An Update to our Supercharging Program

[stopcrazypp]

The bolded I agree with.

But we don't know their motivation as to why it's treated differently. Profit? (selling you a new car makes more financial sense than retrofiring your existing car)

The original context was about CPOs. So the analysis is actually the opposite. Tesla can make more profit if they simply software upgrade the S85s they have in their CPO fleet to P85, as they have done with the S40s to S60 (+supercharging enabled). The fact they have not done that seems to indicate the opposite.

It would also be a lot simpler for Tesla service if they don't treat the performance/sport drive unit differently and just do a software update on the regular rear unit (presuming parts are exactly the same), but that does not happen either.

 

[NOLA_Mike]

You're about 5 pages behind, keep up!

And you guys are about 5 pages in to an argument that seems to have little to nothing to do with "An Update to Our Supercharging Program".

 

[Az_Rael]

Back to our originally scheduled topic: for those in the process of CPO buying right now, I confirmed that I will be grandfathered into the unlimited plan since I "ordered" my CPO prior to January. (my scheduled delivery window does bleed into January 2017, so I wanted to confirm)

So it sounds like CPOs are being treated the same as new orders as of now (I did not ask about CPO supercharger status for cars bought after the New Year - I figured my sales rep wouldnt know that answer yet)

 

[CmdrThor]

Back to our originally scheduled topic: for those in the process of CPO buying right now, I confirmed that I will be grandfathered into the unlimited plan since I "ordered" my CPO prior to January. (my scheduled delivery window does bleed into January 2017, so I wanted to confirm)

So it sounds like CPOs are being treated the same as new orders as of now (I did not ask about CPO supercharger status for cars bought after the New Year - I figured my sales rep wouldnt know that answer yet)

That will make it a huge pain to figure out whether a vehicle has unlimited Supercharging. Let's say someone orders a 2014 Model S CPO on January 2, 2017. It sounds like they don't get unlimited Supercharging. Then in 2018 they want to resell the vehicle private party. Buyers would assume the vehicle has unlimited Supercharging because it is a 2014, but that might not necessarily be the case.

 

[Max*]

And you guys are about 5 pages in to an argument that seems to have little to nothing to do with "An Update to Our Supercharging Program".

You're right, all threads on TMC stay on topic.

 

[brianman]

This is interesting. All the info at the time was that while the batteries were the same, the P had a different motor.

This is incorrect. Or at least it doesn't match my recollection. My recollection was that the inverter and perhaps the electronics were different. The drive unit was different. At no point in my history of following Tesla have I ever had the impression that the motor portion of the drive unit was different between a 2012 S85 and 2012 P85.

 

[Az_Rael]

That will make it a huge pain to figure out whether a vehicle has unlimited Supercharging. Let's say someone orders a 2014 Model S CPO on January 2, 2017. It sounds like they don't get unlimited Supercharging. Then in 2018 they want to resell the vehicle private party. Buyers would assume the vehicle has unlimited Supercharging because it is a 2014, but that might not necessarily be the case.

True. Here is the quote of what he wrote to me regarding my CPO:

"The dividing line will be orders placed before Jan. 1, 2017 and deliveries before April 1, 2017, so you’ve done everything you need to stay under the umbrella the original supercharging policy"

I suppose they could make it lifetime of the car and current owner. Tying it to your My Tesla account. Then no resale cars would come with unlimited supercharging because even in a private sale, you set up your own My Tesla account usually.

I could see this being the plan long term to reduce the number of unlimited cars on the network over time.

 

[dgpcolorado]

That will make it a huge pain to figure out whether a vehicle has unlimited Supercharging. Let's say someone orders a 2014 Model S CPO on January 2, 2017. It sounds like they don't get unlimited Supercharging. Then in 2018 they want to resell the vehicle private party. Buyers would assume the vehicle has unlimited Supercharging because it is a 2014, but that might not necessarily be the case.

Interesting point. Hadn't thought about that complication.

 

[brianman]

Interesting point. Hadn't thought about that complication.

I'm also curious how they plan to navigate the nightmare of private sales of non-unlimited cars going forward.

"Hi, Tesla. I'm about to sell my 2017 P100D that I bought last year. Can I get an official written statement on how many of my second year 400 kWh remains? Thanks."

 

[MP3Mike]

I'm also curious how they plan to navigate the nightmare of private sales of non-unlimited cars going forward.

"Hi, Tesla. I'm about to sell my 2017 P100D that I bought last year. Can I get an official written statement on how many of my second year 400 kWh remains? Thanks."

Maybe the 400kWh starts over with each new owner. That would make it dead simple.

 

[ohmman]

Maybe the 400kWh starts over with each new owner. That would make it dead simple.

It also supports the idea of dropping unlimited Supercharging on owner change. Or at least the facility to do so on Tesla's end.

 

[HyperMiler]

Looking through this thread it is interesting to observe that the current owners of car / charging privileges do not seem to mind the least that others will not be allowed to benefit in similar ways. The argument brought forward that this is a good development for the company/world/sc line management.

So it would be even better if those electrically privileged current oh so supportive Tesla owners would follow their views and give up their free charging spots and started to pay in favor of Tesla or someone in need of free SC charging. Doesn't this otherwise come across as rather self serving?
Any volunteers?

 

[Max*]

Looking through this thread it is interesting to observe that the current owners of car / charging privileges do not seem to mind the least that others will not be allowed to benefit in similar ways. The argument brought forward that this is a good development for the company/world/sc line management.

So it would be even better if those electrically privileged current oh so supportive Tesla owners would follow their views and give up their free charging spots and started to pay in favor of Tesla or someone in need of free SC charging. Doesn't this otherwise come across as rather self serving?
Any volunteers?

Your argument holds no water. Those same owners will not be able to benefit when their lease ends/they sell their car X years down the road. Yet they're still supportive, so it's not very self-serving.

 

[ohmman]

Your argument holds no water. Those same owners will not be able to benefit when their lease ends/they sell their car X years down the road. Yet they're still supportive, so it's not very self-serving.

As an example, I plan to trade my classic S in for a Model 3. I'm supportive, because "free" Supercharging means nothing if I have to queue up for a charge. It also means nothing if the company supplying the charge is no longer viable.

For most people, this should be very low on their list of concerns when deciding whether to trade up to a new Tesla. I say most, because I have met some who drive pretty much nonstop up and down the coast. One was a poker player that I met at the Hawthorne Supercharger. He said he spends more time in his car than he does parked. I could see it being a cost effective decision for him. But I have to imagine he's part of a very small percentage of people that it impacts.

We road trip plenty. Paying for electricity on some portion of our trip won't change the way we view the trip. I suggest people spend a little time calculating daily depreciation and insurance costs on their cars, then dividing that by the miles you drive in a day. I think you'll find that Supercharging costs are going to pale in comparison.

 

[gene]

If you are buying an electric car then you likely are concerned about environmental issues. With Tesla being the catalyst for EV adoption in our ailing world, you can simply consider the $100 or $200 a year you'll spend on distance travel using Superchargers just as you would consider a $200 donation to any other environment group. And unlike certain environmental groups that seem to educate and lobby to no avail, we can see Tesla actually making a difference!

 

[Saghost]

We road trip plenty. Paying for electricity on some portion of our trip won't change the way we view the trip. I suggest people spend a little time calculating daily depreciation and insurance costs on their cars, then dividing that by the miles you drive in a day. I think you'll find that Supercharging costs are going to pale in comparison.

I'm not sure. The actual cost certainly shouldn't be enough to have much impact on the overall price of a road trip, but I think the psychology change might be significant - logic and money aside, I love the idea of free road trips, and my trip to Chicago last week alone required ~520 Supercharger kWh. It's not the only road trip I expect to do this year.

Because of this, I'd love to see a 2000 kWh or 4000 kWh per year option either as an upfront standalone or bundled into a battery upgrade. But we'll have to see what Tesla has in mind for a fee structure. I do want eAP/FSD at some point, once they get it actually working and authorized, which will presumably take me out of the unlimited category.

 

[Boatguy]

While I appreciate that Tesla is doing something to limit SC abuse, their plan is incredibly crude and/or disingenuous for a technology company. The whole point of the SC network is to enable long distance trips. 400kW of SC charging is not much long distance travel in a year.

Tesla knows where the cars live, either honestly by how we are registered, or via the log data by where we charge 90% of the time. They could have implemented a 100kW budget within 50 miles of home, and unlimited for when we are away from home. That would curb abuse and continue with the original spirit of the network.

Instead, the next step we will see, probably in Q2 2017, will be going back to the old system of selling unlimited SC use as a purchase option "because our customers requested it". Take it away, then give it back for a price. This is basically just a poorly hidden price increase beginning 2017; more clumsy Tesla marketing.

Maybe SC network will not be a profit center, but Tesla has de facto implemented an approach that will at least make them self funding. Not a bad idea as it is their only strategic competitive advantage, but very disingenuous.

 

[Saghost]

Instead, the next step we will see, probably in Q2 2017, will be going back to the old system of selling unlimited SC use as a purchase option "because our customers requested it". Take it away, then give it back for a price. This is basically just a poorly hidden price increase beginning 2017; more clumsy Tesla marketing.

I don't think Tesla can afford to do that. There are companies now who are building their whole business model around free supercharging, driving hundreds of thousands of miles per year on mostly (entirely?) Supercharger energy.

I could see them offering a one time buy option package that gave you 10,000 or even 20,000 miles per year of Supercharger energy, more miles than most people drive in total (as I suggested upthread when I was talking about the psychology of it) - but if they offer unlimited, those companies will continue to take advantage of the terms offered and cost Tesla an inordinate amount of money that will have to come from somewhere...

 

[brucet999]

400kWh hours is very small to support long distance trips. A 1000 mile road trip is 4-day weekend!

If Tesla needs to stop abuse of local supercharging, & I agree they SHOULD, geo-fence the owners home, and only permit free supercharging OUTSIDE of a 200 mile radius.

You might want to amend that radius. On normal trips it is most efficient to charge every 150 miles or so. People with S60s likely could not even reach a SC 200 miles from home.

 

[Gizmotoy]

This is incorrect. Or at least it doesn't match my recollection. My recollection was that the inverter and perhaps the electronics were different. The drive unit was different. At no point in my history of following Tesla have I ever had the impression that the motor portion of the drive unit was different between a 2012 S85 and 2012 P85.

eh. You're right. Motor, drive unit, there's no real practical difference in my head. It's all one assembly that's replaced as a unit. In Tesla-land "Drive unit" is more accurate of course, you're right, and specifically the inverter portion is what was considered to be upgraded for the P models.

In a previous career working with AC motors, that company also paired what Tesla calls the motor and inverter into a single assembly, which they called the "Motor." Tesla calls it a "Drive Unit," causing my brain much confusion, despite probably being the more accurate of the two nomenclatures.