even those with similar size battery (like the 95kwh
audi etron) only manage 56% of the range of the model
S (100 kwh).
After all, everyone's worried about how degraded their batteries will be after 10 years, and there's no better way to get hard data on that than having EVs on the market for 10 years.
But the model 3/Y competition in the $40k to $60k
range is looking significantly more sparse
Jeff Dahn, now working with Tesla (exclusively I think) does not agree, and has a fantastic lecture explaining some stuff about lithium ion degradation (specifically, how normal accelerated age testing doesn't work, but they have a different method which lines up very well with long term cell aging)
Tesla does pretty well on safety (passive and active) as well.
My main concern was did Hyundai skimp on the cooling and battery management system like Nissan did with the leaf. The result with leaf was rapidly degrading batteries that lost more than 25% in the first 3 years. Tesla's in comparison often manage 92% of new range after 150k miles.
With all that said, it does look like the Kona Electric is the closest model Y competitor I've found.
And seriously who on earth cares about acceleration beyond a certain point. I mean come on. Nobody is drag racing their car on the way to the supermarket to buy groceries.
I'm hoping there's a model Y killer out before the model Y ships, but if not I think I'll be really happy in a Y.
As for the acceleration. I'm married and have a kid. I drive pretty conservatively. I haven't had an accident of any kind or even a speeding ticket in 20 years. I did however find numerous occasions to floor the model S I was renting and every time it resulted in a huge grin. I'd wouldn't trade that acceleration for say a Hyundai electric that has a 0-60 in 7.6 seconds just for some extra knobs/buttons. Nor is the Hyundai cheap, starts around $38k. In a traditional ICE car the acceleration has significant down sides, cost, MPG, noise, weight, size, packaging efficiency, etc. On a Tesla the acceleration there's not nearly as much of a downside.
Being able to launch the car and be going highway speed nearly instantly is really useful whenever you have to merge in a short distance or take a right turn into high speed traffic. You can get by with an under-powered vehicle just fine in most of the country but if you're commuting in/out of a east coast city between DC and Boston it's going to come in really handy (possibly daily if your commute includes a really bad merge). Just last night some dude in a Maserati cut me off taking a right onto a two lane road where I was going ~70mph in the right lane. Had he been driving anything else I would have had to brake but he mashed the skinny pedal and I didn't have to do anything. If I had to take that turn every day I'd want something fast too. Sure it's a luxury feature but damn does it make things less stressful when you're in that situation.
I have seen a Tesla performance model described as a machine to convert money into smiles.
It does.
It's far more likely to be just one of many factors. And Tesla really isn't great in many of them e.g. interior design, build quality, easy of service, product availability, brand cachet, etc. And now they have to worry if Tesla will even be around in 5-10 years.
Especially for first time electric car buyers, they really do seem rather worried about moving from a 488 mile range (like a honda accord) to a 240-370 mile range (Tesla). I suspect mostly because they haven't internalized the impact of being able to start each day with a full "tank".
And yes people are worried about the difference in range given it's a new technology. But no evidence it significantly influences purchasing decisions especially given that most people aren't driving hundreds of miles in a day.
So almost 8x as many people bought a model 3 for similar or higher prices than the BMW 3 series. In fact at various time periods Tesla was outselling the sum of all similar premium cars in the USA from BMW, MB, Audi, and Lexus.
So sure Tesla owners are a self selecting set, but there's apparently quite a few people that want the model 3.
How much of this is due to many of the buyers were fans where Tesla could do not wrong? I know one of those people.
I also know someone who bought a TSLA recently. He likes the car, but hates dealing with TSLA the company. Incompetent was the word used.
E-tron Q4?
Model Y starts at $48k and has a range of 300 miles.
Doesn't seem like a fair comparison, does it?
A fairer comparison would be the model S. The Model S base is $78,000 ($3,200 more), but has a range of 285 miles (1.4x the Audi) and 0-60 in 4.0 seconds instead of 5.5 seconds for the Audi.
The biggest issue is the Audi seems to have very poor efficiency. So you need a model S size battery (95kw) to compete with the model Y (75 kwh or so). Or you compete with the Tesla model S with a 100 kwh battery and end up with only 71% of the range.
https://www.whatcar.com/news/2020-audi-q4-e-tron-electric-su...
No formal price yet either so could be significantly more expensive.
The established car makers also have to bear the cost of having dealerships. I don't find it too unlikely that some of them are selling their EV at a loss and have the production throttled accordingly.
There are some serious competitors targeting the model S and X coming, although none I've heard come anywhere close to 370 mile range. Most impressively even those with similar size battery (like the 95kwh audi etron) only manage 56% of the range of the model S (100 kwh). It's also substantially slower in acceleration (Telsa is 4.0 second vs Audi e-tron 5.5 seconds).
But the model 3/Y competition in the $40k to $60k range is looking significantly more sparse, especially with similar range. This is where Tesla becomes significantly harder to match because if even if you can match the size of the battery, matching the efficiency is tougher. Running a substantially larger battery to make up for lower efficiency is particularly problematic at this price point.