Hacker News Reader

> Tesla’s Model S outsells Mercedes S-Class, Porsche Panamera, and BMW 6/7 Series combined in the US

Those cars are not even in the same class, of course Tesla would outsell them. Compare sales of the model S in Germany with the C class, BMW 3 (or maybe the 5) and just forget about Porsche.

Other cars you could compare it with are larger sedans of the premium variety Japanese manufacturers (Toyota -> Lexus, Nissan -> Infinity).

I'm really happy to see Tesla make moves but if you're going to make comparisons it helps if they're apples to apples otherwise you just make Tesla look bad.

Downvoters are encouraged to spend some time behind the wheel of an S class (even a 10 year old one will do) and then to go drive a Tesla for a bit.

And yet, by all appearances, the Model S /is/ cutting into S-class sales.

Whether the experience is exactly the same or not is irrelevant. If you're a luxury car maker, you're already feeling this; it's not a hypothetical.

>If you're a luxury car maker, you're already feeling this..

I am not sure. If I want a luxury car, I am going to get a Porsche.

End of story.

I'd be very curious to see actual data about this. I'm not sure one way or the other. Most of the Model S owners I know are people who previously would not have considered buying a car in that price range, so they weren't really potential S Class customers. It's amazing to me how many friends who used to drive Toyotas or at most low-end BMWs and Audis are now spending nearly $100K to get a Tesla. At the same time, the people I know who have cars like the S Class or 7 Series tend to value their refinement and interior quality, which the Model S doesn't really match yet. It doesn't seem like many of them have made the switch (a few have a Model S as an additional car rather than a replacement).

In my world it seems like Tesla has successfully brought a bunch of new buyers to a higher price point, without seriously tempting many of the people who were already buying in that price range. But obviously this is just based on anecdotes and my limited view of the world. So I'd love to see real data about who is buying these cars, and how many of them would have otherwise bought something like an S Class.

Someone over on the Tesla forums was aggregating S/7 series sales from public records and they was a significant and sustained drop since the S was introduced.

Discussion around something similar...

https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/6dj815/tesla_m...

That's about the 3 series, which matches my experience better. A 3 series is a much cheaper car than the Model S (or 7 Series or S Class). I have no doubt that people who had 3 Series are now considering Teslas, and much credit to Tesla for creating a product that convinces these people to spend so much more money.

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01/mercedes-benz-s-class-s...

Except S-Class sales went up in 2013 and skyrocketed in 2014. Overall it seems like the introduction of a new model by Mercedes had far more effect than the Model S and then it fell off because it got older. 7-Series sales were probably also mostly affected by an ageing car.

I know of at least one tesla owner who was definitely someone would would buy an S Class

You keep claiming these things. Do you have any shred of evidence? Because from the numbers we in the industry are seeing, it doesn't seem to be the case.

Not sure why you're downvoted, you're right.

Tesla S starts at $57K.

- Mercedes S starts at $97K - Panamera starts at $86K - 6/7 series start at $81K/$83K.

You're right, you're looking at mid-range Audis and the like. But having been in a 2016 S and several Audis the interior quality is hugely different. The Audi feels great, and the S felt like my eight year old Altima.

I don't want to sound like a hater - the Tesla is a lot of fun to drive, and I like electric, but still.

It depends which Model S you buy though.

It's possible to spec one well north of 100k (isn't a P100D around 140ish?), at which point comparisons to S-classes and 7 series and so on surely must cross the minds of some buyers. I completely agree regarding cabin quality though.

Looking at the price range just reinforces that they're not in the same class:

Telsa S: $57-140k

Mercedes S-Class: $97-226k

That's a 70% increase at the bottom and 60% at the top.

https://www.edmunds.com/tesla/model-s/2017/cost-to-own/ https://www.edmunds.com/mercedes-benz/s-class/2017/cost-to-o...

  2017 Tesla Model S Average Price Paid $86,200
  2017 Mercedes-Benz S-Class Average Price Paid $98,958

Which is just under 15%.

That's misleading.

For the S class: "Based on S 550e Plug-In Hybrid with options".

As soon as you select any other model:

* S550 - $108,506

* S63 - $196,496

* S65 - $241,129

* others - $180K, $230K.

So the S-Class is "for the base model" but using it as a litmus for the S class range is no different to only looking at the Model S 60, at $68K.

"April 16th, 2017 will be the last day to order the Model S 60 and 60D."

https://electrek.co/2017/03/17/tesla-discontinuing-model-s-6...

So, the S 60 does not exist anymore. Further the other models are not electric cars.

"Like the W221 S500, the W222 S-Class will be powered by a more powerful twin-turbo V8 producing 455 hp (339 kW) while the S600 will carry a twin-turbo V12. There is also a diesel-powered S350 BlueTEC version, a hybrid S400 with a 20-kilowatt electric motor and 306 hp (228 kW) V6 engine, a diesel-electric hybrid S300 BlueTEC. A S500 Plug-in Hybrid was later introduced at the Frankfurt Motor Show (IAA) with a market release of 2014 and claimed a 3 litres/100 km mileage, a CO2 rating of 69 g/km and up to 30 km of emissions free driving. The S500 Plug-In hybrid is fitted with a 329 hp (245 kW) 3-litre V6 and an 80-kilowatt electric motor.[25][26] AMG fettered S63 (V8 bi-turbo) and S65 (V12 bi-turbo) LWB sedans are also on offer. All S-Class models will come with a 7-speed automatic transmission.[27]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_S-Class

I would say price ranges are more reliable.

Also since there's no dealers, Edmunds simply just copied MSRP, which also is incorrect TBH because it is not the price for basic model without upgrades.

That's just sticker price, many of those cars get sold at a a minor price premium to a ~30% discount.

Which is why the monthly sales are all over the map:

http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/porsche/porsche-pa...

  2016
  January 336 February 293 March 334 April 371 
  2017
  January 35 February 28 March 554 April 1098  <Likely discounts

     <Likely discounts

Or you know they just introduced a new model...

EU sales show very different trends. http://carsalesbase.com/european-car-sales-data/Porsche/Pors...

January 2016: 227 vs 2017: 660

Yeah, because it takes time to get the cars to the US-

"Class" is not determined exclusively by price point as much as automotive magazines assert that is the only delineation.

It's going to put people in or out of a price tier, but how many people that can afford both are going "oh no, that's just below the price tier I want to buy into".

Sure that's a subtle piece of the puzzle, not a conscious decision.

When you look at the other pieces, like features and performance, the Model S is on par with the rest of the luxury sedans or better. Mercedes, BMW, Porsche, Bentley, Rolls, etc.

> When you look at the other pieces, like features and performance

Yeah, have you compared say "cabin quality" to a Bentley or Rolls? That's another piece that falls way short. Even to a C/E Mercedes.

Door handles being ... problematic, etc, are things that push the S from being "on par" with those cars you name.

Honestly if you think door handles are what push a Mercedes off of "par", then I don't have a response as this seems like a debate about what's subjective and/or important....

I've actually worked at luxury car dealers, I don't find Bentley or Rolls cabin quality to be better than a Mercedes, and I've driven all of them around at least once. Automotive engineering doesn't precisely follow the price curve.

Bentlty and Rolls are covered in a lot more veneer and aesthetics.

They get away with it because they put in monster engines to push their giant hyper-insulated boxes pretty quickly in a straight line and that's about all. The s class is designed to a slightly different specification.

> I don't find Bentley or Rolls cabin quality to be better than a Mercedes

I've only been in a Bentley once, and I think you misunderstand. The quality of -either- a Bentley, Rolls, Mercedes, Audi or whatever, all of those, far exceeds the Model S, which is more akin in cabin quality to my old Altima.

I did, I thought you meant the S class, although my rides in a couple of different trim levels of the Model S didn't leave me with that impression.

I would agree with you as far as aesthetic preference goes, but if you view this as an objective metric similar to cabin space, audio/onboard computer performance, etc. then I would disagree.

The Telsa Model S starts at $70, not $57K. You're quoting the "after estimated savings price" which includes the tax credit (a debatable inclusion) and the savings in fuel over five years (ridiculous to include in a cross-class comparison).

Seems much closer in price to your parent's list than your list, though the reality is it's somewhere in the middle:

    3 Series - $33,450 (-34,550)
    C Class - $39,500 (-28,500)
    5 Series - $51,200 (-16,800)
    Model S - $68,000
    6 Series - $77,600 (+9,600)
    Porsche Panamera - $78,100 (+10,100)
    7 Series - $81,500 (+13,500)
    S Class - $96,600 (+28,600)

Edit: With the US federal tax credit of $7,500, it comes down closer to the bottom list, but still in the middle.

Being competitors is not just a question of price. How many people buying a Tesla have considered buying a Mercedes S Class? How many people buying a Mercedes S Class have considered buying a Tesla?

If you make the same comparison for the EU the differences will be much (much!) larger due to various taxes. Especially for cars with larger displacements. In NL for instance the cheapest Panamera is 109000 Euro.

GP is also using the same marketing trick used by Apple. Sell huge numbers of an anemic product lineup and trumpet those figures against single models from market leaders whose aggregate sales across 20 models dwarf sales of 2 models from Tesla/Apple.

He should have used the E-Class/5-Series/A6 segment, not one below. Then the price difference after incentives is a bit over 10k. While going up market the difference can be more than twice that much.

Maybe you're getting downvoted because there's more than one way to define "in the same class"? Just a thought.

I've always wondered to what extent "traditional" luxury car makers have one hand tied behind their backs competing with Tesla in the electric market thanks to still having to support "legacy" technology like the internal combustion engine.

The major German marques often seem to be investing in shared platforms for next generation models that support combustion and electric drive options, but it strikes me that a platform for a combustion based car has to support a ton of things the electric one often doesn't - combustion engines have typically needed much larger/complex gear boxes and drive train in general, plus all the big firewalls needed to keep engine fires out of the cabin and so on. A purely electric car company like Tesla can presumably build out its platform technology without having to worry about a lot of these things. I'd guess you can even build more cabin space for a vehicle of the same size and so on thanks to eliminating many of them. I wonder if shared platforms can leave in otherwise artificial constraints on the electric version for compatibility reasons?

Yes, a whole bunch of sunk costs.

The internal combustion engine is fantastically cheap for what it entails. It's as complicated as a bloody rocket engine, but an entire vehicle can be bought for a few months California rent. It took literally trillions to engineer it to what we have today. Companies don't want to abandon that investment.

And yet... That's what they'll have to do. The electric car will be so much cheaper to make (and is so much cheaper to operate and maintain) due to its fundamental simplicity that as soon as battery costs get lower, nearly everyone will be forced to transition to electric.

As far as I can tell, the internal combustion engine and related components are not the most expensive part of a modern car to build or maintain. Suspension, braking, tires, electronics, drivetrain and interior features are the parts of a car that typically increase the cost the most. They're also the parts that get the most wear and tear, and the parts that are the most expensive to replace. And they're all still present on a fully electric car. A modern internal combustion engine will last the life of every other component of the vehicle with basically no maintenance, other than an oil change every 5-10K miles. And if it ever does fail, you can get a complete replacement engine for less than the cost of a suspension system or a few hours of a shop diagnosing a computer issue.

Tesla was recently replacing $10,000 electric motors on their Model S because they were wearing out under normal usage - some customers got 3 or 4 of them, if I remember correctly. http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1101153_two-thirds-of-ea...

Brakes and drivetrain are either much simpler or experience far less wear on an electric car.

And your point about how good internal combustion engines are for the price is exactly what I said earlier. It's pretty amazing that we HAVE been able to make ICEs so cheap and (relatively) reliable, considering how complex they are with so many moving parts.

The fact that Tesla had teething issues with their early electric motors does not change the fact that fundamentally, brushless electric motors are simpler, more wear resistant than internal combustion engines in principle by a huge margin.

Tesla isn't the only one who will be able to take advantage of the simplicity of a pure electric drivetrain.

Yup. I can't even imagine how cheap, efficient and reliable electric motors will become after the kind of engineering effort applied to ICEs is applied to them.

Electric motors are already ~90% efficient and far more reliable than IC engines, so there's not much gain to be had there.

Advances would be more likely to come in the form of reduced weight (better magnets for PM motors, e.g.) and durability.

After all, it's not like we haven't been using electric motors for roughly the same amount of time as we have IC engines. Heck, most of us own way more electric motors than IC -- kitchen appliances, HVAC, computer drive motors, laundry equipment. Even the car usually has a dozen or two electric motors in it compared to one IC engine. :-)

They build platform across a lot of models shared between various brands of the same group. So what they lose supporting gas and electric, they (could) win it back with a diversity of models and form factors.

Also it is not before the next generation of cars (i.e. 10 years) that the bulk of their sales could really be mainly electric. (the world is not like California. A lot of people interested like me simply can't get an electric car - not even because of lifestyle, just because of infrastructure) In the meanwhile they will need to provide hybrid or simpler hybrid.

And traditional constructor are experienced at designing roomy interiors. Designing a single interior across a range is probably more a win than a loss.

BTW it seems that nowadays every constructor has some model ready to commercialise either in 2018 or 2019. Will be interesting to see if they really can hit their target and what Tesla competition is really looking like. Interesting times.

BMW tried a dedicated electric, the i3, with a pretty daring design inside and out. Sales were not good, unfortunately. http://www.bmwblog.com/2017/04/07/heres-last-years-bmw-i3-sa...

Note that Tesla's goal isn't 500,000 cars in 2018, but rather a production rate of 500,000/year by the end of 2018. In other words, they're aiming for ~10,000 cars in the last week of December, and probably less before that.

This is easier than actually producing 500,000 cars in 2018, of course, so that just makes it all the more likely they'll get there. Will be really interesting to see how they fare in the next two years or so.

Assuming they meet 20,000/month in December 2017 as Musk says and ~40,000/month in December 2018 as you say, then linearly extrapolating between the two would still get you about 350-400k per year. Same order of magnitude.

And it seems likely if they can achieve 20,000/month in December 2017 they will be able to double that in 12 months.

I would expect them to double it faster, actually.

I think there's an aspirational piece too. Without looking, do you know the names of the CEOs of any other car manufacturer?

So are you going to buy a car from one of them.. or the guy who is going to take us to Mars?

Which Vision do you want to be a part of?

I'm not speaking for everyone but the CEO's vision really doesn't affect my decision to buy a car. I'm personally more fond of 'luxury' cars so I'd go for an S-class unless I already own one and am buying a 'fun' car.

> And if you're a luxury car maker, you don't need me to tell you that as the Model S is already eating your (high profit margin) lunch: "Tesla’s Model S outsells Mercedes S-Class, Porsche Panamera, and BMW 6/7 Series combined in the US" https://electrek.co/2017/05/26/tesls-model-s-leading-us-larg....

Ah, electrek, the personal blog of an early Tesla investor. Great source. (not) This kind of statistic primarily serves as an example of how you can massage numbers to get the narrative you want.