-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Also, regarding the suggestion to call my DS -- I don't actually have the phone number for my DS, only his email address. No phone number is shown for him from my X's page on teslamotors.com, and in the email correspondence I've received from him so far (1 reply), there's no phone in his email sig.
I guess if I wanted to push the issue I'd call my local SC or a main Tesla number and ask people until I reached him, but not sure how effective that will be.
I guess if I wanted to push the issue I'd call my local SC or a main Tesla number and ask people until I reached him, but not sure how effective that will be.
So to sum up, they are being dishonest by posting a lower range number than the math says they can do?
By that logic they would also be dishonest for using the S85D range numbers for the S90D, at least until the last website update.
I confirmed a 70D in February. They changed the design Spec to say 75D. They gave existing orders a free upgrade.
Yes. There's another thread on this forum speculating that Tesla artificially lowered the listed range of the X 90D to reduce cannibalization of X P90D sales. There may be other explanations such as maybe they hadn't finalized the active vs inactive spoiler decision on the X 90D, or maybe the EPA test used different wheels, or maybe the powertrains are actually different between the S and X. But button line is simple math shows a large discrepancy in relative ranges between the S/X 90D and the S/X P90D.
@dropd, I took delivery of a 90D. Given the situation you're in, making the same decision today, I'd still stick with the 90D. Comparing apples to apples, it's a $10k difference since Smart Air Suspension is included in the 90D. If this is something you don't want, then you can view it as a $12500 discrepancy. The other benefit to a 90D + Smart Air is you can do some towing. Even those who didn't order the towing package appear to have received a limited towing option (up to 3500 lbs). I don't know that Tesla will continue to deliver this way, but that provides a lot of extra flexibility.
It'll be toughest when the 100D comes out in a month and the range is up in the 280/290 range.. but I'm going to enjoy the car regardless.
@commasign, my average Wh/mi with my 90D is currently hovering around 330. 257 miles * 330 Wh/mi = 84.81kWh. That's probably a reasonable estimate for usable size of the pack. Maybe they overstated the P90D and were more fair with the 90D.. or maybe the difference really isn't all that great.
It'll be toughest when the 100D comes out in a month and the range is up in the 280/290 range.. but I'm going to enjoy the car regardless.
@commasign, my average Wh/mi with my 90D is currently hovering around 330. 257 miles * 330 Wh/mi = 84.81kWh. That's probably a reasonable estimate for usable size of the pack. Maybe they overstated the P90D and were more fair with the 90D.. or maybe the difference really isn't all that great.
NeverFollow
Active Member
I would wait for the 100D!!! might just happen soon, which would make sense: 75D and 100D.
one hour ago I noticed the same thing... (70 kW Battery) but i just checked 2 minutes ago and the 75D now hoas a 75 kW battery.
Right, it just doesn't seem to me like $10k (or 9.5k with $500 change fee) is worth 20 miles of claimed range on the battery that we might never ever need, plus marginally (?) shorter supercharging times for the very infrequent road tripping we would do. If I were to keep the smart air with the 75D and with the accessory hitch (not the full tow package), would the stealth 3500lb towing still be there? Sounds like it plausibly might.
The Supercharging time savings aren't major. They're something - and sometimes it's nice, but you're right, it's not much. Your financial situation will dictate what's worth it and what's not. I think the 75D offers a pretty great value. I don't know how often I'm going to tow a trailer, but since we're replacing a very utilitarian van, I wanted to ensure I have some flexibility. Storage is limited in the X.
One thing I tell people a lot around here - you might not think you'll be road tripping, but you also could be surprised. I averaged well under 5000 miles a year in my vehicles before I got a Tesla. My 2-year old Model S has over 32k miles. You'd be surprised how much more fun and compelling it can be to take an electric road trip.
pvogel
Member
Boy! Ain't that the truth! I've been jonesing for a road trip since I got the X just under 4 weeks ago. Since I have to do all the driving on a road trip (my wife has low vision and cannot drive) they exhaust me, but I'm really looking forward to a shortish road trip to Bakersfield this weekend for a contest! I'm *looking* for excuses to drive
Ben W
Chess Grandmaster (Supervised)
I'm guessing that the change in top speed from 140mph to 130mph could be related to a change in gearing ratios, designed to improve EPA efficiency at the expense of top speed and 0-60 performance.
In the S (and 90D X), as I understand it, the gearing ratio of the rear motor is optimized for low speed / high acceleration, and the front motor optimized for high speed. If Tesla moderated both of these gearing ratios in the 75D to be closer together, it would decrease both top speed and acceleration, but improve efficiency and range at medium speeds. Could that be what's going on?
Another factor to consider: the "75" and "90" figures are rounded, not precise. (And the numbers are based on the maximum theoretical lab capacity of the cells, not their real-world capacity.) So it could be that the "75" is really 79 in the lab, but they had to round down because they couldn't quite contrive that it was 80, and the "90" really is 90 in the lab. So instead of a 90/75 = 20% additional capacity, it's actually only 90/79 = 14% additional capacity. This sort of thing could narrow the range gap as well.
If it were me, I would still find a lot of value with the larger battery. Not only for the better performance, but because after 8 years of driving, the range would have degraded to roughly what the 75D is brand-new, and that would still be plenty. Whereas if you start with the 75D, after 8 years the range might have dropped to the point where you'll be looking at a replacement battery. Real-world supercharging speed is also significantly faster with the 90D, because you may need to charge up to 80% instead of 90% to drive a given leg of a trip, and charging toward the high end of the pack gets very slow. And of course, resale / trade-in value will be significantly higher with the larger battery and higher performance, so you will recoup some of the costs in the end.
In the S (and 90D X), as I understand it, the gearing ratio of the rear motor is optimized for low speed / high acceleration, and the front motor optimized for high speed. If Tesla moderated both of these gearing ratios in the 75D to be closer together, it would decrease both top speed and acceleration, but improve efficiency and range at medium speeds. Could that be what's going on?
Another factor to consider: the "75" and "90" figures are rounded, not precise. (And the numbers are based on the maximum theoretical lab capacity of the cells, not their real-world capacity.) So it could be that the "75" is really 79 in the lab, but they had to round down because they couldn't quite contrive that it was 80, and the "90" really is 90 in the lab. So instead of a 90/75 = 20% additional capacity, it's actually only 90/79 = 14% additional capacity. This sort of thing could narrow the range gap as well.
If it were me, I would still find a lot of value with the larger battery. Not only for the better performance, but because after 8 years of driving, the range would have degraded to roughly what the 75D is brand-new, and that would still be plenty. Whereas if you start with the 75D, after 8 years the range might have dropped to the point where you'll be looking at a replacement battery. Real-world supercharging speed is also significantly faster with the 90D, because you may need to charge up to 80% instead of 90% to drive a given leg of a trip, and charging toward the high end of the pack gets very slow. And of course, resale / trade-in value will be significantly higher with the larger battery and higher performance, so you will recoup some of the costs in the end.
Last edited:
ssq
Member
Yes, I am now super stoked I ordered the 70D => now 75D and did not splurge the additional 15.5k, I found it very hard to justify the massive difference for the extra 37 miles (now 20?) of range.
BrianD
Member
I do not recall seeing the 72 amp charger option when I originally ordered (Jan) my 70D. Is that newly available now with the 75D or did I just miss it?
It used to be hidden as an Easter egg on the configuration, for some bizarre reason. You had to type the word "charger" anywhere on the page, and it would appear.
flyhigh123
Member
Another nice bump is the matte obeche trim is now $750, but was default when i ordered so it feels like i'm getting a few perks
Wearing a slightly sneakier hat, it may be purely software limited to 130 for the 75D. With the range gap closing between the base model and the 90D, it gives them a stat that gives a perceived differentiation between the 75D from the 90D on the build page while having almost no actual impact. (i.e. How many people are really going to use the difference between 130 and 155, and how often?)
Similar threads
