Tesla: Gen III Coming in 3 to 4 Years – Target Price of $30,000 to $40,000


While the Tesla Model S is Amazing in its Own Right, We So Eagerly Await the Model S

While the Tesla Model S is Amazing in its Own Right, We So Eagerly Await the Model E


Usually, it’s Tesla Motors CEO Elon Musk who makes comments regarding the Gen III (aka Model E) Tesla, but this time Tesla Motors is doing the commenting:

“Our Gen III car will be out in around 3-4 years. We are targeting a $30-$40k price for it.”

It’s right there on Facebook for the whole world to see now:

Tesla Motors Responds on Facebook

Tesla Motors Responds on Facebook

The only noticeable differences we see from what Musk typically states in regards to Gen III and Tesla’s official word is in the vagueness put forth by the automaker.

Whereas Musk zeroes in on a specific price point, Tesla gives a $10,000 range.  Likewise, Musk often says something like it’ll be here in 3 years or expect it in 2016, Tesla Motors says “around 3-4 years.”

Best case scenario: Tesla Model E arrives in 2016 with a $30,000 price tag.

Not best case scenario: Tesla Model E shows up in late 2017 with a $40,000 price tag.

Worse case scenario: …..

At least we’ve got Tesla now on record giving the general public some info on Gen III.

Categories: Tesla

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

45 Comments on "Tesla: Gen III Coming in 3 to 4 Years – Target Price of $30,000 to $40,000"

newest oldest most voted
David Murray

Now.. is that $30K to $40K price tag before or after the $7,500 federal tax credit?

Jouni Valkonen

Tesla is selling cars on global markets and United States is not the whole world.

I think that base price is above or around $40k as shortest range version is cancelled, because they do not sell well. I think that the 500 km version will be the best selling version and average selling price with options above $55k.


Elon had stated earlier this year that the price would be about $35k without the $7500 tax credit.


And I don’t believe him for a second.

If they make a 3-series competitor, then they’re not going to price it below a 328i when they can make the value proposition of gasoline savings.


“While the Tesla Model S is Amazing in its Own Right, We So Eagerly Await the Model S”

I think that last letter should be “E”

I’m very anxious to see the Model E. I’m expecting a release date of December 2016 in limited quantities, ramping up through 2017. I also expect base price of $45,000 (pre-credit), up to about $50,000 once you add supercharging/other options.

Eric Loveday

Surely it should…Thanks for catching the error.

George Bower

Rumor has it that GM already has their 200 mile battery ready to go in their battery lab.


Rumors, press releases, change of directors…means nothing coming from GM.
They’ve been manufacturering pure EV’s on and off now for 15 years now and to date none have been available to buy in more than 1 state out of 50. Let alone the world.


So I understand your point – you are skeptical – but your facts aren’t quite right on this. FYI Oregon is a state.


Ummm…that was before the bubble burst on Envia…


Jump to conclusions mat.

Cody Osborne

Do you know where I can get one of these mats? I have a lot of conclusions I want to jump to! 🙂

Jay Cole

/office space

scott moore

They never did really explain how that works. Are you supposed to do it blindfolded? Turn around three times? Otherwise you see what you are jumping too…


Anyone with technology to double battery density would be stupid to put it in cars first. You can probably fetch $2000/kWh for a 400 Wh/kg cellphone battery, at least until everyone else caught up to your technology.

GM would want 1/10th of that for an affordable EV. Tesla has proven that current tech is dense enough, and cost is the only thing that matters.

David Murray

You make a good point. Current tech is definitely “good enough” and if the price were half what it is, the whole plug-in car industry would be much further along than it is now. However, sometimes the way to reduce cost is by increasing energy density, assuming the cost remains somewhat constant. So either way, it works out!

scott moore

I usually take the stock cellphones I am given and double, or on the last go-around (Galaxy III), triple the battery capacity by adding a battery and expanded back section. I have no need of a “super slim phone”.

The concerns for cars is cost and weight. Tesla solved the first by charging more, and the second by going to aluminum body panels. Do not discount the second factor. Other car makers have been trying to go to Al body panels for years, and held back by manufacturing issues and cost.


Weight isn’t that much of an issue. If you added 500 lbs of batteries to the LEAF (30+ kWh), you’d only need a 15% more powerful motor, and probably only lose 5% in MPGe, so you’d still more than double range.

Cost is the singular issue. While it is true that energy density is often part of battery cost reduction, the raw materials going into batteries are still pretty cheap, and nowhere near the $50/kg of today’s battery prices. There’s plenty of room for cost reduction with volume.


ICE killer, you guys should make a like button for comments …….and it would be better if this site act as a community (eg fb or twitter )people like to comment and share various ideas about evs …..thus u cold improve this site.

Suprise Cat

I bet it will be still over 50000 € in Europe (or massive missing features on the base model).


$30K to $40K. That means $40K.


I surely do not like this whole “after Federal Tax Credit” pricing. The credit will go away when EVs become mainstream product. If the Model E is successful, that will trigger the phase out.

The current model S has a pre-credit price range around $70K to $126K, Based on that the base to top end price range for the model E (pre-credit) could be $42.5K to $76.5K. I will be surprised if the average selling price (pre-credit) is less than $55K.

Oh, and as to Elon’s commentary. Always assume that he is talking only in rough generalities – some might call it shading, others will call it promotion and a few will call it outright deceit. What ever it’s called, don’t use his words to plan on something specific.


Can’t wait for the tax credits to expire. I resent my tax dollars going to those lucky few Tesla owners to help them pay for their cars, when they can certainly afford to pay for all of it themselves.


get out


Can’t wait for the oil industry subsidization to end. I resent my tax dollars going to those lucky corporations to help support their industry, when they can certainly afford to pay for it all themselves.


Not to mention… shame on all the consumers who stick their heads in the sand to this reality and don’t encourage their government to end this special treatment of the oil industry, and remain blissful participants in its eco-system, endlessly pumping its products into their needlessly inefficient transportation machines.


I can’t wait for EVs to pay their fair share of road taxes.

I resent my taxes dollars being used to subsidize wealthy 1 per-centers who use the roads tax free.

Why should struggling, hard working lower class people have to pay road tax and not the 1% ?


Yeah… every person for themselves. Murica! Murica! Murica!

David Stone

They do.
Roads are built to strengthen the economy and should be paid for by the economy, and therefore general taxation.

Just because of the stupid idea to tie road maintenance to gas tax, does not mean that ev drivers do not contribute.

On the contrary, they save lives by not pollution and by not supporting the death and distruction caused in the various facets of the oil industry.

Also, roads are damaged by cars, only when road quality is bad, most often due to institutionalized and unpunished corner-cutting by large construction companies, with the blessing of bought and paid-for polititicans.
The real damage is done by trucks, especially when their suspension is not set according to current weight.

And none of them are electric.

Anton Wahlman

The oil industry pays almost infinitely more in taxes than any “subsidies” they receive. They get investment tax credits much like all other companies, and they are dwarfed by the taxes they pay.

Each year, the US government gives up $50B in incentives of various kinds to the oil industry. Yes, the tax collectively paid by the industry is much higher than this (but not “infinitely”). $50B is a log of money. But, it doesn’t really matter if the industry pays more in taxes than received incentives… that fact alone indicates that the industry CLEARLY doesn’t need any hand-outs! So, why are they getting them? Because we allow it. We allow our government to aid these corporations that pollute the planet, and support other economies around the world (sometimes as their only major economic driver) which harbor groups that seek to harm us. In the big picture, it is absolute idiocy. And then ignorant people whine mightily about the relatively small millions the EV industry receives in government incentives, as if this is somehow a “huge” unnecessary expense graced upon no other industry. (These people usually drive F-150 quad cabs, by themselves, accelerating at full throttle everywhere, as if they are late for their own funeral.) The EV industry is one that we should WANT to encourage as a society. It is arguably “infinitely” better for us than the oil industry… for our… Read more »
scott moore

Fine. Cite an authoritative article on the internet. So far all people have quoted here are “subsides” that are only standard equipment and exploration cost writeoffs, with the usual political spin by the Obama administration.



I cite this many times, few people can come up with a decent rebuttal. What’s sad is that a huge chunk of the “renewable” subsidies is for corn ethanol, which is more like a corn subsidy than a renewable subsidy, but they do put it in there to give a complete picture.


scott moore
Eli is FAR from a impartial source. A good rundown is on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies “In the United States, the federal government has paid US$74billion for energy subsidies to support R&D for nuclear power ($50 billion) and fossil fuels ($24 billion) from 1973 to 2003. During this same timeframe, renewable energy technologies and energy efficiency received a total of US$26billion. It has been suggested that a subsidy shift would help to level the playing field and support growing energy sectors, namely solar power, wind power, and biofuels.[9] However, many of the “subsidies” available to the oil and gas industries are general business opportunity credits, available to all US businesses (particularly, the foreign tax credit mentioned above). The value of industry-specific subsidies in 2006 was estimated by the Texas State Comptroller to be just $3.06 billion a fraction of the amount claimed by the Environmental Law Institute.[10] The balance of federal subsides, which the comptroller valued at $7.4 billion, came from shared credits and deductions, and oil defense (spending on the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, energy infrastructure security, etc.).” Note: AVAILABLE TO ALL US BUSINESSES. Thus, when another business, say, General Electric, gets tax credits, that is apparently not a subsidy (even though… Read more »

Why should these damaging industries be permitted to write-off anything? They rape in (sorry, rake in) record profits year after year. We’re supposed to believe that they can’t afford to purchase the necessary equipment without a hand-out? That they wouldn’t be motivated to explore for oil were it not for government incentives? Nonsense. Why the special treatment for what should be *the primary costs* of their doing business? Costs they should bear themselves.

It is high time (and has been for decades) for the oil industry to bear the full cost of doing business and pass that true cost onto the consumer (who would then feel free-market pressure to find a cheaper alternative). The way things stand now, the oil industry is artificially and unfairly propped-up (not completely, but to a real extent) by the federal government and, as a result, our gasoline is artificially cheap. By the same token, other competing industries are unfairly suppressed.

scott moore

That’s fine. You will need to start with the US constitution, which prohibits, in general, punishing people and businesses simply because you don’t like them.

Note that this has not stopped the government before. In Jimmy carter’s day they passed the “winfall profits tax”, designed to punish the oil companies for making money.


@rick, thanks so much for helping me buy my Tesla. Couldn’t have done it with out you. I’d offer to give you a ride in it but but I think your class envy might rub off on the seats.


Thanks, Tesla Guy. You made me laugh, and for all the right reasons!


If Tesla could bump prices by $7.5k without affecting sales, they absolutely would. So would Porsche, Audi, BMW, Merc, etc. It makes a difference even at that price.

I have no problem with my tax dollars going to luxury EVs, because like all cars, they will depreciate and when they have 5 years of use on them they’ll be a fantastic $25-35k family car with extremely low fueling costs and zero emission that also displace oil imports. I expect EVs to last 20 years, especially a Model S which can have 50% battery degradation and still be a very useful automobile.

Omar Sultan

First, its a tax credit meaning an EV buyer gets to keep more of their own money–the government is not cutting anyone a check.

Second, the credit tapers off after manufacturer has sold 200,000 cars. If Tesla stays on plan, the credit will expire for them before the Model E hits the market.

scott moore

In california its a check.

Omar Sultan

We were taking about the $7,500 tax credit which is a federal program.


I just hope that they can fix their marketing Policy in Europe because the 85 KW standard Model S sells at 116000 $ in Brussels.
The vat is higher but that doesn’t explain it all. There is an extra margin being taken by someone and it is not the 6 % duty that can exwplain a 50% price difference neither.

In the worst case this means a Model III at 60000 $ in Brussels in 2017. That is not an affordable car anymore and completly misses the point that Elon is putting forward.


can you pay in brussel sprouts?


thats just Elon commenting on the Tesla page