Jump to content
  • Drew Dowdell
    Drew Dowdell

    Tesla Announces $35,000 Model 3 Now Available; Closing Most Retail Locations

      After a long wait, the standard Model 3 is now available.

    Tesla announced that beginning today, the standard version of the Model 3 with a base price of $35,000 is available for order.  The base Model 3 has a top speed of 130 mph and a 0-60 time for 5.6 seconds. Additionally, Tesla will be introducing a Model 3 Standard Range Plus with 240 miles of range, top speed of 140mph, 0-60 of 5.3 seconds, and some interior upgrades for $37,000 before incentives.  Tesla claims that these upgrades give customers 9% more range for 6% more money.

    Existing Model 3 drivers will be receiving firmware updates that will increase the range of the Long Range rear-wheel drive Model 3 to 325 miles and the Model 3 Performance top speed to 162 mph.  The firmware update for all Model 3 cars will give an approximate 5% power increase. 

    In the same announcement, Tesla revealed that they will be closing most of their retail locations with the exception of a few high traffic outlets and moving to an online-only sales model.  Customers buying a Model 3 will now be able to try the car for 7 days or 1,000 miles and return it for free.  Tesla claims that this will ease customer concerns about being able to test drive the vehicle before purchase.  By moving to an online-only system, Telsa claims that it will be able to reduce prices 6% on average. 

    Tesla is moving to a Same-Day and in some locations Same-Hour service system where Tesla comes to the driver rather than the traditional method of vehicle service. Tesla is also guaranteeing everywhere in every country they sell in.

    Source: Tesla 

    • Upvote 1


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Good to see the $35k model is here.  The Standard Plus seems like a better deal, I could see big demand for those.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    this will become the litmus test to see if muhrican consumers are willing to skip the dealer.

    • Upvote 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Just now, regfootball said:

    this will become the litmus test to see if muhrican consumers are willing to skip the dealer.

    And to see if muhricans that are not Tesla fanatics to adopt EVs...

    Tesla fans will and did pony up for the top trimmed Model 3. Waited and waited and waited for it to arrive. All kinds of quality problems and Tesla fans  bought the Model 3...

    Now that the 35 000 dollar one has finally arrived, of course there will be more Tesla fanatics buying it...

    But now, we will see for realz how many EV buying muhricans there really are. 

    EV haterz had all kinds of excuses using the Bolt sales as evidence that there are no EV buyes in 'muhrica. 

    EV defenders say that the Bolt is just not a real competitor to the Model 3 and is just a compromised vehicle...and that the Bolt is just not the right tyoe and sized EV...

    Well, the 35 000 dollar Model 3 is upon us. 

    The Model Y soon will be open to reservations...

    NOW is the time to see if the future really is with EVs...

    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, balthazar said:

    Took exactly 3 entire years from the unveiling to having the $35K version available. Model 3 is due for a refresh next year and the bulk of it's pre-orderers haven't even gotten their first car yet.

    I don't want to hear another mention ever again that GM is slow to produce an unveiled production-intended vehicle.

    I don't know what you are talking about...I am still waiting for the gorgeous concept cars of the 50s and sixties to make it into production.

    • Haha 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Me too- it's were all my windfall billions will go; building semi-production '50s concepts.

    I wonder if Tesla will EVER have enough money to afford building a concept vehicle.

    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    They built a concept rocket. The idea that sending a car in space is the only way to make it the fastest car ever....

     

    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Now that this is here, it will be interesting to see how many of my coworkers who are Apple faithful to the core and talked about if they could not have an iCar, they would buy a Tesla once the $35K version was ready actually buy.

    I can now say where is your Tesla? 🤔

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    8 hours ago, balthazar said:

    Me too- it's were all my windfall billions will go; building semi-production '50s concepts.

    I wonder if Tesla will EVER have enough money to afford building a concept vehicle.

    I still wonder if Tesla will survive...

    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    11 hours ago, balthazar said:

     

    I don't want to hear another mention ever again that GM is slow to produce an unveiled production-intended vehicle.

    Like the mythical mid engined Corvette...

    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    When was the ME vette originally announced for production again?
    There's a difference between toying with a concept behind closed doors, and making a public official announcement it's going into production. 99.99999% of consumers have no idea of the long ME corvette proposals going back to '73.

    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Just now, balthazar said:

    When was the ME vette originally announced for production again? 

    2 years ago? 5 years ago?  i don't know...seems like they've been talking about the upcoming C8 for years... (I still think they are going to cancel it before it's ever shown). 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I've NOT seen any official announcement / stage unveiling from Chevrolet yet. Drew?

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    11 minutes ago, balthazar said:

    When was the ME vette originally announced for production again?
    There's a difference between toying with a concept behind closed doors, and making a public official announcement it's going into production. 99.99999% of consumers have no idea of the long ME corvette proposals going back to '73.

    So True, I honestly have no idea how long GM has had rumors and talked about a mid engine corvette, but it seems to me to have been since the 70's or 80's. So if 1973 was the start, then WOW, talk about a freakin long Gestation period. 🤷‍♂️

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    ccap41

    Posted (edited)

    The Model 3 was unveiled March 2016. The first deliveries were July 2017. 

    Ford is even worse with their whole GT500, Ranger, and Bronco situations. 

    The C8 has been spotted testing in September 2018 and it supposedly a 2020? 

    Edited by ccap41
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    10 minutes ago, balthazar said:

    I've NOT seen any official announcement / stage unveiling from Chevrolet yet. Drew?

    Nothing official of when they will unveil the mid engine corvette, but Mark has confirmed the product is real, just not when.

    http://gmauthority.com/blog/2018/08/mark-reuss-publicly-acknowledges-mid-engine-c8-corvette/

    I HONESTLY think this closing of stores and reduction of having people to work with will HURT not Help Tesla.

    While I am not a fan of their style, I personally think they are all very ugly and the Polestar 2 is far better looking than the Tesla 3, being one that HAS to check for leg and head room, I will NEVER be an online order person. 

    GIVE ME my dealership where I can stop, look, ask questions, go home and sleep on it and then come back to finalize what I want.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    ykX

    Posted (edited)

    So lets see out of curiosity if bare bones Model 3 makes financial sense.  (Specially for you  @balthazar :) )

    Model 3 has converted fuel economy of 128 mpg city/ 117 mpg highway (supposedly equivalent kWh to mpg)

    Lets take bare bones Honda Accord, it will be about $10-12k cheaper than Tesla and it has fuel economy of 30 mpg city/ 38 mpg highway

    Tesla of course is RWD and much faster than Accord but lets say for the average consumer it doesn't matter

    Lets take average for Tesla 120 mpg and average for Honda  35 mpg.

    At average of $3 per gallon driving 12000 miles a year will cost $300 in Tesla and $1029 in Accord.  So the difference is $729 per year and it will take almost 14 years to make up the price difference.  Considering Tesla requires less maintenance (no oil changes, transmission, less brake wear out) it might go down to 10 years optimistically.

    So on paper it doesn't make financial sense compared to base common sedan.

    Personally though, I think I would rather drive base Model 3 than Accord. 

    Edited by ykX
    • Upvote 3

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    33 minutes ago, ykX said:

    So lets see out of curiosity if bare bones Model 3 makes financial sense.  (Specially for you  @balthazar :) )

    Model 3 has converted fuel economy of 128 mpg city/ 117 mpg highway (supposedly equivalent kWh to mpg)

    Lets take bare bones Honda Accord, it will be about $10-12k cheaper than Tesla and it has fuel economy of 30 mpg city/ 38 mpg highway

    Tesla of course is RWD and much faster than Accord but lets say for the average consumer it doesn't matter

    Lets take average for Tesla 120 mpg and average for Honda  35 mpg.

    At average of $3 per gallon driving 12000 miles a year will cost $300 in Tesla and $1029 in Accord.  So the difference is $729 per year and it will take almost 14 years to make up the price difference.  Considering Tesla requires less maintenance (no oil changes, transmission, less brake wear out) it might go down to 10 years optimistically.

    So on paper it doesn't make financial sense compared to base common sedan.

    Personally though, I think I would rather drive base Model 3 than Accord. 

    I like the idea of the thing being charged up and ready to go every morning.

    • Like 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    A purchase of a Model 3 is almost like a tribute to Elon Musk. Just getting a Model T was a nod to Henry Ford.

    Also I think this version availability has nothing to do with being able to actually manufacture the standard model.

    It has everything to do with the Polestar 2. That thing is going to be the first real competitor to Model 3. And it also sells online only. 

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    48 minutes ago, Suaviloquent said:

    A purchase of a Model 3 is almost like a tribute to Elon Musk. Just getting a Model T was a nod to Henry Ford.

    Also I think this version availability has nothing to do with being able to actually manufacture the standard model.

    It has everything to do with the Polestar 2. That thing is going to be the first real competitor to Model 3. And it also sells online only. 

    Given how nasty the F and I guys are when you buy a car at a traditional dealership, I will feel no sorrow if they go the way of the dodo bird.

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    balthazar

    Posted (edited)

    5 hours ago, ykX said:

    So lets see out of curiosity if bare bones Model 3 makes financial sense.  (Specially for you  @balthazar :) )

    Model 3 has converted fuel economy of 128 mpg city/ 117 mpg highway (supposedly equivalent kWh to mpg)

    Lets take bare bones Honda Accord, it will be about $10-12k cheaper than Tesla and it has fuel economy of 30 mpg city/ 38 mpg highway

    Tesla of course is RWD and much faster than Accord but lets say for the average consumer it doesn't matter

    Lets take average for Tesla 120 mpg and average for Honda  35 mpg.

    At average of $3 per gallon driving 12000 miles a year will cost $300 in Tesla and $1029 in Accord.  So the difference is $729 per year and it will take almost 14 years to make up the price difference.  Considering Tesla requires less maintenance (no oil changes, transmission, less brake wear out) it might go down to 10 years optimistically.

    So on paper it doesn't make financial sense compared to base common sedan.

    Personally though, I think I would rather drive base Model 3 than Accord. 

    Car & Driver piece is stating the '$35K' is actually $36,200 with the destination charge. Not sure offhand if that's commonly tossed in with a random MSRP or not. I'm willing to forgo that addition for this discussion. However what I am NOT willing to forgo is the included tax credit. $35,000 plus $3750 is $38,750.

    On the Accord side you have oil changes (At $50 per, times 1.6 changes per year: $80, most other maintenance is minor or deferred to the 75K or 100K miles interval.
    3 reportedly costs about $200/ 10K miles in electricity, but don't forget you are also paying more tax on the purchase, more in insurance, around $1000 to upgrade your electric in the garage... these add to the bottom line too.

    And EV will never work for me for a number of reasons, but it might for my wife. I just don't see a clear cost advantage at this point. Maybe in 10 years.

    Edited by balthazar
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So Tesla moved a solid 25,250 Model 3s in Dec. Of course, even Musk was saying 'buy now- tax credit cut coming Jan 1!'.
    Seems people did just that.

    What happened in Jan?? Sales slide 75%, to 6500 units.

    What happened in Feb?? Sales slid another 12%, to 5750 units. Now, Tesla's monthly sales volumes traditionally turn 'volatility' to 10, but this is back to May-June sales numbers, in the peak of the "production hell".

    Let me know if anyone sees an op-ed wondering ''can Tesla turn the sales slump around??' anytime in March. ;)

    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    14 minutes ago, balthazar said:

    Car & Driver piece is stating the '$35K' is actually $36,200 with the destination charge. Not sure offhand if that's commonly tossed in with a random MSRP or not. I'm willing to forgo that addition for this discussion. However what I am NOT willing to forgo is the included tax credit. $35,000 plus $3750 is $38,750.

    The tax will be charged on any other car as well.  Of course taxes on $25k car will be smaller than on $35k.

    I think with some decent options it still will be a $40k car.  Would I pay right now $35-40k for Tesla?  No, there are many other options at the moment that better suitable for my needs for the money.

    However, the point is in another 5 years or so the car market will start looking differently.

    • Upvote 3

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    6 hours ago, balthazar said:

    I've NOT seen any official announcement / stage unveiling from Chevrolet yet. Drew?

    It has been spotted in very complete form out testing. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Given how nasty the F and I guys are when you buy a car at a traditional dealership, I will feel no sorrow if they go the way of the dodo bird.

    I totally agree as Ford sales person is like the worst to deal with out there. So pushy, arrogant and uninformed about their products details.

    I have no problem when bad dealerships go away. But for me, I have certain needs as you know and being able to actually sit in one and test it out will always have me going to a dealership over on-line buying.

    • Thanks 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By Drew Dowdell
      General Motors and LG Chem are joining forces to invest $2.3 billion in a new battery plant near its old Lordstown Assembly complex in Lordstown, Ohio.  The deal is a 50/50 partnership between GM and LG Chem and will create 1,100 jobs in the area. 
      Construction of the plant will begin mid-2020 at a greenfield former manufacturing site. The employees will work for the joint-venture and will not be direct GM employees. Initially, the plant will solely supply batteries for GM vehicles, though with a maximum capacity of 30 gigawatt-hours annually, the company could expand to supply other manufacturers as well.
      GM and LG Chem are forming this joint venture in an attempt to bring down the unit cost of batteries for future vehicles. The plant's capacity, once completed, will be among the largest in the world. 
      General Motors has said it wants to introduce 20 electric vehicles globally by 2023. 

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      General Motors and LG Chem are joining forces to invest $2.3 billion in a new battery plant near its old Lordstown Assembly complex in Lordstown, Ohio.  The deal is a 50/50 partnership between GM and LG Chem and will create 1,100 jobs in the area. 
      Construction of the plant will begin mid-2020 at a greenfield former manufacturing site. The employees will work for the joint-venture and will not be direct GM employees. Initially, the plant will solely supply batteries for GM vehicles, though with a maximum capacity of 30 gigawatt-hours annually, the company could expand to supply other manufacturers as well.
      GM and LG Chem are forming this joint venture in an attempt to bring down the unit cost of batteries for future vehicles. The plant's capacity, once completed, will be among the largest in the world. 
      General Motors has said it wants to introduce 20 electric vehicles globally by 2023. 
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Mazda has an internal debate going on as to whether to electrify or not the next generation MX-5 Miata.  One of the major concerns is keeping the car light weight. The current car in base form tips the scales at just 2,345 lbs. and is incredibly well balanced, so adding batteries and electric motors could upset that balance. 
      Electric motors can be compact and powerful though, adding torque in places where gasoline motors are weak.  In order to provide that power, they require dense and heavy battery packs. Still, if power can be added to the 2.0-liter four-cylinder that produces 181 horsepower and 151 lb-ft of torque, it might make up for the weight increase in a straight line.
      Why do this? It's not like the MX-5 is a huge seller. It doesn't contribute to Mazda's overall volume in such a way that it should require efficiency tuning to meet fuel economy standards. Just 8,971 Miatas passed through Mazda dealerships in 2019.  The answer is in image. Mazda wants to maintain the appearance of being eco-friendly. They feel that the preference of people who enjoy driving sports cars could be changing, so Mazda needs to think about the direction society is going. The next Mazda MX-5 isn't due until 2022 or so, so Mazda still has some time to decide.
      Mazda is committed to the original formula that made the Miata an icon though, and any electrification will have to happen with the thought of maintaining lightness as a priority.

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Mazda has an internal debate going on as to whether to electrify or not the next generation MX-5 Miata.  One of the major concerns is keeping the car light weight. The current car in base form tips the scales at just 2,345 lbs. and is incredibly well balanced, so adding batteries and electric motors could upset that balance. 
      Electric motors can be compact and powerful though, adding torque in places where gasoline motors are weak.  In order to provide that power, they require dense and heavy battery packs. Still, if power can be added to the 2.0-liter four-cylinder that produces 181 horsepower and 151 lb-ft of torque, it might make up for the weight increase in a straight line.
      Why do this? It's not like the MX-5 is a huge seller. It doesn't contribute to Mazda's overall volume in such a way that it should require efficiency tuning to meet fuel economy standards. Just 8,971 Miatas passed through Mazda dealerships in 2019.  The answer is in image. Mazda wants to maintain the appearance of being eco-friendly. They feel that the preference of people who enjoy driving sports cars could be changing, so Mazda needs to think about the direction society is going. The next Mazda MX-5 isn't due until 2022 or so, so Mazda still has some time to decide.
      Mazda is committed to the original formula that made the Miata an icon though, and any electrification will have to happen with the thought of maintaining lightness as a priority.
    • By Drew Dowdell
      The first product to come from Ford's investment into startup automaker Rivian will likely be a Lincoln SUV due to arrive sometime in 2022.  The vehicle will be all-wheel drive and compete against Rivian's own R1S which is priced at $72,500.  The models will share Rivian's skateboard platform, a design that combines the motors, batteries, controls and suspension into a single unit that the body can be built around.  
      The Rivian R1S is a three-row EV crossover with a range of up to 410 miles and will be built in Normal Illinois at a former Mitsubishi plant. It is expected to go into production sometime in 2021.
      There will also be a compact Lincoln EV crossover coming for 2021 that could be built on the same platform that the Ford Mustang Mach-E rides on. 
      EV sales have been tepid so far in the US, but Lincoln is banking on the EVs to be bigger sellers in the Chinese market. 

      View full article
  • Posts

    • All cars are as posted. 1. 1970 Olds 442 W-30 with those rocket wheels instead of the Magnum wheels and preferably no wing...and no vinyl top either...   2.  1969 Plymouth Road Runner  or GTX...preferably a Road Runner so I could honk the horn to hear it go...meep meep.    3. Dodge Challenger Hellcat.  Redeye is optional. I dont care as long as its a Hellcat...   4. 1973 Pontiac Trans Am SD455 with white vinyl interior. 5. 1933 Ford Roadster Hot Rod  with Ford's latest 5.2 liter V8. Not the Voodoo, but the new GT500 V8.   An Ancient Greek mythological themed motif  to compliment the Hot Rod look to it instead of the stereotypical flames and/or skulls...    These would be numbers matching garage queens. Not babied by all means, they'd be driven, but not hard miles.  I wouldnt pamper them too much, but Id be careful as well.    If I was to replace those with clones and restomodded/pro-toured with modern set-ups, then Id daily drive all of them. One week one car, the following car next week and so forth.     
    • Its gots to be all those residual checks that GM cashes in from movie royalties... The Chevy Suburban just got its Hollywood Walk of Fame Star a couple of days ago.... It is said that the Suburban has had a 60 year career and been in over 1750 movies...so...11 billion dollars/per year profit    The year GM went bankrupt, there was a conspiracy against GM and Hollywood stopped re-running  Smokey and the Bandit, The A-Team, Knight Rider...  
    • I have 2 of my muscle cars already. I would certainly entertain a '50s Eldorado Seville and one of the late '50s MoPar supercars, preferably an Adventurer but a 300 Letter Series would be just peachy too.
    • [Wanders off over the moonscape...]
    • Dozens of unique vehicles sell less than 30K per year. Volume is immaterial, profit is the prime consideration. But even then: Luckily, Cadillac, and in turn; General Motors, produces dozen & dozens & dozens of other models. Tesla only builds like 11K Model S per year. Course; they don't make a profit... but they're still building the thing. We've read some wags claim that 'Chevy doesn't make any money; too many low margin models' and 'Buick sales are slowing every year; it can't be making a profit' and 'Cadillac doesn't sell 2 million units/year; therefore they can't be making a profit'. Solid, disconnected thinking there, that. Gee, I don't think GMC is making $11 billion in profit all by itself.
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. gmcbob
      gmcbob
      (45 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...