2024 Tesla Model 3 Reviews: Is the Highland Refresh Still a Leader in the EV Market?

When the Tesla Model S first burst onto the scene, it undeniably revolutionized the automotive world. It was groundbreaking, unmatched by anything else on the road. For years, no electric vehicle could rival its range, performance, or technological advancements. While mainstream automakers have finally begun to catch up, the 2024 Tesla Model 3 Highland, Tesla’s more accessible offering, faces a significantly more competitive landscape and needs to prove it still holds its edge.

After spending a few days with the dual-motor Model 3, equipped with Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” Autopilot system, it became clear that while the Model 3 has evolved, the competition has intensified. While it retains some key Tesla advantages, potential buyers should consider whether alternatives like the Hyundai Ioniq 6 might now offer a more compelling overall package.

Diving into the 2024 Tesla Model 3 Highland

Rewind to 2017, and the launch of the original Tesla Model 3 was a pivotal moment. It represented a more attainable entry point into the Tesla brand, promising impressive range and performance at a (relatively) more accessible price. It undeniably shook up the market. However, Tesla took six years to deliver substantial updates to this game-changing model. In the traditional automotive world, brands like BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and Audi would have released completely new generations within that timeframe. Now, with the 2024 refresh, the Model 3 Highland arrives with notable improvements, but also with some steps back in certain areas.

Visually, the Model 3 Highland presents a more refined aesthetic compared to its predecessor. The redesigned headlights are sharper and slimmer, the front fascia is more pointed, and the taillights exude a more premium feel. While the overall “jelly bean” shape persists, especially in less vibrant colors, the refresh does inject a welcome dose of modernity into the aging design.

Stepping inside, however, reveals a less impressive story. The interior largely carries over the minimalist design of the previous model, which translates to a stark and, frankly, cheap-feeling cabin. While some might appreciate the simplicity, the material quality and overall ambiance fall short of expectations, particularly at this price point. The seats, while rumored to be improved in the Performance version, are unremarkable in the standard model. Ergonomics, a long-standing Tesla criticism, remain a significant issue.

True to Tesla’s current design philosophy, physical controls are almost entirely absent. Wiper and side mirror adjustments, steering wheel column adjustments – everything is relegated to the central touchscreen. This reliance on the touchscreen, with its nested menus and small, similar-looking icons, demands considerable attention diversion from driving. While stationary, the iPad-like interface is functional; however, on the move, it becomes a frustrating and potentially hazardous distraction.

The most controversial ergonomic decision in the Model 3 Highland is the relocation of the gear selector to the touchscreen. Engaging Drive or Reverse requires a swipe on a narrow on-screen bar. While it functions adequately, instances where swipes weren’t registered during the test drive raised concerns about reliability and ease of use in critical driving situations. This design choice prioritizes minimalism to an extreme, arguably sacrificing crucial usability and driver intuitiveness.

Interestingly, Tesla has included redundant gear selector buttons, but their placement is bewildering – integrated into the headliner’s interior lighting panel. These buttons are only illuminated when activated. This odd placement makes accidental activation a real possibility, especially when attempting to use the dome light while driving, potentially leading to unintended gear selections and alarming warning beeps. This design oversight suggests a disconnect between the designers and the practical realities of driving.

Behind the Wheel: Driving Dynamics and Autopilot

Fortunately, the driving experience of the Model 3 remains a strong point. The dual-motor configuration delivers brisk acceleration, producing 394 horsepower and 377 lb-ft of torque. The 0-60 mph sprint arrives in a swift 4.2 seconds, placing it firmly in the performance sedan category, and only fractionally behind cars like the BMW i4 M50. For most drivers, the dual-motor Model 3 offers more than ample performance.

While early reviews lauded the original Model 3’s handling as being comparable to benchmark sports sedans like the BMW 3 Series, a more critical assessment reveals a different picture. The steering, while accurate, feels artificially light and lacks genuine feedback. The aggressive self-centering action and quick steering ratio contribute to a twitchy feel, particularly at higher speeds.

The ride quality is firm, bordering on brittle. While composed on smooth surfaces, sharper road imperfections transmit noticeable jolts into the cabin. It lacks the refined ride comfort of competitors like the BMW i4 or Polestar 2, aligning more closely with the Hyundai Ioniq 6 in terms of firmness. While capable in corners, the overall driving feel is somewhat detached and artificial, lacking the engaging and rewarding character of true sports sedans.

Tesla’s “Autopilot with Full Self-Driving” system remains a talking point. In its most comprehensive setting, it demonstrates impressive lane-keeping and traffic-following capabilities. The system effectively handles stop-and-go traffic and provides clear visual feedback about its sensor perception and driving decisions, including lane changes to maintain desired speed.

However, Autopilot is not without flaws. Occasional lane-splitting misjudgments and overly aggressive steering corrections when driver intervention is needed were observed. Furthermore, even in the “Chill” acceleration mode, the throttle response can feel overly eager, requiring driver intervention in situations like navigating around emergency vehicles. While advanced, Tesla’s Autopilot is still not as refined or nuanced as systems like GM’s Super Cruise.

Highs and Lows: Weighing the Pros and Cons

One undeniable strength of the Tesla ecosystem is the Supercharger network. Tesla Supercharging remains the gold standard in public EV charging. The seamless plug-and-play experience, devoid of the account hassles and payment complexities common with other charging networks, is a significant advantage. This user-friendly charging experience is a key reason why automakers like Ford and Rivian are adopting Tesla’s North American Charging Standard (NACS). The Model 3 itself is undeniably quick and nimble in urban environments, making highway merges and navigating traffic effortless. Forward visibility is excellent, and the dual wireless phone charging pad and rear-seat entertainment screen are appreciated features.

However, the Model 3 also presents notable drawbacks. The interior’s budget-car feel is a persistent disappointment, especially considering the vehicle’s price. Even more affordable cars like the Hyundai Kona offer more refined interiors. Build quality issues, such as a sharp edge on a rear door in the test vehicle, raise concerns. Furthermore, the cabin suffers from excessive wind and tire noise at higher speeds, despite the inclusion of double-pane windows. Child car seat LATCH point accessibility in the rear seats is also problematic.

Market Positioning: Features, Options, and Competition

Priced from around $40,000 before incentives, the Tesla Model 3 occupies a competitive space within the EV market. The Long Range AWD version tested starts closer to $49,000, escalating further with options. Standard equipment is reasonably generous, including heated seats, the central touchscreen, rear screen, and Tesla’s suite of tech features. Crucially, the Model 3 currently qualifies for the full $7,500 federal tax credit in the US.

Option choices are limited, primarily revolving around powertrain, paint color, wheel designs, and the “Full Self-Driving Capability” package. The latter, despite its debatable name, adds a significant $8,000 to the price. All paint colors except Space Gray incur extra charges, ranging from $1,000 to $2,000. The test vehicle, in Space Gray with standard wheels and FSD, reached an as-tested price of $57,130.

The Hyundai Ioniq 6 emerges as a primary competitor, offering a compelling blend of value, performance, and quality. While the BMW i4 delivers a more premium interior and engaging driving dynamics, it commands a significantly higher price. The Polestar 2, similarly priced to the i4 in AWD guise, also competes in this segment. The Ioniq 6, in its fully equipped Limited trim with dual-motor AWD, undercuts the Model 3, often coming in under $55,000 before incentives. Its main disadvantage is a shorter range compared to the Model 3 (270 miles vs. 341 miles). However, the upcoming access to Tesla’s Supercharger network for Hyundai EVs mitigates this range concern to some extent.

Range, Charging Prowess, and Efficiency

Boasting a 341-mile EPA-estimated range, the Model 3 maintains a range advantage over most competitors in its class. Only considerably more expensive EVs like the Lucid Air and Mercedes EQS surpass it in range. During the test, the Model 3 demonstrated impressive efficiency, averaging over 3 miles per kWh.

Beyond range, charging speed and convenience are crucial factors. Tesla’s Supercharger network excels in this regard. Compared to the often-frustrating experience with other public charging networks like Electrify America, Tesla Superchargers offer a remarkably streamlined and reliable charging process. The simple plug-in-and-charge functionality significantly reduces charging anxieties.

Value Proposition and Final Verdict

The 2024 Tesla Model 3 remains a fundamentally capable electric vehicle. It offers brisk performance, acceptable handling, and class-leading range. However, it is also burdened by persistent shortcomings. Even basic actions like unlocking the car can be inconvenient, relying on a sometimes-unreliable mobile app or a keycard that lacks keyless entry functionality. The interior ambiance remains decidedly low-rent. In a market where mainstream automakers are rapidly developing compelling electric sedans, the Model 3’s primary advantages are now limited to range and charging infrastructure – advantages that are diminishing as competitors gain access to the Supercharger network.

The core strengths of the Model 3 – electric power, decent handling, and zero-emission driving – are also shared by alternatives like the Hyundai Ioniq 6. While the Ioniq 6 offers less range, it counters with a more affordable price, a significantly nicer interior, a superior warranty, and a broader dealer network. Subjectively, the Ioniq 6 also presents a more distinctive and arguably more appealing design.

The Tesla Model 3’s impact on the automotive landscape is undeniable. It was a transformative vehicle upon its 2017 debut. However, the competitive landscape has evolved dramatically. Unless maximizing range in a compact electric sedan is the absolute priority, it’s increasingly difficult to recommend the Model 3 over its increasingly capable and refined rivals.