Shockingly, Some Would-be Model 3 Buyers Would Rather Drive a Non-Tesla EV That's Available Now

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems
We’re committed to finding, researching, and recommending the best products. We earn commissions from purchases you make using links in our articles. Learn more here
shockingly some would be model 3 buyers would rather drive a non tesla ev that s

Despite the fandom surrounding all things Elon Musk, there are still some electric car shoppers who’d rather drive than wait. It also seems that, when weighing a prospective Tesla Model 3 purchase, some consumers are willing to let price sway them to another car with a similar driving range.

None of this should come as a shock to those not immersed in blogs and forums devoted to championing Tesla as the sole agent of change in the automotive sphere, and the only “pure” solution to Earth’s problems. To some true believers, however, these shoppers could be seen as traitors to the cause.

That’s their problem. For General Motors, Tesla’s loss of customers is the legacy automaker’s gain.

As we’ve told you before, assembly line issues forced two walkbacks of the company’s Model 3 production target. Originally forecasted to hit 5,000 vehicles per week by the end of 2017, Tesla now says its Fremont factory will reach that number by the end of June 2018. That’s led to a pushback in delivery dates for reservation holders.

The Model 3 comes in two flavors: a base, $35,000 sedan with a 220-mile range, and a $44,000 Long Range model. In the interest of income, the pricier model got first dibs on the company’s slow-to-ramp-up production line. Earlier this month, Tesla informed those who put $1,000 down on a base Model 3 on the first day of reservations (March 2016) that their delivery date was being pushed back to the end of 2018. Some who reserved the following day were told their delivery date will be in early 2019, Bloomberg reports.

For those buyers, and especially those who reserved a Model 3 well after the launch, there’s another problem. While waiting months and years for a new vehicle is annoying, the thought of paying extra once it does arrive is even more of an incentive to shop elsewhere. Some reservation holders worry the federal EV tax credit will dry up before that new car shows up at their door.

At Tesla’s projected production rate, the automaker is expected to use up its share of $7,500 tax credits before the end of the year. After that date, the incentive shrinks by half for the next six months, then again, before disappearing entirely. That means a base Model 3 could rise in price by $3,750 or more by the time it’s delivered. Buyers might find themselves on the hook for the whole $35,000.

According to Reuters, the recent pushback in delivery dates is compelling some reservation holders to look at a 238-mile Chevrolet Bolt instead. The news agency reports GM dealers in EV-friendly California have seen an increase in interest from Tesla shoppers. Many would-be buyers have also expressed their intentions online.

“We’re getting the Tesla people who wanted their Model 3,” said Yev Kaplinskiy, a GM dealer located in that sweet spot between San Francisco and Silicon Valley. “We ask them, ‘What other cars are you interested in?’ They’re mostly Tesla. But they want the car now. They don’t want to wait.”

One forum poster, who claimed to be an early reservation holder, bemoaned the lengthy wait after receiving notice of the delay. “My objective…was always a $35,000 Tesla for the price of a decently optioned Civic (with full federal tax credit),” wrote poster 206er.

GM sold 23,297 Bolts in 2017, with the model becoming available nationwide last summer. While a base Bolt starts at $37,495, they’re readily available, and GM won’t hit its tax credit production limit until well after Tesla, ensuring current buyers the full $7,500 incentive.

Sure, many die-hard Tesla fans will wait however long it takes to get their hands on a Model 3. For others, though, brand loyalty has a limit.

In a survey of 1,058 car shoppers conducted by Autolist, 37 percent of respondents said they would look elsewhere for a car after waiting for a period of 12 to 18 months for a Model 3. (That’s the time frame Tesla cites after a Model 3 deposit). Another 34.4 percent said they would tolerate a delay of three to six months after the 18-month period before cancelling their reservation and asking for a refund.

[Image: Tesla]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Join the conversation
3 of 81 comments
  • Ceipower Ceipower on Feb 18, 2018

    With GM’s well documented failures when it come to new technology, I could never invest in any GM. Once burned , twice shy? In any case everyone has the right to spend their dollars as they choose. Electric car advancements are very likely to continue an if solid state batteries live up to the hype , it probably would be smart to wait.

  • SCE to AUX SCE to AUX on Feb 19, 2018

    If the Kia Niro EV was available today, I'd cancel my Model 3 reservation immediately and go buy one. I may cancel anyway, because of the high price and the terrible driver interface, where 95% of the functions go through a GUI. I'm also not interested in being branded with the Tesla logo. I was interested in the car for its long range, performance, and good looks. As others have noted here, the anti-Tesla trolling by TTAC has probably exceeded the GM bashing during its 2009 meltdown. It fits the definition of envy. There is a regularity to the glee at TTAC to see Tesla fail. TTAC is gradually diverging from being "The Truth About Cars".

    • Russycle Russycle on Feb 19, 2018

      Yeah. Aside from the first two paragraphs, it's a pretty good article. But jeez, those are doozies. And here we are, commenting on them....

  • Lorenzo A union in itself doesn't mean failure, collective bargaining would mean failure.
  • Ajla Why did pedestrian fatalities hit their nadir in 2009 and overall road fatalities hit their lowest since 1949 in 2011? Sedans were more popular back then but a lot of 300hp trucks and SUVs were on the road starting around 2000. And the sedans weren't getting smaller and slower either. The correlation between the the size and power of the fleet with more road deaths seems to be a more recent occurrence.
  • Jeff_M It's either a three on the tree OR it's an automatic. It ain't both.
  • Lorenzo I'm all in favor of using software and automation to BUILD cars, but keep that junk off my instrument panel, especially the software enabled interactive junk. Just give me the knobs and switches so I can control the vehicle, with no interconnectivity of any kind.
  • MaintenanceCosts Modern cars detach people from their speed too much. The combination of tall ride height, super-effective sound insulation, massive power, and electronic aids makes people quite unaware of just how much kinetic energy is nominally under their control while they watch a movie on their phone with one hand and eat a Quarter Pounder with the other. I think that is the primary reason we are seeing an uptick in speed-related fatalities, especially among people NOT in cars.With that said, I don't think Americans have proven responsible enough to have unlimited speed in cars. Although I'd hate it, I still would support limiters that kick in at 10 over in the city and 20 over on the freeway, because I think they would save more than enough lives to be worth the pain.