Choose: Another 25 kWh or Performance?

[bonnie]

I like it! An extra 25 kWh AND a Performance version. So who would pay $102,500 before options for a Model X with 330-340 miles of range and 0-60 in 3.8s (faster than a Roadster!).

Well, no. We all want it all for free.

 

[stopcrazypp]

@stopcrazypp - If you have the data, can you edit your post to include the various flavors (versions, sport/non-sport, etc.) of the Roadster? Thanks.

Edited. Only the motor power (and torque) changed between the years. The battery and 0-60 times stayed exactly the same.

 

[brianman]

Thanks.

 

[NigelM]

Battery size, battery power (@4C), motor power, 0-60 (0-60 Performance/Sport version)

Roadster
56kWh, 224kW, 225kW, 3.9 (3.7)
*Roadster changes added by request by brianman; only the motor power changed, battery and 0-60 remained the same.
Roadster Year, Version, Motor power (Sport)
2008, 1.0, 185kW (185kW)
2009, 1.5, 185kW (185kW)
2010, 2.0, 215kW (215kW)
2011, 2.5, 215kW (215kW)
2012, 2.5, 225kW (223kW)

The battery...stayed exactly the same.

Sure?

 

[stopcrazypp]

Sure?

In case it wasn't clear, that was a list of Motor power (see the description of the numbers above the list). The battery never changed in capacity/weight/volume, and I haven't heard Tesla saying they were drawing significantly more than 4C.

 

[NigelM]

In case it wasn't clear, that was a list of Motor power (see the description of the numbers above the list). The battery never changed in capacity/weight/volume, and I haven't heard Tesla saying they were drawing significantly more than 4C.

I understand the motor differences. I was less sure that there was ever a battery change (why change the motor if the there was no battery change and performance change?) and in some other threads the question on changes in the battery had been left unanswered.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I understand the motor differences. I was less sure that there was ever a battery change (why change the motor if the there was no battery change and performance change?) and in some other threads the question on changes in the battery had been left unanswered.

Because the motor power never exceeded batter power in the Roadster, which is ~224kW@4C, (only in 2012, the last year, did rated motor power match battery output). In other words, the performance bottleneck was the motor/PEM in the Roadster, not the battery. The 40kWh/60kWh packs on the Model S are the opposite (the battery is the bottleneck).

It's the same reason why "sport/performance" versions can be built with just PEM and/or motor changes on the same battery pack.

 

[njligernj]

Performance for sure. Since I've been considering a Tesla I've kept track of my daily miles and I really don't need a lot of range for 99% of my days. I'd buy a lower range, performance model (at a lower price point than the current performance but higher than the lowest range price) for sure. However since that isn't an option I will stick with lowest range. I would agree they are missing out here but they can't please everyone I suppose.

 

[vfx]

Maybe jumping the gun here. Elon said they would be updating batteries every three years.