Tesla Model 3 Free Supercharging? Musk: It’s “Obvious” Owners Need To Pay

JUN 1 2016 BY MARK KANE 112

Typical Tesla Supercharging Station

Typical Tesla Supercharging Station

Tesla’s Supercharging network is one of the strongest selling point of electric cars.

The upcoming Model 3 will be allowed to use the Superchargers, just like the Model S and Model X, but it will not be free.

While Model S and Model X are assigned free lifetime use of the network for long-distance travel as part of the purchase price, the Model 3 is a different story. As expected, free charging won’t be extended to Tesla’s mass-market car.

Model 3 owners will have two options to use Superchargers:

  • purchase package for lifetime access
  • pay for use from time to time

According to Bloomberg, paying for Superchargers is “obvious.” The quote below comes directly from Tesla CEO Elon Musk:

“Free Supercharging fundamentally has a cost. The obvious thing to do is decouple that from the cost of the Model 3. So it will still be very cheap, and far cheaper than gasoline, to drive long-distance with the Model 3, but it will not be free long distance for life unless you purchase that package.”

Musk did not provide any additional details on the cost for charging a Model 3, but he did state the following:

“The best thing to do is to charge your car where you charge your phone: at home and at work.”

Source: Bloomberg

Categories: Charging, Tesla

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

112 Comments on "Tesla Model 3 Free Supercharging? Musk: It’s “Obvious” Owners Need To Pay"

newest oldest most voted

As Musk noted, this was pretty obviously going to be the way the III would get access to the Supercharger network. They were never going to “bake in” the Supercharger network into the lower price point that Tesla is going to be trying to achieve for the III.
The big question is, when is Tesla going to admit that they will need to price the III closer to $40,000? The Gigafactory will reduce the price of the pack, but it won’t reduce it THAT much.
Even at $40k, the III is going to be a great car.

You did not provided why Model 3 would need to be priced at 40 000$.

You know there are plenty of 35 000$ cars out there in same entry luxury segment with comparable body “volume”.

Why will Model 3 be 5 000$ more expensive?

Simply put, the pack. Even if they get the cell price down to $100 a kWh you still have to pay for the thermal management system and that gets your pack price to around $8000 and that is best case. When the pack costs $8k or more, you won’t get a sales price of $35k. Won’t.
But it will still be a very cool car to own.

Wait a minute, you add the pack cost on the one hand but suddenly forget to mention the withdrawal of the gas engine, the clutch, the gearbox, the exhaust pipe, the fuel tank and its pump and piping. All that together is a lot of money that you don’t have to pay for in an ev.

Good point. That kept the price of the Model S really low, not.

For a luxury car the price is indeed low. There are a lot of reviews comparing model s and x for example with bently, bmw 7, ferrari ff and so on. Bently has same acceleration but costs 3 times as much. Bmw is slower, louder, has smaller screen and so on and costs roughly the same. For what tesla offers, the price is fine.

I agree. It’s “convenient” for some folks to forget calculating all the parts NOT in an EV. Maybe they believe it only amounts to a grand or two.

It’s convenient to not include the cost of the BEV motor, the onboard charger, and all the high power cabling.
I am being sarcastic, but my point is that BEVs still cost more to build than an equivalent sized ICE. This is changing but it will take several years for most electric cars to come close to ICE prices. And a lot of that is pack costs.

The Tesla S60 had SC as a $2,000 option. So I would think the model 3 would be about the same or less. I’d buy that in my new model 3 with no problem.

I’d bet money against that.

The new Tesla VP of Finance is really jacking up prices everywhere he can in order to raise profits.

Accessories and optional packages have all gone up. Model S rear seats $1500, then $2500, now $3000.

So Supercharging package $2000 then, probably $3000 when Model III is out or maybe lumped into some $5K Tech Package.

Just watch and see.

Drive train costs aren’t openly shared, but I believe we aren’t out of a ballpark if we assume 3-6k for the whole thing (ICE & transmission). So, an $8k or $10k battery pack, before electric motors, is what’s preventing OEMs from going all-in on BEVs. In other words, for otherwise the same level of luxury, a BEV still probably costs >$5k more to produce.

Chevy wouldn’t $$ pony up for more than a 3.6kw onboard Volt charger, for Volt 2. Tesla will likely include its typical 10kw onboard charger, in addition to any hardware needed to absorb 100kw+ supercharges. -free. To get free watts, as well with your $35,000 car was “obviously” not going to be part of the deal. Nonetheless, people miss understood.

Manufacturing is ~50% of gascar MSRP:
Body+trim 13%
Engine+transmission 13%
Chassis (susp,brakes,wheels,etc.) 13%
Final Assembly 11%

So 35k msrp engine+trans is about 4500 vs. something like 10k for Model 3 battery pack + motor + power electronics.

Almost 25% of gascar MSRP is selling costs. Dealer margin, ads, discounting and incentives, transport, inventory, etc. That’s almost 9k on our 35k msrp gascar. Musk wants to get his 5k back by squeezing this 9k down to 4k or below.

I realize that replacement parts are not the same as the cost of the parts in a new car, but just for perspective a BMW or Audi brand new replacement engine is $25k+ from a dealer, and a transmission is $7K+. Even with 50% markups, these are expensive drivetrains. They aren’t Chevy Aveo drivetrains that the M3 is going up against in this market segment.

The cost of the drivetrain in vehicles in the M3’s class is much more expensive than folks think.

Still not clear if enabling the hardware will also be an option. My guess would be a package or an option to enable plus a per use fee.

$40K is likely not the low end.

When Musk stated a few months ago that the III would “be SuperCharger capable” he was obviously prepping people for the probability that SC access was going to be an option.
His referring to free SC access if you purchase the package makes me think it will be a $2k-$3k option you can select, but who knows.

A pay per use system would imply that you have supercharge capability hardware installed. That is costing something so even for a single supercharger use per year you would indeed need to charge an entry fee to account for the price of the supercharging hardware in your car.

But on production side it would complicate things to have cars with and without, so it could be that they do like for autopilot, put it in all cars but only enable it if you pay for the option; in this case activation for life or activation for pay per use.

Perhaps they should also add a third option which would be activation for life with 100% use to allow apartment dwellers to openly use superchargers when they don’t have a home charging or destination charge option without being accused of abusing the system since everything would be clear from the start. That would be a kind of “super access” contract at four times the standard price (8000 $ for 100% supercharger recharge). That would leave zero possibility for claimers who tell they can’t charge. Even though it would be a bit contrary to the primary idea of what superchargers are there for.

When it was so obviously, why did Tesla not just clearly said it at the reveal?

Sure it was obvious. But some delusional fanboys have taken Musk promises for real 😉


You obviously didn’t actually read the article. It goes on to say this, which is exactly what Musk is confirming now, 2 1/2 years later:

“We suspect that access to the Supercharger network will be an option for Gen 3 (so, some will undoubtedly say it isn’t free then).

Our advice for future Gen 3 buyers is simple: opt for Supercharger access. Tesla’s Supercharger network is a game-changer for EVs.”

The access Musk was talking about 2 1/2 years ago was in contrast to the Roadster and Model S 40, neither of which has access to the Supercharger network, at any price.

His comments, and the comments of the insideev’s writer don’t contradict anything in this story today.


The article says: “Musk confirmed to the crowd of gatherers that Gen 3 will get free access to the growing network of worldwide Superchargers.”. The rest of the article is just speculation what blog authors thought. Of course it was obvious for every sensible that it is not possible to provide it for free. Yet it was wide spread and well known fanboy assumption that Model 3 will provide free superchargers included in $35,000 price, and this assumption came from Musk words.

I can say more, that it is obvious for every sensible person that you will not have any usable $35k Model 3 in 2018 in mass production. You may have some $45k-$65k mass production car in 2020 at best. Model S sells at $70k barebone and Tesla is loosing money before investments and can’t get out of serial stock dilutions. How on Earth they would be able sell almost the same car for half the price?

Obviously you don’t know the difference between a direct quote of Musk’s actual words, and a third-party’s interpretation of Musk’s words. Because that sure as heck isn’t a direct quote.

The entire article is what you call “just speculation what blog authors thought”. But it is very funny that you cherry pick one single sentence and blindly state that it means something that the whole rest of the blog contradicts.

The title of that article is misleading. They say free in the title but they say it will be an option that cost money.

This makes sense and I welcome it, however it will require some rebuilding of the existing SuperChargers as they are not set up to gather info that could be used authenticate and “turn on” for charging. Seems like it could be an easy fix.

Can’t rely on the car to do this as SC capability enabling has already been “hacked”. Using the car to manage the transaction seems unwise.

Not true that “SuperChargers… are not set up to gather info that could be used authenticate and “turn on” for charging.” Model S and X owners get a notification today that they are overusing the network, so data needed to bill anyone for use is already being gathered. I’ve read that SCs are also already overcrowded in some locations because Model S/X owners charge near home so they can drive free instead of very cheap by charging at home. These owners should also be charged at locations within some radius of home (50 mi. or so) to alleviate this overcrowding that affects all owners. I would be very happy with a pay per use model as I will only be taking road trips from time to time out of my metro area.

Yes Brian, the best figure I know for average number of fast charges per year while traveling is 4-10.

That seems low to me. I do 2 ski trips, 1 beach trip and 2 other trips a year personally, plus a couple of business trips and total out about 25-30 supercharge connections annually.

That seems high to me. Assuming average of 300 miles driven per charging, 30 charging sessions is 9000 miles, just on supercharging. Most people don’t drive so much. I think most people will be once or twice a month (12 to 24 times), 3600 to 7200 miles and the rest at home for a total of about 15K miles a year.

That is, assuming that superchargers are priced high enough to discourage use unless absolutely necessary. If people are using more now, it’s due to “free” supercharging, not due to any need.

Assuming 15k miles driven a year (in the U.S. the average man drives 16,550 miles per year, while the average woman drives 10,142 miles per year), and figuring 150 miles (the average distance between many Superchargers) per SC session, 4 charging sessions a year totals 600 miles, and 10 charging sessions total 1500 miles. 150 miles represents 1% of yearly charging, so 4-10 sessions a year is also 4-10% of yearly charging. Tesla average yearly Supercharger use is 5-8%, and there are a couple factors that push it that high too.


In the future fast charging for longer range EVs like Tesla is actually expected by some analysts to reach around 2%.

You’re using distance between superchargers, but people would not use supercharger unless they are on longer than 200 miles trip. Then added range for 1 supercharger is close to 400 miles. I suspect some trips are less, so I guesstimate 300 miles on average for a trip that needs supercharger use.

But if people are “abusing” supercharging, they would use it for far shorter trips, as you suggest, 150 miles. Then the number of supercharging will be much more due to abuse.

Actually Spark EV I think you are quite wrong on this one, sorry to say. I guarantee that the vast majority of Model 3s (with 215 miles range) will certainly charge not much more than 150 miles away from their starting point with a full charge. So pretty much any trip longer than 150 miles will utilize Supercharging. There are factors that bring the 215 number down including allowing a buffer (maybe 20 miles) when getting a Supercharge, and then from a Supercharge of 80% it will be even less between charges, like around 100 miles. Also, you are including in the total trip distance the miles that would be from charging at home, whereas I am talking Supercharged miles. So the added range from one Supercharger session on a trip will add typically 100 or so miles to a total trip distance of 250 miles. I believe you rightly suspect some trips are less like you said. IMO the majority will be. If most Model 3s will pay per use for the Superchargers (like I believe they will) then abuse will be very minimal I suspect. But anyway… the main thing I was actually illustrating and proving is that… Read more »

@drucifer … So 2 + 1 + 2 + 2 = 25 to 30? Are each of these trips 800 to 1200 miles or did you study math at Donald Trump U?

I agree its over-rated, how valuable free access to superchargers really is. Yes, some dudes in CA pay ~40 cent/kwh tiered rates, but most of the rest of us, who are part of the 12 cent US average, would probably put more value on our time than to venture out of our way to a supercharger.

4-10 long distance supercharges per year shouldn’t cost more than ~$10 each. Nobody knows what Tesla will charge, but that’s about the electric cost, to them. ***This isn’t a big deal***, unless you’re a condo owner who plans only to depend on the SC’s.

This is much more about capital cost. Electricity cost is just smaller fraction of it.

Quite true. It’s the service that’s being paid for. And for the record, utility demand charges can be 2/3rds of the total electric cost.

Yes true. The car reports this, not the SuperCharger.

This isn’t rocket science. If whatever protocol they currently use to communicate between car & charger has been hacked, a firmware upgrade should be able to fix that (and for safety reasons, it’s obvious that there is such a protocol, and no reason it can’t be encrypted).
The superchargers are presumably Internet-connected (to provide Tesla with usage data, report when a station needs repair etc.) — I’d be very, VERY surprised if it isn’t trivial technically to implement a scheme where the car’s ID is sent to Tesla, to verify it’s authorized to charge and under what pricing plan.
Obviously the implementation needs to be robust, but there are any number of existing protocols for this (micropayments) — no need to reinvent the wheel.
The more interesting question is what type of charging arrangement will be offered: Opportunistic per charging session, lower price per sessions for buying more sessions in advance, subscription per time period etc.

And remember Musk is the guy that brought us PayPal, so he’s done payment before.

Exactly. I think Elon’s not worried about implementing a car-based payment system for Superchargers. The same system could be used by other automakers vehicles, if they paid to play.

Its far easier to secure the connection to the car than a card.

I’m pretty sure it will be a 3 month subscription or something, and not a pay per use, as I remember that there is a big issue with SC’s and the regulations that cover gasoline pumps, which have to be tested etc, and that was one of the reasons not to charge for their use. Forget the link but someone will have it.

Superchargers VIN authenticate every vehicle attached. In the event of a comm failure with the mothership, there is a failover where the supercharger will charge any Tesla, even if it didn’t have supercharging turned on, but comm failures are very rare.

Why on Earth would it need to talk to the mothership to check a given VIN? A chassis number is just a few bytes of data; holding a local copy of the list of cars that has supercharging enabled is absolutely zero issue. Even if hundred of millions of cars were on the list, the list would still easily fit on a cheap USB stick or memory card, even without compression…

They probably keep local data copy cached, but it is constantly changing data and it gets updated in real time, and charger obviously does have connection to mothership anyway, so why not check for new data one way or another. Remember supercharging was optional for early Model S and it was enabled post sale on per client basis.

Now if communication fails temporary, you can deny any new clients or allow all. Allowing all would be more logical solution for slow charging process, it is not gas station.

Again, the comm is from the car, not he SC.

Superchargers are not ready but the cars may be set up with software mixing GPS data and charging state. Easily.

Well, this should keep in mind that Musk is, for the future, trying to ward off any unnecessary traffic lining up for a charge.

Told you so.

As a model 3 reservation holder, I didn’t expect free SC…nothing is free.

Around 70% of comments agreed too, back in March. I think I was on the high end at 5k, and got lambasted for that, but my thinking was they would only want people who really needed the sc network.
Though I still think there may be a usage option too.

Probably a software onboard -on off switch/ subscription to Tesla billing department direct to your credit card. Can’t see them over complicating charging.

That’s exactly how it works. First time I used a supercharger in my Model S, it wouldn’t charge and I called the toll free number. It was over the holidays, but because my VIN was so low, I was emailed saying I wouldn’t have to pay for the Supercharger access since it was a back-and-forth thing in the news. So I’m standing in a cold empty mall lot at 1:00 AM over Thanksgiving and the Tesla technician says he can enable it for a fee. I wasn’t the most polite customer, but I said what needed to be said, and my vehicle was correctly enabled already, but the stall was inoperative, so I switched stalls and that was what was required.

This is the right move no question about it. SC’s will become as unusable as single point DCFC’s if a bunch of 3 drivers ( new to the whole EV thing) use the superchargers freely to charge their car everyday.

Doing the right thing is almost always tougher, but this is e right choice for existing Tesla owners, owners to be, and the company itself.

I was really disapointed because the Model 3 is not going to be for free, as it will cost about 35K.
Now I’m even more disapointed because it won’t even have free access to Tesla’s superchargers.
Get real guys!
At least has Tesla a supercharger network.

Are you a Republican? Because you seem to want free stuff…or are you being sarcastic?

The concept of paying for supercharging isn’t upsetting to me – after all if it was free where are you going to put the 400,000 cars every day?

Musk is already STRONGLY discouraging people from using the SC as their ‘home charger’.

I’m somewhat more confused as to how you can get a model 3 to go 215 miles with ‘much less’ than a 60 kwh battery which we are told that the 3 will not have,

Or, maybe the BOLT with 60 kwh battery and ‘only’ 200 miles is just conservatively rated.

Bolt Cd 0.32
Model 3 Cd 0.21-0.22

“Model 3 owners will have two options to use Superchargers:
1 purchase package for lifetime access
2 pay for use from time to time”

I didn’t option #2 coming from Musk/Tesla. How was this inferred?

agreed kdawg. Hey Jay how did you guys conclude the part about paying per charge?

“purchase package for lifetime access”

This is the same as what Tesla S/X is doing now, except they are mandatory, not optional. Hopefully this will be expensive enough to discourage most people from taking this option. This is bad.

“pay for use from time to time”

It’s not clear what this means. Pay flat fee per month? Pay each time based on kWh used? Pay each time based on how long it’s connected? Combination of them all like eVgo OTG plan?

If it’s monthly flat fee only, it will have even worse abuse than one time fee; people will simply try to maximize use to get their money’s worth, whether they need it or not. While they may not sign up every month, there will be millions of Tesla 3 on the road, and even a small percentage is a huge number of abusers.

IMO, best is something like eVgo that combines both time and energy cost but without the subscription fee. That will open up the potential for even other maker cars to use them.

Sparky: I had the same thought that this could open the door for other non-Tesla cars to use the SC’s. Seems like a great idea to me. Also, as you so often point out, people will abuse the system if it is free. This should help to eliminate that problem. Most people will only very occasionally even use the SC’s, so this solution is fair for everyone.

Charge for time parked would be the best way to try to curtail campers. The name of e game should be encouraging turnover at super charger locations.

Elon did say, “package” so, could he have in mind, a fee for Super Charging, to come in a package with other conveniences, say like, a larger battery? 70 kW? AWD? Autopilot? ???


That’s what I’ve been guessing as well. To keep the line moving they will require autopilot. That’s a 3000$ option.

So right away the car is up to 40K. I’m figuring in the 50’s for the way I want one configured. I’ll want the bigger battery as well. Oh and air suspension. Oh and Dual motors.

Supercharging is baked into the Model S and X price. That’s the only difference. It used to be an option for Model S as well obviously until margins increased.

It makes sense to try to discourage locals from charging close to home,

Imagine what trying to get a charge to finish your journey will be like once the model III and the subsequent even cheaper Tesla offering gets going in full force.

The best incentive for everyone who can charge at home or work is to make it less attractive or it will ruin it for the vast majority, if the tech is there, you could limit the amount of charge to ensure you have enough to get the the car’s registered address but no more if they are within say 30 miles from home ?

Your idea of limit to the charging according to the distance to your home is interesting because it would indeed render abuse almost impossible. However the supercharger would need to know if you are coming back home from far away or coming from home and on your way to far away. Indeed if you go far away and pass to recharge at a supercharger, you don’t want to receive a limited recharge. That is going to be tricky to determine. Arguably you could say that you are not expected to start your day with an empty battery but just in case it happened you wouldn’t want to stand a customer with a partial charge because of that assumption.

I was working on the basis that it would not appear to be unreasonable to expect owners with access to home chargers to have started the day with a full charge or enough so that it would not require charging from a local charger.

It would require us EV enthusiasts to act responsibly for the greater good.

Well now that that is confirmed, I guess people can stop claiming “free supercharging” when lauding the model 3. It’s about time the reality of the price point hit.

They get free supercharging. The cars will come enabled (hardware FREE).

OT-This month’s Motor Trend interviews Toyota VP saying Prius Prime charges “faster” than Volt. Never mind that this is a function of a smaller battery. Toyota and Chevrolet also provide FREE charging (hardware). Just that its closer to a 3kw, and not a 100kw take rate.

So how many people that plunked down ‘3’ reservations (~90% new to Tesla, btw) were expecting they could get a Tesla with free supercharging for only $35k?

$35k base….then add $1,200 for delivery fee, then at least another $2.5k for Supercharging, and we’re almost at $40k! Oh, and by the time base Model 3’s actually start getting delivered, the $7.5k tax credit will likely be gone for Tesla.

Some people are in for some not-so-nice surprises soon.

I don’t believe that many of those who put $1,000 down will be surprised at all by this.

Even if some people are disappointed with this, even if some other fees/options are to be added, I will still buy a tesla if I can and will still AVOID the dealers and especially GM (for how they’ve acted like bullies in tandem with dealer’s organizations/lobbyists).
Even if trump is a liar and a fraud I (if possible) would still never vote for HC no matter how 99% of media is trying to bash him day in day out. The same about dealer’s mob and their supporters (big oil?).

And $1000 for metallic paint, as is typical in the luxury class.

There will be increasing numbers of people disappointed as we get closer to Model 3 launch, but I think interest is so high, they’ll be able to sell as many as they can build at $45,000 to $55,000. That’s good for Tesla because they need to reach profitability.

Typically equipped, the Model 3 will likely end up being what the Model S was supposed to be: a $49,000 car.

I count on a €2k “free for life” charging for my reservation. That’s what I have put in my budget while saving up for the Model 3.

Assuming about $50 per month in electric use at home, $2K will be recoup in 4 years. But more use will have recoup even quicker, thus inviting abuse. Why charge at home and pay even more when you already pre-paid for supercharging, especially if supercharger is nearby?

I hope Tesla remove this option, or at least make it lot more expensive. I think $100K (yes, 3X the price of car) would be “reasonable”; that could be used to setup another supercharger.

Needs to be some cap on even “unlimited” supercharging…like up to X sessions a month/year, then it costs extra $$$ if you exceed the number.

That would prevent local supercharger “squatters” from abusing them.

Then they will use exactly X times. While problem may be less than unlimited, it’s still going to be a problem.

Maybe another way could be to limit one “free” car per location (assuming more than on supercharger at all locations). If there are more than one “free”, they’d have to wait. If they don’t want to wait, they’ll have to pay per use like everyone else. But I don’t think this will go over well with those who pre-paid large amount.

For me it would be about $17 a month charging at home.

I would never ever waste my time sitting in a parking lot at a supercharging station instead of charging at home. I don’t understand why anyone would ever do that.

If I were a child worker from Bangladesh I might be happy with that “salary” for wasting my time.

I have 15 kilometers to the closest supercharging, the value depreciation of the car to go there and back is (a lot) more than the cost of the “free” electricity. I say as Elon, if only people could count.

For many of us who can do the math, sitting at supercharger (aka DCFC) makes no sense when you can plug in 5 seconds at home. But the power of free (or pre-paid) is so strong that almost everyone I encounter / wait for at DCFC are locals using “no charge to charge”. As I often bitch in forums here and elsewhere, free charging SUCKS!


Even some Tesla drivers who can afford ~80K car apparently were doing it, causing congestion at superchargers. As such, pre-paid (aka, “free”) is to be strongly discouraged unless the fee is high enough to put in another supercharger.

If Tesla is going to start on demand billing for the Supercharger stations Tesla should install CHAdeMO and CCS chargers at the stations so they can get a lot more traffic and make a lot more money at the remote stations.

Best idea ever! It’s win for Tesla to make extra money, win for all EV drivers for more charging stations!

Well, Tesla would never want to do it, but the EU will FORCE Tesla to do it (at least CSS).

Tesla would wouldn’t want the additional problems associated with CHAdeMO/CCS-Combo chargers because they they don’t already have enough cash burning problems at the present time. Model 3 ramp up is first priority, after getting the Model X growing production pains out of the way. Maybe after 2020, certain other companies that want in on the Tesla Super Chargers can buy in, when they see the light and want to join Team Elon. I’m thinking GM will be last on board. They are fighting for their Franchise dominance every where.


The addition of CCS will be nice and profitable to help PAY for the infrastructure.

Tesla WON’T Do it, because it will give access to the very network that sets tesla apart from future 200+ mile EVs (namely Bolt right now).

Musk said anticipated ave car is $43K with the base $35k. I’m definitely a local user so welcome the PayPerUse option to not bake in the cost of the network that I would rarely use.

This is exactly what I’ve said over and over again, by not allowing non-Tesla EVs to use the Supercharger network Tesla is actually restricting electric vehicle adoption. I will never consider buying a Tesla, any Tesla at any price, unless these predatory business practices cease.

Completely illogical as usual.

The fact of the matter is Tesla has done MORE to encourage EV adoption then any other global entity and certainly FAR MORE then the laggard OEMs.

Tesla has been the pioneer of EVs by being the only all-in OEM on EVs and by fully thinking out all the steps necessary to transition to EVs including long-range cars with logically placed DCFC that you constantly whine and snivel about here.

Tesla established its Supercharger system BECAUSE THERE WERE NO OTHER DCFC STANDARDS available at the time to enable rapid recharging for long distance travel!

If Ford or any other of the laggard OEMs were truly serious about pushing EV adoption as fast as possible they would also invest in these same ecosystems so talk to Ford (which doesn’t have even ONE car that is DCFC capable) about it if you are that concerned.

As has been pointed out to you repeatedly, Tesla has offered ANY of the laggard OEMs to join its Supercharger network at any time. which it established BECAUSE THERE WERE NO OTHER DCFC STANDARDS available at the time!

Get real, that’s a good monicker for you. Tesla chose to ignore working to development a common DCFC standard that could have promoted far greater EV adoption. Tesla offer to make Superchargers available to other manufacturers so far appears to be nothing more than lies and deceit but you have swallow their lies deeply.

You are in denial FFE.

The DCFC work being done was far too slow for Tesla’s deployment schedule so developed their own system which is superior by doing levels 1, 2, 3 all with the same small plug.

No, you are in denial. Your God is not worthy of the pedestal you put him on.

You watch too many movies obviously.

Musk is not a god, just a very driven and talented individual who is pushing very hard for the transition to sustainable transportation and in doing so leading the charge for EVs.

Texas FFE — End the nonsense.

This has all been explained to you ad-nauseum so many times that only intense brain damage or willful ignorance explains your continued posting of the same bull-puckey in every Tesla story, no matter what the topic of the story is.

Tesla has repeatedly invited other car makers to join the Supercharger network. It isn’t Tesla’s fault that nobody has big enough batteries in their cars yet to be able to supercharge.

Tesla had to have their own chargers, because the standards group screwed around setting a standard, and weren’t anywhere near being done when Tesla was already testing Validation test vehicles getting ready for production.

Normal people post on stories about topics they actually care about. Yet you freely admit you have ZERO interest in Tesla’s, yet you repeatedly post the same bullpuckey over and over on stories about a car you have zero interest in.

End the nonsense.

Where did Musk say that a pay-per-use scheme would be available? I did not hear that on the call. A one-time up front cost for SC access would be consistent to how it worked initially with the Model S. I bet that fee will be included in the larger battery pack option.

Ahahahah, bad day to be a loony

Make complete sense…

I called it.

They were a bit shady on their ambiguous language that allowed people to think that it was included.

Its a little more complicated than that.

What Musk was really saying was that ALL Model 3s will be capable of Supercharging by including all the wiring necessary.

This means that at any time during the life of the vehicle and owner can pay to have the Supercharging electronically enabled.

Well, I hardly expected Musk to be totally open about this.

His Forte is getting people enthused about new products, and therefore, to keep the enthusiasm ‘UP’ the details are dribbled out much later.

I mean how many people would buy a Model S if they knew at the outset that a car which ‘rarely caused wear on the friction brakes’ if they knew out-of-warranty the brake job charge (apparently every 4 years or 50,000 miles) will be over $8600.00?

Bill, you are exposing your bias again.

When you say “totally open”, you imply that a decision had already been made, and policy had already been set in stone, and that somebody was hiding it.

There is absolutely no evidence of that. In fact, all the evidence is the opposite, with Tesla already stating that all the decisions haven’t been made, and that there will be a second reveal.

You are aware that there will be a second reveal, with more details, right?

You aren’t silly enough to think that Tesla isn’t being “totally open” about everything that is yet to be announced, just because they haven’t made all the decisions yet?

It has been nearly a decade since your problematic Roadster experience. Time to let it go. The Tesla that will be building the Model 3 is hardly the same company that was importing gliders and hand building cars a decade ago.

Plenty of inaccuracies again for you Nix.

I replaced my Roadster 1 year and 10 days ago. That is 1/10th the ‘better part of a decade’.

Hehe Musk says the same thing – OF COURSE IT COSTS PLENTY TO SERVICE A TESLA – you think you can get a Rolls-Royce or Bentley fixed for $19.99?

I’ll wait for the passage of time to see what actual out-of-warranty costs are for these vehicles. What incidentally, do you drive?

The last gasbag who gave me all kinds of lip didn’t have a penny invested in EV’s of his own money.

I’ll spend my money where and when I please – no comments from the peanut gallery needed.

Bill — No, full brakes are definitely NOT needed every 4/50K. That is bogus. And the one person known to actually document the full brake system replacement actually got it for about 40% less, because Tesla cut the price for them.

Actually, Tesla has significantly cut parts prices across the board over about the last year or so.

Oh, and you clearly don’t even know what brake jobs cost in $100K+ high performance vehicles.

10K-12K Brake jobs:


20K-43K brake jobs:


Great decision, everyone wins.
If supercharging comes standard on every M3, that means majority of owners will have hard time getting a charge when needed. You can simply forget about it during holidays or long weekends.

By charging a reasonable small fee, owners that live around supercharging station will choose to charge at home.

Even with the SC cost on top of the $35K, it’s at the price of the Bolt.

No, Tesla should not allow non Tesla EV’s to charge. If the other Big companies don’t support their EV’s by building out infrastructure, why should Tesla have to allow their products?
The other companies to man up and grow some balls. THEY (the non Tesla companies) are the ones hindering EV adoption, not Tesla.

Also not seeing where you parsed out a pay-per-use option. Seems like the M3 will follow the model of the S60, where you could opt-in to Supercharging for $2000/$2500.

I hope to see a …..

Lifetime option for occasional usage
One year option with an occasional and a daily usage price.
Lease term option occasional/daily
Pay as you go demand pricing option

Probably best to eliminate the lifetime option.

I could see certain groups choking up the superchargers now that a Tesla vehicle is “mainstream priced”.

– über drivers
– residents that live near a supercharger location

Why pay for a home charger set up (and electricity) when you’ve already paid for free lifetime?


Tesla might even have to charge “penalty rates” if they see you supercharging within x number of miles of your “home base”.

I think it’s crucial that Tesla keep the limited number of superchargers available for long distance travelers.

I think supercharging for life will cost around 3k. Anything above that would be a dealbreaker and supercharging is my only option.

It can’t be “free for life” or it would look like Tesla is planning to go bankrupt in few years with ever increasing number of cars on the road. Or it would need to cost some $5k with 10 year limit. Right now they account their “free supercharing” liability for some 8 years only. Assuming they scale up production, it may be not a big deal to eat extra costs for early cars later. But this can’t increase forever.

So they can go with per-use model like every gas station around. The problem with this model is that capital cost makes supercharging more expensive than gas, and it doesn’t look good at all for marketing. They may subsidize the cost, but really they are loosing money already, it can’t go forever. More likely you will see some monthly fee in addition to per-use fee. Per-use fee may be cheaper than gas if you’ll ignore monthly fee, problem solved.

It will be bad for marketing EVs if per use is expensive than gas.
It does appear to be a bit messy and expensive whichever model they choose to implement because of the capex involved. Now that they have shown EVs are capable of going mainstream I hope all manufacturers agree on a fast charging standard and charging infrastructure takes off.

Also It would be interesting to watch how the economics of gas stations change when displaced gasoline from PHEVs and BEVs start affecting their business. Will there still be as many? They will include fast chargers? Would there be enough demand since most folks home charge? I know I am thinking too far ahead 🙂

Sure, makes sense. Just like Society give something free to those who could easily afford to pay for it and charge of those who can not, perfect! More reasons why the model 3 is not going to be as affordable as many would hope. By the time you get one with the features that you like and supercharging added the $35,000 price is going to be nowhere to be seen I’m expecting closer to 50K

happy to have access to supercharger, and also happy to pay for the electricity. If I cam close to home, I will charge there. If I am travelling, then happy for the convenience of a fast charge, and think it is fine to pay for it, and unreasonable to expect
a. A Cheaper car
b. free power..
So pay for the car at the right price, and appreciate the ability to fast charge when travelling.

I hope for a pay as you use model. And a price set a little higher (10-20%) than the local average price. That way Tesla will still be customer frendly but will prevent abuse.

As someone noted if a monthly electric bill of 50$ can be avoided due to supercharger “abuse” the single payment of 2000$ will be cheaper after 3.5 years. That is a very short time span.

In germany the calculation is even worse. With 20kWh/100 km and 15.000km/a assumed. The 2000€ fee would be vheaper after less than 3 years.