Tesla Launches $45,000 Model 3 With 260-Mile Range


Tesla has just revealed a $45,000 Model 3.

Via its website, you can now order the cheapest Model 3 to date.

At just $45,000 and with 260 miles of range, this RWD version of the Model 3 is sure to be hotter than hot. That’s just 50 miles less than the long-range Model 3 and still substantially more range than other electric cars available today.

Top speed is listed at 125 mph and 0 to 60 MPH is just 5.6 seconds.

Delivery is listed at 6 to 10 weeks.

This is believed to be the 3rd battery option (short, mid and long) that will eventually be offered on the Model 3.

Turns out it’s a long-range battery with fewer cells, which means production can happen almost right away.

That works out to be some $30,000 (estimated ) less than a Jaguar I-Pace, but with more range.

In highly related news, it appears as though the long-range RWD Model 3 is now nearly gone.

Order yours now here

Categories: Tesla

Tags: , , ,

Leave a Reply

210 Comments on "Tesla Launches $45,000 Model 3 With 260-Mile Range"

newest oldest most voted

When is the order deadline to guarantee delivery by 12/31/18 and getting the 7.5k Fed credit? Musk implies we can still order it to get the full credit

Order page redirects to the design page.

This is potentially very exciting for those select individuals, that take delivery before the $7.5k starts to disappear, at year end.

Still over 400 km range, so should sell well.

Last week deliveries were guaranteed if placed before a deadline. You have to ask yourself: Is that 6-10 week once again “estimated” or guaranteed?

I thought the deadline for orders to receive the full tax credit was 15 October. What happened? Did they build another tent that opened up new production capacity?

Wow, I was not expecting this option. I wonder i this was designed to push the standard model further out.

It is designed to convince SR customers to buy in Q4 instead of waiting. There isn’t enough US demand at 49k+ to buy their Q4 production, so they need to pull demand forward.

MR with $7500 credit is almost the same price as SR with $3750 and slightly less than SR with $1875 credit.

Seems like it

Where there is a will there is a way.

That looks like the best concise summary of the situation that I’ve seen. Thanks, Doggy!

“There isn’t enough US demand at 49k+ to buy their Q4 production, so they need to pull demand forward.”

That’s not what I had expected to happen already in 2018.

Tesla basically announced that unless you confirmed your Model 3 order a few days ago, you won’t get it delivered before the new year (and thus with the $7500 tax credit).

So this is about 2019 orders, when the credit reduced to $3750. Any planned Model 3 customer in the US that preferred a 2019 delivery of a LR Model 3 bumped up their schedule and ordered already (unless they absolutely couldn’t afford it).

That effectively means there will be almost no US deliveries of the LR in early 2019 (just leftovers and new spontaneous buyers). Yes, they could just deliver to Europe and China, but that would be idling all their US stores that can now handle more delivery volume.

To keep US sales of the Model 3 alive in Q1 2019, the introduction of a lower cost model right now was basically their only choice.

You are aware that what you call “new spontaneous buyers” is how the vast, vast majority of all car sales are made, right? Including the vast majority of Tesla Model S and Model X, which ran through there reservations a quarter of a million cars ago?

Are you somehow implying that the Model 3 won’t have their vast majority of sales from “new spontaneous buyers”, just like the rest of the automotive market? If that is your claim, please provide some documented support for your ASSumptions.

I’m thinking no more than 1000 MR deliveries will get the $7500 credit, and perhaps only a handful. Most will get delivery in Jan with the $3750 credit. I expect the SR to have few deliveries before July, so most will have the $1875 credit.

MR with $3750 credit costs $3125 more than SR with $1875 credit, and of course $4000 less than a new LR order. I can see people choosing either, depending on their needs. I still think the SR is the best value, despite the lower rebate.

I called Tesla store, they said no guarantee for Model 3 RWD – Mid Range 12/31/18 delivery.
So, RWD – MR $3750 tax credit is most likely, only $250 less compared to RWD – LR with $7500 tax credit for those delivered prior to 12/31/18.

And yes, I’m a day one reservation holder hoping for RWD SR Premium ($40,000 – 7500 = $32500) purchase that will never happen. Disappointed, but waiting for next year price adjustments after Tax Credit is reduced / eliminated.

Yea it is and it seems like a way to cash in on the tax credits fear. It has 50 miles less, than the LR and only 40 miles more than the SR. Performance is also the same on the base range and the mid range model. But LR premium is 4k, while mid range premium is 5k. So less value added for more money.

But if you include the $3,750 lost in tax credit, it becomes a pretty good deal. $1,250 for 40 miles is really good!

Some people are gonna be PISSED when they don’t get their 260 mile Model 3 by the end of the year, despite assurances it will be delivered in time. Trust me, it’ll happen.

It doesn’t matter. For every person upset with Tesla and their sales practices there are at least 100 fanboys to cheer Tesla on, explain why it had to be and basically call the unhappy customer an idiot.

They won’t be pissed. They’ll just return it and wait for a better deal.

Tesla has a 1 day return policy, so if they drive it home and decide they are “PISSED”, they can return it.

I think you are projecting. You must be completely “PISSED” that you paid $44K (including additional shipping charges to the East Coast) for your decked out Bolt with less range that will only charge at 50kW.

Annoying to me that they quote a “price” post tax credit and gasoline savings (compared to what and at what price electricity and gasoline). So with a color and destination charge it’s $47,700 or $48,200 plus tax plus another $1000 for white interior. Presumably this include the PUP. As such it is simply $4,000 less than the equivalent long range. Worth the difference??? Interesting they are offering this though. To bad it’s not available without the PUP.

Yeah, you seem to be new to how cars are offered.
They all start with a base price.
Try BMW’s site as an example, but there, they don’t mention the Fed Tax Credit they can take off in a lease. The 320i starts at just $34,900. Try to get one at that price. No dealer, in his right mind, would stock the base model with no “options” like power seats.

The 330e Performance, the hybrid model, has a Federal Tax credit, and it starts at $45,600.

New cars (other than Tesla) are not “offered” with a gas saving deducted from the price. Think about the gas savings from a Prius rather than a Dodge Demon with similar interior space. Just silly. Same with showing post tax credit and CA rebate. Tacky

The price is lower than before, there’s your math.

Tesla isn’t calculating gas savings versus a Dodge Demon!

They used very conservative numbers of only 10k miles per year and 28mpg. The average new car is driven ~85k miles in its first 6 years. Use that with $3/gallon, and you’d get $4300 savings even compared to a 35 MPG car.

You can also be damn sure that a Prius salesman is calculating savings compared to a 30 MPG car.

I have no problem with the way Tesla advertises price. They have an asterisk next to the “after savings” price, and they have the raw price right there for you to also see. It’s a huge advantage of EVs, and consumers should be aware of how much it adds up.

It’s tacky because it is not a price at all. It’s a cost. “After savings cost” would be fine, “after savings price” is tacky.

Why shouldn’t every company that sells EV’s tell consumers how much they could save vs. a similar ICE car? Isn’t that part of educating consumers who might not have any idea what running costs savings will be?

The full price before tax incentives and gas savings are right there clearly on the same page, and the price details are all right there too.

I guess if you were an ICE car maker and you didn’t want to show how much buyers could save vs. their ICE cars, then you wouldn’t want to show savings vs. gas. Otherwise I’m not sure who would benefit for NOT knowing more information vs. less information about buying and EV vs. an ICE.

The full price is at the bottom of the page – surprise!

Yes they do.

Look at the lease details.

Not a lot of people can get the full tax credit and the incentive

I’m sure the vast majority of potential Tesla owners can.
And if you don’t qualify for the full tax credit on a $45k car purchase, you probably shouldn’t be buying the car anyways.

To be fair Tesla also shows the cash price. If you go to the GM Bolt page they show MSRP as the main price and the after credit price below, which is a little less confusing.

There is also no mention at all on the GM page about how much you can save in gas buy purchasing their EV instead of one of their ICE cars.

I wonder why they don’t give their potential buyers that information?

Because it’s an answer that’s as long as a piece of string. It’s essentially useless as it varies significantly depending on whether mileage driven, type of mileage, cost of fuel, cost of electricity and weather (lose on average 20% of your range in winter and that’s a significant cost differential compared to someone in Florida for example).

There should be a cash price front and centre, then they can start playing around with all the possible maximum scenarios, rather than just artificially decreasing the “up from” price, forcing you to spend time trying to work out what they’ve added in. It’s another thing that will work for first adopters but will piss a lot of more mainstream buyers off when they head into a dealership/shop and find the price they thought it would be was actually some made up figure not the price they’ll be paying to actually buy the car.

Tesla certainly aren’t the worst on their website (Nissan and Mitsibushi are by far worse).

Because they do not want to portray the cars they sell in massive volumes at a profit in a bad light?

Delivery in 6 to 10 weeks?? In Europe we still wait endless to get the first deliveries of the long range

Get in line.

No long range any more

That’s not my reading. Looks to me like it means no more LR RWD version. That is, if you get the LR option, then you have to take a dual motor version.

They still have AWD LR and performance LR.

Musk’s tweet of full confidence in the RWD option could mean he’s confident that, with its shorter range, it won’t cut into sales of LR AWD. (FWIW, I agree with him and it looks like sales of LR RWD, and its superior range, were indeed cutting into higher margined offerings).

The focus is to enable as many US Tesla owners to benefit from the US $7500 tax credit as possible and make Q4 look good. After that Europe will get its due.

Call it the Q4 Model III.

American company. BMW and Mercedes always send their lesser cars the opposite way. Continental preference is a real thing.

If Europeen customers also start to think that “continental preference is a real thing” Tesla will be DEAD in less than one year since the production level they have invested in will be quite too small regarding demands.

The point is that many Europeans reserved on day one, I reserved one hour *before* the beginning of the presentation of the car. I am ok to wait 2,5 years and probably 3 years, but it is a bit strange that US citizens that are not even in the queue right now get the car 6 months before me. However, I will wait, I understand your “federal credit issue” but please stop saying stupid things such as “continental preference”, we have many car manufacturers in Europe and we also can wait for them…

“will be quite too small regarding demands”

sorry, “quite to hight”, off course !

get in line early the line is long and getting longer by the min. or you can enjoy that Nissan Leaf or Kona if you can find it.

$20,000 more than my 2018 Leaf S for RWD, more torque, and 120 more miles.

I’m OK with putting that savings as the DP on a bona-fide weekend ride.

My Leaf’s main job is in-town driving where a Tesla is still overkill.

Obviously you’re bad at math.

? I got $3000 cash on the hood (and 0% interest for 72 months) from NMAC, plus ~$2800 dealer discount on the 2018 S.

I’d get +20kwh, or ~80 more miles, so I guess that was my mistake??

He is not. The base Leaf S is less of a car but it is half the price of this TM3 version. I guess what he is saying is the equivalent of “why would i drive a Lexus ES when i can drive a Corolla for half the price”. We beat this dead horse before….

Not to mention that the Nissan Leaf will have approximately 10% + or – battery degradation, after 3 yr./ 36 k. That’s a reduced 135 mi. range in 2021. So basically almost 1/2 the range of the Tesla Model 3, in about 3 years.

1/2 the price, and about 1/2 the range, you choose your range/price penalty, over the long haul.

Admittedly battery loss is the Leaf’s achilles heel: after 4 months and a hot hot summer I’m at 96% SOH.
Degradation will tail off (he says hopefully), but that’s a big chunk towards losing 16kWh to warranty claim (~24kWh).

Depreciation is also much more substantial on the Leaf.

Corolla torque: 128 lb-feet
2018 Leaf: 236 lb-feet
Lexus ES : 267 lb-feet
Model 3 RWD: 307 lb-feet

Please don’t compare my ride to a Corolla when it’s much closer to the Lexus (and can in fact blow the Lexus off the line, which is what counts for in-town driving (and 99% of driving outside of track days anyway).

I park next to a Model 3 at work often and don’t find its looks particularly compelling — from the back & front it’s downright goofy; the front-right is its only good angle really.

Now, if the Model 3 came in an AWD sports coupe version and looked as good as an FD RX-7 I’d gladly pay MSRP @ 4% loan or whatever for it; that would be my dream car.

Model 3 tho, not so much.

A leaf driver calling a Tesla goofy? I’ve heard it all now!

The Price Is FOR SURE Getting Very G00FY. To The Point Where They Can Stick Tesla Where it Hurts ! Speaking Of Sticking , I wonder if the Diver is Still Suing Musk Too…

Or just use the DP and buy the Model 3 and have daily and weekend driver rolled into one car. 2 cars to serve 2 separate purposes doesn’t seem like wise financial play. Especially considering you have to double your insurance, registration, and storage. But, to each their own.

Or by that rationale, you can buy a used Yugo that makes the Leaf look like the biggest financial ripoff ever.

4-door coupe is not my first choice for a weekend car. If Ford doesn’t f up the 2020 Bronco I might get that.

There’s nothing “coupe” about the Model 3.

Just checked and noticed a couple other things:
1) There’s no option to buy the ‘Full Self Driving’ package anymore. Is this an acknowledgement that FSD is not anywhere near ready? How much will the upgrade cost later? Under the “Autopilot” heading, there is a list of basic safety features, AEB, and collision warnings, with the option to buy Advanced Autopilot for $5k … I wouldn’t call the safety systems ‘Autopilot’ so maybe the idea was to make TACC standard and “FSD” the $5k upgrade? if so, the wording is confusing.

2) There’s now the option for white seats cost $1000 more than the black interior. Black interior is no longer shown as being a $5k option.

Yep, i saw that too.

Your couple of things.
1) FSD is not available because HW3 is not yet in production. FSD for HW2-equipped cars require a free upgrade to HW3.
2) The $5K option is built into the prices of the cars. $45K car is:
Base $35K + $5K premium package + $5K mid-range battery.

Did folks notice AWD dropped by $1K? It was $4K, then $5K, then $6K.
Now it is Base $35K + $5K premium + $9K long-range battery + $5K AWD = $54K.

Gotta love Tesla and their constantly changing options pricing!

“There’s no option to buy the ‘Full Self Driving’ package anymore. Is this an acknowledgement that FSD is not anywhere near ready?”

InsideEVs broke that news out into a separate article:

“BREAKING: Tesla Model 3 Full Self Driving Option Is Going Away”


According to Elon’s tweet, this is a one-week suspension of the option because “it’s too confusing”. Time will tell if that’s the real reason, or if his tweet is just a face-saving measure because he doesn’t want to admit that the offer of FSD was very premature, and they’re going to take it off the table until Tesla gets much, much closer to full, reliable, Level 4 autonomy.

Alternatively, they don’t want to waste money on improving hardware 2.5 now, only to have to upgrade it to HW3 in less than a year.

Still no lease offers.

Don’t hold your breath.

You can get a bank to lease it for you

Can you? Perhaps 2-3 months ago, I looked around online for even one single comment saying that people were getting a bank lease on the TM3. All I found is people reporting that banks were saying it’s too early to underwrite a lease, because TM3 hasn’t been on the market long enough to assess its real value.

Of course, things might have changed since I did my fruitless search. I’d be interested to know if anyone has found or heard of a report about someone being able to do a 3rd party lease of a Model 3.

Ally bank and others

Downvotes. Why? I’m getting tired of that crap.

laying out $50K on a car is $250/mo opportunity cost, ouch.

My 0% for 6 years from NMAC was a great sweetener for getting a car best for in-town use.

I can go 150-200 miles in a trip, but it’s not as convenient as ICE, unlike a 50Wh+ BEV.

I would explain all of this to you but you won’t get it anyway….
If you really wanna get creative, compare your Leaf purchase to buying a bicycle. How much cheaper a bicycle would have been? Did you think about that?

My 99% use case is driving 30 miles a day.

Don’t need to spend tens of thousands more for that 1%. Rather have something more GT ish.

Note that if Tesla had this Model 3 RWD in a Ferrari California / Mazda RX-7 GT coupe package I’d liquidate my Roth to buy it.

4-door coupe tho? Already got that.

“My 99% use case is driving 30 miles a day.”

So compare it to an electric bike instead of a regular bike….. His point still stands.

So don’t buy it…I don’t think people are suggesting that everyone run out and buy one of these regardless of their financial situation. But if you were in the market for a 40K car anyways this could make sense after tax incentives and fuel savings.

Yeah, that’s great, but it’s still a leaf.
Up here in Montreal that leaf wouldn’t last me my drive to work and back in -20C weather + plus then needing to drive another 50-80 km for hockey for my son while needing heat.
plus I want a car that I can use for trips etc…

You use heat in Canada? Who would have thunk it?

“Up here in Montreal ”

Less than 1% of this world’s population lives that far from the equator. Your market is an outlier.

While strictly accurate, that statement is meaningless in this context. A far more relevant question is what percentage of the world’s population that can realistically afford to buy a BEV lives near or above the 45th latitude (which is where Montreal is situated). It turns out to be a rather impressive potential market. Try looking at a globe, or just scroll through this:


Leasing a Tesla is a bad proposition anyways. Unless you like throwing away money.

What is the purpose of this? I don’t get it!
If delivery is 6 to 10 weeks then this will also get the full credit…meaning the Oct 15th deadline was just BS to pull more people in for the more expensive LR.
Elon, give me 150 miles at $30k and will buy it today…and will wash your clothes for a week.

Scratch Elons laundry off your “to do” list,


…Please put down the Tide Pods, and carefully step away from the non-existing “150 mi. / $30k” TM3 (SR) vehicle!


Told you so. They were looking under the cushions for more money cause they not selling at a rapid pace like in June and July

No, that’s not it at all. If that was the case the shipping to EU would begin immediately. They just wanna milk the US customer first.
This is actually a pretty good deal! $40K net and you get 260 miles, white interior and PUP! If i wasn’t cheap f@#$ i would have bought one, it’s definitely worth it.

They can’t ship EU ‘immediately’ because it isn’t homologated yet.

So ,immediately after’?

“it isn’t homologated yet.”

Says who? Source please.


In the real world, Tesla has to deal with EU (and Norway’s) regulations, shipping schedules, and upgrading the Tilburg “final assembly” factory to handle the Model 3, all before they can start selling TM3 in Europe.

Some things can be rushed. Others can’t. I think this is one of the latter.

Very true.
I am afraid that theres going to be a bottle neck at the tillburg factory, since my understanding is that battery and car isnt shipped together and has to be assembled at the tillburg factory?

Two words: Tilburg Tent 🙂

They leased another building next to their Tilburg site a few months ago. Model 3 battery is harder to install though. We’ll see what happens soon enough.

they don’t need “assembly” for Norway…

They have had quite a while to work on getting tillburg ready.

Likely the October 15 deadline was intended to flush the LR RWD models out of the pipeline in advance of this mid-range option being offered.

“What is the purpose of this? I don’t get it!”

Pretty obviously the purpose is to (at least temporarily) maintain current domestic demand for the TM3 without offering the Standard Range version. In other words, Tesla wants to continue selling higher-trim versions of the TM3 domestically, and this is the way they have decided to do that.

In other other words, 😉 Tesla is still struggling to bring down costs enough to justify putting the SR version into production, and this Mid Range version is a compromise to allow them to offer a lower price and yet still charge a higher price off each unit sold than they would get from SR units.

BTW — The worry that “Tesla might cancel the Standard Range Model 3″… I think that just got more plausible. I still don’t think it’s likely, but the analogy with “Remember that Tesla cancelled the Model S40” just became a lot more relevant.

Exactly. It also means there aren’t enough US customers willing to buy out their Q4 production at the 49k+ price point.

And of course, Doggy has absolutely no proof of that absurd statement.

Tesla will easily sell every Model 3 no matter the variant that they can produce for years both in the US and overseas for that matter.

Doggy’s conclusion is a straightforward logical conclusion. Not only is it definitely not “absurd”; I’d say it’s the most likely explanation based on the available evidence.

There is no logical reason for Tesla to offer a previously unannounced “Mid Range” version of TM3 if it could sell all it can possibly make of the $49k+ trim levels with no changes to options, pricing, nor expanding the market to overseas regions.

Of course, there are other things Tesla could do to maintain the demand level for $49k+ Model 3s; things like offering leases. But suddenly offering a Mid Range version of the TM3, without any previous announcement, is the option Tesla has taken to maintain domestic demand.

An alternate conjecture: They are slightly limited on cell production compared to demand. This lets them sell more complete cars than they otherwise could until the cell production catches up.

Don’t get why you get a down vote for that, since it is probably the reason.

Yes, that is a reasonable alternative scenario, so thanks!

I don’t think it’s correct; recent reports seem to suggest that Gigafactory 1 can handle the volume needed. But that’s just my opinion, and it’s possible you’re right.

Alternate to alternate conjecture: Elon Musk telegraphed Tesla’s decision to green-light the approval for this new battery size way back in May when he said that they can’t make the SR until they hit 10k/mo in production numbers.

The alternative to believing that this is a response to Q4 demand, when we are just 19 days into Q4, is that this is a response to Q2 ramp-up realities for the SR, so they decided back in Q2 to do try and meet SR reservation holders in the middle and put out the MR.

One alternative requires you believe Tesla can put out a brand new battery size just 2 weeks into Q4 in response to Q4 demand. The other implies Tesla was able to do it in 2 quarters and it has nothing to do with Q4 or Q3 demand

The only other explication I can think about right now is not having enough cells to sustain the car production increase.

Edit : Sorry. Didn’t see David Gould previous post.

Unannounced definitely does NOT mean unplanned.

For Tesla to complete crash testing and get EPA numbers, etc for govt compliance, Tesla would have had to have started on the medium range battery LONG before Q4

There is absolutely positively no way that this car is a response to Q4 demand. It would have had to have been planned long ago.

If I were to venture my educated guess, The decision to green light the mid-range model 3 likely happened the day before Elon posted this at the end of May:


How could anyone even know that? We aren’t even three weeks into the quarter
I can’t wait to hear how releasing a $35k is a desperate last ditch move from Tesla, who is only outselling the Toyota Corolla.

Doggy — So your argument is that Tesla is SO FAST at production, that they got their Q4 demand (we are only a 19 days into Q4) numbers, and pivoted SO FAST that they put out a new car into production in response????

Really? Complete with EPA ratings and gov’t safety approvals?

Is that seriously your argument now? after you’ve been whining endlessly over and over ad nausea for over a year about how long it has taken Tesla to get the Model 3 into production?

Another Euro point of view


The number of S40 reservations counted in the hundreds, and SR res. are likely in the hundreds of thousands.

The fact that they are advertising it as “medium” is actually proof that there WILL be a “standard”

Correct my math if I’m wrong, but doesn’t the quarter end in 10 weeks? Are you angry that Tesla is reannouncing that they are right on the edge of the deadline?

How does it cost $35K after Federal and CA State tax rebates/credits?
Right NOW, the Tesla site no longer says 4-6 weeks. It says 6-10 weeks.

This is basically Tesla trying to offset the loss/phaseout of the Federal Tax Credit.
$3,750 loss in tax credit.
$5K discount from the old “Long Range RWD + Premium”.

Current 2018 CA buyers of the Long Range RWD + Premium essentially paid $50K – $10K = $40K.
First half of 2019 CA buyers of this Mid Range RWD + Premium essentially pay $45K – $6250 = $38,750.

Kudos to Tesla for trying hard to keep the TM3 affordable.
No kudos for trying to say its a $35K car. Maybe only a lucky handful will get that.

Lol. Trying to say this is a $35k car.

Musk is turning out to be a Manipulating Liar ! With His Propriety Rights & Economies Of Scale BULL SH!T !

6-10 weeks is still in Q4, so still qualifies for $7500 Fed + $2500 CA.

Pretty weak to mention 35k at all, though. 2.5 years after introducing the car as 35k without subsidies.

Not everyone can get a $7500 tax credit and don’t live in California to get $2500 rebate

“Not everyone can get a $7500 tax credit and don’t live in California to get $2500 rebate”

Not all M3 are sold to Californians but most are.Likewise I’m sure most California M3 buyers can use the full tax credit.

Not as weak as your obvious misrepresentation. Tesla just started production only 1 year ago.

Nothing about this is easy or fast as Jaguar, VW etc are finding out trying to get their production going of compelling EVs.

Cool. They will be pumping those out at a good pace, less work to build, no front motor.
Demand for it is probably through the roof.

This is great news, but I’m sure the shorts will spin it as a lack of demand 🙂 I wonder if Fremont’s Model 3 capacity is exceeding Gigafactory’s cell capacity, thus you can make more cars with less batteries if there’s a mid-range option? I also wonder if mid-range will be RWD only and short range will be AWD only and they will share the same battery module (we know the RWD is more efficient than the AWD)? Also curious that the long range RWD is missing, maybe it was not popular enough? Lots of questions, but it’s great to see some progress on lower cost models.

“but I’m sure the shorts will spin it as a lack of demand ”
They will because they can. It’s logical to think that Tesla did not get enough LR orders to the Oct 15th deadline since they are guaranteeing these mid range cars will also get the full credit. 10 weeks is still this year.

I think the more likely answer is that demand for the LR RWD model was limited, and the October 15 deadline got people to move and allowed Tesla to flush the pipeline of LR RWD models before offering the new mid-range option. I checked the Model 3 order page last week, and the LR RWD model had a delivery estimate of “within four weeks.” It was obvious at that time that Tesla didn’t have a lot of LR RWD variants in the pipeline, and now we know why.

Maybe LR RWD demand was limited in the US. I am sure that there is a lot of demand in the rest of the world. Not every buyer had his dollars flowing in like many in the SF bay area! And who needs AWD in most parts of Eirope. Due to the big ICE cars from Germany we never have snow anymore!

10 weeks from today is December 27th, during the holidays. Only an idiot would guarantee someone that they could get you a car during Christmas with $7500 on the line.

Also, if Tesla can sustain demand and profit at these levels in just the US and still beat the Corolla in sales, they should get an award. The short range version was going to start production in Q4 along with international sales but a midrange version coming out and no international sales is desperate?

“It’s logical to think that Tesla did not get enough LR orders to the Oct 15th deadline”

It is not logical at all that any car company would decide to put out a completely new battery size for an EV 3 days after a deadline, and start delivering it 6 weeks later.

This would have had to have been decided LONG LONG before the oct 15th deadline. There is absolutely no way at all that this is any response to anything in Q4.

But I love how hopeful people are that Tesla can make huge production changes with days’ notice now! It is a turn-around from complaining about how slow it takes Tesla to fix production issues, to now thinking they can turn around a complete new battery in just a couple of days, and have deliveries start in a month and a half…

Very cool but I can already hear the shorts. “Tesla cant sell and 50K Model 3s so they dropped the price.” Short sited morons or paid goats. Well done Tesla. More options are always good.

Yes, but please, it’s “short sighted“.

sight = vision

site = place, or page on the internet


You get shot down for being any kind of nazi…

No soup for you! 😉

“Tesla cant sell and 50K Model 3s so they dropped the price”
That’s exactly what happened. Thanks for recapping.

Tesla sold more of that model than any other version of the Model 3, or 3+ years in Bolt sales worth.

“That’s just 50 miles less than the long-range Model 3“ yes but at what watt-hour/per mile? Remember that Tesla intentionally and voluntarily set the wh/mile consumption rating on the LR RWD much higher.

WOW! I absolutely did not see this coming at all! I haven’t even seen anyone hint at or speculate that Tesla would offer a Mid Range version of the Model 3. Good to know that Tesla can keep secrets when necessary. 🙂

This third option will increase demand, which very likely — almost certainly — will delay the debut of the Standard Range TM3 even further. I expect to see a lot of negative comments about this. Well, if I had a reservation and was waiting for a SR TM3, I’d be disappointed too.

Now that Elon knows the SEC is watching for any misinterpretation of an out-of-place tweet, no more loose lips.

There’s the Federal Government exercising Orwellian double-speak: While banging their drums in the name of enforcing transparency, the SEC scares an American company into complete secrecy.

I mentioned it as a possibility a couple times on other sites. I didn’t expect it this soon, though.

Where’s the 35K model 3? Again Tesla is playing the game of upsale! A whopping $10,000 or 30% more yet the range boost is less than 20%! I’ve had enough of Doing Musk‘s financial tricks!

Ugh, the usual nonsense. M3SR has been announced for early next year long before this version was announced. This doesn’t replace it, it’s just an extra option.

Wondering about Elon Musk’s tweet: “Costs $35k with federal and state rebates”. Is this THE $35k EV that he promised?

It’s certainly not what was promised (35k without subsidies), but Musk doesn’t mind if the 35k number motivates you to place an order today.

No. Is that a real question, or just concern trolling?

Bingo. Elon can finally say he delivered a $35k*** Model 3 as he promised. Just need a few asterisks. 😉

HOW CAN THIS BE GOOD ? This Makes No Sense At All ! The Long Range 310 miles is $44,000. & NOW $45000 for 260 mile Range.?? It’s Totally Stupid ! Is This A Joke ? I May Consider 220 Miles For $35000.. .But $45,000 for 260 Miles ?? $1000 more for Less Range ? That is Absurd ! .If that’s the Case ., . I’M OUT !….0r Am I Missing Something here ?

They never offered a $44k LR version. Cheapest was $49k because they are only selling premium interiors. This is now the least expensive Tesla ever sold.

$49G Yea , But You Got LR & The Premium Interior with that…I Already Know All That Sh!t ! I f **KING Hate This Price Increase Bull Crap , When Battery Cost are Supposedly Coming Down & Tesla Price Are Going Up ..! …

All cars currently include Premium Pkg.
35k SR
40k SR + Premium Pkg.
40k MR
45k MR + Premium Pkg.
44k LR
49k LR + Primium Pkg.

Your spots already been taken, no worries.

Ship 0f F00LS !

Why are you upset that Tesla has added an option? Aren’t more buying choices a good thing for both buyers and for Tesla?

The only downside I can see to this is that it seems to be yet another sign that Tesla is intentionally delaying putting the Standard Range version of the Model 3 into production. But that’s not a change in Tesla’s marketing strategy. Tesla has very clearly stated it’s not going to put the SR version into production until it can do so profitably. There are other things Tesla could have done to maintain demand for higher-priced versions of TM3; options such as offering leasing.

The only real change, insofar as a delay in putting the Standard Range TM3 into production, is a perception on the part of those waiting for that version. If that’s the case, then you shouldn’t be getting upset at Tesla; you should be upset at yourself for indulging in wishful thinking.

They added one option but eliminates one, too.

The 49k version was the best of all Teslas for long trips.

Good point, thanks.

It’s a Price Increase f00l !

MR 3 has 4/9 of the range increase of the LR over SR at 5/9 of the price.
That option represents about $450/kWh.
So the cheapest model yet Is also more profitable
That sounds like motivation to me.

45k for ~64 kWh is not more profitable than 49k for 78 kWh unless their cell cost is >300/kWh.

The vehicle other than MR/LR options is the same cost and same retail price. The MR option has higher margins than the LR option.
For those that want the LR battery spec, they are now forced to buy addition options (at least AWD). Tesla options are not given away.
So no matter which way you go, it’s more profit for Tesla.
These changes are not about providing more value to the consumer.

“45k for ~64 kWh is not more profitable than 49k for 78 kWh unless their cell cost is >300/kWh.”

(49 -45 k$) / (78 / 64 kWh) =~ 285 $/kWh.

If Tesla’s cost is less than $285/kWh then it is more profitable…..excluding sales opportunity cost.

Actually we need to back out their markup but we don’t know what that is.

a half year ago a German tesla dealer tells me no model 3 under 40000€ euro
seems this Information is right

Tesla has stores, galleries, service centers, and even a few delivery centers. Tesla has lots of sales reps.

It doesn’t have any “dealers” at all.

Huh? Was that a surprise? Of course. Euro prices include ~20% VAT, US prices are always net of taxes. Plus there’s the additional shipping costs US –> Europe.

Really “substantially more range than other electric cars available today”, how is 260miles substantially more than 238 Bolt, or 258 Kona, or even 220 iPace? Did you just redefine substantial to be less than 10% improvement?

Seems to be some deficiency in your critical thinking ability. If you’re trying to define 260 as “not substantially more” than 220, then it looks to me like you are the one trying to redefine the word “substantial”.

Furthermore, the statement you quoted is both factually and logically correct. You are trying to spin that as if the writer of this article said “substantially more range than any other electric car”. If the writer had inserted the word “most” there, it would be logically and factually the same statement.

one tenth, substantial, hmmm, nope still doesn’t.

When I went to school, going from 220 to 260 was an 18% increase, not a mere one-tenth.

Perhaps you were taught a different sort of math? 😉

And sorry iPace 234 mile range, which is disappointing given battery size. Hope some OTA update can improve efficiency somehow. Thats a whopping 22 mile difference, super substantial 🙂

The lack of serious quickcharge capabilities for i-Pace will make the difference a lot more substantial for people who regularly venture outside base range.

it gets substantially more when you driving substantially faster

So electric cars are going to remain expensive for long. Until then we can bank on plugins.
But no company is willing to sell plugins on a high volume basis.

Define expensive and define long. The $35K version(=average transaction price for cars) is still on the menu and not that far out.

A little annoyed here. Just spent a fortune on a blue P3D- with white interior. Not too many white interiors around as it’s a little exclusive… But not it’s cheaper and available on every car… Even recommended! Oh well, I guess the scaling and broadening of options was inevitable

They were clear when they introduced the white interior that it was going to be available in all PUP but it would be first introduced in the P version and others shortly thereafter. It was a matter of time and it was never going to be exclusive.

WTF does “It’s a long range battery with fewer cells.” mean?
What’s the kWh?

Guessing same pack, but with fewer cells, so all the same components used, just leaving some spots blank or with fillers?

Same pack, just fewer cells.

Fewer cells = lower pack voltage = slower charging? Unless they’ve taken out an entire parallel string…

Yeah, that’s not how this works, it’s not like all cells are serial connected in batterypacks, it’s all wired for the usual 400V pack voltage. A smaller pack will get lower miles per minute of charging if the C rate stays the same obviously though if that’s what you mean by slower charging.

Same pack voltage, less Mac current. Instead of 96 serial by 46 parallel it’ll be something like 96S38P.

Fewer cells = not as many cells.

Model3 Owned- Niro EV TBD -Past-500e and Spark EV,

Think this has more to do about shaking loose some batteries for the powerwall production line too. There’s simply not enough batteries now that the battery pack assembly lines have increased x3 fold, they need to rev up the battery production.

What better way than to reduce the pack density while still maintain throughput.

Bingo! My first take on this was that battery pack production was not able to keep up due to cell production limitations (raw material issues maybe?) If you’re trying to sell cars, but can’t make enough battery cells, you solve the problem by putting less cells in each car. Problem solved. Now you can push out as many cars as the Fremont factory can build, and look like a genius in the process.

Model3 Owned- Niro EV TBD -Past-500e and Spark EV,

Exactly. With this move, my best guess is that this quarter’s limit is the actual battery. They are maintaining throughput on the same batterypacks (with less cells) so no limits on assembly there with the 3 newly installed battery pack lines.

This gives precious battery materials for the Powerwall 2’s that’s been sitting idle installations for nearly 6 months. Remember, a huge portion of the debt servicing is from Solar City. Having no Powerwalls to install there doesn’t help their cause at all.

This is a pity. A lot of people do not need AWD but do want long range. And LR is better with the RWD than with the AWD which has the dual motor, even though they are both listed with 310 miles range. There was an item once where the RWD was closer to 330 miles. Not very customer oriented this move!!!

If a lot of people wanted LR RWD versions Tesla would be supplying them. Clearly Tesla is currently scrambling for demand for high end versions.

Maybe more people would wand the LR RWD if they were more aware of the extra range.

“This is a pity. A lot of people do not need AWD but do want long range.”

Not to say you’re wrong, but the demand for the AWD versions has been significantly higher than Tesla expected. However, I am surprised that they’re eliminating the LR RWD version, or at least that they’re doing so this soon. I do understand that it benefits Tesla to offer as few different versions of the car as possible, but it seems like they are cutting themselves off from part of the demand if they eliminate the LR RWD version.

I guess Tesla hopes they can persuade people to upgrade to the dual-motor LR versions, or switch to this new Mid Range RWD version, and I further guess that Tesla thinks the changes will result in increased demand, not lowered demand.

This version makes the price per extra kWh even more expensive than in the LR version, that was already insanely expensive with $360//kWh.
As I said many times before, the $35k version is still far from a reality and profits are far from great right now. This version is cheaper, but Tesla is probably increasing the profit over the $49k version.
Also batteries should be getting cheaper not more expensive.
This is not yet Tesla making a better car for the money, is still the opposite.

Nothing surprising, but a bit disappointing.

Everybody knows that a 35k Model is not possible with 4500 M3s a week. Also we know that there is a limited demand for the priciest version. Therefore Tesla is offering something in the middle.

Not very good (and confusing) for customers, very logical for Tesla.

Wow, this is front page news on Reuters today. That’s not the sort of treatment other carmakers get for launching an extra version of an existing model.

The same range as Kona and Niro, but about $10k more expensive?

Sure, but the Model 3 looks better, is faster, will have better resale, and it’s actually available.

That Extra 10 Grand is for the Tesla Charging Infrastructure… Nobody rides for Free !…

How so, given that Tesla charges for its use, and at what looks like at-cost, without subsidies?

To be the non Tesla fanboy opinion about this article:
This is 50 miles less range for $5k less, or 45 miles more for more $5k – when compared with the SR version.
Clearly less bang for the buck… after one year of model 3.

just a way to encrise profit with 5k for a base price car. Let s explain if with 49k you could travel 310 miles for 253 ~260 miles travelled the price shoud have been 40k not 45k.

Maybe, if you only look at one metric. But there’s also folks who are priced out of the market by the $5k and now JUST can swing it, getting a Tesla. In that regard, it’s worth it to some.

I agree with you. The car is cheaper and for some the extra range is irrelevant.
Anyway Tesla is releasing a cheaper car, decreasing the value of it above the discount and that is a bit disappointing, even more when one year passed over the launch of model 3.

Yea , Nickle & Dime The Buyer , But these Guys Just Don’t Get It . 0r Plainly Refuse To Understand it..

Mid-Range battery pack could be about 62 kWh.


Nice! Another option. So I guess the $35k Standard Model would be 220 miles of range, hard top roof and maybe cloth seats, to pull out $10k from the price.

in reality +5k to base price car

I Guess Elon Has to Find Some “Free Money” Somewhere to pay the Penalty For Carelessly Running His Mouth at Other People’s Expense , Which Costed Some Share holders a Ton of Money . As Time Goes By, I am Becoming Less & Less Enchanted With Tesla , Musk & All His F00LISH Shananagans Proprietary Rules , Etc: ….I WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE TO HIS CAUSE & THIS PRICE INCREASE STUPIDITY ….I AM 0UT ! Musk’s True Colors Are Surfacing ! I’ll Will Shop Elsewhere !

My thoughts – 50 miles less of range = $4,000 less in price
Before announcement cheapest M3 was $49k w/ 310mi of range — Now it is $45k w/ 260mi range
By my logic each of those 50 miles is worth $80

No need to over complicate things.

This car makes sense. Based on the math, it’ll be a 60kwh battery. There is the Bolt, the revised Leaf and the Kona, which all are at 60kwh (and others announced as well) plus their prices are closer to $40k than $35k. When the Model 3 was announced, competitors were at $35k. They were targeting a price point. It has been years since the announcement and the competition has their cars in play. Do the 60kwh and let customers compare apples to apples. Yes it’ll cost more, but Tesla is able to leverage brand to get a premium.

It’s a little more than 60 kWh. It’s also now $47k. At least until I refresh my browser again.

If the RWD LR is testing at 230wh/mile, that would be 60kwh.

A newer article here links to Troy Teslike estimate of 3744 cells. I had earlier estimated 3648. This is 65-66 kWh area.

Black with aero, $45k

Thanks. I was playing with options and it saved my color preference. Closing the window and starting from scratch didn’t reset it!

FSD? MIA on the order pages all of a sudden.

Another Tesla promise vanishing – Tesla collected upfront money on FSD options for two full years without delivering anything (10/2016 until 10/2018).

Any Kickstarter project doing this would be sued soon…

I called Tesla store, they said no guarantee for Model 3 RWD – Mid Range 12/31/18 delivery.
So, RWD – MR $3750 tax credit is most likely, only $250 less compared to RWD – LR with $7500 tax credit for those delivered prior to 12/31/18.

And yes, I’m a day one reservation holder hoping for RWD SR Premium ($40,000 – 7500 = $32500) purchase that will never happen. Disappointed, but waiting for next year price adjustments after Tax Credit is reduced / eliminated.

Hmm, it doesn’t look promising for a $35k Model 3. I think they will announce the low range premium model after $3,750 is gone, and it will be $41k or so. The total cost will be similar to the LR model, unless the congress somehow extend the federal tax credit.

“That works out to be some $30,000 (estimated ) less than a Jaguar I-Pace, but with more range.” Article written like this is what makes me think this website is just a shill for Tesla.