70D vs. 90D?

[Oloron]

I'm curious about people's thoughts about the 70D vs. 90D.

My wife and I have put down our deposit and will be configuring our Model X order after a test drive early next week. A little background:
- This would primarily be my wife's car.
- Vast majority of use will be shuttling kids around town - around 5k miles/year.
- If we do drive somewhere farther with the family (e.g. vacation, etc.), this is the car we'd use.
- We tend to hold cars a long time - the car it's replacing is 14 years old.
- My wife couldn't care less about things like 0-60 times.

All things equal, less expensive is better, but curious if people have thoughts (or comparable experience with the S) on the trade-offs between the 70D and the 90D. In particular:
- Any sense if the range difference is that noticeable if doing a longer drive?
- We'd plan to hold it a long time, so it may be moot, but is there any indication if 70's or 90's depreciate at different rates?
- The 90D comes with the Smart Suspension. Should we care?

Thanks!

 

[vandacca]

If you can afford it, go with 90D so that your family trips will be easier to plan, especially in colder climate. Otherwise, if you weren't going to use the Model-X for long distance travel, the 70D would have be sufficient. However, the 70D will not begin deliveries until the later half of 2016, so there is would also be a delay in receiving your 70D (which may not matter to you).

If you weren't concerned about long distance travel right now and happy with the 70D, you *may* have the option in the future to upgrade your battery pack. Tesla hasn't officially announced battery pack upgrades, but have hinted that once the battery loses significant range, they will be providing upgrades to the latest battery technology. This should mean you could upgrade the battery pack to the latest size (e.g. your 70D could become a 100D in 10 years). However, nothing is confirmed right now.

 

[fengshui]

Since no one has a 70D, no one knows how it will compare. That said, here's why I went with a 70D over a 90D:

• The range difference is present, but to me the only times it will come up is on long travels. It will come up in two ways: Longer supercharger stops, and less ability to push beyond the supercharger/destination charging network.
  • The longer supercharger stops doesn't seems like a big one to me. Sure, for long cross-country drives, you may take an extra hour or so per day due to slower supercharging. Unless you're doing a ton of road trips, this works out to maybe 10 hours a year of waiting. In a few edge cases, you might even have to stop at a non-supercharger to make it to your destination where in a 90D you wouldn't. Lets say that happens twice a year, for another two hours of waiting.
  • Less ability to push beyond the supercharger network is more of a concern, but the supercharger/destination charging network is growing fast. There will always be very rural areas that you can't make it to on a 70D that you could reach on a 90D. Personally, I don't see myself travelling to those places more than once every couple of years and when I do, I'll just rent an ICE. I can even take the Tesla on the cross-country part of my trip, then rent the ICE I need for the rural portion of the trip and return it when done.
  • Given that my estimated annual delay from the 70D is about 10 hours, and the 90D costs me an additional $17,550 after tax, even over 10 years, I'm still can pay myself $170/hr in savings for that waiting time. I'm okay with that.
• Generally from the Model S experiences, the more expensive the Tesla, the more it depreciates. Cars also depreciate faster if they have features that are superseded. When Autopilot 2.0 comes out for Model X, I expect all Autopilot 1.0 cars to lose some value.
• On the suspension, most people with the S feel that you really can't tell the difference between the two suspension options. The Smart Suspension is nice if you regularly need the extra height to not scrape on a driveway at your home or work, but otherwise, they're both great, just different. Smart suspension does have a small risk of needing expensive repairs over the long term, in a way that coil is unlikely to.
• The cost delta of the 90D is really big, when you add in the required smart suspension, the towing package (at $750, it's a no-brainer once you have the required suspension), and the tax. If I could get a 90D for only $8-10k over the 70D, I would be tempted, but not at $17k.

 

[Ldub22]

I am facing the same decision with my wife and she opted for the 70D. Our reasoning: she has no interest in acceleration AT ALL, so the better off-the-line jump is wasted on her; she doesn't want the air suspension; all superchargers that we would use for family trips are well within range; and it is WAY CHEAPER. I, of course, as a P85D (soon to be P85D) driver am appalled, but I understand her reasoning that the 90D and the 70D are essentially the same vehicles, aside from lesser acceleration and marginally less range. Plus, as a 70D owner, we will probably get a better built car as they get all the teething problems done on the P90D and 90D owners who JUST COULDN'T WAIT!!!

 

[ohmman]

One thing to keep in mind is that you might find yourself more interested in road trips. It could be my stage in life/the age of my kids, etc. but I've put 30k miles on my MS in less than 2 years, after having put less than 90k miles on my '99 Acura in the 15 years leading up to it. That's about a 2.5x increase, mostly due to road tripping.

On road trips, that extra range can often be the difference between making or not making some of the bigger stretches. Also, don't forget range degradation, as you said you keep the vehicle for a long time. That range on the 70D may be 10-15% less by the time you're ready to trade up.

I chose the 90D because I wanted maximum range. I didn't pick my P85 MS based on range as much as power; I just didn't think the range would be a big deal with my usage. However, I've used every last bit of that range many times over.

It all depends on how you use the car, so really think on it.

 

[fengshui]

I chose the 90D because I wanted maximum range. I didn't pick my P85 MS based on range as much as power; I just didn't think the range would be a big deal with my usage. However, I've used every last bit of that range many times over.

How many times over, specifically? And when you did use that range, what other choices would you have made had you known when you started that you would have 20 miles less range? $17.5k is a LOT of money. I could buy a Spark EV for that, or a lightly used LEAF.

There is also the 5-6 year possibility of the pack upgrade to 100+ kWh, or at any time when I needed the additional range.

 

[ohmman]

How many times over, specifically? And when you did use that range, what other choices would you have made had you known when you started that you would have 20 miles less range? $17.5k is a LOT of money. I could buy a Spark EV for that, or a lightly used LEAF.

You are correct that everyone must consider what $17k means to them. Your financial situation is a big factor in the decision.

I don't know a specific number for how many times. A lot. Perhaps I'd have planned differently, but there are some stretches that either require an RV campsite stop, or no stop at all. Shasta Supercharger - Bend, Oregon is one example of a trip I've taken a few times that wouldn't be possible without a stop if I had a 60/70. One time I had to stop anyway because of rain and wind conditions (reverse trip, though). Coming home from Yosemite without stopping was another. If I'd stopped, I would have taken a route that was significantly further.

If you stick to only highways and only Superchargers, you're probably fine. Or if you prioritize your time differently, or any other number of things. I just wanted to share my experience - for me, I value my time saved well at or above the $17.5k level you quoted. YMMV.

 

[fengshui]

I don't know a specific number for how many times. A lot. Perhaps I'd have planned differently, but there are some stretches that either require an RV campsite stop, or no stop at all. Shasta Supercharger - Bend, Oregon is one example of a trip I've taken a few times that wouldn't be possible without a stop if I had a 60/70. One time I had to stop anyway because of rain and wind conditions (reverse trip, though). Coming home from Yosemite without stopping was another. If I'd stopped, I would have taken a route that was significantly further.

Interesting. That Mt. Shasta to Bend, OR run is quite tight in a 70. I might feel required to take the long way around, or stop in Klamath Falls for a traditional charge. Thanks for the example. (The 2016 map puts a supercharger in Bend, but that's still not enough to straight-shot it from Mt. Shasta in a 70, especially in bad weather. Eventually, Tesla will put a supercharger in Chemult or somewhere similar, but that's not even on the 2016 map at all.) Hmmmmmm.

 

[Rockster]

If your interest is longevity, I think the bigger battery now is the way to go. While there may be a battery upgrade path a decade from how, there's no certainty that there will or that it will be cost effective when it's available.

 

[kiefer]

I have the exactly the same thoughts. The small difference I have is that we might be facing an additional tax on EVs here in Denmark, that will make the 90D roughly 50.000 USD more expensive than the 70D. The biggest problem is that the danish tax government can not seem to make a decision on wether this tax applies or not on my car. The configuration of the car is only about a week away with delivery within the next couple of months.

So the decision is a little hard, should I go with 90D and risk a tax of 50.000 USD or go with the 70D. It would really have been nice if they had some of the 70Ds on the road for real life comparison...

One more thing, the 70D has a mile rating of 248 miles on the page with danish language and 220 miles in US. So I get 28 miles more range just for speaking danish...

 

[GoTslaGo]

You should check out some of the range issues folks are having with their Model X (P90Ds). Larger vehicle, larger profile, more weight etc is contributing to lesser range than expected (and of course the P and L don't help). If you're only planning local driving maybe less of an issue especially if you have another backup long range vehicle.

But I'm thinking that you'll love the vehicle and want to start road tripping in it, and range will become an issue. I'm planning on getting an X90D, and told my wife we should start trying longer distance drives with the S70D to see about the range. But if they start upgrading the Model S with some features of the X (auto doors, etc...) I may opt for a S90D instead for road tripping.

Have fun!

 

[kiefer]

We already have a new S85 with Auto pilot for longer daily use. The X would be once a year roadtrip around europe. The daily use of the Model X would be for the wife to drive around. We are most definitely going for a non-performance, mostly based on the price tag. I do not even dare to think about the tax for a P90DL ;-)

 

[fengshui]

You should check out some of the range issues folks are having with their Model X (P90Ds). Larger vehicle, larger profile, more weight etc is contributing to lesser range than expected (and of course the P and L don't help).

Do you have citations for this?

 

[goneskiian]

It's hard to tell so far since most X's have been delivered in the dead of winter with new tires.

Roamer has made some posts in the Model X Range thread as he's got the most miles on an X by far.

I'm curious which Tesla (S or X) will have less of a range hit when loaded with 4 bikes or so on a hitch mount rack. My thinking is an X due to the higher profile, but it's already starting at a disadvantage compared to an S. So, will that range hit be offset enough to justify an X over an S? I dunno. We think we want a higher driving position too so that has to factor in as well.

Anyway, sorry for the some somewhat of a thread derail. I'll post my questions in a more appropriate thread as well.

 

[ohmman]

I'm curious which Tesla (S or X) will have less of a range hit when loaded with 4 bikes or so on a hitch mount rack. My thinking is an X due to the higher profile, but it's already starting at a disadvantage compared to an S. So, will that range hit be offset enough to justify an X over an S? I dunno. We think we want a higher driving position too so that has to factor in as well.

My feeling is that you're going to get a similar range hit on either the S or X with your bike setup. The idea that the larger face of the X will somehow "shield" the bikes and cause less range damage is, I think, an incorrect notion. The entire vehicle is set up to create laminar flow. Disrupting it at the rear is going to be a problem no matter which model you get. At least, that's my guess.

I think a MS will always have a better range than a MX, no matter what you've got on the back.

 

[omgwtfbyobbq]

My guess is that it depends on the size of the bikes/rack and the rear silhouette. If it sticks out from an S more than an X, the S will probably take a larger hit as a percentage of range. On the flip side, if the difference between the two is small enough, there will be a similar reduction in absolute range. I don't think it would affect the laminar flow because the rear of a vehicle is subject to pressure drag, but it can still make that worse.

 

[ratsbew]

I'd go with the 70D since it will cover 99% of your needs. You just need to go into it realizing that a few times per year on longer trips you will have to take longer breaks. Use the $17,000 saved to enjoy the local amenities (shopping, food, etc.) while your 70D charges up. That's decent quality family time actually that you're "forcing" yourself into.

 

[goneskiian]

My feeling is that you're going to get a similar range hit on either the S or X with your bike setup. The idea that the larger face of the X will somehow "shield" the bikes and cause less range damage is, I think, an incorrect notion. The entire vehicle is set up to create laminar flow. Disrupting it at the rear is going to be a problem no matter which model you get. At least, that's my guess.

I think a MS will always have a better range than a MX, no matter what you've got on the back.

Kinda what I was afraid of. I guess it really comes down to is how much we'll actually use it like this and how important the higher seating position is.

My guess is that it depends on the size of the bikes/rack and the rear silhouette. If it sticks out from an S more than an X, the S will probably take a larger hit as a percentage of range. On the flip side, if the difference between the two is small enough, there will be a similar reduction in absolute range. I don't think it would affect the laminar flow because the rear of a vehicle is subject to pressure drag, but it can still make that worse.

That's what I was thinking too, that the larger rear end of the X would shield the bikes better (hiding them in the dirty air off the back) and thus not affect the range quite as much. Since the X is already at a range disadvantage I doubt the bikes would make up that difference, even if there was one.

 

[Oceanwolf]

I stick with my 70D decision. The only issue that I will have is to use my 06 Mariner Hybrid until it shows up. I need to return my ML350 Bluetec in May

 

[Oloron]

Thanks for all the replies! (Apologies for not saying so earlier, been one of those weekends)

For what it's worth, we did the test drive/"Meet the X" event today. Impressive car - first one we seen that "checks all the boxes" for what we're looking for. Unfortunately, it costs 50% more than anything else we've looked at.


Given how much we liked it, the list of impressive stuff would make for a long list, though I will say that seeing it back itself into a parking space using autopilot is a very "we live in the future" sort of moment.

On the negative side, I would note that the interaction with the doors is a little questionable. The attendant was cautioning us to always close all doors electronically. The passenger side front door on our test drive model was having issues because someone physically swung it closed hard. Not sure how hard a fix it would be. I suppose it could be solved by either releasing the tension on the motor when it senses a hard push, or just by beeping when it senses a hard push to remind the user to not do that. In any case, it's very intuitive to just swing the doors closed, so that's something they'll need to address eventually.