Tesla To Complete Model 3 Design By June 30

2 years ago by Eric Loveday 70

Tesla Model 3 Prototype

Tesla Model 3 Prototype

Model 3 With Tweaked Front Fascia

Model 3 With Tweaked Front Fascia – Via Jordan on Twitter

The Model 3 that Tesla revealed at the end of March is still just a prototype, but according to Tesla, the production-version of the electric car will be locked down on or before June 30, 2016.

This June 30 target was revealed during the Q1 Tesla conference call by CEO Elon Musk:

“from an engineering standpoint, we are already almost complete with the design of Model 3. […] So I think we feel pretty good about engineering completion of the last items probably within six to eight weeks, thereabouts. And so we’re sort of completing the final release for tooling no later than the end of June.”

So if the Model 3 will be ready for tooling no later than the end of June, then the full production-intent version should also be on display for the world to see right around that same time.  Tesla will also be free to ready “part 2” of the Model 3’s debut, with all the components finalized at that time; although we suspect that will still come much later, closer to the EV’s second half 2017 release.

Among the changes we expect to see from prototype to production form include a reworked front fascia and a fully redone interior with some exciting touches.

Source: Teslarati

Tags: , ,

70 responses to "Tesla To Complete Model 3 Design By June 30"

  1. Anon says:

    With all this PR about timetables and deadlines, it would be reassuring to hear what steps to fully vet and QC this new vehicle / platform before production ramps to unbelievable numbers.

    As painful as Model X is to build flawlessly, its lessons come at a nearly perfect time for M3.

    1. sven says:

      “. . . before production ramps to unbelievable numbers.”

      “Unbelievable numbers” is both a poor choice of words and an very apt description.

      1. ffbj says:

        It can’t be both. If something accurately reflects the condition as it exists how can it be a poor choice? Also if it was a poor choice what would be a better one?

        I think what you were trying to infer was that while ‘unbelievable numbers’ is apt in your view it is not flattering to Tesla.

        So a better response, from you would have been: “Unbelievable numbers” is both an unflattering choice of words and an very apt description. (Implying that they are lying).

        1. Anon says:

          It’s only a poor subjective choice for his mental filters. Unbelievable numbers could be either good or bad. We don’t yet know. It’s that glass half empty metaphore, but we know historically how Sven reacts to anything regarding Tesla…

          1. mxs says:

            Forget Sven and what he or I think .. we all know how credible are Tesla’s deadline commitments and predictions, right?

            The hype is unbelievable …. if the pre-orders jump again to let say 600K after Reveal 2 what are the chances that Musk will up the plans again and will say whatever pleases the stockholders, analysts and fan base?

            I always thought they will need a lot of luck, now I think it’s more like miracle. There’s not enough manufacturing brains and experience right now …. there’s a reason Apple manufactures in China and it’s not just the cost, but rather the lack of other things needed for mass quality manufacturing with quick and cyclical design changes.

            But, if to fail, why not do it in spectacular manner?

            Tesla has already done its part, by forcing the acceleration pedal as far as electric vehicles. If they fail spectacularly, it’s not like the overall progress will be wasted …

        2. MikeM says:

          There is a concept known as “Poetic license”.
          Both Anon and Sven are allowed a little of it. Ease up!

          1. ffbj says:

            Poetic license is not, as many would have you believe, an excuse for sloppy etymology.

            1. sven says:

              Ffbj,

              Unbelievable is ambiguous since it can have two different connotations/meanings, as opposed to a word that has one distinct and precise meaning. Unbelievable can mean: 1) difficult to believe (incredible or astonishing), or 2) unlikely to be true, impossible to believe (not to be believed). Likewise “Unbelievable demand” can mean 1) difficult to believe, but achievable demand, or 2) impossible to believe and unachievable demand.
              See this definition:
              https://www.google.com/#q=unbelievable

              It was a poor choice of works because one group of people, the Tesla boosters/fans, would attach a completely different meaning than another group, the Tesla skeptics/doubters, yet both meanings would be correct. Thus the meaning attached might not be the meaning that the writer wanted to convey.

              1. storky says:

                “Shop Chizeler Motors where the savings are unreal and the prices are out-of-sight!”

    2. phatcat73 says:

      Model X is a monstrosity in new technology. Model 3 will be a slimmer version of the S and the effort to develop a new EV is simpler than ICE IMO. Tesla has used the same motor for the S, X, RAV4 EV, and Mercedes EV, with varying software limits as the differentiator. Other non frame synergies can be applied.

      1. TomArt says:

        They use the same design of motor, yes – 4-pole, 3-phase induction motor (of Nikola Tesla fame).

        However, the motors for each are different in size and various tweaks. The front motor appears to be the same for the dual-motor S and X, but the rear motors are different – the RWD has a big rear motor, and the P90D has a big rear motor, but the regular “D” configurations of the S and X have a rear motor not much bigger than the front motor.

        The Model 3 is going to have different motors than the S and X, most likely, for at least some of the configurations (RWD, AWD, and performance AWD).

      2. wavelet says:

        Ah, but the X was always supposed to be a slightly higher-off-the-ground, risk-free, SUV-ish Model S variant using the same chassis, drivetrain and most other components (just read any discussion or presentation about Tesla’s business plan drom several years ago).
        I really hope Tesla’s learned its Lesson (and particularly Musk… The fact that the X was allowed to morph into what it did is a significant management failure).

    3. Breezy says:

      QC will be sufficient to get it out the door and stay together long enough for Elon to flee to Mars, beyond the jurisdiction of any Earth-based government.

  2. a-kindred-soul says:

    I hope there won’t be a reworked front fascia, as the writer mentions. It’s perfect. But for people who can’t get used to a grill-less face, Tesla or third parties could launch an add-on option.

    1. kdawg says:

      I’ve got used to the front end. Just leave it as is, IMO.

      1. Forever Green says:

        +1 kdawg

        1. xChuke says:

          +1

              1. Mr. M says:

                +1

                1. LEAF_n_PiP says:

                  +1

                  1. Skryll says:

                    -1

      2. cmina says:

        +1

      3. Speculawyer says:

        I love it. More than the other 2 they have for old S and New S/X.

    2. sven says:

      People seemed to like this more rounded nose posted by Speculawyer in another thread:

      1. kdawg says:

        I’d be OK w/that nose too, but it’s almost too Porsche-ish, and I’m not a fan of Porsche.

        1. cmina says:

          I’d like the front end that comes with the most extra miles and directly induces the least amount of cabin noise.

          1. Bryan says:

            Amen +1 From my position nothing matters more than efficiency Both look fine, keep the one that performs best.

      2. floydboy says:

        Nah! Now it’s a Porsche. Just stick a flush chrome Tesla ‘T’ with that lower underline like the S and X, to break up the monotony of the nose.

      3. Claude says:

        They won’t do that! They changed the S to look like the X and the nose of the model 3 is similar to those so….

      4. DTM says:

        I’d prefer the rounded nose. Current nose is too disruptive for me

      5. Ryan says:

        +1 on new nose. Hope our votes get counted.

      6. Michael Soremekun says:

        I’d pick that nose.
        🙂

        1. MikeM says:

          Eeeeuuw!

          1. jm says:

            “Are we not human? Do we not pick?”. (Jerry Seinfeld)

    3. Robert says:

      If you look at the 1960 Renault Caravelle I think you will notice the similar look of the front. This look was very popular for those times and I think it will be again on the Tesla 3

      1. Aaron says:

        Wow, Robert… you nailed it!

      2. wavelet says:

        Not just Caravelle. Any rear-engined non-sports car, and there were quite a few: the original Fiat 500/650, Fiat 850, Fiat 126, VW Type III, NSU Prinz, Contessa… Some of them were extremely popular backin the day, altthough unknown in the US.

      3. sven says:

        1960 Renault Caravelle:

      4. Josh Bryant says:

        Great reference Robert!

        I think this look will grow on people. It also has huge aero benefits. It matches Musk’s pre-reveal comment of unique but in a very functional way.

    4. Huffster says:

      When I first saw the model 3 nose, at the unveiling, I thought it looked like a car that had an accident with the back of the garage wall. But it has grown on me. As long as the design is for aerodynamic function, rather than just looks, I’m okay with it now. Really not that big of a deal, as I was a reservation holder before the unveiling and was going to buy one no matter what it looked like anyway. My heart and mind is with Tesla and their mission.

    5. Eric P says:

      I also hope they don’t rework the front fascia. The original looks so much better than this tweaked version. Tesla had it right the first time. I hope they don’t change a thing because of ICE minded design who want to live in the past.

      Elon MUSK: please don’t change the design of the front facsia for Model 3. We don’t want an ICE-like grille. Thanks!

  3. Murrysville EV says:

    “So if the Model 3 will be ready for tooling no later than the end of June, then the full production-intent version should also be on display for the world to see right around that same time.”

    Not so fast. Tooling lead time can be 4-18 weeks, depending on what you’re tooling. Then you have to build prototypes, test them, tweak them, etc.

    I wouldn’t expect to see anything truly production-intent until Q4-2016. Actual production-ready stuff won’t come together until a year from now.

    1. floydboy says:

      I agree Murrysville EV. The timeline you laid out seems more plausible.

    2. Josh Bryant says:

      I agree with your timeline.

      I expect Reveal Part 2 to be right around the 2017 July 1st date Musk talked about for start of production. No point in increasing demand between now and then.

    3. James says:

      They should have pt 2 (final exterior/interior) then pt 3 (instrumentation: screen & HUD) reveals. Software UI design can extend later. And a 3rd reveal will be good marketing too.

  4. Bob says:

    K.I.S.S., then build some beta test cars and send one to me.

  5. pjwood1 says:

    Fix the dash, or else.

    1. StopWhining says:

      Temper Tantrum much?

    2. Murrysville EV says:

      The dashboard is the only part of the car I don’t like. The tacked-on 15″ display looks like a science project.

      At least give it a HUD.

    3. ezradams says:

      Agreed. I need a binnacle in front of the drivers position. At the very least, a heads up display.

  6. Josh Bryant says:

    Does anybody know when the production Bolt design was frozen?

    It would be interesting to compare timelines of the two cars from production freeze date. GM should be quicker to enter and ramp production. (100 years more experience, lower volume.

    1. sven says:

      The production Bolt design was probably frozen when GM “let it go” into pre-production, sometime around March 22, 2016.

      http://insideevs.com/chevrolet-bolt-ev-starts-pre-production-in-michigan-video/

      1. sven says:

        Oops. This article claims that a production Volt will/was shown at the 2016 CES, which ran from January 6-9, 2016

        “The upcoming CES (January 6-9, 2016 in Las Vegas) will be the place where General Motors for the very first time will present the production version of Chevrolet Bolt.”

        http://insideevs.com/production-chevrolet-bolt-unveiled-january/

        1. Josh Bryant says:

          Thanks, I was thinking it was probably sometime at or just before NAIAS.

          P.S. Even a well versed EV fan like yourself swaps Volt and Bolt by accident on occasion. I really wish they would have changed the name.

          1. sven says:

            D’oh!

          2. sven says:

            Zoinks! I just realized that the V key is right next to the B key on the computer keyboard, and your left index finger is used to hit either key. Expect many more typos in the future!

            1. Josh Bryant says:

              Don’t worry you aren’t the only offender.

              GM’s decision frustrates me, it was hard enough to explain the Volt to the uninitiated. Now this will ^2 the confusion.

  7. floydboy says:

    I hope they make the dash curve outward to encompass the touchscreen. In its current floating configuration, it seems too vulnerable to becoming a point of contact.

    1. Anon says:

      I like the minimal, free floating idea they’re going for, but I agree– it feels a bit delicate and exposed. How would it hold up to rambunctious kids, spastic dogs, bulky cargo (long surfboard, kayak, 2 X4’s, etc.?), bumping into it?

      Really need to see the final interior, and that will probably later in the year, or next. *shrugs*

      1. Dan says:

        More importantly, how will it cope with a passenger’s head coming towards it in a crash.

        1. Anon says:

          Or the other way around, pushing into the cabin from a frontal frunk breach / collision.

    2. dRanger says:

      Compare pictures of Model X and Model S prototypes to the actual production vehicles. They both showed the floating display as a placeholder for the final design. Expect the display to be dash-mounted, and an additional HUD for the driver.

  8. TomArt says:

    I do not expect significant interior changes, and essentially no exterior changes, at this point.

    If Musk is crazy enough to take a crazy goal and cut the timetable in half, then they don’t have time to screw around with much, inside or out. They will probably leave well-enough alone.

    Also, I would be highly surprised if the nose and the dash are changed in any significant way. Given what the drivers told the guests about the various advantages of the dash design, it sounds like it was deliberate, and not simply a fashion statement – it had real engineering advantages, including visibility and airflow.

  9. Sparkinator says:

    I must admit that I hate the lack of a “regular” dashboard. However, I’d miss it less if they did some kind of a HUD for the basics like speed and state of charge. then no dashboard would make sense.

  10. Walt says:

    I suspect part 2 of ≡ will be shortly before Bolt goes on sale, there abouts.

  11. Four Electrics says:

    Musk is going to keep adding features and fall behind schedule. Hope people are prepared to wait until 2020 for their Model 3

    1. Speculawyer says:

      Trolly McTrollface.

  12. HVACman says:

    Technically, what Musk is “sort of” talking about is called the “design freeze” stage at the end of June. With luck, a lot of cash, and perfect coordination between engineering, manufacturing, and production control, the model 3 could be in either pre-production or early production by late 2017.

    Based on comments from Musk, etc. on various past stock earnings conference calls, the Model 3 will be the first time Tesla will have attempted this fast-track mass-market design/production integration process. Here is a link that describes the process as the industry now executes it:

    http://wardsauto.com/news-analysis/shrinking-product-development-time

    1. sven says:

      Great link. Thanks!