Official Tesla Model 3 thread

[frontrangeleaf]

All of this discussion about vehicle service life is ultimately dependent on the owner's usage model. Huge differences in interpretation and conclusions if you're insisting on a full-on ICE replacement vs an urban corridor vehicle. Hardly any mention of any of this above that I can see. It seems a little over the top at times.

As an urban corridor vehicle, any current EV with 200+ miles of range, real world under reasonably favorable conditions (e.g. not the coldest day of winter, not the most favorable day in sprint or fall either) can be expected to be useful enough to many if not most American households for 10 years or more, depending on their day-to-day transportation needs. Best value for money? That's a different question.

On the other hand, as we all know, insisting on cross-country highway speed performance is only available on the highest performing models, and likely not for a lifetime comparable with your average ICE car no matter what you buy. I would argue that off-road applications are likely not the sweet spot either. Nor towing.

That's the state of the art today. There is a spectrum of transportation needs, and a given household will experience some fraction of those. The question is simply which fraction of the spectrum are you trying to meet? More specifically, which fraction of your needs are you asking the vehicle in question to serve?

Many here seem to be strongly opposed to buying more battery than they need. Hyper-optimizers it seems. There are trade-offs to be sure, and not all of them financial. However, more battery buys more useful life, and extends the range of transportation tasks you can take on with confidence.

However much battery you buy up front, it will degrade over time and eventually constrain the usage applications that the car can meet. For many families, their needs shift over time anyway. If the car stops meeting your need, you sell it. No car, practically speaking, is an investment, exceptions to the rule notwithstanding.

The world is full of cars, for better or for worse. Find one that meets your needs and makes you happy.

[LeftieBiker]

Our experience with the 2013 PIP is that if you want a long-term vehicle, a PHEV will have a longer useful life. Even with a third of the original pathetically short AER gone, the car is still about as useful as it ever was. The trick is to buy one with at least 50% more EV range than is needed. OTOH, we really weren't expecting the ICE to be so troublesome as the car got old.

[SageBrush]

All of this discussion about vehicle service life is ultimately dependent on the owner's usage model. Huge differences in interpretation and conclusions if you're insisting on a full-on ICE replacement vs an urban corridor vehicle. Hardly any mention of any of this above that I can see. It seems a little over the top at times.

As an urban corridor vehicle, any current EV with 200+ miles of range, real world under reasonably favorable conditions (e.g. not the coldest day of winter, not the most favorable day in sprint or fall either) can be expected to be useful enough to many if not most American households for 10 years or more, depending on their day-to-day transportation needs. Best value for money? That's a different question.

On the other hand, as we all know, insisting on cross-country highway speed performance is only available on the highest performing models, and likely not for a lifetime comparable with your average ICE car no matter what you buy. I would argue that off-road applications are likely not the sweet spot either. Nor towing.

That's the state of the art today. There is a spectrum of transportation needs, and a given household will experience some fraction of those. The question is simply which fraction of the spectrum are you trying to meet? More specifically, which fraction of your needs are you asking the vehicle in question to serve?

Many here seem to be strongly opposed to buying more battery than they need. Hyper-optimizers it seems. There are trade-offs to be sure, and not all of them financial. However, more battery buys more useful life, and extends the range of transportation tasks you can take on with confidence.

However much battery you buy up front, it will degrade over time and eventually constrain the usage applications that the car can meet. For many families, their needs shift over time anyway. If the car stops meeting your need, you sell it. No car, practically speaking, is an investment, exceptions to the rule notwithstanding.

The world is full of cars, for better or for worse. Find one that meets your needs and makes you happy.

Very reasonable POV

I'm obviously in agreement since I have posted numerous times that we own 1.5 vehicles to cover our needs and wants -- a. hobbled LEAF and a full-ICE replacement Tesla. We paid $47k for the two cars, well within the costs of two somewhat similar ICE vehicles but with much lower maintenance and fueling costs and less environmental and social impact of fossil cars.

[GRA]

All of this discussion about vehicle service life is ultimately dependent on the owner's usage model. Huge differences in interpretation and conclusions if you're insisting on a full-on ICE replacement vs an urban corridor vehicle. Hardly any mention of any of this above that I can see. It seems a little over the top at times.

Actually, there's been plenty of discussion of varying usage models between myself and WetEV going back a few years in numerous topics, including this one, but my apologies if I assumed that most people here were aware of that and that isn't true in your case.

As an urban corridor vehicle, any current EV with 200+ miles of range, real world under reasonably favorable conditions (e.g. not the coldest day of winter, not the most favorable day in sprint or fall either) can be expected to be useful enough to many if not most American households for 10 years or more, depending on their day-to-day transportation needs. Best value for money? That's a different question.

AFAIK we all agree with your main point and have so stated ourselves. It's the subsidiary point where we differ, i.e. whether there's a large enough market for $30k+ BEVs limited to routine urban use. I've said on numerous occasions that multi-car, ideologically-motivated households that can afford to specialize may consider that's acceptable value for money, but so far there's no indication that the general public agrees, and that's who has to be convinced to buy if BEVs are to 'cross the chasm' to the mass market.

Maybe 6 years ago I said I thought 150 miles @$30k base MSRP was the point at which mainstream consumers would start to consider BEVs, but that was when the avg. US gas price was close to $4/gal. With current gas prices I think it's 300 miles @ $30k, or 150 miles @ $15k for an urban car.

On the other hand, as we all know, insisting on cross-country highway speed performance is only available on the highest performing models, and likely not for a lifetime comparable with your average ICE car no matter what you buy. I would argue that off-road applications are likely not the sweet spot either. Nor towing.

That's the state of the art today. There is a spectrum of transportation needs, and a given household will experience some fraction of those. The question is simply which fraction of the spectrum are you trying to meet? More specifically, which fraction of your needs are you asking the vehicle in question to serve?

Of course, and it's my contention that mainstream consumers see no compelling reason to make the switch now, because the affordable BEV needs fraction is inadequate, and likely to remain so for some years absent gov. incentives/mandates that change the value equation.

<Snip rest>

[WetEV]

All of my ICEs have been more reliable than the average Tesla. Course, I rate reliability highly when making purchase decisions, and it's always possible to get a lemon, but if you take care of it a reliable ICE should have about the same capability throughout its life as when you bought it. No BEV can make that claim yet.

Notice that BEVs age different than ICEs. That makes BEVs completely unacceptable to GRA because BEVS age differently. I could go off on a rant about how the new horseless carriages don't age the same as horses do. A horse never needs an oil change. So obviously horses are the only acceptable form of transportation.

Tesla BEVs are the least reliable BEVs. So of course that's what GRA points out. Tesla reliability, or lack there of. Not that the Leaf, in cool climates, is one of the most reliable cars. GRA just can't be bothered.

I'm curious - what % of the older car owning/buying public do you think are retirees or similar whose car needs can be satisfied by what is essentially an enclosed, HVAC-equipped golf cart?

Anti-BEV bigot speech, there GRA. Golf carts don't have range or speed or crash safety like a Tesla 3LR. Even a very old cheap one with only 25% of the battery left.

We are NOT talking about new car buyers, so don't quote surveys of new car buyers at me. We are talking about the people that are looking for something cheap. As reliable as they can get. These people are very unlikely to be driving long distances. They can't afford to. Sure, ICE cars don't lose much range as they get old. They just need more and more repairs. That is different, and not necessarily better than a BEV.

[Oils4AsphaultOnly]

You did see where the average age of the U.S. LDV fleet is now 11.9 years, with 1/4 of them 16 years or more. Whether or not one individual owns a car through its life, it's clear that cars need to remain viable for any usage the owners might want to take for 15 years or more if that car is to be seen as useful.

That is an amusing statement. Old cars just are not as good and new cars. They break down more, they burn more gas (and oil), they pollute more, they don't drive as nicely, they are less safe at higher speeds, and various systems might no longer function. AC broke? Open the windows. Advertised as "it runs". That's why they are cheaper.

Electric cars are not going to age exactly the same way as gas cars have. More than likely will run trouble free until they just die.

Sure, new cars may have features that are desirable (or not), but if people can't afford them that's moot. While AOTBE a BEV should be more reliable, things are rarely equal. All of my ICEs have been more reliable than the average Tesla. Course, I rate reliability highly when making purchase decisions, and it's always possible to get a lemon, but if you take care of it a reliable ICE should have about the same capability throughout its life as when you bought it. No BEV can make that claim yet.

Range will decrease, but many elderly and/or poor people don't travel all that much. My Grandfather never left the small town in Kansas he lived in during the last decades of his life. Visit all the corners of the town, and that would be under 10 miles. Grocery, pharmacy, friends, church, and hospital. I don't have a log, of course, but doubt if he drove more than 4 miles in any day.

My sister-in-law lives in a small town in New England. Longest trip she has taken in the past decade was to visit her mom in the hospital. About 40 miles one way. Very unlikely to take a longer trip. Unless her husband dies, she can't be away from home for more than a few hours. He doesn't leave home, unless to go to doctor or hospital.

Many people, IF ELECTRIC CARS WERE COMMON, would be happy with a quarter of the range of a 2020 Model 3LR. If cheap to buy and reliable.

I'm curious - what % of the older car owning/buying public do you think are retirees or similar whose car needs can be satisfied by what is essentially an enclosed, HVAC-equipped golf cart?
GCR:

Study finds global tipping points for EVs: 31-minute charging, 291 miles of range, $36,000

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/11 ... nge-36-000

From the study itself:

EV range is a major concern for those considering the switch from an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle, with eight in 10 consumers in our study identifying range as an important or very important factor. The majority of consumers told us they expect to travel at least 469km – the distance from London to Paris – in a full charge. Fleet managers have even higher expectations, averaging 550km.

The average range industry professionals told us they could achieve for an EV is 397km, just 72km short of the desired average, but still significantly less than a standard internal combustion engine vehicle - which can reach 500-1,000km on a single tank of fuel. Although the majority of journeys are shorter than the 469km tipping point, driver anxieties about the range of EVs is a significant barrier to mainstream adoption. Consumers and fleet managers also reported that access to charging infrastructure is also a factor in their decision-making, which further emphasises the issue of “range anxiety”.

As expected, the US range requirement is higher than the average, we're midpoint on price, and charging times are slightly quicker (30 min.) than the average.

Or do you believe there's a big used market for cars with 24 or at best 30 kWh LEAF range here?As the people who need to buy used cars tend to be unable to afford multiple ones for specialized purposes, that seems unlikely to me. But then you were claiming that range isn't compelling, and I (and Elon, among others) obviously differ with you on that.

Depends of the future, doesn't it? And the future isn't like the past, but sometimes it rhymes.

Consider the past, and the current market for ICE cars.

First owner often owns for 3-6 years, perhaps 60,000 to 100,000 miles. Then sells it for something new, or returns it at end of lease.

Second owner often owns it until 8 to 12 years, and sells it as it still has some value and is starting to get expensive to maintain.

Third owner drives it until it breaks, or needs an expensive repair soon, or serious rust, or ...

Fourth owner can't afford anything better, and "it runs". Until it doesn't.

So how do used electric cars play out? Oh, not now, in 40 years. Might it rhyme that?

Electric car of the future, with a battery that might give 1,000,000 miles, or only 300,000 if passively cooled? How might that play out over the life of a car? Other parts of the car are likely to fail first, even if passively cooled. If the wheels fall off, the value of the car might be the salvage value of the battery.

Sure, things may be completely different in the future, but for now it may well be that the value of degraded batteries for second life as stationary storage is greater than the demand for 'super golf carts', in which case there'll be a whole lot of battery-less cars with plenty of life left in them which are good for nothing but scrap, as putting a new battery in them makes no economic sense. Which gets us right back to throw-away cars, and considering the embodied energy in manufacturing and scrapping them, that's a lousy idea.

GCR:

Study: EVs will still cost more to make, even after batteries get much cheaper

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/11 ... et-cheaper


Barring life of the vehicle batteries, ISTM only battery leasing makes replacing packs commercially viable.

GRA does not own, nor have owned an EV (not even a PHEV). GRA is the proverbial virgin trying to give sex advice to parents. Not sure what he's doing on this thread (or even this forum for that matter)!

[DougWantsALeaf]

Ok, I know I am asking for some potentially firey responses here, but what do the Tesla drivers here think of consuner reports review of full selfdriving? Does this reflect your experience? I only know of propilot and its limited use cases.

https://youtu.be/IQOf_F6hibk

[DanCar]

Most People who drive a lot and have lots of money appreciate current FSD features. Example of appreciate for just autopilot: https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads ... -3.180868/

...I didn't just buy a car made by Tesla, I actually got a chauffeur from Tesla too doing 70% of my driving.

Consumer reports tested version 24. Version 32 and 36 have been released. Many updates are coming such as quantum leap. Elon or someone said that dumb summon will be much improved in the quantum leap version. I hope so. I don't expect much of an overall improvement. I don't expect Elon will be close to level 5 in the next ten years. I'll be happy if I'm wrong. I do expect level 3 in stop and go traffic on limited access freeway in about 3 years.

[webeleafowners]

DP

[webeleafowners]

Ok, I know I am asking for some potentially firey responses here, but what do the Tesla drivers here think of consuner reports review of full selfdriving? Does this reflect your experience? I only know of propilot and its limited use cases.

https://youtu.be/IQOf_F6hibk

I watched the video. It’s fair.

I can’t speak to the summons feature as we are almost never in a private lot and have only used for entertainment purposes.

Auto parking seems fine although I almost always park so far away that there is never anyone around us, so very little use.

Dumb summons is occasionally useful for us when we have projects in the garage and it’s easier to just back the car out from outside. Used it maybe half dozen times. Works well.

We drive 90 percent of our miles on Autopilot just for the added layer of safety. The car sees things I don’t occasionally, and vice versa as well. It’s a level 2 system so needs to be monitored. It however has never missed a stop sign or stop light and has on one occasion stopped at a stop sign I didn’t see. (A temporary stop sign in a campground).

We both use the lane change feature 100 percent of the time. Just another level of safety.

The actual navigate on autopilot (where it takes your exits for you etc) only works on interstate/freeway type roads which are rare where we are so I have limited experience with that. It did navigate me out of Vancouver once...which was cool because I don’t know those interchanges well.

Auto steer works...ok. With the following notations.
- it takes some corners too fast (pucker factor)
- it takes some corners too slow (piss off people behind me)
- occasional phantom braking is a thing...including a Boston pizza sign it thinks is a stop sign
- it occasionally stops at certain railway crossings and crosswalks even when the lights are not flashing.
-although the latest software update is supposed to fix this speed limits are not accurately tracked and one must pay attention. We don’t have the latest software yet but it will probably come down in the next week.
-One is supposed to disable auto steer around bikes. We do but occasionally forget. When you forget it gets super cautious around bikes on secondary highways and will brake fairly hard to reduce speed when going past them. It will not veer over the centre line to give them more space (because I think that would be illegal). I actually do veer over the centre line (if there is no traffic coming). If there is traffic coming I also slow down just like it does, so maybe it’s not so bad after all. But then again, as per instructions, you are supposed to disengage Autopilot when passing bikes.

On main highways (double lane each direction etc) one can go an hour at a time and never intervene. Very pleasant. On twisty turny two lane secondary highways one can expect multiple interventions in an hour. I still prefer it on over off on these types of roads. Lane discipline, distance keeping, avoiding speeding tickets etc.

It has improved since we got the car, and the car has a lot more features which just keep coming every 3 or 4 weeks. Don’t like your Tesla? Wait three weeks. It’ll change.

Gotta run. No time to check spelling. .

On edit. Had to put this up. We had to take a picture of this stupid sign when the car saw it and we didn't. We own a private lot in this campground and have for about 17 years. We drive it once a week as we cut the grass on our lot etc. Complacency I suppose but we never saw this stupid sign. At least Jarvis (name of wifes car) was on the ball. We were trying to figure out why the car was stopping, then saw the sign. Kind of funny at the time. We had it on TACC (adaptive cruise) not autosteer but those features are still active on TACC. Yes the sign is on a pole welded to a wheel. Stupid sign (in my best Homer simpson voice)