Forums

$30,000 Model 3?

$30,000 Model 3?

If the 312 mile range for the 75kWh Model 3 ends up being about right, then factoring that down would give a theoretical 50kWh battery Model 3 a range of about 208 miles. With a bit greater efficiency due to lower weight, that figure could even reach the 215 mile mark.

Now I am not suggesting that such a model would be available early on because we all know (don’t we) that the base model will come with a 60kWh battery. Assuming that the base 60kWh battery model comes in as planned at $35,000, a 50kWh model may be priced about $30,000 or even a bit less. If that were released at the time that the US tax credit phases out, it could help to keep the reservations and orders ticking along at least for those people happy with a lower range.

It would also bring the Model 3 into a lower price point and be potentially more attractive to many more ICE buyers and more attractive in overseas markets.

Any thoughts?

ReD eXiLe ms us | 22 giugno 2017

The EPA hates Tesla. They typically rate the range of their vehicles at barely 90% of what might be hoped for. Because of this, any battery pack capacity you think might just barely make it over 200 miles range -- won't.

215 × 0.90 = 193.5

215 × 0.86875 = 186.78125

carlk | 22 giugno 2017

Likely not. No company will make $30K product when it could not make enough $35K and up products for years to come. You could always buy a CPO which will start to show up by next year though.

AJPHL | 23 giugno 2017

The next price point where there is enough separation from M3 pricing is around $22k. Of course, then it wouldn't be an M3 but rather a new model, something more the size of the Bolt. I don't see that happening for a while, if ever.

minervo.florida | 23 giugno 2017

Elon was going to make a cheaper smaller car and now says no need.

Semi truck next, then model Y, then pick up trucks. 3-4 more giga factories, double super chargers this year and then next year 50% to 100% more again. More service and sales centers as we speak.
Wow, just wow.

Rutrow | 23 giugno 2017

Has anyone heard the range estimate on the EVSemi?

dsvick | 23 giugno 2017

If history is any indication there wouldn't be much demand for it. They discontinued early model S versions with smaller batteries and seem to be doing the same thing again with the recent discontinuing of the 60kWh. Most people want more range not less and seem to be willing to pay for it. Maybe in a few years there will be enough EVs out there that people will realize they don't need as much range as they think they did.

dd.micsol | 23 giugno 2017

Please, the Dolt will go 240m so entry model 3 should be darn close to that.
The EV semi is to go over 1000m from *ah hem* sources.
Like I mentioned 6 months ago-the entry will be 55kw just to keep up with the Dolt.
55 and 75kw packs. Now if the new cells can sustain a slower energy drain - we might see 50kw packs.
But it's been said already that 300+m p charge have been seen. So that says 4m per kw
55x4 is 220. 10% more range with the Dolt entry level. 27% more range with tesla 75kw than Dolt only level.

Iwantmy3 | 23 giugno 2017

It won't happen. The numbers don't add up.
If the $35000 version of the car includes a 60 KWH battery. The the 50KWH battery is only 10 KWH less. Tesla's cost for the battery is only ~$125/KWH. This means that they would only be saving $1250 by decreasing the battery size. (Note: just because they charge more than this to upgrade doesn't mean the y would offer more than this to downgrade.)

As a result, the car price wouldn't drop below ~$33750 for this downgrade.

nadurse | 23 giugno 2017

No there wont be, but as others have mentioned, if you want a 30k or less option then wait a couple years and get a CPO model 3.

I think some company will serve the econo box market of electric cars eventually, but it most likely wont be tesla.

topher | 23 giugno 2017

"The EPA hates Tesla. They typically rate the range of their vehicles at barely 90% of what might be hoped for."

EPA ranges are tested by the car manufacturer aren't they, not the EPA? (except for some checks).

"Most people want more range not less and seem to be willing to pay for it."

You mean most people willing to spend $50,000 or more on a car. That is nothing like 'most people'.

Thank you kindly.

High Plains Drifter | 23 giugno 2017

As far as a 30K Tesla.. it will be doubtful if we even get a $35K* Tesla, (given the direction for green energy subsidies by the present administration). The Model 3 may not be a $35K* car for consumers pushing their budgets. Because the $7500 savings is not a refund but a tax credit.

As far as you assumption on the battery size... my guess is that the Model 3 will have a lot smaller battery than most are anticipating. It will be able to achieve its target 200 mile range. But it will be under an ideal closed track controlled environment. The Model 3 will be a relatively light vehicle like the roadster and will require less Kwh per mile because of its significantly lower weight.

dyefrog | 23 giugno 2017

I disagree on a few of your points. IMO, 215 will be the minimum EPA number. Whether that means a 50 Kwh, 55Kwh, or 40Kwh, IDK. Agree that the 3 will be more efficient and maybe the motors will be too.
The tax credit if qualified can be looked on as a savings regardless that it comes in the form of a tax credit. One pocket to the other.

eeb9 | 23 giugno 2017

For a lot of potential customers, $35k is a stretch, so they'll be looking at the base model features and hoping for the tax credit to ease the burden. These people are also ideal targets for a (potentially) lower cost version of the 3 or perhaps the Model Y.

We all need to remember that the 3 *starts* at $35k and goes (way) up from there. It's only "inexpensive/affordable/mass market" in comparison to the MS and MX.

I've never in my life spent more than $35k for a car. I expect to spend about $50k for my 3, and I expect it to be well worth the price difference. I'm really only willing to spend it now because it's a Tesla - my expectations are high.

dsvick | 23 giugno 2017

" It will be able to achieve its target 200 mile range. But it will be under an ideal closed track controlled environment."

The target is 215 and, yes, I'm sure it will meet it. Also, there are very specific test procedures that they have to follow in order to get the EPA range/mpg figures, they can't game the system to the extent that you seem to intimate.

ReD eXiLe ms us | 23 giugno 2017

AJPHL: As Tesla's costs go down, everyone else's will go up. If there is 'enough separation' between a Toyota Avalon XLE and a Lexus ES 350, then a $27,500 version of the Model ☰ would be fine. By the time Tesla is able to offer a car for $22,000 ever car that is currently at that price point will be nearing $30,000.

LA-Fohlen | 23 giugno 2017

@topher, you are correct that most of the people would not look for a $50k car but most of the people won't look for an EV to begin with. The majority of car buyers are probably more in the $15k - $25k range and with that EVs are not an option (yet).

topher | 23 giugno 2017

@LA-Fohlen "The majority of car buyers are probably more in the $15k - $25k range and with that EVs are not an option (yet)."

You missed my point, which was that limited range cars didn't sell well when in the $50,000 range. That doesn't tell us much about whether they will sell in the $30,000 range.

If you want a cheap EV, they do exist, buy a used Leaf for $10,000.

Thank you kindly.

topher | 23 giugno 2017

@Drifter: "The Model 3 may not be a $35K* car for consumers pushing their budgets. Because the $7500 savings is not a refund but a tax credit."

The $35,000 is BEFORE the tax credit. After, it is a $27,500 car. There are things you can do to increase your tax liability in order to take advantage of the full credit (such as converting IRA to Roth IRA).

Thank you kindly.

carlk | 23 giugno 2017

minervo.florida
"Elon was going to make a cheaper smaller car and now says no need."

The reason I believe is future shared cars will bring down cost of ownership a lot.

ReD eXiLe ms us | 23 giugno 2017

topher is correct.

carlk is correct.

LA-Fohlen: The majority of vehicle purchases in the U.S. are of used cars with an average sale price of $19,000+ and an average age of 10+ years. The average sale price of a NEW car in the U.S. is over $33,000 now. The majority of NEW cars sold in the U.S. are between $22,000 and $25,000. Because of this, the market for 'cheap' NEW cars is drying up.

Most traditional automobile manufacturers have already abandoned the sub-$15,000 price point. It is very likely that by 2020 they will have abandoned the sub-$20,000 price point. Do not be surprised if none of them offer sub-$25,000 NEW cars beyond 2025. That is another reason why there is no reason for Tesla to go after that market for Sales.

hmgolds | 23 giugno 2017

First, I think the biggest impediment to the M3 is range, time to charge, and availability of charging stations. Far more important than a $5k lower price.

Second, complexity is the enemy of both efficiency (of production) and reliability. A different battery is not like dropping in a different D cell in a flashlight. There are implications for software, etc. For an organization with limited resources, that means diverting time, resources, and management attention from producing other Model 3s. At some point, it will be justified but I don't think they have reached that point yet.

AJPHL | 23 giugno 2017

Tesla doesn't do the sub-brand thing so I was making an assumption that a sub-$30k needed to fit alongside its current and roadmap line-up rather than as part of some theoretical sub-brand where there would be a lot more price flexibility. And also assuming current pricing rather than factoring in inflation etc as others did subsequently.

PhillyGal | 23 giugno 2017

As much as I'd love to see an even more affordable Tesla in the future, the company's mission is better served by their path they have already announced - Semi, smaller crossover and pickup.

Not everyone can afford a brand new car, that's just life. But by getting out as many desirable mid-priced cars as possible as quickly as possible, you'll be effectively creating a pipeline of used EVs.

Once people realize that an EV with xx,xxx miles on it is NOT equal to the wear and tear of that same mileage on an ICE, I think they will be lining up to get a used, several year old Model 3 with 100,000 miles on it.

eeb9 | 23 giugno 2017

PhillyGal - I agree on that point. That pipeline will matter,many will make these much more reachable for many more people.

That said, I am hoping that the Y isn't a small crossover... PLEASE [insert deity of your choice here] LET IT BE A HATCHBACK!!!

:-)

eeb9 | 23 giugno 2017

I hate not being able to edit typos out of my posts...

PhillyGal | 23 giugno 2017

@eeb - A small crossover would still have a hatchback - it'd just be taller and American drivers seem to love tall vehicles.

eeb9 | 23 giugno 2017

I know. It drives me nuts.

Dammit.

:-)

Rutrow | 23 giugno 2017

Me to.

Rutrow | 23 giugno 2017

too

95dawg | 23 giugno 2017

CPO == euphemism for used car.

Tesla calls their used cars used cars.

noleaf4me | 23 giugno 2017

no chance their range falls short of the Bolt.....200+ miles will become the new bottom for EVs - anything less will just not be worth it.

bj | 23 giugno 2017

@dd.micsol - "The EV semi is to go over 1000m from *ah hem* sources"

I gets out me napkin and scribbles - say 500 Wh/mi for a rig (being optimistic) = 500 kWh battery. Yikes. With 150 kW supercharger, we're looking at overnight SC for about 6 hours. If efficiency is halved to 1000 Wh/mi, it now has a 1 MWh battery and will need Tesla's next-gen "SuperDuperCharger" to be viable.

topher | 23 giugno 2017

"we're looking at overnight SC for about 6 hours."

Why wouldn't you charge the semi on multiple chargers. I have always assumed that was the plan (if not battery swap).

Thank you kindly.

ReD eXiLe ms us | 25 giugno 2017

bj: In other conversations on the subject, yes it seems it is best to have around 1 MWh of capacity for a big rig. That should be enough to manage a potential 1,200 mile maximum range, and a comfortable 'Real World' 800+ mile range with a sizable buffer. It is the energy used that is most important, not the energy reserve you have on hand.