2010 Roadster Sport 2.0 vs 2011 non sport Advice

[bart513]

So I'm trying to decide between a 2010 2.0 Roadster Sport fully loaded with CF exterior and upgraded interior, 2 extra sets of silver forged wheels, 14,000 miles and a 2011 Roadster non sport with 5,000 miles, adjustable suspension and double DIN Nav/Rear Camera. Any opinions???

 

[Doug_G]

Go for the non-Sport 2011. I'll take low mileage over the tiny incremental improvement in acceleration. Especially since it already has the adjustable suspension.

 

[bart513]

Thanks for your vote Doug. I'm not sure how much the mileage will mean in the end as I drive about 1,500 miles/month. Would it make a difference if the warranty on the 2.0 ends in 2016 and on the 2.5 in 2014?

 

[djp]

Would it make a difference if the warranty on the 2.0 ends in 2016 and on the 2.5 in 2014?

Extending the warranty for two years costs $4,000, plus $5,500 for the battery. The chance that you actually have $9,500 worth of repairs in those two years is fairly low, so I'd say the bigger factor is the price difference between the cars.

Personally I'd go for the non-Sport 2.5. The double DIN is a big improvement over the JVC and is something you'll notice more than the acceleration. The non-Sport is still plenty fast.

 

[bart513]

Price is basically the same for both. Interesting djp you have a 2.0 with single or double DIN?

 

[djp]

I upgraded to the double DIN and adjustable suspension, and very happy with both! Unfortunately Tesla no longer supplies the double DIN upgrade.

 

[DrComputer]

I've got a 2.0 non-sport with the single DIN JVC. Although it's not perfect, the acoustics of the Roadster with the top off are not great and the JVC sounds fine. Since the price is the same I'd get the 2.0 Sport with the longer warranty.

 

[augkuo]

If you can, check the CAC value of the cars - if not, see what the ideal miles on a range/standard charge are.

If the price is about the same, I would get the one with the longer warranty. I've had little things like the tire pressure monitor (4th or 5th?), 12V battery (on 3rd one now) go bad on me so it'll be worth it. You can always get a single DIN stereo with flip-up screen and rear camera installed for ~ $2k. Plus it sounds like the 2.5 is from a private seller (warranty ends in a year) vs the 2.0 from Tesla CPO (3 year warranty) so Tesla will have had it refurbished for you.

good luck!

Thanks for your vote Doug. I'm not sure how much the mileage will mean in the end as I drive about 1,500 miles/month. Would it make a difference if the warranty on the 2.0 ends in 2016 and on the 2.5 in 2014?

 

[Bobfitz1]

I've got a 2.0 non-sport with the single DIN JVC. Although it's not perfect, the acoustics of the Roadster with the top off are not great and the JVC sounds fine. Since the price is the same I'd get the 2.0 Sport with the longer warranty.

I've got a 2010 2.0 Sport with 27K. When I bought it, paid extra 5K to extend full warranty (battery pack and rest of car) for add'l 36mo/36K miles. While .2 sec faster doesn't sound like anything, I would not give it up. If I have a passenger 150 to 200 lbs in car, I can feel the slight decrease in the max acceleration and it is slightly less thrilling than without that extra weight. I think the extra adrenaline and longer warranty already paid beat better radio. I'm still standard charging to 185 kwh and the past year info seems to say that with proper care our packs should keep plenty of range for all but long trips way past 100K. I've become less worried about adding more miles cause I don't expect to sell it for a long, long time.

 

[bart513]

So far we have 2 votes for the 2011 non sport and 2 votes for the 2010 Sport. Very interesting commentary so far.

 

[thefortunes]

I've got a 2010 2.0 Sport with 27K. When I bought it, paid extra 5K to extend full warranty (battery pack and rest of car) for add'l 36mo/36K miles. While .2 sec faster doesn't sound like anything, I would not give it up. If I have a passenger 150 to 200 lbs in car, I can feel the slight decrease in the max acceleration and it is slightly less thrilling than without that extra weight. I think the extra adrenaline and longer warranty already paid beat better radio. I'm still standard charging to 185 kwh and the past year info seems to say that with proper care our packs should keep plenty of range for all but long trips way past 100K. I've become less worried about adding more miles cause I don't expect to sell it for a long, long time.

Wow...you must have gotten the super secret special 185 kWh model...range of 800 miles. Just kidding :biggrin:.

Back to the OP's question...I think it all depends on how you will use it. If you are going to track it, run it hard through the twisties, etc... then maybe you will enjoy the extra torque at the bottom. If not, I was told (by various Tesla personnel) that the 2.5 is much more refined and holds it's value better (their words, not mine).

P.S. If you get the 2.0 sport I am in the market for a set of wheels so you can offset some of your cost.

 

[hcsharp]

I'd vote for the 2.5 because it's quieter, already has the double din and backup camera. I think it also has a better heater and A/C. The 2.0 is a sport but the 2.5 already has the most important upgrades that came with the sport, the adjustable suspension. Lower miles.

Who's this for? Don't you already have a 1.5?

 

[bart513]

I sold the 1.5 to a wonderful party who will enjoy it, so it will be for me. I wish my wife would've been interested so we could end up with 2 roadsters!! I don't race the car but use it almost daily and twice a week drive it for 3 hours one way. Thanks "Fortunes" about the set of wheels to offset the cost should I opt for the sport. The bumper to bumper 3 year warranty is part of what is tweaking me about the sport (not to mention the CF exterior and upgraded wheels) but the 2.5 is a bit less worn and has the double DIN with rear camera and adjustable suspension.....

 

[thefortunes]

I currently drive close to 2 hours daily with my 2.5 and would DEFINITELY test drive them both if possible.

If what I am hearing is accurate, the 2.5 will be a much better/quieter ride on the highway. I also love the double DIN (mainly for the nav and rear-view camera).

 

[bart513]

The 2.5 is close enough for me to test drive it but the 2.0 Sport is out of state so it's not possible. I love the rear-view camera on my Prius but not everyone does. I'm trying really hard to think about what is best for me versus "the best deal." As I said earlier I'm somewhat seduced by the CF exterior, 2 extra set of forged silver wheels and the extended warranty...... Interesting that you were told that the 2.5 would hold it's value better than the 2.0 Sport given there were only 500 sports made to the best of my knowledge.

 

[jayfrost]

I will weigh in, but note that I am a 2.5 owner and may be partial because of that. I have driven a 1.5, a 2.0 Sport and a 2.5. I loved them all. I liked that the 2.5 was quieter and seemed like a "tighter" drive. In addition, I really like the double din and recently upgrade the unit to the Parrot Smart. It has really made the whole experience better as driving the car is amazing, but sometimes I still enjoy feeding my tech habit. I was in a similar position before I bought mine and at the end of the day, the lower miles, quieter handling and carbon fiber interior made the difference for me.

 

[asgard]

I had the same choice about 2 months ago. Had to choose between a CPO 2.5 Sport 12.5K miles with CF interior and a CPO 1.5 standard, 5K miles without any upgrades.
I test-drove both cars. The difference in acceleration in standard mode is negligible. If you can tell the difference, it's probably the placebo effect or you are one of those rare people who can actually sense such things
CF and double DIN are cosmetic. Noise reduction? Who cares. I crank up the music volume, and as far as making phone calls - this is the wrong car to be talking on the phone. Enjoy the drive to the max. The phone is a distraction as far as I am concerned.

In the end I went with the 1.5 and I am spending the money I saved on such cool things as Nitron shock upgrades and other fun stuff in the future.

If you want the frills and the low noise interior and a 4-DIN whiz bang audio/video/gizmodo that works some times, Elon has a car called the Model S

 

[Doug_G]

Thanks for your vote Doug. I'm not sure how much the mileage will mean in the end as I drive about 1,500 miles/month. Would it make a difference if the warranty on the 2.0 ends in 2016 and on the 2.5 in 2014?

Yes. I would prefer lower mileage for longer battery life... But an extra two years of warranty trumps that big-time.

 

[dna4life]

xtra set of forged rims for

So I'm trying to decide between a 2010 2.0 Roadster Sport fully loaded with CF exterior and upgraded interior, 2 extra sets of silver forged wheels, 14,000 miles and a 2011 Roadster non sport with 5,000 miles, adjustable suspension and double DIN Nav/Rear Camera. Any opinions???

do you have the persons contact info that has that vehicle with the extra sets of forged rims. wanted to see if he would be willing to sell a set? thanks

 

[strider]

For a daily driver I would vote for the 2.5. More comfortable seats, more sound insulation (though that can be added later), better stereo, and lower mileage on the pack. From all the data I've seen around here, mileage is the single greatest factor on battery life so you're losing a full year's worth of driving with the 2.0.