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

[ckessel]

I wonder if the 40kWh battery could do 5.6, but the discharge rate would harm the batteries and so Tesla decided to limit acceleration to whatever discharge limit was non-damaging.

 

[Cobos]

They also didn't say that it *would* be eligible.

Tesla has said all along that details could change and that as those details were released reservation holders would be given the option to change their minds. I understand that some of these details are not matching some people's utopian mental models of their Model S, but those people really need to take a deep breath.

Assuming Tesla can sell a car in Norway with charging faster than 3.0kW is not an utopian mental model. As an investor from Tesla second largest customer group I am worried that unless they get the charging handled properly here they will loose out on a LOT of sales.

We have one of the largest GNP per capita and due to egalitarian wages and expensive ICE cars there are a lot of potential customers for Tesla in Norway. They are competing on price with a higher spec Ford Fusion here, so to get customers cross-shopping between a Ford Fusion and a Model S they need the base-model to be capable enough. THAT includes sensible quick-charging.

Cobos

 

[EVNow]

Tesla has said all along that details could change and that as those details were released reservation holders would be given the option to change their minds. I understand that some of these details are not matching some people's utopian mental models of their Model S, but those people really need to take a deep breath.

Bad assumptions in this post. As I wrote elsewhere - the Tesla rep I talked to yesterday in the store said she had been telling everyone supercharger would be available on all models and was surprised to see the news.

 

[de704]

Just order two Big Macs instead of one while you are waiting!

If they allow Chademo connection there will be no difference.

So your being good to the planet with your Model S but bad to yourself with the Mickey Dees

 

[de704]

Bad assumptions in this post. As I wrote elsewhere - the Tesla rep I talked to yesterday in the store said she had been telling everyone supercharger would be available on all models and was surprised to see the news.

Yah, In my experience the Model S sales people can be hit or miss on their knowledge. Which is funny, It's not like they're selling anything. They should have time to keep up with the specs.

 

[tnawara]

Agreed. An individual rep's word - although the only information we may have at a particular point in time - is not official word from Tesla.

 

[EVNow]

Agreed. An individual rep's word - although the only information we may have at a particular point in time - is not official word from Tesla.

Wrong. Tesla employees salesreps in the stores are representing Tesla officially.

Ofcourse, we know all the sales reps make mistakes. So, that is not the point.

The point is that your claim that "some of these details are not matching some people's utopian mental models of their Model S" is totally bogus. Even the Tesla sales reps thought QC would be in all models - so hardly utopian mental model of some people.

As I've written elsewhere I don't really understand why a few who aren't planning to buy the 160 miler are so dismissive of the concerns of people who want to buy the 160 miler. Vey snobbish, IMHO.

 

[dsm363]

How was anything tnawara said dismissive or snobbish? Are you really saying someone buying a $80,000 luxury sedan is looking down on someone buying a $50,000 luxury sedan? Please stop acting like you are being oppressed. People understand why you may be frustrated and upset but things are the way they are. Time to use your energy to contact Tesla and lobby for the changes you want.

 

[William13]

Have you ever tried to order a car before? I think the Tesla employees have a very good grasp of their product especially when I compare other car dealers. Occasional lapses notwithstanding.

QC would fry the battery in the 40. Get the second charger and HPC and get a half charge in one hour. This is very similar to the QC giving half charge in 30 minutes. The time for a full fill is probably even closer percentage wise.

 

[cinergi]

I can see why those opting for 160 are feeling like those getting 300 don't get it (and even snobbish). I've been staying out of these threads because I'm getting a 300-miler and I'm having a hard time putting myself in 160-miler's shoes. While reading the posts of 160-milers vs. 300-milers, I do pick up on the tone EVNow's calling out. Clearly there's a lot of passion in this area, and 1) I hope Tesla's reading it (but tempering it with reality -- what percentage of people are truly upset? They can't please everyone AND run a business) and 2) folks take the time to voice their concerns directly to Tesla.
This is a new market, a new company, and new technology. It's not going to go perfectly.

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

I can only afford a 160, well really not even that one but I am planning on getting a 300 because I figure there is no reason to ever spend more that 30k on a car and if I'm going to spend over 50K then why not spend over 90K? If I still lived in the Bay area I would get a 160. Living in Humboldt though, there is no way I would be able to get out of the area safely w/ a 160 so 300 it is.
I still think the 160 is pretty sweet and If it is your commute car, perfect. If you need to go on a long trip, rent a car. You will also put less miles on your S and save plenty of money in the long run. Complaints about the acceleration are pretty weak. 6.5s is decent for a sedan. The QC shouldn't be necessary if this is a commute car & I think if your commute is more than 15 min/miles or so then there is a real problem with our society (duh)
my commute is 2.5 miles( 5 min) and If it wasn't wet for so much of the year I would make an electric trike (which I plan on doing anyways)

on another note, when I was asking questions about the roadster at Menlo the reps didn't have answers for most of my technical questions but at the factory there was quite a bit of knowledge since many engineers were there and they could direct you to an engineer/employee that had an area of expertise. I think they said the average employee age is 25yrs so many have some learning to do but it is no excuse for giving out mis-information about the options.

 

[dhrivnak]

I must say I was very pleasantly surprised with the overall pricing on the Model S. Having designed and built and EV and two plug-in hybrids, I really feel Tesla is very agressive on the pricing. Seriously try to find a quality glider and the components to even get a 7 second 0-60 and 100 mile range and I seriously doubt one could do so for $50,000.

I agree $3700 for the tech package while on the high side is no different than any other car I have purchased where I have though many options were overpriced. I wish the world was not that way but I also wish I could buy a loaf of bread for $1.

Following Tesla and owning a Roadster I have found Tesla to be as open an upfront as ANY other company and in my humble opinion Tesla has been much better than average and as I think about out I am not aware of any company that has been more open than Tesla.

Going back to the accleration limited on the 160 mile pack I do believe that is a technical limitation. On home built EV's the discharge current id directly proportional to the size of the pack. Where I can pull 300 maps from a 100 amp-hr pack I can pull 600 amps from a 200 amp-hr pack. One can complain all they want but that is the state of current batery technology.

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

..Exactly why I am getting a Tesla instead of building my own EV. Price it all out and it is a killer deal + the company openness is awesome

 

[Norbert]

This is a new market, a new company, and new technology. It's not going to go perfectly.

That's true, but perhaps not even the crucial point. Everyone knows batteries are expensive. Battery manufacturers need to find a balance between price, power/price, charge-rate/price, range/price, and life-time. Two years ago (or something like that), it wasn't clear whether Tesla would be able to offer a 300 mile range option in 2012. Things turned out to be the other way around: the difficult part seems to be at the other end of the scale.

So here is a bit of the other side of it: The Volt media debacle has shown that the mainstream media is *very* keen on exposing quality problems in EVs, imaginary or real. Tesla may have found that an 8-year warranty is needed, and compromises risky. While EV enthusiasts and DIY types might be willing to buy a new pack as soon as the next improved battery tech comes out, and bet on that, the Model S cannot only sell to EV enthusiasts. When the mainstream media would learn that the first packs would have degraded after n years (whatever the number is), the consequences could be, um, disadvantageous.

 

[Trnsl8r]

My personal theory (which I in no way can back up) is that Tesla meant to offer QC on the 160 all along, but only recently realized that they couldn't get it together for whatever technical reason. If I'm right, it must have been a bitter pill for them to swallow to publish those specs the other day, not to mention reading the forums. (It would also explain the surprised sales reps.) It's still in development after all, things may still change... maybe we'll get in late 2013?

 

[dmckinstry]

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.

Personally, it wouldn't have made a bit of difference if they said "0-60 mph times will vary between 5.6 and 6.5 s, depending on battery pack size." They should make that completely clear in further releases.

Of course, I've never had a car that came close to 6.5 s for 0-60. I guess most of you are used to much more powerful cars than I am.

 

[dmckinstry]

No, because all the website said was that the Model S went from 0-60 in 5.6 secs. Also, at some point they had announced a supercharging system of some kind but didn't say that the 160 car would be inelligible.

Perhaps so, but the supercharging system wasn't announced that long ago. And, they can probably still charge their 40kW-hr pack in no more time than it takes the Leaf to charge their 24kW-hr pack. They just won't be able to charge in less than half the time it takes for the 85kW-hr pack.

 

[Cobos]

Perhaps so, but the supercharging system wasn't announced that long ago.

I've seen several people say this, but that is wrong. Tesla has always talked about a quick charge in 45 minutes. That was part of the specs from the very first demonstration. They haven't shown the exact data and the details around their solution for how they were going to recharge in 45 minutes until recently, but that is not the same as announcing it.

Cobos

 

[brianman]

I've seen several people say this, but that is wrong. Tesla has always talked about a quick charge in 45 minutes.

Why are people treating these terms as identical?


QC
Battery Chargers and Charging Methods
Quick Charge = 3 to 6 Hours charging at 0.3C rate


SC
Model S Options and Pricing | Tesla Motors
Supercharger .. replenish 160 miles of travel in about 30 minutes when applied to 85 kWh vehicle

Look out, Nissan Leaf: Tesla S will sell for under $50,000, run for 160 miles | ExtremeTech
car recharge to half-power in 30 minutes


These don't sound like the same rate to me. Am I missing something? My eyes gloss over for any of the C discussions so I've never really focused on it.

 

[dpeilow]

"Supercharge" is just some marketing guff that Tesla has come up with.

Cobos is right, they always talked of a 45 minute charge for the Model S. It was not recent news.


If you are going to comment on charge times then I suggest you learn about C rates. 1C is the current in A equaly to the capacity in Ah, such that the battery (theoretically) charges in one hour. 2C is double that current, so battery charges in 30 minutes. Half C charges in two hours. Etc.