Tesla Model Y - maY replace mY beloved Clarity...

[David Towle]

At the risk of a derail, I subscribe to the “Efficient Market Hypothesis”.

What is a share of TSLA stock really worth? Checking right now, $269.96. Whether that’s over- or undervalued only makes sense in hindsight. Every buyer has a seller at $269.96, or at least pretty close, and they all ideally have access to the same information we do.

But maybe that would deserve its own thread.

Of course its just this idiot's opinion that its overvalued. I think Tesla has 5 years left tops, 2 big issues I see. 1 is the upcoming inevitable big recession. 2 is all the other comapnies' electric cars coming out. Tesla would have stood a much better chance if they had prioritized the volume SUV over the volume sedan, rather than the reverse.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

“We’ll see what happens.”

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

We thought of a miniwan. We will see when time comes close.

7 seater, 300 mile range is a very sweet spot especially for folks in California.

It's not really a 7-seater; it's a 5+2 seater. Those optional rear seats are too small for normal-sized adults; they are strictly for younger kids and extra-small adults.

I think the Model Y is going to sell like hotcakes, probably even better than the Model 3. But let's not accept all of Tesla's spin uncritically. It's not really a 7-seater.

​

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Tesla has constantly over promised and under delivered.

Tesla has consistently delivered as promised... just not on time. Tesla's track record for delivering on promises is, I'd say, much better than most or all other EV makers. (Let's not even talk about Volkswagen's history of vaporware...)

Where exactly is that much promised $35k Model 3? (The latest promised future price is $36.2k.)

What kind of Tesla bashing is this?

You can order a $35k Model 3 right now, and likely get it delivered within 4-6 weeks, if you live in the USA. If you're nit-picking that the $35,000 MSRP doesn't include... what is it, $1200 destination charge? ...well, no auto maker includes that in its MSRP.

If you don't like Tesla's cars, you're certainly entitled to your own opinion. But, as they say: You are not entitled to your own facts!

​

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

I think the Y is what the Model 3 should have been.

I think a lot of people are gonna agree with that. The Model 3 having only a trunk, and not a liftback hatch like the Model S has, certainly has caused a lot of would-be buyers to look elsewhere.

But then, the Model Y isn't going to sell at $35k or below, at least not anytime soon.

​

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Be aware if you check pricing on the Tesla website they 'help' you by automatically (and pretty deceptively) reducing their price by deducting their calculated fuel savings.

This is true. The "price" displayed in large font (with an asterisk *) includes estimated fuel savings. You have to look down at the bottom of the web page to see the actual price, in a smaller font.

As a Tesla fan, I find this appalling. One thing that attracted me to Tesla was that it used to be they eschewed this sort of deceptive advertising.
(◣_◢)

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Tesla would have stood a much better chance if they had prioritized the volume SUV over the volume sedan, rather than the reverse.

I think Tesla (or Elon Musk) really, really wanted to hit the $35k price point. That apparently wasn't possible for a hatchback/liftback design, or at least wasn't possible with everything else Tesla wanted (including range) in the Model 3. So they went with a sedan design instead.

And even after that, it took them -- what, a year and a half? -- after the Model 3 went into production, before they were able to start selling the much-promised $35k trim level.

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

If the Model Y is classified as a crossover I'm okay with that. But I have a much different image in mind when a car is classified as an SUV.

Unfortunately, auto maker marketing departments keep stretching the terms "CUV" and "SUV" to include smaller and smaller cars, as well as hatchbacks like the TMY (Tesla Model Y), because cars labeled "CUV" and "SUV" sell better.

No doubt many people are gonna call the TMY a small CUV or even a small SUV. But it doesn't have the higher ground clearance that a real CUV has. And absolutely no way does it qualify as an SUV in its original meaning, which indicates a passenger vehicle built on a light truck frame/unibody.

IMHO the TMY is a hatchback. A large, "lifted" hatchback, but still a hatchback.

Just my opinion. YMMV -- Your Mileage May Vary.

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

What will be the next model name be now that Elon finished spelling “S3XY”?

Well, the next car will likely be the Roadster Mk II. Will that be the "Model R"? So far at least, they're just calling it the Roadster. And the Semi Truck is called just that.

Looking down the road, there's the pickup. Will that be the "Model P"?

Personally, I'd be happy if Tesla started giving real names to its models!

​

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

No one has mentioned how fun it is to drive the Model 3 compared to the clarity. 0-60 in 3 secs, its rapid acceleration is quite intoxicating. I know we don't need it but it's just fun.

This is one of the reasons I think it's rather pointless to compare the Clarity PHEV with the Model 3. I mean, you can compare any two cars, even a Rolls-Royce with a Yugo. But nobody in the market for a Rolls-Royce would consider a Yugo, or vice versa.

The Clarity PHEV is -- now that GM has stopped making the Volt -- unquestionably the best PHEV in production today. And the TM3 is unquestionably the best sub-$50k BEV on sale today... arguably the best sub-$75k BEV, altho no doubt there are (for example) Jaguar I-Pace owners who will disagree.

The Clarity PHEV and the Tesla Model 3 are very different cars, with very different virtues and flaws. Seems to me that a head-to-head match between the two is more of a contrast than an equivalent comparison.

​

 

[MNSteve]

The Clarity PHEV and the Tesla Model 3 are very different cars, with very different virtues and flaws. Seems to me that a head-to-head match between the two is more of a contrast than an equivalent comparison

Some people like apples ... some like oranges.

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Actually it did appear. Unfortunately for only about a week before prices went up - but some people are receiving a $35K Model 3.

Tesla is not raising the price of the entry level $35k Model 3. You can still order one today. Other trim levels, and Tesla's other models, are indeed getting a 3% price increase, but not the Standard Range Model 3 with no options at all*. The MSRP is still $35,000.

*And just like the Ford Model T, you can have it in any color you like so long as it's black!

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

How can one compare any car with a 5x price difference?

Let's see...

Tesla Model S: MSRP $76,000
Honda Clarity PHEV: MSRP $33,400

5x the price? Methinks your math is somewhat spurious, sir.

​

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Question. I could look for this on the web but I would get a bunch of different answers. Not that I won't get a bunch of different answers from the crowd here.

So I buy a Tesla with 300-mile range. After I've driven the 300 miles, how long does it take to charge me up for the next 300?

In practice, people who actually drive the Model S say the best strategy is to charge enough for the next 150 miles of driving, with a 10% safety margin. Charging to 100% takes too long; the charging speed is fastest at 10-15% or less, tapers off somewhat above 60%, and tapers off sharply above 80%.

So the optimal driving pattern, when driving a Tesla car and using the Supercharger network, is driving for 150 miles and then stopping for a 30 minute charge. Obviously that will only work if there are Superchargers along your intended route, but Tesla's Supercharger network is well distributed to maximize the possibility that this will happen if you're driving a long distance.

The Model 3 may be able to charge that same distance faster, at least if you get the Long Range version.

​

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

And the thing that always annoys me, not only with Tesla but with "carbon avoided" calculations like Chargepoint does, is that they tilt the stats in their favor by comparing to the cost/emissions of an "average" gas vehicle. I've seen the "gas equivalent" mpg used as low as 22 mpg. In some cases I will be wrong, but I think most EV/PHEV buyers would be in a 40+ mpg hybrid if not an electric. Personally, if I were buying an ICE vehicle I would immediately cross anything that can't achieve 35 mpg off my list.

According to the EPA, cars being driven by Americans today average 24.7 MPG.

Claiming that Tesla should compare its BEVs to other types of EVs in its advertising seems rather silly to me, with gasmobiles being 98% of the new car market. Tesla isn't trying to convert other EV drivers to driving Tesla cars; it's trying to convert gasmobile drivers to driving electric cars!

​

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

And you must remember that there is a limit to how many super chargings you can do on a trip and not harm the battery. (Both Tesla and Nissan admit that)
I took the Clarity over the Tesla and saved enough money to put a 10 kW solar PV system in. I’m not putting up with range anxiety or waiting around on trips to charge.

This may be the first time I've ever seriously disagreed with anything KentuckyKen has said on this forum. (But I still love his avatar! )

Tesla cars are designed and built for repeated use of Superchargers. It's true that it's hard on a Tesla battery pack if you use Superchargers for daily charging, but certainly there's no reason to avoid repeated use of Superchargers on occasional long-distance trips. In fact, Tesla has designed their cars to reduce the fastest Supercharger charging rate, for the first few minutes of charging, if the car has used Superchargers too many times. (I'm guessing that's what KentuckyKen is referring to?) So at worst, even with heavy use, you'll merely wind up having to wait a few more minutes while Supercharging. It's not like you're going to prematurely, significantly, age your battery pack that way, as happens with all too many Leafs.

Even the Tesloop Model S's and Model X's, which are rental cars charged at Superchargers every day, are reported to have not all that much loss of battery capacity despite their years of heavy use. See, for example, this InsideEVs News article:

"This Tesla Model X Drove 300,000 Miles In 2 Years"

​

 

[PHEV Newbie]

Of course its just this idiot's opinion that its overvalued. I think Tesla has 5 years left tops, 2 big issues I see. 1 is the upcoming inevitable big recession. 2 is all the other comapnies' electric cars coming out. Tesla would have stood a much better chance if they had prioritized the volume SUV over the volume sedan, rather than the reverse.

If you go through the numbers, it's going to be very challenging for Tesla. They have many billions in corporate bond liabilities that are due starting this year and yet they will need to raise additional billions to maintain and expand their operations going forward. Currently, their stock has been downgraded by key investment banks as a "sell" and that will make it virtually impossible to issue more stock to raise money without causing existing shares to crash. Musk will have to pull a rabbit out of his hat to keep Tesla afloat. On the other hand, inexperienced Millennial investors have continued to pour money in despite the weak financials. They might be just the rabbits he needs.

 

[MNSteve]

So the optimal driving pattern, when driving a Tesla car and using the Supercharger network, is driving for 150 miles and then stopping for a 30 minute charge. Obviously that will only work if there are Superchargers along your intended route, but Tesla's Supercharger network is well distributed to maximize the possibility that this will happen if you're driving a long distance.

Stopping every 150 miles isn't unreasonable. The 30-minute wait is a little excessive for my taste, but again not horrible.

I assume that Tesla owners have access to a mapping facility that helps with this planning.

 

[bulls96]

Just how popular is the Clarity? Better seller than the Insight?

Units sold will give u an idea where the consumer is headed. I just don't see the Clarity reaching the mass popularity of the Model 3.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Given a 300-mile range, and derating it for cold weather, only an 80% charge, and the need to reach an alternative charge site if necessary, I would not feel comfortable making the round trip on one charge.

I think there is some confusion here.

If you are going to be driving a distance which will challenge your BEV's range, then by all means you should charge to 100% for the day. I think the person you were responding to was talking about only charging to 80% at a Supercharger stop. There's a good reason as a general rule not to charge beyond 80% at a Supercharger, because it takes much longer to get that last 20%. It's better to drive on and make another Supercharger stop before you get to your destination; that will get you there faster, assuming there is another Supercharger station along the way.

But let's not confuse the initial charge, which you're most likely doing at home or at work on a slow (L1 or L2) charger, with an en-route Supercharger charging stop. Charging strategies for home charging are very different from charging strategies for en-route charging.

Now, if you're driving a BEV and you have to charge to 100% for your daily driving needs, then you bought the wrong car. You should either have bought a BEV with a longer range, or you should have bought a Clarity PHEV so you can run on gas after the battery is exhausted. But if you only need to charge to 100% on rare bitterly cold days, due to range drop in those conditions, then likely that's not a problem. Occasionally charging a BEV to 100% isn't a problem. Doing it every day is going to prematurely age the battery, no matter what brand you're driving; even a Tesla. (There are exceptions to that, but I won't open that can of worms here.)

Charging to 100% on a daily basis with a PHEV such as the Clarity is a different matter. PHEVs are generally designed with a larger reserve capacity, so charging to a nominal 100% -- that is, 100% of usable capacity -- probably is not nearly close to an actual 100% charge (that is, 100% of full capacity) as it is with a BEV. If you drive a Clarity PHEV or other PHEV, you should probably just charge to 100% whenever you charge, and not worry about battery capacity loss. (I've given different advice on other occasions, but only within the context of discussions about maximizing battery life.)

​