At then end of January, 2019 they were selling a 270 mile range Model S, 0-60 in 4.2, without AP, for $85k. Today for $80k you get 370 miles of range, 0-60 in 3.7, with AP.
Obviously the question on everyone's mind is, what are the gross margins? If these are strictly process improvements which are fully maintaining margins, then it is extraordinary progress in 6 months. I would expect that there is some combination of process improvements, technology transfer from Model 3 -> S/X, and at least some margin erosion, particularly as the Federal tax credit continues to wind down.
The TM3P for $54,900 is truly an absurdly low price for that level of performance. I'm somewhat shocked it's not at least $57,990, but I understand what they're doing -- it's almost pure margin for them when they get an upsell from LR-AWD to Performance, so the more they can shift the mix to performance the better.
As long as a significant part of that gross margin can be put back into capital expenditures (developing new vehicles and infrastructure, developing more manufacturing capacity), things are looking bright for continued EV development and adoption regardless of what the incumbent manufacturers are up to.
The LR is no longer so I would end up with an AWD which I would not want, but if equipped as before it would be $54,990. This used to be a $5000 option over the price of the LR. If my TM3 were totaled today I would not buy one if I had to choose AWD, first it is a feature I have no use for where I live nor do I want the efficiency loss compared to the LR.
So has there been much movement?
TBH, in a few years my replacement likely will not be a Tesla, there are many things to like about the TM3 but road noise and lack of full blue tooth audio support are issues I will not suffer long. This company has its priorities ass backwards at times, apparently fart gags and video games are more important than delivering promised voice commands and then doing a proper blue tooth audio stack. When 20k cars do both features better its disappointing.
This. It makes It makes me angry when I see those features it reminds me that this is a company not run by adults.
One would hope you could tell the car to change radio stations, switch to the phone for music, or even control the temperature, but for now we get limited navigation and satellite radio commands.
Would I use them, some. However the point was, they don't focus well. Fart gags and video games are not features that make every day driving easier. Having full access to the music on my phone via blue tooth like nearly every other car has had for years would be. Instead I have to use my phone to change play lists which actually is not legal in my state.
From what I read the only way to control most of the things is through the central screen, which can be a pain compared to dedicated knobs. "Hey tesla, fire up the A/C" seems better than having to touch/look at the screen.
The games/jokes are probably not built by the same teams anyway. It's more of a PR thing.
Model 3 Performance at $54,990: 0-60 in 3.2s
Model S Performance now includes Ludicrous at $99,990: 0-60 in 2.4s
Model X Performance now includes Ludicrous at $104,990: 0-60 in 2.7s
If your planning on buying a car to track a 4 door, 5k lbs car isn't exactly the best choice.
https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/road-tests/a22625274/t...
Bjørn Nyland has an amazing series of EV videos (of course, mostly Tesla). He recently set the 24-hour EV range record, and has milllions of views. He's also funny as hell to listen ramble on and on.
Here is him trying to overheat a Tesla Model 3 [1], but you could spend an afternoon on his channel watching him drive around [2].
And remember, even when there is no speed limit, Richtgeschwindigkeit is 80 mph, and if you're going faster, the judge will apportion more liability to you in case of an accident, even if you've driven perfectly.
BTW: Model S max speed is 155 mph.
I have the slow one and it's Very Performant, so much so that I rarely get a chance to use the speed.
Sorry but this isn't accurate at all. It's an electric muscle car. It goes fast in a straight line and that's it. It can't corner, it can't sustain the acceleration for long periods of time due to overheating (which is completely reasonable - it wasn't designed for that), it's heavy as hell. It's just really really good at flooring it from a standstill or low speed, cruising, and highway acceleration (50 mph to 90 mph).
This isn't a knock on any Tesla, but they're grand tourers at best. Certainly not a supercar. You can't compare these with something that can actually corner at all.
The production EV record is held by a non-stock TM3P (upgraded suspension, brakes, and tires) at 1:37.5 [2].
By comparison, here are a list of Laguna Seca records [3].
[1] - https://youtu.be/_DZSMxrHyHo
https://fastestlaps.com/tracks/laguna-seca-post-1988
Most of the stuff around the 1:45-1:47 mark is a hot hatch, a grand tourer, or a muscle car.
Seriously, you gotta understand, I'm super hyped for the electric GT series with the Model S to take off, but these are not supercars. They're comparable to an M series BMW or a nice muscle car, which is fine.
But 1:47 is with stock tires even. I don't know where you draw the line, if you are upgrading suspension parts and not just tires, rotors, and pads, but that’s still pretty basic kit to see 1:37, which does make it competitive with some supercars.
I’d like to see a time with TM3P just with racing tires, pads, and rotors, but stock suspension, if it can beat 1:40 on that chart.
By most accounts, the stock TM3P is ahead of the BMW M3 on the track, not just drag. It’s not a supercar, but it is the most super car you can get for $54k!
You'll kill me for saying it, but this sport sedan has the same toss and catch that makes the best front-drive hot hatches such a joy to hustle—bolstered by no-joke instant horsepower and the predictability of vectoring all-wheel drive.
The instant acceleration and drag strip performance means it's closer to something like a Dodge Demon than a Ferrari 488. That's OK, it's just not realistic to say it's something it's not.
Looking at the french prices, the model 3 performance (3.4s) is 62000 euros once the ecobonus has been deducted - that's nearly 70k USD!
if your definition of "performance" includes anything other than launching 0-60 a couple times, then yes, there are plenty of ice cars that offer the same level of performance at or below the Tesla price point.
even if all you care about is that 0-60 number, it comes with caveats. to actually get the advertised number, you need to wait 30+ min to heat up the battery, and you can't do it more than a couple times before performance degrades. it will be a while before EVs can match the agility and sustained performance of their ice counterparts.
It's once metric of many in how a car performs. And yes, there is plenty of performance competition at those prices. The 100D runs a 10.5 quarter mile, which is really good, but not world beating. Factor in any of the competitors pricing their cars below production cost and the landscape looks much different.
I go to the strip several times a year and I'm pretty sure running a sub-11 quarter mile would scare me. This is coming from someone who drives a reasonably quick car (12.7ish).
I do agree that 0-60 is a silly performance benchmark, since it measures traction more than power in modern cars. But performance Telsas are fast by any measure.
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_car...
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_mot...
edit: Actually 10.5 is pretty insane for a production vehicle but we live in a time with a lot of insanely fast and overpowered cars.
Source? On your wikipedia page it says 10.9 ... Also, it's currently more expensive than a Model S Performance.
It was an argument against the "insanity" of a 10.5 time, you're right it costs quite a bit more.
Even today it's impressive to see a street car run under 12s. On a given test and tune night, I'll see maybe one out of 50 street cars run sub-11s, and they're always obviously modified.
You claim it isn't insane, yet your example is BMW's fastest car. I'll throw out another Definitely Not Insane Car running a similar time: Ferrari 488 GTB.
Whether or not it's "insane" is semantics.
The point is that once you get up into this echelon of cars, 10.5 isn't game-changing. Chrysler built a car that will stomp the Model S, and it costs 20% less. For $100k you can build many cars that will outperform a Model S; 10.5 quarter mile isn't "insane" at that price if that's what you're optimizing for.
I suppose it's exhausting seeing Tesla marketing claim "fastest car ever!" because 0-60s are fast (which, as you said is mostly due to traction and the electric drivetrain). It's embarrassing when people start comparing the Model S performance to Ferraris and Lamborghinis. They aren't even in the same league when it comes to being race ready.
Which car is that?
No, it's not. It's what my old-man BMW on/off road bike will do (with a Cycle World editor onboard, not me). It's what the 1982 Honda 1100cc V65 Magna would do (with Pee Wee Gleason, professional drag racer, onboard) 37 years ago.
Pretty nuts for a car, though.
Indeed. Any stock Supersport 600 bike will do 10.5 right out of the showroom.
Next, is it one you can comfortably pickup groceries and take the family for a road trip?
The point that I was making, and that I have just introduced an example to support, is that there are practical applications for the kind of acceleration that make certain types of people clutch their pearls.
Also, a 200hp hot hatch is going to have a hell of a time putting that power to the ground. There's a reason I'm talking in terms of acceleration and not power.
that said, if I need to accelerate faster than my gti can handle at full throttle in 2nd/3rd gear, I will probably just wait for a bigger gap. everyone has their own tolerance for these things though; I play merges extra safe.
Tesla Pricing history: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1F5IQOynIawoXiJPVarLD...