[0] http://fortune.com/2018/07/24/tesla-repair-damage/
[1] http://www.thedrive.com/news/23278/report-tesla-model-3-insu...
One bit of anecdata: full coverage on my 2017 Model S 100D (all options except performance) is only slightly higher than full coverage on the car it replaced: a 2014 Prius C with no options.
I was bracing for the worst, Re: insurance, but (I'm with Geico) the rate is...in my mind at least, very low. Perhaps they're factoring in all of the built-in safety features?
I pay about $95/month for Progressive insurance on my $28,000 Subaru BRZ. I got a quote on a $135,000 Tesla Model S P100D, and for the same coverage (Full coverage + Liability with moderate deductibles), it was $140/month.
Here's some actual data: USA Today found the Tesla Model S to be _the most expensive_ car to insure. [1] This was apparently such a problem that Electrek reported Tesla was considering starting their own insurance company. [2] Both of these articles are from 2018.
1: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/budget-... 2: https://electrek.co/2018/05/29/tesla-insuremytesla-insurance...
I certainly don't doubt that at all. 200 HP isn't a lot, but combined with being rear-wheel drive and coming with economy tires, it's enough to get you into trouble if you're stupid.
I'm 36 though and bought it because I wanted a car that has some pep when I want it, and good fuel economy when I don't. I average 33.5 mpg when it's stickered at 24 city/30 highway!
> Here's some actual data: USA Today found the Tesla Model S to be _the most expensive_ car to insure.
What I'm hearing is that the area I'm in generally just has really cheap insurance.
I bought this BRZ about 2 1/2 years ago. At the time, I was paying $90/month for an old 2000 Suzuki Esteem for only liability and uninsured motorist with Nationwide insurance. They quoted me $180 to insure my BRZ for full coverage. I decided to shop around and switched to Progressive after they quoted me the $95 for the BRZ with better coverage and lower deductibles.
With Tesla one thing is certain: at this time parts and skills are rare, expensive, and time consuming. So unless you live in the Tesla factory, getting the part you need and a person qualified to make the fix will cost a lot and take a long time.
They need to develop the support network just like they did with the charging network. Make partnerships with big car service chains, provide training, ensure a steady supply of parts, etc. That's a big logistical undertaking.
$250k/$500k for uninsured motorist.
As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, though, where you live can make a huge difference. If you feel like you're getting a raw deal, shop around. A lot of people never bother and car insurance companies know this and will creep up your insurance rates even if your driving history is perfect.
I always have to provide a mileage estimate to get an insurance quote -- and if I don't go to enough places that sell my mileage info, I have to send in a mileage declaration about once a year; so use shouldn't have anything to do with it.
In both cases (again) use has everything to do with it.
Since their introduction over 6 years ago, well over 200,000 Model S' have been sold, and Geico has insured quite a few of them.
> actuaries don't know how to price it in yet
This is pretty far from my field of expertise, so I can't make any kind of directed comment. I'll just say that it strikes me as unlikely that Geico either doesn't have enough data yet and/or doesn't know what it's doing.
I don't know much about
I'm not a subject matter expert either but I would love to hear from someone in the industry.
For Tesla parts are rare and expensive, authorized service partners are rare and expensive, so fixing the car costs a lot.
Tesla manufactures parts itself, and is still getting their main production lines working right.
https://www.carscoops.com/2018/05/tesla-blames-bosch-recall-...
They want to control everything, but are too hard up to stock parts.
For covering normal wear and tear maintenance, that would be an auto warranty – or extended warranty, service contract, protection plan, etc.
At least, those are the standard terms in the United States.
As far as I'm aware warranties only cover faulty / defective parts (and labour to replace), insurance is intended as accident cover, everything else is regular maintenance.
When I added my 16 year old to my insurance, there was quite a difference in cost, depending on which car we said was his primary car.
First, Teslas aren't exactly rare. Upthread, someone said 200,000 have been sold (have not fact-checked, but it seems plausible). Second, autopilot related fatalities are covered breathlessly in the media, ignoring all of the other, far more common sources of fatalities, such as drunk driving. And finally, there is no media coverage of the number of accidents prevented by autopilot, which I suspect is pretty high.
Current production rate is 107,000/year, more than 1% of GMs 10million/year.
However, your point stands: Teslas are, at this point, relatively rare.
The answer probably depends on state law and other factors. With autopilot the driver is nominally in control — which is why Tesla aggressively does the PR dance to blame the driver. My guess is that due to the newness and arbritration clauses, they have gotten lucky.
States can change that though — for awhile you couldn’t lease a car in New York because the law let someone injured in an accident due the leasing company!
That’s just an artifact of increased media coverage.
*https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/07/tesla-sold-200000-cars-...
A lesson I learned the hard way.
I'll never buy another Fiat, not because I don't love the car. But because in my region, repair and maintenance options are limited compared with other brands.
Next time I'll go with a Ford/Chevy/Toyota/Whatever simply so I don't have to drive 200 miles away for service because the local dealerships are understaffed and only open banker's hours.
Edit: service not an MOT.
Like I said — Doctor's hours.
Otherwise it's a sales-focused dealership that can't be trusted with your car anyway.
This is literally fake news. I too assumed it will exorbitant from my 2018 Tesla M3 Long Range, then I got a quote from my agent (Safeco), it is same price as my 10yr old BMW. In fact, it is cheap for a new car.
$650 for 6 months (Tesla & X3) is not astronomical.
I paid $500/month as a 20 year old on a $5000 used Intrepid because I was in a high risk category in a major city. My uncle who lived on a farm in another state paid $500/year for both him + his wife on newer cars.
Point is, if he thinks it's fairly or underpriced for his particular situation, it probably is.
It's like saying that he literally has a fake profile because I know a guy redindian and he doesn't have a BMW. Or that the Tesla M3 must be a fake car because I don't own one.
I just looked up my actual bill for the split (it is even lower). I pay $257 for X3 ($42/m) & $357 for Tesla ($60/m). For context I am in Seattle market, 40s, clean record. When I said fake news, I meant the article seem to play on the FUD for Tesla/EV vehicles. Check the M3 forums, no one seem to pay $2500/6m unless in corner cases.
"BREAKING $50K Tesla Model3 insurance similar to other $50K car insurances"
Do you really think that fixing a car where the parts are very rare and expensive, in authorized garages that are rare and expensive, while taking a very long time because there's no network for servicing will be as cheap as fixing any regular equivalent car that does have that servicing network?
Any car that's expensive to fix will have more expensive premiums. And expensive to fix usually means: it's often involved in accidents, parts are expensive, garages that fix it are expensive, takes a long time to fix. Tesla checks the last 3 out of the 4 main boxes in most regions in the world.
[0] http://www.thejournal.ie/car-insurance-10-year-old-vehicles-...
Yes, data is not the plural of anecdote, and I want to agree with the source that Tesla repairs are more expensive (repairing anything aluminum is expensive; see: Audi A8), but I am just not seeing these high costs reflected in ANYONE's bills.
The cost of insurance is more related to how often certain cars get into accidents or get stolen and then adjusted for he driving record of the person driving the car. It has almost nothing to do with repair costs of the car itself.
Source: a Mustang GT costs more money to insure for me than a Mercedes C63 AMG. Repair costs on the AMG are borderline criminal and yet according to the actuaries it’s a lower risk.
A very large (and the most variable) part of the actuarial cost of car insurance is third party liability, not the liability the insurer takes on for repairs to your own car or fire/theft.
The difference between insuring a 19-year old man and a 55-year old woman on the same car is huge.
2005 Mercedes E320 CDI: $572.40
2018 Tesla Model 3 Long Range: $641.76
Anybody want to buy a 2005 Mercedes?
That's an interesting claim. Any firsthand data to back it up?
For me, insuring a 2014 Tesla Model S cost less ($405) than insuring a 2006 Toyota Prius ($429). Six-month period, Progressive Insurance, California, no accident history, identical coverage on both except the estimated mileage was 5,000 annually on the Prius and 12,000 annually on the Tesla -- that's right, driving the Tesla more than the Prius.
It's odd that insurance would be lower for the Tesla if it's supposed to be "through the roof."
(and for what it's worth, our Model X is even lower -- $337 for six months. Again, identical coverage.)
They do seem to have velocity problems with service scaling, and dealers and independents may be able to help with that, but I see no reason to expect it to be a problem once growth levels out.
I don't particularly like the lack of 3rd party general maintenance, but most of Tesla's target customers probably don't care.
My knee-jerk reaction is to respond that "Well every part they make is going into a new car, they don't have the capacity yet to keep up with production while building spare parts"
But after more thinking, I think you're right. They should prioritize at least having enough spare parts on hand so that people aren't waiting months for new body panels. I think pleasing the people who already have a car in their possession is more important than getting cars to more customers. People on the wait list already know they're going to wait a while, but having to wait an excessively long time for replacement parts creates a very negative user experience and I think is more likely to lead to order cancellations.
Mercedes & Tesla trade at the higher end, where just the impact on perceived quality (in addition to the quantifiable financial benefits of buying a car that will maintain value) is important. OTOH, EV are already knowingly buying a car that ranks poorly on that front. Who wants to buy a 2015 model EV in 2018? Range improvements alone would kill the price.
So... not sure it matters too much yet. Going forward.. who knows. I think tesla may already be "in for a penny, in for a pound."
There's a fair argument that the volt is a better economical buy than the used leaf.
If you need a commuter car to get you to and from work every day, and errands/visiting people in town on the weekends, getting one with a fuel cost per mile of 15% of normal (or even free if your work offers charging) makes a lot of sense. The 90 mile range is rarely a limitation at all.
If you need a car for frequent long trips out of town, the 90 mile range would be a huge hindrance. In that case I would discourage you from buying a 2015 Leaf.
But if we're being honest the money you lose after a decade is a lot less then the money you saved when you purchased it.
In fact, they specifically poached a number of former executives from BMW's M division to lead those projects.
But when it comes to warranty you should take care, people imagine this is like the warranty on their phone. It's not, basically it says the body won't rust. The rest is covered by dozens of other clauses that more or less just guarantee than almost nothing gets replaced under warranty.
Furthermore, almost 80% of electric cars are leased [1]. When electric cars aren't being made for compliance reasons, or to lower the overall emissions of an auto maker's fleet (and thus subsidized in some way), then resale value will be of critical importance.
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-03/why-most-...
What a terrifying statement! I owned an AMG Benz for about 3 years and it was nerve racking towards the end. Glad I kept it in good shape and nothing blew up on my watch.
Engine or ABC work on those cars can cost a fortune, for one because you'll need a shop that really knows what they are doing, for another because the parts are expensive.
Maintenance as you've correctly identified is key, as is a good inspection prior to purchase and a good warranty by the company you buy it from.
On the plus side, you can buy these for a very small fraction of the new value even with very low mileage. If you want to pity someone it would have to be the first owner, it's fairly regular to see write-offs in excess of $4/mile driven.
Most shops in the US won't do more than basic work on them. Being so rare, you typically have to go to the dealer or a Euro-import specialist shop in the US. These shops typically won't work on a new-new car, they typically wait until the model is 5 years old before picking up the equipment for them (which can be expensive).
It's not a cultural different, but an economics one. I'm sure getting a Ford Mustang fixed in the UK is expensive despite being a car any American mechanic is comfortable working on.
The issue is that German cars in particular have a reputation for being quite expensive to maintain outside of warranty. In general for most cars it's not a big deal.
Mercedes has been around almost 100 years. A new powertrain isn't a big deal if the processes are in place.
Tesla is probably crunched on repairs since they have so much unfulfilled demand.
And Mercedes (and VW) has dumped poor reliability cars on the US market for two decades now. The only experience they have is marketing to stupid US buyers.
Need charging stations built, parking lots ripped up and wires ran, local grids probably need upgrades, not to mention all the kinks to still work out that make owning a corolla/camry type vehicle far cheaper for 90% of people. EV is great for people who can afford to experiment and have a spare car, but people on a budget who need something that works, which is the majority, can't go for that yet.
Generation capacity is another issue - less cost than location and if there should be more incentives. Although if we suddenly need to build lots more generation capacity in short order it will put pressure on supply chains and have a cost impact as well which will feed through.
Mercedes is more experienced in building cars that last for a long time. The C-Class is known for being able to drive up to 1,000,000km.
Further it is still fundamentally an engineering issue to have cars last longer, the Germans have a very long history at being the best engineers. So they too will benefit from having less parts.
Owning Tesla outside of Warranty is worse than owning Benz outside warranty. Unless Tesla expands its support and does a better job with "ownership" and "repairability" of their Cars, I would Trust an 8 year Benz to an 8 year old Tesla .