Repair-It

Perhaps ironically then, the Bolt will probably have much worse resale than the Model 3.

Also, speaking of Bolt and EV comparisons, it seems like GM was going after the Leaf with the Bolt. Which I think is a low bar. They should have aimed higher.

The Bolt will be the car to buy in the used market in 4-5 years.

The bolt will definitely have a lower resale than the 3 because it is stupid looking. I am not ready to accept that people don't care at all what their car looks like.

The Model 3 is nice, and actually looks it. I am not saying that the Bolt is bad mechanically, just that, that's not good enough. A Corolla is excellent mechanically, it does nothing for any kind of excitement or emotion.

Half of what is wrong with EVs and hybrids is that they look like EVs or Hybrids. The Volt is not bad. I would take a much more used Volt before I was seen driving a Bolt.

I totally agree that they should have raised the bar on the Bolt. We are in full agreement. They targeted the worst EV to compete with??? Strange strategy. At a minimum, GM should have targeted the Prius Hybrid, but as an all EV. You know, step up instead of try to follow...

I hope that GM and Tesla merge. I realize that is an inflammatory statement but, I don't care. I don't want GM to waste all of it's resources trying to compete with Tesla's tech and autonomy when it can use those resources on performance and production. I would rather GM to mass produce the Model 3 for Tesla. It really is a win win for both companies and car enthusiasts. Seems like Tesla could use the mass manufacturing expertise of GM, and GM could use the styling and hip appeal of Tesla.

I don't think I posted this.

This is the long range RWD car.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/20 ... est-review

$56k as tested, $45k base price. Let's look at the numbers.

Zero to 60 mph: 5.1 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.6 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 27.8 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.1 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 1.9 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 2.8 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.8 sec @ 101 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 141 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 176 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.84 g

The lower speed acceleration is fairly strong but it seems to fall off quickly. 13.8 @ 101 is in the ballpark of a new Camaro V6. Right off the bat we have a huge problem because the Chevy SS was like $47k brand new, MSRP anyway. And today $30k buys a nice SS. The SS runs like 12.9 @ 111 or something in that range. It is SIGNIFICANTLY faster. I would wager the handling and braking is also miles ahead.

Here is a 2014 automatic:

Zero to 60 mph: 4.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.5 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 28.6 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.1 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.6 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.1 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.9 sec @ 111 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 160 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 153 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.95 g

Ok, yes, if you both are rolling at 5 mph and you both floor it, you'll hit 60 at the same time, at which point the SS will just freight train the Tesla. 10 mph trap is about the difference between my CTS-V and STS.

What I would say is if they offered a Performance trim on every sub-model that would help achieve the most overall performance at every given price point. Because even at $45k for the base long range, that is not compelling performance at all.

Shit, look what a $42k Charger Scat Pack 392 can do:

Zero to 60 mph: 4.1 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.3 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 16.2 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 4.7 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.1 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 2.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.4 sec @ 115 mph
Top speed: 175 mph (mfr est)
Braking, 70-0 mph: 153 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.91 g

Why the hell would I buy the Tesla?? Even the fat Charger out-skidpads the regular long range Model 3.

Gaaaaaaahd damn.

https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sal ... e1=DODCHAR

2016 Charger Scat Pack, 30k miles. $32k.

Or this 2015 with 47k miles for $30k.
https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sal ... e1=DODCHAR

Here is perhaps a more direct comparison to the Model 3's actual competition.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/20 ... est-review

2015 BMW 335i AWD (which, being a 2015, has already depreciated a lot)

Zero to 60 mph: 4.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 11.9 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 18.0 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.7 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.8 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.3 sec @ 105 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 127 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 186 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g

PRICE AS TESTED: $58,170 (base price $46,450)

Prices more or less right on top of the long range RWD Model 3. Even against a car with the BMW-tax, it's not a great deal.

But let me just take a second to disparage the BMW. Ok so it is rated at 300 lb-ft @ 1300 rpm. OMG AMAZEBALL low end torque right? Not so fast. 0-60 is 4.6 seconds, which is pretty quick. Now look at the 5-60. 5.7! That is WRX levels of lag. Atrocious. This is where performance EV stuff does really well, which I will happily admit. I think that is the one area (aside from the pragmatic operating cost considerations) that an EV would really win me over. But I am not sure when I'll be ready to give up the V8 experience. I guess super high gas prices combined with EV performance that is not just better 0-60 but on the big end - then I'll have a reason to question my preference. I guess it would be a more daily driver type vehicle, not the special enthusiast car.

I would have given a used Model S some consideration as a daily driver if they depreciated like every other EV car, or even like every other large luxury car, neither of which was the case.

Ok I'll pull the string. What level of depreciation were you expecting, and pick a year/model of Model S and what are the specs?

I think everything is priced in. There are energy savings to be had. Plus the Tesla tax. Best bet is to try not to lust after things that are popular. Fortunately I'm kind of hard wired that way. How convenient for me.

Here is why hybrids and EV cars have been "ugly" to date. Tesla found a way to buck the trend, though I am personally only giving the Model S a pass in that regard. My read is that people want to be seen as environmentally conscious and a Civic Hybrid, which has seem far fewer sales but looks just like a Civic, does NOT overtly make that statement. I'd argue Tesla bucket the trend in the same way that Apple is super popular but somehow still seen as cool, which is the Silicon Valley association. We'll see what happens as time goes on - I guess what Tesla is doing was inevitable really, but someone had to do it first, and to pull that off, you need the Silicon Valley cred (that is my argument anyway).