All: Eagerly waiting for the summons to configure production X 12121...So, we have S 60 41448....and it has the same power motor as the 85 and weighs over 200 pounds less....we detect no difference in acceleration when we have driven our car versus loaners and another 85. That said, the 60 is represented to be slower. The X 70D and 90D appear to have the same motors...the 70D ought to weigh less though do not have that info yet, but if so, there is less mass, so...anyone know if there will be any actual difference between the performance of 70D versus the 90D, and if so, why? I am probably not going to spend 13K for 37 miles, but if the performance is significantly different, it would be an added factor...because the power of the S is pretty seductive and habit forming....J
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
70D and 90D performance
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model X
Hmmm...so the lowest power Tesla motor is 259 hp..me thinks
And the 90D has one front and one rear....What do you think the powers are for the 70D? I know of nothing smaller than 259.....
Here is some S analysis:
The powertrain, which consists of one or two motors, a battery, inverters and gear boxes, is liquid cooled. The battery packs are either 70, 85 or 95 kWh microprocessor-controlled units filled filled with conventional 18650 laptop lithium ion cells.
Motors are three phase, four pole AC induction motors, and regenerative braking is standard on all models.
Horsepower values range from 315 to 762 horsepower. These values are post-gearbox numbers and are not simply the motor outputs.
And the 90D has one front and one rear....What do you think the powers are for the 70D? I know of nothing smaller than 259.....
Here is some S analysis:
Powertrain Breakdown
The Tesla Model S comes with your choice of three different output motors and three battery packs. The motor options are either: a 259 horsepower motor, a 382 horsepower motor or a 512 horsepower motor. All-wheel drive models get a combination of those motors.The powertrain, which consists of one or two motors, a battery, inverters and gear boxes, is liquid cooled. The battery packs are either 70, 85 or 95 kWh microprocessor-controlled units filled filled with conventional 18650 laptop lithium ion cells.
Motors are three phase, four pole AC induction motors, and regenerative braking is standard on all models.
Horsepower values range from 315 to 762 horsepower. These values are post-gearbox numbers and are not simply the motor outputs.
2016 Tesla Model S Motor Options | |
| Trim | Post-Gearbox Horsepower |
| 70 | 315 horsepower |
| 70D | 328 horsepower |
| 85/90 | 373 horsepower |
| 85D/90D | 417 horsepower |
| P85D/P90D | 691 horsepower |
| P85D/P90D w/Ludacris Mode | 762 horsepower |
The motors being the same doesn't necessarily mean the acceleration is the same. The 60 & 70 kWh batteries run at lower system voltages than the 85 & 90 kWh batteries - 14 modules in series instead of 16 (each with 6 cell in series, so 84 vs 96 cells in series.)
As a result, the same motors deliver lower maximum power (since the motors and drive inverters are limited to a maximum current flow rather than a maximum power output,) and the cars accelerate slower.
The difference might not be readily detectable driving the cars - especially since the design and nature of electric cars means it shows up in the 30+ mph region only (below that the car is torque limited rather than power limited in both cases...) but the difference is real, and likely to be the same in the Model X.
Walter
For the S, unless you're timing things or are racing others the difference might not be worth it if your trying to be cost conscious.
But for the X, if you're towing big stuff, the 90D might be a real necessity, specially if you ever intend to go up the mountains towing a ton+ trailer. Both for the performance and the fact that towing will eat up your range.
But for the X, if you're towing big stuff, the 90D might be a real necessity, specially if you ever intend to go up the mountains towing a ton+ trailer. Both for the performance and the fact that towing will eat up your range.
Last edited:
GasKilla
No Gas Know Peace
Not true. Both the 70D and 85D or 90D have 2 259HP motors but the 70D is limited by the power the battery can deliver to the motor and therefore it produces less HP than a 85D or 90D. So in theory 10 years from now you can upgrade the battery pack and achieve higher performance from a 70D because you now have a battery that can deliver more power to the motors.
Edit- spelling
- - - Updated - - -
It seems I mistakenly thought you were discussing the model S not X, but I believe these specifications would be the same between model lines.
I have to laugh when people discuss whether a 6 second 0-60 time is good enough. Y'all must be young, or have a really poor memory. 
All of these cars were about 6 seconds 0-60:
BMW M1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
BMW M3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Camaro_(third_generation)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvette_(C4)
Ferrari 308 GTB/GTS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Lotus Esprit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jaguar XJS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Maserati Biturbo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mercedes-Benz SL-Class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Porsche 928 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
All of these cars were about 6 seconds 0-60:
BMW M1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
BMW M3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Camaro_(third_generation)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvette_(C4)
Ferrari 308 GTB/GTS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Lotus Esprit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jaguar XJS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Maserati Biturbo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mercedes-Benz SL-Class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Porsche 928 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Thanks, I'm old enough to remember those cars, and quite happy to look back and savor the fact that my Roadster's acceleration crushes all those "fast" cars, and even my 2013 S85 beats them!
I have a 2013 85 as well. I'd love to have a P85D, but I think back to the 1980s for a reminder of just how quick the 85 is!
Tesla has totally crushed the "EVs are slow" meme. Good riddance to that lie. Anyone who knows how electric motors work isn't the least bit surprised that EVs can be made to be extremely quick indeed.
Looking forward to the "Maximum plaid" new Roadster, which I wouldn't be surprised if it comes out faster 0-60mph of all road cars and is able to reach 180-200 mph speeds (around 300km/h).
Since Tesla needs to kill each lie a million times, might as well go overboard if possible to leave 0.0000000000000 doubt.
exactly, I will probably refrain from doing much racing with my 5 year old in my X.I have to laugh when people discuss whether a 6 second 0-60 time is good enough. Y'all must be young, or have a really poor memory.
All of these cars were about 6 seconds 0-60:
anetfish
Member
For those who don't want to spend too much on MX, and don't really care the 1.2s on 0-60mi/30 mi extra range/slower charing/a few months more delay in delivery, does it make sense to order 70D and save the 13k difference of 90D and 70D for a few years later, when the battery price reduces to $200/kwh or $100/kwh, and upgrade the battery to 100D or even 120D?
I learnt from the forum that the motors of 70D and 90D are identical. It's just the smaller battery and the software that cause all the difference.
If today's battery cost is 13000/(90-70)=650$/kwh, let's say in 3 years, the battery cost goes down to $200/kwh due to the Giga factory and model 3,
at that time, 70D buyer can use the 13000 to upgrade to (13000+200*70*0.8-500)/200=120kwh battery where 0.8 is the discount rate and 500 is the labor.
In the $300/kwh scenario, 70D buyer can upgrade to (13000+300*70*0.8-500)/300~=100kwh, and in the $100/kwh scenario, (13000+100*70*0.8-500)/100=180kwh.
The idea is based on the expectation that the battery cost will go down faster in the next few years. What you think?
I learnt from the forum that the motors of 70D and 90D are identical. It's just the smaller battery and the software that cause all the difference.
If today's battery cost is 13000/(90-70)=650$/kwh, let's say in 3 years, the battery cost goes down to $200/kwh due to the Giga factory and model 3,
at that time, 70D buyer can use the 13000 to upgrade to (13000+200*70*0.8-500)/200=120kwh battery where 0.8 is the discount rate and 500 is the labor.
In the $300/kwh scenario, 70D buyer can upgrade to (13000+300*70*0.8-500)/300~=100kwh, and in the $100/kwh scenario, (13000+100*70*0.8-500)/100=180kwh.
The idea is based on the expectation that the battery cost will go down faster in the next few years. What you think?
MrBoylan
Member
It's an interesting theory if you can afford to wait for the 70D and if the 70D's 220 Mile (EPA) range is enough for your daily (and/or long distance) driving needs for the next few years. But today's battery cost is definitely *NOT* $13K for the 90 kWh battery. That's just the price differential between the 70 kWh battery and the 90 kWh battery. I believe the "list price" right now on a 90kWh battery is somewhere around $35K-$40K (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) so I think it will be quite some time before $13K can buy you an even larger capacity battery than that. Theoretically, you will get trade-in value on your 70 kWh battery to offset the cost, but after a few years, the capacity (and the value) of that battery will have diminished.
The writer David Nolan did an upgrade from a 60 kWh Model S to an 85 kWh model S. I believe it was a fairly simple (5 hour) job and his net upgrade cost was actually $17,000 for the upgrade (as opposed to the $8,000 more he would have paid for the S 85 had he bought that in the first place). But he got a basically new S 85 (at least as far as the battery is concerned). You can read more about his experience here:
Life With Tesla Model S: Battery Upgrade From 60 kWh To 85 kWh
BTW, the "list price" of the 85 kWh battery in 2013 (according to this article) was $44,564. But I'm sure it has changed since then.
-CB
This is one of the primary reasons I am going with the lower priced battery pack. We are somewhat isolated living in Denver. The Model X for me is an around town car and to/from ski weekend car. Getting 37 miles extra of range does not change this. I will wait for that point in time where price has come down enough, and range has grown enough, to swap out a battery and create a true road trip vehicle. If the time never comes, we will continue to use our ICE as our road trip car and the X for around town and short family trips.
anetfish
Member
I read again David Nolan's article. My math should consider also the new battery shipping and tax, which was ~3500 in David's case, including labor. So now it comes down to how much value remains in the old 70kwh battery. David's 60kwh battery got a 80% discount rate after one year. Anyway, after all those overhead, my strategy seems not that optimistic.
Then I'm puzzled why the price diff between 60kwh and 85kwh in David's case two years ago is 8000, but today the price diff between 70kwh and 90kwh is 13000? The battery price increased from 8000/25=320 two years ago to 13000/20=625 today for both X and S? The pricing seems weird...
Then I'm puzzled why the price diff between 60kwh and 85kwh in David's case two years ago is 8000, but today the price diff between 70kwh and 90kwh is 13000? The battery price increased from 8000/25=320 two years ago to 13000/20=625 today for both X and S? The pricing seems weird...
MrBoylan
Member
The $8K price difference was actually from when David originally bought the car, so I think that would have been mid 2012. It had gone up to a $10K difference between the two models in 2013. But the likely answer is that the price increase is not directly related to the *cost* increase. Buying a Model S or Model X today, you're getting the base 70 kWh battery at a discount, but paying a premium (per kWh) to upgrade to the top of the line battery.
The $13K differential on the Model X is identical to the differential on the Model S today between the 70 kWh pack and the 90 kWh pack. But on the X, you are also forced into getting the Air Suspension for an additional $2,500. It's not clear whether upgrading the 70D Model X battery to a 100kWh battery in a few years would also require you to get Smart Suspension. It's also likely that if you buy a 70D and decide to upgrade to a 90D even just a few weeks later, it would probably cost you significantly more than $13,000. As you said, shipping and labor costs, in addition to depreciation on the 70 kWh battery, plus whatever profit they're making on the 90kWh battery as an a-la-cart part.
It's similar to Autopilot: you can purchase the Autopilot Convenience Features package at initial purchase for $2500 but adding it later (via a software update) costs an additional $500 ($3,000 total). Tesla wants you to commit to the higher priced, more fully optioned item up front so they have that cash in hand.
I'm pretty sure that experience was rather rare, and people who have asked to upgrade batteries since have been told a flat-out no.
Sad. I'm hopeful that this is a temporary "no" and eventually (in a few years) Tesla will have a battery upgrade program, similar to the Roadster. They're kind of busy right now to address this, but I would think it would be relatively trivial to design a battery-upgrade path once they aren't resource constrained.
