You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
to be fair, manufacturers do this quite often, though typically through model year improvements. A car could have 300hp in 2018 and then a bump in power to 330hp in 2020, with zero or minimal MSRP increases. Same as options, heated seats could have been a $500 option in 2018, but becomes standard in 2020.
If you think about it, for those of us that bought the LR AWD back in 2018, the MSRP was almost the same as a performance is now.
Tesla also did this with Ludicrous mode or plus or whatever it was called on the S and X. used to be a $10-12k option (I don’t know the exact dollar amount), but now it comes included with the performance versions.
That said, while I don’t agree an acceleration increase to 3.2 sec 0-60 should be expected as free for existing LR AWD owners, I do see Telsa unlocking more power for the LR AWD at some future point “for free”.
Yeah it wasn’t derogatory, it was just saying part of the reason we understand the AWD didn’t get a full performance unlock was because of the 990 motors. Until they existed we were all sure every performance 3 (without PUP) was the same as every AWD. So far we haven’t seen any performance models with the 990 motor, but you never know.
I don’t think a performance unlock should be free. It should be a paid upgrade. The 2k accel boost is a great compromise for all AWD owners considering they could have done nothing at all.
How it more car than I paid for? It’s the same car but without the software block. It’s adding no additional functionality. It’s not entitlement, it’s what we paid for. I guess we should also pay for bug fixes as those were there when we bought the car.
If they sold it to me as having a 350 mile range and I was willing to buy it at that price why the heck would it bother me if I could upgrade to the 400 miles later? In fact Tesla's do hold back some battery capacity to keep the range higher as the battery degrades. They could unlock more range for your car.Bug fixes are no different if you are using the logic of “this is what it came with” or this is what you paid for.” I have never had a car that fixed known glitches that didn’t impact safety. And like I’ve stated, there is additional hardware options with the performance. And, as already stated, if margins allowed for a stealth than this is what the $2k should get you. Not halfway there. Fairness? If there are no hardware differences how was it “fair” to sell a stealth?
And calling it a performance upgrade is entirely disingenuous as it is merely lifting a software block. Would you be okay knowing the car could achieve 400 miles of range at the moment you purchased it but Tesla held it back because they could nickel and dime you all the way to 400 miles?
Exactly so if you want a direct comparison you have to look at the stealth P which is the P with none of those things. It's still more expensive than the LR AWDBut that is part of the performance package cost.
Exactly so if you want a direct comparison you have to look at the stealth P which is the P with none of those things. It's still more expensive than the LR AWD
My 2018 P3D Stealth was marketed as Performance and has the same hardware. So saying until recently is not true.If I was talking about stealths I would have stated such. It was not marketed as a performance until very recently. The hardware wasn’t the same, stop being purposefully dense. Or is it purposeful?
If they sold it to me as having a 350 mile range and I was willing to buy it at that price why the heck would it bother me if I could upgrade to the 400 miles later? In fact Tesla's do hold back some battery capacity to keep the range higher as the battery degrades. They could unlock more range for your car.
If I was talking about stealths I would have stated such. It was not marketed as a performance until very recently.
The hardware wasn’t the same, stop being purposefully dense. Or is it purposeful?
Then you're wrong yet again
The P3D- has been explicitly sold and marketed as the performance model since it was introduced in mid 2018.
In fact it was the standard performance version of the vehicle for most of 2018.
They also offered an additional "upgrade" package to the base performance model that added the brakes and giant wheels for another $5000.
Which is how we got the P3D+
The - or + means with or without the added package.
BOTH are performance models.
Except, it was.
All of 2018 and early-to-mid 2019 the P3D- and the LR AWD were exactly the same HW.
And since then, other than the rear motor they still are.
Are you ever not completely wrong?
Lol do you not understand what the word “completely” means? Your own post shows that I am not wrong. Mind blowing.
Welcome to the world of software pricing. Just because you have the ability to consume the full features doesn’t mean you get them for free.I truly don’t understand why the vast majority here don’t have a problem with being asked to pay for something they’ve already paid for. The ability for your car to accelerate faster is there. You paid for those motors. You paid for the battery pack. You paid for the software. Now you want to pay more to utilize those items. And attacking someone for “wanting something for free” either means you don’t understand what you have already paid for or means you need to check your fanboying.
320. Alright, if you are willing to part with additional money given those circumstances, have at it. I find this practice to be unethical. If I purchase a product that has X capabilities I expect to get that. I don’t expect to have to continue to provide more money to get the most of something I’ve already purchased. It’s not like I am asking for a free hardware update. This is something the car can natively do.
And that’s what you got. You paid for a car with a range of X and a 0-60 time of Y. How they achieve that is irrelevant. Like I said the software is an integral part of this car as much as anything. This is something ICE cars do with the ECU tune REGULARLY. You can pay money to get a new chip or have the ECU flashed to make the car faster and unlock power the manufacturer locked with software.
Yea try getting a BMW, Mustang or Lexus a FULL >.05 seconds 0-60 faster for $2K.Yup.
Only real difference here is you usually have to pay a 3rd party to flash the ECU to unlock the extra power the car "came with"
Instead, you can pay Tesla directly for the same thing ICE cars have been able to do for decades and nobody complains about it, AND not worry about it impacting your warranty either.
That's better
I see your point. But I think it’s a different scenario when you are talking about an application that doesn’t run the risk of harming your computer. No one can say for sure, but maybe it’s to cover the cost of extra warranty repairs in case the boost taxes the motors.We don’t really know enough about the software boost to know exactly what they did to increase the power in the AWD cars. Was it an expensive and elaborate piece of software that cost a substantial amount of money to develop and test, or did they just realize the AWD motors could handle more power and decide to release greater access to the battery for those who want to go faster?
Apple, Google and Microsoft routinely update their operating systems to provide new features and better performance. They do not charge for it. So I can understand why someone could look at that analogy and compare it to the Tesla Operating System.
I’m not going to argue about whether Tesla should charge $2K for this upgrade. They are a business and they don’t owe it to us. But I don’t think it’s out of the question that they could have offered it for free. Lots of us bought Model 3’s when we knew the operating system was full of bugs. We believed that Tesla would work them out and provide a more stable platform as well as new features that make the car work better.
We have some really strong opinions in this thread but I don’t see it as black and white either way as everyone wants it to be.