2021 Model X, Monroney Sticker Range Increase

[BM3B]

Their claim comes from their interview of a Tesla rep, they say, there's a spearate story on the range test, only, that got posted about a week ago. Which is impressive that they got Tesla to talk to them at all.

This makes some sense.

Also, holy damn the LR+ Model S was a good deal at $69,420 + destination. I guess that means my 7seat poverty-white LR+ X was a good deal at $83.495 + destination, but it sure hurt a lot more. More performance (in some metrics anyway) and space than Taycan 4S for half-off. MERICA

Totally, what a deal. I got mine for the same price of course $83k and change. I feel lucky to have it, you can’t get a new X yet due to the refresh delays. I bet our cars are worth more than original sticker price! Big batteries rock

 

[dmurphy]

Their claim comes from their interview of a Tesla rep, they say, there's a spearate story on the range test, only, that got posted about a week ago. Which is impressive that they got Tesla to talk to them at all.

This makes some sense.

Also, holy damn the LR+ Model S was a good deal at $69,420 + destination. I guess that means my 7seat poverty-white LR+ X was a good deal at $83.495 + destination, but it sure hurt a lot more. More performance (in some metrics anyway) and space than Taycan 4S for half-off. MERICA

So let's be clear for a second... Pearl white tricoat is *never* a poverty color. It might be the freebie with Tesla, but it's far from low-end. Ask any body shop - they'll tell ya!

But yes - you got a great deal. Can't say I'm unhappy with mine, either! $93,490 of which $7k was FSD ... Definitely not a cheap vehicle, but I'll chip away at it with the free supercharging bit by bit

 

[Richbot]

Ha, dude, I was already doing the math in my head when an old Ford panel van behind me had to go to the median to miss me in traffic the other day. At least the paint match from bumper covers to the metal is already sorta...weird from the factory depending on the light, so the replacements would probably have been better ha. In direct sun it's perfect, in shade it looks a little yellower on the plastic bumper covers. It is nice overall though. Never been a fan of non-metallic white cars, will always look like a contractor van to me, but metallic is juuust tolerable enogh to keep me from paying $1500 for A DIFFERENT COLOR PAINT YOU HAVE TO PUT ON THE CAR ANYWAY

Too bad they don't offer anodized aluminum finishes

 

[ohmman]

Pearl white tricoat is *never* a poverty color.

I paid for it as an upgraded color on my S and my first X...

 

[Harvey Danger]

Hey there ohmman I see the mask is gone from the avatar- nice to see things getting back to normal..

 

[jimmyle1511]

I have 2020 LR+ production date 9/20 delivered in 10/2020, G battery, running stock rim, latest version 2021.44.5 and 20k miles and my range is est only 336 miles only. How do you guys got up gl 371 miles?

 

[DCGOO]

I have 2020 LR+ production date 9/20 delivered in 10/2020, G battery, running stock rim, latest version 2021.44.5 and 20k miles and my range is est only 336 miles only. How do you guys got up gl 371 miles?

Slow down.

 

[dmurphy]

I have 2020 LR+ production date 9/20 delivered in 10/2020, G battery, running stock rim, latest version 2021.44.5 and 20k miles and my range is est only 336 miles only. How do you guys got up gl 371 miles?

G battery’s rated range is 351, not 371. That was the “H” battery.

My 2020 LR+ with G battery now shows 338 miles as max, down from 351. That’s 96.2% of original. Very normal.

Note these are rated ranges which do not reflect real-world conditions. Actual mileage may vary. Product measured by weight, not volume. Do not fold, spindle or mutilate. Caution: hot. Product appearance may vary. For external use only. Objects in mirror are closer than they appear. Limit one per customer. Not valid where prohibited by law. Actors have been compensated. Not valid in HI or AK.

 

[ElectricIAC]

G battery’s rated range is 351, not 371. That was the “H” battery.

My 2020 LR+ with G battery now shows 338 miles as max, down from 351. That’s 96.2% of original. Very normal.

Note these are rated ranges which do not reflect real-world conditions. Actual mileage may vary. Product measured by weight, not volume. Do not fold, spindle or mutilate. Caution: hot. Product appearance may vary. For external use only. Objects in mirror are closer than they appear. Limit one per customer. Not valid where prohibited by law. Actors have been compensated. Not valid in HI or AK.

It's got Paul Anka's guarantee...
Guarantee void in Tennessee.

 

[Richbot]

My H battery is showing between 361 and 365 at 100% now at 17,500 miles. Depends on the most recent poll I guess.

 

[ajadan]

Old thread I know, but I can’t find many other threads that discuss the G vs H battery revisions (2020 LR+ vs late 2020 and 2021 LR++ should we call them?). I’m interested in picking up a MX of this vintage. Was anyone ever able to assess capacities of these batteries through charging, Scan My Tesla, or something else?

Best I can tell from the discussion, it seems like the batteries have the same capacity (105.3kWh by the maths, likely inclusive of the 4-5kWh buffer Tesla builds in but uses for EPA testing where they run the cars to a true zero). However, they differ in the efficiency calculation (G=300 vs H=284 rated Wh/mi) as a means of getting the extra 20mi. That wouldn’t explain why the battery needed a revision to H (unless to trigger new EPA testing) nor why the G battery couldn’t also get the update with increased range (probably also EPA testing regulations). It would suggest that the both versions can be driven the same distance at any given equivalent energy consumption and that it would simply be easier to match the rated Wh/mi in the G battery as compared to the H battery.

If I have the summary right: Really no difference between LR+ (2020 G) annd LR++ (late 2020 and 2021 H) other than what the range meter displays and how easy it would be to match/beat the rated efficiency calculation. Those with 2021 model year designations and/or 371 rated range would only be useful for resale value down the line and bragging rights.

 

[Battpower]

Old thread I know, but I can’t find many other threads that discuss the G vs H battery revisions (2020 LR+ vs late 2020 and 2021 LR++ should we call them?). I’m interested in picking up a MX of this vintage. Was anyone ever able to assess capacities of these batteries through charging, Scan My Tesla, or something else?

Best I can tell from the discussion, it seems like the batteries have the same capacity (105.3kWh by the maths, likely inclusive of the 4-5kWh buffer Tesla builds in but uses for EPA testing where they run the cars to a true zero). However, they differ in the efficiency calculation (G=300 vs H=284 rated Wh/mi) as a means of getting the extra 20mi. That wouldn’t explain why the battery needed a revision to H (unless to trigger new EPA testing) nor why the G battery couldn’t also get the update with increased range (probably also EPA testing regulations). It would suggest that the both versions can be driven the same distance at any given equivalent energy consumption and that it would simply be easier to match the rated Wh/mi in the G battery as compared to the H battery.

If I have the summary right: Really no difference between LR+ (2020 G) annd LR++ (late 2020 and 2021 H) other than what the range meter displays and how easy it would be to match/beat the rated efficiency calculation. Those with 2021 model year designations and/or 371 rated range would only be useful for resale value down the line and bragging rights.

My interest was got S not X but never really felt I got a clear answer.

I think my S has F, and believe there was very little real world difference with later rev batteries.

 

[Genie]

Old thread I know, but I can’t find many other threads that discuss the G vs H battery revisions (2020 LR+ vs late 2020 and 2021 LR++ should we call them?). I’m interested in picking up a MX of this vintage. Was anyone ever able to assess capacities of these batteries through charging, Scan My Tesla, or something else?

Best I can tell from the discussion, it seems like the batteries have the same capacity (105.3kWh by the maths, likely inclusive of the 4-5kWh buffer Tesla builds in but uses for EPA testing where they run the cars to a true zero). However, they differ in the efficiency calculation (G=300 vs H=284 rated Wh/mi) as a means of getting the extra 20mi. That wouldn’t explain why the battery needed a revision to H (unless to trigger new EPA testing) nor why the G battery couldn’t also get the update with increased range (probably also EPA testing regulations). It would suggest that the both versions can be driven the same distance at any given equivalent energy consumption and that it would simply be easier to match the rated Wh/mi in the G battery as compared to the H battery.

If I have the summary right: Really no difference between LR+ (2020 G) annd LR++ (late 2020 and 2021 H) other than what the range meter displays and how easy it would be to match/beat the rated efficiency calculation. Those with 2021 model year designations and/or 371 rated range would only be useful for resale value down the line and bragging rights.

My 21 MXP built 12/2020 has the H pack, sticker range was 341 miles. This is prerefresh, the refresh came out in the fall 2021.

 

[Bigriver]

This is good news. Any idea what range the Performance model will have?

You are in a thread about the 2021 model X range.