40kwh Model S canceled

[fluxemag]

I thought of an unfortunate side of the 40's being cancelled when I was at work today. I'm an Engineer, so the S is a little above most people's pay grade around here. Lots of Civics, minivans and Corollas in the parking lot. Mostly this is because Engineers are generally very practical people. But there are a few nicer cars out there. An M3, M5, 650i, A5, 911S, Boxster, FX50, STS-V...mostly bought used and probably in the 35-45k range. These are the people who know and have asked about when I'm getting my MS. There's just no way I can sell them on it now with the entry point so high. I think this cuts out a large swath of the Engineering population.

When I made my reservation in November, I had heard a rumor about an impending price increase. I had always thought the base model MS had way too much value for the price to stay that way for long. So the price increase came around and although it was only 2.5k, I still felt good. Little did I know that 5 months later the entry point would be 12.5k higher, and totally beyond what I could reasonably justify. So I feel very lucky and quite vindicated in my decision at 1AM 5 months ago. Looking forward to getting the car!

 

[Chuck Lusin]

I probably would have not got the car if the original base price was $69,900 (before the $7,500) I could get four of my current cars at that price! Also don't forget about the wait until next tax time to maybe get the full $7,500, and the extra tax on the higher total.

 

[Man_Utd]

I thought of an unfortunate side of the 40's being cancelled when I was at work today. I'm an Engineer, so the S is a little above most people's pay grade around here. Lots of Civics, minivans and Corollas in the parking lot. Mostly this is because Engineers are generally very practical people. But there are a few nicer cars out there. An M3, M5, 650i, A5, 911S, Boxster, FX50, STS-V...mostly bought used and probably in the 35-45k range. These are the people who know and have asked about when I'm getting my MS. There's just no way I can sell them on it now with the entry point so high. I think this cuts out a large swath of the Engineering population.

When I made my reservation in November, I had heard a rumor about an impending price increase. I had always thought the base model MS had way too much value for the price to stay that way for long. So the price increase came around and although it was only 2.5k, I still felt good. Little did I know that 5 months later the entry point would be 12.5k higher, and totally beyond what I could reasonably justify. So I feel very lucky and quite vindicated in my decision at 1AM 5 months ago. Looking forward to getting the car!

I totally relate to your post. I'm an engineer as well, and my work is the same way. Someone at my work has a new Audi A7 which IMO is the best car in the lot.
When I started looking for a car to buy, I was looking to spend around 35k. Then I justified the expense of the MS with the money saved in taxes and fuel cost. However, the warranty costs takes a chunk of the savings.
BTW, I'm flying to Shanghai this weekend. Hoping to catch the F1 race.

 

[vfx]

So we don't know what Tesla will derate the 60 kWh car to make it a "40". will it get Tesla's claimed range (160?) or the EPA range (that was never tested?).

Tesla is in a tough spot. If the amputated car's range is too small it gets to close to Elon's now twice made comments of a hobbled car with a not enough range to be useful, and if they make the range too close to the 208 60kWh range, many of those buyers will be unhappy that they overspent.

And if there in no electro-mechanical reason to not have Superchageing in a 40 kWh battery, and presumably even less issues with a 60 kWh car the is software limited, will Tesla allow SCing in this newly hobbled Model S?

 

[doug]

And if there in no electro-mechanical reason to not have Superchageing in a 40 kWh battery, and presumably even less issues with a 60 kWh car the is software limited, will Tesla allow SCing in this newly hobbled Model S?

I'd assume no. Tesla would probably require software limited 40kWh owners to first have to pay to unlock the rest of the 60kWh pack before they'd let them unlock supercharging. There is of course no technical reason for that, but probably are some understandable marketing reasons.

Since it's software, an interesting prospect would be (say if you have a weekend trip) to "rent" increased battery capacity or the ability to supercharge for a number of days. But I doubt Tesla wants to deal with that.

 

[jkirkebo]

Regarding pack voltages it seems the 60kWh is lower voltage than the 85kWh. There was a picture from someone supercharging a 60kWh pack not long ago, and the charging voltage was 315V ar low SOC. 85kWh packs seem to start at around 350V.

 

[JRP3]

Beginning charge voltage would depend on the SOC of the pack. With the smaller pack size the 60's are probably reaching the superchargers with a lower SOC. For the reasons I mentioned previously I'd be surprised if Tesla operated the cars at different voltages.
As for derating, I'd assume they'll derate it to allow 40kWh's of energy.

 

[NigelM]

BTW, I'm flying to Shanghai this weekend. Hoping to catch the F1 race.

It's next weekend (4/14).

Sorry for the off topic.

 

[Rodolfo Paiz]

I thought of an unfortunate side of the 40's being cancelled when I was at work today. I'm an Engineer, so the S is a little above most people's pay grade around here. Lots of Civics, minivans and Corollas in the parking lot. Mostly this is because Engineers are generally very practical people. But there are a few nicer cars out there. An M3, M5, 650i, A5, 911S, Boxster, FX50, STS-V...mostly bought used and probably in the 35-45k range. These are the people who know and have asked about when I'm getting my MS. There's just no way I can sell them on it now with the entry point so high. I think this cuts out a large swath of the Engineering population.

A new M3 is around $75K, a new M5 around $105K, and so on. The ones that were bought used for $35K to $45K are probably 4-7 years old depending on the model. What really cuts out a large swath of the "engineering population" is not the Model S pricing, but rather the fact that it is a new model of car and there simply aren't any four- or five-year-old used Model S cars to be found yet. It's just going to take a little time, that's all.

 

[fluxemag]

I totally relate to your post. I'm an engineer as well, and my work is the same way. Someone at my work has a new Audi A7 which IMO is the best car in the lot.
When I started looking for a car to buy, I was looking to spend around 35k. Then I justified the expense of the MS with the money saved in taxes and fuel cost. However, the warranty costs takes a chunk of the savings.
BTW, I'm flying to Shanghai this weekend. Hoping to catch the F1 race.

Very exciting! I just bought my tickets to Austin for November. Turn 12...

Again, sorry to turn this into an F1 discussion.

- - - Updated - - -

A new M3 is around $75K, a new M5 around $105K, and so on. The ones that were bought used for $35K to $45K are probably 4-7 years old depending on the model. What really cuts out a large swath of the "engineering population" is not the Model S pricing, but rather the fact that it is a new model of car and there simply aren't any four- or five-year-old used Model S cars to be found yet. It's just going to take a little time, that's all.

I guess I was low balling it. The 911, STS-V and the A5 were brand new. But at the old base price it certainly took the "gas savings" argument to pass the wife test for me. But then of course I had to have the pano roof for head room. And the stereo seemed like a good idea...and how can I pass on the leather???

 

[pete8314]

Very exciting! I just bought my tickets to Austin for November. Turn 12...

Again, sorry to turn this into an F1 discussion.

- - - Updated - - -

Lucky. I'm trying to wangle something through one of my vendors, didn't work out last year though. The Austin race was great, but I have a hard time paying $400 for a Courtyard room that would be $79 any other time of the year.

 

[boilerbots]

Boilerbots,

Your post is a bit confusing. First, the pack is 40kWh, not 40KW. The problem with using lower voltage means the operating voltage of the drive components, BMS, and charging components will be lower. This can be dealt with of course but it means more changes. Using the same operating voltage but limiting current draw is easier and more efficient. You also contradict yourself by first saying the cells in parallel are the same, then you say there are most likely less cells in parallel, so you're arguing opposite points. You may be correct that Tesla lowered the pack voltage but kept the same current, or was going to, but that's the more difficult and expensive way to go, IMO.
It's true that torque is related to current, but voltage keeps the torque up at higher RPMs. Back EMF is what limits torque at higher RPM's, and that limit comes sooner with a lower operating voltage.

I got tired of typing kWh vs. kW will just type the number 40 in the future since people generally know what it means.

The main point is that cells where going to be removed, if there are cells in parallel then you can remove some but you need to end up with a balanced pack. Lets say for the sake of this discussion you have 2000 cells and you decide to build a battery pack with 2 cells in parallel, so 1000 pairs in series. Now you want to downsize the pack by 1/3, so you want approximately 1334 cells in the pack, what do you do?

You can't keep 1000 in series because you would end up with 334 cells to put in pairs and the rest single by themselves.

Option 1, perhaps you make 667 pairs and the voltage drops by 1/3 but you can still draw the same current out because the parallel capacity is the same, the battery pack is lighter.

Option 2, you go with smaller capacity cells to keep 1,000 pairs in series, keeping the same voltage but lower capacity cells can have higher internal resistance and thus lower their current output. Also this would probably keep the weight of the battery the same. This configuration probably lowers the total current output.

I believe they intended to go with option 1 because the torque specs of the 40 vs. the 60 where the same. Only the HP number and maximum RPMs of the motor where reduced. This is in fact exactly what you would expect if you could draw the same current but have a lower voltage potential.

The voltage of the battery system doesn't affect much of the electronics because with switching power supply systems the voltage difference between the input and the output of the circuit only affects the duty cycle of the switching. The charger and motor controller can easily deal with this voltage difference with some firmware changes, unless their original circuit design had some minimum voltage problems that where not designed to handle the future 40 pack.

This is all in speculation of course and there could be other reasons. Personally I want to take one apart and do my own investigation. I would love to see the layout of the motor controller board, I would love to see the firmware source code.

 

[JRP3]

Obviously your cell pair scenario is completely unrealistic. The reality is probably 75 or so cells in parallel and then a group of 100 or so of those parallel packs in series, for a fully charged operating voltage around 410V. Since series voltage is additive, if they cut the pack capacity from the 85kWh pack to the 40kWh pack only by taking out series strings, and lowering voltage, they'd end up with less than half the operating voltage. No way they did that. They may have taken out some series strings and lowered voltage somewhat but they definitely reduced the number of cells in parallel. I wouldn't put too much importance on the specs of the 40 car since it never went into production.

 

[jkirkebo]

Obviously your cell pair scenario is completely unrealistic. The reality is probably 75 or so cells in parallel and then a group of 100 or so of those parallel packs in series, for a fully charged operating voltage around 410V.

I believe it is 96 cells in series (just like the Leaf) and 74 in parallell, for a total of 7104 cells.
The 60kWh pack must have fewer cells both in series and i parallell. Probably 84 or 86 cells in series.

 

[boilerbots]

After I wrote that I thought to my self that it was a contrived example and a bad choice of numbers since the pack is probably somewhere in the 325V range. The point of the example is that you want to keep the pack balanced, same number of cells wide over the entire series so you have to work within those confines.

I just read an interview with Elon on Engadget last night and he stated that they built a 40 and he drove it and thought the performance was sluggish and didn't want to ship it. I find that interesting for several reasons. First, perhaps Elon is spoiled by the dynamics of driving a performance series. Second, perhaps engineering reduced the current output capacity of the pack, thus reducing the torque which would lead to a sluggish feeling.

- - - Updated - - -

As a 40 reservation holder I am certainly pleased to be getting the software limited option. I find the $11k upgrade price a bit steep considering that if none of the 4% pay for the upgrade they perhaps loose money.

One consideration should be to reduce the price each year to account for vehicle depreciation. It wouldn't make sense to pay $11k in 10 years for the upgrade, in that time the value of the vehicle (and battery) has depreciated quite a lot.

Second option, pay per use. Give everyone the full range capacity of the 60 but each time you cross the 40 limit you pay some amount per KWh (like a cell phone plan). Then they could encourage people to use the capacity more without fear of getting cut-off and make up some of their cost. A better option than calling for a tow truck.

 

[ggies07]

Second option, pay per use. Give everyone the full range capacity of the 60 but each time you cross the 40 limit you pay some amount per KWh (like a cell phone plan). Then they could encourage people to use the capacity more without fear of getting cut-off and make up some of their cost. A better option than calling for a tow truck.

This sounds like a great idea.

 

[Jenni]

This sounds like a great idea.

I had similar thoughts about this. I'm excited about my 40 because it's all I need and can afford. And unless my needs change drastically in the next couple of years, I will not pay that steep amount for an extra 48 miles, as the technology, along with my car, has aged. Several years from now, I'd be in the market for a massive pack switch to something cutting edge, not 208 miles. So, for now, I love the idea of the price to upgrade decreasing by 2k/yr up to 5 years, or the cell phone type usage plan. It will help defray the cost for TM, as I doubt they will get many upgrades at that price from the most price-conscious 4%.

 

[chicagotsla]

I personally would not upgrade past 1-2 years, unless Tesla discounted the upgrade yearly. Us 40k folks can range charge as much as we want with out any large consequence (from what I gather on the forum). No need to spend another 11k after a few years. Might as well sell the 40 and buy a "better" larger capacity Tesla (400-500 mile range?) when that comes out.

The upgrade is a nice option to have, if you decide quickly that you need the extra miles.

I am still trying to figure out if the EPA numbers need to be done on the "40's" it would be interesting to see.

 

[JRP3]

I would not assume you can range charge without concern. That would only be the case if Tesla was reserving a portion of capacity at the top of SOC, which we don't know to be the case and which I think is unlikely.

 

[measton]

40 kw buyers comments

1. Car dealers offer incentives all the time. I purchased a volt and then they lowered the price 4 months later. That's life, you can buy a lot of stuff cheaper if you wait.

2. 40kwh buyers are getting more than they are losing but it's not a total win. My insurance will be higher because replacement cost will be higher and the car accelerates faster. I will also be driving a less efficient car (due to weight). I could care less about the improved acceleration. My car will have some software limitation that I"m almost certain will never be fully explained. I live in a a blue collar neighborhood. I was hoping to down play the price but now with the price increase and the loss of the 40. People will get on the web site and think I"m driving a 70k car instead of 49k. Same concerns at work. I'd have waited for the Gen III but I just loved the fact that someone left a very safe well appointed nest to build this car. I've been driving electrics for 9 years, how could I not support the Tesla.

3. I think overall they should offer the 60kwh range for less than 10k. The people who bought the 40 already did the calculation that they didn't want to spend 10k for the extra range. Tesla could recoup more of the money they are losing with this upgrade to 60 by offering the 60kwh range for 5k,or 7k. The other option would be offering 50k range at a discount. Note I still wouldn't be interested but many would. All of these things would bring money into Tesla and make the company who is backing your warranty and providing service and chargers richer and more likely able to do these things. I really don't get the people who cry about the fact they spent more money. This happens all the time.

4. I agree with those that say they never wanted the 40kwh car. Yes they only represented 4% of the reservations but it should be obvious to anyone that those that get in line first are going to be richer and more able to suffer the loss if the company didn't do well. I am certain the 40 would have made up more of the reservations going forward. They may have worried that it wasn't profitable enough and that it did cannibalize some 60kwh sales. It's also possible that they want the Model S to be an expensive car and have the reputation that rich people drive the Model S. It turns my stomach but many people want a car like this because of the status it brings.