71–80 of 102 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I kinda get you, but just because there's a bunch of marketing gibberish on the pricing page doesn't mean they aren't being disruptive.
I think part of the point of being disruptive is that you don't need to sink that low.
I might have to test drive one soon. My wife is strongly disapproving me getting a Roadster in a few years. If I find that 0-60 in 3.3 seconds is enough, I might settle for a Model 3.
EDIT: They also removed the option to purchase full self-driving. Interesting...
I just noticed they're now advertising the 0-60 of the performance trim as 3.3 seconds. Only a week or so ago, they were advertising 3.5 seconds. I might have to test drive one soon. My wife is strongly disapproving me getting a Roadster in a few years. If I find that 0-60 in 3.3 seconds is enough, I might settle for a Model 3. EDIT: They also removed the option to purchase full self-driving. Interesting...
I test drove a 90D and the acceleration off the line is heart-stopping. And that is listed at 4.7s.
Just in case anyone is wondering how this plays out pricewise, the base model is $46.2k, but they headline the price as $33.2k: Price $45,000 Incentives: -$7,500 Gasoline savings: -$4,300 Price after savings: $33,200 Destination & doc fee: $1,200 It's rather disappointing that for all the talk from Tesla about disrupting the way people buy cars they maintain nonsense practices like adding on destination and doc fees,…
Looks like they still don't have the "standard interior" option available, so that's extra $5k. Once (or if) they offer standard interior, we're talking $40k. If they're calling this battery option mid-range and it's 260mi range, then it's sounds like we're yet to see the 200+mi (maybe 210-220) $35k car. They're probably not able to produce the $35k car yet without losing money.
They've probably exhausted RWD demand backlog so I wouldn't be surprised if this was (initially)a software-limited long range battery, so that they can sell their RWD inventory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regarding one of the last points in that, I continue to be baffled by Elon/Tesla's focus on shared personal vehicles, instead of public transport.
I continue to be baffled why people are baffled that most people prefer not to travel in cramped, enclosed spaces with random strangers and without the option to carry more than what you can hold in your hands. Sometimes people even have more than one small child with them. Is that really so hard to understand? The personal transport vehicle has been desirable from the beginning of time and now (almost) everyone can…
Transport is typically supply-led.
For roads, more roads encourage more drivers, and more drivers congest the system, leading to marginal overall improvement - there are only so many cars that can travel a stretch of road in any given period of time.
While with public transport there are also only so many buses/trains that can travel a stretch of road/rail at a time, we are typically well short of saturation - outside of some of the densest metros, there is often capacity for increasing the number of services. Investment in these forms of transport increases frequency and reliability, and simplifies connections. The 'downside' is that this increased efficiency tends to attract more users to the public transport system - which yes, means imperfect reduction of crowding, but still significantly improved throughput.
Also, the people on public transport are not 'random strangers', they are members of your community.
Re carrying, as a sibling comment says: backpack. Alternatively one of those granny trolleys. Plus, many buses/trains intended for longer transport (c.f. commuting) have luggage racks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They do account for electricity costs in the "gas savings": "The average person drives between 10,000 and 15,000 miles and spends between $1,000 and $1,500 on gasoline per year. In comparison, the cost of electricity to power Model 3 over the same distance is up to three times lower. Over the six year average length of car ownership, that's between $4,300 and $6,400 in gasoline savings. We've assumed a fuel economy o…
But the cars I plan to buy also don't use gasoline. Ex: Chevy Volt, or the Prius Prime. I dunno, I find it dishonest. Any electric vehicle shopper knows that gasoline is a major cost-driver and reason to buy electric instead. The Chevy Volt is currently $33,520. Then gets a $7500 Federal Credit (and unlike Tesla, Chevy hasn't run out yet. If your Tesla 3 is delivered in January 2019, you only get $3750 in credits). A…
It almost wants me to walk into a Tesla showroom and show them their press release and say "I'll take the $33,200 model. Here is my check."
The back pedaling and hand waving would be entertaining.
Just in case anyone is wondering how this plays out pricewise, the base model is $46.2k, but they headline the price as $33.2k: Price $45,000 Incentives: -$7,500 Gasoline savings: -$4,300 Price after savings: $33,200 Destination & doc fee: $1,200 It's rather disappointing that for all the talk from Tesla about disrupting the way people buy cars they maintain nonsense practices like adding on destination and doc fees,…
[1] https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/articles/destination-charges/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did Apple include TCO in their iPhone pricing given that they support their device longer than other OEMs ? No. Did Toyota include TCO in their hybrid car pricing given that it also reduces gas consumption? No. Did Rolex include TCO in their watch pricing given that the resale value doesn't significantly depreciate ? No. Nobody does this because it's intentionally deceptive.
Actually, iPhone pricing from US telcos used to only show the discounted price, with the carrier subsidy. You paid sales tax on the full price, but that number was in the fine print. These days you can buy it either way, so it's more obvious.
But yeah it was weird in other countries when you would see “Thing X costs $Y” and everyone would do the $Y * exchange rate and say “why is it so much cheaper there”. Then you come to America and discover that the advertised price excludes compulsory fees and taxes. All American companies do this, and I would argue it is unethical, and should be illegal, but I don’t have the billions of dollars needed to buy a law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the cars I plan to buy also don't use gasoline. Ex: Chevy Volt, or the Prius Prime. I dunno, I find it dishonest. Any electric vehicle shopper knows that gasoline is a major cost-driver and reason to buy electric instead. The Chevy Volt is currently $33,520. Then gets a $7500 Federal Credit (and unlike Tesla, Chevy hasn't run out yet. If your Tesla 3 is delivered in January 2019, you only get $3750 in credits). A…
What are the ramifications of never changing the gas in a hybrid like the Volt? Does it “go bad” eventually?
Engine Maintenance mode: haven't used the gas engine in some period (month?) so it uses the engine for a small period of time (less than my 12 mile commute) so get the engine oil moving.
Fuel maintenance mode: doesn't let average age of gas be over a year. i.e. I filled my tank August 30, 2017 from basically empty. On Aug 29, 2018 it went into fuel maintenance mode and even though I had a full battery, it would only use gas. I was probably around 1 gallon left, I filled it up, so expect around june 2019, it will go into fuel maintenance mode again unless I finish off the tank and fill it up again.