Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Model 3 Unveiling [video]

model3.tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 395 posts

Re: Model 3 Unveiling [video]

#251

Post by brusch64 »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #63

Pretty smart looking car. Doesn't ape the Model S' look too much, clearly looks a little more compact, and the roofline makes it look both roomy and a little space-agey. From the front it almost has a Porsche Panamera look going on... Nice looking car. I wish Tesla good luck, though I don't think they'll need it.

different strokes for different folks.

Can't stand the front. Looks more like a Toyota than like a "premium car". But I don't like the Porsche Panamera too. I don't think we have the same taste in cars.

Re: Model 3 Unveiling [video]

#252

Post by rconti »

bdunn wrote: post #216
11402101 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supercharging network should be irrelevant in my mind. If you need to drive more than 200 miles away, you need ICE. Assuming you could get a 100% full charge in 30 minutes at a supercharger, and 210 miles of range at 60mph, you are driving 3.5 hours and standing around for 30 minutes. Meanwhile, ICE can get you 400 miles, or 6.5 hours of driving at 60mph, on a 15 minute gas fill up. Electrics are great for a lot of r…

I own a Model S and have clocked 23k miles on it over the last year, most of which on long roadtrips. I love it. The car mostly drives itself between superchargers, and the SCs are usually next to coffee shops or restaurants. I don't mind getting up and stretching / having a drink every few hours. But if minimizing recharging/refueling is your main priority, yeah, you can't beat ICE.

As a high performance driving enthusiast, I am very receptive to electric cars. I've hammered on the Roadster and Model S pretty hard on close courses, and instruct others. I put money down on a Model 3 today.

That said, "15 minutes to refuel" an ICE is way overstated; it's more like 5 tops, including a piss break and cleaning the windshield. I don't disagree that the supercharger setup is great (I have a friend who does deployments), and it would come in handy for my regular bay areasan diego roadtrips. That said, Tejon Ranch to San Diego is kind of pushing it on a slightly lower range S, and 2x 30min stops is non-trival for most people. I just finished a 4000mi southwest roadtrip (incidentally, a piss break in BFE Utah had me at an unexpected supercharger station), and we're a ways from where I'm comfortable doing such a trip on electricity. But that's fine -- that's my hangup, not a technical problem, and not something that can't be solved relatively soon. If electric adoption continues to ramp up as quickly as it has, finding a station won't be an issue, it'll just be a minor inconvenience to spend 25 mins more charging up -- which, again, is probably a worthwhile tradeoff for lower operating costs, and considering that 98% of customer miles involve regular end-of-day recharges.

Incidentally, my quickest roadtrip was down the west coast at an average speed of 75mph; 900 miles in about 11h with only a single fuel stop. By stopping in Oregon, where the clerk fills your car for you, I was able to receive a full tank of fuel, a piss break, and a gas station hotdog and soda in approximately 2 minutes' time. YMMV :)

Re: Model 3 Unveiling [video]

#254

Post by m_mueller »

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #134
gameshot911 wrote: post #115

Okay, I'll say it. I don't like the hatchback-esque look. I would have much preferred a normal sedan design. Yes the car is amazing in a ton of other ways, and yes the look will probably grow on me over time, but I don't want to "learn to love it". I want to innately find it beautiful at first glance. And my initial, instinctual reaction to the unveil was...a feeling of slight letdown.

Hatchbacks give you more headroom than sedans. So if they're primarily concerned with its back seat roominess then going hatchback makes a lot of sense. Hatchbacks are simply more practical vehicles unfortunately. They don't even have that much worse MPG than a sedan, and they give you a little more space to work with. It is a pragmatic choice.

Hatchbacks are also hugely popular in Europe. Maybe it will grow on Americans as well - something like the Model 3 could be watershed car that creates a new design fashion.

Re: Model 3 Unveiling [video]

#255

Post by robmcm »

rconti wrote: post #244
manav wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The car looks comparable to a Honda CRZ or a Toyota Prius (or a Subaru BRZ). They should have gone with the small-sedan form factor, but I think they believe it will cannibalize Model S sales.

A Honda CR-Z is a compact 2-seater in the United States. A Toyota Prius is an economy sedan with a surprisingly large back seat. A Subaru BRZ is a small 4-seat sport coupe. Your comparison can't possibly be valid because it's all over the map. From what I've seen, it IS a small sedan in the vein of a 3-series of A4 (larger than a Civic, smaller than an Accord).

It looks like it's a hatch-back, so wouldn't 1 Series or A3 be more fitting?

Re: Model 3 Unveiling [video]

#256

Post by rconti »

gameshot911 wrote: post #115

Okay, I'll say it. I don't like the hatchback-esque look. I would have much preferred a normal sedan design. Yes the car is amazing in a ton of other ways, and yes the look will probably grow on me over time, but I don't want to "learn to love it". I want to innately find it beautiful at first glance. And my initial, instinctual reaction to the unveil was...a feeling of slight letdown.

I don't see why anybody likes dull sedans. They all look like Camrys to me. Even some of the best-looking cars that LOOK like sedans (like the Model S and Mazda6) were liftback/hatchback designs.

I'm on car number 7 now and hope to never own a sedan in my life. Wagon/hatchback for life.

Re: Model 3 Unveiling [video]

#257

Post by brusch64 »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #239
Cookingboy wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Design is pretty subjective, personally I think this is far more attractive and looks way more premium: http://images.car.bauercdn.com/upload/32029/images/1040x585/... Interior: http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/547435/2015-merce... http://preview.netcarshow.com/Mercedes-Benz-C-Class-2015-160...

I find peoples' car aesthetics opinions totally incomprehensible. Ask 10 people what they like and you'll basically get 10 mutually incompatible answers. Personally, I like futuristic looking stuff (I think it goes back to the Lamborgini Countach when I was growing up). Other people hate that, hate the Prius, etc. I'm always shocked how many people think a car has to have a traditional shape or it's ugly. Some people…

Yeah this is really funny. Somewhere in this thread somebody said that he finds the 3s design superior to the Model S and that he really likes the Porsche Panamera. My taste in cars is completely the opposite.

But I don't care too much about asthetics in cars, I value practical considerations much higher.

Re: Model 3 Unveiling [video]

#258

Post by rconti »

impish19 wrote: post #75

I was hoping he was referring to something other than the snacks that were served to the people camping overnight outside stores to order the Model 3 with this tweet: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/715566236822671360 "Incredibly inspired by the interest in Model 3. You won't be disappointed. Also, small token of appreciation coming for those who lined up."

I assume it's a t-shirt or keychain or something. I was "in line" (1h before store opened, 1h to get to the front) so I guess we'll see.

Re: Model 3 Unveiling [video]

#259

Post by masida »

DarkTree wrote: post #241
refurb wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a per-unit sold basis, Tesla Model S is wildly profitable, with a gross margin north of 30% OK, I searched for "30%" in your link and nothing came up. So I scanned and saw nothing that claimed a gross margin of 30%. Where's it hiding? I assume by gross margin you mean, "revenue - COGS". This of course ignores all the fixed costs, so it doesn't mean much. Even if they weren't investing in future growth, their fix c…

While I agree fixed costs shouldn't be ignored, isn't it true that they are called fixed costs for a reason? As in, as Tesla scales up production and is selling way more cars, their fixed cost per unit sold will go down with economies of scale. I think gross margin is much more meaningful here, but definitely correct me if I'm wrong.

Fixed costs aren't totally fixed, it's just that they won't change for every unit produced. But it may be the case that they will change when you produce say an additional 100 units (or 1,000 or 10,000 units).

So if you ramp up production and you need for example an additional factory, that means your fixed costs will go up.

Re: Model 3 Unveiling [video]

#260

Post by rconti »

mikeash wrote: post #158
mehrdada wrote: post #96

He mentioned it has autopilot hardware standard (like the current Model S), which makes me suspect you have to pay a few thousand dollars more to unlock it in software.

He said autopilot safety features will be standard, which means the convenience features (lane keeping, automatic parking, etc.) will cost extra. Just like the S and X.

Right to both points -- that's how I read it too. You could call it "crippleware", though autopilot hardware (albeit on a 2018 car, though on the other hand in 35k of 2018 dollars) ain't exactly cheap. It's probably more economical for Tesla to build the cars with the same h/w and then upcharge for the s/w. And it's nice to have the opportunity to do a software update for it if you later want it, even though I know some don't like the crippleware "feel". And yes, I also heard them saying the safety stuff will be standard. Again, makes sense. Nobody wants the bad PR of installing safety hardware, but some poor family got killed by their Unsafe Tesla Car (TM) because of a software feature that was disabled by Evilon Musk.
Post reply on HN