer charge cycles, the lifespan of the car will be longer? I suppose that is true, a 300 mile battery will only be recharged 67% as many times as a 200 mile battery. Or do you mean cost of the car vs. mileage range.

The extra $8k for the autopilot and full self driving though, I would totally get that.

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 07-31-2017 at 07:55 PM.
  #11  
Old 07-31-2017, 08:28 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Or do you mean cost of the car vs. mileage range.
Just that. It's a bit of a silly metric, but in any case the LR model is $141/mi while the base model is $159/mi (sans rebates). The pack lifetime aspect is definitely a thing too, but if the Model S is anything to go on, pack degradation is not a huge deal. The numbers I saw were roughly 6% loss after 125,000 miles.

One thing about autopilot is that it can be added later if desired since it's just software. They'll charge more later, but that might be worth it if you can't afford it right now or are skeptical of Tesla's ability to deliver on it. The basic autopilot features are already working of course, but we'll have to see how full the full self driving really is.
  #12  
Old 08-01-2017, 08:14 AM
YamatoTwinkie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
$9000 is pretty steep for an extra 90 miles in range.

Personally I make less than half a dozen road trips a year that are longer than 220 miles. Evenso, with all the Tesla supercharge stations near the interstate now, is the larger battery pack worth it? My road trip is in the midwest, is about 360 miles but even with that there are 6 Tesla superchargers on the interstate along the drive I make. The bigger battery doesn't seem appealing.
For tesla's current Model S sedan, going up 76 miles in range from a 75D (259 miles) to a 100D (335 miles) is an extra $23k. $9k for 90 miles doesn't seem all that bad, relatively.

There are other benefits to the larger battery size, such as acceleration (0-60 mph times of 5.6 seconds vs. 5.1 seconds), recharging rates, and an extra 20,000 miles on the battery warranty. 220 miles is the rated range, but will be less in cold weather, spirited driving & battery age (expect to lose 1% capacity per year). Also remember that to preserve battery life, you don't typically want to charge more than 80% of full battery capacity unless you're going to use it immediately after "topping off".

For your 360 mile trip, the bigger battery may be the difference between 1 short supercharging stop vs 2, depending on where the supercharger is located and what the weather is.
  #13  
Old 08-01-2017, 09:48 AM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,904
Quote:
Originally Posted by YamatoTwinkie View Post
Also remember that to preserve battery life, you don't typically want to charge more than 80% of full battery capacity unless you're going to use it immediately after "topping off".
I didn't watch the full video, but there's an interesting article here that estimates that we should more or less stop worrying about losing more than 20% of a Tesla's battery capacity.

http://insideevs.com/do-tesla-batteries-last-forever/
  #14  
Old 07-31-2017, 10:12 PM
echoreply's Avatar
echoreply is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 826
I'm also early on the Model 3 list. It's saying the estimated time to get a long range version is November-January and a standard version is February-April. I can't really justify $9,000 for the long range. The only thing that would make me get it is if it was the only way to get the $7,500 federal rebate. I don't think that will be the case, though.

For me, I need a new car, I don't want all the bother that comes with an engine, and I also don't want something boring. That kind of leaves Tesla. Getting a $12,500 discount (federal+state) on a new car is also too good to miss.

I think I'll be getting the standard model, in black, with the $5000 assisted driving package. I can't see getting the $3,000 full self driving package yet, as the software is not written, and the regulations are not in place to use it. I'm expecting that in a few years when it's ready, I'll be able to upgrade. I'm also not paying $5000 for rear seat USB charging ports.

I have a free to use level 2 J1772 charging station at the elementary school across the street. If I'm willing to leave the car a block away, I can probably drive with no electricity costs.

I guess Tesla could still screw things up enough I won't get one. The build quality on some of the prototype Model 3s looked bad. For all the Bolt advocates, the panel gaps were no worse than what I've seen on production GM products. I remember a rental Chevy something, where I could stick my fingers in panel gaps on one side of the car, and the other side was nice and tight. That was 10 years ago, so maybe they're better now. Fortunately people who've seen the production Model 3s say the look better than the prototypes.
  #15  
Old 08-01-2017, 01:18 AM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by echoreply View Post
The only thing that would make me get it is if it was the only way to get the $7,500 federal rebate. I don't think that will be the case, though.
Yeah, it's almost guaranteed you'll get it unless you wait for the AWD version. The rebate clock starts ticking in the quarter that Tesla sells their 200,000th car in the US. That won't happen until early next year. Then, they get the remainder of the quarter and then another full quarter of the full rebate. If Tesla is smart, they'll delay their 200,000th US shipment until day 1 of Q2 2018 so that deliveries up to September are covered. Then, the rebate is halved to $3750, which lasts two quarters, then halved again for another two quarters. So shipments up to late 2019 should get some kind of rebate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by echoreply View Post
I'm also not paying $5000 for rear seat USB charging ports.
Guess you don't care for the glass roof .

One thing that sounds fun to me is car camping. Like in the car. Some Model S owners have taken to folding the rear seats down, putting in some padding, and just sleeping in the car. You can leave the heater on since it doesn't require the engine; it's only a couple dozen miles of range worth per night. Being able to see the stars from under the glass roof sounds great. The Model 3 should work just as well here; actually better since supposedly the seats fold without even a bump at the hinge.
  #16  
Old 08-01-2017, 06:43 AM
Balthisar is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Southeast Michigan, USA
Posts: 11,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by echoreply View Post
For all the Bolt advocates, the panel gaps were no worse than what I've seen on production GM products. I remember a rental Chevy something, where I could stick my fingers in panel gaps on one side of the car, and the other side was nice and tight. That was 10 years ago, so maybe they're better now.
GM is incredibly bad at this. One of my favorite things to do is walk through their display of current model cars in their world headquarters and look at their gaps and margins (I'm a body in white engineer professionally, by the way).

Typically when putting cars out for public display, you choose the best, or you refit them to be the best, because, you know, they're supposed to represent what you will actually purchase. I guess maybe we can say GM is more honest; they don't put nice looking cars on display; their crappy margins and flushness represents what you'll really buy!

Although it's been a couple of years, the Tesla Model S I looked at in Shanghai had a lot of the same types of issues (this is an honest appraisal; I'm on record somewhere saying that I think I'd enjoying owning a Model S, by the way).

You know who does a good job across the board? Even their crappy, little Corolla is dialed in quite nicely.
  #17  
Old 08-01-2017, 09:53 AM
jz78817 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,776
EVs/hybrids have pretty sophisticated battery management strategies, they won't let you mistreat the battery.

well, except for the Nissan Leaf, but I think that one was down to inadequate thermal management...
  #18  
Old 08-01-2017, 09:54 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is online now
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,299
I may get a model 3. My reservation time is projecting November. A couple challenges I have, and some have nothing to do with the car itself.
  • The biggest issue is that in my household, I chose the last car for myself, so the other person pretty much gets their pick of what they want. That doesn't always line up with what I want
  • Trunk space is a bit limited. Hard to make costco runs with that tiny trunk.
  • For both the Model S and the Model X, the interior finishes I have thought were kind of cheapish. The dash display is nice, but inside there's little else. The back was either missing or had poorly placed cup holders. Behind the front seats was this odd plasticy material. It was roomy, but didn't seem very useful. I don't know how the model 3 will be.

So yeah, the interior finishes don't scream out, this is awesome! I know, cup holders are a trivial thing to worry about, but I swear the cup holders are the reason I didn't get an M3 before. And with young kids, cup holders, rear entertainment and layout, those are really really important.

Last edited by Bone; 08-01-2017 at 09:54 AM.
  #19  
Old 08-01-2017, 11:45 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
I swear the cup holders are the reason I didn't get an M3 before.
That sounds familiar. My 330i has what I'd count as half of a cupholder. Technically there are two, but one is completely unusable as it sits under the armrest, and the other is only large enough for a soda can, not a largish bottle or coffee mug.

Supposedly the Model 3 has improved things over the S/X, including such features as door pockets, but I haven't yet seen a full rundown of the interior amenities. If it has two real cupholders I'll consider it a big improvement .

The rear seats fold down flat or almost flat, so Costco runs shouldn't be a problem unless you bring the whole fam.
  #20  
Old 08-02-2017, 09:09 AM
Pleonast's Avatar
Pleonast is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Los 'Kamala'ngeles
Posts: 7,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
The rear seats fold down flat or almost flat, so Costco runs shouldn't be a problem unless you bring the whole fam.
I can't flip down the rear seats of my Bolt because of the kids' car seats. When I go to Costco, I have to remember their cart holds more than my car's cargo space. Sometimes the kids get to carry groceries on the way home.
  #21  
Old 08-02-2017, 10:26 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is online now
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleonast View Post
I can't flip down the rear seats of my Bolt because of the kids' car seats. When I go to Costco, I have to remember their cart holds more than my car's cargo space. Sometimes the kids get to carry groceries on the way home.
Totally. This is a real issue and will always come up when we are car shopping. How do I go to costco with this? The bolt was ruled out as a result. The 500e Fiat was ruled out as a result. Seriously, the fiat lease deals made it a net positive in cash flow compared to the SUV we currently use in that the cost of the lease was less than the gas we were spending, and it wasn't close. But the car is so damn small!

And with young kids, they are always with you.
  #22  
Old 08-10-2017, 09:24 AM
YamatoTwinkie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
Supposedly the Model 3 has improved things over the S/X, including such features as door pockets, but I haven't yet seen a full rundown of the interior amenities. If it has two real cupholders I'll consider it a big improvement .
This video from a test ride at the delivery event goes over a lot of the interior features. 4 cupholders, two in the front in the center console, and 2 in the back on the pull-down center armrest. Door pockets that look shaped to fit a water bottle. Coathooks, individual rear reading lamps, etc. Some stuff that was "missing" from the S/X.
  #23  
Old 08-10-2017, 08:08 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by YamatoTwinkie View Post
This video from a test ride at the delivery event goes over a lot of the interior features. 4 cupholders, two in the front in the center console, and 2 in the back on the pull-down center armrest. Door pockets that look shaped to fit a water bottle. Coathooks, individual rear reading lamps, etc. Some stuff that was "missing" from the S/X.
you left e out the glove compartment and adjustable mirrors. Motor Trend said it all, it is the most important vehicle of the century. I mean, coat hooks AND a glove compartment. I was a little confused about the windshield wipers. The stalk on the column gives you one swipe but you have to use the display to run it?

At some point in the near future we're going to be reading about people unconsciously grabbing the display for support and snapping it off or cracking it.
  #24  
Old 08-10-2017, 08:51 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664
The Model S/X had adjustable mirrors and a glove box.

I'm curious how the software will end up, but I anticipate they'll use the steering wheel scroll wheels for a number of things, like wiper speed, sound volume, climate control, etc. A touch-only button for the glovebox seems ok to me. Probably shouldn't be digging around in there while driving anyway...
  #25  
Old 08-02-2017, 10:35 AM
swampspruce's Avatar
swampspruce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Cool Pool
Posts: 4,303
What irks me is the variability of the rebate schemes in Canada. There's no federal program at all, and the provincial ones vary from $0 (Alberta, of course), to $14000 in Ontario [plus a $1000 rebate for the home charger]. As an added bonus, I get to pay the exchange rate of %30 roughly so my $35000 USD Model 3 becomes $45500 Cad before taxes.
Now, obviously that's not Tesla's fault but it makes it just that much harder to make the leap to an all electric. I'm prepared to make adjustments to the way I drive and treat the idea of driving a Tesla in Northern Alberta in much the same way as my forebears would have driving a Model T 100 years ago in that trips require a bit more planning and preparation. In fact, most of my present vehicle's duties would be admirably suited to a Leaf, Bolt or a Tesla (Although I despise the Bolt's exterior design, and the Leaf for that matter). 99% of any distance driving we do is covered by my wife's Edge, and the little distance we do in my car is usually for maintenance for same. I really want to buy a Model 3, but I'm not shelling out 50 large for a car I haven't even sat in.
  #26  
Old 08-02-2017, 09:06 PM
FoieGrasIsEvil's Avatar
FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 17,944
Does any of this ring true to anyone (passed along email from my Dad):

Subject: Gas vs Electric Automobiles

ELECTRIC CAR...Hmmm... It makes you wonder…

Ever since the advent of electric cars, the REAL cost per mile of those things has never been discussed. All you ever heard was the mpg in terms of gasoline, with nary a mention of the cost of electricity to run it. This is the first article I’ve ever seen and tells the story pretty much as I expected it to.

Electricity has to be one of the least efficient ways to power things yet they’re being shoved down our throats… Glad somebody finally put engineering and math to paper.

At a neighborhood BBQ I was talking to a neighbor, a BC Hydro executive. I asked him how that renewable thing was doing. He laughed, then got serious. If you really intend to adopt electric vehicles, he pointed out, you had to face certain realities. For example, a home charging system for a Tesla requires 75 amp service. The average house is equipped with 100 amp service. On our small street (approximately 25 homes), the electrical infrastructure would be unable to carry more than 3 houses with a single Tesla, each. For even half the homes to have electric vehicles, the system would be wildly over-loaded.

This is the elephant in the room with electric vehicles... Our residential infrastructure cannot bear the load. So as our genius elected officials promote this nonsense, not only are we being urged to buy these things and replace our reliable, cheap generating systems with expensive, new windmills and solar cells, but we will also have to renovate our entire delivery system! This latter "investment" will not be revealed until we're so far down this dead end road that it will be presented with an 'OOPS!' and a shrug.

If you want to argue with a green person over cars that are eco-friendly, just read the following. Note: If you ARE a green person, read it anyway. It’s enlightening.

Eric test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors … and he writes, "For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.” Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9-gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles.

It will take you 4-1/2 hours to drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you have a total trip time of 14.5 hours. In a typical road trip your average speed (including charging time) would be 20 mph.

According to General Motors, the Volt battery holds 16 kwh of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery. The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned so I looked up what I pay for electricity. I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh. 16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery. $18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to operate the Volt using the battery. Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine that gets only 32 mpg. $3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg = $0.10 per mile.

The gasoline powered car costs about $20,000 while the Volt costs $46,000+… So the American Government wants loyal Americans not to do the math, but simply pay three times as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country!
  #27  
Old 08-02-2017, 09:36 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,362
if the high end charger requires 75 amp service then a separate box is required which is not the problem. the charger is expensive enough that the cost of adding another box is just part of the budget. The problem is the inability to service even a small fraction of the increase in power consumption in many locations.

THAT's a problem. Of course the consumer can just buy a generator that runs on natural gas but the co2 levels will probably go up.

If we know how many of the cars will sell in California then it should be easy to calculate the net increase in power consumption and the savings in co2.

Last edited by Magiver; 08-02-2017 at 09:36 PM.
  #28  
Old 08-02-2017, 09:38 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,433
So let's see a BC Hydro (water power) exec disses electric cars and renewable energy. Isn't that like asking an oil exec for his opinion of the same?

I've never heard the wild claim about not being able to have 3 cars on the same block charging up. Sounds like unadulterated bullshit. Lol, from a Straight Dope archived thread I found through Google: "Typically, in an urban area, tower power transmission lines are 100,000 volts at 1000 amps." (User name: Ice Wolf) Also, larger houses these days are sometimes equipped with 200 amp service. I seriously doubt that a neighborhood of McMansions is going to suffer regular brownouts on hot days or when they're all partying because of power draw. But I'm sure we have dopers on board who can explain this better.

The whole Chevy Volt thing *is* unadulterated bullshit. You wouldn't bother to recharge the battery on a long drive, you'd stick to the gas engine.
  #29  
Old 08-02-2017, 10:05 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera View Post
I seriously doubt that a neighborhood of McMansions is going to suffer regular brownouts on hot days or when they're all partying because of power draw. But I'm sure we have dopers on board who can explain this better.
.
It doesn't matter if it's a McMansion or a tent. The electricity comes from the same source. Either there is excess capacity to handle the additional load or there isn't.

California currently has a surplus capacity of 21% going into 2020 which should work out nicely in the ramp up of electric cars.

Last edited by Magiver; 08-02-2017 at 10:06 PM.
  #30  
Old 08-03-2017, 12:06 PM
FinsToTheLeft is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera View Post
So let's see a BC Hydro (water power) exec disses electric cars and renewable energy. Isn't that like asking an oil exec for his opinion of the same?
Hydro is just a Canadian term for electricity, since that was the original power source in most provinces. In Ontario, the provincially owned generation company used to be called Ontario Hydro. When they split up transmission and generation, we ended up with Hydro One and Ontario Power Generation.

My local provider is owned by the City of Toronto, called Toronto Hydro. According to https://www.cns-snc.ca/media/ontario...ectricity.html our current mix is about 58% nuclear, 25% hydro, 14% gas with the balance being solar, wind, and biofuel.
  #31  
Old 08-02-2017, 10:02 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
Does any of this ring true to anyone (passed along email from my Dad):
It's almost entirely nonsense.

You don't need 75 amps for a Tesla charger. The Tesla needs about 0.3 kW-h/mi, and the average American drives 12k miles per year. That comes to 10 kW-h/day. If you charge for 12 hours while home, that comes to an average of 7 amps. Less than a typical hair dryer. A Tesla has more than enough capacity to smooth out typical daily fluctuations.

It does not take 10 hours to charge a Tesla at a Supercharger, which are along all the major routes and increasing over time. They will charge 170 miles in 30 min, which increases trip time by perhaps 25%.

I don't know where the author lives but $1.16/kW-h is ridiculous. I have a hard time believing anyone pays that much, even on time-of-day plans at peak hours. Most electric companies have electric car plans that give discounts for nighttime charging; $0.05-$0.10/kW-h is more likely for these plans.
  #32  
Old 08-03-2017, 08:26 AM
Balthisar is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Southeast Michigan, USA
Posts: 11,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
...a home charging system for a Tesla requires 75 amp service.
That's your choice. With 220 service, you have home charging options from 60 amps down, and 110 VAC options, too. There’s no requirement.

Quote:
Eric test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors … and he writes, "For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.” Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9-gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles.
It would seem that the Volt really sucks, then. I’ve talked to Volt owners in real life, though, and their experience isn’t like this at all. As a then-user of a Fusion Energi, I was always a bit envious that Volt owners got 45 to 50 miles before the switch to gasoline, whereas I got from 15 (when freezing or colder) to 25 miles. On pure gasoline, my gas-only mileage was about 44 mph, and this was on the freeway (never needed fuel for local trips or commuting).

Quote:
According to General Motors, the Volt battery holds 16 kwh of electricity.
All other things being equal, it proves why a Volt should get about double the electric range of my 7 kwh Fusion.

Quote:
The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned so I looked up what I pay for electricity. I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh. 16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery.
I’d like to know where in the country this dude lives. A kwh of energy is less than 15 cents in most of the country, and about 12 cents here, including distribution. If you take a peak rate plan and charge at night, then you can conceivably charge at half this rate at night.

Quote:
So the American Government wants loyal Americans not to do the math, but simply pay three times as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country!
It’s all FUD.
  #33  
Old 08-03-2017, 08:52 AM
Pleonast's Avatar
Pleonast is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Los 'Kamala'ngeles
Posts: 7,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
Does any of this ring true to anyone (passed along email from my Dad):

Subject: Gas vs Electric Automobiles

ELECTRIC CAR...Hmmm... It makes you wonder…

Ever since the advent of electric cars, the REAL cost per mile of those things has never been discussed. All you ever heard was the mpg in terms of gasoline, with nary a mention of the cost of electricity to run it. This is the first article I’ve ever seen and tells the story pretty much as I expected it to.

Electricity has to be one of the least efficient ways to power things yet they’re being shoved down our throats… Glad somebody finally put engineering and math to paper.

At a neighborhood BBQ I was talking to a neighbor, a BC Hydro executive. I asked him how that renewable thing was doing. He laughed, then got serious. If you really intend to adopt electric vehicles, he pointed out, you had to face certain realities. For example, a home charging system for a Tesla requires 75 amp service. The average house is equipped with 100 amp service. On our small street (approximately 25 homes), the electrical infrastructure would be unable to carry more than 3 houses with a single Tesla, each. For even half the homes to have electric vehicles, the system would be wildly over-loaded.

This is the elephant in the room with electric vehicles... Our residential infrastructure cannot bear the load. So as our genius elected officials promote this nonsense, not only are we being urged to buy these things and replace our reliable, cheap generating systems with expensive, new windmills and solar cells, but we will also have to renovate our entire delivery system! This latter "investment" will not be revealed until we're so far down this dead end road that it will be presented with an 'OOPS!' and a shrug.

If you want to argue with a green person over cars that are eco-friendly, just read the following. Note: If you ARE a green person, read it anyway. It’s enlightening.

Eric test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors … and he writes, "For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.” Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9-gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles.

It will take you 4-1/2 hours to drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you have a total trip time of 14.5 hours. In a typical road trip your average speed (including charging time) would be 20 mph.

According to General Motors, the Volt battery holds 16 kwh of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery. The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned so I looked up what I pay for electricity. I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh. 16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery. $18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to operate the Volt using the battery. Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine that gets only 32 mpg. $3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg = $0.10 per mile.

The gasoline powered car costs about $20,000 while the Volt costs $46,000+… So the American Government wants loyal Americans not to do the math, but simply pay three times as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country!
Here are the raw numbers for my Bolt: I had a 30-amp, 240V charger installed. The car's battery nominally holds 60 kWh. Nominal mileage rate is 4mi/kWh. Those are all numbers from spec sheets. My night-time electric rate is 0.08$/kWh.

Doing some calculations: nominal complete recharge in 8.3 hours (actual is closer to 10 hours). Nominal mileage recharge rate is 28.8 mph (actual closer to 25 mph). Nominal cost to fully charge is $4.80 (actual closer to $6.00). Nominal marginal cost per mile is 0.02$/mi (actual closer to 0.025$/mi). Nominal numbers are based on the spec sheet; actual numbers are based on mine experience.

I haven't included service costs. Electric cars don't need serviced as much as liquid-fueled cars. Just things like rotating tires, topping off windshield fluid, replacing cabin air filters. Brake pads last a lot longer, because almost braking is done via regenerative with the electric motor instead of the friction. No oil changes, of course. No engine air filters.
  #34  
Old 08-03-2017, 10:37 AM
Doubticus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: South-West
Posts: 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
Does any of this ring true to anyone (passed along email from my Dad):

Subject: Gas vs Electric Automobiles

The gasoline powered car costs about $20,000 while the Volt costs $46,000+… So the American Government wants loyal Americans not to do the math, but simply pay three times as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country!
Volt owner here so I can shed some light on this. $46k is what the Volt used to cost, now they vary between $35k and $38k, and that is before the $7,500 rebate. I personally don't buy cars new because of how fast they depreciate. I bought my 2012 Volt for $18K with 30,000 miles on it, not a stripped down one either, it has all the options.

25 miles on a charge is a worst case scenario (maybe driving over 80mph with the heater on full). I average about 35 miles on a charge. It worth noting that the new Volts get 54 miles on a charge. Like the others have said, I only charge the car overnight and on long trips I use gas like normal. As such I'm averaging 138 mpg. It cost me about 50 cents to charge my Volt overnight to get 35 miles of range. As you said that electricity has to come from somewhere. The Union of Concern Scientists published a map that shows how much CO2 released by charging an electric vehicle relative to where they charge. In most cases the worst is equivalent to a car getting 35 mpg, and in some places better than 85 mpg. In my area I have a rating of 52 mpg, but I offset half my energy consumption with solar.
See: http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/c...y#.WYNC84jyuUk
  #35  
Old 08-06-2017, 11:00 PM
The Niply Elder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
… So the American Government wants loyal Americans not to do the math, but simply pay three times as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country!
[/I]
The irony factor in this post burns.
  #36  
Old 08-04-2017, 08:26 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is online now
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,299
One other benefit of center display - anyone in the passenger seat can easily tell how fast you're going and let you know about it. Wait, is that a benefit?


"oh, yeah it only looks like I'm going that fast because of your angle"
  #37  
Old 08-04-2017, 03:17 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
One other benefit of center display - anyone in the passenger seat can easily tell how fast you're going and let you know about it. Wait, is that a benefit?
Been like that for a while. Every passenger with a smart phone knows how fast you're going--usually with greater precision than the driver, in fact .
  #38  
Old 08-10-2017, 10:08 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,362
the steering wheel control wheels are the auto version of the track ball.
  #39  
Old 08-10-2017, 10:45 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664
I don't quite get the analogy, but a lot of people liked trackballs despite them never quite taking off. If anything, I see it more like trackpads, which have more or less taken over given that laptops outsell desktops. They aren't superior to mice in every way, but they certainly have a form factor advantage and are good enough for most purposes.

In other news, the EPA report for the Model 3 is available. It has some interesting tidbits, such a that they're now using permanent magnet motors (the S/X used induction motors), and that the long range model has a max energy capacity of ~80 kW-h.

I've heard through the grapevine that the Model 3 motors are a big improvement over previous ones, and I guess they finally decided that permanent magnets are overall superior to induction. There's a set of tradeoffs but apparently PM is relatively higher efficiency at high speed, which is where the car is least efficient to start with.
  #40  
Old 08-11-2017, 09:06 AM
Pleonast's Avatar
Pleonast is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Los 'Kamala'ngeles
Posts: 7,152
How soon until we have "fly by wire" in cars?
  #41  
Old 08-11-2017, 06:46 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleonast View Post
How soon until we have "fly by wire" in cars?
depending on how you define it we're already there. many of the controls that you think are directly operating the car are actually talking to a computer.
  #42  
Old 08-11-2017, 06:57 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
I don't quite get the analogy, but a lot of people liked trackballs despite them never quite taking off. If anything, I see it more like trackpads, which have more or less taken over given that laptops outsell desktops. They aren't superior to mice in every way, but they certainly have a form factor advantage and are good enough for most purposes.
call it whatever you want but it's a user-friendly control thingy for the computer. 2 is better than 1.
  #43  
Old 08-11-2017, 08:14 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664
I'm not sure what your point is, then. The common functions can be controlled via the multi-function steering wheel controls and the touchscreen. The less common controls will be touchscreen only. Seat position, mirrors, air vents, and perhaps a couple other things will be profiled. Some stuff will be voice-activated, though I personally wouldn't depend on that too much.
  #44  
Old 08-13-2017, 04:05 PM
ratatoskK is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Beyond the Pale
Posts: 4,159
I'm on the list for a model 3, but I live on the east coast, so by the time they start delivering here, there may be other options. On the other hand, one of the (faraway-ish) places I drive to has a supercharging station, so that's a consideration.
  #45  
Old 10-31-2017, 03:16 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,904
So an update is in order: this summer, one analyst expected that Tesla would deliver 83,000 Model 3s this year, based on hitting 5,000 cars per week in October. Link.

Thus far, Telsa is averging 120 cars per month. Link.

I'm very much rooting for Tesla, and I may consider a Model 3 for my next car in a few years. But let's get this straight: no Elon Musk prediction should be given very much mind. I'm undecided as to whether he sets outrageous goals (aka "lies") to motivate his workforce, in that "beatings will continue until morale improves" theory of management; or if he's just poorly informed as to how his businesses are performing.
  #46  
Old 10-31-2017, 03:45 PM
jz78817 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
So an update is in order: this summer, one analyst expected that Tesla would deliver 83,000 Model 3s this year, based on hitting 5,000 cars per week in October. Link.

Thus far, Telsa is averging 120 cars per month. Link.

I'm very much rooting for Tesla, and I may consider a Model 3 for my next car in a few years. But let's get this straight: no Elon Musk prediction should be given very much mind. I'm undecided as to whether he sets outrageous goals (aka "lies") to motivate his workforce, in that "beatings will continue until morale improves" theory of management; or if he's just poorly informed as to how his businesses are performing.
I honestly think he believes you can build cars like writing software. if schedules slip, throw bodies and hours at the problem.

unfortunately not the case. There are things which have to be done before other things can start, and those things take time.

Tesla is trying to get a baby in one month via 9 women.
  #47  
Old 10-31-2017, 03:59 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
So an update is in order: this summer, one analyst expected that Tesla would deliver 83,000 Model 3s this year, based on hitting 5,000 cars per week in October. Link.
How exactly is Tesla responsible for hitting targets estimated by a random blogger? 83,000 units in 2017 is way out of line with anything Tesla said. Here's an actual quote from Tesla:
Quote:
Our Model 3 program is on track to start limited vehicle production in July and to steadily ramp production to exceed 5,000 vehicles per week at some point in the fourth quarter and 10,000 vehicles per week at some point in 2018.
Somehow, the blogger went from "5k per week sometime in the 4th quarter" to "5k per week in September and more from then on".

Tesla is definitely a little behind on their ramp, but this Ben Sullins guy isn't a professional analyst and certainly not a Tesla spokesperson; he's a YouTube fanboy blogger.
  #48  
Old 11-01-2017, 09:50 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,904
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
How exactly is Tesla responsible for hitting targets estimated by a random blogger? 83,000 units in 2017 is way out of line with anything Tesla said. Here's an actual quote from Tesla:


Somehow, the blogger went from "5k per week sometime in the 4th quarter" to "5k per week in September and more from then on".

Tesla is definitely a little behind on their ramp, but this Ben Sullins guy isn't a professional analyst and certainly not a Tesla spokesperson; he's a YouTube fanboy blogger.
Okay, Elon said 1,600 cars by September, and reality was 220.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timei...l-3-production

There is no universe, no nitpicking of the numbers, that adds up to anything other than Tesla massively missing its production goals. How can you describe this as “a little behind in its ramp?” Was Hiroshima a “fairly noisy event?”
  #49  
Old 11-01-2017, 10:46 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
How can you describe this as “a little behind in its ramp?”
Describing things in terms of time makes more sense than fractions. None of the early numbers are meaningful in the long term (like a year)--even tiny glitches in the setup could bring the entire throughput to 0. The only real question is how far away they are from achieving some reasonable fraction of full throughput. If their conference call is to be believed, that's about 3 months farther away than expected. Compared to Tesla's previous misses, that's barely worth mentioning.
  #50  
Old 11-01-2017, 04:52 PM
Gatopescado is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: on your last raw nerve
Posts: 21,886
Tesla tanking?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/comp...cid=spartandhp
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017