Tesla Model 3 Reservation Holders Want These Features In Their Upcoming Car


Tesla Model 3

Tesla Model 3

Thanks to Paul Carter, we have data from Tesla Model 3 reservation holders. Carter has been keeping track of and analyzing the information through the Model3tracker.info website (via Teslarati). It is a members only group for fans and future owners of the Model 3. Currently there are over 4,000 Model 3 owners registered for the site and actively contributing information.

Tesla Model 3

Tesla Model 3

Initial information showed that 90% of reservations holders would pay for Supercharger access and 75% would be going for the largest battery pack option (43% want at least some sort of battery upgrade). Now, Carter has compiled information about option preference.

Not only are very few consumers planning to get the base Model 3, but 7% intend to go all in, choosing every single available feature. About 30% plan to choose at least some upgrades.

Choosing a loaded vehicle will likely bump forward delivery time, since Tesla will produce the loaded, more profitable cars first. Base models may be the last to come off the assembly line.

Somewhat ironically, this could also mean the possibility of losing the $7,500 US tax incentives if Tesla shoots by the 200,000 EV produced mark (and subsequent wind-down period too quickly). Choosing a more loaded, expensive car could be hypothetically cheaper, with incentives applied, than a base model, delivered later, and no longer qualifying.

Those participating in the tracker website were also interested in Supercharger access and Autopilot. About 36% chose each of the options. However, Ludicrous Mode didn’t receive much attention.

The bottom line is that we don’t expect to see many $35,000 Model 3s out there. The cheap price is surely a draw, but seeing what people need and want, this will not be an inexpensive car. But, with all that Tesla offers, and now the Autopilot 2.0 and self-driving capability, one shouldn’t expect a loaded Model 3 to be easy on the wallet.

Check out some additional details and graphs at Teslarati

Categories: Tesla

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

87 Comments on "Tesla Model 3 Reservation Holders Want These Features In Their Upcoming Car"

newest oldest most voted

Remember the expected SC credits and the fact that AP can be activated later…Take the base now, add options later…

My nice to have feature list would be:
– self park and unpark
– collision avoidance option when driver backs up and misses sensor warnings
– integrating yelp and maps to allow looking for and adding stops along the way of a trip other than just superchargers, multiple destination trip planning,
Better traffic and wind forecast integration

Everything else I trust will be fine

Yelp blackmail and destroy small business that dare not to advertise with Yelp. But google will be a nice tool.

Here in NYC, if your a small business and get on Yelp, your business grows. I’ve talked to owners of barbershops, auto centers, massage parlors and restaurants who say alot of people just say Yelp. Yelp is an online word of mouth. It does hold businesses hostage… To provide excellent service or get called out.

The yelp blackmail rumor is not true according to former internal source I know

You actually have to have used the product or service, I use it and went through quite a procedure.

“Initial information showed that 90% of reservations holders would pay for Supercharger access”

Yeah, that Supercharger network is Tesla’s biggest market advantage right now.

Although they do have many others like nice designs, big batteries, constant updates, advance autonomous features, etc. I really think the Supercharger network puts them heads & shoulders above everyone else. That’s biggest deficit of the Bolt compared to the Model 3, IMHO.

yes spec
as a current Model S owner I’m quite concerned about having a lot more people wanting supercharger access. There were actually lines at the Vacaville, ca supercharger which is between sacramento and san francisco. There also were lines at the Truckee, Ca supercharger site. It’s pretty obvious that Tesla will have to add significantly to the number of superchargers once model 3 is in full swing.

Unlike some BoltEV fans I totally agree with you that the superchargers are a big asset.

When the time comes to move up from my 2012 Model S, I may decide to just roll into a 2014 since that was the first year with auto pilot…rather than buying one of the first Model 3’s. Driving in California it almost is a necessity because of the congestion.

My guess is, if that goes on long enough, 3rd parties will emerge to fill the need. There will be people willing to pay a fee if it means not having to wait in line for the free supercharger.

georgeS: Don’t think you have to be too concerned. I of course, don’t know for sure, but for quite a while I’ve thought about what Musk would have to do to satisfy all his former promises, yet keep the ‘immaterial’ costs of the SC network from skyrocketing with new M3 owners. I suggest a simple solution basically used by the cellular companies – those that offer unlimited data but it might be slow. SC FACTS: 1). Nationwide access to fast charging while on vacation or long trips. 2). Musk’s repeatedly stated desire for ‘the Locals’ to charge at home (this includes taxicab “S”‘s) . My Solution: 1). Double the number of trivially cheap stalls from each charging bay from 2 to 4. 2). Implement software in the car to throttle the amount of juice going to the battery. This could be as simple as turning the contactor on and off in relation to the other cars at the other 3 stalls. 3). People who were deemed truly on a trip, or truly on vacation, would get priority at the charger, and would charge at the maximum rate their car could take. The other 3 cars who are locals or taxi… Read more »

There are three potential ways to reduce clogging of the Supercharger system, and reduce waiting lines at busy stations:

1. Increase the number of chargers at the station

2. Increase the speed at which charging can be accomplished

3. Limit Supercharger access in some way

Your suggestion, Bill, which is to decrease the speed at which charging can be accomplished, would of course only make things worse. It would also get customers upset with Tesla, when they realized what was happening.

The puzzle here, Bill, is why this isn’t obvious to you.

HAHA, let’s see how Musk actually resolves this. Since he is tangentially concerned with cash-flow, and expenses – I bet his solution is closer to mine; but then he has thanked me for my Roadster Purchase.

I’ve at least done something to help Tesla – but that’s why he’s thanked me, and not you.

You’ve never owned a cell phone huh? Upset or not, people keep buying them.

You of course, wouldn’t profer your own solution for fear that it would be taken apart. You haven’t begun to take mine apart.

Your supposition is inaccurate from the get go:

People who legitimately are on vacation or on trips will find an open charging stall running at full speed.

Or, they can listen to your blather and wait in line.

If the number of model 3’s to be sold is what it seems at first blush – they will need to Double the number of charging stalls per charger bay to 4, plus triple or quadruple the number of charger bays to keep the congestion reasonable.

Its a good problem for an up and coming company to have.

Bill, I have my doubts the solutions of preferring etc that you propose (as good as they sound) will actually be used. Thing must needs be simple and understandable to all. Most likely pay per session with a good amount of Superchargers in the network and more added as needed will be what happens. We will see.


Part of the answer of course, is in the future, how ‘tight’ will money get, if at all?

If there is no money problem at all, then we’ll see 50 stall superchargers with 25 charger bays.

In my utility’s case, that will be the largest facility they’d provide without special, extra cost construction…

And hay, if they’re REALLY flowing in the doe, maybe they’ll pay for THAT too!

It’s really amusing how arrogant people are. You imagine yourself a genius who can simply sit in your chair and dream up the best solution to this, when other people actually know the answer. Not from guessing, but from empirically trying out the different models in markets with a higher EV share than Model 3 will make. And the winner is: pay per minute. You can give whatever silly reasons you want for why you don’t imagine this is as good as your idea. But you can’t point to empirical data, because it shows you’re wrong. Frankly, it’s also logical! The time you occupy a charger is the most precious resource in this game, so putting a price on that is optimal. Pay per session does absolutely nothing to prevent hogging or needless charging – to the contrary, it gives each user an incentive to “get their money’s worth” by charging until full regardless of actual need. A one-time, upfront payment like Tesla has today is even worse, providing an incentive to charge even when zero charging was necessary at all. But be religious about it. Ignore the experience from Norway, where EV share of new car sales has been… Read more »

Typical European Snootiness towards a pretty typical American.

Thankfully, not all of your countrymen view things the way that you do. I fully allowed that there may be several ways to solve this issue.

The fly in the ointment to your argument, is that people are STILL buying “S”‘s in large numbers, all of whom have been promised ‘free charging forever’.

Instead of calmly presenting an alternative scheme, and listing its advantages, you simply suggest something which only can work in a minority of cases and you do something which all the clowns do here: YOU LOVE TO ATTACK THE PERSON RATHER THAN TALK ABOUT THE CAR OR THE ISSUE.

Also, if we were talking about Cellular Telephones you’d be here jumping up and down that the data plans we have in the states couldn’t possibly fly.

This is the most compelling feature of my suggested scheme. Its proven success in other markets.

I’d be easier on you if you ever came up with any brilliant solutions. but the ones in general I’ve heard from you indicate you’re a pretty Dim Bulb, No offense!

Wouldn’t a Model 3 be too small for you anyway?

Tesla S gets “free charging”, but it’s not clear if that 90% wants “free charging” or just supercharger access to cost something. If it’s just to cost something and they opt for pay-per-use, congestion may not be as bad. People don’t travel 200 miles a day while free chargers might plug in supercharger every day (or multiple times a day).

I’m certainly hoping 90% won’t be “free charging”; 400K cars driven by $40K budget drivers (ie, Leaf drivers) will surely clog up all superchargers to hopeless level as to be all but unusable.

I’m with you Sparky. I believe Musk will make the cost for unlimited supercharger access enough that most people will opt for pay-as-you-go access instead. This will dramatically reduce M3 use at superchargers as owners will only use while on a trip or otherwise necessary. Make the pay-as-you-go rate a bit more than the cost of home charging but still reasonable.

I also think at some point Tesla will tack on that fee for S and X, just new sales as previous owners will be grandfathered in. The more new owners opt for unlimited and pay that fee, the more cash Tesla has to expand the supercharger network.

As a Model 3 reservation holder and member of the model 3 tracker site, the anticipated options assume that there would be a price, though the SC question was originally set up as an initial one-time cost (like the old S60s), but I think they changed it to something more generic, such as specifying that you would pay for SC access if it wasn’t included.

I would assume that most people who added their reservation to the list, and filled out the questionnaire, recognize that the SC question is related to whether you would be willing to pay for it, one way or another, or whether you would want it only if it was standard (unlimited, like S and X).

In other words, I think the poll results on the website are very accurate for the sample that added their reservations to the list.

I’m beginning to hope that Tesla does what the motions want and give them “free for life” access, or at least just pay per use rather than per minute, which is the only sensible solution. We know this because the different models have been tested in a real market with high EV share. And the evidence is as clear as day.

Please ignore the empirical knowledge in favor of armchair speculation. I will sit back and enjoy the ensuing mess, saying I told you so, and watch each of you start arguing for a part per minute model which it is urgent to implement.

Why are you guys so arrogant? How do you convince yourself you know this better than those who actually have the experience and have been through the experiment? Do you realize how it makes you look to someone who’s seen it all before??

That might be because some current users of the SCs are too damn cheap to charge their cars at home. Instead they abuse the SC network that was designed for interstate travel. Tesla needs to track owner’s travel and if they haven’t crossed a state line or transversed the length of California, then the SC should refuse charging or limit it to give the owner enough juice to get home. Just MHO.

My bet is my M3 will cost somewhere near $50k

SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD

nothing affordable about that. Like saying ACA is affordable.

Autopilot needs to be separated into components of ‘safety features’ and then cool gadgets. Like GM having 2 separate levels of things to keep options open

Why do you think health care should be free?

Economies of scale, bigger R&D, heard immunity, generally decreased amount of illness spreading around. Bigger economy growth (more people can work more days).

You name it.

Of course as long as bang per $ is on reasonable level.


All good, pragmatic reasons. I would still add human decency and basic solidarity with ones community members to that list. That is, even if it were not profitable to society in purely financial terms – which I’m convinced it is – I would still think there were good reasons for making health care a common good and responsibility.

Insurance co. have zero incentive for affordable insurance, and have PhD economists to teach them how to create monopoly markets. Allow the FBI to investigate offshore market collusion and Maybe you could bring down healthcare costs.

Capitalism simply doesn’t work for working class America.

Capitalism? Insurance companies are prohibited from competing across state lines. It’s like only being able to sell cars through dealerships. If anything, such is socialism, not capitalism.

Bullpucky. Insurance companies can go insure patients in any state they want. They just have to follow the rules in those states. What insurance companies can’t do, is offer insurance to voters in California or New York based upon the regulations that lawmakers in Nebraska or Rhode Island voted to write. That is what is being proposed. Why should voters in Nebraska or Rhode Island be able to vote on insurance regulations for MY state, while I have zero say, and zero representation on what those regulations say? Why should MY insurance company who follows the rules written by MY representatives that I voted for, be driven out of business by some company who chooses NOT to follow the rules my state set? Because there is absolutely nothing to stop them from offering insurance coverage that meets the rules in my state. Rules created by people I voted for. But they want to come in and offer a substandard insurance in order to undercut my current excellent insurance, and drive them out of business. It is a race to the bottom to see what state will offer the least customer friendly insurance regulations possible, that benefit the insurance companies the… Read more »
If insurance policy is successful in Nebraska (ie, people there want them), why shouldn’t they offer it in CA/NY? After all, we are all human. Companies operating in only some states know their policies work for them. You may say it’s policy regulations, but the effect is company regulations and fewer choice for consumers. In market, you are always represented since you can choose to buy another policy. If policies (aka, companies) are allowed to go across state lines, you can shun bad ones based on Nebraska regulation over good ones based on CA or NY regulation or vice versa. You are very well represented with your vote (purchase) making a difference in your life immediately. But you have no choice when it comes to insurance regulation. Sure, you may vote some politicians off, but that’s far from certain the regulation will change even if the politician get voted out. Meanwhile, you’re forced to pay for stuff you’ll never use (like mammogram for guys) and ever increasing premium. Limiting choice and making consumers pay more is just like mandatory car dealer regulation. Sure, Tesla could setup dealerships and follow regulations to be able to sell in all states, but there… Read more »

Not when there are few, large insurance companies. Then, there is no real competition for your business, prices keep rising while services keep dwindling.

Furthermore, it has not been demonstrated that profit motives provide superior healthcare services. In fact, the USA has been the poster child for the opposite effect!

1) Who says the people with substandard insurance are happy with their insurance? The internet is full of stories dating back decades of shady insurance companies with lax regulation screwing over customers. Are you really that out of touch? Why do you think the regulations were created in the first place? They were created because people were so angry that they contacted their representatives and demanded changes. But I can’t do that if the regulating body is in another state. They don’t care about me, and I can’t vote for them. So I have zero representation. 2) The problem with insurance that doesn’t meet state minimums is that the costs associated with substandard insurance failing to pay is usually passed on to the rest of the consumers in the state. Somebody gets sick, gets healthcare, the substandard insurance doesn’t pay, and the hospital has to increase fees for everybody. Then my good insurance rates go up because of your bad insurance. 3) Claiming that people have informed choice in their insurance coverage is absurd. Have YOU ever read and understood the full impact all the fine print in competing insurance policies before choosing to buy one policy over another? Seriously,… Read more »

Lots of nonsense there, but health insurance regulation to prevent inter state commerce is precisely like dealer protection laws. Both claim they’re for consumer protection when in reality hurts consumers.

I will give you this. Transparency in health care has all but disappeared. But that’s due to almost all health care cost paid by third party (insurance). When someone else pays, people don’t pay attention to actual cost, and that causes things to spiral out of control. It reminds me of “free” charging EV clogging up DCFC and long waits. Mandated health insurance only make that worse.

But it doesn’t matter what we say. What matters is what will happen in the future. With projected huge increase in insurance premium, more people will qualify for subsidy. In coming years, that increase in cost could put most US under government paid health insurance plan, because it will be too expensive for individuals to pay. That is, if the funding doesn’t run out first. Seeing how “third party pay” will run up the cost to unsustainable levels, it’s only matter of time before something will explode.

A competitive market is generally the best way to produce the best and least expensive goods and services.

Unfortunately, competition doesn’t work for health care, because everybody wants the “best” care, not the cheapest, and hospitals have discovered that patients perceive the most expensive care and treatments as “best”, whether they actually are or not.

The countries where health care is universally available, relatively cheap, and effective, are those countries where every single cost and fee is fixed by the government. Japan is an excellent example; the Japanese like the care they get, their health plans don’t try to kick them out of a hospital before they’re ready to leave, and they’re healthier than we Americans are. (Caveat: The latter is partly due to healthier diet and more exercise.)

The real problem with American health care is that we Americans refuse to imitate countries where the system works much better than ours. Stubbornly clinging to “American exceptionalism” may be good in certain places, but in others — like our health care system — it’s perverse and extremely counter-productive to stubbornly cling to that.

SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD

Japanese also generally have a very strict appreciation for Law and Order and authority.

Look at the Tsunami and Earthquake; almost ZERO looting; people handing in billfolds full of money found on the street to the police.

Not going to happen here unfortunately. Same with their healthcare style. We just don’t take no for an answer–very American Cowboy.

The FBI seems to be a wing of the DNC, so that may just work.

AP already is separated into different levels! The safety features are standard (warnings, auto-braking, etc.). The not-technically-hands-free features are what you unlock for a fee.

Yeah, this is why I keep debating a CPO model S instead. I’m no accountant, but it seems a comparable deal to me.

When my configuration e-mail arrives, I may end up doing the same thing. A blue 75D with the cold weather package and AP and upgraded sound would be just the ticket!

As a model 3 reservation holder and Tesla cult member since 2010, I want 0-60 in 3.5 seconds, 215 mile range per charge, AP, SC access(pay as you go), for $50k.

So you want an electric quicker than a BMW M3 for less money than an M2 ? good luck with that.
To get that kind of acceleration you will likely have to take one or 2 battery upgrades and the Performance version.
Prepare to choose between sub-4 seconds acceleration or sub-50k price.

Not likely. The P90DL already kicks the crap out of quarter-million-dollar two-seaters for $130k. I have yet to see any specifications or price estimates that lead me to conclude that the Model 3 will not be able to deliver a similar price/performance advantage over other vehicles anywhere near it’s price.

The base battery pack has 215+ miles of range, so that’s already covered in the 35k. The larger battery pack (required for performance version) will most likely be less than 5k, but let’s go with 5k just for safety margin. Another 5k for dual-motor (a high estimate, but also necessary for performance version). The performance version would probably be less than 10k, but let’s call it 10k. So, that’s 35k+5k+5k+10k=55k. That vehicle should have a sub-4-sec 0-60 time, and then add AP for another 5k, then I’d say the high estimate for what Mister G wants would be about 60k. Not unreasonable, considering.

I’ve suspected for a while that the $35,000 Tesla would be un-obtainable. That’s why I still say the Chevy Volt and Bolt EV are better alternatives for those wanting an affordable EV.

That’s also why I think Chevy should make a high-end model of the Volt (not ridiculous like the ELR) with a little bit more acceleration power (even if the ICE has to run) because I bet people would pay the extra for it.

“That’s why I think Chevy should make a high-end model of the Volt”

As you also mention into your post, that’s the thing: they did !
And we’ve seen the results. Really nice (looking) car but quite expensive. Even at a (later) discount.

Yeah.. but the ELR was priced at ridiculous amounts.. I’m talking about a Volt around $45,000 that can compete with Camaros and Mustangs at the drag strip.

Most Camaros and Mustangs at the drag strips are V8s, 0-60s 4.0-4.5…You’re asking for the current Volt’s 0-60 to be cut in half and for “only” $11K before any other upgrades such as sportier suspension and visual upgrades…The ELR with software enabled ICE decreased the 0-60 by 1.5 seconds…That’s a high 6-low 7 0-60…I could see them doing something like but understand that alone won’t “keep up with Camaros and mustangs”…It would be a far greater effort spend on simply adding a second motor to the Bolt EV to make it AWD which could increase the range…

FWD cars are limited in 0-60 MPH time to about 6.25 sec due to traction. In order to compete against mustangs, etc. Bolt will need RWD or AWD.

Here’s a thought: put SparkEV’s 140 HP motor in front and Bolt’s 200 HP motor in rear for 340 HP AWD setup. That could result in 0-60 in about 4 seconds or bit less. Now _that_ could rival Tesla 3.

That makes no sense. The 35k Model 3 will most certainly be obtainable, just not in 2017.

I think it’s likely. They’ve got to look like they kept the promise by technically speaking keeping it. But there’s no promise that any specific number will be made. Nothing to do them making it just as real as the $56,000 Model S. Maybe you’ve forgotten already, but that was the promised starting price, and they did offer it for a short while and a few such cars exist somewhere out there, though I’ve never seen one.

Yeah, I added up everything that I wanted in a Model 3 and ended up with a Model S 🙂

I want SC access, winter package, and AWD. I don’t care at all about autopilot as it’s mostly useless where I drive.

My guess is while I prefer a smaller car, by the time I get a chance at getting a model 3, I’ll be able to get a used S that fits my needs for quite a bit less.

SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD

I really hope there’s three levels pilot options:

1. Safety – autobrake, collision avoidance
2. Convenience – valet, autopark, lane drift; autopilot 8.0a essentially
3. Full autonomous option

–getting a 35k car with 8k option is a bit extreme.

It will likely be comparable to the new Model S and X

1. Free
2. $5,000
3. $3,000

I’d ask questions nobody else is, like will they drop Bilstein and go with Monroe shock absorbers? Will the go-cart responsive ball joints be scrapped for cheaper rubber? Will it have programmable charging, like every other EV in its class?

I haven’t gone to Teslarati, where I’d guess there’s more concern for screen size?

it was reported that Hankook will be one of the OE tire suppliers for the model 3.
I’ll take AWD as my number 1 feature.
I’m sure the car will be awesome.

I don’t know how 4,000 can be a representative sample of +/-400k reservations. Especially since the people that would be on the forum are more than likely super fans that know about all the features and want them, but can’t afford low-end Model S territory. Also, everyone that put a reservation down was probably already at least a Tesla fan as well. The entry level car is to pull buyers away from entry-level 3 series and entry level A4’s…those people are not fans yet and may not even know the product exists. With as many $299/mo lease base luxury cars on the road, I have to imagine that entry, or near entry will make up a descent percentage of sales. Maybe not right away, but eventually.

Well, since Tesla does not formally advertise, then winning over non-fans will have to wait until people start seeing them on the road and/or knows someone that has one.

The sample is big enough if it were representative. But the problem is it’s very much the opposite, since it’s reservation holders that seek out the tracker and not the other way around. Basically it tells us what the 1% most fanatical reservation holders want.

I got a booking and ill take the fastest one, rwd. I dont care about range or ANYTHING else. Ludicrous mode? Definately.

4000 people is 1% of all the model3 worldwide bookings.

I don’t care for 0-60, Nav, Autopilot, cowbell.

I want EV range. (and leather seats 🙂 )

I’m in that boat too. Drove for 20 years, know everyplace, and how to get there.
Great driver. You go faster than you need too, and you are asking for it, reaction times are stressed, people do not understand P=mv.

mv as in mass times velocity? That’s momentum. If you mean power, that’s mvvv (cube of linear velocity).

Well, it’s the momentum that kills you.

Actually, it’s the power that kill. Power is change in energy over time. Momentum by itself doesn’t kill. Change in momentum is related, but it’s really power. I’m being too pedantic.

And speed not limited to 90mph when purchasing the vehicle in Germany 🙂

Just as long as you’re aware that the faster you drive a BEV, the shorter the range.

Be an informed shopper!

Matt a volt owner in Ohio

They better make and deliver the cars per the order the reservations were made, I made sure to reserve mine as early as possible (30mins before the announcement) so that i would hopefully get the tax credit. Making the more profitable cars for the “late comers” isn’t right.

SparkEV-Fiat500-Leased - M3 Reserved - Bolt- TBD

reservation is just that — doesn’t give a placeholer in the queue, just a reservation. Being in Ohio, you’re not going to see anything for at least two waves.

with 30min prior to announcement, I believe there are some 100,000 ahead of you. If the number crunchers are close and Tesla does make it out of the gates end 2017, AND with strict linear reservations (they’re not). You probably will miss out.

Best hope for you imho—upgrade with fully loaded options. (or get CBO Model S)

I want that Bay Area View everytime I look out of my Model 3.

Haha, I want it to have laser beams on it. Well, that is until I find out how much that option would cost…

If you buy a 90D and will tesla let you upgrade to 100D when they release it?

If I buy a tesla 3 with everyihing on it what woulddo anyone think it would cost?

Maybe 55k.


Base $35,000
Biggest battery, AWD, and Ludicrous $70,000
Premium Upgrade Package $3,500
Premium Leather $2,500
Carbon Fiber $1,000
Premium Sound $2,500
Sub Zero Package $1,000
Enhanced Auto Pilot $5,000
Self Driving $3,000
Upgraded Charger $1,500
Glass Riff $1,500
Biggest Wheels $4,500

uh, no…are you being facetious? Your $70k upgrade will more likely be $20k, all together. Musk already said that upgrading to dual motors will be “less than $5k”, and one could make a reasonable extrapolation that the larger-capacity battery pack will probably be somewhere between $5k and $8k (so, about $10k for both). Performance and Ludicrous will probably be another $10k or so. A P3DL, before other options, will probably come out to about $60k or less.

Yes indeed. There is no way you are going to get a 2.5 second to 60 Model 3 for $70. This is rightfully so, as if I paid for a Model S P100D Ludicrous, I would be upset if someone got the same for half the price.

The 20K you mentioned, will get you AWD, battery upgrade (but not the biggest) and acceleration upgrade (but not the quickest.

$70K. P100DL is roughly double base model S.

That is my assumption, as well. Based on comments made by Musk with respect to the cost of some options (like battery upgrade and dual-motor), I think that a fully-loaded Model 3 would be $70k-$75k.

I think that the people that think they will get a loaded 3 for $70K, and it will be the same as a fully loaded S P100DL, are dreaming. I wish it was the case but it would be bad for business as it would hurt the sales of a 150K car.

I’ll take the hatchback option, oh wait…

wait …. for reveal part 3. Elon said the trunk issue has been fixed.

I want the Model 3 with reliability standard. Probably too much to ask for until year 3 or 4 of the production run given Tesla’s track record. The reservation holders are idiots.

Wrong…reservation holders are not idiots, we are pioneers that put our money where our mouth is. What are you?

We are pioneers? More like comedians it would seem, and not very good ones.

I’m a reservation holder. And it certainly makes me neither a pioneer nor a member of the cult (which is sadly all too real; Elon can be described as the Chairman on the Mount).

My reason for reserving is pretty simple. I think Model 3 may be supply constrained for a couple of years. That will make it depreciate less than other cars. And I think it may be a great car. Unless Tesla goes bust, I can also get my money back should i choose to.

In other words, I’m simply being opportunistic. I exploit the cult rather than become seduced by it.

Of course there’s a risk. But I need a car, and any car is a risk. Especially now, because cars are so rapidly improving. High depreciation will be by far the biggest expense in car ownership, so minimizing it has the biggest impact.