I really hope the German government does something to make it more desirable for employees to want the Model 3 or similar cars as company cars.
Just to explain the involved costs:
There's two ways the government taxes company cars for employees, either you get to write a driving log, that then marks each route as either private or business and then you get the privately driven part taxed as income OR you just get 1% of the new car value taxed as income each month and don't have to provide a driving log. The company pays for leasing, gas and maintenance.
That's where electric cars savings on fuel and maintenance don't affect business customers, they don't care mostly because the company pays for the gas anyway and is used to do that so it will stay that way quite a while.
I just hope they give a tax break on the 1% rule, so it's just 0,5 or something similar that makes these cars more desirable compared to a similar priced gas guzzler.
EVs (and PHEVs) already profit under the 1% rule - the base price gets reduced for the tax calculations, based on the battery size. I am absolutely planning on getting my Model 3 as a company car with the 1% regulation - my company has a Tesla leasing contract, and Tesla confirmed to me on the phone that I can convert my private Model 3 reservation to a company car, keeping the place in the queue and delivery schedule.
Sadly that taxbreak runs out in 2022 and until then declines every year, while not being that substantial. It's tied to battery capacity and maxes out at currently 8000€ from the new price. So with a Model S in a base configuration without any features for example you have to tax 600€ per month instead of 680€. That's a 12% reduction in tax burden, nothing that would push me towards a car in that price range, especially if I had to then accept less features for a similar price. For a Model 3 its more favorably pushing it up to 20-25%, but once again, compared to a similar priced gas guzzler, the feature/cost ratio isn't there, even if you compare it to relatively expensive BMWs or VWs.
I'm currently looking for a new company car and own Tesla stock so look at these numbers quite closely because I'd love to get a Tesla, but it isn't cost effective to get one if you can't factor in the gas savings and maintenance savings.
Diesel cars are going up in costs for sure over the next time. car manufacturers have to equip them with working exhaust cleaning, and I am sure, the fuel taxes are going to rise after the elections.
Electrical cars can also charge at your work place without it being taxed, that exception was made last year.
So I would see the Model 3 quite competing to a BMW 3 or 5 series - what is preferable pretty much depends on your preferences and needs.
Been thinking the same myself. This is purely my own speculation, but I can see taxation of diesel at the pump skyrocketing in the next two years.
All these plans to scrap petrol and diesel engines by year X are clearly not genuine, and people see that.
No democratic government in the western world as an authority horizon further away than the next election - so rather than trying to ban something that may or may not ever take, it just seems more practical and more likely to just keep pushing up the price of the fuel by taxation until it no longer makes sense for anyone.
Bonus: you don't need to offer a scrappage bribe from the public purse either.
At least here in Finland electric cars use the same taxation method as Diesel called "käyttövoimavero" which roughly translates to "usage power tax". This is based on weight so 0,015€ per day per 100kg. On top of that there is the "car tax" which is based on emissions which for electric cars is at the minimum which comes at 106€/year.
One thing I am sure of is that once the amount of electric vehicles starts to rise they will just up the "käyttövoimavero" (or come up with a new one) to make up for the lost tax revenue.
Tesla should offer the autopilot features as a monthly subscription to businesses. This way, they could lower the taxed sticker price of the car further.
BMW has all-electric models like the i3. If the government made it really attractive to buy them maybe they'd put some more effort in making them affordable.
The issue is that many European companies provide cars to their employees as a benefit. The employees then have to pay tax on their personal use of the car, at a rate proportional to the price. It's not the business owners who will care - it's the employees who have to pay the tax.
Is there a HUD or do I have to move my eyes to the centre console to check my speed? Seems like bad ergonomics to me... and whereas the road ahead is perhaps still in my peripheral vision when I check my speedo, its less so if I am glancing at the centre console (which maybe has a bunch of other distracting things on it as well?)
Center console indicators are quite common. One advantage is that, the indicators are never blocked when you are in a turn. With your traditional instrument cluster placement, the steering wheel blocks the indicators.
Mini Cooper: There is a speedometer directly behind steering wheel, in a smaller secondary instrument panel, as shown in the picture.
Toyota Yaris: Not shown in that picture is the Head Up Display projected onto the windscreen, even closer to the driver's line of sight. I drove a Yaris for a few days a while back, and the HUD is good - not distracting there's and no need to turn your head, which would be dangerous.
Saturn ION: Seems to be the only valid example. I don't know myself, can't remember ever being in a Saturn ION. Wikipedia tells me that GM does not make them anymore.
it still seems to me that for reasons of safety , you want some instrumentation to be very close to the driver's default line of sight. Not necessarily all of it, but a few key indicators such as speed.
I drive a Yaris myself (the center display looks different than the one pictured, but the concept is the same). It doesn't have a HUD and I actually love the center display. As stated before, it is never blocked. In a turn, when a normal instrument panel is behind the steering wheel, I can still monitor the speedometer and shift gears according to the speed.
Also, I totally have the road in vision when looking at the speedometer.
I know for a fact that the one in Yaris and C4 is an option... And for a while, it wasn't available in many countries. For a C4 Picasso, this is still the case.
Not sure why you think C4 comes with the HUD, but rest assured the 1999 Xsara Picasso didn't. I drove it for many years and it was fine. Glancing down at the behind-wheel display is equidistant to glancing right to Model 3's (which has the important bits in the same position, perhaps even closer to the driver, then Picasso did).
It'll be fine. Don't judge it before actually trying it for yourself.
I have the Toyota Prius C which is based on the yaris. I absolutely love the center console indicator and hate driving cars with it behind the wheel now. I'm really glad to see more manufacturers switching to the center console displays.
I drive a Mini Cooper from time to time and it's not great. They have a small screen behind the wheel which also displays the speed, but with a low refresh rate so you can go over the limit easily if you don't pay attention.
The Yaris in particular must be easy to build as either a left hand drive or right hand drive vehicle. I'd hazard a guess that was a significant motivating factor for Toyota.
please do not compare properly designed center consoles, that are very close to the windshield base, to that corner-cutting excuse of a design for the model 3.
the main design flaw here is that the proximity makes it a completely different visual field than the road. while all your examples (I guess, havent clicked all, and only drove extensivly a twingo 1st gen, designed by stark studios) the distance makes your eye see the panel info while looking at the road. even more so than the behind the steering wheel models.
My wife's has driven a Yaris for 10+ years which has everything on center console. You get used to it within minutes of driving it. Obviously it is perfectly legal
B. Fahrzeuge
III. Bau- und Betriebsvorschriften
§57 Geschwindigkeitsmeßgerät und Wegstreckenzähler
(1) Kraftfahrzeuge müssen mit einem im unmittelbaren Sichtfeld des
Fahrzeugführers liegenden Geschwindigkeitsmeßgerät ausgerüstet sein.
Translated: "the speedometer has to be in the immediate field of vision of the driver".
It's somewhat murky.
Last time that I drove a Yaris, and that was a few years back, there was a Head Up Display which put a few things against the windscreen, directly in front of the driver.
I see it as 'Don't make me think!' (Steve Krug) applied to a fresh redesign of what is really needed and where.
This is the Google home page compared to Alta Vista. The absence of dials, switches, knobs, hidden buttons, things you have to twist in their own special way, it is all good.
Clearly there are some situations where the buttons have to exist, e.g. for seat adjustment, as you wouldn't want to be doing that whilst leaning for the screen. However, the minimal approach and a clear, easy to use console is way ahead of what other cars are doing for their interiors.
Without the clutter of an existing car interior I am sure that big flashing lights on the centre console about exceeding the speed limit will be perfectly visible to all occupants of the car.
This latter point is important, routinely my brother in law drives at speeds that are faster than what he tells my sister. She is sat next to him but can't see the speedometer, so if he says one speed then she has to believe him, even if it is just slightly fast rather than the true excessively fast figure. Having a centre console is a bit more fair to passengers wanting to know that information too. If it is the car rather than the driver that is driving I guess this is no different - everyone including the driver is a passenger.
> The absence of dials, switches, knobs, hidden buttons, things you have to twist in their own special way, it is all good.
In it's place are things you have to touch and slide without the tacticle feedback and consistency of controls.
> This latter point is important, routinely my brother in law drives at speeds that are faster than what he tells my sister. She is sat next to him but can't see the speedometer, so if he says one speed then she has to believe him, even if it is just slightly fast rather than the true excessively fast figure. Having a centre console is a bit more fair to passengers wanting to know that information too
SO this car is gonna be mentioned in divorce proceedings /s
The screen is not in the center console it sticks above the dash. Seems like the speed is probably just as close to the road as any other vehicle if not closer.
Do you think a diagonal saccade is worse than a vertical one for some reason?
Nitpick: Moving your eyes to look at a speedometer is a conscious muscle movement, not a saccade. Saccades are involuntary, automatic and not consciously felt; they're the sensory system's way of automatically building up the visual "scene" in your brain from multiple images even though you feel like your gaze is fixed on a single point. You can't focus on the road and read the speedometer from your peripheral vision.
Yes, I do think it is worse, but that's just my gut feel, presumably Telsa designer's think otherwise. Not many other cars with the speed in the center console (older new-generation Minis come to mind though).
Renault Espace (among others) has had this for quite a while and it works fairly well. I'd even say it keeps your peripheral vision on the road more than the traditional clocks (if done right).
I agree that it works well in the Espace, however my impression is that while in the Model 3 the display is in the center like in the Espace it's also closer to the driver, making the viewing angle larger...
Elon mentioned the interior was redesigned with full autonomy in mind. I guess the use case "driver maintaining the vehicle speed via non-autonomous pedal pressure while wanting to check the vehicle speed because he did not enable cruise mode" is a weird edge case for them.
On autopilot the car will stick to the assigned speed (with adaptive cruise control slowing down or speeding up depending on the traffic in front of you). In fully autonomous driving mode the car will read the speed limit signs and adjust.
It's pretty bizarre to treat driving without an $8000 options package as a weird edge case. If autonomous driving is that central, it seems like it should be a basic feature, not an upgrade.
The company likely has the data on the percentage of customers opting in for autonomous features and likely optimized for that.
Considering the hardware in every vehicle supports autonomy, it's a feature that could be sold to the customer later on or as an on-demand subscription.
If autonomous driving is out of the question, what makes Model 3 appealing compared to a Chevy Bolt, Chevy Volt or a plug-in Prius?
edit: I believe that adaptive cruise control (automatic speed adjustment based on the obstacles in front) is included in basic config, autopilot would include that + lane steering + lane change assistance with blind spot monitoring.
The reviewer went out of his way to emphasize the test drive is for a fully-loaded version.
> Franz’ car is a loaded version—a Premium (add $5,000), meaning better-grade materials, wood-veneered dash, 12-way front seats, 12-speaker sound, heated rear seats, side-by-side inductive phone chargers, and that panoramic glass ceiling
> paired with this car’s $9,000 long-range battery
> Tesla Model 3 is available with Enhanced Autopilot ($5,000) and for another $3,000 what’s called “Full Self-Driving Capability”
> $59,500 before incentives—including $1,500 for the larger 19-inch wheels (18 inches are standard), and a grand for the red multicoat paint
> And it’ll be a while before $35,000 versions are built
Their review of the $35,000 vehicle might be very different.
The review of the basic model might be very different ... or might be similar, I don't know. I was just trying to answer your (perhaps rhetorical) question:
> If autonomous driving is out of the question, what makes Model 3 appealing compared to a Chevy Bolt, Chevy Volt or a plug-in Prius?
The reviewer didn't mention anything about testing autonomous driving features. He raved about the car performance, from a driver perspective. Responsiveness, vibration on the steering wheel, how stable it is, etc. That is, he was looking for a features of a car that needs a driver, not what an autonomous car would provide. Therefore an answer to your question: "If autonomous driving is out of the question, what ..."
To be fair, a base Model S doesn't have all the autopilot stuff and upgrade sound and everything else. So to compare equivalent equipment packages, that Model S is a lot more than $9k more.
doesn't the model S though also give you free access to superchargers (unlike the model 3 where you have to pay)? This should factor in the comparison if you live close to one and/or plan a lot of cross country trips where they are available
The value of free Supercharging is fairly small for most people. If you drive 12,000 miles/year and 25% of your driving is Supercharged, you'll end up paying something like $100/year in Supercharger fees for a Model 3.
The "small battery" still has more range than any other electric car out there, except the Bolt, which has a very small lead, but does not seem to be made in large numbers. And it matches the promised range (>215 miles). So it is great value for everyone, who does not need the 300 mile range. So you do get a sporty (0-60 <6s) 5 seated electrical sedan for 35k, which is great.
Except for the part where they're not actually making the 35k base model yet, sure. So in reality you might be able to get it for 35k at some unspecified point in the future, assuming they don't outright cancel the base model again.
The S40 was cancelled because there were very few orders for it. If you now order a Model 3 you have to wait way into 2018 for delivery. But according to the Tesla web page, the production of the base model starts in November. They had to choose a battery size to start the production with, and it makes sense to start with the larger one, especially as all press reviews are done with the larger battery.
The 2005 onward NC model Mazda MX-5 Miata: A test by Car and Driver magazine revealed a 0-60 mph (97 km/h) time of 6.5 s for the 2.0 L (120 cu in) U.S.-spec NC[1]
I suspect the average MX-5 owner is quite happy with the characteristics their vehicle. Hell, I consider my long wheel base turbo diesel VW T5 Transporter quite sport to drive. For a (very basic) camper van.
Also, the Miata is also widely considered a unique sports car. Sure, handling plays a role - but most people consider Camaros and Trans-Ams sports cars also. If the 3 is as nimble as the miata, it could earn a spot in the sporty list through its agility- but the original post referred to the 3's 0-60 as the reason to consider it sporty. Case in point, no one considers a CRX 'sporty.'
Maybe I am old, but the Model 3 gets 0-60 in about the same time the Porsche 911 used to. I would consider everything less than 8s "sporty". That does not mean, it is a race car, just something with quick performance. The fact that the full power is always instantly available without shifting or pressure by the turbocharger building up, closes the gap further.
The Tesla will probably feel a lot quicker even with similar 0-60 times because the EV drivetrain is so much more responsive.
I have a Model S 85, with a 0-60 time similar to what Tesla is claiming for the Model 3. A couple of months ago I had a Cadillac ATS rental which also has a similar 0-60 time. It was a decent car overall, but it felt like an absolute snail compared to my S. Floor the accelerator in the S and you go. Floor it in the ATS and Stuff begins to Happen, and Eventually the car begins to Move. I assume they have similar numbers because the ATS makes up for it with better acceleration as you get closer to 60, but most acceleration I do isn't a pure 0-60 run, but 0-30, or 10-40, or whatever.
* don't mind the noise, burning tires, and clutch wear
* have perfect traction, weather, straight road, temperature
* execute two perfect shifts
With normal driving you also have to worry about what gear you are in, what gear you want to be in, handling the throttle in the mean time, and turbo lag. By the time you go from say cruising on the highway in 6th and full throttle in 3rd the model 3 will already have a substantial jump on you.
The telsa on the other hand is pretty simple, just stomp. There's no wrong gear to be in, no shifting, not much noise (traction control and no gas motor). In a wide variety of situations a Tesla model 3 (at least the large range version) is going to feel faster than a WRX. I have had both a forester xt and a WRX.
You're making an incorrect comparison, there's a logic failure there.
$59,500 as shown, then you use that to compare to the base Model S at $68,000, referencing a "real-world" price difference of 13%.
How exactly is $59,500 defined as the official "real-world" price, such that it gets pegged as the key comparison point to use vs the base S? That's a wholly subjective premise you crafted.
"Real-world"? Musk said the Model 3 would have a 220 mile base range from Day 1, years ago. And it does. This isn't price creep. This is delivering exactly what you promised. And for most people, 220 miles is more than enough. How far do you drive to work?
If everything goes right, Model 3 can change the business model of cars. Shift to value add + functionality upgrade based pricing versus a sales and service oriented model.
Also they own the repair market. You can't get your tesla serviced at a normal shop as the software, parts, and diagnostics are proprietary, so they could actually sell the car at a loss and make the big bucks on repairs.
I don't want this. But its a viable business model.
Right now there are not enough of them on the road nationwide to justify a secondary shops wanting to service them, however if they meet their goals with the Tesla 3 there will be
This will result in law suits against Tesla if they do not provide a way for 3rd parties to make parts and service the vehicles as there are multiple federal laws the prevent this type of locking down
Car manufacturers have tried this in the past, it always fails to work out of them.
The parts were supposed to be reduced compared to an ICE. What kind of important parts would they service ? (open question)
Proprietary diagnostics is not surprising, not a lot of cars right now have that amount of electronics and software, it's probably reverse engineering to get a glimpse of the car brain on your own.
From what I've heard Telsa vehicles rare in for warranty repairs at a higher rate than most other new vehicles.
"The main problem areas involved the drivetrain, power equipment, charging equipment, giant iPad-like center console, and body and sunroof squeaks, rattles, and leaks."
The most common problems involve replacement of the electric motors, warped brake rotors, door handles that fail to slide out as a driver approaches, and numerous squeaks and rattles, which may be more apparent given the very quiet nature of electric propulsion.
Other problem areas cited by Tesla owners are leaking cooling pumps for the battery pack, dead windshield wipers, persistent alignment issues with the wheels, and misaligned latches for the front trunklid and the rear liftgate.
Thus far, all such problems have been handled under Tesla's four-year/50,000-mile warranty (it's eight years and unlimited mileage on the powertrain)--and owners appear to be pleased with the level of attentiveness and customer service they have received.
But Consumer Reports notes that once the car is out of warranty, such problems could become expensive for owners of older Teslas to fix.
Oh I remember this now, but it's 2 years old. I dearly hope Tesla managed to install more durable mecano-electronics parts it would be a bad PR move to have the best electric motor / battery tech next to frail secondary one.
I don't see this happening. Look at computers or the home CE market. We've moved away from buying something once and then upgrading it over a period of time. Instead consumers are attracted to new devices, with more features and most importantly a refreshed design.
When you have plastics that age, seats that wear and parts that fail people are always going to want to buy a new car instead of adding new features to an old one.
I feel that the portable market changed the buying habit. The race to make things smaller, lighter and more powerful won over the benefits of modularity.
I do agree that the mindset shift will also apply to cars. The difference is cars have a stronger resale market than tech.
> Buying a new $700 phone every couple years is a very different thing from buying a new $40,000 car because you can't get it fixed.
Isn't that what they said about the iPhone when it was first released? Perhaps your income level is less than the target market segment for the Tesla Model 3.
I'm certain if I ever own a Tesla, it'll be a long way into the future.
I'm glad they keep pushing forward though, it's causing the infrastructure to advance to a point where I'm almost ready to go fully EV.
Where I am, a low-mileage (20-30k) 3-5 year old Nissan Leaf is the equivalent of around $12k with no road tax to pay. And it gets around 150mpg equivalent due to electricity prices.
The Nissan Leaf is a terrible EV. The 3-5 year old models you mention have very low range (~60 miles). That's why they're so cheap. People that own them are constantly mindful of their charge % and are always on the lookout for charging stations if they're deviating from their normal commutes. I've seen many of them run out of juice on the leftmost lanes during commute hours too, causing even more congestion for miles. If you were looking at new cars, you can get a 2017 Chevy Bolt with 200+ mile range for not much more than a new Leaf.
Admittedly, Georgia made it practically free to lease for two years. Lease ended, gave it back. Buying one outright was a viable option, but buying wife a nice newish SUV (while I kept the old SUV) won out; she had dibs on the next vehicle and wanted something big.
I suspect if the battery is still showing full bars it should be closer to 80 miles, but in any case my commute is 11 miles, has never been more than 20, and at that price you can pick up one with a fast charger.
There's also a review up at the verge as well. He seemed to like the interior for its elegant simplicity. And mentioned that having the speed on the LCD was likely better for him than having in the usual place. The new prius is similar in that regard.
For a while, I thought Tesla lacked taste. This new interior proves me wrong. It is simply stunning. This strikes me as the obvious future of automotive design.
I'm sure it's a great car in person, but from a casual observer's perspective, the dash looks like they upcycled the trim from a 70s car/station wagon/boat by sticking a shitty Android tablet onto it. It reminds me of something they'd whip up on Mythbusters to remotely drive off a cliff, under tight budget constraints.
This statement seems unnecessarily harsh. To me it looks like a next generation interior that can be customised with software to support autonomous driving for non-owners of the vehicle.
Which is, as long as it doesn't cut important functionality away, for me very preferable to an interior style littered with screens and buttons and knobs. I think the Model 3 is even an improvement to the S there, you have a more minimalistic looking interior even, but they added important usability with proper door handles and pockets and the center console.
I got a 2017 Subaru Impreza with a touch screen interface. Terrible idea on a car. I'm constantly accidentally grazing the touch screen and changing things that I'm not sure of cause I'm watching the road. Too many buttons is awful, but a touchscreen is even worse. You need some kind of physical feeling when you're not looking at the screen and your brain isn't being tricked by the screen.
> Which is, as long as it doesn't cut important functionality away, for me very preferable to an interior style littered with screens and buttons and knobs.
I very much agree with you here with one exception. I wish there was the option of no center screen at all. I don't want maps and whatever multimedia features it offers. As for the stuff that you have to have that you now access only through the center console, they could still put it in the center, just in place of the screen rather than on the screen.
While I appreciate almost everything Tesla does, and I may be in minority with this opinion here, but damn are their cards ugly / generic looking. Especially so with the interior. I like spartan features, or lack of, but it's just - ugly.
Safety comes from all-wheel braking, not all-wheel acceleration. As long as you have traction/stability control, AWD is not really any safer unless you're on a winter rallye track (=want to accelerate into corners).
That paper acknowledges that AWD does provide more traction than 2WD, it just says that drivers can become overconfident as a result of that extra traction.
Their data also shows that for cars, across all types of cars, AWD cars are in fewer overall (though more severe; the focus of the paper) accidents than 2wd cars.
Given my own experience, even considering this paper, I still want an AWD.
If we're talking about safety, then the injury risk is kind of important.
The paper did not do any research on traction or driver overconfidence so remarks about these are just casual commentary, but for the record, the mention of AWD traction is not particularly relevant to avoiding traffic accidents:
"While these important results
imply that AWD
shall
not be considered as a safety
feature, it should be kept in mind that AWD does have benefits in terms of improved traction compared to 2WD cars, for instance on icy uphills, snowdrifts
and, depending on
the vehicle,
in
off-road driving"
"AWD technologies should be further developed so that slippery road conditions are not disguised by the improved traction provided by AWD."
AWD provides more traction, and thus more control than 2WD. I have no desire to give that up because some people take more control to mean "I can go faster." You're welcome to come to a different conclusion.
Yes, I've tried it on ice and snow. When going straight, the traction control is so good that you don't even know it's there aside from the lack of acceleration. I can put my 360hp RWD car on an icy road and floor it from a stop, and nothing happens besides slowly increasing speed.
Then back end will break loose if you floor it in a turn, but just don't do that.
That cornering case is the precise case I don't want a RWD car. "Just don't do that" is a really poor attitude to take, especially when you can't tell at what point the rear end will break loose.
I'm past the point in my life where I want the excitement of "will I recover this before I hit the ditch?"
Cars have tons of "just don't do that" failure modes. For example, flooring it while at a red light. It's not inherently bad advice.
IMO there's a huge difference between a car where "the slightest bit too much pressure" causes the rear end to break loose, and one where the rear end will break loose but only if you really abuse the accelerator. The Model S is in the latter category, and the Model 3 will probably be as well. As long as you drive like a sane person, it's fine.
Remember that the battery and lack of front-mounted motor give the Tesla a much different weight balance than cars you are used to. Add in extremely good traction/torque control and very quick response and you can have a well-driving RWD vehicle even in snow.
Brake fluid needs to replaced eventually, same as in ICE cars. But that's only once in several years. No oil, no transmission fluid. And yeah, you need to refill windshield washer fluid every once in a while too :)
Other than that, since there are much fewer moving parts, there is much less regular maintenance necessary. Brake pads and discs survive much longer thanks to regenerative braking.
It has regen, which is basically energy capture via electric brakes. But it also has regular breaks, most drivers don't use them much so they last a really long time.
Yes and no. The low use of the brakes can be bad in non optimal weather, and can lead to the brakes getting stuck, uneven etc. There has been some problems with this in Denmark and Norway. So you still need to service the brakes.
Brake wear depends a lot on your driving style and circumstances. My very much ICE-only compact car develops a sideways brake bias because I never use the brakes very hard in normal driving, but you can alleviate that (and indeed, eventually must, to pass the annual inspection) by a couple of sharp hard brakings to clean whatever muck off the pads and rotors, or whatever that is causing it.
But I wouldn't call a once-in-a-decade service a hassle in maintaining a car. Without any luck you might have to service your suspension and track angles as often (due to potholes and whatnots) to keep your tyre wear in control.
How does it work? Does it use regen exclusively if you press the brake pedal lightly, and then the mechanical brakes are only engaged when you stomp on the pedal, or?
It depends on settings, state of charge and temperature of the batterypack. On normal it stars a slow regen as soon as you let go of the "gas". And brakes are only deployed if you hit the brakes. However if you already have a full battery (very rare) or the battery is cold (very often in cold winter) the battery cant absorb the charge, so regen is disabled. This means the car brakes very differently, with or without regen, but this is also indicates on the dash.
I have a Gen 3 Prius and it works the same. The only think I'll add is the Prius uses the brake pads at low speed (<10mph) and when you come to a full stop as well.
Left <-> right interchange doesn't really happen anymore since radial tires have become standard on most vehicles.
Radial tires are unidirectional, so if you go left -> right your tires will be rotating backwards, and then they won't be able to channel water out from the treads.
Change the wheel a given tire is attached to. This is to have a regular "wear" on your tires. Incidentally, you can also regularly rotate your mattress to have a better sleep.
I don't think I've ever had this done when getting my tires rotated. They just move the wheels and tires from front to back and sometimes from left to right.
From what I've heard Telsa vehicles rare in for warranty repairs at a higher rate than most other new vehicles.
"The main problem areas involved the drivetrain, power equipment, charging equipment, giant iPad-like center console, and body and sunroof squeaks, rattles, and leaks."
The most common problems involve replacement of the electric motors, warped brake rotors, door handles that fail to slide out as a driver approaches, and numerous squeaks and rattles, which may be more apparent given the very quiet nature of electric propulsion.
Other problem areas cited by Tesla owners are leaking cooling pumps for the battery pack, dead windshield wipers, persistent alignment issues with the wheels, and misaligned latches for the front trunklid and the rear liftgate.
Thus far, all such problems have been handled under Tesla's four-year/50,000-mile warranty (it's eight years and unlimited mileage on the powertrain)--and owners appear to be pleased with the level of attentiveness and customer service they have received.
But Consumer Reports notes that once the car is out of warranty, such problems could become expensive for owners of older Teslas to fix.
Electric motors are one of the most rugged pieces of equipment in the world.
Coming from a state run engineering enterprise, where every motor is purchased from the lowest bidder, even the worst quality motors run for decades before even showing signs of any trouble, including mechanical.
For a car like the Tesla, it's hard to believe that the motor will give any sort of trouble.
Also, most electric motors, even those driven by variable frequency drives, are extremely simple in construction and are extremely resilient to shocks and prolonged use.
Almost all modern motors have efficiencies upwards of 97.5%, so you have very less heating losses and mechanical losses even in the most demanding conditions.
It may be hard to believe, but read the forums (especially of other cars with Tesla drivetrains, like the Mercedes-Benz EV or the Toyota RAV 4 EV) and you'll see many tales of woe regarding the motors. Tesla makes their motors in-house, so it's not surprising they've been working out the kinks for years, given their sales volume (until recently).
If I think about it, there must be 20 - 30 electric motors within a 40 meter radius of my desk at work. Probably 60 within 100 meter radius. Most of them are bolted to hydraulic pumps, cranes, or CNC machine drive mechanisms. Can't say I've ever seen an electric motor fail in the 20 years I've been working in metal fabrication.
But I didn't write any of that comment, it's quoted directly from an industry observer.
Just recently we've learned of faulty airbags in vehicles going back ~17 years, occasionally killing the driver.[1]
We can't point at a thing and say "well, it's full of parts that ought to be reliable, so it'll be reliable."
Seems to fit their long term goal of just renting out cars. If you make it prohibitive to own outside the warranty the default eventually becomes leasing.
Funnily enough, there is no key fob on a Model 3. You are supposed to use your phone to unlock your car (using Bluetooth) or a key car (using NFC) in case your phone is dead or you do not wish to couple your phone with the vehicle.
I personally like the idea because I hate carrying my keys with me and a credit card sized car would be much better for me. But I think Tesla should offer to sell normal key fobs for people who which to use those instead.
With a mass-market car, I hope that Haynes or Chilton put out a repair manual if Tesla doesn't make their shop manual available to the public at low cost.
> associate road test editor Erick Ayapana had penciled me into a 2.0-liter Alfa Romeo Giulia to get here, and it feels like a wet sponge by comparison.
I'm curious about the risk of the center detached tablet becoming a loose, dangerous projectile in the event of a crash. I haven't seen anything so far on how they've attached it to ensure that's not a problem in hard collisions.
Never really understood the "luxury" interiors with huge number of details, materials, mixes of leathers, wood, different kinda of metal, etc.
The interior that stood out to me was porsche 911 from around 1970. Not distracting, simple, robust, and lasts 30 years (when I saw it).
A larger display for excellent situational awareness (map, gps, dozen or so cameras, ultrasonic, and radar). What were you hoping for? A few dozen chrome knobs sprinkled around?
There's already two knobs on the right and left of the steering wheel, hopefully you can customize them for whatever you use the most. They didn't mention speech recognition. But if my phone can manage to be woken up and nav to wherever I need to go, seems like it shouldn't be too far behind for tesla. Two knobs, big screen, and voice prompts sounds good to me.
Touch screens are terrible to use while driving, especially for frequent operations (volume, change stations, climate control, hazard lights, wipers, etc). The current trend is to push more into these touch interfaces, but most car manufactures have still left some of the more important ones as physical buttons.
For tesla the matter is not ergonomics, but simply cost.
I love automatic wipers. They turn on in the wierdest situations. Particularly when you've been on a road trip and your windshield is covered with a nice smattering of bug guts.
Thats why you have the two scroll-wheel knobs on the steering wheel. You select a function and then you can adjust them with a physical control while driving.
"terrible" seems overdramatizing. "Slightly inconvenient at first, but fairly convenient a few weeks down the road after the muscle memory develops" is a more apt description. Volume and wipers have been duplicated to steering wheel knobs and levers, hazard lights do have a physical button (as electrical system failure and touch screen outage are a possibility), and climate control defaults to the last desired temperature (and that's if you chose to go off auto).
It might be great functionally, but it looks like there's no design or aesthetics at all - kind of like an iphone made with matte plastic and without rounded corners.
I was struck how sad the interior of the Tesla S looks compared to a mid-priced Audi.
I understand how people can be excited about the driving experience and the fossile-fuel-vision of a Tesla. But interior wise they are not anything special.
At this price I'm actually kind of interested in what the lease prices would be.
I realize the waiting list is going to be really long of course, but the lease prices (assuming no opportunistic markup at the leasing company) should come in at a price point that actually makes this pretty cheap when fuel is taken into account.
Hopefully Tesla have the good sense to embrace this wholeheartedly, as I suspect that's where the critical mass could come from (and due to the short timeframes on car leases, extremely rapidly).
> Tesla’s trying to change the vocabulary we’re using to describe it, from “kilowatt-hours” to “range.”
I understand why they did it -- Tesla's cars tend to be the most efficient EVs around, often by significant margins compared to competitors. But for someone who was hoping battery size competition would be the new megapixel race, this is quite disappointing to hear.
I suppose "range" could be used in the same way, but range is less "hard factual", as they can twist it however they want, unless they actually use the EPA and WLTP cycles.
The only thing worse than the Teslas are the Mercedes B250E and BYD e6.
This should be no surprise. Teslas are big, heavy, spacious cars, whereas other EVs tend to be small. Efficiency isn't a priority, and there's no reason to expect a 4,500lb Model S to be as efficient as a 3,300lb LEAF.
Tesla doesn't fudge range. They list EPA range in the US (and NEDC range in European countries). I think they may be required to.
> Tesla's cars tend to be the most efficient EVs around, often by significant margins compared to competitors.
Well, yes and no. Teslas have very low Cd, so are aerodynamically efficient for their size, but they use AC induction motors which are less efficient then the PM DC motors in most other EVs. Compared to the Bolt or the Hyundai Ioniq the Teslas are less efficient at lower speeds.
Nice but still not what I need. I need a long range electric car whose interior I won't be afraid to damage from time to time. I need something that moves me, my family and my stuff (skis, bikes, windsurf + sails, mountaineering gears, etc..) to where I need to be, not something for showing-off and asserting status.
The large screen in the middle of the car is a non complete non-starter - lots of the stuff I carry in my car are going to poke nice holes in it: what a joke.
Tesla (or anyone else), please build a cheap, high-impact plastic, no-large-screen interior car with front and rear seats I can fold for lots of room and I'll buy them for the rest of my life.
What I want is a long-range electric 4x4 Renault Kangoo that is not a utility vehicle. I'm sure it can be built.
I'm not exactly implying that buying a car to show off and assert status is reprehensible. Have I touched a nerve?
Anyways - I'm just saying that I hope EV manufacturer move up (or down) the immaculate luxurious interiors trip sooner rather than later so that some of us can buy and start using EVs without having to constantly worry about ruining a design project we're probably not worthy of.
Ah - well, Tesla found a way to make EV sexy and I'm sure they have very ambitious goals. I'm just hoping that what's next steps down a bit from the luxurious (at least to me) interior and focuses on cargo space that can be used without bringing in tears ;-)
I'm fortunate enough (no pun) to be willing to spend money on an EV and I just don't find what I want. I understand Tesla had to produce vehicles like these to make people realize EVs actually were usable cars (usability predicated on luxurious interiors and sporty performances - which I don't care about.)
Just to explain the involved costs: There's two ways the government taxes company cars for employees, either you get to write a driving log, that then marks each route as either private or business and then you get the privately driven part taxed as income OR you just get 1% of the new car value taxed as income each month and don't have to provide a driving log. The company pays for leasing, gas and maintenance.
That's where electric cars savings on fuel and maintenance don't affect business customers, they don't care mostly because the company pays for the gas anyway and is used to do that so it will stay that way quite a while.
I just hope they give a tax break on the 1% rule, so it's just 0,5 or something similar that makes these cars more desirable compared to a similar priced gas guzzler.