Late last night Elon Musk revealed the long anticipated Model Y. Essentially a crossover variant of the Model 3, the Y will be the second least expensive Tesla and the longest range utility in the world.
Several days ago Cadillac did precisely the opposite. Instead of introducing a boundary-pushing vehicle that redefines what a luxury car could be, Cadillac debuted new torque-influenced badges that will adorn most of its products starting with the 2020 model year. And those torque numbers will be in metric.
Is there anything revolutionary about the Model Y? Not really. It basically just translates the Model 3 into a crossover. According to Musk it shares about 75 percent of its components with the 3, including the platform it sits on.
For an extra $3,000, buyers will be able to outfit their Y with an optional set of third row seats. Given its relationship with the 3 the announcement that the Y will boast this feature is a bit surprising. And it’s entirely possible that the move will siphon customers away from the Model X, which also has third row seating. As long as the Y sells in sufficient numbers that won’t really be much of a problem.
The powertrain configurations for the Y will be similar to how Tesla builds its other vehicles. There’s the entry level trim that boasts the lowest range, two dual motor variants, and a long range model. Tesla will probably expand its Y offerings once it is able to lower its manufacturing costs.
If you were hoping for something radical with the Y, I’ve got bad news for you: prepare to be disappointed. The Y can be equipped with the exact same paint and wheels as its smaller sibling. That is not a bad thing. There are no outlandish features or claims that come baked into this crossover. A maturing brand needs debuts like this on a regular basis if it wants to be taken seriously. And Tesla has accomplished that with the introduction of the Y. (Editor’s note: The Y is essentially a high-roof Model 3 with a hatchback)
As for the interior…did you expect anything different? It’s standard Tesla Model 3 minimalism. And if you were curious about cargo capacity, the Y has 66 cubic feet of space behind the first row. The closest internal combustion vehicle with a similar volume is the 2019 Mitsubishi Outlander, which sits between the compact and midsize crossover segments and is also available as a three row vehicle. The Outlander has 63.3 cubic feet of volume behind the first row. I highly doubt anyone is cross shopping the Outlander with the Y or vice versa, but if they are, I’d like to meet them. That theoretical human is a very interesting person.
The Y will also debut with “Full Self Driving” capability. This technology will soon be available on the 3, and apparently it will enable the driver to let the car pilot itself on highways and city streets. The newer Teslas will also be able to leave a parking spot and scoot over to the driver provided that person is also in the parking lot.
The Model Y will also be able to take advantage of the latest upgrades to the Tesla charging network. With the rollout of the third iteration of the Supercharger, Tesla users will be able to charge their vehicles faster than ever before. The new charger has a peak output of 250 kW and can charge a Model 3 at a rate of 1,000 miles per hour, which means a 3 could be fully charged in a little under a half hour. The new charger also won’t split power to two different cars when each of them are hooked up to one unit – they’ll both get full power.
At the same media event for the Model Y, Musk also took the opportunity to announce more concrete plans for Gigafactory 3. It is currently being built in Shanghai with the goal of producing battery cells and vehicles. Its total output for both items will match the combined output of the Fremont and Nevada factories. The Shanghai factory is being brought online to produce vehicles for the Chinese market only, but obviously that could change in the future. The new factory is expected to match Fremont’s capacity of 500,000 vehicles per year.
By contrast, Cadillac’s lineup is ho-hum and its future models have not impressed critics. Their plans for an all-electric vehicle are “we’ll have one eventually.” And it seems they’re perpetually trying to impress the cooler European luxury brands by imitating them with harebrained gimmicks no one cares about. The latest Cadillac boondoggle will put badges on its future vehicles that denote their torque. But it won’t be in Ib-ft. Instead, the number will be based on the metric figure, and it will be rounded up to the nearest 50. Americans have historically been allergic to the metric system in the past, but China, which is Cadillac’s biggest market, uses the metric system.
Anyway, this development is not a good sign for the brand. The recent leadership change was supposed to bring about more rational decision making, but it unfortunately seems like the division is still focused on chasing the Europeans in the worst way possible. Cadillac might have a competitive all-electric vehicle in its lineup by the time the Model Y goes on sale in late 2020, but I’m not holding my breath.
Sources:
“Tesla Model Y: This Is It” – Justin T. Westbrook, Jalopnik
“Tesla unveils Model Y with 300 miles range and 7-seats” – Fred Lambert, Electrek
“Tesla unveils design of Gigafactory 3 in Shanghai, announces ambitious capacity” – ibid
“Tesla launches new Supercharger with 1,000 mph charging, better efficiency, and more” – ibid
“Cadillac Is Switching to New Torque-Based Engine Badging” – Andrew Wendler, Car and Driver
“Room for up to 7 adults with optional third row.”
With that roofline, I doubt it.
I had the same thought, it looks like a tall roof sedan. It may very well seat 7 adults but I cannot imagine it will be pleasant for two or three of them.
This wouldn’t be inconsistent with other similarly-priced crossovers though. Have you sat in the third row of a Lexus RX350L? There seems to be a market for crossovers with kid-sized third row seats.
The RX still looks to have headroom in the third row and a relatively upright hatchback, it’s not a fastback like the Model Y is. It seems squarely designed for in the niche that is occupied by the BMW X2/4/6 or Mercedes GLC “coupes”.
From the pictures I’ve managed to find it looks like there will be about 2 inches of legroom in the 3rd row.
Perhaps the 2nd row is adjustable to help out a bit. Otherwise I don’t see much point in it. Any kids small enough to fit there will be in car seats, which won’t fit.
The Model Y certainly seems like a no-brainer for Tesla, and should do well as an EV in the popular compact CUV segment. The risk is arguably more about cannibalization of the Model 3 and Model X, plus the fact that the vehicle won’t arrive until fall 2020. I also think that “Musk Theater” might be losing steam, as the markets and media seem underwhelmed with the newest offering, perhaps because it’s not a dramatic breakthrough–it’s just a different form-factor of the 3. Tesla still piles on the hype though: it’s interesting how aggressively the company is marketing “Full Self Driving Capability”–that name alone seems to be begging for sharp scrutiny and potential regulatory and legal blowback.
As for Cadillac and metric torque figures, well, it’s just pathetic and frankly seems like a bad joke. The brand seem to be plunging deeper and deeper into the abyss. And these clowns think they will be able to challenge Tesla and the Germans in EVs? Seriously?
Paul correctly pointed out that the metric torque designations are basically for China. That takes a lot of the bite out of my acidic take on the move, but I still think its poor decision.
Well I, for one, think it’s a cryin’ shame that international law forces GM to apply all the same badges and callouts to the cars they sell in America that they apply to the cars they sell in China. If only there were some loophole, or (better) if only that accursed law had never been written in the first place, they could apply a different few cents’ worth of frivolous ornamentation to the cars for over here versus the cars for over there. But alas, lackaday, it is not to be.
Ah well. The Cadillac cars can surely hold their own and garner good market share on their actual merits!
…oh, wait.
I said that China was Cadillac’s biggest market. Obviously, they don’t have to use these badges in the US. Frankly, while it’s not exactly brilliant by a healthy margin, I don’t think it’s exactly all that big a deal either. It’s just a rounded-up number that points out which relative level of output this particular car has. Who actually knows how many hp or lb.ft. one’s car has these days, except for guys who read car blogs?
any pictures of the third row seating? i’m having a tough time visualizing it.
I desperately hope the ratio of model Y/3 is the same as the X/S, The core styling that works swell on the sedans just doesn’t translate upward properly, although at least the Y lacks the ridiculous Falconcrest doors.
As for Cadillac’s metric torque, I find the use of torque rating as a badge designation more curious than the metric system, wasn’t it Buick in the past who marketed their engines with torque instead of horsepower?
Yes, that was Buick. But not only Buick, as Plymouth had a “Golden Commando 395” in 1959 that was 361 cubic inches and put out (you guessed it) 395 ft lbs of torque.
This falls in line with the old auto industry adage of “American car buyers talk horsepower, but they drive torque”.
If I remember correctly the original Model S came with optional third row child seats. I don’t think that I’ve seen one in a parking lot equipped like that.
Yes, that triggered the feeble police officers…
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9I5WylWtkaE
Metric torque labels. Wonder how late they had to stay up to come up with that?
So I am unclear on that Cadillac plan – are the metric torque badges only for the Chinese market or will those be used here in the US as well?
If we are getting them, part of me says that it would cost very little to spit out a second bunch of badges with numbers in foot-pounds. Another part of me says that this is the stupidest idea for a badge I have ever heard of.
They may as well do a badge that says “All-Inject” to signify that every cylinder gets fuel injection, or that every car they make does. Do I get to be the first one to reference the deck chairs on the Titanic? 🙂
On all Cadillacs.
It’s just a way to designate different power levels, in rounded-off numbers. Most people don’t really know their torque numbers anyway. I don’t actually read that much into it.
Normally on drawings we dimension in millimeters with inches in square brackets.
So you could do 400[295.0249] which would not be enough to entice me to buy one.
JPC, if you think this is the most stupidest badge idea ever, I guess you’re fortunate enough to have avoided spending any time in Las Vegas where people with more money than brains apply callouts to their cars indicating the diameter of the wheels.
At least the wheel diameter callout means something. What Cadillac’s doing makes about as much sense as putting a screen door on a submarine.
It looks like GM has run out of ideas for Cadillac.
Well, they had a good run.
Cadillac is kinda like SNL. You have golden ages 70s-early 80s, early to mid 90s and bad years in between.
As long as they can keep selling stuff from the rest of the family parts bin at significantly higher margin it will exist.
The Model 3, which I’m seeing all over the place these days, is so attractive….but it’s not a hatchback. We love hatchbacks, they’re so useful and we can bring our dogs on trips. It’d be hard to replace our 2010 Prius hatchback without one.
So, a Model 3 with a hatchback is attractive, in spite of the tall roof. The 300-mile Model Y comes out in Fall 2020 at $47K. But the 230-mile standard Model Y won’t come out until Spring of 2021, two years from now. They say it’ll cost $37K at introduction. So I have some waiting to do.
Notice I just implied a Tesla could replace our Prius. I’ve been driving a Prius for 18 years now, since the first one came off the dock. But Toyota still has no US EV. I read that Tesla is decimating the Prius market and taking lots in trade. Toyota is dying to me after all these years.
But in return Toyota is adding the Hybrid form to much if not most of its range, they are less and less dependent on the Prius itself.
Corolla, Camry, Avalon, Rav4, Highlander so far unless I am forgetting one. I could see the next Sienna having a Hybrid option. Maybe even some form of it for the trucks. In Europe, Toyota is cleaning up with hybrids after the diesel fallout.
Recently they stated that they could use their battery resources to either build some fairly small number of full electrics (20k, maybe 50k? Can’t recall) OR they could use the same amount of battery material to build well over a million hybrids and as a result of that tradeoff actually cause more positive environmental change (gas savings) by pursuing that route, which I found interesting.
Yes, it’s great how Toyota has rolled out their hybrid technology, though they’ve had 20 years to do it. I often see hybrid Camrys and other non-Prius Toyota hybrids.
They’re being a little disingenuous though in saying they could use their battery resources for EVs, because most Toyota hybrids are still using nickel-metal hydride battery packs, which are fine for hybrids but bigger and heavier than lithium batteries. They do use lithium in their plug-in Prius Prime and some other hybrid models.
I’d seriously consider a plugin Prius if it had decent electric-only range. 25 miles just isn’t enough.
That tesla Model Y does not do anything for me. I like the Model 3.
However the thing that excites me is the recharging ability of getting 168 miles in only 15 mins using super charging chargers and the 12,000 ones already available.
This excites me because both makes owning an electric car easier for somebody like me( a person that does not have a way to charge an electric car at home). I have long felt that the ability to highspeed charge an EV up so that it is ether fully charged or charged at least halfway quickly would make more folks EV owners.
I can see gas stations being the way to advance EV ownership as they could easily add 2 or 4 banks of chargers over next to the place they have for air and vacuuming and bring more business in.
If you can’t charge an EV at home, they’re probably not for you. High speed charging degrades the battery; the faster you charge, the more the damage. It’s meant purely as a way to get a “top up’ on a long trip, not as a way to regularly charge your car. People have found this out the hard way, even though Tesla and other EV makers have made that quite clear.
Wow, I definitely did not realize that fast charging damaged the batteries!
I’ve never noticed that EV makers communicate this disclaimer. Are owners notified post sale as part of a user’s guide or owner’s manual? Or is it conveyed more directly as part of marketing materials or website content?
That’s battery basics. And yes, it’s in the Tesla manual somewhere. As well as not charging to 100% unless you’re going to need every last bit of range. Recommended max charge is 90%. But there are folks who don’t charge past 80%, or even less, if they’re wanting their battery to last really long. If a person has a regular daily commute and doesn’t need anymore than a modest percentage of the potential range, it makes sense to charge it up overnight to a lower level.
Li-ion cells are actually happiest at about 50-62% state of charge (SOC). And charging them to a higher SOC and discharging is what inherently degrades them. If they sat at 62%, they’d probably last forever.
High speed charging places a huge stress on them; it’s the same as if they were being discharged at that rate. It creates massive heat, and heat always damages.
The Supercharger network was always designed for long distance travel, which explains why they’re mostly on highways, and not so much in neighborhoods.
The push to ever higher charge speeds intrinsically comes at the expense of some battery life.
To buy an EV and plan to only charge it at high speed chargers, like a gas car at a gas station, is a big mistake. Also, it creates high demand on the grid during peak hours. A key assumption about EVs from the get-go was that the US grid had excess capacity to charge millions of EVs at night. If EV charging becomes a daytime affair, it will require substantial upgrades of the grid.
Thanks for the detailed info. Here’s my stupid question of the day: would it also help a cell phone battery’s longevity to be refilled only to 90%?
Yes. But how are you going to do that?
That’s the issue. We charge them overnight, and they fill to 100%, just as an EV would.
Some of Tesla’s models actually have bigger batteries than stated and are limited by software. The advantage they have is that when they are limited to 80% of actual capacity they can then charge 100% of what they do have (that is software limited). Kind of a nice little bonus vs the full-fat version where the whole pack is accessible but not recommended to be used.
Cool! They need to apply that feature to iPhones.
and they fill to 100%, just as an EV would.
I’m not sure about others, but you can very much specify a Tesla’s maximum charge level.
It’s wear, not damage, and it’s important to keep the magnitude of the charging wear effect in perspective. Every rechargeable battery gets a little wear every time it’s recharged, just like anything else that’s used regularly. How much wear is affected by how deep it was discharged, and how much and how fast it was charged.
Here’s an article from Teslarati last summer about the first Model S to reach 400,000 miles, driven by Tesloop, a Tesla-only intercity shuttle service for Southern California commuters:
“The first battery HV battery replacement was at 194,000 miles, while the second was at 324,000 miles. Average battery degradation over the vehicle’s first 194,000 miles was around 6% with multiple Supercharger stops every day. Between 194,000 – 324,000 miles, the HV battery degradation was estimated at around 22%. According to Tesloop, this was likely due to the company’s practice of constantly charging to 95-100%, instead of Tesla’s recommended 90-95%. On its blog post, Tesloop shared Tesla’s reminder to the company after its first HV battery replacement:
“Found internal imbalance in HV battery due to consistent supercharging to 100% from a low state of charge (SOC) without any rest periods in between. HV battery has been approved to be replaced. Also recommend that customer does not Supercharge on a regular basis and does not charge to 100% on a regular basis. We also recommend that the customer use scheduled charging to start charge 3 hours after end of drive at low SOC.”
So with heavy Supercharging to almost full they got nearly 200K miles on the first battery pack, and 125K on the second. This is an extreme case of frequent supercharging, that still yielded substantial battery lifetimes, comparable to whole-car lifetimes of some ICE cars we’re used to. But Tesla apparently does not recommend regular Supercharging.
To sum up, it’s best to stick with level 2 (multi-hour) charging most of the time with today’s EVs if you need to get maximum service out of the battery pack. But even frequent supercharging still yields decent lifetime.
Rapid charging is probably the #1 topic of battery r&d nowadays. Some labs using solid electrolytes are getting very fast recharging with long lifetimes. This is an area that will improve over time. I think rapid charging (< 15 minutes) is necessary for EVs to achieve majority usage over the next decade, and I think a solution is very likely over that time frame.
So figure 150ish if you run it hard and 300 if you are as gentle on the battery as possible.
Tesloop has a interesting deep dive on how depreication models for EVs will be different than ICs.
https://www.tesloop.com/blog/2019/2/6/tesla-and-the-electrifying-economics-of-depreciation
Now when the Tesla Semi, Freightliner Cascadia and M2 EV go into regular revenue service it will be interesting to see how they hold up. Running Team or slipseat you can easily put 20k miles/month on a truck.
That’s an interesting article with good data and some fresh ideas, thanks. Used car value based on actual data collected in real time from the specific car? Change is coming.
You don’t need a place to charge at home to have an EV. If we are talking about a Tesla and its super charger see Mike’s point on the Teslloop car. The typical owner could get away with 2 of those quick charges per week. Get down to 30% and hit the charger for 15min and you are good to go for 3-4 days.
The other factor is that some employers have chargers at work. I’ve got a friend that currently has an i3 and had Volts in the past. He does not have a charger at home despite the fact that he certainly could install one if he wanted to. He doesn’t need to though because he has charging at work, with the Volt he charged every day at work and was able to make it home and back to work. Fri night and Sat he might plug in the 110v cord. With the BMW he never charges it at home top it off on Fri and that will get him through the weekend and then charge in on Mon or Tue depending on how much he used it that weekend.
A number of years ago I gave a presentation at one of the local Google campuses for the non-profit I’m involved with. at least 40% of the spaces in the floors of the garage I was in had chargers. Every EV or PHEV that was available at the time was represented.
Around here many Walgreens and Fred Meyer stores have chargers though they are the level 2.
The problem with charging outside the home however is the cost at the public chargers. I recently picked up a C-Max Energi for my wife, partially as an experiment to see if she could adopt to plugging in her car. So I looked at the charger at the local Fred Meyer to see if it was worth considering the public chargers in a situation like that. The cost per kwh was ~4x that of what I pay at home and it makes the electric miles 50% more than buying gas for the engine.
You don’t need a place to charge at home to have an EV.
That’s pretty obvious. And obviously charging at work is an alternative to at home. My point is that unless you’re a pretty hard-core EV’er, it’s going to be less than ideal. As you pointed out, rates are high. Supercharging is not free anymore with new Teslas. You might have a wait if you go there at the wrong time, like a busy weekend or so.
Not being able to charge at home or work would put an EV off my radar. The convenience of leaving home every morning with a “full tank” of cheap electricity is one of the biggest draws for EVs. Until rapid charging becomes widespread and batteries can take that on a regular basis, it’s a deficit. Who wants to replace a battery not long after the warranty is up?
Free or discounted charging at work could become another amenity like dental or a rich 401k match to attract employees.
Figure for most employers the extra electrical consumption is onlt 1-2hrs of their burdened labor rate at most.
About 10 years ago, snowblower manufacturers decided to stop reporting horsepower and instead show torque ratings.
Finally I can compare my Craftsman snowblower to a Cadillac.
Or an Edsel.
Edsel named their engines based on torque figures. So the top-line 410 cu. in. engine was called the “E-475” based on 475 lb-ft of torque.
Buick later did the same thing with the “Wildcat 445” engine. 401 cubic inches, 445 lb-ft of torque.
Somewhere there is a GM executive tearing his hair out over his prestige brand being likened to a snowblower or an Edsel……
Cadillacs used to be compared to lots of products.
“It’s the Cadillac of minivans!”
I read the Cadillac headline and assumed it meant the torque for the cylinder head bolts etc…..
Me too
And Cadillac keeps alienating it’s domestic customers and spiraling down to forgoten car companies.
Until Cadillac brings back Eldorado and Sixty Special, how is a round number based on torque worse than any other arbitrary alphanumeric naming system?
Honda supposedly radicalized the styling of the Civic in an attempt to scare away the oldsters who buy them in Europe. Oldsmobile and Buick tried to court a younger clientele in other ways.
My first thought was that Cadillac is just trolling silver haired Republicans. Maybe they hope people will pile up Cadillacs and burn them. Great publicity.
I am sure I will see these things on the street in Vancouver, in hordes, in no time. The Model 3 is the new chic go to car for the cool set. The Model 3 is already commonplace, and those driving them is a real cross-section of society.
Five years ago, the entry-luxury market was dominated by the BMW 3 series and MB C Class. Not anymore, not when a Tesla can be had for the same, or less money.
Charging is not nearly the problem it’s made out to be. For example, I drive about 50 km a day. After three days in my Tesla Model 3 I might feel like a top-up. I get home in the evening, plug it in to 110 v and when I am ready to head out in the morning, the battery is at 80%. Yes, 80%, because maximum battery life is when the battery is between 30-80%. Trickle charging it at 110v makes the batteries last almost forever, at least according to the Nissan Leaf groups I have been looking at.
Another great thing about EV’s: you can heat them up, or cool them down, using a remote function, while the car is still plugged in. That’s only one of the benefits and I would be much happier paying my publicly owned utility than an oil company.
Most EV makers leave a capacity margin above “100%” for battery lifetime. I just checked my Fiat 500e manual and it says nothing about charging to less than 100%. Fiats, like most of today’s non-Tesla EVs, can’t do fast charging so that’s not an issue for me.
You mentioned the Nissan Leaf. There’s a stubborn controversy about its battery pack cooling. Batteries give off a small amount of heat when charging, the faster the charging the higher the temperature, which affects capacity wearout. Most EVs, including Teslas and Fiats, have an active liquid cooling system for the pack, with a pump, a little radiator and a fan. I’ve heard my Fiat’s fan come on once or twice in summertime 220V charging. Leafs just use passive air cooling, so fast charging, which some Leafs are equipped for, can raise pack temperature such that some owners think it affects lifetime. So they’re more conscious of partial charging and charging rate than the rest of us.
I’m disappointed that Nissan has stubbornly stuck with passive cooling on the Leaf.
In warmer climes it has made them the Oldsmobile diesel of EVs with 30-40% battery degradation in extreme cases.
Instead of advertising metric torque numbers, I think that Cadillac should advertise the number of jelly beans that will fit into the windshield washer fluid reservoir. Thoughtful info such as that will return Cadillac to its rightful place as “Standard of the World.”
I have no problem with the Cadillac’s torque badges; I certainly prefer that to the misleading badges fitted to German luxury cars that used to denote engine size in liters but now denote…. nothing at all except for a higher number trying to be more prestigious. As for being metric, I’m old enough to remember when it seemed all wrong for a Mustang to have a 5.0 instead of a 302. We ‘Muricans don’t want no stinking liters, give us cubic inches.
I’m not at all underwhelmed by the Model Y – actually it’s *exactly* like I was expecting save for the surprise 3rd row seat option. It’s actually the Tesla I would most consider buying – the least attractive, but the most practical. But I’m concerned about how long Tesla takes to ramp up its new models, and how long will Tesla be able to get away with charging $3,000 for “autopilot” features that are standard on a $22,000 Hyundai Elantra? Not 2020, imo. I also think charging $1,500 to $2,500 for any color other than black is excessive.
“ I highly doubt anyone is cross shopping the Outlander with the Y or vice versa, but if they are, I’d like to meet them. That theoretical human is a very interesting person. ”
You are forgetting about the Outlander PHEV; although not solely plug-in electrified power, it is a couple grand below starting price of “the cheap Y”. Scandinavian and Belenux countries gobble up the PHEV, so it isn’t as far fetched as one would initially think to see the idea to cross-shop the two.
What is interesting is the claim that electric cars are “zero emissions.” Is it possible that consumers will keep hearing “zero emissions” and in the back of their mind equate that to “zero cost?” Will they realize that public charging stations are there to make a profit and will they be willing to pay 4X the actual cost of service?
Probably not; probably; depends on how it compares to other options.
The actual value of the contents of a Coke can are about six cents.
I don’t really see the big deal with Cadillac. Do you really think that is the only thing they are working on? GM is investing big money in EVs including transforming a brand, you are being awfully harsh on them over a naming convention hardly anybody is going to care about. Meanwhile, you gush about Tesla who is backtracking all over the place the past week and who is asking again for a cash infusion from their customers 18 months (at best) in advance. I know Paul will probably disagree but again those are pretty big red flags to me, no other manufacturer would be able to get away with such antics. Personally I just don’t get it, but it is fascinating to watch.
As a retiree, my driving is now limited to nearby locations (grocery, home improvement store, dentist, etc). All within 75 miles of home.
I would consider an EV, but don’t want to take a $45k leap of faith to find out its not for me. A used Nissan Leaf or Chevy Volt would be my first baby step.
FWIW, I have been told that not all charging stations are compatible with all EVs on the road. It would be annoying to chase down a compatible station only to find out that it’s broken. Also, the hassle to install a charger at my home only to find out I would have to change it out if I bought a different EV.