Living with a car from the future: Tesla Model 3

The car will plan stops at the Supercharger for you along with a time to stop. So, for example, if I wanted to go to Vegas and my battery was half full, it tells me to stop for 30 minutes at the cluster in Green River and then again for 30 minutes at Beaver. That's what I remember from asking it yesterday. If I'd been starting with a full battery, it probably wouldn't have bothered with the Green River top-up. So the exact location of the chargers isn't critical, it's not like you spot a truck stop from the interstate because it has the tallest sign. I have seen three of them in hotel parking lots which makes me think someone's doing deals in quantity. You can also see the list of nearby amenities on the Tesla website for each cluster, I'm not sure if it's accessible via the car.

The new Netflix option means that now you've got something to do while you wait if you don't want to go for a walk. A friend who has been on a couple of multi-stop trips reports that the enforced breaks are actually kind of nice if you get out of the car to stretch your legs. Depends on exactly where the chargers are, I suppose.

You will not be seeing Flyin' Tesla. You also don't see Flyin' Dodge Truck, Flyin' M5, Flyin' Mini, Flyin' CRX, etc :)

Drove the 2019 Miata RF to work today. Boy, it's noisy :)

So I've had a few people ask me, a notorious petrolhead who's known for huge engines in little cars, why I went electric. I've been trying to put the answer together in my head, and here's the best I can do.

I used to have a 1987 Subaru DL. It was carburetted, and at one point I had to rebuild the carb. That thing was almost hidden in vacuum lines and kluges and add-ons. It was clearly a piece of technology that was well obsolete and had bandaids on bandaids to keep it working at an acceptable level. That was one of the last cars to be shipped with a carb in the US, I believe, and it was clear why.

I'm getting that same feeling about internal combustion engines. The amount of stuff and complexity we're piling on to a fundamentally simple design to meet current needs is getting past the point of sustainability. I'm not talking about computers and fuel injection, but of energy recovery systems and hybrid systems and variable compression ratios and electrically driven water pumps. There's a Volvo that's turbocharged and supercharged and has a hybrid system - while that's technically really impressive, it makes me think of that carburetor.

Meanwhile, electrics feel like they've reached the point where they're legitimate alternatives. There's been a step change in performance and range in the past five years and they're no longer weird little econoboxes that have the performance and top speed of a moped. While they'll continue to improve, I think they've plateaued at a point where they're useable as everyday cars including the occasional (or weekly!) road trip. They're mechanically very simple, a reset after the complexity of a current ICE. Just a motor or two, some sophisticated battery management and the same sort of integrated chassis found in any modern car.

Hybrids are an awkward middle ground to me. They're either electric cars with a supplementary ICE, or ICE cars with a supplementary battery. All the complexity of the ICE but with the mass of the batteries and motors.

Was there some trepidation? Yes, of course. I'm planning to keep this car for a couple of decades, and I'm investing a fair chunk of change into this. I know that there will be better EVs coming (just like any technology) but I think this one's mature enough that it will stand the test of time without becoming an embarrassing relic.

Respectfully disagreeing...(this is a cool thread from a car geek standpoint) random thoughts:

Electrics are not there yet. The operating cost savings and insurance penalties don't allow for a reasonable payback vs a $16,000 Ford fiesta or Toyota corolla.

Powerpacks are non sustainable from a scarcity of rare earth elements standpoint, power/weight ratio still sucks 

Electrics will soon lose their operating cost advantage as soon as government sees a dip in road tax revenue

Tesla had a $1B operating income loss last year, won't be solvent in five years. Gravity still works, cannot sustain losses indefinitely. The actual product Musk sells is hype, not cars...so that's why it hasn't hit the fan yet.

I'm not too thrilled about comping some millionaire $7000 tax credit so he can purchase a $50,000 golf cart then drive in the HOV lane and sneer at me in my ICE car...

How can this vehicle ever be mainstream with a sky high price tag and charger requirements? Waiting to see the first older apartment building in an urban area with row after row of charging stations. How many landlords will allow tenants to install chargers at rental properties...

Say what you will about GM, but they cannot make an EV that sells more than a handful of cars. They ARE fulfilling a niche market though...at 1.18% of total US demand. Interested to see how the largest car maker on earth VW will be able to thrive in the EV market with the next gen models coming out, If Ford GM VW cannot make it work, what hope is there for Tesla, Fisker, all these stock market pumpers.

I wonder about the safety of very high voltage systems bouncing over the road, catching fire in garages, being involved in MVA's and as they age.

There's much that can be done for ICE ---consolidate 24 grades of gasoline to two- summer blend and winter blend for the entire US. Roll back so called safety standards to 2000 levels - I can buy a new Harley without 15 air bags, back up cameras, lane warnings -why not a new car? 

Keith Tanner said:

Hybrids are an awkward middle ground to me. They're either electric cars with a supplementary ICE, or ICE cars with a supplementary battery. All the complexity of the ICE but with the mass of the batteries and motors.

I think that's an excellent overall summary. Having had a passing introduction to a Honda carb attached via some insane number of vacuum hoses to some sort of apparent vacuum logic cube, it resonates.

The quoted item is one I'm still wrestling with. Hybrids feel to me a bit like buying one of those VCR/TV combos; no great gain to putting all that mechanism in the same box, but now if either one breaks you've got one more expensive problem. BUT... Having had my fill of awkward charge stops with the Leaf, and realizing a few weeks ago that we had a one-day round trip that would've required us to either leave earlier than we wanted to or stop on the way home at a point when we'd much rather be in bed than at a rest stop, it put another nail in the coffin of likely move to an EV, while even one of the plug-in hybrids with only 20 miles of range would do 80+% of our errands on pure electric while still road-tripping like an ICE, so there's a real-world gain to that complexity. A long-range Tesla would have done it nonstop, but anything above the base Model 3 (or maybe a used S) is just more money than I can rationalize spending on a car. We could certainly do it, but it just feels like a huge expenditure for uncertain gain, and I say that with the clear intent that this is not a judgment on anybody else's decision, it just pushes a little further from frugality than I can cope with when cars costing so much less have so great a proportion of the utility. Not that this is an entirely sane argument, as a $500 Grand Vitara has an awfully large proportion of the utility of any driving vehicle...

Just tried to run that trip on Tesla's trip planner; they don't show a standard-range Model 3, so I used a 250-mile range Model X. It had me stopping both directions, if briefly (10 and 15 minutes, but that's two freeway exits and re-entrances with suburban routing; I'm calling it taking 40-45 minutes out of my day). If I could get my head around a long-range, it would be close to a non-issue.

Agent98 said:

Respectfully disagreeing...(this is a cool thread from a car geek standpoint) random thoughts:

Electrics are not there yet. The operating cost savings and insurance penalties don't allow for a reasonable payback vs a $16,000 Ford fiesta or Toyota corolla.

Powerpacks are non sustainable from a scarcity of rare earth elements standpoint, power/weight ratio still sucks 

Electrics will soon lose their operating cost advantage as soon as government sees a dip in road tax revenue

Tesla had a $1B operating income loss last year, won't be solvent in five years. Gravity still works, cannot sustain losses indefinitely. The actual product Musk sells is hype, not cars...so that's why it hasn't hit the fan yet.

I'm not too thrilled about comping some millionaire $7000 tax credit so he can purchase a $50,000 golf cart then drive in the HOV lane and sneer at me in my ICE car...

How can this vehicle ever be mainstream with a sky high price tag and charger requirements? Waiting to see the first older apartment building in an urban area with row after row of charging stations. How many landlords will allow tenants to install chargers at rental properties...

Say what you will about GM, but they cannot make an EV that sells more than a handful of cars. They ARE fulfilling a niche market though...at 1.18% of total US demand. Interested to see how the largest car maker on earth VW will be able to thrive in the EV market with the next gen models coming out, If Ford GM VW cannot make it work, what hope is there for Tesla, Fisker, all these stock market pumpers.

I wonder about the safety of very high voltage systems bouncing over the road, catching fire in garages, being involved in MVA's and as they age.

There's much that can be done for ICE ---consolidate 24 grades of gasoline to two- summer blend and winter blend for the entire US. Roll back so called safety standards to 2000 levels - I can buy a new Harley without 15 air bags, back up cameras, lane warnings -why not a new car? 

- ICE still owns the bottom of the market, the $16,000 Corolla (which is a fictional beast, given that MSRP of a Corolla is basically $20k). But if you move a bit upmarket into BMW 3-series territory, they're legit competitors and EVs will start to compete at lower and lower price points as things mature. We've already seen this. Note that the average price of a new car in the US is about $36,000, and the Model 3 (the most popular EV) starts about 10% above that. Not exactly sky-high prices.

- My Model 3 has almost exactly the same power/weight ratio as my E39 M5, so maybe it doesn't suck all that much. Oil's not all that sustainable either. As long as we insist on trucking our people meat around all over the place, there's going to be a cost. A battery pack with 300-500,000 mile lifespan seems like a reasonable option there.

- This is a valid concern - although you'll notice that operating cost was not part of my reasoning. Still, the Model 3 costs about 15% of what it costs to run the M5 in fuel costs, so we have a little way to go before they even out. That doesn't include maintenance costs, either.

- Who cares what Tesla's profit/loss is, or who the figurehead is? I didn't lay that out as a reason either. I looked at the actual product for sale. Tesla as a company is a different discussion, and one that's really hard to discuss without bringing in baggage such as...

- millionaire with a golf cart sneering at you? C'mon, you were doing well with logical points until this point. If we were talking in person, this is the point where I would end the conversation and wander away because you're obviously carrying around a bunch of baggage and malformed stereotypes and have disengaged your critical thinking skills.

- yes, the infrastructure is still building out. Eventually, landlords will learn that having chargers will make it easier to rent properties so they will be motivated to allow it or install their own. 

- Right, GM is struggling with it. So are many of the others. But it is being done well by some of the majors, and more will learn or will license technology. Just because not everyone can do it yet doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be done. GM is having too much fun selling big trucks and SUVs at high profit levels to be serious about EVs so far. VW has the potential to do some really interesting things because they're more motivated and are bigger in markets where this is a higher priority. Which is an argument for EVs, not so much against.

- ICE cars catch fire too. There certainly are different things to be worried about in an accident with EVs vs ICEs.

- this is an independent thought from powertrain choice. Modern cars are certainly far safer than those from 20 years ago. Harleys are not an example of where we want to be.

Ransom said:

The quoted item is one I'm still wrestling with. Hybrids feel to me a bit like buying one of those VCR/TV combos; no great gain to putting all that mechanism in the same box, but now if either one breaks you've got one more expensive problem. BUT... Having had my fill of awkward charge stops with the Leaf, and realizing a few weeks ago that we had a one-day round trip that would've required us to either leave earlier than we wanted to or stop on the way home at a point when we'd much rather be in bed than at a rest stop, it put another nail in the coffin of likely move to an EV, while even one of the plug-in hybrids with only 20 miles of range would do 80+% of our errands on pure electric while still road-tripping like an ICE, so there's a real-world gain to that complexity. A long-range Tesla would have done it nonstop, but anything above the base Model 3 (or maybe a used S) is just more money than I can rationalize spending on a car. We could certainly do it, but it just feels like a huge expenditure for uncertain gain, and I say that with the clear intent that this is not a judgment on anybody else's decision, it just pushes a little further from frugality than I can cope with when cars costing so much less have so great a proportion of the utility. Not that this is an entirely sane argument, as a $500 Grand Vitara has an awfully large proportion of the utility of any driving vehicle...

Just tried to run that trip on Tesla's trip planner; they don't show a standard-range Model 3, so I used a 250-mile range Model X. It had me stopping both directions, if briefly (10 and 15 minutes, but that's two freeway exits and re-entrances with suburban routing; I'm calling it taking 40-45 minutes out of my day). If I could get my head around a long-range, it would be close to a non-issue.

Charging stops on long trips are part of the EV equation. If you can't afford 40-45 minutes on a long trip, then rent an ICE or look at alternative transport. There's nothing wrong with that if it's an occasional thing - it's the equivalent of renting a big diesel truck when you need it instead of paying to own one all the time. Also - would your ICE need to stop for fuel on that trip? The difference might be closer to 20-30 minutes. On our Denver trip last weekend, all of our stops are ones we would have made anyhow - food stops specifically.

Keith Tanner said:

I'm an EV supporter and former owner, but I'd like to point out out that only looks like a mess because we can *see* the mess.  In an EV the mess is invisible because it isn't the hardware, it's the software... millions of lines of code to handle everything from regen and traction control to making fart noises.  I'd argue that the tangle of junk in that code is at least three or four orders of magnitude more messy than any vacuum hose system on any ICE car, and by extension it's that much more complicated to diagnose and fix.

No question that the complexity is in the code. But that code doesn't get old and crack and let air into some passage and cause the car to only start when it's warm outside 15 years down the road. It stays the way it is - and bugs can be patched over the air as they are diagnosed over an install base of hundreds of thousands. So it's not completely analogous. There's a difference between a complex thing that requires fixing because it breaks and wears out and ages and a complex thing that is just complex but doesn't need fixing.

Code plus the host of processors, sensors, components and circuits that the code operates within.  As it aged, the charging unit on my EV started producing faults more and more frequently and there were only a handful of known diagnostic procedures and fixes for that hardware.  In the end the end the whole charging unit was replaced/junked--under warranty, thankfully, since the bill would have been over $7,000 otherwise.

Fair enough. Solid state hardware is usually pretty reliable, but of course we're dealing with higher power levels here than in a laptop.

But you get my point. I was not trying to say that EVs are the simplest, most reliable things ever. I was trying to point out that the ICE is showing signs of a technology that is struggling to deliver, something I associate with obsolescence. That's the point where you sometimes have to take a step back and decide if this is really the right path or are we dealing with the sunk cost fallacy on a high level with regards to the tech?

nderwater said:

I'm an EV supporter and former owner, but I'd like to point out out that only looks like a mess because we can *see* the mess.  In an EV the mess is invisible because it isn't the hardware, it's the software... millions of lines of code to handle everything from regen and traction control to making fart noises.  I'd argue that the tangle of junk in that code is at least three or four orders of magnitude more messy than any vacuum hose system on any ICE car, and by extension it's that much more complicated to diagnose and fix.

I don't see how the software in an EV is any more complex than an ICE car.  Controlling an electric motor seems pretty trivial compared to taking a torque request and balancing throttle plate, ignition advance, fuel delivery, O2 sensor reading, gear selection, and on and on to optimize economy and emissions.  Battery management is probably reasonably elaborate but, again, compared to managing a modern gasoline engine or transmission?  

To add: my understanding from someone in the auto industry on the R&D side is that designing a modern engine is a massively complex and expensive task, involving a zillion hours of simulation, prototyping, dyno testing, etc.  That kind of non recurring engineering cost just doesn't exist in the EV space.  The barrier for entry in the auto world (while still super high, granted) has been lowered, which is kind of exciting.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

I think I've got some once-burned, twice-shy overreaction to having to stop and charge based on just how unpleasant it was with the Leaf. I recognize there are a lot of differences between the cars and the infrastructure then and now, but I'm having trouble unclenching.

All excellent comments Keith. Ok the millionaire sneer was a wisecrack....loosely based on a single incident....LS1 FBody with a LM2 didn't get out of the HOV  lane fast enough in NoVA for His Excellency. Heh. 

Keep posting I love the updates as do others, that's the magic of GRM all car guys/gals are welcome here...(have you ever tried talking cars at work? Blank stares. I'm the only gearhead in my workgroup in a big "engineering" company. )but the  IT contractor has a Tesla 3 dual motor. Great car can shut down anything but a Huracan. No fan of the pickled oak interior wood trim or the fan blade wheels. Other than that nice fit/finish. Would love to live in a world 25% EV 25% hydrogen and the rest Audi to Dodge hemi to Packard Hearse to 3 wheeler . Cheers

Ransom said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

I think I've got some once-burned, twice-shy overreaction to having to stop and charge based on just how unpleasant it was with the Leaf. I recognize there are a lot of differences between the cars and the infrastructure then and now, but I'm having trouble unclenching.

No doubt. I had much the same reaction when considering Level 2 chargers on our trip. There’s no such thing as a short stop and they’re just scattered all over the place with no overall plan. The nature of Supercharging makes it a totally different animal.

Agent98, I don’t have any trouble talking cars at work for some reason ;)

I have a number of collectible cars with jewel-like drivetrains, but I can see the writing on the wall about the ICE future.  It's amazing that over 100 years later we still rely on hot compressed gasses to push a piston in a cylinder, to turn a crank to power the wheels.  Like an overglorified steam engine.  Won't be long before all the major car manufacturers start to appreciate the cost savings of not employing armies of engineers, patent lawyers, and tooling manufacturers for complicated ICE development and manufacturing, once they switch to exclusively making electric cars.  Do you really think Porsche and Ferrari, for instance, will still be making ICE cars in 30 years?  How about 15 years?

And who's to say we'll be stuck with the current battery technology?  Batteries have evolved tremendously in just the last decade.  Maybe they'll even be replaced by some form of super-capacitor, able to take on a massive recharge almost instantaneously.  I expect gas stations to eventually be about as common and relevant as film processing labs.

Oh, and if noone's mentioned it yet, the real value of Tesla isn't in selling electric cars.  It's in the data collection business.  Big Data.  Like Amazon, and Facebook.  It has over a half-million cars on the road amassing 1 BILLION miles of autopilot data, constantly refining the AI, and creating a virtual neural network.  Way, way, way ahead of the competition.

Another big, misunderstood detail of the pro-EV side is investment diversity and long-term use.

Even if a battery pack has 300,000 miles, as long as it generates enough voltage for the cars systems (which Lithium does VERY well with) it'll drive. Your range will be reduced yes- but because the aforementioned voltage is still fine, you still have the same "performance" to the motor which is something an ICE engine simply cannot do. Heck, even if the batteries voltage degraded that much it still has use- a 50kwh battery that has 'degenerated' to a 30kwh battery is still a usable battery. GM has plans to take used Chevy Volt cell packs and turn them into grid storage for that reason, and with Tesla producing patents for million mile batteries and chemistries the lifespan of one of these cars could easily be in that reach.

As for investments- it's a battery. You have one in your pocket in your phone, in your laptop, in your car... if say, VW makes a bomb-ass electrolyte it can see new revenue leasing it out to other manufacturers, assuming protection via patent and they'll make money off the deal. I think it's only a matter of time before Tesla begins doing that- they've sunk billions into chemistry research, and it shows.

This thread makes me want an EV even more.

But my budget has me in a Leaf and my desire is in a 3 or S.

I believe a battery is considered “used up” at 70% capacity, FYI. 

So I am currently heading for Laguna Seca with the diesel tow rig and a two car trailer. Making lots of noise and drinking lots of dinosaurs as I carry a bunch of fun stuff to the track. But looking at my DOT log for today, I stopped for 15 minutes in Green River (fuel and a pee) and for 30 minutes in Beaver (fuel and lunch). I also stopped in Jean NV to fill the tank for tomorrow before I headed for my hotel. 

When I asked the Tesla to take me to Vegas with a half-full battery earlier this week, it suggested 30 minutes at the Green River Superchargers and 30 minutes at Beaver. Assuming I left from home with a full charge, I suspect that first stop would not be needed. So that EV trip would be almost identical to my diesel trip. Yes, I’m doing a lot more work which means more consumption, but the first stop was as much for biological necessity as diesel, and the second was perfectly timed for lunch and the DOT mandated break. These are the same stops I make when I’m doing this trip in the M5. There are Superchargers in my hotel parking lot, so I’d be starting tomorrow with a full charge just like the full tank I have in the truck now.

Huh. 

Out of curiosity I just looked at the Tesla trip planner to see how long they think it would take me to get home from my current consult. It included a 45 minute charge break near Pittsburgh, and travel time would be roughly the same compared to the Alfa because I have to stop for dinner somewhere anyway. Yes, with the Alfa I could make the 300 miles without a stop but that's not the sensible option if I want to drink or eat anything along the way.

It really seems that while an EV trip still requires a tad more planning, if you don't travel like Kowalski the additional charge stop time is less of an issue that I originally thought.

You guys stop and eat and walk around a lot more than I do on my drives.  Hell,  most of the time I plan my fuels stops on convenience and traffic.

Stopping twice on a 579 mile trip doesn’t really seem unreasonable. Especially when DOT hour of service regs requires one of those stops. 

It was foggy and muggy here in Florida this morning. Its interesting how the glass roof of the Tesla shows the extra tint in those conditions. 

In reply to Keith Tanner :

I don't have to worry about DOT from that perspective.  I also tend to keep my stops short and convenient.

Well, highway heroes like yourself will not be well served by cars that  need to be refueled occasionally or bladders of less than a gallon capacity :)  On the drive I did today, potential stops are about an hour apart. While I could have pushed through to Salida for that first stop, the extra 100+ mile wait would not have been comfortable. 15 minutes is about the minimum for a refuel/bathroom stop, really. And if you’re charging the car, you can multitask. Can’t do that with gas.

Although I will say that long distance travel becomes a whole lot more pleasant when you adopt the DOT HOS regs. They exist for good reason, and taking 30 minutes to eat lunch at a table instead of choking down fast food as you drive makes life a lot nicer. 

In reply to Keith Tanner :

I fully admit I don't have the patience for it.  I have a classic truck with a smallish tank that probably gets 10mpg.  I don't take it on road trips.  Regardless,  different strokes.  I didn't intend to derail the conversation.  I'm just not one of the types that is going to look at lengthy charging times as an opportunity to eat/shop/etc.  It is far from a positive for me.  
 

You can't multitask with gas?  You mean they enforce those don't leave pump unattended signs?