Standard Battery Tesla Model 3 Delivery Estimate: Just 4-6 Months

Red Tesla Model 3 driving

OCT 19 2018 BY MARK KANE 206

Tesla Model 3 Standard now expected in February-April of 2019.

Tesla recently announced that is expanding its Model 3 family with a surprising new battery size versionMid Range – and removed the rear-wheel drive Long Range version, the question now is when will we finally see the Standard Range version?

The official answer is 4-6 months, which could be February-April 2019, if there are no delays.

Tesla spokesperson stated:

“As Model 3 production and sales continue to grow rapidly, we’ve achieved a steady volume in manufacturing capacity, allowing us to diversify our product offering to even more customers. Our new Mid-Range Battery is being introduced this week in the U.S. and Canada to better meet the varying range needs of the many customers eager to own Model 3, and our delivery estimate for customers who have ordered the Standard Battery is 4-6 months.”

The Standard battery Model 3 should be rated for 220 miles (354 km) or more, while the Mid and Long Range (RWD) are estimated for 260 miles (418 km) and 310 miles (499 km).

The price of the Model 3 Standard should start from $35,000 before any incentives. The Mid Range starts at $45,000, while the Long Range (RWD) was at $49,000 (with some obligatory equipment packages).

But wait, there’s more.

Per Elon Musk:

“We came up with a new design that achieves the same outcome, that’s actually lighter, better, cheaper and we will be introducing that around the end of this year – probably reach volume production on that in Q1 or something. That will make the car lighter, better, and cheaper and achieve a higher range.”

Categories: Tesla

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

206 Comments on "Standard Battery Tesla Model 3 Delivery Estimate: Just 4-6 Months"

newest oldest most voted

I’m still confused.
I am positive, based on all the news I’ve read over the last decade, that selling this car in any volume is impossible.

Don’t get too excited. They probably will ship the M3 with standard battery… with required PUP. But, that’s not what the holdouts want. They want an M3 for $35k. I still maintain we’ll only see a token number shipped at that price point.

That’s always possible.

Would a ‘token number’ be 500k by 2024?

There isn’t much demand, in most car models, for “stripper” units with absolutely no options whatsoever. We can confidently predict that the serial Tesla bashers will say “Aha! We told you so!”, when it turns out that only a small percentage of Model 3 buyers order the base $35,000 version. They’ll say “See! It’s only a token number!”

Serial Tesla bashers are soooooooo predictable that way. 🙄

I suspect a $35K model 3 will absolutely outclass any other car at that price though. It is likely still going to have great acceleration, traction control, lowest probability of injury safety ratings, and decent enough range for most uses. When it comes down to a choice of a SR Model 3 over other electric vehicle offerings in the same price range I don’t see anything even close on the horizon. I think it will sell quite well. So long as it is available, they will lose their short shorts. Up-sales are even better for the bottom line! Haters will hate and shorters will short though. Some of them might come around, once they realize they’ve been duped by those who they thought were there own kind, but were just manipulating things for their own gain and often with major conflicts of interest. They’ll likely cannibalize each other as their short positions tank.

Why you mention shorters. Who tf cares about them😒

Elon. To the point of inflicting great damage on himself, Tesla, and it’s investors.

But you’re quite right. Betting against a stock no more makes it fall than betting it will go up makes it go up. Elon and everyone else should ignore the bets and get to work.

People betting on TSLA one way or the other is precisely what makes the stock rise and fall.

An fanboys will fan, trying to manipulate for their own gain.

Haters gonna hate, fanbois gonna wait, and the stock ain’t so great.

It would however be much easier to know that if anyone had actually seen the non-premium interior. Then we would know what a “stripper” car would look like.

And this is a little different than most other cars. Here, when you try to buy it, each option is essentially immediately 5K (either long range or premium interior). It is not like there is a way to add some interior or performance niceties at a lower price point here.

Not every option. Paint upgrade is a single option. And can’t you choose the larger wheel size as a stand-alone option?

Anyway, it’s reasonable to expect that over time, the number of options will increase; that some options will be broken out into stand-alone options instead of being part of a package. I certainly do understand that Tesla wants to keep the number of individual options limited in order to streamline and speed production, keeping costs down and production levels up. But more options will yield higher demand, and eventually that’s going to be important even for the Model 3.

You should try to remove the blinkers and read what you wrote, imagining you’re one of the 6700 million people not residing in the US.

Yes, it will matter “eventually”, as you say. But with Model 3 Tesla is very much in the “initial sales” phase, having just started to roll out deliveries in a small region called Trumpistan. Across the pond is 480 million Europeans eagerly awaiting their first glimpse of the baby Tesla, and further east multiple times that again.

Tesla has said European sales would start this year. But they’ve said a lot of things. As a general rule, I’ve found that if what they say concerns the past it is sometimes accurate, but anything concerning the future is 95% likely to prove false.

$35K + $1K delivery fee + most customers will want to choose a color other than black… possibly white $2K (min. $1.5k, max. 2.5k) = $38k will probably be reasonable lowest point. Also, we had some inflation over the years, so mythical $35k version will probably stay a myth or a stripper token vehicle as mentioned by Pushm-Pullyu.

I find the constant debates about this mythical $35k boring and uninspired. It is just a tool to bash Tesla. The real key question is whether Tesla can sell 400k units worldwide with ASP ~$40k-$44k ($50k-$53k in EU with VAT, see China). Or if they can deliver FSD, since they bet a lot of money on it.

I will be getting mine Black and treating the paint instead.

$1500 for paint is completely ridiculous.

That’s what I did.


It looks sinister in black.

It will be my first black car ever, but I’m looking forward to it.

“…a stripper token vehicle as mentioned by Pushm-Pullyu [sic].”

Please don’t put words in my mouths. It’s only Tesla bashers who claim Tesla will make only a token few base $35k Model 3’s. What I said was probably only a few percent of orders will be that. A few percent of something like 200,000 – 400,000 per year is a heck of a lot more than a “token few”!

@Pushi: I have no doubt that demand for a $35k M3 will be high. It’s supply that will be extremely limited (or non-existent).

I have no way to prove it to you on here, but I drive a Model 3 everyday. Been a great car so far. Glad I pulled the trigger before the Federal credit steps down, and before my state credit runs out of funds. Given the relatively small post-credit price delta between the stripped base car, and the PUP LR RWD car, people were/are foolish to holdout for a $35k version.

I they not. People have budgets. I don’t think $55k are in a lot of mainstream America’s budgets for a sedan

People with budgets shouldn’t be buying $35k or $50k cars on credit. They should be buying a used Honda Civic or Accord for $15-20k. Better yet, used Volts are an amazing deal.

Having a budget is a separate issue than having a low income. There are plenty of people who can afford a 35k or 50k car, but also choose to have a budget.

Absolutely spot on ‼️

My point was that someone who couldn’t afford to buy the LR car at $49k and wait for the tax credits (for me federal+state was -$10.5k), probably also shouldn’t be buying it at $35k. With the MR car the pricing with credits is even more compelling.

I can’t imagine why anyone would be waiting for a $35k stripped car when you can buy a much better version for a small premium today. The only reason I can think of is that they would be stretching themselves to buy even a $35k car. And, I think stretching to buy a car is foolish.

I guess you mean poor people. Generally they are the least likely to have a budget, which in many cases is a big part of the reason they are poor!

Yes , homeless people or people on food stamps shouldn’t be buying Teslas, there fixed that for you.

Agree. But $40k might still be a fit for a very large number of people. It’s a bell curve, and the number of potential buyers increase much more moving from $45k to $40k than when moving from $65k to $60k. With some incentives still applying and the much lower running costs, and high desirability, a $40k Model 3 should have very good chances being considered and preferred by people looking for a $35k ICE. At least if people have access to cheap financing, and I think buyers in this bracket generally do.

“I have no doubt that demand for a $35k M3 will be high. It’s supply that will be extremely limited (or non-existent).”

Well, obviously at present supply ins non-existent. 😉

No point in repeating what I’ve said on the subject. We’ll have to wait several months, at least, to see which of us is right. I do expect that whenever the $35k version finally goes into production, it will be produced in very limited quantities at first, because of the need for more quality control in early production of a new version.

If you’re right, then the percentage of $35k units produced will increase substantially over time. If I’m right, it won’t.

You do make me laugh! 🙂

> No point in repeating what I’ve said on the subject. [Proceeds to repeat…]

No but they want to build thier car from that price point. I wouldn’t mind a stripper option since my first new car was a stripper Spark

Entirely depends on the brand. Some brands give you little equipment as standard and charge a lot for options, but some have very well equipped base models that sell well. The most basic Hyundai Kona you can get in Norway has their equivalent of autopilot, auto wipers, auto headlights, heated steering wheel, rear cross-traffic radar, blindspot detection, adaptive cruise, AEB, CarPlay/AA, HUD, wireless phone charger – I believe M3 SR will have none of this except auto wipers. It does cost $40k, but also has more range. If Tesla makes the SR available and either deliver many or have a reasonable delivery time, nobody can credibly claim it’s not real, since if the delivery time is short but few cars are delivered we will know demand is low, whereas if many are delivered it shows demand is solid, and Tesla caters to it. The problem however is what Tesla says and leads people to expect and then do. If they hadn’t created the impression there would be a $35k Tesla available in 2017 the would be no reason to feel they don’t deserve so much celebration for MAYBE coming through in 2019. As for us Europeans, it feels very much… Read more »

well the Kona EV is not available in most N.American markets, so Hyundai has utterly failed us in the U.S. and Canada

@Gazza: 2024 is far off and batteries are getting cheaper, so I won’t guess that far out. I’ll say that in the next two years less than 1000 $35k Model 3s will be sold.

How could You know it’s impossible? Musk talks about new battery design which allows to make it cheaper, so what are the arguments for being impossible?

Wasn’t it 4-6 months 4-6 months ago?

Does this mean that SR will ride on a potentially different chassis and body which would mean that it may have different driving dynamic and safety performance.

I think Elon was talking about the battery mainly.

Last week it was 3-5 months. It’s delayed 1 month. Basically means NO ONE will get $7500 Federal Tax Credit with the Standard Battery. I think this configuration with $7500 credit is the best deal your going to get. Guarantee you about this time next year, prices will be higher for all configs.

Basic car – 35000
Any color – 1500
Premium interior – 5000
Tax rebate – (-3750)
Total – 37750

Add in delivery and documentation, the basic car will definitely be around $40000 even for SR

So people waiting for SR and having tax liabilities of greater than 7500 are better off ordering the LEMR today.

What is the LE? I get MR is Mid-Range… is LE Low-End?

I think that’s some sort of acronym he made up himself. I haven’t seen it anywhere else. At any rate, he failed to communicate.

Ppl arguing about 5k difference for a car that they will drive for 5 to 10 yrs is just sad. You pay 500 to 1k more per year. Gas money alone is more than that.

Arguing about $5k is sad? Please consult your financial planner.

You must be a one-percenter, or even perhaps among the one percent of the one-percenters, if you think people who find $5000 to be a significant amount are “just sad”!

And what does the price of gasoline have to do with it? The difference between a $35k Model 3 and a (hypothetical) $40k Model 3 has absolutely nothing to do with the price of gasoline.

Spending an extra 10k for 40 additional miles on a car that may or may not arrive in time to save you $3500 on incentives seems thin to me.

And what penalty will you pay when your “guarantee” fails? Because it certainly will. I don’t need a crystal ball to make that prediction; it’s a certainty.

I think there is at least a 50/50 chance Congress will remove the 200,000 unit limitation.

they may remove the 200k limit and drop it to $5k or less for 2019 and then phase it out quickly thereafter….

Or they may scrap it entirely in 2019 — my real bet!

And 50/50 Trump will veto. Thats 75/25 against.

Only 50/50? The car lobby is rubbish!

We all knew that 8 months ago. I think this mid range may mean they never produce the “standard pack”, I can see them making it less expensive and charging less for it around june as sales slow and credit drops to $1875 for the second half of 2019. They could definitely make the “premium package” nicer by then, and have a tweener between that and standard (who knows if they will ever make that available) with no glass roof, and less expensive seats and trim.

Nah, it was 3-6 months, 4-6months ago. 😉

Unfortunately I think that’s about right. 🙂

You’re mixing up units. Tesla time is different from real time. I suspect it’s more like 8 to 12 months real time.

Like dog years?

Nah, dog years are a 5-to-1 ratio to human years. With Elon Time, it’s only 2 or 3 to 1. 😉

If you’re not in North America, the ratio of EM3T (Elon Model 3 Time) to the atomic clock is infinity.

No it means it will have a lighter battery pack, that is lighter than the current one with proportionally fewer cells installed.

Last thing I heard from Elon was 3-6 months after reaching steady-state production of 5k/week. Apparently that now has happened.

It has always been 4-6 months. The question is only if it will remain so.

It was 3-5 months a few days ago.

You would think that lighter, cheaper and better would have garnered far more attention. It’s the holy grail of EV’s and should have boosted the share price!

From a stock’s perspective, all that matters is cheaper cars at the same supply constrained volume. The math is pretty straightforward on what that does to expected revenues.

Ah, so the problem is that they expect the company to stop growing even though it’s clear they are going to keep growing.


Nah, looks to me like it is we are seeing increased production, how do we increase our US demand to match? Make a cheaper Model. Their revenue goes up. Remember, almost all the cars they were selling were AWD models.

Talking to my short friend, I think they see it as a demand problem for Tesla even though it isn’t one, it is to increase volume to match their increased production. Isn’t that the entire point with the cheaper cars? As production builds out they need to offer cheaper cars to fill that, not more expensive.

I agree. It’s probably a sensible move, too, but bad news for Europe. Tesla’s need to focus on profitability over growth in the medium term very likely means we get a higher price, and a European factory won’t come as soon as it otherwise would have. The annoying thing is that they don’t communicate their actual plans. But I guess that would have its own set of problems — I suspect the plans change pretty often! And the media, including this site, would helpfully simplify their headlines, so a mere roadmap placing,, say, the RHD version in Q1 2020 would become “RHD Model 3 coming in early 2020”. It would be perceived as a promise rather than a plan, and when the plan changes people would get angry. In the past they said more, but it wasn’t their real plans, they just said whatever would generate maximum buzz while not being obviously untrue to the average person. I recommend re-watching the part of the M3 launch where the timeline is discussed, and using internet archive to look at the coming $56k Model S. If you go back a little further, to when the “top secret master plan” was presented, there’s… Read more »

Right – I mean Tesla really needs to increase volume. If only they could make more cars that a year ago, they could do well.

It is straightforward. It’s shocking how many people are trading without doing any math. So many people don’t seem able to ballpark the numbers on their own, and instead wait for analysts to say something, or for the official numbers to come out from Tesla.

Please do share your magic formula for determining if a stock will rise or fall! You must be unimaginably rich, having figured out how to reduce the game to some basic math.

What could possibly be lighter, cheaper and better other than an improved battery and with all that, why not wait for the SR version?

Because at some point, people want what they want — or sometimes actually need — now, and not in a year or two. If everybody waited for the next improvement in computers, because something better will come along next year, then nobody would ever buy one. Yet we know that lots of people buy computers every day.

Ditto for cars, Teslae or otherwise.

We’re way past post-computer, and I think we’ve entered post-smartphone.

There are other ways. When Nissan introduced “125 improvements” to the LEAF in 2013, skinnier seats was one of the “improvements”. They were lighter, cheaper, and “better” (because lighter and cheaper). The only part they forgot to mention was that better meant better for Nissan.

Assuming you by the base mid-range Model 3 with PUP and get it delivered before Dec 31 this year the estimated cost will be:
$45,000 + $1,200 (destination) – $7,500 Fed Tax Credit = $38,700

If you wait 4-7 months, base standard battery Model 3, with likely PUP and delivered after Jan 1, 2019 and before Jun 30, 2019, estimated cost will be:
$40,000 + $1,200 (destination) – $3,750 Fed Tax Credit = $37,450

If you wait for the base standard battery Model 3, without PUP and if it’s delivered after Jun 30, 2019 (as I don’t think Tesla will make this available till after that date) estimated cost will be:
$35,000 + $1,200 (destination) – $1,875 Fed Tax Credit = $34,325

So if you order now and get delivery before Dec 31 this year, the medium battery upgrade and PUP will only cost you $4,375 from the lowest price configuration with $1,875 tax credit. I think the $45,000 medium rage is a great value. These prices don’t include state tax, registration or EV incentives.

I don’t think Tesla will deliver any base SR version without PUP before June 2019.

Seems reasonable to think Tesla will offer the SR version months before making PUP non-mandatory. You shouldn’t have gotten any downvotes for that comment.

RIght. Did you misread the analysis. He guesstimated “after June”.
I think betting money would say no base SR without PUP until after June – who has said it would come before?

SR – March? SR (no pup) – July

This could be derailed by opening up Europe and China. They could probably absorb all the LRs for the first 1/2 of 2019.

Great analysis, I think you are right on!

In my province I get $5k rebate either way and with the exchange rate the long range is over $70k.
That is an awful financial decision.

I’m not a grammar Nazi, but I do like when spelling errors turn funny. “$45,000 medium rage” gave me a good laugh! But I think health experts agree “short rage” is preferable. Not sure about “standard rage” though.

“We came up with a new design that achieves the same outcome, that’s actually lighter, better, cheaper…”
… but he’s still going to charge you $35k instead of passing those cost savings onto the customer. I’m sure everyone is ok with that though.

The cost savings needs to be there for them to sell the $35k model, so yes it is being passed to the customer. No cost savings realized and found, no $35k model.

Lawrence, as a Tesla shareholder, I would be thrilled at the news that they found a way to make the battery lighter, better, and cheaper. As a purchaser of the the Model 3, I’m thrilled that they made the batter lighter and better, but I’d ask “if they managed to make it cheaper, why are they not passing that savings on to me?” Tesla adjusts their prices all the time, sometimes up, sometimes down. If they announce that they found a way to make the battery cheaper (and note that it was not through economies of scale), I’d like some of that savings.

because they will be at a competitive disadvantage compared to most other carmakers due to the $7500 tax credit phasing out. They will need all those savings going forward.

Sparc, what kind of messed up logic is that? Tesla pockets exactly the same amount of money whether there is a credit or not. When there is a credit, it’s a credit to the buyer and the government pays Tesla that $7500. When there is no credit, the customer pays the $7500.

Every carmaker plays by the same rules when it comes to the EV credits. No competitive disadvantage.

That is quite possibly the least-informed comment on the finances of the EV industry that I’ve ever seen. Congratulations! 🙄

CONgrats are in ODOR!

Pushmi, it would help if you could tell us how elimination of EV credits to consumers affects the actual dollar amount Tesla receives for each car sale.

It should not be necessary to point out that EV makers can, and do, get away with charging higher prices when they are offset by a tax credit. One only needs to point to the sudden dropoff in sales when such tax credit ends, to show the very real difference in demand.

It also should not be necessary to point out that those auto makers — everybody except Tesla and GM — who have not sold large numbers of EVs are at an advantage going forward; they’re getting the “second mover” advantage by waiting to see what the pioneers in the field do. They’re benefiting from mistakes made by GM and Tesla, as well as benefiting from today’s lower battery prices.

“Second mover” auto makers moving into the EV field have a decided advantage here, since they can start taking advantage of tax credits now, when they’re running out for GM and Tesla.

It’s worse than that. The idiotic phase-out structure (time limit, not units) means that what is a buyer incentive becomes a manufacturer incentive to wait. If a maker starts selling EVs only in 2020 (ahem, Toyota) they’ll benefit from a much bigger EV market, enabling them to sell far more EVs in the phase-out period, and thus benefiting from a much greater total tax cut applied to their sales.

With the market nearly doubling every year, a manufacturer postponing for 4 years can expect the credit to apply to ten times as many vehicles in the phase-out period.

This wasn’t really the case when starting in 2010, because the market was so small they are only now reaching the end of the fixed 200,000 cars quota. But it is the case now for a big manufacturer such as Toyota. We can only hope the political risk bites them!

Bump down the hostility please

They need to stay in business

I’m guessing R&D costs aren’t free. I’m just spitballing here.

Tesla isn’t going to pass 100% of the savings along to the customer for exactly the same reason Tesla doesn’t pay dividends to stockholders. Because Tesla reinvests every bit of profit it possibly can in continuing to grow the company, while the EV market is still wide open for expansion.

In other words, Elon is showing his dedication to long-term planning at Tesla. Quite clearly you’re focused on the sort of short-term thinking that Wall Street started showing in the “greed is good” era of the 1980s; the short-sighted thinking that has been such a disaster for so many formerly sound American companies.

Thank goodness you’re not in charge at Tesla!

“if they managed to make it cheaper, why are they not passing that savings on to me?”
Because you were still willing to buy at the original price (or if not you, several thousands standing in line right behind you waving check books) and they’d rather retain the money to invest, than give it to you to squander.

It will get cheaper. Just not next year. If you have a way for Tesla to run as non profit, yet keep growing their volume, please do share.

I call BS. If you are a Tesla shareholder, why are you so eager for them to sell what they told you is a money-losing product that would bankrupt them?

It’s passed on to you. If Tesla keeps the saving you own it via your shares. If they don’t, you pay less as a customer. Only if they give it to charity will you lose out.

It is still massively early days in this transition to sustainable transport, if Tesla is able to eke out a bit more margin on their low end, more power to them. The sooner they can build more factories, pay off looming debt or whatever. Profit is needed to capitalize ongoing expansion.

No, it’s not still early days…the Leaf has been out for 8 years; the fossil fuel industry PR campaign works well on you doesn’t it?

EVs will sell well when they can be offered at affordable prices, i.e., ICEV prices, and that far less that $35,000; this will happen when batteries are also affordable.

on what planet is the Model 3 not selling well? And that’s at $60k. The $35k version once it comes out will sell far faster than Tesla’s production capacity for a long time.

For those of us watching closely, sure things have been happening for a while, but we’re still very much in the early adopter stage. Most people are still not even thinking about getting an electric car.

It very definitely is still early days. EVs are still less than 2% of the new car market, worldwide. When we get up to something like 25%, then perhaps it will be time to say it’s no longer early days… altho the vast majority of cars on the road will still be gasmobiles at that time, so arguably that would still be too soon.

And yet model 3 is already outselling cars less than half it’s price

I have a leaf and thank fully we still have a hybrid for the second car as the leaf has half the range I need for days I have to drive to site.
There are only a few used ones for sale and supply of any new electric car that is not Tesla is a year out for delivery here….
Yeah there are no EV’s that are mainstream since you can not just go buy one and drive it off the lot!
And again 100km real range is only good for a city commuter.

I don’t understand why they made the cheaper statement and then kept the price the same. Where I work, we have cost take out programs all the time. The goal is to make more money. The only time we have a cost take out and announce it, is because we want more market share and broadcast that we are sharing the cost take out.

Because the cost that is hurting them right now is the pack building and structure. They cannot build the smaller packs and have a chance at any margin if the pack structure for fewer batteries and fewer dollars spent is costing them too much to build. Now that they think they can build the pack and structure cheaper, faster and better, they believe they can build the SR pack and make their margin goal.

This won’t happen until (Elon time) Q1 2019, so that is why there is no change in pricing or specs of the LR model. They may or may not change those prices or specs as a result, since across all versions of Model 3 they will need a higher margins on the longer range versions to make their overall Model 3 margin goal.

Well, the Promised Base Model 3 was announced to have about 5.9 0-60 time, and 220 miles range … So… If they can give it 5.7 0-60 time, plus 235 Miles Range, and still sell it for the Same $35,000 price, that would still be good! If the $35,000 was able to be: “Including” the $1,200 Shipping / Delivery fee, that would be even better!

When they can get a Full Self Driving Tesla, with All Wheed Drive, and Premium upgrade, for at or Under $35,000, it will likely be the Future $25,000 Tesla Small Car!

“The only time we have a cost take out and announce it, is because we want more market share and broadcast that we are sharing the cost take out.”

If you haven’t yet noticed that Tesla is run very differently than most companies, then you must be new here. Stick around and keep an open mind! 🙂

To “Independent Observer”, You say you can’t understand Tesla is on an All Out Drive for profitability at present? Sounds like you just arrived at the EV Party! And, Actually, Tesla DID make it less expensive to buy, by $4,000.00! Since “Acquisition Costs” are a Bigger Driver, than Cost Per Mile, or Miles of Range per Purchase Dollar, what they did makes a lot of Sense, for the Present Market: providing a Lower Cost option, for those who are motivated mostly by Up Front Costs! Also, the choice is now split by a wider margin of purchase price, by making the long range battery with the Dual Motor, and the Single Motor only generally available with the new mid range pack! Most people accept the “Spend Less, Get Less” aspect of buying things, from Smart Phones to Cars, to Houses; as well as from Airline Tickets, to Airplane Purchases, or from an inside Cabin, to a Suite with a Private Balcony, on a Cruise Ship! This means, if purchase cost is your motivational pince point, instead of longer term value, you now have a new option! This one was not ever discussed in the past, but it still makes sense,… Read more »

You can always buy a Leaf or Bolt for that kind of money, but it won’t be a Tesla.

What automaker has ever passed on savings from manufacturing? The answer is none.

Leaf is keeping the price improving the battery. I3 is getting more battery keeping the price too.
Model 3 never really got any cheaper.

The Model 3 is going from $49k to $35k and will be cheaper than the Leaf…

Going from a higher trim with better performance to lower trims with less performance and fewer interior and exterior upgrades. Not the same.

Even though the SR 3 will be less quick off the line than a LR 3, the SR 3 will still be a lot quicker and sexier than any Leaf ever built. The SR 3 will still have the advantage over the Leaf and the Bolt, but it will be interesting to see what 2019 will bring. New Leaf’s 0-60 is a relatively pokey 8.0 seconds according to Motor Trend, while the Bolt is a spritely 6.3 seconds and the 220 mile standard range 3 is a respectable 5.6 seconds.

Cypress, if you want a car with half the range at half the price, the Leaf is a Good Choice, maybe better than the AWD Model 3!

Here is a New Choice, with about a 100 Miles More Range than the Current Leaf! For what? $15,000.00 more? Where can you buy a New EV with 100 Miles of Range, for that $15,000 difference?

And still do Road Trips Far Easier, in America, where it is selling, than any other Non Tesla EV? Even more range than the past Model S @ 60 kWh, with 208 Miles Rated Range! Or even the 70 kWh Model S, that was sold with 240 Miles Range!

So still a great New Option, fir those who can’t afford a Model S 100D, with 335 Miles Rated Range, or waiting years for companies outside of Tesla, to offer such range and flexibility, that competes with all the available Charging options for a Tesla!

The Model 3 has been in production for a year. Did the Leaf or I3 do any of what you said within that timeframe?

“Model 3 never really got any cheaper.”

What an odd statement! The Model 3 hasn’t been in production long enough for there to be any reasonable expectation of lowering the price.

You’d be better off looking at the Model S. Tesla’s response to lowered costs over time usually has not been to lower the price, but rather to add in more features and better functionality at the same price.

It’s a lot cheaper than S/X but has comparable range

The Chevy Volt was $44k when it came out. It is now closer to $34k. Or lots of car maintain their MSRP or close to it, year over year, which is actually passing on savings, because due to inflation, the car is cheaper each year if the dollar amount remains the same.

Tesla has done it multiple times with the Model S. They have come in 5 forms:

1) Actual price cuts
2) Adding new features/functionality to the base model at no additional cost (including retroactively making cars already sold faster at 0-60).
3) Making optional features part of the base price.
4) Increasing battery size at a discounted price delta.
5) Keeping same trim prices steady vs. inflation while ICE car makers have had to raise prices to make up for the falling value of the dollar due to inflation.

All of this can be found right here in the insidevs archives, except the last one. That requires you go to an inflation calculator on the web and do the work to see for yourself.

That would be Ford with its Model T one hundred years ago with ICEV mass production techniques maturing. BEV mass production is still in its infancy but once the cost go down seriously and gross margins get bigger and bigger I wouldn’t be surprised if Tesla did what Ford did back in the day.

Wrong!!!!!!!! As cars became mass produced (starting with the model T Ford) the costs to the manufacturer and prices charged the buyer dropped dramatically. This was how it became possible for an ordinary working person in the U.S. to afford a car. Previously cars, like carriages before them, had been the province of the rich. This remained so in Europe until after the second world war.

Not so wrong! Go custom build your own 260 Mile Range, to 310+ Mile Range, 5 Seat EV, and Fast Chaging Network, and get back to us with your actual costs!

Tesla IS reducing costs to get a practical EV, and faster than most, if not all, existing OEM’s!

Even Nissan, with its selected City by City “No Charge to Charge” arrangements, are not as usable as Tesla’s pay for Time or kWh Supercharger arrangements, for Model 3!

Certainly manufacturers can be expected to pass some of their savings along to the customer, altho in many cases that happens only when they get real competition.

But anyone who expects a manufacturer to pass along 100% of any cost savings to the customer, and not keep any portion of that as profit, does not have even the most basic grasp of how business finances work. One can likely find exceptions to that rule, decisions to lower the profit margin as a marketing strategy to increase sales volume, but those will be exceptions — and not the rule.

They have to stay in business to save the world

Gosh yes, how terribly disappointing that Tesla will keep part or most of any cost savings for itself, as profit… just like every other company that doesn’t go bankrupt. 🙄

Unlike you , we realize that continued presence of Tesla is absolutely critical for EV revolution. Things that it does for financial viability are totally Okay with us.

First people complain that Tesla loses money. Now that they are finally starting to make a profit by cutting production cost, people complain again and suggest Tesla should continue to lose money so they can buy a cheap EV.

You charge for a product what people are willing to pay for it. Ask Coca-Cola or Apple or Levi’s about production cost vs sales price.

^^^ this.

Well, the shareholders will be happy. The shorts, less so.
Tesla is perhaps the only company I’ve seen, maybe with the exception of Apple, where selling product at a price that customers will pay, rather than a lower price with less profit, is viewed as a good thing by some people.
As you seem to be a shareholder (its not totally clear from your post), I’m surprised you didn’t appreciate what you were buying into. Perhaps you should sell if you think this is a bad move for profits?

I’m skeptical of it actually being the case that it’s better. Auto makers along with everyone else do spin any changes they make as “improvements”. Nissan swapped the great seats in the 2012 Leaf for skinnier, less comfy seats, and said they were lighter, cheaper, better — but omitted to explain they were better for Nissan because they were cheaper. That having been said, as a buyer I’m interested in getting value for money, not interested in the seller not making a profit. So if it really is a better solution, why on Earth would I not be happy to pay the same and get something better?? Conversely, I don’t want to pay $15 for a bottle of beer, or $8000 for a watch, just because it is inefficiently made. The seller may offer terrible value even before profits. Or excellent value including a large profit margin. High profit margins indicate a problem with an uncompetitive market, but say nothing at all about the value proposition relative to others. Tesla, by the way, doesn’t exactly have a history of raking in huge profits and stuffing it away with no idea what to do with it. Perhaps the frequent comparisons to… Read more »

They changed from 3-6 to 4-6, guess the 3 month maybe 6 month definitively does not work anymore

Or, why make a 220 Mile Range Model 3 NOW, or spend so much effort on it, when a few adjustments can allow them to offer a 260 Mile Range Model 3, sooner, and take up some of the slack, with fewer complications, and simplified production flows?

Sounds like body build and structural changes to improve on some of the inefficiencies discovered by the Monroe team, many of which were already known to Tesla and resulted in some earlier engineering dismissals.

It is significant for the SR, because lighter weight means less battery and lower costs to achieve the same range. Improves the probability of the SR being profitable at $35k.

This was a big stretch of the imagination. When he was discussing “lighter, better, cheaper”, he was talking about the battery and only the battery.

The battery pack which includes the structure the pack is encased in.

The Model 3 battery pack’s case is lightweight plastic. Unlike previous Tesla models, it does not contribute to the strength and stiffness of the car body. So, no real opportunity for savings in the battery pack’s case.

You need to go back and look at what Elon said in context. He definitely was not talking about reducing costs in body build. He was talking about a cheaper way to make a battery pack, and that won’t have anything to do with structural steel and/or aluminum.

Isn’t the bottom of the pack still metal? From the descriptions it sounds like the pack provides shear strength for the body. Little or no bending strength, though.

I have no idea. A diagram of the TM3 body shows a sheet of high-strength steel all across the bottom of where the battery pack sets, so I’m not sure that the pack itself needs a metal bottom plate. OTOH such a plate would certainly make the pack easier to move around without collapsing, so from that perspective I would guess you’re right.

The battery pack weighs and costs almost the same as the rest of the car, so making it lighter and cheaper is a tremendous improvement.

Hmmm… The battery pack is only about 1/4 the average cost of making a Model S. It may be somewhat higher for the Model 3, but I seriously doubt it’s more than 1/3 of the cost, at most.

It also isn’t 50% of the weight. 25-30%

With Tesla continuing to meet their marks and even showing a profit, maybe,
we should start a deathwatch for legacy auto, a reflection of the deathwatch of Tesla, that has been kept for many years to no avail.

I would place Ford and Daimler at the top of that list followed closely by the VW group or elements thereof.
The problem for them is that things will only get worse, not better, in almost every category.
Trade War, Tariffs, EV penetration, a general economic downturn, riding it out is not a strategy that will prevail..

They will go all bankrupt, in the end there’s only Tesla.

What a boring world that would be.

Still, can’t blame Elon for them not “Listening Up”, at the unveiling of the Model 3! Or for ignoring the Semi Unveiling, showing that Tesla is moving both Down Markett, with the Model 3, and using the Model 3 to to help them move Up Market, via the Model 3 Motor driven Semi! And Way Up, to Supercar Teritory, with the New Roadster!

He has spoken about a Large Truck, derived in part, from the Semi, and his desire to build a Pickup that makes the F150 Pickuo sad it didn’t move to Electric!

However, some Obvious Targets the others are now started to concern themselves with is not “Will Tesla Make it to 10,000 Model 3’s per Week?” But rater How Soon will the make it to 10,000/Wk???

If a single Model 3 has the effect, just with new owners taking a few friends for some rides, suth that fewer people plan another ICE Purchse, or waiting to buy an EV, like the Model 3, or some other Tesla, the OEM’s are going to feel heat from their own customer base!

That would be very bad. We need at least as much variety in EV’s in the future as there are in ICE cars today.

Need? We need the variety we have today? I would argue that we absolutely do not. Battery manufacturing is a limiting factor and control of that will consolidate manufacturers of cars. We will have less variety in the future.
The younger generation has spoken and they don’t care as much about cars and will not push as many resources to owning a unique vehicle as older folks.
Think about Needs vs Wants here for a sec. We need to transition off fossil fuels. We need to get to work and school. We don’t need variety in cars.
Sure we need smaller cars and bigger cars. Everything else is a want.
(and I fully appreciate that we don’t actually need cars at all but just making the point that variety is way down the priority list)

Good point!

Actually BMW are the most at risk. Tesla is taking their share quite aggressively. Ford and Daimler have diversified offerings that Tesla is yet to target.

True, BMW is in bad shape too.
I don’t think legacy manufacturers will go away entirely, but be reorganized and get smaller,
like what is happening to Ford.
Discontinuing almost all their sedan lines, cutting workers, in this case white collar, by 12k jobs or so.
Yes they still have the F-150, but that is about it.

And the Mustang! 😱

Ford did not do well in today’s financial news…..

The big ICE makers all have the same problem. In order to build a car that competes with the Model 3, they have to build a really nice EV. If they do that, their EV’s will overshadow their ICE cars in the same price range.

At 2% of the market worldwide EV’s aren’t not the top concern of automakers. They need to be ready for the EV takeover, but it’s not happening tomorrow or next year or the year after that. It will take time regardless of what we think on this site.

There are 2 ways That EV’s can “Take Over”: First, is with Sales Share, as is already happening wth Tesla’s offerings; and second, is Mind Share: that is where people stop replacing their ICE Vehicles with new ICE Vehicles, while they wait for the EV they want, to come! Both, have the same effect: ICE Sales Drop! And % of EV Sales Rise! It matters little what “The Global % of EV Sales Are”, since, market, by Market changes, is more painful! See Norway, now moving New Car Sales past the 50% point for EV’s! As EV % of sales grows, the Rate at which it Grows, Also Increases, causing even more downward sales pressure on ICE Vehicles! As Model 3 sales move up, now in 4th position in USA, to 3rd, 2nd, and finally to 1st, it may have little effect on Toyota Global Sales numbers, as a % of sales, but IT WILL HAVE PUT PRESSURE on Toyota! (And Honda! And GM! And MB! And BMW! And VW! Etc!) As Tesla Moves the Needle, other companies make Token Responses, bringing out an EV or Two, putting even More Pressure on ICE Sales! A Simple “Unveiling” of Model 3… Read more »

They will sell 10,000 units @ $35,000 and then phase out the RWD and make AWD as the standard with a price tag of $39,000.
Anyway average price of a vehicle sold is $34,000, so many will be willing to pay an extra $5,000 to get a luxury fast vehicle that will easily get that $5,000 with fuel savings.

“Anyway average price of a vehicle sold is $34,000, ”

….actually for Sept.2018 in the US it was closer to $36,000 though arguably some of that increase can be attributed to Tesla’s $60,000 ASP for the model 3.

Average doesn’t equal median.

The median price of a new car in the US is probably $30,000, maybe less. and this includes Pickup Trucks and SUVs.
The median for a Sedan is probably $25-28,000.

Even $35,000 for s sedan is too pricey for most people, not to mention the shipment cost, color charges, etc

Yes, there is a difference between median and average, but the underlying data for different car categories tends to narrow that statistical difference. When you compare it to cars in the same category, $45K is right on track:

Entry-level Luxury Car $42,502

$35K is actually well below the entry-level luxury car price.

“Average doesn’t equal median.”

Sometimes it does. Median is one type of average. Other types are the mean and the mode.

Ummm Nope! Mean=Average. Median is the middle value in an ordered set of values. Mode is that value that occurs most often in a set of values. Google is your friend….

And, what does Google have to say about rich folk that might typically buy cheaper cars, to conserve their cash, suddely paying double, for a Tesla?

It has lots to say about fools doing lots of foolish things, including taking out loans for things they don’t truly need.

I did Google the subject before responding. Perhaps next time, before you decide to “correct” me with misinformation, you’ll do the same.

That’s a very non-standard description. No one considers median or mode to be “averages.” Must have taken a while to dig up that site.

if $35,000 is too expensive, why are Folks trading in Honda’s for $49,000+ Model 3’s?

Maybe folks who buy “Cheaper Cars”, are simply more aware of Electric cars coming, than folks that buy ICE “Status Symbols?”

I think it’s over $30k, some say $32k some say over $35k, not looked for the details about what is included and what’s not.
In 2018 average price will probably increase.

I doubt that. Reports seem pretty conclusive that AWD is less efficient. That is not the long term trend and you are forcing an extra 11% in cost to be less efficient?
Just because the S is that way, doesn’t carry down to the 3.

That applies to ICE AWD where the one engine and extra differential gearing in series (front to back, then left to right differentials) and CV joints add mechanical losses. For BEV the extra motor adds to the regen capability and improves efficiency. The gearing on the back motor is optimized a bit for torque at the low end (on the only motor for RWD or FWD). The front motor can be geared higher and operate at lower RPM and therefore more efficiently at highway speed further improving efficiency.

Sounds to me like Tesla is now going to field a new battery chemistry at the end of the year. More energy density per kilogram means lighter weight. Probably no cobalt, less electrolyte, semi solid design of some sort.

I guess there could be changes in chemistry, but I think he was talking about the design of the pack which includes the modules and outer structure, not the design of the battery cells. The Grohman machines that are being installed will make assembling this new pack design better, faster and cheaper, thus they can bring the smaller pack to market and still hit their margin goals and $35k price point.

Yeah, Elon’s statement points more towards a better, cheaper way to put the pack together, not to an improvement in battery chemistry. If he was talking about cheaper cells, he would have said so. He certainly has in the past.

You make the same mistake as many and assume that they arrival of the SR battery option in 4-6 moths means arrival of the $35k option.

But I’m guessing that’s still with the mandatory premium upgrade package. They even took that off as a separate item on the order page, and is just included in the prices now.

All Model 3 come with $5000 premium package, so when standard version is released in 4-6 months, it will be a $40,000 version, not $35,000 version.

Only a three year wait for first day reservation holders to make an order.
I think I will stick with my plan to buy ether a Kona or Leaf 60Kwh for more miles and the same money.

Less money if the tax credit doesn’t change if you are in the US.
Life is not all about miles per $. Even from a practical standpoint, supercharging is an enormous value add.
Maybe CSS will catch up – maybe in won’t.
I got my Leaf in 2013 and there wasn’t a Chademo in my state so I didn’t pay for the upcharge. Over the next 2 years, 10 got built in my range. Over the next 3 – zero got built (hyperbole and includes CSS installations). I use the Chademo adapter in my Model S and the reliability is horrible. You need 99% available and reliable and what I see is 70%.
So I have zero faith in the continued build out of non-Tesla QC systems. Just keep that in mind with your decision. Your region may be totally different than mine.

“supercharging is an enormous value add.”

Meh. Only if you do a lot of long road trips. But most people maybe do trips over 200 miles 1/yr or maybe 2/yr.

For the time and money you save with home charging, you could either rent an ICE for a long trip, fly, or live with a little more inconvenience on the rare lmroad trip.

People put too much emphasis and emotion around the SC network.

The Tesla SC Network has set the bar considerably high, whatever else the emotional people want to take away from from the exiting and expanding CCS/CHAdeMO DC FC Network, isn’t really worth all the fuss.

In 2022-25 Tesla won’t have quite as much of SC Premium Charging Experience advantage, here in the states, as other EV competitors will slowly bring up the rear.

“People put too much emphasis and emotion around the SC network.”

Buying cars is often at least as much about emotion as about practical needs. Since Tesla’s Supercharger network helps so much in getting Tesla free publicity (i.e., advertising) and selling its cars, it has been spectacularly successful for Tesla’s business. This despite the fact that from a practical standpoint, the benefit is overrated for most buyers, just as you say.

At the very least, it’s a comfort to Tesla owners to know the Supercharger network is there if they ever need it. That has helped Tesla greatly in relieving range anxiety among its customers.

I agree, EVs are perfect as the 2nd car in the house, there’s huge potential sales there giving they still represent a tiny share of the global market.
Plus, super charging is nice, but Tesla exclusive (if it’s to be kept) will start to stay behind very fast – the “others” network will be bigger in 2 or 3 years (my guess).

In Europe it already has. CHAdeMO is effectively dead (even Honda switched to CCS in North America — it’s now just the LEAF and Outlander PHEV using CCS).
If the various EV vendors will cooperate (and there’s every reason for them to do this), not on building the networks, just coordinating them, it’s hard ot believe the SuperCharger network will remain larger in the medium (4-5 year) term. I don’t see one company, Tesla, controlling >50% of the market, esp. since there will also be medium-battery PHEVs.

Ha! “Patience, Grasshopper!”

I “Decided” (Read as “Reserved” a place in my Future) that I would be a “Pilot”, when I was 8 years old, living on a small, poor, farm, over 100 miles from the nearest Flying School! And yet, just 10 years later, I had saved 3x the Typical cost to learn to fly, and started my flight Training, officially, after already having flown with other pilot friends, over 5x!

Some people are so impatient!

I bought my first EV, as a 4th hand owner, as an older EV Conversion, built by Students, in 2006! I might be 13 Years waiting to get my Model 3, and that may be pushing it too! (Yes, I lined up on the early morning of March 31st, 2016, to put my Reservation Down, too, alnost 10 years after buying my Converted ICE to EV!)

Sounds familiar the ever evading launch date?

If you had the number one selling EV of all time in just one market at $50k with a distribution network that covered markets 3X your one home market, why would you put limited resources into a cheaper car?
Tesla should open up other markets when demand is satisfied for the LR/premium in the US. That is the right move for the company and the world environment. Might not make a couple of hundred thousand US buyers happy but that is not the priority and certainly shouldn’t be.

Yeah…how much demand for this 220 miles version will remain with the large gap between SR and LR now filled up and many less premium cars from Hyundai, Nissan and GM offering better range? This could be the new Model S/40. Maybe similar life expectancy.

Now is the time that model3 starts getting improved!! Hang on folks they are just getting started 🙂

If the new design battery pack is lighter and cheaper, that will kind of toss the pricing structure for the entire line up in the air. I predict very interesting times.

Battery pack (ex-cells) is a small portion of vehicle weight and a very small portion of cost.

Can they let go of the $5k premium package on the midrange trim?
Oh, who am I kidding. Won’t happen before 1/1/2019.
But kudos to the base-model customers holding out for so long, you’ve forced Tesla’s hand a bit to come part-way ($4k, to be precise) towards you 🙂

At this point I’d say, if your midrange delivery date is guaranteed pre-Dec.31, take it and run. If not, wait either base-trim comes out or the premium package drops, and you can still get the half-rebate with deliveries by June.

“Take it and run” may be good sage calculated near term advice. Certain States may choose to up the ante, on their individual EV rebates soon (Cali. seems to be a possibility), to potentially offset some of the Tesla half FED rebate disappearing, on lower priced EVs possibly under the $40-50k threshold. It’s all wait and see now, before 2019 arrives.

“Oh, who am I kidding. Won’t happen before 1/1/2019.”

Base won’t happen before June 2019, IMO.

I wasn’t talking about base, I was talking about removing the $5k premium option from the new midrange trim. That would drop its minimum price to $40k.

Just like location, location for homes, a stripper no one wants as a resale. It will depreciate the most. If an average car sells for $33,000 , the Model 3 selling at $45,000 is a steal of the century even excluding the tax incentive.

I have a shocking, radical thought. That perhaps Tesla will deliver on what it said it would.

Please keep up the good work thinking that way, hopefully my thinking along those same lines, for the Model Y (SR) Base Model, will perhaps bring “Tesla will deliver”, to a timely TMY (base,SR) delivery fruition.

Excellent. It is still to unprofitable to sell the base $35K model. But a midsize battery drops the entry price down to $45K so that it is more affordable to more people now.

This is why I’d refrain from buying any EV for a few years. Progress is already being made on Tesla’s battery. Look at the Leaf. Last year’s model is already obsolete. The range of newer Leafs may top out around 250 miles, but the price should continue to come down each year until solid-state arrives. I’m expecting EV’s with solid-state batteries to follow a similar pattern of improvements and price decreases. Still, I’d pay a reasonable premium for the right EV with a solid-state battery. Until then, I’ll just wait.

With that thinking, you’d still not be joining the PC bandwagon, let alone smartphones.
At some point you need to join, and the decision is a combination of merit and price.

We leased our first Leaf in 2012 because we wanted to be a part of the solution to the oil economy, not part of the problem like we’d been for two decades of gas/diesel driving. The lease was discounted from the 2011 prices, but we still had to keep our ancient gasser on the side b/c the range was 73 miles and we were unfamiliar with the territory. It wasn’t expensive but not cheap either ($4600 down and $99/month for 2 years).
By the time our third, 107-mile lease in came around in 2017, we got it practically for free (well, officially 0 down and $125/month for 2 years). Part of the price was thanks to loyalty discount as well as personally knowing the Leaf specialist. Get in at the ground floor, etc. etc.
A BEV had already been our *only* car since 2015 so we knew it’s plenty enough for us. Can’t find better value anywhere.

It should be reasonable accurate assuming that the new mid range is between 12 to 13 kWh less. For the standard range they’ll decrease a further 12 to 13kWh. For the mid range Tesla discounted $4000, for the standard range it expects to go down another $5000 (assuming the premium pack is $5k). That way Tesla is pricing batteries of the MR version with $300/kWh, to go to the SR version $400/kWh. As you increase battery size the price per kWh should be cheaper, not the opposite, more when Tesla sells the LR version extra battery at $360/kWh – that is insanely expensive. The $35k car would be the model 3 with the best bang for the buck (the premium pack is also insanely expensive), that unfortunately means less profit for Tesla and currently is probably their main concern. Before I used to say that the SR version would never be sold in quantity before 2019 Q2, with the new MR version I’m tempted to move that date to 2019 Q3. The LR extra battery cost is $360/kWh, the MR extra battery cost is $400/kWh. Tesla is making the model 3 more expensive, the new MR is actually a sign… Read more »

After two years they might actually sell a few at $40,000.

Maybe if Stephen Hawkings was still around he could explain Elon Musk time.

Still says 4-6 months