Vellum Venom Vignette: Rage Against the Rulebook
Things used to be so much easier. Back in the good old days, cars were redesigned at slower clip than now. As the Center for Automotive Research notes, it took an average of 8.6 years in the 1980s to either retire or totally redesign a platform. That sped up to 7.6 years over the next two decades. Now, a paper in the TEM Journal notes that, as of the last 10 years, it takes half as much time: roughly 4 years. That’s a transformative pace, likely accelerated by both advanced technology across the supply chain and competitive pressures from a global market.
Well, unless you’re Tesla.
In the way that the outgoing Dodge Challenger experienced but one notable design revision, taking place after six years in production, the 2023 Model 3’s “Highland” revision is astoundingly similar to a 2017 Tesla Model 3. While Tesla is good (very good, in fact) at over-the-air software upgrades, its work performing timely design updates on traditional automotive “hardware” has been less than impressive.
However, my limited time with a Model 3 Highland earlier this year suggested Tesla is doing an admirable job improving and contemporizing its core sedan, albeit on an elongated timeline and centered around pleasing the brand’s core audience.
This is an example of a mid-cycle refresh in all its glory, which the Model 3 Highland celebrates with slimmer headlights and the same lobster claw taillight design that everyone stole from Volvo. A sleeker front bumper reportedly helps with aerodynamics, while the rear deck no longer sports the Tesla “T” emblem. The T-E-S-L-A name is now spelled out, which accentuates the Model 3’s lower-slung proportions and visually widens the posterior.
All these changes are subtle, yet noteworthy, improving an already impressive rendition of the age-old three-box design. The Model 3 Highland looks more serious from front to back, and there’s something cohesive, even expensive-looking about both fascias.
Look at the turn signal lights, which have a unifying arc inside their lenses. It may seem like a trivially small thing, but it’s a smart detail Tesla has neglected in the past while designing the automotive equivalent of an iPhone.
On to the cabin. I am far from someone who likes to stifle anyone’s creativity, but perhaps the Model 3 Highland’s interior design is a bridge too far.
There are longstanding traditions that people (who largely don’t adore Tesla) expect with automobiles, even if federal laws don’t explicitly mandate it. Combine that with Tesla’s history of tech-bro “disruption” and you get oddball choices like a steering yoke, the lack of an instrument cluster positioned in front of the driver, and the deletion of the turn signal and transmission stalks from the steering column. The yoke is a Model S thing, and still not available on the Model 3 as factory fitment, so let’s focus on the other two bits.
While centrally located gauges aren’t entirely new (see: Toyota Yaris, Prius, or Mini Cooper), cramming nearly every function on the car into a centralized, multi-function touchscreen is a Tesla innovation. Small screens that only display basic information in front of the driver wouldn’t be terribly expensive addition, especially when you remember that the Model 3 Highland’s asking price ain’t exactly in Chevy Bolt territory. (That car is now out of production, but it was over $10,000 cheaper.)
Naturally, the aftermarket offers multiple solutions to satisfy this concern, but it’s awfully indicative of Tesla’s priorities and thinking that it implemented a screen for rear seat entertainment but nothing for the driver of a Model 3.
Then there’s the transmission, which, fine, only has one speed, but is no longer controlled by a physical lever. (There was a gear selector stalk on the pre-refresh Model 3.) Switching into park or reverse is now within the purview of the touchscreen, which I found to be shockingly intuitive. We’ve discussed UX/UI design in the past, and it is a field of study to be respected; the implications of bad UX/UI can be deadly. This, despite my initial skepticism, works well.
You really do get used to the virtual transmission indicator. Yes, maybe it would get frustrating in denser areas where three-point turns and parallel parking are mandatory, but there are buttons (inconveniently) located near the rear-view mirror for those inclined to avoid the central screen. Maybe the button solution is cheaper than the stalk, but my money is on the fact that the steering wheel area and dashboard are now even cleaner and more seamless-looking than before.
Not having a turn signal stalk, either, was initially a shock to me during my limited time in a Model 3 Highland. But then I tried the turn signal buttons on the left-hand pad of the steering wheel—a revelation! Perhaps I’ve spent too many wasted hours with D-pad controllers on various gaming consoles, but I took to the turn signal buttons like a moth to a flame. They had a fantastic tactile feel, and my left thumb felt totally in control. I wish all switches in cars felt that good, no exaggeration.
The concept lost some luster with me after a bit of time. Activating the turn signal when the wheel is already turned is a difficult task involving eyesight distraction and no context for muscle memory. Your brain reprograms itself to push the button before turning the wheel at all, which is an adjustment in some situations. Oddities like this might not affect those who inherently admire Tesla products, but it feels like a big ask for someone tempted by the current sweetheart lease deals on EVs from other automakers.
I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention that Tesla threw a fair bit of R&D cash into NVH control and interior upgrades (fabric trim inserts, elegant mood lighting, etc.), and the automaker continues to have one of the most underrated factory audio systems on the market. Tesla treats the ears without wasting money on the current trend of absurd audio-branding partnerships. I find that refreshing in this day and age.
Driving the Model 3 Highland, and examining it from a design perspective left me with two questions: Are the recent changes enough to lure in even more mainstream automotive consumers? And why did it take so long to add these updates?
I doubt that Tesla’s maverick designs, moving at the pace of a snail, are up to the budding competition over the long haul. It’s mostly worked for Tesla so far, but the company is largely ignoring the fundamentals of how a mass-market car company behaves (or not?) and sometimes even acting like a meme stock. Back in 2023, BYD took Tesla out to lunch in China. This year shows significant Tesla market-share erosion in the U.S., thanks to the Mustang Mach-E. I simply don’t see the Model 3 Highland (and its future Model Y counterpart) making up lost ground.
This brings us to a final question: Should we even consider the Model 3 Highland’s changes radical, given Tesla’s penchant for ignoring the rulebook?
I like the measured approach to this article. With Tesla over years it has been tedious to read about the cars because so much praise has seemed very empty if one is actually looking at the designs. I can’t speak to the driving dynamics but quite of those “features” sound terrible to me.
The model 3 has never registered as anything special in my eyes because it just looks like an updated 2007 Pontiac G8 to me (moreso than say a 2008 Malibu which reads less sporty-inspired).
I kind of feel one could play a game of “match up the lineage” pretending that Teslas were descended from GM models or amalgams of the most-average design elements of the given segment. Model Y look like bland CUV styling with some botox pushing some proportions oddly.
I get that the above may sound harsh to some, the designs just don’t impress me, certainly not deserving so much praise beyond other contemporary designs.
While not for me, I salute the Cybertruck for actually walking the walk of the design hype. I’m not sure history will look back on these fondly but at least they actually are different.
The Tesla roadster is sharp looking, but then again look at the price bracket it is in means it shouldn’t be a dog.
If you took the full slate of Tesla vehicles and rebadged them all as Buicks and gave them to defined focus groups —would the praise be the same? I suspect if the responses were gathered without the group able to have someone spoiler (this is just a Tesla) that some very interesting data and comments would come out.
I don’t know that the target audience cares much about model-year design improvements such as the shape of turn signals or lack of shift stalks. I don’t think that’s why they bought. And, IMO, if any Tesla customer really cherished the looks of their vehicle, Cybertruck sales would be practically non-existent.
Tesla is snot a company that is known for style. It is a tech company. They work in areas of tech and styling is secondary often left to the wind tunnel.
Then the wild card is like the truck with Musk’s shock value for publicity.
Cars in the 50’s through the 70’s were restyled nearly every year with a new design or significant refresh. This was fun as nearly every year brought a new look.
Tesla really is not styling for looks but aero. The spend little changing the body. They ad a grill they remove it. Change a tail light or wheel.
To be honest Tesla was making a ton of money on the S model but they left the styling rot on the vine. They really could have vine with a body update and continued to sell more S models at higher prices.
The 3 is a nice quiet drive. I have wheel time in one and how it operates if fine though it could use more range.
The interior just feels plain. This is where I spend my time do I want to have an interesting interior with controls.
The centered dash has failed how many hi Ed but I assume it is for export options to make them cheaper to offer.
I really would love to see Tesla send a car to Italy and have it styled. Still use a wind tunnel but just see where they can improve the design.
The reason cars change little anymore is cost. It is expensive to change things with crash test and other things. But they still could do better at Tesla.
For all the fawning over Tesla designs over the years, I have never understood it. The reader who said it could be a lineup of Buicks from years past really nailed it. To me, they are dull, bordering on ugly (excluding the truck which is downright hideous). And interiors should be a nice place to spend time. Interiors of Teslas all feel like you got the base model of a Ford Escort, with nothing there. Austerity is one thing but these things are just dull. And in some cases, the apparent strive for nothing being visible in the interiors means the basic controls are harder to operate, which is insane. Pass.
I term the styling androgynous.
I disagree with the comment that Tesla is not a company known for style. Things like chopping the roof of a Lotus Elise for their original roadster (i.e. not cheap to retool structural pillars) and making a luxury EV mildly similar to the Mercedes CLS (Model S) ensured that EVs were appealing to the well-heeled buyers who could afford them.
Tesla is (or perhaps was) a luxury car brand with luxurious proportioning (i.e. these don’t look like Chevy Bolts), stylish gadgets (pop out door handles) and a general attention to detail that appeals to buyers that’d otherwise buy top end German vehicles. If it wasn’t for Tesla’s luxury play, we’d be stuck with awkwardly proportioned Nissan Leafs that very few people find appealing. Tesla made EVs cool and it wasn’t just from their tech company credentials.
Tesla has relied on gimmicks. Pop out door handles, farting dashes, radical truck styling, big big screens, Gullwing doors that did not work well.
Elon likes to shock and provoke.
What he did get right was to do the S model. It brought the profits for an EV. The Market made the mistake doing the cheaper EV models that were not cheap and no profits.
This is why I think Elon should focus more advancements on the S.
The marketing is what created the image. It created the cult like fans.
Tesla also still is not making the needed money but they are doing better with EV than most.
I expect them to remain a player. It is their tech company that has made them the better sorted drivetrains.
It seems to me, having worked in the industry for half a century, that the development time for a new car has slowed down a lot, ad the greater the technological processes advanced, the slower the development time became.
Don’t forget, the entire 1955 Chevrolet line was designed and produced in 2 years, including a new engine, chassis, and 7 body styles in 3 trim levels. The entire Chevy II line took 18 months.
The Grand Wagoneer line that was introduced in 2022, was well underway when I left Chrysler (FCA) in 2014. That’s more than 8 years.
I think development time is more related to executive actions, ability to make, and maintain, decisions, ad a clear sense of purpose before the project is started. Technology has little to do with anything.
Cost and regulation have slowed down platforms and updates. Engines update more in search of more mpg and lower emissions.
For Tesla to grow they must appeal to non Tesla fans.
This means looking beyond blind loyalty.
They must be easy to use, attractive to more than family and competitive with what is coming industry wide.
This will mean being more conventional in areas expected to familiar.
My first drive in a Tesla was mostly trying to find controls. Looking for gauges that were not where they were expected.
Some times being different can be a good thing but for things you expect yo fall in hand it can be disconcerting.
Like my GMC had buttons for a shifter. I got used to it. But for some shopping that can kill the deal.
A loyal cult but they need more if they plan to survive. Saturn had a loyal following and where are they?
Their interface with the driver is the biggest issue. I don’t want a touch pad and some sort of yoke or whatever they try to do for a wheel. They may be the best of their breed but they are seemingly different just to be different. I think the Model S looks good but I’m not going to get one any time soon.
I have no interest in an electric car. But on the other hand, thieves are having a field day stealing the charging cables for the copper. Each may only be worth $15-20 but snag 20 or more of them and you got a party…
Coming from an ownership experience I think the Model S is attractive from all angles. I still am struck when I walk up to mine (my second one) at the curb or in the parking lot. There is a reason why TESLA has not needed to do more than a refresh on the shape. It is attractive. The Cyber-truck also has an attraction. Yes, it may be polarizing, but that is to its advantage. It was designed to be a disrupter. Job done.
More than anything I want the readers to know that I am a ICE guy (with 31 of them in the collection), but my EV (Model S Plaid) is just as interesting as my others. I am a consummate car-guy with taste ranging from Muscle Cars to Sportscars, but still I wanted to experience electric as far back as 2016. It is not for everyone, but it is often what mode I choose to roll with, now that I am on nearly a decade of experience.
Nevertheless… The Model 3 has never looked better, and there is still life left in the artfully designed Model S my friends.
You are a loyal and committed Tesla fan and that is fine.
The trouble is not everyone is and while the S is a fine looking car the styling has really not changed much in near a decade. This is not the way forward to attract new buyers.
A for the 3 I find it not offensive but I find it Androgynous. It lacks that simulating look that makes you keep looking. I know Tesla has to work in a box of aero but I would think they could give it more personality. Even a top fuel funny car can use decals to great affect to add styling.
The sales of the S have dropped greatly and it has hurt the income as that was the money maker.
While Tesla is a High values stock company they lack much in development funds. This is why their cars are often several years late to market. They have grown and survived in spite but they need to leave the shock value things behind as that will only take you so far.
Most people just want a good reliable car with good range and resonable charging.
Sometimes different isn’t better. Ford didn’t advertise they had a “different” idea, did they?