Ads which illustrate why I am so pissed about Tesla's marketing of the 160

[AnOutsider]

What if Tesla decided to remove Supercharging capabilities from all models, including your fully loaded Sig? How would you feel?

Personally, I wouldn't care. I got the 300 mile pack because I wanted a car that could go the distances I needed to go (trips to NYC at the outset). Beyond that and I'm taking my gasser anyway. PA just announced they're putting chargers on the turnpike, and while cool, once again I sort of don't care because anywhere I planned to go using the Turnpike, I've got the range for it. Philly? Check. Poconos? Check (and even there I'd likely be going to a cabin so I can charge there).

so yeah, the Superchargers were a more recent announcement and they had zero bearing on my decision to order a Model S. If Tesla cancelled all plans for them today, I would not be personally affected.

I think people that made reservations on the Model S (a rather expensive car) wanted the security in knowing that their car will support those technologies as they become more ubiquitous.

Technically it can support it, if they choose to upgrade when those technologies come about.

 

[dsm363]

What if Tesla decided to remove Supercharging capabilities from all models, including your fully loaded Sig? How would you feel? The fact that DC quick-charging isn't available much at the moment is of little consolation for those that were led to believe it was a feature of the Model S (i.e. all battery pack options). The technology will come eventually and I think people that made reservations on the Model S (a rather expensive car) wanted the security in knowing that their car will support those technologies as they become more ubiquitous.

I would be disappointed but I would still buy the car. I might not be able to get satellite radio unless I spend $1,500 for the panoramic roof too. I didn't even know about the Super Charging for the first 20 months my reservation was down. It was a pleasant surprise but I had no expectations that it would be common place for many, many years. If super charging was the one feature you can't live without, then the Model S might not be the car for you. It's disappointing I'm sure but for whatever reason, that's the direction Tesla decided to go. I wish they would find a way to add it back as an option at least on all the cars but that might not happen.
Telsa may provide a Chamdeo adapter (though it's unlikely) and they just announced their options. Maybe they'll be able to work something out with the 40kWh pack where you accept a reduced warranty (assuming there is no technical reason preventing super charger access).

 

[onlinespending]

Personally, I wouldn't care.

I'm glad to hear that it would work out in your situation and that DC quick-charging was not in your expectations. But the fact remains that DC quick-charging has long been advertized as a feature of the Model S (it is an EV afterall), so it shouldn't come as a shocker, even for those not affected by Tesla's decision, that those opting for the 40 kWh battery pack are to be a bit disappointed. The point I was trying to illustrate was that many 85 kWh reservation holders would be quite disappointed if they took away Supercharging as an option from their car, even if it isn't a concern in your particular case. Rather than the "you should have known better", or the "Supercharging isn't even available, don't worry" messages, I would expect people to be understanding of the frustration felt by the 40 kWh camp.

 

[dsm363]

I'm glad to hear that it would work out in your situation and that DC quick-charging was not in your expectations. But the fact remains that DC quick-charging has long been advertized as a feature of the Model S (it is an EV afterall), so it shouldn't come as a shocker, even for those not affected by Tesla's decision, that those opting for the 40 kWh battery pack are to be a bit disappointed. The point I was trying to illustrate was that many 85 kWh reservation holders would be quite disappointed if they took away Supercharging as an option from their car, even if it isn't a concern in your particular case. Rather than the "you should have known better", or the "Supercharging isn't even available, don't worry" messages, I would expect people to be understanding of the frustration felt by the 40 kWh camp.

I think most people understand but it's now at the point that people have to decide what to do now. For whatever reason, it seems Tesla isn't able to or isn't willing to add that feature to the 40 kWh car possibly without breaking the promise of the car at under $50,000. I'm sure there would be many people who were then angry at Tesla for lying about the base price in that scenario.

 

[Dennisf]

I think the problem can be easily solved when tesla just presents us with the standard equipment. Buyers who buy the standard car will stop looking at the things the don't get (or want to pay for) and start looking for al the kit that is included in their new car.

I'm not a marketing guy, but if you ask me the marketing department was not involved when they put the price and options list online. I bet they could have predicted everybody falling over each other about the things they don't get instead of looking what they are getting.

So my biggest question is: What is the standard equipment? I'm sure a lot of 40kw buyers will be very happy with what they are getting.

 

[dsm363]

I think the problem can be easily solved when tesla just presents us with the standard equipment. Buyers who buy the standard car will stop looking at the things the don't get (or want to pay for) and start looking for al the kit that is included in their new car.

I'm not a marketing guy, but if you ask me the marketing department was not involved when they put the price and options list online. I bet they could have predicted everybody falling over each other about the things they don't get instead of looking what they are getting.

So my biggest question is: What is the standard equipment? I'm sure a lot of 40kw buyers will be very happy with what they are getting.

The standard equipment is a 10kw charger (three times the Leaf I think) allowing you to charge at 40A. Not great for travel but will still allow you to take full advantage of the public charging networks around at 30A. I know, it's not super charging but it's still should be a great car and the best EV on the planet even at the base price. I agree, people are laser focused on what it doesn't have.

 

[ChadS]

The standard equipment is a 10kw charger (three times the Leaf I think)

10kW is indeed 3 times the rate of the Leaf's L2 charger.

However, the Leaf also has a 65kW CHAdeMO port (it was optional at first, but standard now). I think most people assumed the much more expensive Model S (even the 40kWh version) would at least match that. And it still may; Tesla hasn't announced their CHAdeMO plans. I hope Tesla just means that the 40kWh car can't do 90kW charging at a Supercharger, but is still allowed 65kW at a CHAdeMO station (or 40kW or whatever they want to put the limit at; the CHAdeMO chargers can scale down to whatever the car will take).

 

[dsm363]

10kW is indeed 3 times the rate of the Leaf's L2 charger.

However, the Leaf also has a 65kW CHAdeMO port (it was optional at first, but standard now). I think most people assumed the much more expensive Model S (even the 40kWh version) would at least match that. And it still may; Tesla hasn't announced their CHAdeMO plans. I hope Tesla just means that the 40kWh car can't do 90kW charging at a Supercharger, but is still allowed 65kW at a CHAdeMO station (or 40kW or whatever they want to put the limit at; the CHAdeMO chargers can scale down to whatever the car will take).

Good point. The Model S should at least match the Leaf in each category. The company is in a different position though in that they can't afford to take a loss on each car they sell for a year or two (I thought I read that about the Leaf) and I'm sure the 10kw charger costs more than the 3.3kw charger the Leaf has. Anyway, I really hope they at least allow CHAdeMO charging for the Model S as you said. Those will be much more common that the Super Charger to start anyway.

 

[onlinespending]

10kW is indeed 3 times the rate of the Leaf's L2 charger.

However, the Leaf also has a 65kW CHAdeMO port (it was optional at first, but standard now). I think most people assumed the much more expensive Model S (even the 40kWh version) would at least match that. And it still may; Tesla hasn't announced their CHAdeMO plans. I hope Tesla just means that the 40kWh car can't do 90kW charging at a Supercharger, but is still allowed 65kW at a CHAdeMO station (or 40kW or whatever they want to put the limit at; the CHAdeMO chargers can scale down to whatever the car will take).

Exactly. Some form of DC quick-charging would be nice (and was to be expected given everything that Tesla has said all along and the fact that even the little Leaf supports it). It appears they haven't even worked out the kinks with Supercharging and the 60 kWh battery pack option, because it's a TBD priced option. I can't imagine they'll charge at the full 90 kW rate, but will be a scaled down amount. So too should the 40 kWh pack option have a scaled down DC quick-charging option. I'm somewhat hopeful Tesla is listening and will make something available for the 40 kWh option.

 

[dpeilow]

it seems Tesla isn't able to or isn't willing to add that feature to the 40 kWh car possibly without breaking the promise of the car at under $50,000

It's the fact that it's not on the options list that is the problem. If they have to make it an option to hit $50k, I think people would understand.

 

[dsm363]

It's the fact that it's not on the options list that is the problem. If they have to make it an option to hit $50k, I think people would understand.

I agree. I wonder if that was a marketing/management decision based on offering the 8 year warranty? I don't know but I hope Tesla offers an explanation or figures out a way to add that as an option, even if it's expensive. I think it would make everyone happy that way. Tesla can still say they're delivering a car under $50,000 and everyone gets most of what they want.

 

[brianman]

What if Tesla decided to remove Supercharging capabilities from all models, including your fully loaded Sig? How would you feel?

If they dropped the Sig Perf cost by $1,500 by making Supercharging an option, I probably wouldn't take the option. Just another data point...

 

[onlinespending]

If they dropped the Sig Perf cost by $1,500 by making Supercharging an option, I probably wouldn't take the option. Just another data point...

And if they made it a $1500 option to add to the 40 kWh model, I'd take it. Aren't options great?

 

[brianman]

And if they made it a $1500 option to add to the 40 kWh model, I'd take it. Aren't options great?

Agreement!

 

[jkirkebo]

And if they made it a $1500 option to add to the 40 kWh model, I'd take it. Aren't options great?

Yep. So please give us a CHAdeMO option too. I'm not buying the car without it. I don't care if it's an adapter or a socket in the frunk as long as I can use all the fast chargers. The Model S would be replacing our long-distance diesel car, without QC it can't do long-distance and would thus be of no use to us. I won't buy one just to replace our Leaf, it is way too large and expensive for just running errands around town and commuting. And I love the Leaf, no way I'm getting rid of it

If the CHAdeMO option was $5k it would still be acceptable.

 

[Norbert]

I agree. I wonder if that was a marketing/management decision based on offering the 8 year warranty? I don't know but I hope Tesla offers an explanation or figures out a way to add that as an option, even if it's expensive.

For the 60 kWh pack, they did figure out a way to make it an option, as that is what it is. And apparently they are still thinking about the subject since the price is still TBD. (On this list, the only TBD).

Whatever the chances are that Tesla might be able to change its mind about this, I'd guess the chances for a CHAdeMO adapter are higher. Though, for marketing reasons, it *might* be announced only after the 300 mile version has been launched, its use demonstrated in practice by actual customers, and reflected upon by the media. Certainly, the new webpage contains the sentence "Other adapters available for purchase", though that refers more likely to all the adapters available for the Roadster. But we heard someone saying they might be working on a CHAdeMO adapter without being sure whether it will become a product. It might be that with the 40 kWh chemistry and by Tesla's luxury quality standards, they might have to set the charging limit below 50 kW, which again wouldn't be the real thing and not the kind of thing Tesla would want to stand for. I think it will also have much to do with the question of how much Tesla wants to focus its own energy and attention, and that of potential customers and the media, on long range (200+ miles) + Supercharging. So they might consider it counterproductive to stretch themselves in that direction, but rather focus on making the 230 mile option in the future, and eventually Bluestar, more affordable.

 

[mscottring]

For what it's worth, I'm with you on this. I brought this up on another Tesla forum and was promptly shouted down by the fans. The fact is I believe Tesla knew from day one that the only way they could get this level of performance was with the 300 mile battery pack. They also happened to know that they needed to get reservations on the books, so they decided to keep some of those details to themselves. Lets face it, it would have been really easy to place clear and detailed information on their site stating, "0-60 time is with 300 mile battery pack only". But they didn't.

As you all know, I'm pretty upset about what I feel was misleading advertising by Tesla for their 160 Model S. A forum member sent me a link to an archived version of Tesla's website, pre-option pricing. The link to the archived page is here: http://webarchive.teslamotors.com/models/ I don't know how old the archived page is, but it is a good example of what I'm talking about. I haven't had a chance to review their Model S pamphlet from two months ago, but at this point do I really need to?

I've attached three images. I had to crop them to remove my email header and didn't have time to make them prettier, sorry about that. However, you can clearly see that Tesla marketed the $49,900 Model S as having a 0-60 time of 5.6 seconds and a 45-minute Quick Charge. One page indicates, correctly, that the range is 'Up to 300 Miles', while the other simply states '300 mile range'. On every page, the price is listed at $49,900.

But wait, you say, there is an asterisk next to the price! Obviously that indicates that these specs apply only to the more expensive models? Nope. If you look at the last picture, I included the note pertaining to the asterisk: That the $49,900 price was after a federal tax credit. Wow, nice of them to let us know!

If Tesla did not deliver on these claims, it wouldn't be too big an issue. However, they did deliver. They just delivered it for the higher-end Model S. I find it very hard to believe that they have technical limitations which prevented them from delivering QC to the 160, and I find it equally hard to imagine they wouldn't know that the 0-60 performance wouldn't apply to the 160. Even posters here state that they knew the battery size would limit the 160 from achieving that 0-60 time. If forum posters familiar w/ EVs understood that, Tesla must have.

Again, the issue is that Tesla misrepresented their product to reservation holders like myself. There may even be non-reservation holders who heard about the performance and filed it in their mental archives for the day that the vehicle actually comes out. When they hear that the car is out and meets those specs, they'll excitedly head right on down to a Tesla store and ask to see it...only to be shown the more expensive models.

"But I thought it was only $49k?" Oh yeah, well we have that model but it doesn't meet those specs.
"So you're telling me that you did indeed meet those specs, but they're only for the more expensive car? Yes sir, very good sir!

"But that's kinda shady, ain't it?


And before someone says, 'But you don't know, maybe they will offer a 45-minute Quick Charge!', let me preempt you with a question:

If they do not offer it, then will you agree that they misrepresented it?

 

[VolkerP]

The Model S should at least match the Leaf in each category.

Sorry, but Tesla decided to go mid-to-long range, high energy density, high safety, mid-to-low power density with their battery pack. You cannot have both high energy density and high power density in one chemistry.

 

[jcstp]

Sorry, but Tesla decided to go mid-to-long range, high energy density, high safety, mid-to-low power density with their battery pack. You cannot have both high energy density and high power density in one chemistry.

I think he only meant that he want the 40kw batterypack S also to have possibility for quickcharge! Same as the Leaf does!
At least CHADEMO speed. Not the full speed of supercharger

 

[heems]

I for one whole heartedly support Tesla. I think all this point by point comparisons and hanging on to single words like "base" and "up to" from documents from 3 years ago when the car was nothing but vaporware is silly. Time to grow up. If you can do better no one's stopping you. You don't like Tesla's effort, fine go buy another car but quit playing victim and poo-pooing those that have stuck their necks out there...