The Tesla Thread

adolf hamster said:
the transportation and distribution problems are solved if we crack the storage- which granted is the hard part.

as for the cost, once it gets done on a wide enough scale it'll cheapen up, digging oil out of the ground is hardly cheap but when you do it on as big a scale as the oil industry it winds up pretty cheap.

as for the power- we'll need to be building a bunch more nuclear power stations to power an all electric future anyway, so a few more isn't going to make the situation much worse.

it sounds bad looking at it now, but then so did the idea of building towns that stand on the sea bed and drill miles into the sea, didn't stop us from getting there eventually.
Click to expand...

I'm not anti-HFCV. I just see it as a pipe dream (for now) rather than an alternative. You could argue that they have the potential to be better than BEVs (and they are, in some respects). But even the forecasts by the most pro-HFCV manufacturers in the world, for sales in the most pro-HFCV country in the world, are 10 years behind actual BEV sales and infrastructure.

I expect 10-20 years from now, HFCVs will be viable. But I'm not certain there will still be space for them in the consumer vehicle market. BEV development and take-up is simply moving too fast.
 
Last edited:
satchef1 said:
I'm not anti-HFCV. I just see it as a pipe dream (for now) rather than an alternative. You could argue that they have the potential to be better than BEVs (and they are, in some respects). But even the forecasts by the most pro-HFCV manufacturers in the world, for sales in the most pro-HFCV country in the world, are 10 years behind actual BEV sales and infrastructure.

I expect 10-20 years from now, HFCVs will be viable. But I'm not certain there will still be space for them in the consumer vehicle market. BEV development and take-up is simply moving too fast.
Click to expand...

well at the minute you're right, but like i say if we can get the storage cracked then unless ev's have already taken over complete dominance then i can see hydrogen becoming the main replacement.

and at least infrastructure development can utilise existing sites for petrol stations.

guess we'll see, its just as likely some massive battery breakthrough may happen that'll allow high energy density quick charge batteries.
 
The main reason that there is not a decent competitor from BMW and Merc is simply down to battery availability. There simply is no supply for them to take, it's all taken by existing demand.

They will need to build their own factory to be able to enter the market with a product they can produce the required volumes they need to make it profitable.

We already know that a car that isn't designed to be an EV from the concept is compromised in one way or another (Golf, Ionic, Soul, etc.)
 
Amp34 said:
it's not technically feasible for the price point they're looking at (unlikely considering the Bolt EV is sold elsewhere)
Click to expand...

FYI the Bolt is estimated to lose around $9,000 per unit. GM fancied being first to the pie in order to gain a foothold.

I believe there's still a chance that it makes it over here in RHD form in the next few years.
 
chroniclard said:
I am not sure most of those cars above are even comparable to a Tesla.
Click to expand...

In what way? The base model Tesla doesn't even have heated seats for example, it's not a "luxury" vehicle. Something like the e-Golf (with 125 miles of range) is pretty comparable to the Model 3 without the extended range or AP.

Joe T said:
FYI the Bolt is estimated to lose around $9,000 per unit. GM fancied being first to the pie in order to gain a foothold.

I believe there's still a chance that it makes it over here in RHD form in the next few years.
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks.

And yes, I agree. As much as the previous announcement by GM posted above is rather wishy washy it basically says it needs to be profitable for them to worth it. Less a "never arrive", more a "we need a business case.
 
Amp34 said:
In what way? The base model Tesla doesn't even have heated seats for example, it's not a "luxury" vehicle. Something like the e-Golf (with 125 miles of range) is pretty comparable to the Model 3 without the extended range or AP.
Click to expand...

Yeah but then its a golf with tacked on E credentials. Tesla is completely different from the ground up/feels more futuristic.

However my only frame of reference is the bosses Model S, so I would assume the 3 is much lower spec but I dont know. :)
 
chroniclard said:
Yeah but then its a golf with tacked on E credentials. Tesla is completely different from the ground up/feels more futuristic.

However my only frame of reference is the bosses Model S, so I would assume the 3 is much lower spec but I dont know. :)
Click to expand...

It may feel/look more futuristic but without the "premium upgrades" pack (heated seats and the glass roof amongst others) - $5k, Autopilot - $5k and the enhanced range - $9k, to me it doesn't feel like it's going to be particularly futuristic.

Oh and if you don't want it in black that's another $1k.

I feel like the car that everyone actually wants is going to be in the $50k+ range. For those that just want a car to go from A-B in reasonably short stints then the base model will be fine, but so will the "Golf with tacked on E credentials" IMO. I'm sure there will be plenty of people buying the base model, but how many are choosing it over the other options only because it's a Tesla - a bit like people buying a base model 1 series BMW because it's a BMW, not because it's any better than any of the equivalent models.
 
Amp34 said:
It may feel/look more futuristic but without the "premium upgrades" pack (heated seats and the glass roof amongst others) - $5k, Autopilot - $5k and the enhanced range - $9k, to me it doesn't feel like it's going to be particularly futuristic.

Oh and if you don't want it in black that's another $1k.

I feel like the car that everyone actually wants is going to be in the $50k+ range. For those that just want a car to go from A-B in reasonably short stints then the base model will be fine, but so will the "Golf with tacked on E credentials" IMO. I'm sure there will be plenty of people buying the base model, but how many are choosing it over the other options only because it's a Tesla - a bit like people buying a base model 1 series BMW because it's a BMW, not because it's any better than any of the equivalent models.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, I quite like the Model X but when I add the stuff I would like its 130k. :p
 
Amp34 said:
It may feel/look more futuristic but without the "premium upgrades" pack (heated seats and the glass roof amongst others) - $5k, Autopilot - $5k and the enhanced range - $9k, to me it doesn't feel like it's going to be particularly futuristic.

Oh and if you don't want it in black that's another $1k.

I feel like the car that everyone actually wants is going to be in the $50k+ range. For those that just want a car to go from A-B in reasonably short stints then the base model will be fine, but so will the "Golf with tacked on E credentials" IMO. I'm sure there will be plenty of people buying the base model, but how many are choosing it over the other options only because it's a Tesla - a bit like people buying a base model 1 series BMW because it's a BMW, not because it's any better than any of the equivalent models.
Click to expand...

It is positioned against a 3 Series/A3/C Class and it does so very well in terms of price and it's features and options.

I have just checked and a base level 3 series doesn't have anything you have mentioned either. In fact the 3 series doesn't have quite a few things the Model 3 has sub 6 second 0-60, parking sensors, reverse camera, music streaming, web browser, 8 year warranty on the power train etc.

When you move up to the 330i M Sport which is a more comparable model which is £36k and you still need to spec options to get the things you want. Once you take into the account the tax and fuel savings Model 3 looks competitive in my opinion. Then there is the whole don't have to fill it with fuel thing which is worth a lot to more people than you think.
 
The issue with Tesla is nothing about it feels like a luxury car. It's a technical masterpiece but nothing in there feels like it has any real quality - heck the interior of the Model S has so many bizarre gaps and just missing bits it feels unfinished.

I always wonder just how amazing a joint venture between Tesla and Mercedes Benz would be. Mercedes do the car stuff, Tesla do the EV stuff...
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
It is positioned against a 3 Series/A3/C Class and it does so very well in terms of price and it's features and options.

I have just checked and a base level 3 series doesn't have anything you have mentioned either. In fact the 3 series doesn't have quite a few things the Model 3 has sub 6 second 0-60, parking sensors, reverse camera, music streaming, web browser, 8 year warranty on the power train etc.

When you move up to the 330i M Sport which is a more comparable model which is £36k and you still need to spec options to get the things you want. Once you take into the account the tax and fuel savings Model 3 looks competitive in my opinion. Then there is the whole don't have to fill it with fuel thing which is worth a lot to more people than you think.
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting it's up against the 1 series, rather that it's an equivalent thought process.

Price point wise the E Golf (and the Bolt EV) are both around the same starting price as the Model 3, and depending on where you are in the world or the queue you may be able to pick them up way sooner than the Model 3. If you want to add on all the extras to make the Model 3 the futuristic car many want it to be then you're looking at a much higher price point. That's the point I'm making.

What can you get for £50k? How does it compare to the Model 3 with AP, extended range and "premium pack"?
 
Lol still trying to compare it to a 125mile golf, it's not even in the same league.
The other benefit which most people seem to miss is the supercharger network, especially in EU. You can jump in one and drive to say south of France with no planning (other than stops) with any other events you would need to get hold of several different charging cards in several countries ahead of time which isn't the easiest thing to do.
 
Amp34 said:
What can you get for £50k? How does it compare to the Model 3 with AP, extended range and "premium pack"?
Click to expand...

Nothing with that kind of performance and can drive its self on almost every 'A' road in Europe.

Bolt and Golf are not in the same league of either range (Golf) or quality or features.

Fox why don't you think the Model 3 looks 'quality'?
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
Fox why don't you think the Model 3 looks 'quality'?
Click to expand...

Never seen one but the S is the more expensive model and it's not a quality product inside or out. It's very impressive but it's clear the design effort has gone into the tech rather than the rest of the car. It's nothing like a premium car inside.

I can't see how the 3 will be better, it's half the price.
 
Glaucus said:
Lol still trying to compare it to a 125mile golf, it's not even in the same league.
The other benefit which most people seem to miss is the supercharger network, especially in EU. You can jump in one and drive to say south of France with no planning (other than stops) with any other events you would need to get hold of several different charging cards in several countries ahead of time which isn't the easiest thing to do.
Click to expand...


Rather than just say "lol", why not explain why it's not in the same league.

I've explained my reasoning but so far all you've said is "supercharger network".

For me the Model 3 without the extended range and autopilot is no better than the Golf for my wants/needs as explained above. The extra range of the standard Tesla is going to make little difference. For around town it won't make a difference, and it's still not enough to negate extra stops to places I'd want to go (whereas the 300 mile one would). So as much as the supercharger network is great, I wouldn't have to use it for most/all journeys I'd be taking in the car with ER, I'd just charge at home. With both the standard range version and the E Golf I'd have to charge up, so again little difference there.

The autopilot is one of the other main reasons for getting a Tesla. Not full auto, rather just for those motorway/highway drives. Without it it's again no better than the Golf.

Sure it may have a faster 0-60 and may have one or two nice things inside (debatable with the Golf), but as an everyday vehicle (for my needs anyway) it's no better than the Golf (and the base model Golf comes with heated seats, another "requirement" - the GFs insistence).

Stick the AP, premium pack and extended range into it on the other hand and I'd jump in in a heartbeat because it's exactly the sort of car I would love, but that's not a $35k car, that's a $50k car.

Now if your enjoying a Model 3 because of the 0-60 performance, or the Tesla badge then no, the Golf is nothing like the Model 3.

Just for some perspective here we are actually looking around at a potential new vehicle in the next year up to the $40k CAD price point, which the base level Model 3 will probably just fit into. I'm not dreaming here, it's a logical thought process for vehicles we should be looking at. A thought process I don't think is particularly outlandish or different to many others looking around.
 
The mileage is massively different and not in a similar league, you need to be blind not to see this. It makes a collasal difference. How can you say it doesn't. 220miles bring significant range and flexibility, and you can easily drive for over two hours and choose recharge locations that ft the trip. The same can not be said for 125 miles.
As well as the range for weekend trips it also means you don't have to use near 100% of the battery regularly, which prolongs the life.same can not be said for a 125mile range for a bigger group of people.

They are totally different class which ever aspect you look at it, you might as well compare it to a lead as that's similar range to the golf.

It's also not just supercharging and the massive difference in range, Al though those two on there own mean it's a far more capable car. You still missing the point even if you don't pay for Ap/SD the hardware is still on all Teslas and you can buy software unlock in the future. This is another huge selling point, the same can't be said for any other car out there.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom