Looks like this can be fixed with a firmware update. Will be rolling that out in a few days. With further refinement, we can improve braking distance beyond initial specs. Tesla won’t stop until Model 3 has better braking than any remotely comparable car.
Also, Consumer Reports has an early production car. Model 3 now has improved ride comfort, lower wind noise & many other small improvements. Will request that they test current production
To be clear, all Model 3 cars, incl early production will have same great braking ability. Nature of any product, however, is that if you care about perfection, you make constant small refinements. Today’s Model S is far more refined than initial production.
Asked " What’s the explanation for variability in stopping distance?" he responded:
The CR braking result is inconsistent with other reviewers, but might indicate that some Model 3’s have longer braking distances than others. If so, we will address this at our expense. First time we’ve seen anything like this.
Also responded to a person who wrote "Elon any chance of adding air compressors at Superchargers to fill up our tires ??" with "Good point. Yeah, we will do that for the bigger locations."
(For anyone who cares) - Just minutes ago Musk responded to this:
Very strange. Model 3 is designed to have super good stopping distance & others reviewers have confirmed this. If there is vehicle variability, we will figure it out & address. May just be a question of firmware tuning, in which case can be solved by an OTA software update.
Even if a physical upgrade is needed to existing fleet, we will make sure all Model 3’s having amazing braking ability at no expense to customers
Lots of people responding that they think that the CR report is BS because their cars stop better than any other car they've ever had, yadda yadda... but I'm glad Musk isn't being dismissive.
I stand corrected - I was looking at the comparison table, while they clarified in the more detailed analysis. Regardless, they declared that the Model 3 "ekes out a win in this category" vs. the BMW.
Also charges at about a third the speed from an inferior, fragmented network. Worse performance (not bad, just worse), worse handling (again, not bad, just worse), econobox interior, much less interesting options, etc. Heck, even getting the aforementioned charging speed is an option. With a $2k higher MSRP.
Also, the GP is wrong; Model 3 comes with cruise control. TACC is part of AP, but normal cruise control is standard. Collision warning / autobraking / etc (all safety components of AP) are also standard.
Tesla's also have very low depreciation rates. Their competitors? Not so much.
There could be some randomness with the braking distance, and if so, that should be remedied. But Car and Driver did six stops and ended up with an average of 119 feet. It's the difference between the averages of Car and Driver and CR that's strange. Car and Driver found it averaging better than a BMW. CR found it averaging worse than a Ford Pickup. Even if individual braking events are variable, the averages should be much closer than that.
Nine times out of 10, this first brake application and steering cut says most of what I need to know; up ahead are loopy black tire marks where a few notable sport sedans have already half-spun. As the arc of orange cones appears on the right, I straighten my ankle into the brake pedal. The 3’s nose barely sinks, I can lower it like a micrometer, as I’m gauging my stopping rate to within a foot or two. Very precise braking.
They measured an average braking distance of 119ft, vs. 123 ft for the BMW 330i.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against CR. But their testing mechanisms often seem really poorly controlled. Which can go either way - they found a 350 mile range for the Model 3 LR with 18" wheels, which is well further than normal. Their range measurement isn't a drive cycle, it's just a guy driving, which is obviously going to introduce a lot of randomness. One likes to hope that their braking tests are better controlled, but somehow I doubt that. They got hugely divergent braking distance results on the Model 3, with their first measure being around 130 feet, but others much higher dragging the average up.
A speedometer is not a "function". Yes, it's on the upper left of the screen, just beside the wheel.
I'll take it that you've never driven a car with a central speedo (this isn't even that central). After they get used to the different location, most people love them. Either way you're looking mostly "down", only in the latter it's "down and slightly to the side". But it means the wheel never blocks the speed, and it lets them lower the dash and give a better field of view out the front.
Tesla - like all manufacturers - does not own transport trucks (they don't own the oceanic shipping companies for overseas deliveries, either). They contract out, just like their competitors. Delivery issues during transport affect everyone equally. The only solution would be to vertically integrate the transportation system. Heck, given Tesla's obsession with vertical integration, they may well do that some day.
And yes, the car you get is the state of the car when you sign on the dotted line. Tesla introduces new features, pricing, etc very quickly, with little to no warning. If you're not happy knowing that the day after you sign Tesla could come out with something newer, better, cheaper... don't buy a Tesla. They don't wait until year-end like most manufacturers.
It weighs between 3549 and 3838 lbs. On the light side that's a bit heavier than a BMW M3
No, why don't you post actual numbers. The BMW curb weights (+100lb gas on average, more when full) are:
BMW 330i manual (0,1s slower than a 3549lb Model 3 SR): 3501+100 lb (101,4% of the weight, +0,1s) BMW 330i auto (same speed as a 3549lb Model 3 SR): 3541+100 lb (102,6% o the weight, 0,0s) BMW 340i manual (0,2s faster than a 3814 lb Model 3 LR): 3675+100 lb (99,0% of the weight, -0,2s) BMW 340i manual (probably-the-same-speed as a probably-around-3650+100 lb Model 3 SR AWD): 3675lb (103,4% of the weight, 0,0s) BMW 340i auto (0,3s faster than a a 3814 lb Model 3 LR): 3704+100 lb (99,7% of the weight, -0,3s) BMW 340i auto (probably-0,1s-faster than a probably-around-3650lb Model 3 SR AWD): 3704+100 lb (104,2% of the weight, -0,1s) BMW M3 manual (0,6s slower than a probably-around- 3915lb Model 3 LR-P): 3575+100 lb (93,9% of the weight, +0,6s) BMW M3 auto (0,4s slower than a probably-around- 3915lb Model 3 LR-P): 3630+100 lb (95,3% of the weight, +0,4s) BMW M5 (0,3s faster than a probably-around- 3915lb Model 3 LR-P): 4370+100 lb (114,2% of the weight, -0,3s)
I'll repeat what I wrote: It is not by any standard "a very heavy car" And of course, real-world testing has shown that Tesla has sandbagged the model 3 LR performance figures, and probably the other model 3s as well, probably to boost sales of the S line; most people get under the nominal 5,1s in the LR.
For comparison, my 2012 GTI...
... does 0-60 in 5,4 seconds and is a much smaller car. Why not compare to a motorcycle while you're at it? People have been comparing Model 3 to the 3-series, Audi A4 and Mercedes C350 because that's the class that the vehicle is in.
Anyone who keeps up with the automotive press knows that the Model 3 fit-and-finish has been very poor to date
And anyone who actually follows real buyers through their delivery process realizes how absurd the media hype has been, taking every single case they can find of a fit and finish error and blowing it all out of proportion, creating a narrative that simply doesn't match reality.
No, all vehicles have not been flawless. But this picture that they've been painting where your average car is held together by duct tape just doesn't even remotely match reality. Most people - after hearing the media scare stories - inspect their vehicles with a fine-toothed comb. And most find nothing whatsoever.
Check out the Model 3 forum and start following people's reports as they get their config invites, wait for their VIN, get their delivery dates, go to pickup, and give their feedback afterward.
And BTW your claim about "every teardown" is wrong. You mean "Every teardown by one Randy Munrone". Ingineerix, Jack Rickard, and Evannex disagree.
No. It's $35k without the credit; $27,5k if it gets a full credit. LR is $44k without the credit, $36,5k with a full credit. LR + PUP is $49k without the credit, $41,5k with a full credit.
Where I am it works in just the opposite manner. All cars have a massive VAT (for example, a BMW 3-series' VAT will be around 40%). EVs don't have to pay it. We also have huge gas prices (in US dollars figures they're now over $8/gal).
I wasn't counting laps, but the brakes burned out around 14 minutes in, and he was averaging under 2 minutes per lap, so more like 7 laps. And they weren't racing brakes. There's a reason that racing brakes exist; stock brakes are not designed for prolongued heavy usage.
Yeah, I do see the rear seating position as a screwup - and such an easily remedied one too. There's tons of headroom (excess, really) back there; they should have just made the rear bench higher.
Slashdot Mirror
More updates after I went to bed:
Asked " What’s the explanation for variability in stopping distance?" he responded:
How does it make a difference whether the update comes in over the air or whether you have to drive your car in to a dealership?
Gasoline cars aren't the only ones available used.
Another:
Also responded to a person who wrote "Elon any chance of adding air compressors at Superchargers to fill up our tires ??" with "Good point. Yeah, we will do that for the bigger locations."
(For anyone who cares) - Just minutes ago Musk responded to this:
Oh, now another:
Lots of people responding that they think that the CR report is BS because their cars stop better than any other car they've ever had, yadda yadda... but I'm glad Musk isn't being dismissive.
To turn what on and off? Be specific. Give an example.
I stand corrected - I was looking at the comparison table, while they clarified in the more detailed analysis. Regardless, they declared that the Model 3 "ekes out a win in this category" vs. the BMW.
ED: Other way around. Argh, I give up. Wish you could edit posts here :P
ED: Wait, you were linking Motor Trend, not Car and Driver.
Also charges at about a third the speed from an inferior, fragmented network. Worse performance (not bad, just worse), worse handling (again, not bad, just worse), econobox interior, much less interesting options, etc. Heck, even getting the aforementioned charging speed is an option. With a $2k higher MSRP.
Also, the GP is wrong; Model 3 comes with cruise control. TACC is part of AP, but normal cruise control is standard. Collision warning / autobraking / etc (all safety components of AP) are also standard.
Tesla's also have very low depreciation rates. Their competitors? Not so much.
There could be some randomness with the braking distance, and if so, that should be remedied. But Car and Driver did six stops and ended up with an average of 119 feet. It's the difference between the averages of Car and Driver and CR that's strange. Car and Driver found it averaging better than a BMW. CR found it averaging worse than a Ford Pickup. Even if individual braking events are variable, the averages should be much closer than that.
Motor Trend measured an average of 119ft.
From MotorTrend's testing:
They measured an average braking distance of 119ft, vs. 123 ft for the BMW 330i.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against CR. But their testing mechanisms often seem really poorly controlled. Which can go either way - they found a 350 mile range for the Model 3 LR with 18" wheels, which is well further than normal. Their range measurement isn't a drive cycle, it's just a guy driving, which is obviously going to introduce a lot of randomness. One likes to hope that their braking tests are better controlled, but somehow I doubt that. They got hugely divergent braking distance results on the Model 3, with their first measure being around 130 feet, but others much higher dragging the average up.
A speedometer is not a "function". Yes, it's on the upper left of the screen, just beside the wheel.
I'll take it that you've never driven a car with a central speedo (this isn't even that central). After they get used to the different location, most people love them. Either way you're looking mostly "down", only in the latter it's "down and slightly to the side". But it means the wheel never blocks the speed, and it lets them lower the dash and give a better field of view out the front.
A BMW M3 has starting price $66,5k
A Model 3 LR has a starting price of $44k.
Model 3 LR is not meant to be a track car. Model 3 LR-P is. And it comes with racing brakes.
I have no clue what your argument is. Try again. And try being an adult next time as well.
Tesla - like all manufacturers - does not own transport trucks (they don't own the oceanic shipping companies for overseas deliveries, either). They contract out, just like their competitors. Delivery issues during transport affect everyone equally. The only solution would be to vertically integrate the transportation system. Heck, given Tesla's obsession with vertical integration, they may well do that some day.
And yes, the car you get is the state of the car when you sign on the dotted line. Tesla introduces new features, pricing, etc very quickly, with little to no warning. If you're not happy knowing that the day after you sign Tesla could come out with something newer, better, cheaper... don't buy a Tesla. They don't wait until year-end like most manufacturers.
No, why don't you post actual numbers. The BMW curb weights (+100lb gas on average, more when full) are:
BMW 330i manual (0,1s slower than a 3549lb Model 3 SR): 3501+100 lb (101,4% of the weight, +0,1s)
BMW 330i auto (same speed as a 3549lb Model 3 SR): 3541+100 lb (102,6% o the weight, 0,0s)
BMW 340i manual (0,2s faster than a 3814 lb Model 3 LR): 3675+100 lb (99,0% of the weight, -0,2s)
BMW 340i manual (probably-the-same-speed as a probably-around-3650+100 lb Model 3 SR AWD): 3675lb (103,4% of the weight, 0,0s)
BMW 340i auto (0,3s faster than a a 3814 lb Model 3 LR): 3704+100 lb (99,7% of the weight, -0,3s)
BMW 340i auto (probably-0,1s-faster than a probably-around-3650lb Model 3 SR AWD): 3704+100 lb (104,2% of the weight, -0,1s)
BMW M3 manual (0,6s slower than a probably-around- 3915lb Model 3 LR-P): 3575+100 lb (93,9% of the weight, +0,6s)
BMW M3 auto (0,4s slower than a probably-around- 3915lb Model 3 LR-P): 3630+100 lb (95,3% of the weight, +0,4s)
BMW M5 (0,3s faster than a probably-around- 3915lb Model 3 LR-P): 4370+100 lb (114,2% of the weight, -0,3s)
I'll repeat what I wrote: It is not by any standard "a very heavy car" And of course, real-world testing has shown that Tesla has sandbagged the model 3 LR performance figures, and probably the other model 3s as well, probably to boost sales of the S line; most people get under the nominal 5,1s in the LR.
You have not driven a Model 3. And you seem to think people here are idiots.
That's pretending that oil isn't fungible.
And anyone who actually follows real buyers through their delivery process realizes how absurd the media hype has been, taking every single case they can find of a fit and finish error and blowing it all out of proportion, creating a narrative that simply doesn't match reality.
No, all vehicles have not been flawless. But this picture that they've been painting where your average car is held together by duct tape just doesn't even remotely match reality. Most people - after hearing the media scare stories - inspect their vehicles with a fine-toothed comb. And most find nothing whatsoever.
Check out the Model 3 forum and start following people's reports as they get their config invites, wait for their VIN, get their delivery dates, go to pickup, and give their feedback afterward.
And BTW your claim about "every teardown" is wrong. You mean "Every teardown by one Randy Munrone". Ingineerix, Jack Rickard, and Evannex disagree.
No. It's $35k without the credit; $27,5k if it gets a full credit. LR is $44k without the credit, $36,5k with a full credit. LR + PUP is $49k without the credit, $41,5k with a full credit.
Where I am it works in just the opposite manner. All cars have a massive VAT (for example, a BMW 3-series' VAT will be around 40%). EVs don't have to pay it. We also have huge gas prices (in US dollars figures they're now over $8/gal).
I wasn't counting laps, but the brakes burned out around 14 minutes in, and he was averaging under 2 minutes per lap, so more like 7 laps. And they weren't racing brakes. There's a reason that racing brakes exist; stock brakes are not designed for prolongued heavy usage.
The actual production target is 6k, not 5k. 33 weeks to 200k (which assumes a larger percent of orders being US orders than I expect). 2 1/2 quarters.
Yeah, I do see the rear seating position as a screwup - and such an easily remedied one too. There's tons of headroom (excess, really) back there; they should have just made the rear bench higher.