Comment by bengl3rt | Hacker News Reader

Comment by bengl3rt | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

The $49k base price is totally misleading. To get the "supercharger" access that makes road trips possible, you're out another $12k at least ($10k 60kWh battery plus $2k "supercharger" fee). Nav is $4k. Putting the rapid charger into your home (if you have one and don't park in an apartment complex/on the street) is another four figures.

All this to match the performance and luxury of the Acura TL I could get for $40k.

Is it really the best car in the world if it's impractical or out of reach for most people?

EDIT: Yes, I know all car manufacturers use a deceptively low base price and then nail you on "options" like air conditioning. Frankly I've often wished there was a law, or at least a gentleman's agreement in the auto industry, mandating that something can be an "option" for a maximum ten years before it's considered part of the basic accoutrements in a modern car and gets rolled in to all units shipped. Also, Tesla prides themselves outwardly on not being like the rest of the auto industry, but inherits its worst practice and magnifies it tenfold - base price $49 but for something usable you're pushing $70.

"Putting the rapid charger into your home (if you have one and don't park in an apartment complex/on the street) is another four figures."

Hold up. No one needs the High Power Wall Charger and Twin Chargers. I actually reconfigured my reservation to remove these. They are a symptom of range anxiety. Most people will be able to get by with a simple NEMA 14-50 outlet. That charges the 85kWh battery overnight.

I almost never drive more than 300 miles in a day. I rarely even break 100 miles. For the rare times I do, I can go to a Supercharger and fill up for an hour and be back on the road. But again, the majority of the time I'll be charging at home on a standard outlet. In fact, I'm going to try a standard 120v wall outlet for a while and see if that works for me. If not, I can get a NEMA 14-50 installed pretty easily by any old electrician.

Is it really the best car in the world if it's impractical or out of reach for most people?

"Car of the Year" doesn't mean, "Car everybody needs to go buy".

Taking a quote from Motor Trend's website:

the vehicle that best represents exceptional value, superiority in its class and most significant development

Take a look at historical "Car of the Year":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_Trend_Car_of_the_Year#Car...

Notice, for example, the Nissan GT-R ($100,000) for 2009, and the Honda Civic ($15,000) for 2006

Value is linked to price. Tesla is doing the public a disservice by encouraging the notion that the Model S starts at $49k, when it really starts closer to $70 in order to approach a conventional car in utility.

Do you get $70k worth of car when you spend $70k on a Model S? Absolutely. You get something that can hold a candle to if not surpass the $70k BMW M5 in every way. But the curve isn't linear - the $49k barebones Model S is nowhere near as useful as the BMW 528 you'd get for the same money.

Please actually read the review. They don't pretend the extra features come in the $49k model.

Additionally, it's a holistic approach. Nobody said it was a blowout victory in every single aspect.

Just, stop. Many, many people will be happy with the base model. Your argument is like complaining that an iPad doesn't have a keyboard or that the base model doesn't have cellular.

Pedant: in no wise can you get into a new M5 for less than 90k, short of appropriation.

Also note the Probe, Alliance, Citation, Omni, Vega, and Corvaire.

The award even went to the Mustang II in 1974.

It reflects zeitgeist as often than quality.

I can honestly say, I do not compare the Tesla Model S to an Acura TL on price. It is something new, an actual viable electric car for normal consumers.

I compare it to industry shifting products like the iPhone, LCD flatscreens, laser printers, and Xerox machines.

And gas/operating cost savings, and HOV lane access. And some states have a tax credit on top of the federal credit.

(That said, I don't see much point in buying anything but the Performance model -- assuming you keep it for 5-10 years, drive a lot, it seems like it's worth the extra $30k)

Honestly, that puts it solidly into "more than I can ever imagine paying for a car" territory. It's also too big - I can't imagine street parking a behemoth like that in San Francisco.

I quite like the Acura TSX - small, luxurious, $30k. I'd happily pay $40 for Tesla's equivalent.

Yeah, I agree about size (I wonder how much of it is that Elon has a 98th percentile family size -- 5 kids and at least one wife at most times). I'm happy to trade 0-3% financing for operating expenses, though, so if I could buy a $50k car which saved me $100-200/mo over a $30k car.

The sweet spot today is probably a 2y old gasoline Lexus or Acura(, or maybe an Audi or BMW if you really care about certain performance aspects -- or a diesel mb or vw if you drive exceedingly long distances), for opex, financing cost, and experience.

I think this will change before 2020, though.

> "option" for a maximum ten years before it's considered part of the basic accoutrements in a modern car

Just isn't really practical. Satnavs have been optional for that long, yet my mum doesn't want one, why should she now be forced to cover the cost of it because it's included in the base price? Etc.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com