Tesla model 3 off to strong start

[meyersnole]

Tesla to 'Rethink' Model 3 Production Due to Huge Demand

 

180,000 pre orders on first day. Pretty impressive for an order you had to put money down and would not receive the car for a year or more.

 

Maybe Ford will move up its plans on Model E?  Will be interesting to see what kind of affect this has on GM and the Bolt... did they get it out fast enough and will this help or hurt their market?

[Russael]

I watched the unveiling event the following morning on Tesla's website.  Elon loves his public speaking, but I think he's kind of bad at it. :)

 

As far as the car goes:  The front of the car, even though it totally lacks a grill (ala EV1), totally reminds me of a Porche Boxter.  Rear end is total Model X.  But that interior... I'm not too thrilled about having a single large monitor in the middle of the car.  I'm so used to having an instrument cluster in front of me with a center stack for non-essential driving items that I think that's a bit of a hurdle for me.  I know some cars (I believe the Mini), put everything in the middle.  It's something new and something to probably get used to.  It's different... breaks the mold.

 

The price is definitely right.  

 

215 miles is about the same as a performance car or an older truck/suv on gasoline for city travel.  And I love that it is supercharger enabled.

 

That being said... I'm still excited about the car.  I'm not one who put a deposit on one... yet.  The Fusion will carry me for a good, long while yet.

[larryh]

The plug-in electric vehicle tax credit phases out after 200,000 qualifying vehicles are sold by a manufacturer.  With more than 200,000 reservations, people are no longer going to get the full tax credit, and after one year following the phase out period, there is no tax credit.  So the Tesla Model 3 is going to be more expensive the other plug-in vehicles. 

Edited April 2, 2016 at 07:56 PM by larryh

[murphy]

The 200,000 vehicles have to be delivered in the USA.  Those sent to other countries don't count in the total.

[cwstnsko]

There is also no guarantee that the 1st to make a reservation will be the 1st to receive their cars.  There is a sequence to the delivery plans.  Fully equipped get built before base models, existing Tesla customers get their cars before new customers, and the most recent rumor is that west coast deliveries will start before east coast.  If you want your car before the 200k number gets delivered, your best bet is to own, or buy a Model S or X, Live in CA, and order a fully loaded D version with a big battery.

[Eric4539]

As much as the Model 3 is affordable I still want the Model S!!!  Tesla used to have a bunch of pre-owned Model S for sale but not anymore!  I know my next vehicle will be pure EV (I keep telling myself that).  My Energi is the stepping stone from Hybrid to pure EV, and I still love my Energi!

[flyingcheesehead]

The plug-in electric vehicle tax credit phases out after 200,000 qualifying vehicles are sold by a manufacturer.  With more than 200,000 reservations, people are no longer going to get the full tax credit, and after one year following the phase out period, there is no tax credit.  So the Tesla Model 3 is going to be more expensive the other plug-in vehicles. 

 

 

IMO, they should change it so the credit ends at the same time for all OEM's. It's not fair that Tesla, who has really stuck their neck out and laid it all on the line to develop EVs, should have a competitive disadvantage for doing so.

[murphy]

The credit phases out after a manufacturer sells 200,000 cars in the USA.  Car sold to other countries are not included in the count.  And it's a credit, not a rebate.  You must owe the IRS at least $7500 in taxes to get the full tax credit.  It also can't be carried forward to later years.

[flyingcheesehead]

The credit phases out after a manufacturer sells 200,000 cars in the USA.  Car sold to other countries are not included in the count.  And it's a credit, not a rebate.  You must owe the IRS at least $7500 in taxes to get the full tax credit.  It also can't be carried forward to later years.

 

 

The trick to getting the credit if you don't owe enough tax is to lease. The credit goes to the lessor, they can build it into the lease. I got my Fusion Energi for less than a Fusion Hybrid this way.

[stevedebi]

The trick to getting the credit if you don't owe enough tax is to lease. The credit goes to the lessor, they can build it into the lease. I got my Fusion Energi for less than a Fusion Hybrid this way.

Same here, I leased my C-Max Energi for exactly this reason.

[stevedebi]

IMO, they should change it so the credit ends at the same time for all OEM's. It's not fair that Tesla, who has really stuck their neck out and laid it all on the line to develop EVs, should have a competitive disadvantage for doing so.

I see it as completely fair. Each manufacturer gets 200K cars and the credit runs out.  That is quite fair and equitable for all.

 

If EVs are a viable technology, they need to compete on their own merits, the same as all other cars. If they are not yet a viable business model, then they need to find a model that works.

 

Personally, I don't think they can be profitable yet. Time will tell. But the government should bow out of the market and let it settle.

Edited April 5, 2016 at 03:57 PM by stevedebi

[openair]

Personally, I don't think they can be profitable yet. Time will tell. But the government should bow out of the market and let it settle.

If the government does not get involved than nothing will change. The oil companies and big money would continue to prevail. These subsidies and proposed increased taxes on fossil fuels and other carbon producers are the least disruptive tools a democratic capitalist government has to wean the modern world from our self destructive addiction to fossil fuels and the resulting profits. Same as taxes on cigarettes. Our children future is more important than short term profit.

 

Things need to change from the current 2+2=5 that the majority of ppl embrace for reasons far above profit and competition.

 

The pentagon has declared air pollution a national security threat. The WHO has declared air pollution one of the top health threats across the globe.

Edited April 5, 2016 at 04:34 PM by openair

[stevedebi]

If the government does not get involved than nothing will change. The oil companies and big money would continue to prevail. These subsidies and proposed increased taxes on fossil fuels and other carbon producers are the least disruptive tools a democratic capitalist government has to wean the modern world from our self destructive addiction to fossil fuels and the resulting profits. Same as taxes on cigarettes. Our children future is more important than short term profit.

 

Things need to change from the current 2+2=5 that the majority of ppl embrace for reasons far above profit and competition.

 

The pentagon has declared air pollution a national security threat. The WHO has declared air pollution one of the top health threats across the globe.

Well, time will tell on climate change as well; I personally follow hard science that does not involve computer models that have already been disproven. But for the current moment, fossil fuels are still the most efficient.

 

I do not consider that "addiction" to be self-disruptive. I can see that we are on opposite sides of the fence on this, which is no problem.

 

I wonder what the Pentagon would think if it had no fuel for its jets? That declaration was purely political.

 

I don't think the average American is that concerned, here is a sample survey.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/01/poll-91-of-americans-arent-worried-about-global-warming/

Edited April 5, 2016 at 07:33 PM by stevedebi

[PJFW8]

There is a small group that advocates that we return to the middle ages!  No, not ISIS, although they do, but there are a few radical "environmentalists" who think humans are a world-destroying virus. That is nuts! Long after we are gone the earth will abide! We need to protect this planet but not our inflated egos. Cars are not destroying us, but radical environmentalists would like to do just that! Global warming is real! Irrational over-reaction is not productive.

[meyersnole]

There is a small group that advocates that we return to the middle ages!  No, not ISIS, although they do, but there are a few radical "environmentalists" who think humans are a world-destroying virus. That is nuts! Long after we are gone the earth will abide! We need to protect this planet but not our inflated egos. Cars are not destroying us, but radical environmentalists would like to do just that! Global warming is real! Irrational over-reaction is not productive.

 

You do not have to believe that we need to return to times before the middle ages to understand that we (humans) are having a profound impact on this planet. An impact that may or may not be recoverable. Probably depends on your definition of what recoverable means. 

 

Forget about climate change for a minute and just think about the ecosystems that have been changed by clearing forests, over fishing, chemicals dumped into the water systems, watersheds destroyed for development, or water sources drained for commercial development and on and on....

 

Non renewable power creation and emissions from vehicles have a significant impact on our health and is linked to aggravated asthma, bronchitis, emphysema, lung and heart diseases, and respiratory allergies. Truth is that cars are destroying us... just slowly. Are cars more of an issue than any other number of things humans are doing (like cutting down the amazon forest?) to this planet? Does the proportion really matter?

 

Transportation by electricity is just part of a solution, does it really help if emissions are shifted to non renewable power creation, maybe some due to efficiency. We continue to reduce emissions and improve efficiency to stay ahead of the number of power plants required or cars on the road. Only have to look to China or other populous places on this planet to see that the air becomes toxic if we don't at least try.

 

I would not call a vision of electrified transportation supported by wind/solar/geo/tides/dams ... in conjunction with a better storage medium (the better battery) back to the middle ages.  Not sure what has been done or seriously proposed would be considered over reaction. 

[openair]

Transportation by electricity is just part of a solution, does it really help if emissions are shifted to non renewable power creation, maybe some due to efficiency. We continue to reduce emissions and improve efficiency to stay ahead of the number of power plants required or cars on the road. Only have to look to China or other populous places on this planet to see that the air becomes toxic if we don't at least try.

Last year Paris France had so much air pollution you could not see the eiffel tower from even a short distance away. In response Paris banned all gas and diesel vehicle manufactured before a certain date from Paris.

 

For the deniers: yes, the reason they choose those dates is efficiency but efficiency only goes so far and as more ppl buy newer cars and populations continue to grow and result in more vehicles efficiency will have to continue to grow as well and the dates of those vehicles banned will continue to move up.

 

Also, as far as electric vehicles impact on economy, what effect on the tourism economy do you think the reduced view of and from the eiffel tower will have?

Edited April 6, 2016 at 07:30 PM by openair

[meyersnole]

You can also go back and look at photos from US cities in the 1970s compared to today to see the impact of emission regulation (the clean air act). 

[stevedebi]

I don't argue that the environment needs to be kept clean. Today's ICE vehicles are the cleanest ever.

[Automate]

No free superchargers for Model 3 owners

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2016/06/01/tesla-says-software-update-will-fix-model-x-doors-model-3-owners-wont-get-free/?intcmp=hphz08

 

[flyingcheesehead]

No free superchargers for Model 3 owners

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2016/06/01/tesla-says-software-update-will-fix-model-x-doors-model-3-owners-wont-get-free/?intcmp=hphz08

 

 

No surprise... But at least the network is there and you can pay for it if you need it. There is no other DCFC network available for cross country travel for any other EVs, so whether it's free or not, it gives Tesla a massive competitive advantage.

 

I'm guessing it'll be similar to early Model S - $2000 or $2500 to enable for the base model, or upgrade to a larger battery with Supercharger access included.

[JATR4]

I used to live in Springfield, MO.  This news about TESLA chargers there.

 

"A new Macadoodles liquor store, Shell gas station and Tropical Smoothie Café are coming to north Springfield by fall 2016.

It will include eight "Supercharger" stations for Tesla electric cars — Springfield's first, said Tim O'Reilly, managing member and CEO of O'Reilly Hospitality Management.

 

O'Reilly's company will operate the development, located near the intersection of Glenstone Avenue and I-44 at 3050 N. Kentwood Ave."

 

The chargers are just off Interstate 44.