Official Tesla Model 3 thread

[dgpcolorado]

...When other companies have long range EVs - they will put in the money to make their charging networks widespread and reliable.

While that would be nice, I don't believe it for a minute. Those other car companies just don't have the vision to do that IMHO.

Feel free to gloat if your prediction, of "widespread and reliable" charging networks, turns out to be true in a few years, when the long range EVs hit the market!

Meanwhile, I won't be holding my breath in anticipation.

 

[TomT]

+1 Look had badly Nissan has mismanaged charging from day one as a good example!

While that would be nice, I don't believe it for a minute. Those other car companies just don't have the vision to do that IMHO.

 

[DNAinaGoodWay]

If they do, it's likely to be one or two 50 kW max stations per install, not 6-8 120 kW stations. But with a $400 CHAdeMO adapter, and maybe a CSS adapter someday, anything the others build will serve to fill in the supercharger gaps.

 

[GRA]

I will probably give preference to Tesla and Nissan because they've both been early adopters in the BEV market.

Nissan is an early adopter in the BEV market. Nissan dealers, for the most part, are not.

This is going to be a huge reason as to why the Model 3 would blow out even a lesser priced but equally capable Leaf.

That's like saying Blackberry is the only company who have figured out how to do email push ...

When other companies have long range EVs - they will put in the money to make their charging networks widespread and reliable.

I wouldn't be so certain about that. Nissan is the only company out there with "their own" charging network--none of the others don't even have anything. And it's not really a network, because it's only in dealerships--you'll have a fun time with cross-country trips if you can only stop at dealerships to charge, while Superchargers are out along interstates.

Many companies have explicitly come forward and said they'll never build a charging network. Volkswagon is one of the more prominent companies to state this.

I'm not aware of VW having said such a thing, but if they did at one time, they've changed their minds. As was announced a month or two back, VW along with BMW and Chargepoint is going to build dual-standard QCs spaced every 50 miles or so along the Portland - San Diego and Boston - Washington corridors, and BMW at least is also installing CCS QCs at their dealers - see: http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1096446_bmw-vw-and-chargepoint-to-build-100-ccs-fast-charging-sites-for-electric-cars" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Nissan has also said that it was going to start installing dual-standard QCs - http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/27/business/nissan-plans-1000-new-stations-to-quickly-charge-electric-cars.html?_r=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

so it's clear that the companies have woken up to the fact that they'll need realistic networks once they start producing cars that have adequate range for (shorter) road trips. They do need to install more than one QC per site; I know BMW has already done this at some dealers and headquarters facilities, but we need them to also do so on the 24/7 QCs.

 

[dgpcolorado]

If they do, it's likely to be one or two 50 kW max stations per install, not 6-8 120 kW stations...

Yes. One or two (or three) quick chargers per location isn't going to cut it. Neither is something in the range of 50 kW. Add to that the various payment schemes, ranging from free to expensive, for the QC stations and the whole QC system remains just an aid to local or regional travel. While useful for its limited purposes, it isn't a well-thought-out network to enable long distance interstate travel, as is the case for Tesla's Supercharger network.

 

[eloder]

Many companies have explicitly come forward and said they'll never build a charging network. Volkswagon is one of the more prominent companies to state this.

I'm not aware of VW having said such a thing, but if they did at one time, they've changed their minds. As was announced a month or two back, VW along with BMW and Chargepoint is going to build dual-standard QCs spaced every 50 miles or so along the Portland - San Diego and Boston - Washington corridors, and BMW at least is also installing CCS QCs at their dealers - see: http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1096446_bmw-vw-and-chargepoint-to-build-100-ccs-fast-charging-sites-for-electric-cars" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Nissan has also said that it was going to start installing dual-standard QCs - http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/27/business/nissan-plans-1000-new-stations-to-quickly-charge-electric-cars.html?_r=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

so it's clear that the companies have woken up to the fact that they'll need realistic networks once they start producing cars that have adequate range for (shorter) road trips. They do need to install more than one QC per site; I know BMW has already done this at some dealers and headquarters facilities, but we need them to also do so on the 24/7 QCs.

"Each site will include not only "up to two 50-kW DC Fast chargers, or 24-kW DC Combo Fast chargers with the SAE Combo connector," but also 240-Volt Level 2 charging, which can be used by every electric car sold in the U.S. today."

So a pay-per-use, "up to two" fast chargers that are only 50 KW in strength constitute a realistic network?

That's part of the problem. No other manufacturers or networks are remotely as close as Tesla in effort in the charging network. 50 KW charges are going to result in 40-60 minute charge time for 170-180 miles. Not only will each stop have a fraction of the number of chargers, but each car will need to charge for just over twice as long for the journey.

Someone who buys a Bolt or Gen 2 Leaf in three years is going to have a vastly inferior experience to someone who buys a Tesla of similar specs.

 

[GRA]

Many companies have explicitly come forward and said they'll never build a charging network. Volkswagon is one of the more prominent companies to state this.

I'm not aware of VW having said such a thing, but if they did at one time, they've changed their minds. As was announced a month or two back, VW along with BMW and Chargepoint is going to build dual-standard QCs spaced every 50 miles or so along the Portland - San Diego and Boston - Washington corridors, and BMW at least is also installing CCS QCs at their dealers - see: http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1096446_bmw-vw-and-chargepoint-to-build-100-ccs-fast-charging-sites-for-electric-cars" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Nissan has also said that it was going to start installing dual-standard QCs - http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/27/business/nissan-plans-1000-new-stations-to-quickly-charge-electric-cars.html?_r=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

so it's clear that the companies have woken up to the fact that they'll need realistic networks once they start producing cars that have adequate range for (shorter) road trips. They do need to install more than one QC per site; I know BMW has already done this at some dealers and headquarters facilities, but we need them to also do so on the 24/7 QCs.

"Each site will include not only "up to two 50-kW DC Fast chargers, or 24-kW DC Combo Fast chargers with the SAE Combo connector," but also 240-Volt Level 2 charging, which can be used by every electric car sold in the U.S. today."

So a pay-per-use, "up to two" fast chargers that are only 50 KW in strength constitute a realistic network?

That's part of the problem. No other manufacturers or networks are remotely as close as Tesla in effort in the charging network. 50 KW charges are going to result in 40-60 minute charge time for 170-180 miles. Not only will each stop have a fraction of the number of chargers, but each car will need to charge for just over twice as long for the journey.

Someone who buys a Bolt or Gen 2 Leaf in three years is going to have a vastly inferior experience to someone who buys a Tesla of similar specs.

No argument that the Supercharger network is far superior for now; I've said as much repeatedly. The point is that the automakers have now realized that _they_ are going to have to do this for a while for the same reasons Tesla did - marketing. While the existing non-Tesla QC network and the charger speeds are far inferior to Tesla's, that can change, and with the financial clout these corporations have, if they put their minds to it they can catch up to Tesla quite fast. They've got another two years to get their act together. As it is, I consider most of the existing CHAdeMO network to be essentially useless owing to poor location, access restrictions and unreliability, so CCS and CHAdeMO are starting off on a level playing field when it comes to installing a network to enable roadtrips. As for charging speed, 50 kW is all the current units can put out, but it's not the ultimate limit of even the current CCS standard (CHAdeMO is less IIRR), let alone any second generation.

As for pay-per use, that will be essential. As I've said before the 'pay all at once up front' model works okay for a car that starts at $70k, but even there it makes putting SCs in high-usage urban areas problematic, as locals are too likely to camp out at the SC and block them for road trippers, and the economics probably don't work either. Pay per use avoids this. To be sure, if they can't get the price per charge down to less than gas, no one will be buying long distance BEVs anyway; it will be BEV commuters plus ICE, and/or PHEVs like the Volt, with FCHVs/PHFCEVs possibly coming on if the price drops enough.

 

[desiv]

Someone who buys a Bolt or Gen 2 Leaf in three years is going to have a vastly inferior experience to someone who buys a Tesla of similar specs.

If you are talking purely charging infrastructure, then depending on where they live and their charging needs..
But not necessarily...

With a 200-mile car and home charging at L2 that can cover the average refill (which I don't expect to be more than half) overnite, and a growing infrastructure (ala the PNW), there might not be much more need for some people.

Now, I'm not saying that better isn't better.. ;-) It is.. And it might be "required" for people to be more comfortable to buy EVs, even if they don't end up using much of the infrastructure.. I think the psychology is important..

But I'm not sure how "required" it is yet.. I think some of the other car companies are taking a "we will build it (or help) as we see the need, and not before."
Risky doing that, but for cost reasons???

Out of my pay grade to know which is the right long term choice.. ;-)

desiv

 

[GRA]

The point is that the automakers have now realized that _they_ are going to have to do this for a while for the same reasons Tesla did - marketing. While the existing non-QC network and the charger speeds are far inferior to Tesla's, that can change, and with the financial clout these corporations have, if they put their minds to it they can catch up to Tesla quite fast. They've got another two years to get their act together. As it is, I consider most of the existing CHAdeMO network to be essentially useless owing to poor location, access restrictions and unreliability, so CCS and CHAdeMO are starting off on a level playing field when it comes to installing a network to enable roadtrips.

Today from Nissan, via ievs.com:

Northern California Will Get More CHAdeMO Chargers Along Specific Inter-City Routes

Nissan and Japan-based trading company, Kanematsu Corporation, announced that together with Japan’s largest public R&D management organization New Energy Industrial Technology and Development Organization (NEDO), will work on a new EV project in Northern California.

The project is focused on longer-distance driving, which means DC CHAdeMO fast chargers. An undisclosed number of chargers will be installed along inter-city freeways.

“The NEDO project will seek to encourage the use of electric vehicles for longer-distance, inter-city driving by installing and maintaining multiple rapid chargers along specific inter-city routes. Nissan and Kanematsu will collect, analyze, and research data on EV driving patterns in California, and create a suitable model to help promote more extensive use of electric vehicles in the state and beyond.

Full article here: http://insideevs.com/northern-california-will-get-chademo-chargers-along-specific-inter-city-routes/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[N952JL]

What percentage of current LEAF drivers are likely to switch to a Model 3, first chance they get? That would be a good poll.

No dealer hassle & supercharger access will be a hard combination to beat. I don't see how any of the upcoming gen 2 BEVs will be able to compete. Maybe a 48 kWh eNV200, just for size.

I'm planning to make the switch. The chance to go with one car, no ICE, and still be able to make long trips is too good to pass up.

For me, the Supercharger network changes everything about EVs. Other 200 mile range EVs just wouldn't compare.

You can add me to the list.
2012 Leaf second in GA.

 

[N952JL]

Tesla is the only company that has figured out how to build a network of charging stations.

That's like saying Blackberry is the only company who have figured out how to do email push ...

Sure, technology-wise, everybody knows *how* to build a network of charging stations. But while Nissan was putting L2 chargers at all of their dealerships, and maybe a single DC fast-charger here and there, Tesla made deals with various shopping malls and hotels to strategically place multiple-outlet charging stations along key routes & intersections to allow cross-country driving. Tesla realized that this would be an important long-term strategy to help sell their electric cars, while the other car companies just dipped their toes into the water.

Tesla could do this because they had a decent range to begin with. The Leaf does not. Even with L3 quick charge, you would spend 30 mins charging for every 45 min of highway driving. What sort of trip can you make with a ratio like that. Now with over 200 mile range you might reach a 3 hr drive to half hr recharge. It may not be good, but it is doable.

 

[N952JL]

...When other companies have long range EVs - they will put in the money to make their charging networks widespread and reliable.

While that would be nice, I don't believe it for a minute. Those other car companies just don't have the vision to do that IMHO.

Feel free to gloat if your prediction, of "widespread and reliable" charging networks, turns out to be true in a few years, when the long range EVs hit the market!

Meanwhile, I won't be holding my breath in anticipation.

Maybe not at first. But they don't need vision. Tesla has already shown them the future. They just need to follow. When they see that they can't compete with Tesla they will be forced to follow tesla's lead. Why would we spend the same amount of money, for a similar car from another manufacturer if he doesn't offer a bundled useable fast charging network?

 

[dgpcolorado]

Maybe not at first. But they don't need vision. Tesla has already shown them the future. They just need to follow. When they see that they can't compete with Tesla they will be forced to follow tesla's lead. Why would we spend the same amount of money, for a similar car from another manufacturer if he doesn't offer a bundled useable fast charging network?

Why indeed? Yet some others here at MNL seem to think that just producing a 200 mile EV, perhaps with a Chademo/CCS port, is good enough. And for local/regional driving it likely is.

As I've said before, I think the Tesla Supercharger network is a paradigm shift in EV utility. My personal view is that the major car companies just don't "get it" yet and that it will be quite a few years before they do "get it".

Not that my crystal ball is better than that of anybody else, but I think those companies who do try to complete in the long distance EV market are more likely to join and expand Tesla's Supercharger network than to try to create their own proprietary network. That would seem to be fine with Elon Musk, should it happen.

We shall see. First the Model III needs to make it to market and be "affordable". If that happens, I think it will shake up the BEV market, even though the Model III would be severely supply constrained for several years, at least.

 

[jlv]

First the Model III needs to make it to market and be "affordable". If that happens, I think it will shake up the BEV market, even though the Model III would be severely supply constrained for several years, at least.

Agreed. (I keep thinking back 4 years ago when the Roadster started at $100K+ and the forthcoming Model S would be available for as little as $57K after the federal govt rebate, and how that has turned into the actual Model S price today that is significantly higher).

 

[Zythryn]

First the Model III needs to make it to market and be "affordable". If that happens, I think it will shake up the BEV market, even though the Model III would be severely supply constrained for several years, at least.

Agreed. (I keep thinking back 4 years ago when the Roadster started at $100K+ and the forthcoming Model S would be available for as little as $57K after the federal govt rebate, and how that has turned into the actual Model S price today that is significantly higher).

At launch you could buy a base Model S for $49,900 after government rebate (less in some states).

 

[desiv]

At launch you could buy a base Model S for $49,900 after government rebate (less in some states).

That was the plan (the 40kW one, right?).
But didn't Tesla cancel that model because there wasn't enough interest?

I think lots of people will be happy if the Model 3 hits it's low-end price point.
But I think a fair amount of people (myself included) will be surprised.

I think about the advertising where Tesla was claiming you could get a Model S for something like $500/month.
Turns out the out-of-pocket was significantly MORE than the $500/month. But they took into account things like how much your time is worth at $xx/hour and time not spent at a gas station and such...

So the "end result" could theoretically be closer to that price, but the actual out-of-pocket is much more.

I'm not sure we won't see something similar (why not, it's marketing...) with the Model 3.

That said, I'll be watching to see how close they get, time and price wise..

desiv

 

[TomT]

Actually, those folks who did buy one got a great deal. They got the 60Kwh pack, software limited to 40Kwh. No battery degradation issues for them!

That was the plan (the 40kW one, right?).
But didn't Tesla cancel that model because there wasn't enough interest?

 

[dgpcolorado]

That was the plan (the 40kW one, right?).
But didn't Tesla cancel that model because there wasn't enough interest?

I think lots of people will be happy if the Model 3 hits it's low-end price point.
But I think a fair amount of people (myself included) will be surprised.

I think about the advertising where Tesla was claiming you could get a Model S for something like $500/month.
Turns out the out-of-pocket was significantly MORE than the $500/month. But they took into account things like how much your time is worth at $xx/hour and time not spent at a gas station and such...

So the "end result" could theoretically be closer to that price, but the actual out-of-pocket is much more.

I'm not sure we won't see something similar (why not, it's marketing...) with the Model 3.

That said, I'll be watching to see how close they get, time and price wise..

desiv

If the goal, repeated several times by Elon Musk, is to make it "affordable", then they need to come close to the $35k price for the base model. But I expect the Supercharger network access to be an extra cost option, which I will happily pay. I also expect that Tesla may tilt early production toward pricier versions and those wanting the less expensive base model may have to wait.

This is all speculation for now. They have said that they are working on the Model III in parallel with the much delayed Model X and that the Model III release is still on target. After the Model X delays I think that most people are taking a "show me" position on the Model III specs and release date.

I just hope that Tesla really does manage to make the Model III, and that it is affordable and Supercharger capable. I don't much care if it is a year or two late. My LEAF and backup ICE car will suffice until then.

 

[GRA]

Via ievs.com:

Tesla Has Yet To Complete Model 3 Alpha Prototype

http://insideevs.com/tesla-yet-complete-model-3-alpha-prototype/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[dgpcolorado]

According to the latest from Elon Musk he hopes to reveal the Model 3 in March 2016 and begin production in "late 2017".

http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/6/8562127/tesla-plans-to-unveil-its-35000-model-3-in-march-2016" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;