Tesla Model S, 3 Comparison Sheet Now With Pricing Information


S Over 3 Tweet

With pricing information added to the comparison sheet, it becomes ever so clear that to get the bells and whistles most buyers seek on the Model S, it’s significantly more pricey than the Model 3.

With Tesla trying hard to up sell the Model S over the Model 3, even going so far as to release a comparison sheet that shows the Model S beating the 3 in every noted category, curious onlookers have begun to dig a little deeper into Tesla’s pitch.

Over on Reddit, an image surfaced of an updated Model S versus Model 3 comparison sheet (via NoVA_traveler). The updated image includes pricing for the various features that supposedly put the Model S out in front on the 3.

The title of the Reddit thread is trying to be a bit humorous “Fixed the S vs. 3 Compare Sheet.”

Take a look at the updated image with pricing info below:

Fixed the S vs. 3 Compare Sheet from teslamotors

With the pricing information added in, it becomes immediately evident that you’ll pay dearly for the various Model S features that will get you to the claimed advantages Tesla says the S has over the 3.

For example, the sheet says the Model S does 0 to 60 MPH in 2.3 seconds. However, the Tesla document doesn’t note that it’ll cost you $70,500 over the base S price to get that level of performance. Sort of deceptive without pricing info, don’t you think?

What the graphic with pricing added really points out is that most of the “features” of the Model S aren’t standard. Some are bundled in only with particular versions of the car that easily cost upwards of $120,000.

If we look at it from that point of view, then the two vehicles aren’t even in the same ballpark, meaning that nobody considering a $35,000 car would even have thoughts of purchasing a $120,000 car.

Here’s the no-price-included sheet originally released by Tesla:

Model 3 Features Update On Right Column

Lastly, back in April, Tesla released this post on its blog regarding the S versus the 3. It provides a little more insight into Tesla’s stance on which vehicle you should buy and why:

We’ve been getting ready for Model 3 by advancing manufacturing, expanding our charging network, improving service, opening more retail stores and much more.

With a new model coming this year, we know our customers will have questions about which car is right for them. One question we’ve been asked is, “Should I trade in my Model S for a Model 3?” While Model 3 will be our newest car, it isn’t “Version 3” or the next generation Tesla. Our higher priced premium models still include the most advanced technology and the best driving experience we have to offer.

Model S is the leader in its class in every category, which is why 94 percent of our owners say they will buy Model S again. It has a 5-star safety rating and will continue to be our flagship Model with more range, more acceleration, more power, more passenger and cargo room, more displays (two) and more customization choices. With Ludicrous+, Model S has a zero-to-60 time of 2.28 seconds as measured by Motor Trend, making it the fastest accelerating production car in the world. Model S will also continue to be the longest-range vehicle we offer, capable of a landmark 335 miles on a single charge, meaning you can travel from Los Angeles to San Francisco nonstop.

Model 3 is smaller, simpler, and will come with far fewer options than Model S, but it makes driving feel effortless and offers a good range of at least 215 miles for our starting model.

At the foundation of every Tesla is safety – keeping our customers safe is part of every decision we make. In addition, every Tesla vehicle (Model 3 too) comes standard with full self-driving hardware which, through over-the-air software upgrades, will enable a Tesla to be substantially safer than a human driver. As we continue to test and validate new features, customers can expect an increasing number of updates to be rolled out to their cars this year. And while innovation at Tesla will never stop, the very best vehicles we make are already available for purchase and on the road today.

Category: Tesla


44 responses to "Tesla Model S, 3 Comparison Sheet Now With Pricing Information"
  1. Bob Nan says:

    Its very good that they showed 5+2 passenger seating of Model S in pictures.
    They should highlight the fact that Model S is the only sedan in the World that can seat 7 and go against the full size luxury vehicles of other makes. Also Model S has 30 cu. ft. cargo capacity (Frunk+Trunk) which is not available in any other sedan.

  2. Someone out there says:

    I don’t think the base level 3 will come anywhere near the model S in range so the “215+” of the base model will probably not be much more than 215, maybe 219 miles or something. A battery option will probably sail past the Bolt but then that would be a significantly more expensive car.

    1. Terawatt says:

      Want to bet? 🙂

      I think they will beat the Bolt. They kinda have to given the cocky answer Musk tweeted when a user indicated the Bolt would/might beat the Model 3 on range (“ye of little faith” or something like that).

      1. unlucky says:

        It’s going to be hard to beat the Bolt with a much larger car, AC motors and a drivetrain designed for performance (wider, stickier tires, etc.).

        Shouldn’t be hard for Tesla to beat it on the highway with their much lower profile though. And if you’re driving cross country (and every Tesla buyer seems to think this is what they do most of the time) then that’s really what matters. I mean, around the city 200 miles range is more than enough for virtually all use cases.

        1. realistic says:

          They all have “AC motors”, whether PM, Induction, or SR.

          On a watt-hr/km-kg or watt-hr/km-m^2 basis (energy usage per mass and/or footprint), Tesla is really strong. But as you point out the M3 is a fairly large car compared to the Bolt, so 215mi will be harder than it looks without a significantly larger battery.

          1. QCO says:

            He meant induction motor, which is a bit less efficient that a PM motor.

      2. Someone out there says:

        If the base model 3 gets more than 238 miles of range it will seriously cannibalize low-end model S sales. Tesla won’t want to do that.

    2. Joe says:

      What about the trunk size?
      It’s seems to be super small, when you consider that the figures does include the front trunk.
      Basically back trunk will be much smaller than Bolt despite Chevy’s far more compact length.

    3. FISHEV says:

      Model 3 with 70 kWh battery should get about 300 miles making it one of the longest range Teslas.

      1. Someone out there says:

        Maybe but that is at least a $50k car

  3. FISHEV says:

    Except there is no pricing for the Model 3. Of course we wanted a smaller car, the S is a monster boat that costs us range, range, wonderful range and is a pain in the city. No one wanted a “stripped down” Model S.

    Sigh. Oh well, we’ll wait for AWD, hope the mini-hatchback we saw in previous pictures is for real (that at least looks like a fix we asked for). The promised towing which would have needed air suspension seems off the table completely in the rush to production. The 70 kWh/300 mile range seems still on and that, along with the AWD is the key to making it a car one could keep 10 years.

    1. Dennis says:

      Why would towing require air suspension?

      1. FISHEV says:

        The Model X requires air suspension for towing.

        The Model 3 has a low ground clearance of 5″ so it would need to raise up to 6-7″ to take the hitch and to keep the rear end from hiting the ground, having the hitch dig in and disaster.

    2. Jason says:

      Funny, I’ve been able to tow in every single car I’ve owned, except my current Leaf, and I’ve never had air suspension. I really cannot figure out why the EV’s can’t tow, even a small 750kg load. So what if you lose some range, for a quick trip to the tip or a load of wood, it makes the EV so much less versatile for no apparent reason.

  4. ericonline says:

    Tesla could easily make many of the popular standard features of the Model S cost extra on the Model 3. Supercharging – they could implement a one-time activation fee ($1,000?) for access in addition to the pay as you go charges. Tesla could also include a basic Level 1 charging cable with the car, and make the Level 2 with adapters an option. This is a nice benefit of the Model S/X that people forget about.

    Other add-ons could include LTE connectivity, use of the App (charging/preconditioning), navigation, homelink, the J1772 adapter.

  5. Mark C says:

    Eric, did I miss the pricing information? I pretended to read it through twice, but it’s early and I haven’t finished my first cup of coffee yet.

  6. BMosier says:

    14 cubic feet of cargo space (a civic has 15)? My goodness that’s small for two trunks! Either the frunk or the trunk must be really tiny.

    1. bro1999 says:

      Seems rear passenger space was more of a priority than cargo capacity of the trunk.

      So you can probably fit 5 adults in a Model 3….just can’t haul all their stuff for any road trip for them to go on!

      1. Kdawg says:

        That’s why I’m hoping the seats fold down, because I rarely have someone sitting the back, but I need to be able to haul big things sometimes.

        1. CVVH says:

          That’s why the Bolt is better in that regard. If that’s something you do a lot, might be better with the wagon style offered by the Bolt.

          I had a Pontiac Vibe which is similar in interior space to the Bolt, and I could fit 8ft lumber in it. I used it to haul my old fence (in chunks) to the waste disposal center. 500lbs or so of lumber and concrete, and I still had room for more.

          Wagons for life!

      2. unlucky says:

        Longitudinal and transverse rear passenger space. Given the Model S has mediocre rear passenger headroom (poor if you don’t have the glass roof) I expect the Model 3 to suffer on rear headroom too, especially if you don’t have the glass roof.

        1. pjwood1 says:

          Plenty of rear seat roof, in Model S that has no sunroof, and I’m 6′. That said, a bit more with glass.

          1. unlucky says:

            I can touch my head to the roof of a Model S in the back with the metal roof. And I’m sub 6′. It doesn’t even have ample headroom with the sunroof. Not sure about the new glass roof, I haven’t sat in one yet. Although I probably will in the next week since a friend just got a newer model with one.

            The exceedingly low roofline just kills the interior space in that car. It means the front seat seating position is stretched out, hurting the 2nd row space. And in the back the roofline also cuts headroom to the quick.

            That car is an amazing study in how to make a huge car so small inside. The only car I can compare it to is a Bentley Continental GT. That car has 1st gen Volt-sized rear space even though it is huge. Although it is a two door so it’s less surprising than with the Model S. The Model S has more rear space of course but it’s still surprising how tight it is if you looked at the outside first.

    2. Stimpy says:

      Same as BMW 3 Series.

  7. Delta says:

    It does seem strange that Tesla is worried about low end Model S being cannibalized by Model 3.

    They should avoid any negative information about Model 3 limitations. They want to sell an order of magnitude more Model 3 than Model S. And they want to sell it to a whole new middle class audience – which is tens times bigger.

    So pointing out weaknesses or lack of features may send these middle-class clients to GM Bolts and Nissan Leafs – instead of higher end Tesla’s.

    1. theflew says:

      I think most will be surprised by the content of the base Model 3. Everybody imagines fully loaded model 3’s, but the reality will be a steel roof, clothe seats, standard wheels.

      1. Get Real says:

        You mean like what comes on the base Bolt and virtually every other base car?

    2. Doggydogworld says:

      Why does it seem strange? They obviously see cannibalization happening, and are simply reacting.

      I agree it’s a mistake to badmouth the Model 3. Dropping the S 60 and lower the price on the 75 were smart. They still need a few more upmarket features for the base S (without changing the price). Most companies would make Autopilot S only, but Tesla can’t go there.

    3. pjwood1 says:

      Strange, but then its not. Consider how many Prius conquests make Model S buyers. BMW wouldn’t have to worry about losing 7-buyers, to 3-buyers, but Tesla to an extent has no idea how many people are in it purely for EV, AV (Autonomous Vehicle), or both. For those two, the cars are going to behave very similar (A 5.3 0-60 is still 80’s Porsche Carerra territory).

      We’re finishing the quarter that would show the worst Osborne sales dent into the Model S, as Model 3 production is about to start. People defer to an ideal, rather than the reality of what it will be.

  8. Serial anti tesla troll thomas says:

    Haha 7 people in a S???? Maybe when all of them are not taller than 1 meter ????.
    My wife was sitting once with a friend in the rear seats in a S Taxi in Amsterdam and told me afterwards that she has never sit so uncomfortable.

    1. RC368 says:

      Did she use to be a man and play basketball.

    2. realistic says:

      The Model S rear seat looks bigger than it is because the non-Executive seating is plain and fairly flat, so it APPEARS big. The reality is that a Camry rear seat is more comfortable and spacious in a car that’s 3 inches narrower.

      I think becasue so many people were impressed by the overall vastness of the Model S early on. Many of these flks were “conquests” from the Prius world won over by the large and stylish pure EV; most were not former 7-series or 550 Sedan owners. Thus there is an incorrect public perception that the S rear seat is cavernous. It isn’t, and the Model 3 will be noticeably smaller.

      Again: does it matter? Not too much, I think.

      1. RC368 says:

        You”re just making that stuff up.

        1. realistic says:

          RC, you are welcome to take five minutes to look at these specs on the manufacturers site and then apologize for your gross ignorance and presumptuousness.

      2. Mark.ca says:

        So you think that the S stole customers from the Prius? Yeah, these 2 are in he same category and are targeting the same buyers much like a Versa buyer is taken by Porche.

        1. realistic says:

          Mark, as a Canadian you might not spend much time in places like Point Loma or Manhattan Beach, where very nice homes with very well-heeled occupants frequently had (and still do have) a Prius in the carport. The average income of Prius owners, especially in the over 55 bracket, is surprisingly high. In the early days if the Model S Prius owners were the largest single brand conquests:


          Ha, indeed.

  9. Brad bitzer says:

    What does “without referral” mean for Supercharging?

    1. David R Zayas says:

      Being referred by an existing customer.

  10. realistic says:

    Lost of speculation about Model 3 back seat here. It should be pretty clear that, while the car is not small, the back seat is. That’s not a critique, but it’s something that needs to be understood if anyone thinks the issue matters to market success.

    From Tesla and Chevrolet web sites come these numbers (inches) for Rear Seat Head Room, Leg Room, Shoulder Room and Hip Room for the Model S and the Chevy Cruze:
    Cruze: 37.3 36.1 53.2 51.9
    Model S: 35.3 35.4 55 54.7

    Note that the Chevy Cruze wins on head and leg room, but the Model S wins on leg and hip room.

    The Model 3 is 11 inches (+/-) shorter than the Model S and places rear seat passengrs closer to the downward roof slope and the rear glass than the S. The Model 3 is also about 3 inches (+/-) narrower than the Model S.

    Conclusion: the Model 3 will probably have smaller overall back seat dimensions than the Chevy Cruze in every measure.

    They sell a LOT of Cruzes, so it seems most people don’t mind a small-ish rear seat. But the flash impressions from folks sitting in the back of the mules and the static display cars overestimated the probable seating volume.

    1. realistic says:

      OK, OK: the Model 3 is aimed at the BMW 3-series (thought I’d address that before the chorus started).

      The BMW 3 Sedan has a fairly good rear-seat volume, with Head, Leg, and Shoulder (inches) at 37.7, 35.1 and 55.1 respectively (Hip not listed). That’s virtually idential to the Model S in Leg and better in the other two values.

      So, if it matters at all (and I don’t have a clue), the Model 3 rear seat will be noticeably smaller than that of the BMW 3 Series.

      1. RC368 says:

        Just a bit too much for an amateur.

        1. realistic says:

          Splain yerself, RC. I don’t understand your statement.

  11. cab says:

    Of course Tesla is afraid of the 3 gobbling up Model S sales. Unlike say BMW, Tesla doesn’t have a full line of cars to spread the sales over. They have the S and the X. BMW has the 2 series, 3 series, 4 series, 5 series, 6 series, 7 series, X3, X4, X5, X6….etc. BMW can afford for folks to hold out a bit for a new model…the whole brand won’t suddenly go without sales – Tesla doesn’t have that luxury.

    It doesn’t help that the most compelling attributes (long range, attractive quick electric) of the S are found in the 3 as well. It’s not like the Model S is some “super luxury” car. Its one hit wonder (i.e. the big screen) interior is low rent compared to anything else even remotely close to its price class. The Model S is going to need to move WAY upmarket to keep luring buyers, but I suspect they will be in a lot smaller numbers unless the Model 3 ends up with a cardboard interior and a box to sit on.

    1. RC368 says:

      All those cars you mentioned had their day.