Tesla Model 3 Mid Range Production Now Underway


The newest version of the Model 3 is now in production.

First VINs (Vehicle Identification Numbers) have started to come in for the Model 3 Mid Range aka Model 3 MR. VINs are assigned to cars after the car enters production.  First deliveries are expected next week. The Model 3 Mid Range was nicknamed ‘Lemur’ after Elon’s tweet a couple of weeks ago when he unexpectedly announced this new trim level in a cryptic way.

The screenshot is from the Teslike Model 3 Order Tracker. You can use the Google form here to add your data if you have configured a Model 3.

Based on my latest calculation, I estimate that the Model 3 MR battery pack has 3,648 cells compared to 4,416 for LR and 2,976 for SR. Tesla seems to slightly under-advertise Model 3 battery capacities.

In terms of gross margins, after the latest price adjustments, the Model 3 MR has only 1.5% worse gross margins than the LR. Here are the details of my calculation:

If the 3,648 cell count estimate is accurate, the range of the Model 3 MR with the 18″ wheels and aero covers is expected to be more than the 2014 Model S 85 and 2018 Model S 75D and same as the 2016 Model S 90D. Interestingly, it is also more than the Model 3 LR AWD with 19″ wheels or the Model 3 Performance with 20″ wheels.

Source: Teslike.com

Categories: Tesla

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

39 Comments on "Tesla Model 3 Mid Range Production Now Underway"

newest oldest most voted

To Elon say I: I’ve got junk in the trunk and funk in the frunk! This new Model 3 is rockn’ it, baby!

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

I thought the “Standard Range” was to be $35K?
It’s listed in the table at $40K.

Price seems to include the currently mandatory premium package on each one.

I am the ivan801 guy listed in the spreadsheet above. I just got a call from local Tesla shop, they have my car and it should be ready for delivery tomorrow. They confirmed that 151,555 is in fact my VIN.

That’s slightly ahead of schedule! Congrats to your TM3!!! *jealous*

Really? Hm. I think I may have to make like Munroe and also eat crow. I was saying Tesla wouldn’t start building or delivering Mid-Range until end of November, early December… signs point towards me being wrong and they’re moving quicker on this than I expected. I think I want to up my guesses from earlier of 18K deliveries of Model 3 in October and 22K in November to 20K in October and 24K in November… I’m going to leave my estimate of 28K in December alone.

I think they are manufacturing Lemur for out of California customers. As November ends they would focus solely on South California customers, this way they will deliver a lot more cars without having large numbers out in transit.

“Lemur”? I’m pretty sure Tesla isn’t manufacturing any type of primate… 😉

Do Not Read Between The Lines


And then they announced the Mid-Range.
People back-formed to “Limited Edition Mid-Range”. It’s conceivable that “lemur” was Tesla’s internal name for it.

Why South(ern) California? You do realize that Fremont is in Norcal, don’t you? That would make delivery to Northern California residents without having large number out in transit.

My bad, I always thought fremont was in SoCal

Many congratulations

You just got your VIN two days ago, and are already to take delivery? Sounds like they started building these as inventory cars even before opening orders…

Is there a VIN character for battery size?

Not that I am aware, only single or dual motor.

“Is there a VIN character for battery size?”

That’s a good question. No there isn’t one specifically for battery size. If the only delta is the battery capacity you shouldn’t be able to tell the difference between a MR and an LR Via the VIN unless Tesla got creative with the character for the motor/ drive type or the body type& GVWR.

Why are Model 3 dual motor versions lower range than single motor? It would seem to me that it should be higher since the front motor can recover more re-gen braking energy. Models S & X have better range for their dual versions, why not Model 3?

This question has been raised before, but I haven’t seen a good answer. It does seem that the much better regen recovery available with AWD (since you get more regen energy from the front wheels than from the rear) should more than compensate for any loss of efficiency due to the increased friction/resistance from having two drive units instead of just one.

Um… no. The dual motor may have a more aggressive regen ability however that doesnt mean it recoups more energy than the rear wheel drive model.

There is extra friction and weight caused by the front motor (bearings/universal joints etc) which affect its real world range.

Tis just science/engineering 😉

At 0.2 max regen, I’m pretty sure there is absolutely no need to engage the front wheels at all — so no, the extra motor doesn’t help with regen efficiency.

Model S and X only use induction motors, which have a fairly narrow band of good efficiency. Having two motors with different gearing helps broadening the range of good efficiency — apparently enough to make up for the mechanical losses of an extra drive unit.

The Model 3 has a permanent magnet main motor, which has a wider band of good efficiency to begin with, and thus it doesn’t get the bonus from a differently geared extra motor.

Do Not Read Between The Lines

3 RWD: rear permanent magnet motor
3 AWD: rear permanent magnet motor, front induction motor
S RWD: large rear induction motor
S AWD: small rear induction motor, small front induction motor
S Performance AWD: large rear induction motor, small front induction motor

In the S, there were efficiency gains from having two smaller induction motors.
In the 3 there are no significant efficiency gains to be had, so the extra weight of the front motor reduces efficiency.

The bit of extra weight probably doesn’t cost that much efficiency. It’s mostly mechanical losses I suspect.

My dad ordered his on the 25th and they told him 99.9% certain delivery by end of year. Big deal for him for tax reasons.

According to my estimates, even SR would give 20% margin to Tesla right now.
Cost of constructing Tesla by teardown analysis – $28K
Let us say the cost is – $30K ($5K margin for Tesla for selling price of $35K)
Cost of premium interior – $5K ( it costs Tesla $2K to make premium interior so a margin of $3K)
Total margin for Tesla $8K
At a selling price of $40K, that is a margin of 20 %

Your numbers also say LR+PUP costs them about 35k to build and AWD/P about 37k. Actual cost in Q3 was 10k higher and they guided to similar costs in Q4.

Also Elon said on the call they can’t sell SR version until they reduce costs further.

They guided similar *margin* in Q4, with lower ASP being balanced by lower costs.

They said “slightly lower trim mix”. That’s why I said similar costs instead of identical. They’re talking about a few hundred less per car, not $10k.

More likely in the lower thousands I’d guess. They have a cheaper entry model now; the mid-range model got (slightly) cheaper; the high-end model got much cheaper; and there is less pent-up demand for the higher-end models… All this should add up to way more than just a few hundreds less on average.

(Which means cost reductions must actually be pretty significant again to make up for that.)

“Cost of constructing Tesla by teardown analysis – $28K”

But that’s only an estimate by an outside party, one who doesn’t have access to figures for how much Tesla is paying for parts, nor access to figures for how much it costs Tesla to make parts in-house.

Costs of buying parts or making parts can be estimated pretty well based on a detailed teardown to determine all the materials and process steps going into them. The big unknown is how much overhead Tesla currently has over industry averages because of not yet fully streamlined production.

The $28,000 estimate from the teardown only says how low the costs should get once the production is fully ramped and streamlined — not the actual costs they have right now.

(Also, I don’t think the premium interior gets a 60% margin. Unlike some other options, this one actually requires a bunch of stuff that involves non-trivial extra costs. I suspect the margin on this is less than 50% — balanced by other options having more than 50% margin, all the way up to almost 100% for software-only features like Enhanced Autopilot…)

Something tells me the Shorts are going to have a “next level burn of the century” at end of Q4 2018.

Well Done!
I think a good option besides the Model 3 sedan and SUV(Y), would be a sleeker/lower 3-door coupe/fastback on the Model 3 platform. Think BMW 4-Series coupe. Maybe Model 4? Also thinking with the ‘flood’ of Model 3 sedans to hit the market, a coupe would offer some individuality, and even more fun for those not needing 4 doors.

Do Not Read Between The Lines

They have so much to do, varying the body for a limited variant is not going to happen for a long time.

The Model 3 is” Musk’s Mustang Moment.”

Model3 is going to take over the world! Every car looks ancient history next to a model3

Actually, it seems Elon figures greater Uptake for Model Y, and since it follows all the hard earned lessons from the Model 3 Ramp, it should be able to compete well on price, AND on Margin!

Figure this, with a Model Y Production Target for Early Q1, 2020, even if Tesla was a bit late on Model 3 hitting the 10,000 per week, like July, 2019, instead of June, 2019, that still gives them 5-7 Months to stabilize Model 3 Production at that rate, and 9-12+ Months of Reservations Advance!

I suspect, a Model Y Ramp Up may not be as heavily “Pitched”, but still be a better Ramp Speed than the Model 3, by at least a factor of 2, and as a combined result, may astound Many, at the Rate of Production Ramp Speed!

Troy, If possible, please also add a column in your table for energy efficiency of the car. For example, in last week’s conference call Elon Musk said energy efficiency for the LR Model 3 was 4.1 (310 miles / 75 kWh = 4.1 miles/kWh)