Tesla Model 3 Compared To Dozens Of “Competitive” Vehicles

Tesla Model 3


Tesla Model 3

Tesla Model 3

The most comprehensive Tesla Model 3 “competitive” vehicle comparison to date has just surfaced over on Imgur.

You’re in for a real treat here. Literally dozens of “competitive” vehicles are compared to the Tesla Model 3 in easy-to-decipher visual form. There’s even an alternative powertrain-only graphic to compare the 3 to other mostly plug-in vehicles.

Why the quotes around “competitive?” Well, for starters, some of the vehicles compared to the 3 only make the charts because they use some form of alternative propulsion. Other vehicles are really too expensive to be considered competitors. Add in the title of the Imgur uploads “Comparing the Model 3 with 24 vaguely rival-ish cars” and it becomes obvious that not all the listed vehicles can compete with the 3.

You’ll see why the competitive doesn’t really fit for some of the listed vehicles just as soon as you check out the graphics (below). Here’s just a tiny snippet of what you’ll see in the Imgur (via SomeGuy64) comparison graphics.

Snippet of Tesla Model 3 Comparison Graphic (Check out full images here via Imgur/SomeGuy64)

*Note: There are 4 images which you can scroll through the last three by clicking the next and previous arrows. A single click on any image will whisk you away to the Imgur page where you can enlarge each image to more clearly see comparative data.

Tesla Model 3 comparison sheets

Source: Imgur via Reddit

Categories: Tesla


Leave a Reply

58 Comments on "Tesla Model 3 Compared To Dozens Of “Competitive” Vehicles"

newest oldest most voted

Seems like the Model 3 is the clear-cut winner. Imagine the specs when Elon comes out with the Performance version..

(And if any haters want to sling arrows, can you at least refrain from the ‘fanboy’ cliche?)

It depends on what you value most, I guess.

If range is important to you, the Model 3 might not be as good, than if you highly value performance.

It has all the well known advantages that come with the EV drivetrain, as well as all the disadvantages, besides weight, wich is impressively competitive (for the base version).

Yes, the Model 3 is definitely the loser when it comes to range. For the single digit percentage of customers who really need a long range, they should avoid the Model 3 or get the 310 mile version.

Except that Tesla doesn’t actually produce a $35,000 car. Cheapest that has been delivered is $49,000.

Keep pleasuring yourself to that thought for another 3 months, because that’s all the time you have to keep milking that line.



Like R.S. said, it depends on what you value. I wanted longer range at a cheaper price, and the Bolt delivers because it is being heavily discounted. I also wanted forward drive due to snowy or slick conditions. The extra cargo space, instrument cluster infront of my view, actually getting it within a day & having a smaller size (easier to park etc.) is all icing on the cake.

The chart says the Bolt charges at 50kW, but it is really 80kW (once 80kW+ CCS come online, but it isn’t a car limitation).

Better to compare miles in 30 minutes when it come to charging: Bolt “up to” 90 miles vs small pack Model 3 130 miles in 30 minutes. Note that Bolt does need that 80KW charger for that, good luck finding one.

Yes, the Model 3 does charge faster on the supercharging network. There are many pros & cons to consider. The marginal increase in charging speed, considering how little I use fast charging, doesn’t sway the decision: Bolt for me.

Have you actually used Bolt at DCFC? They start off at about 40 kW, taper to 36 kW about about 50%, then taper to 25 kW about 70%.

I saw a Bolt at 80% took 20 minutes to add 10 kWh. That’s 30 kW on average.

There was Leaf next to it, and it took 20 minutes to add 13 kWh, 39 kW on average.

I charged my SparkEV after Bolt using the same charger, and added 14.8 kWh in 20 minutes (went past 80%), 44 kW on average.

All the talk of Bolt doing 80 kW is just fantasy. Fact is, Bolt is the slowest DCFC charging EV in the world.

I have a Bolt & I have used fast charging. It isn’t winning any races at the fast charger, but it charged as much as I needed it to. Do I wish it was faster? Of course. Does it outweigh all the other factors in my decision? Absolutely not. The Bolt is an excellent, all around EV, but not perfect in all areas.

Hard to say how it will perform on 80kW+ CCS. Hardly any exist yet. Perhaps more power can go to the battery conditioning to maintain higher charge rates. I’m not struggling either way.

Pretty sure the i3 is slower, but I know what you mean. GM should just make the 80kW unit standard and charge people from a 150kW unit. The latter would definitely be something to write home about.

“Make fast charging standard and charge for 150 kw”.

Except I don’t want it and don’t want to pay for it, even at the extremely economical $750. But that’s the point. Its cheap enough so that those who want it can select the option.

The only reliable CCS I’d have in the States is to Buy one of the BOSCH 25 kw fast chargers and install it in my garage for $8200.

Excepting for those who need it, I’ll let them buy it since my plain old L2 is good enough for me.

Totally agree that it’s an individual choice. Personally, I don’t like driving around with a paper bag on my head – which is what I’d have to do to be seen driving a car as ugly as the Bolt.

I consider fellow EV owners to be brethren so take that as purely a good natured ribbing.

Even more of a clear cut winner if one factors in the fact that spec and performance wise the base $35K Model 3 compares to a $44K BMW 330i (calculation Electrek).

The only major problem with this comparison is that the base model 3 comes with cloth seats. All of the competitors come standard with fake leather. That’s the only problem with the model 3 – i’m not cancelling my reservation but I find it shitty that Tesla is making me shell out an extra 5K for the fake leather, it should have been standard.

So, factor in the gas and maintenance savings over 5 years and your 5k premium pkg is more than paid for, and you have glass roof, premium stereo, and several other goodies to enjoy!

The current Tesla maintenance plans for the Model S cost more than typical ICE maintenance. Yes, in theory the Model 3 will be cheaper to maintain, but honestly ICEs are pretty cheap if you don’t overdo it. My van has had 4 oil changes in 3 years over 60000 miles and 1 12V battery. Total maintenance cost of about $200.

And they are a huge waste of money that most people shouldn’t buy. But Tesla will take your money if you give it to them. So will other automakers.

Don’t buy the service. Do it yourself.

-Tire rotation every year (free)
-Alignment every year ($160 lifetime, if needed)
-Battery for key fob every year ($3-6)
-Wiper blade replacement every year ($5-30)
-Brake Fluid every 2 years ($5-30)
-Cabin air filter every 2 years ($15)

Take it to Tesla for these:

-One time drive unit fluid service
-Battery coolant change very 4 years

Tesla’s aren’t like most ICE cars who will tell you if you can’t prove the car was regularly serviced by a professional, they won’t cover warranty repairs.

The yearly services on the Tesla are not required for warranty coverage.

Or just upgrade the seats after market.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

That’s what I’m sayin bruh.

You can probably find even more comfy ones.
That’s what I suggested to a few peeps when they told me their Bolt seats suck after driving it a few weeks.

People don’t buy a brand new car to change the seats. Ok , I confess that I once bought a new truck and had the seats recovered in leather before taking delivery. But that certainly isn’t the norm.

I don’t know why it’s not. People will certainly add aftermarket things to their cars, such as the center console which reportedly the TM3 is missing.

Is having the upholstery replaced on a car seat, or leather (fake or real) leather covers added as slip-ons, really that different? That’s not a rhetorical question. Maybe it really is different in people’s minds.

Personally I’d much rather have cloth than leather, as it’s warmer in winter and much cooler in summer. But that’s just me.

You can do that?

This is how Tesla (hypothetically) makes money.

The base BMW M3 comes with cloth seats. If it is fine for a $65K dollar BMW as one of the seating options, it is certainly fine for a $35K dollar Tesla M3 220 or 310.

I have to say that whoever put this together did a really nice job. I do agree that the Model 3 is competitive with most of those vehicles. Having driven an EV for the past 5 years, it’s easier to see. That said, these competitors do have advantages not captured on a spec sheet like multiple factories, high volume production experience, mature distribution channels, local sales and service, brand loyalty and trust built up over many years.

I’m on record as saying Tesla will deliver around 80,000 M3 by the end of next year. That’s my guess anyway and it assumes no hiccups along the way – like a major initial quality issue.

For my money, I’d pick up a used Model S with the 4 year warranty and free supercharging. If l had to go new, I would probably lease a new LEAF.

80,000 – wow. Are you a betting man?

Designed to be easy to make. Hiccups are one thing and could severely limit 2017 production but a hiccup running well into 2018? Unlikely.

They already make 80,000+ much more complicated cars a year, why limit the 3 to that?

Well, it’s going to take a minute, but here goes:

1. I don’t buy the 400K reservation number. I estimate that at least 50% of the reservations are phantom and will never be converted to sales due to high price, people having multiple reservations, cold feet, what have you.

2. I don’t believe Tesla will build the low option cars anytime soon due to low margins which will suppress demand and result in reservations not being converted to sales.

3. I don’t buy the ramp up schedule. Going from the prototype stage to the production stage is difficult enough already and Tesla skipped a lot of the critical development

[Crap don’t know what happened there]


4. Given the compressed schedule and the lack of product and production testing, I expect there to be some problems with production and delivery.

5. Once time is lost, you can’t get it back.

Again, these are just my opinions. Personally, I think 80K would be a sound number all things considered.

Yawn. More of the avalanche of FUD coming from the same crowd who said the Model 3 wouldn’t come until 2019. Boring.

How do you like your Bolt?

I don’t have a Bolt nor do I want one at this point. You must have me confused with someone else. I have a 5 year old LEAF and I am neither long nor short Tesla.

Even if the 400K reservations number is phantom, they could easily get new orders to replace them.

As long as they are able to deliver that $35K base model, I think they’ll have no problem selling thousands & thousands of them. It looks great, it is cheap to fuel, it has good range…people want it.

True enough. Again, we’re all just speculating. I think with a new motor, a new type of battery cell and pack, and a completely new platform coupled with the lack of testing and the production ramp, there is room for some pessimism. After all, Tesla has never had a completely glitch free product rollout. Besides, you know the best part about being a pessimist? You’re either proven right or pleasantly surprised.

Oh…I definitely think that there are serious production risks. And I wonder if they can be profitable selling the base Model 3 for $35K.

But if they can build that base Model 3 for $35K, I think the one problem the will NOT have is finding customers. It’s elegant, practical, quiet, affordable, simple, and dirt cheap to fuel.

80k requires a massive design or manufacturing flaw that requires line shutdown for many months. Or several major flaws, discovered at different times, each needing a month-long shutdown.

It’s unlikely to see such major/massive flaws this late in the game. Their accelerated schedule probably missed a bunch of minor flaws. Tesla won’t slow production materially for minor flaws. They’ll “batch” the changes up for several months, then address them in 1-2 week shutdowns each quarter.

80,000 by the END of 2018? I’m generally pretty skeptical but I think they can do much better than that. It is designed to be simple to assembly. I think the elimination of the dashboard helps a lot with that.

It looks like they’re comparing entry level luxury. But for value, Subaru WRX is hard to beat. While it’s not as quick and awful efficiency, it’s about $8K cheaper and comes with AWD.

But I’d take Tesla 3 over WRX, because auto pilot hardware is in there, and I can upgrade later when I think it’s working well. With WRX, I’d need to get a whole new car.

Totally agree. The WRX is a great value for the money and it’s reliable to boot. AWD and a manual transmission = fun. That said, I don’t think I can ever go back to ice for my daily. EVs just make commuting so effortless and drama free. I will continue to keep a an older sports car around for those days I want to add some drama.

“drama” That’s what internal combustion is reducing itself to, with every passing day.

This article makes no sense to me . they’re comparing all sorts of nonsense cars to the model3 . It’s NONSENSE !

Correct, L’amata. Check the other images in the IMGUR link, though. The comparisons make a lot more sense than the one at the top of this article.

Thank you, I get what you are saying , but when someone Compares A “Fossil Fuel CLUNKER” to a Model 3, it just doesn’t add up , As of now in my view there is no EV that makes a Fair comparison to Model 3 . A comparison is made to something Else that someone would buy in Lieu of the other that is Very Alike in all or most aspects, one being “SIZE”…. ” A Comparable”…. Not a Puddle jumper i3 , Bolt , Leaf or an Oil Burning “CLUNKER” which is Totally out of the question to me as a Buyer..We’re getting all our fruits & vegetable all mixed Up Here..That’s only my opinion & Yes I love Musk ,Tesla EV’s, Rockets that land themselves upright which is a 1st*, & “HUGE BREAKTHROUGH”. He’s a very Smart Guy..& All GAS Cars Are 0LD School “CLUNKERS” that are being forcibly shoved down people’s Throats …

You forget a few things in this articule
The tesla is free noise pollution.
All the rest are Moisés polute .
Just to mention one of Many ice disqdvantges.
The noise in citéis are very important !

I live by a busy freeway. I dream of the day, not so far in the future, when I will no longer be woken by noisy internal combustion engines.

If you live by a freeway, noise is the least of your worries. EPA’s toxic gas limit is city wide average (or some area wide average). But the source of toxic gas is few busy roads, especially freeways. You can do the math on city area to freeway area to estimate out how much higher poison gas is around freeways.

Free poison gas dumping SUCKS!!!

Besides, modern ICE cars are very quiet when driven. Tire noise is far more. I actually tested this, and SparkEV is noisier than Lexus when driving at decent speed due to tire noise.

As SparkEV said, don’t count on it, above ~70 kph, tire noise dominates and you can’t hear the difference between a modern ICE car and EV.

“when I will no longer be woken by noisy internal combustion engines.”

LOL. Ignorance.

You should more worry about ICE’s exhaust that harms you daily rather than the noise from ICE. Emission particulates directly harm you daily with exhaust that gets into your lungs and blood stream when they are PM 2.5 or smaller.

Beside few modified ICE exhaust cars or someone who is revving their engine to high RPM to pass or merge, most hwy noises are from tires, not engines. Tires contributes to a big portion of the so called “hwy noises”.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

Compare to these cars?!?!?!?


I don’t want to….
Suck/Swallow OPEC J***
Send my money to countries that want us dead

How do any of those other cars even qualify for comparison????


Because us folks who appreciate EVs aren’t relevant to the ones who will be buying the Model 3.

This car must hold its own against gas cars in the same price range in order to sell in the hundreds of thousands. Otherwise, it just as well might be a Bolt or a new Leaf, and sit mired in the muck of low selling EVs.

This is the article that should have been published yesterday. Instead, we had some apologetic piece about even though the Model 3 doesn’t measure up, it was still a nice car.

If anybody looking at these specific list of cars don’t care about any specific comparison, that’s great, you can skip over those cars when you look at the list.

On the other hand, somebody else who owns or is looking to buy one of the many cars certainly might be very interested. And that’s great too.

All is good.

I don’t see anywhere model 3 is more competitive than my Evo, which gives 1:51 track time in Laguna Seca.

If want to talk about HP or 0-60, it has 280HP and 4.9 sec for 0-60, range is 300+ miles, the historic and world famous 4WD system called ACD. If you want to talk about the safety, then braking distance is much more important than 0-60. This evo has Brabo brakes, and that ends the discussion here I guess. I don’t buy a car without a LSD anymore, and I’m not sure if model 3 has it. To me it looks like model 3 is just typical low performance car.

Mitsubishi killed the EVO way back in 2015. So unless you have the ability to re-animate the dead, and you don’t mind driving an undead zombie car, you are SOL. It is dead. Gone. Put an X through it. Some fantasy 2017 or 2018 EVO won’t appear on any comparison chart.

If you are waiting for some EVO XI fantasy, go read up on the US delays for the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV…..

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

This car?

The one that get’s the less MPG than an SUV?

Keep sending your gas money and swallowing OPEC jizz to the Prince’s and Kings at OPEC there buddy….