On a technical note, you mean range, not mileage. I don't think that anyone is claiming that the Model 3 will have electrical motors that are twice as efficient as the Leaf's motors or anything -- the claim is that it will have batteries that hold more energy than the Leaf's.

I think you're right to be at least a little skeptical of the Model 3. For one, it seems like something of a stretch to say that they'll be on-the-market in 3.5 years with a vehicle that will feature batteries from a factory that hasn't even found a site yet.

That said, I imagine that the Leaf will have a better range in 2017 as well. It seems clear at this point that better battery tech is the final hurdle for electric vehicles. It doesn't seem completely implausible that with a lot of resources thrown at the problem, they'll be able to lower the cost of increasing the energy capacity of batteries in the next few years.

People who would buy a Model 3 would never buy a Leaf because it performs like a Leaf. The target market is BMW 3 series buyers who buy the car because it looks nice, has tons of power, and handles well.

They're going after the guy who wants a 3 series with instant torque. Range is a secondary consideration as long as it gets over 200.

If in 2017 Nissan will have a cheaper, less powerful car with a 200+ range that will also be cheaper than the Model3 - then I think Tesla will be left in the dust.

The Model3 is their chance to break out of the luxury market and the Leaf is going to squeeze them really hard from the low end.

I think at the point, the main thing setting them apart is the Supercharger network. The financial viability of that endeavor is a bit unknown.. but if it translates into significant car sales, then it may pay off.

I don’t think you understand the point I was trying to make. I could be wrong, but I don’t think Tesla intends mass-market to mean targeted at the Camry buyer. The person who is looking at a Tesla isn’t looking at a Nissan Leaf as a fungible product, similar to how an iPhone 3G or 4 buyer didn’t really see Android as a viable alternative in 2008-2009 or even now. To a large extent, the target customer is price insensitive within the 35-45k price range and is an enthusiast looking at entry level luxury alternatives like the BMW 3 series, Audi A4, Mercedes C class, etc.

As someone who has driven a Model S, the experience is so much better than an ICE vehicle (acceleration, technology, not having to go to a gas station), that the other entry level luxury vehicles, while very nice, feel very obsolete and uninspiring.

I do, however, that the market will be much bigger than anyone anticipates because many will realize the cost is similar to a Camry after gas savings. I also think they’ll drive one of these vehicles and realize that it’s a much better experience than other vehicles.

Luxury car manufacturers are very good projecting who their customers aren't. To a certain extent, a car purchase says something about who you are not as well as who you are. A lot of iPhone buyers are saying I'm not an Android as much as they're saying I'm an iPhone user. A lot of Tesla's target customers for the Model 3 fall into the same category.

I disagree with your assessment that Tesla doesn't have any new technology that will improve their efficiency over Nissan.

Tesla builds their own powertrains and battery management systems, which are good enough that other automakers license or purchase these components from them.

I also believe that Tesla has efficiency advantages due to the high degree of automation they've built into their factories, as well as the lack of dealership markups. Tesla's profit margin on the Model S is excellent compared to many other automakers, which leads me to believe that they will also be able to offer more for less with the Model 3.

I think the fact that Tesla "gave away" all their patents is a sign that this isn't a battle over technology, but a game of marketing, branding, and efficient manufacturing. I seriously doubt Tesla has some secret factory sauce that Nissan (who's been building cars for decades) doesn't have access to.

I disagree with this. The key isn't the technology but building the better driving experience.

If someone comes out with a vehicle with on demand torque, a 0-60 time under 5.5s, excellent handling, and most importantly, great styling and interior, I'd consider it. Tesla vehicles are able to stand on the merits of the driving experience, EV or not. That's not something no other EV manufacturer can currently say.

To drive my point home a little more, this car's sweet spot isn't really the Prius owner or someone who would consider the Leaf.

It's the guy who won't buy a car with a > 6 second 0-60 time. The guy who wants to step on it and be put in the back of their seat but for whom 50-60k is a little bit too much to spend. They can't afford an M3 but want an M3 performance so they buy a 335, a G37 / Q50, or an IS350. I've personally discounted the IS250 because the acceleration is too slow for me.

If the Model 3 gets 5.3 0-60 or better, it's a no-brainer.

I drive a CTS (3.6l is slow in that heavy vehicle). I want a Model 3. I think I fit this stereotype. I drive 120+ miles round trip. If I could do that paying $.07kwh vs $3-$4 per gallon I would do it. Also I'd buy a Model S if I could afford one right now. The only thing I'd like to see if an AWD system in a Tesla but I'm not sure it makes sense from an efficiency standpoint.

There's also the different, not better concept. The Model 3 will be a sedan, the leaf is a hatchback. Etc. All the same reasons there is a market for the many kinds of ICE vehicles we see today.

A model 3 hatch would be sexy though.