# Contemplating buying a Tesla model 3



## Markydee11 (Oct 21, 2011)

Hey Bimmer fam,

Test drove a model 3 today, and needless to say I was hella impressed. After hours of research, and endless youtube tutorials, I think this could be the real push for EV performance cars. 

I have been a bimmer boy for a long while now, but I think the Tesla movement is resonating with me. Something about saving money, saving the environment, all the while going 0-60 in 3.5 seconds is enticing...and autopilot :jawdrop:


What do you guys think? is this the real deal or am I just hyped from the test drive?


----------



## paranoidroid (Sep 22, 2018)

There are many owners in this group that own a Tesla Model 3 now. I suggest this thread which has a report from a few Model 3 owners (including myself).

https://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1295251

As someone who has been a bimmer fan for 20 years and still owns two BMWs - I can say while the Model 3 is far from perfect no other car has ever impressed me as much as this one has.


----------



## jjrandorin (May 8, 2013)

Hello OP,

As paranoidroid says, there are already a few of us here that have this car now. There are two VERY VERY long threads here on this very topic. In case you didnt know, Anything tesla on this board tends to turn into a #[email protected]$#$ storm. If you really want to see what people on this board think about the topic of the tesla model 3, here are a couple of threads you can read if you so desire, with one of them being still here on the first page (meaning I am a bit confused how you didnt see it):

https://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1030313

That thread has over 100 pages, and the last post is as of 12/05, so its long, and current (and full of "opinion" which shows how any conversation around tesla tends to end up on this board).

The thread that @paranoidroid linnked you to is also current, and is a bit better, but pretty much ends up the same way.

As another person who recently made the same decision you are contemplating, coming from a leased 2016 435 that I chose to turn in and buy a Tesla Model 3 Performance edition, rather than lease another 435, here are a few of my thoughts before this turns into another regular "should I buy a tesla?" thread which is like someone asking "should I get a 320 or 330, or do I need the power of a 340??" here.

1. The interior is at least 1.5 to 2 steps down in its feel of luxury from your typical bmw 3 series. The lack of an instrument cluster is disconcerting... even if you (like me) almost never looked at it because you used the BMW HUD for almost everything. No HUD in the tesla model 3 which is a glaring omission in a car with so much "tech" in it. The seats are comfortable, adjust 12 ways, etc. Its not a comfort thing its a lack of feeling of luxury. "Spartan" would be a good way to describe it. Its grown on me, but if you are used to, say, BMW 5 series interiors, this is going to feel like a huge let down until you get used to it.

2. The tech integration in the tablet is FANTASTIC, if you are into that sort of thing. The lack of buttons for a few things (like climate control) is a bit strange, but I guess tesla was like "we are automating most of this, lets just do it all with software". Its not bad once you get used to it. The way you adjust the climate control air direction on the tablet is great, how it manages keys, the fact you can turn on a "VALET" mode to limit speed and acceleration, I could go on. The fact that they roll out major updates to the car is also awesome if you are a tech forward person. The update they released right before I got mine was the addition of a dash cam recording feature.

Yes, the car had cameras in the front (like any BMW with ACC with stop N go) but tesla just ADDED dash cam recording from those cameras as a free update (among other things they added). As an IT person by trade, I love this, and it means that, at least until your hardware goes out of date, you will continue to get updates and features. The computers are supposed to be fairly easily replacable by tesla as well so theoretically you could drive the car for 5 years, stop receiving updates (like an old phone) but then replace the computer if you wanted to and upgrade.

3. The actual driving experience is pretty great, especially in the performance version with the 20 inch wheels. 0-60 in 3.3 seconds (recently upgraded from 3.5 seconds to 3.3 seconds via those over the air updates I mentioned), is MASSIVE acceleration. When I was in the BMW showroom turning in my 435, while I was waiting for the lease end person to come out, I was looking at a video ad screen in the waiting room. It had an ad for the BMW i8, talking about the ultimate performance, etc. Then, the ad went to the next screen and it said "0-60 in 4.2 seconds", and I had an internal thought that "wow, the car I just bought is significantly faster in a straight line than that, for 10s of thousands of dollars less".

Yes driving is more than just a straight line, but at least to me, it drives better than my 435 did, and I loved that car. Part of this is likely the Pilot Supersport 4S tires it comes with, but the steering is more connected than my 435 was. The suspension is at least as good, and I had a fully loaded 435 with track package, adaptive suspension etc. Its not just straight line acceleration, its actually pretty engaging driving, in addition to the MASSIIVE feeling of power, that is easily accessible by anyone just by pressing the go pedal. No launching, etc. That may or may not interest some.

The lack of the engine noise is strange, but you get used to it pretty quickly. I miss the sound of the engine under acceleration, but will have my wifes X3 M40i to enjoy the sound of the engine in. The car is pretty quiet inside due to the lack of engine noise. Because of the lack of engine noise, its easier to focus on the interior cabin noise, and its not bad at all. The sound system is better than the Harmon Kardon I had in my 435.

The "fit and finish" is not what you normally expect in a car in this price range (the "fully loaded" Model 3 AWD Performance Dual Motor" version I got had an MSRP of 71,700 including destination and a $75 document fee. Since there is no negotiation on price, this was the price not including tax.

In CA I will receive a 7500 tax credit, and I have already applied for the 2500 california EV credit, so thats 10k back, so the effective price before tax is 61,700. Still expensive, but just a bit more than the 435 I had (which was a loaded version with an MSRP of 64.5k and ended up being around 57k ish. In order to compare apples to apples, one cannot compare the "Performance 0-60 in 3.3 seconds" Model 3 to a BMW 330 as far as cost and performance (although that 330 has a nicer looking interior in general). I paid the 5k for the "enhanced autopilot" which is not necessary if one doesnt want those features, but the performance of, and features of, the car are closer to a fully loaded 340 / 440 than they are to a stripped one as far as tech goes.

The build quality of the car is not up to what you may be used to for german cars. Things like panel gaps that look a bit "off" or rubber gaskets that dont look fully in place etc, seem to be pretty common. My experience (and that of many others as I have spent some time recently immersing myself into teslas version of this board), is that tesla is pretty easy to work with in getting things fixed. They have a mobile service which will come to your home and fix the car if its able to be fixed that way, and because its basically a big computer (just like BMWs now are, it just doesnt hide the fact like BMW does), they can fix some things remotely if needed

The purchasing experience was SUPER painless. A 3-4 page Motor Vehicle Purchase agreement, with 1 page being the summary of your pricing, the 2nd page being the pricing breakdown, and 2 pages of "fine print" instead of the reams of paper you get when you get a car at a regular dealership.

No "would you like the tire and wheel package, no talk about extended warranty, nothing like that" . when you go to pick up your car, you could spend less than 10 minutes signing the paperwork and leaving if you wanted to. Most of your time will likely be spent inspecting the car, and having the delivery person go over the features of the car.

Looks are subjective, but I like the way the 4 series looks over almost all other BMWs currently on the market. I LOVE the looks of the 4 series grand coupe specifically. The BMW looks much better (much much) better from the front to me. I love the signature kidney grills. The tesla does not look bad to me (or I would not have bought it, and be "stuck with" it for the next 6 ish years), but the BMW looks better to me. The model 3 will look better to me when I get the "chrome delete" I an planning on getting, as I cant STAND chrome trim around windows, and the chrome trim is prominently displayed on this car.

As far as operating costs, I have done some calculations, and for my particular usage (roughly 15-16k a year driving), the cost of driving Model 3 vs driving even my 435 is going to save me around 2k to 2.5k a year in gas vs electricity costs. I have solar, which currently generates 110% of my current usage pre electric car. I am talking about the savings with just this car vs the 435, with the gas mileage I got over 3 years on my 435 driven in sport mode (as this is the way I drove the car exclusively) vs driving the tesla model 3 "regularly" not trying to hyper mile or anything. Since the regular driving mode of the model 3 feels like sport mode in my 435 (for the model 3 performance model with 20 inch tires anyway), I feel this is an apt comparison.

Also, obviously there is a much lower cost of maintenance. No oil changes, due to the way the car uses regenerative braking, the brakes should last to 70-100k miles, no transmission flush, etc etc. I didnt have any of those costs before because I was leasing my BMWs (or said another way they are already baked into the cost of the car).

So, my operating costs will be MUCH lower, for a car that drives better to me, has more tech, and is significantly (significantly) faster than anything I have ever owned, let alone my 435. It doesnt look as nice (but still looks ok to me, just not as nice as a BMW), but is hella fun to drive.

So, this is my opinions, as unfiltered as I can give them with plus and minus vs my 435. I really like my new tesla, but also know that I will have a BMW still in the household for a roadtrip if we want to do that. I dont see myself being an "all electric" household, for at least another 5 years or even longer.... and by that time the other ev would likely be a BMW if they step up to the plate like I think they will.

I would love to have a BMW 4 series all electric vehicle, and I think I might get a chance to in my lifetime. In the meantime, I am digging this tesla model 3 performance, with the instant acceleration, tight integration with my phone, much easier to use navigation integration, ability to open my garage doon when I come home (and close it when I leave) without me pushing a button, and drives and handles better than my outgoing car.


----------



## namelessman (Dec 23, 2004)

jjrandorin said:


> Hello OP,
> 
> As paranoidroid says, there are already a few of us here that have this car now. There are two VERY VERY long threads here on this very topic. In case you didnt know, Anything tesla on this board tends to turn into a #[email protected]$#$ storm. If you really want to see what people on this board thing about the topic of the tesla model 3, here are a couple of threads you can read if you so desire, with one of them being still here on the first page (meaning I am a bit confused how you didnt see it):
> 
> ...


This post should be in a separate thread! :thumbup:


----------



## Mark K (Jun 5, 2010)

jjrandorin said:


> *I would love to have a BMW 4 series all electric vehicle*, and I think I might get a chance to in my lifetime. In the meantime, I am digging this tesla model 3 performance, with the instant acceleration, tight integration with my phone, much easier to use navigation integration, ability to open my garage doon when I come home (and close it when I leave) without me pushing a button, *and drives and handles better than my outgoing car.*


Of course you will see 3/4 series EV, don't see why you wouldn't.

As far as handling goes, it is truly unfair to compare the two. Comparing handling of Model 3 with F3x is less fair than comparing Audi A4 FWD handling with Porsche Cayman/Boxster. If we could have ICE made of peanut butter and then use butter knife to spread the lump all over the underbody of the car, then we would have apples-to-apples comparison in Model 3 vs F3x.

To OP, it is my opinion that EV is an objectively better choice than ICE-powered car in absolutely everything except for two aspects (as of now at least)

1. Large amount of miles driven weekly outside of metro areas in flyover area of the country

2. Racetrack driving

Both aspects will probably be gone in about 5-10 years once everybody catches up with the tech Porsche will deploy in upcoming Taycan. This objectively.

Subjectively, it is up to you. AFAIC, I bought my last ICE-powered grocery getter, no reason to replace it with ICE instead of EV when the time comes.

Subjectively, I don't plan to ever own a fun car (weekend/racetrack) without ICE and MT.


----------



## jjrandorin (May 8, 2013)

namelessman said:


> This post should be in a separate thread! :thumbup:


which thread should it be in?


----------



## Markydee11 (Oct 21, 2011)

Wow, thank you for your honesty! It sounds like a great choice, have you used the supercharger for road trips yet? It seems like many peoples concerns are about milage but in talking with tesla owners it sounds like most people just charge at home and super chargers if they need it. Is it a pain? better than a gas sketchy station trip?


----------



## Markydee11 (Oct 21, 2011)

Mark K said:


> Of course you will see 3/4 series EV, don't see why you wouldn't.
> 
> As far as handling goes, it is truly unfair to compare the two. Comparing handling of Model 3 with F3x is less fair than comparing Audi A4 FWD handling with Porsche Cayman/Boxster. If we could have ICE made of peanut butter and then use butter knife to spread the lump all over the underbody of the car, then we would have apples-to-apples comparison in Model 3 vs F3x.
> 
> ...


So your more in the market for the roadster is what your telling me? LOL

Thanks for the feedback, I think milage is the only concern I may have too. I am gonna go in next week to see what options are all available.


----------



## namelessman (Dec 23, 2004)

jjrandorin said:


> which thread should it be in?


A brand new thread may work! Your feedback is pretty detailed and provide another perspective for festers.


----------



## paranoidroid (Sep 22, 2018)

Markydee11 said:


> Wow, thank you for your honesty! It sounds like a great choice, have you used the supercharger for road trips yet? It seems like many peoples concerns are about milage but in talking with tesla owners it sounds like most people just charge at home and super chargers if they need it. Is it a pain? better than a gas sketchy station trip?


There are quite a few good videos if you search for 'Model 3 road trip' that detail the road trip experience. I've done road trips in both my Model 3 and one of my BMWs very recently. Unless it's camping somewhere very remote where charge logistics are tough, I would take my Model 3 hands down over the other two cars despite needing a bit of planning for longer trips.

I use https://abetterrouteplanner.com just to see where and when to optimally hit the superchargers.

I would highly recommend having the ability to charge at home. That way you always start the day at a high charge and you essentially never worry about range/charge for normal day to day. It's like having a full or nearly full tank every morning. You would only think about charging when going on a road trip.


----------



## Autoputzer (Mar 16, 2014)

The main reason I own a nice car is for road trips through flyover country. So, Tesla's are non-starters for me. The whole battery replacement cost thing would eliminate them as a beater. Actually, even my beater has to be road trip worthy. I'm doing a 1000-miler soon in my Cobalt because of the horrible parking situation where I'm going.

The car most often traded in on a Tesla Model X is a BMW 5 Series. So, it stands to reason that a BMW 3 Series could end up being the car most traded in on Tesla Model 3.


----------



## paranoidroid (Sep 22, 2018)

Mark K said:


> As far as handling goes, it is truly unfair to compare the two. Comparing handling of Model 3 with F3x is less fair than comparing Audi A4 FWD handling with Porsche Cayman/Boxster. If we could have ICE made of peanut butter and then use butter knife to spread the lump all over the underbody of the car, then we would have apples-to-apples comparison in Model 3 vs F3x.


You can't compare an Audi A4 FWD with Porsche Cayman/Boxster only because they're in different price and utility (family sedan vs. 2 seat sports car) classes. If it was in the same price and utility class most enthusiasts would take the handling dynamics of mid-engine RWD.

An equivalent priced F3x and Model 3 can be fully compared in handling, the end customer will cross shop this segment/price tier and only cares about the results.

This is like those saying it's unfair to compare the much superior crash/safety ratings of Teslas over everything else. They say ICE has the burden of the mass of the front engine, far less space for crumple zones, etc.

Well, exactly. The end customer only cares about the ultimate safety rating, not the details of the burdens ICE have.



Mark K said:


> To OP, it is my opinion that EV is an objectively better choice than ICE-powered car in absolutely everything except for two aspects (as of now at least)
> 
> 1. Large amount of miles driven weekly outside of metro areas in flyover area of the country
> 
> 2. Racetrack driving


I definitely agree with this.


----------



## openwheelracing (Aug 1, 2008)

Multiple E90 and F30 owner here.

My Model 3 handles better than any Bimmer i've ever owned (all with sport suspension).

I won't even talk about acceleration.

My complaints: wind noise, tire noise, rock hard tires and body panel alignment.

The single biggest reason I went with Model 3 is: SAFETY.


----------



## sids911 (Apr 4, 2014)

I currently have a 2016 340i and a LR AWD model 3 in garage. I will only add to excellent observations noted in this thread (especially by jjrandorin) and mention that the most disappointing thing about Model 3 has been the fit and finish. This is not an inexpensive car - and for the money that you pay, the fit and finish has been sub-par. I have had rattles since the day 1. The turn signal stalk is not as satisfying as BMW, its very glitchy. Similarly, the rimless doors do not close with a solid thunk - they feel cheap. The most horrible was the door interior trims, the glued on plastics and inconsistent finish is apparent in all the Model 3s that I have seen.

Oh one more thing - the Model 3 sometimes feels like an appliance due to lack of mechanical sounds.

It may sound like I do not like my car, but all of those thoughts are left behind when I am behind the wheel and enjoying that instant torque thats capable of actually delivering 0-60 in 4.5 seconds! 
Charging and range anxiety has been a non-issue, largely because I can charge at home and SuperChargers are not that far away. Overall, I wish I could get a Model 3 clothed in a BMW 3 series body


----------



## Dave 20T (Apr 7, 2013)

jjrandorin said:


> The lack of buttons for a few things (like climate control) is a bit strange, but I guess tesla was like "we are automating most of this, lets just do it all with software". .


This is a sign that the design emphasis is not for the sports sedan driver, but rather the wow factor and the tech solution. Even BMW is not immune as having many buttons can be beautiful but is not the best.

The best is to have large controls that you can handle with mittens. Also to have controls, such as stove top like knobs that you can feel and see with peripheral vision while driving.

Controls that are well designed, in my opinion.


----------



## jjrandorin (May 8, 2013)

Dave 20T said:


> This is a sign that the design emphasis is not for the sports sedan driver, but rather the wow factor and the tech solution. Even BMW is not immune as having many buttons can be beautiful but is not the best.
> 
> The best is to have large controls that you can handle with mittens. Also to have controls, such as stove top like knobs that you can feel and see with peripheral vision while driving.
> 
> Controls that are well designed, in my opinion.


I disagree with those being "great controls" pretty strongly, and also disagree with your premise that is the best design. for me the "best" design would be natural speech voice commands that worked 99 percent + of the time and did what I wanted.

"turn up the climate control to 72 degrees"
"play XXX song / artist"
"Navigate me to XXX location / where is the closest YYY?"

I would much rather have that work than the dials you show there. In fact, I would not want a *new* car with those dials. they belong in a 90s car, to me.

But.. we are all different, and I respect your right to like buttons and dials like that :thumbup:


----------



## dwlink (May 27, 2007)

jjrandorin said:


> I disagree with those being "great controls" pretty strongly, and also disagree with your premise that is the best design. for me the "best" design would be natural speech voice commands that worked 99 percent + of the time and did what I wanted.
> 
> "turn up the climate control to 72 degrees"
> "play XXX song / artist"
> ...


All for the speech recognition, but it needs to mature to recognize commands in a natural speaking voice. Some of the demos I've seen of the recognition in the new 3/4 series look promising compared to the speech recognition in my F36 which I don't even use.


----------



## jjrandorin (May 8, 2013)

dwlink said:


> All for the speech recognition, but it needs to mature to recognize commands in a natural speaking voice. Some of the demos I've seen of the recognition in the new 3/4 series look promising compared to the speech recognition in my F36 which I don't even use.


Thats 100% true. On the topic of this specific thread (tesla model 3), they only have 3 types of voice controls currently, but they work extremely (extremely) well.

I can say "Navigate to XXX" and it understands virtually 100%. It also understands that " where is the closest XXX?" (like "where is the closest home depot?") means navigation and will pop up a list on the navigation with all of the stores that meet that search criteria.

The way voice commands were implemented in my 2016 435, I only used 1, which was "messages". In order for these to work, they MUST understand natural language sentences, and the user needs to have confidence it will do so.

Failing that, buttons are better, and BMWs setup is pretty darn good for mixing in buttons for things that you need while driving.

I will admit that, after a month of ownership, I like my model 3 more, not less. Its just such an amazing car to actually drive, both canyon carving and commuting. After I got the windows tinted, the chrome wrapped, and the interior console and dash wrapped, the appearance of the car is now pretty darn attractive to me.

I liked it before but not as much as my 4 series. With the way it looks now, I like the looks almost as much as the 435 gc, except from the very front as I adore bmw kidney grills. From every other angle it looks just as good to me now.


----------



## Dio///M (Jul 12, 2015)

Dave 20T said:


> This is a sign that the design emphasis is not for the sports sedan driver, but rather the wow factor and the tech solution. Even BMW is not immune as having many buttons can be beautiful but is not the best.
> 
> The best is to have large controls that you can handle with mittens. Also to have controls, such as stove top like knobs that you can feel and see with peripheral vision while driving.
> 
> Controls that are well designed, in my opinion.


The bottom set is absolutely gorgeous


----------



## FaRKle! (Jun 18, 2016)

jjrandorin said:


> The way voice commands were implemented in my 2016 435, I only used 1, which was "messages". In order for these to work, they MUST understand natural language sentences, and the user needs to have confidence it will do so.


I wonder if they improved things for the LCI. I use nav voice commands/inputs (in addition to emails/texts) all the time and they work well.


----------



## 750LIXM (Nov 25, 2018)

After having my 750 for a little over a month now, what i've come to realize is that 0 to 60 prowess is almost wasted thus far, one second quicker in a model 3 would be no less wasted. I can hardly ever enjoy what it can do except for the occasional on ramp in the one in ten instances there is a gap in front of me. 

My neighbor has a model 3 and has the same 'issue'. So the speed/power/acceleration for a daily commute to the office, might at well be a Rav4. The 7 seems to do voice commands good but I prefer pressing buttons and so far have only used the navi for novelty purposes. My neighbor is ho hum on the model 3 controls and track balls. 

Fit and finish is as bad as I've ever seen a car make it to production. 

We can't make it to any of our lake homes and back on an electric car quite yet so puts us right back into the 7 or an suv.


----------



## acoste (Nov 27, 2011)

openwheelracing said:


> Multiple E90 and F30 owner here.
> 
> My Model 3 handles better than any Bimmer i've ever owned (all with sport suspension).
> 
> ...


Speaking of SAFETY.

Model 3 is good in frontal collision (at least for the driver). However the F30 offers better protection in a side pole crash (for example sliding into a tree or a pole) plus there is a chance that the battery goes on fire in this kind of accident. 
Even the frontal collision isn't that simple. Protection in order starting with the best: 
Model 3 driver; BMW F30 passenger; Model 3 passenger; BMW F30 driver;


----------



## paranoidroid (Sep 22, 2018)

acoste said:


> Speaking of SAFETY.
> 
> Model 3 is good in frontal collision (at least for the driver). However the F30 offers better protection in a side pole crash (for example sliding into a tree or a pole) plus there is a chance that the battery goes on fire in this kind of accident.
> Even the frontal collision isn't that simple. Protection in order starting with the best:
> Model 3 driver; BMW F30 passenger; Model 3 passenger; BMW F30 driver;


Are you able to provide real facts, data, engineering analysis to back these F30 vs Model 3 safety assertions?


----------



## acoste (Nov 27, 2011)

paranoidroid said:


> Are you able to provide real facts, data, engineering analysis to back these F30 vs Model 3 safety assertions?


I analyzed the NHTSA data for both.

There is an issue with Tesla's design. It is more similar to the body-on-frame design rather than the unibody structure (although it looks like a unibody). 
Body-on-frame cars don't have crumple zones and therefore they aren't very good at protecting the passengers. Model 3 has very narrow crumple zones on the sides due to their battery design. Tesla made the body super rigid to protect the battery. Other EV car makers made the battery strong and have less rigid chassis to provide some more crumple zone. The difference between F30 (since it has no battery) and Model 3 is even bigger.

To illustrate the difference it is better to watch the Model X and BMW X5 pole side crash (Model 3 and F30 comparison is the same but it's more visible here for the SUVs):

Notice how rigid the bottom part is. The car tilts 20+ degree.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjapNSJJT0I&t=50

And here BMW is swallowing the impact with the bottom structure. The car looks more severe after the crash however the passengers suffer less injury.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEDZifPOS9Y&t=47


----------



## paranoidroid (Sep 22, 2018)

acoste said:


> I analyzed the NHTSA data for both.
> 
> There is an issue with Tesla's design. It is more similar to the body-on-frame design rather than the unibody structure (although it looks like a unibody).
> Body-on-frame cars don't have crumple zones and therefore they aren't very good at protecting the passengers. Model 3 has very narrow crumple zones on the sides due to their battery design. Tesla made the body super rigid to protect the battery. Other EV car makers made the battery strong and have less rigid chassis to provide some more crumple zone. The difference between F30 (since it has no battery) and Model 3 is even bigger.
> ...


Got it, so more unqualified armchair quarterbacking through youtube videos and no real facts, data, engineering analysis. The youtube videos don't illustrate anything with what the test dummies inside the structures experienced.

NHTSA provides over 100 pages of raw data for the crash testing.

You're not a mechanical structural, vehicle safety engineer so you're not qualified to analyze the NHTSA data. If there was a statement by a qualified engineer who analyzed the data and came with those conclusions it would be a different story.

NHTSA themselves deduce the data into five potential stars as well as probability of injury in which the Model 3 achieves five stars in all categories and the F30 five stars except four stars in front driver safety.

Additionally, NHTSA deduces the data into a combined crashworthiness score and probability of injury by taking the weighted average of the Relative Risk Scores (RRS) in front, side and rollover crashes. You can get the spreadsheets through the NCAP Combined Crashworthiness Ratings doc on regulations.gov. Both the Model 3 and the Model X in your example score far better than their counterparts.



acoste said:


> There is an issue with Tesla's design. It is more similar to the body-on-frame design rather than the unibody structure (although it looks like a unibody).
> Body-on-frame cars don't have crumple zones and *therefore they aren't very good at protecting the passengers*.


NHTSA's deduction of their data is complete opposite of your conclusion, the Model 3 probability of injury through weighted Relative Risk Scores is lower than any car they've tested.

There may be those who are qualified to offer alternative interpretations of NHTSA's data but last we checked you are far and away less qualified to analyze NHTSA's raw data than the organization themselves.


----------



## acoste (Nov 27, 2011)

paranoidroid said:


> Got it, so mor...


I think NHTSA numbers are hard data, no opinions there. It is not just one score. It is deceleration and forces on different body parts.

Problem is you don't seem to understand physics. If you didn't understand the difference based on watching those videos, there is no point for me to explain it in more details.


----------



## paranoidroid (Sep 22, 2018)

Dave 20T said:


>





Dio///M said:


> The bottom set is absolutely gorgeous


I agree, it has that clean minimalist ala Dieter Rams / Braun school of functionalist industrial design.

I have an E36 with this panel right in my garage so I'm a bit biased but I feel this is the most timeless of these designs.


----------



## paranoidroid (Sep 22, 2018)

acoste said:


> I think NHTSA numbers are hard data, no opinions there. It is not just one score. It is deceleration and forces on different body parts.
> 
> Problem is you don't seem to understand physics. If you didn't understand the difference based on watching those videos, there is no point for me to explain it in more details.


Yes the NHTSA numbers are data in a 100+ page PDF. My point is their conclusions of their data directly contradict your conclusions, however you have no qualifications that enable you to assert a contradictory conclusion.

I understand exactly what you're trying to say with your youtube videos, it's not a matter of not understanding physics. Your conclusion from that video is:



acoste said:


> The car looks more severe after the crash however the passengers suffer less injury.


You provided no evidence to come to this conclusion and NHTSA's conclusion from the NCAP Combined Crashworthiness Ratings is the direct opposite.

All I'm asking you is to show the exact data from NHTSA for both cars and how you came to the above conclusion and why you're qualified to make an opposite one.


----------



## acoste (Nov 27, 2011)

paranoidroid said:


> You provided no evidence to come to this conclusion and NHTSA's conclusion from the NCAP Combined Crashworthiness Ratings is the direct opposite.
> 
> All I'm asking you is to show the exact data from NHTSA for both cars and how you came to the above conclusion and why you're qualified to make an opposite one.


My opinion is not different than NHTSA rating. Not sure where you are getting that from.

Look at the stars. Side collision, all 5 stars. frontal collision: BMW has 4 star for the driver, everything else is 5 stars.

I have mentioned exactly that: "Protection in order starting with the best: Model 3 driver; BMW F30 passenger; Model 3 passenger; BMW F30 driver;"

To see the difference between 5 star and 5 star make the effort and look up the numbers in those 100 page documents.


----------



## paranoidroid (Sep 22, 2018)

acoste said:


> My opinion is not different than NHTSA rating. Not sure where you are getting that from.


What I'm asking is data and qualified analysis to back up these claims:



acoste said:


> *There is an issue with Tesla's design..*
> Body-on-frame cars don't have crumple zones and therefore* they aren't very good at protecting the passengers.*
> The car looks more severe after the crash however* the passengers suffer less injury.*


If you agree with NHTSA's conclusions then really you are trying to argue minutia of two very safe cars that somehow (in your typical FUD) that Tesla is still less safe than others. Which is really pointless to anyone reading and trying to decide between these two cars, but if you do make those claims then I'm going to ask you to back that up with real evidence and real analysis (not some Youtube videos and some armchair quarterbacking).



acoste said:


> To see the difference between 5 star and 5 star make the effort and look up the numbers in those 100 page documents.


The data from the 100 page docs is deduced into a combined crashworthiness score and probability of injury by taking the weighted average of the Relative Risk Scores (RRS) in front, side and rollover crashes. Both the Model 3 and the Model X in your example score far better than their counterparts. NHTSA's conclusion from their data don't support your claims above.

If you make specific claims the onus is on you to provide evidence and qualified analysis, not on me.


----------



## acoste (Nov 27, 2011)

paranoidroid said:


> What I'm asking is data and qualified analysis to back up these claims:
> 
> If you agree with NHTSA's conclusions then really you are trying to argue minutia of two very safe cars that somehow (in your typical FUD) that Tesla is still less safe than others. Which is really pointless to anyone reading and trying to decide between these two cars, but if you do make those claims then I'm going to ask you to back that up with real evidence and real analysis (not some Youtube videos and some armchair quarterbacking).


It takes too much time to go into details so I won't.

But just very quickly:
Tesla Model X and S batteries extend into the area of the rear section of the front wheels. Therefore the front section has limited length for crumple zone. So an ICE 5 series is equally good in frontal collision at 35 mph than the 2 models mentioned above although an EV could do a much better design and Tesla has fixed this problem for the Model 3.
And why I say S and X aren't as good as a 5 series in frontal collision is because at higher than 35mph frontal crash the impact will reach the rigid body frame on the S and X while the 5 series has a little more crumple zone. Plus if an S and X hits a tree at 50+ mph in the middle, the battery goes on fire.

Tesla Model 3 in frontal collision is very good, as mentioned above.
Side pole collision is slightly worse at 20 mph already compared to BMW F30 however the big difference comes at higher speeds. If one hits a tree sideways at 40 mph, and the impact is not at the drivers door, the Model 3 driver will suffer more injuries on the hips and spine plus there is a high chance of battery fire. (If it is the drivers door, then it doesn't matter, both drivers are dead.)


----------



## acoste (Nov 27, 2011)

Why I'm angry about about this design is: all they had to do is just make the battery double layer so the total area would be smaller and they could have made a safer car. But they decided against it. Maybe they wanted a lower center of gravity or better cooling or I don't know why. 

See the Model S layout. Model 3 is somewhat better. Compare it to the Jaguar I-pace layout.


----------



## paranoidroid (Sep 22, 2018)

acoste said:


> It takes too much time to go into details so I won't.
> 
> But just very quickly:
> Tesla Model X and S batteries extend into the area of the rear section of the front wheels. Therefore the front section has limited length for crumple zone. So an ICE 5 series is equally good in frontal collision at 35 mph than the 2 models mentioned above although an EV could do a much better design and Tesla has fixed this problem for the Model 3.
> ...


What I was originally asking (8 posts up) was qualified analysis. This can be from NHTA data reduction with their Relative Risk Scores in the specific areas and circumstances you're referencing (presenting the specific data) or referencing a statement or analysis by an engineer or consultant who has the credentials to use the NHTA data or their own vehicle structure engineering experience and come to these conclusions.

Everything you just said above is just pure armchair quarterbacking and no one reading it should take it as anything more than mere speculated opinion (that we already have more than enough of on the internet).

If you could truly armchair quarterback physics like this then no one would ever need to run real-world crash tests and extensive data logging in the first place. Or have the need to hire qualified expensive engineers in specific fields of body & structural engineering.


----------



## Saintor (Dec 14, 2002)

> but I think the Tesla movement is resonating with me


Forget the 'movement' and focus on the car.

No sound, no soul. The Tesla3's interior is too poorly designed & finished for that kind of money. Recharging can be an issue, especially when there are frequently some line-ups at recharging stations in metropolitan areas. And we don't know if this company will be there in 3 years; it is still in very bad shape.

And there are a few decades ahead to burn all that available oil. :bigpimp:


----------



## Dio///M (Jul 12, 2015)

Tesla just sent layoff notices to over 3,000 employees after having done the same last summer in an attempt to save the company. Model X and S prices have been reduced and with the state tax incentives reduced, Tesla is preparing to sweeten the deals on the Model 3. Profits have fallen after the peak Q3 of "18 and the big established car makers are pulling out all stops to get their share of the EV market in the very near future.
In anticipation of the arrival of all the competition, the company is now trying to enter more markets, especially in Europe and Asia. Time will tell I guess, but I don't see how circumstances in the near future will benefit the company's financial situation.


----------



## nyca (Aug 22, 2014)

Slowly, the bloom is coming off the rose:

https://www.autoblog.com/2019/01/31/tesla-stock-drops-cfo-quits-model-3-demand-china/

Focus on this quote from the article:

"This is a strong indication that demand in the U.S. for both the mid-range and long-range Model 3 versions has largely been exhausted, and the company is still working through the estimated ~6.8k of unsold Model 3 inventory," Cowen analysts said."

The early buyers in the US have all but been exhausted now, they must have had huge numbers of cancellations of people who put down early deposits, 6.8K cars are actually unsold right now. They have the backlogs in Europe and China to cushion them.


----------



## voip-ninja (Mar 22, 2012)

acoste said:


> Speaking of SAFETY.
> 
> Model 3 is good in frontal collision (at least for the driver). However the F30 offers better protection in a side pole crash (for example sliding into a tree or a pole) plus there is a chance that the battery goes on fire in this kind of accident.
> Even the frontal collision isn't that simple. Protection in order starting with the best:
> Model 3 driver; BMW F30 passenger; Model 3 passenger; BMW F30 driver;


Can you point to a single case of a Model 3 catching fire after an accident or otherwise?


----------



## acoste (Nov 27, 2011)

voip-ninja said:


> Can you point to a single case of a Model 3 catching fire after an accident or otherwise?


Front section of the Model 3 got fixed compared to Model S so I don't expect issues on the front.

For the Model S on the side the battery got damaged at the 20mph side pole test. See attached image. The damage just reached the cells so at higher speed the cells will get crushed.

Now for the Model 3, they strengthened the sills, but made the battery case lighter. Distance between the cells and the outer side of the sill remained the same (crumple zone). Model 3 battery doesn't have the structural strength which the Model S has.

Due to the strengthened sills the Model 3 battery didn't suffer any damage in the 20mph side pole crash test, but it's just a matter of speed when the sills will give up. Also this strengthened sill is the one causes more injuries in this type of crash.

So you are right, so far no fires but it's just a matter of time until someone slides into a tree sideways at (my guess is) 35-45mph.


----------



## voip-ninja (Mar 22, 2012)

acoste said:


> Front section of the Model 3 got fixed compared to Model S so I don't expect issues on the front.
> 
> For the Model S on the side the battery got damaged at the 20mph side pole test. See attached image. The damage just reached the cells so at higher speed the cells will get crushed.
> 
> ...


Now go find out how many BMWs caught fire in the past 18 months.

I will wait.


----------



## acoste (Nov 27, 2011)

voip-ninja said:


> Now go find out how many BMWs caught fire in the past 18 months.
> 
> I will wait.


You meant gasoline BMWs, right? Because none of the BEV i3s got on fire. Tesla has the highest BEV fire rate. There is only one known case of Nissan Leaf fire for example out of 350k cars sold.


----------

