Musk Confirms Performance Version Of Tesla Model 3 Coming Next Year


Tesla Model 3

Tesla CEO Elon Musk took to Twitter to confirm that a performance version of the Model 3 is coming next year.

As it stands right now, the highest performing Tesla Model 3 does 0 to 60 MPH in 5.1 seconds with a top speed of 140 MPH.

But what if one desires more performance? Like maybe something along the lines of the Tesla Model S P100D? Well, fear not. A performance Model 3 is coming, though perhaps not until sometime next year.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk took to Twitter to answer a question on a possible performance version of the Model 3. Here’s the exchange:

Musk Says Probably Middle Of Next Year For Performance Version Of Model 3

Before Tesla launches a performance Model 3, the automaker will have to get through “production hell,” which Musk says will last at least 6 months or so.

What can we expect from a performance Model 3? Dual motor for sure. 0 to 60 MPH in around 3 seconds seems like a target to us too. Just slow enough so that the Model S is still the 0 to 60 champ, but quick enough to put some major distance between it and its lesser variants. Price? $55,000-$60,000 seems a reasonable guess.

Categories: Tesla

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

68 Comments on "Musk Confirms Performance Version Of Tesla Model 3 Coming Next Year"

newest oldest most voted

More like $55k-$60k+. Any performance version is going to require the larger battery. And I would assume the premium package so that’s already $49k with no other options.

I totally agree! No way it’s going to be 55k

This is the same mistake made when we talked about the cost of upgrades, including battery, of the Model 3, compared to the Model S.

Don’t just assume everything will be much cheaper on the Model 3. If a RWD Model 3 “large battery” costs more than 44k, why would Tesla only ask 11k more for the performance version plus AWD?

“Don’t just assume everything will be much cheaper on the Model 3.”

After the specs published following the Reveal, I’m no longer assuming any option will be cheaper on the M3 than on the MS.

I thought options would be priced lower since the M3 is both aimed at a lower market segment and it’s made in greater numbers; larger production runs should yield lower unit prices for parts.

But clearly Tesla is aiming for the M3 to compete with the likes of the BMW 3-Series, the Audi A4, etc. And the options are priced accordingly.

I made the mistake of assuming the M3 would be priced to compete with the Bolt EV, the Leaf 2.0, etc. It’s not; it’s aimed at a more expensive market segment.

I made the same mistake.

I thought the M3 would compete with Leaf 2.0/BoltEV, $35k version would be the priority and options/upgrades would be priced at about a 20% margin and benefit from economies of scale.

Instead it looks like options are in the 200-300% margin area, the $35k version will ship in Q3 2018 and this $49k M3 is not the affordable EV that was in the original Tesla business plan (aka BlueStar — was supposed to be half the price of the $57,400 Model S which was supposed to be half the price of the Roadster).

Based on Tesla’s past on price creep I would not be surprised if they dropped the 220 mile M3 in the next nine months if demand continues to be strong enough for the 310 mile M3.

Between that and the fact they have nothing else affordable planned in their product roadmap, I’m starting to wonder if Tesla will ever be for the general public.

If not, it would really be sad if the DOE loans and tax incentives all went to just build a luxary carmarker for just the top 7% of the population.

The one thing that is certain; M3 is certainly no Model T today.

I don’t think they’re going to drop the lower range version. They’re going to have to do something when the tax credits run out and their cars effectively become $7500 more expensive.

People keep talking about the order backlog, but I simply don’t see demand being that high for a $40-$50K car. There just aren’t that many people who can afford it, and even among those who can, they may not want to. I personally cannot justify spending that much on a car. I just don’t drive enough for it to be remotely worth it.

“…this $49k M3 is not the affordable EV that was in the original Tesla business plan (aka BlueStar — was supposed to be half the price of the $57,400 Model S which was supposed to be half the price of the Roadster).” Hmmm, I don’t recall anybody at Tesla ever saying they would drop the price by half for each step in the DarkStar (Roadster) –> WhiteStar (Model S) –> BlueStar (Model 3) progression. Yes, the master plan was to make each step lower priced than the last, but that was based on the continuing drop in battery prices, and Tesla certainly had no control over how fast those prices were dropping. The M3 certainly is lower priced than the MS. I think the entry level prices of the M3 is about 1/2 that of the MS, sans incentives. But the options on the M3 raise the price faster when compared to the base price, as a percentage or ratio. One thing the original master plan did not include is Tesla investing billions of dollars in a battery “Gigafactory” in order to be able to control their own battery supply. Tesla’s business plan has wound up being rather more complex… Read more »
Google search reveals the historical thinking on pricing in lots of places; for example: “Shortly after Tesla held a press conference Wednesday morning touting its $250 million planned plant in San Jose, Calif., Tesla chairman Elon Musk presented his vision of Tesla’s leadership role in the auto industry at the AlwaysOn GoingGreen conference. Musk said that Tesla has the ability to accelerate the auto industry’s progress toward the adoption of electric vehicles by 5 to 10 years. Lighting even that small fire could be very important if you consider what a decade of delay can do for climate change, he said. Tesla’s efforts to spur the auto giants will include a third-generation, low-cost electric vehicle that could possibly be priced as low as $20,000, (he mentioned $30,000 as an option, too) a price point that is “super affordable,” he explained to us in a phone interview. ———————- The point is not to hold him to the number; 9 years is a long time ago, a lot changes and this is a tough business. The point is, however, the $49k M3 is certainly not the affordable Tesla in the vision. Ideally they should drop the “mass market / affordable” messaging.… Read more »

People keep making the same mistake over and over and over with comparing the Model 3 to the Model S. They are two different cars for two different markets. They dropped the Model S 40 because people that wanted the car wanted long range and premium features (and the budget to go with it). People that want the Model 3 want an moderately priced EV with a usable range. I predict that at least 40% of the Model S sales will be the 220 mile version.

Yup. We wanted a basic EV, with DCFC, and heated front seats for winter. Our Bolt LT ended up costing us $36,509 plus tax, and license fee. That is a crazy amount of money for a car. But it is super smooth, quiet, and has more gadgets than we will ever use. Driving it, on cruise control, is head and shoulders better than the wife’s old Corolla, which I already thought was a self-indulgent barge.

To get a lighter color, which we insisted on to reduce AC loads in summer, would cost a grand extra on the Model 3. To get the heated seats requires going with a ridiculous $5K upgrade!

Yup. we were looking at a Model S and to get XM radio and we had to buy premium sound and the optional sun roof. Same thing fork out $5K extra.

The rumors of the Nissan Leaf’s death have been greatly exaggerated. I suspect the Model 3 will be wildly popular but it never was and never will be something that is competing in Toyota Prius land. Elon Musk is wisely moving only as far down the pricing scale as he has to. His company depends on making money. He isn’t running a charity. He has not generated a profit. In order to generate the profit, he needs to play a tricky game of price and volume. He says the S and X paid for the 3. Ok. I’d say the 3 will get them to the next stage where he’s got a mid market SUV and then eventually a true car for the masses. Something that realistically will sell under $30,000. It will be 5 years before that happens. 2 or 3 to the SUV then another 2 for the economy car.

That all sounds right to me. Unfortunately, we are too old to wait.

I am not seeing many realistic headlines about the Model 3, so far. Stuff like, “Musk did it! $35K Model 3 goes 300 miles!”

Model 3 Prices will drop as time goes by.

They started expensive because the demand is there and it’s easier to drop prices than to raise them. Tesla needed a nice pricing cushion for when the incentives go away.

Some will treat “Performance” as a blanket term but here we have the “P” trim which is separate from the “Ludicrous” upgrade which could be be independent from the RWD/AWD (we don’t know yet know if a RWD P version will exist)…

You can be pretty sure that the Performance version will be AWD, in my opinion.

Without a doubt there will be an AWD performance version, the question is will there even be a RWD performance version?

You would need a hypersuperduper RWD motor, so: no.

You’d be right, if you weren’t wrong…Tesla has had “hypersuperduper RWD motor” equipped vehicles before, so: Maybe…

But that was before Tesla started making dual motor AWD cars… and discovered they were more energy efficient in addition to making higher performance easier.

I suppose it’s not completely impossible that we’ll see Performance trim in a single-motor M3, but that seems like Tesla would be going backward, and I don’t see any rational reason for Tesla to do that. In addition, that would be needlessly producing more versions of the car than are necessary… so why would Tesla even be tempted to do it?

I predict they won’t.

Yeah, we know they are making an AWD version, that high performance is easier and more efficient with AWD, and that Tesla wants to sell as many high-priced options on every car that they can.

Plus the big-battery rear-drive car does 0-60 in 5.1 seconds, which is crazy fast already.

So I’ll be shocked if they don’t make the Performance version AWD only.

Perhaps the number one reason would be to get people to spend more over the $35K base…Question still remains, someone puts in a reservation today, you can still get a RWD $35K M3 when their number is called?

Alternatively they could add additional performance specs to the non-P AWD verion…

If you want the 35k model you will have to wait till April 2018 at the earliest if you are near the top of the wait list. If you want the car asap the price is 49k. Big battery and premium package.

“…will there even be a RWD performance version?”

I doubt it. Probably dual motor only for the Performance trim.

My guess is $69K minimum for the performance model. The current P100D is a $40k premium over a 100D. So if the current larger battery Model 3 is $44k, add $5k for dual motor, and another $20k for performance, you’re at $69k.

But 0-60 in around 3 to 3.5 secs for $69k is phenomenal.

I think $65-70k for performance model 3.

Tesla clearly shows no lower price on Model 3 options, at the contrary, so the calculation is now much more likely to be 44000+5000+40000=890000 $ for a Model 3 P75D. And that is without any other options excluding vat.

Perhaps one zero to much there, so it will be only 89000 $.

Wait a minute, battery prices should decrease going into the future so all Teslas might decrease in price unless wall street banksters pressure teslas board to squeeze out more profits.

“More” profits? Lol.

Shareholders have donated billions. At some point they deserve some return.

“Donated Billions” is a tad bit generous, in the terminology department, on your part. Tesla is NOT a 501(c)(3), last time that I checked. And,

YES Tesla shareholders in the past, have been patiently altruistic regarding ROI, among other challenges in calculating profitability, using known standardized valuation metrics.

Tesla stock got its IPO at $17; those who invested in Tesla stock within 2-1/2 years after IPO bought in at $37 or less. Current price is $335. So most early investors have seen their stock increase in value by 1000% or more.

They could sell 10% of their stock and get their money back… or sell 20% of it and double their money… while still having a valuable nest egg in the remainder.

This is very, very far from what I’d call “altruistic” on the part of Tesla stock investors, and I don’t see that Tesla choosing to re-invest its profits in company growth, rather than paying dividends, is keeping people from buying Tesla stock… in droves.

* * * * *

Disclaimer: Please note my remarks are not to be taken as advice to buy or sell any stock, including Tesla’s. Investment advice is best gotten from a professional financial adviser coming up with a plan to fit your personal needs, not some random two-headed Llama (who isn’t even a stock investor) posting free “advice” to the internet! 😉

The moment one calls the big banks and hedge funds of the stock market altruists i know that they know nothing about how this market works. The stock market in its essence it’s a “find a bigger fool later” type of mentality so no one is being altruistic here.

Recently those “charitable donors” were getting as much as 25% interest lending out their shares to shorters.

If they were unhappy, they would sell their shares.

Actually it is 59 for supped up RWD. So expect performance version to be 60-70k

44k – Big battery
+5k – Dual motor
+5k – 54k “P” option

That’s stripped (black, ugliwheel, steel roof, no autopilot, etc.). Ludicrous, if offered, will be more.

Won’t be able to get it with $5k premium interior. Also $5k more for Autopilot (which most will purchase). Probably another wheel option with it for $3k-$5k.

My guess is $80k for the fully loaded.

No way the P option comes for only $5k separate from numerous other options. On the Model S the P option costs $42,500. I expect a $30,000 bump for the Model 3 P, maybe more.

Tesla will blow out the doors the competition in offering a performance model at 50k, leaving all wanna bees back at the station.

This will drive more production hell, but better than than the butt ugly competition

No way. It’s already basically $50k with the big battery and AWD. AWD will improve performance a nice bit by itself, and it will outperform it’s competition at that price I bet, but the Performance package will be tens of thousands extra and offer super-car level performance, though not quite as fast as the Model S Performance.

But you’ll be at the station for a whole hour to get 300mi. I would have left the station 55mins before you.

So who is blowing whom away?

Most of these guesses on price are way too low, in my opinion.

I expect the performance version will require the bigger batter, AWD, and then a significant kicker for the performance package which will include larger rims and tires, beefed up circuitry and higher output motors.

I expect ~$75,000 minimum for a Performance Model 3, and with options I expect ~$85,000 which is what BMW charges for their competing product the M3.

Regardless of price, a 3,800lb 75-80KWh car opens doors to some impressive speed/acceleration numbers. Also, better endurance.

Model 3 performance version can’t just beat the BMW M3 it needs to destroy it. So 0-60 of 3.5 would be a little bit of a disappointment since the BMW already achieves 3.9. I’m thinking it will hit 2.9. Still slower than the Model S at 2.5 but enough to embarrass BMW M3 drivers. Accelerate sustainable transport!

Yep, I agree.

and I “agree” also at least as a ….hope. If the “Ludicrous” version Model 3, verbally promised by Elon about a year ago, is not at least as quick as an original P85D with Ludicrous, 2.8ish seconds to 60 mph, then I will likely cancel my deposit and look elsewhere, even possibly a Lucid Air (which I DO further have a deposit on right now). OTOH, the Tesla Supercharger system is a HUGE element in which car I get next as I am a 1-car household, so my single car needs to be able to do….everything….from the local drag strip to road trips to anywhere in the U.S.

M3’s aren’t about 0-60.

If you want to drag race, get a Dodge Demon.

Teslas slow down on track to protect their drivetrains (including batteries). There’s no reason to think the Model 3 will be immune to this.

The Model 3, no matter what its 0-60 will certainly not even be able to match an M3 in performance on a track, let alone obliterate it.

How many M3 owners EVER get to run their car on a track?

In the vastly more common scenarios of carving up a mountain road, or maybe participating in a local autocross event if you are into competition the Model 3 will be fully capable.

BMW starting price on the M3 is $64k and tops out around $90k with all the boxes ticked. I expect the Model 3 prices to be similar.

The model Motor Trend tested on day one was $59,500. $60K for a P version seems rather low. It’ll be big battery, AWD. Given all this I can’t imagine it’ll be less than $70K.

Honestly, I don’t think a P version makes sense with current pricing. It’ll overlap too much with the Model S. Enough to cannibalize sales.

If I were Musk, I’d delay the P version until you can put somewhat of a price drop on the 3 so you can reduce the overlap some.

They already have a ton of orders anyway. It’s not like you can’t afford to wait.

Who cares if they overlap in price? They still serve different niches. Do you think that BMW worries about the M3 overlapping in price with the 6 series?

I’m coming around to this way of thinking too. Especially after reading that deliriously effusive love letter of a driving review from Motor Trend. The M3 is going to be bought by people who want a hot performance sports car, never mind that it will carry 5 people. The Model S has great acceleration, but not great handling or responsiveness. The M3 has all three, and a Performance trim level will have even better acceleration.

Is the M3 gonna cut into sales from BMW and Audi and other “premium” brands? Count on it!

Since a primary competitor to a high end Tesla Model 3 is the BMW M3 I’d not use ‘M3’ to refer to the Model 3 … potential for confusion is high.

While I agree, at the same time I think we need to observe that many people posting here are already using “M3” to mean “Model 3”, and I doubt they’re going to stop. I suggest a better way to differentiate the two is to always say “BMW M3” when you mean that model.

It might help, though, if we start saying “TM3” to mean “Tesla Model 3”? Or will that just create more confusion?

I completely agree the BMW 3 series has the most to lose. In areas that matter to the typical BMW 3 series the Model 3 seems like it will beat it in every way:
1) Brand image… Tesla has cache right now and seems to have stolen BMW’s mojo in this area. This really has to be chafing BMW’s hide.
2) Performance (some BMW drivers care mainly about this). I have little doubt the most potent version of the model 3 will outrun the BMW M3 to 60. And that is the metric people like to brag about. Most won’t care that a BMW M3 would beat a model 3 around a race track for an hour.
3) Cool tech
Audi and Mercedes at least (most likely unless Tesla has really upped their game with the model 3) have nice interiors as a strength. Lexus also has really nice interiors and bullet proof reliability as a strength. But, I can’t think of any advantage BMW has over Tesla right now in sedans at least. If BMW is smart they will aggressively shore up their X3/X5 market share.

“Tesla has cache right now…”

Please. It’s cachet, not “cache”.

The difference is people who bought a 6 series bought it knowing the M3 existed. And other ICE alternatives. There are a lot of potential customers for Tesla’s P-series cars that feel they have no other choice because until the P-series Model 3 comes into existence they really do have no other EV choice.

If the P Model 3 comes out and is a real performance alternative to a P model S it will cut Model S sales.

That’s life in the big leagues. As you offer more cars then some of your customers will gravitate to lower cost options.

If you have any illusions that the Model 3 P310DL will be anything other than a performance monster then I’d advise you to get ready for them to be shattered. It will not offer quite the straight-line performance of the Model S P100DL, to maintain some incentive for people to buy the more expensive one. But it will definitely be fast as hell and will likely be preferred by many performance oriented people who prefer the smaller, lighter package with more nimble handling.

But don’t cry for Tesla. A $85,000 Model 3 P310DL will have plenty of profit margin built in and will help expand the sales of the brand significantly over those reached by the Model S P100DL.

It will need bright red racing seats, huge ass spoiler, and R or RT designation. 🙂

Perhaps someone should write an article entitled “For Those with Far Too Much Money and Far Too Little Taste: How to Turn Your Model 3 into a Rice Burner”. 😉

Don’t know how anyone can think the Performance version with be less than 75K.
P version will likely have the premium package $5000 built in, AWD $4000?, plus at least $25000 P premium. That’s already $79200 NOT including autopilot!

That said, that’s still a bargain for a sub-3sec beast!

plus AP and other options, model 3 Performance can easily surpass $90000.

Model 3 competing against the benchmark midsize sport sedan, BMW 3 series. BMW 3 series MSRP $34-$70,000 including the M3.

And BMW M3 goes way above $70k with options. The version Motor Trend tested in 2016 cost $86,000 if I recall correctly.

Meh, just get the 3 out already in huge numbers.

I miss in the options the tow hook, any word about that?

I will be very interested to see how the city vs highway range works out for the Model 3. Let’s assume it has 50 kWh in the standard pack. The upgrade is about 50% bigger, or about 75 kWh, like the smallest Model S. I assume the base Model 3 will have less city range than the Bolt, but more highway range.

Tesla will have to be careful to not cannibalize sales of the model S if they launch a performance model 3. Expect it to be quite pricey.