Current owners of 40 kWh configuration

[bkp_duke]

I was surprised they never dropped the price. You could always buy a non Tesla charger and make a direct connection to the battery to charge beyond what the software allows. Make sure you know what you're doing though

Far far easier than that might be getting someone to root the car and unlock the rest of the pack capacity. I also suspect the BMS, which has it's own firmware and is in the pack, would prevent you from doing what you describe above.

 

[cwerdna]

How much less was the 40 than the 60 when brand new? The 40 buyers, I had thought, got a really incredible deal on the original car - one which Tesla almost certainly lost money on? So the original 40 buyer are probably not in a position to complain too loudly.

Originally, the upgrades in capacity were priced in $10K increments (from 40 to 60 to 85 kWh).

2013 Model S Price Increase | Blog | Tesla Motors has the original prices before and after an increase.

Tesla, the company is still losing $. If you add up all their cumulative net losses and net profits (IIRC, there were 2 profitable quarters), they've accumulated about $3.2 billion in net loss since they began reporting publicly.

 

[bkp_duke]

Originally, the upgrades in capacity were priced in $10K increments (from 40 to 60 to 85 kWh).

2013 Model S Price Increase | Blog | Tesla Motors has the original prices before and after an increase.

Tesla, the company is still losing $. If you add up all their cumulative net losses and net profits (IIRC, there were 2 profitable quarters), they've accumulated about $3.2 billion in net loss since they began reporting publicly.

Tesla is ONLY losing money because they CHOOSE to do an gigantic capital expenditure for accelerated growth. With a slower CapEx, they would be profitable.

I don't buy the "this is reasonably priced for an upgrade" bit. It was in 2012/2013, but not now. For ~20k you can buy a pristine full 85 kWh pack from a wrecked car. That the "aftermarket" upgrade price.

 

[cwerdna]

Tesla is ONLY losing money because they CHOOSE to do an gigantic capital expenditure for accelerated growth. With a slower CapEx, they would be profitable.

Nope. Please see the answers to my questions at 2017 Investor Roundtable:General Discussion and 2017 Investor Roundtable:General Discussion. You can see that the massive capital expenditures do not show up in a big way nor all at once under the costs portion. It's been coming out of cash. Please see the above posts for more explanation.

Then look at TSLA's SEC filings at Tesla - Quarterly Report. Look at page 5 and then pages 34 thru 37 about the costs.

 

[eAdopter]

I have a 40, and I agree with your statements. After Tesla dropped the upgrade price for 60/75 owners, I inquired again about unlocking my 40... and was quoted the same $11k.

I think Tesla should reduce the unlock price. However I don't think they will, simply because they have no interest in even considering it. There isn't a practical benefit for them. We've been forgotten; they have other things to focus on.

Even if they did discount the price, what would 40 owners be willing to pay? I definitely will never pay $11k. I don't think I'd even do it at $5k... maybe $3k?

I've come to accept and somewhat relish in the fact that I own one of the most rare Tesla's out there (more rare than the Signatures). It's something a bit special... it has a story... do I want to make it just another average old "60"?

btw - Tesla will also allow you to enable "Fast Charging" and buy the CHAdeMO adapter without unlocking the battery for ~$2500. Still no SuperCharging, however it's at least an option.

My S40 range also dropped from 140 to 125. However, I never really got 140 miles of real range out of it... I think 125 is just a more accurate estimate. Maybe that's due to it carrying around 20kwh of dead weight?

I think Tesla has some interest in reducing the unlock price. As a software developer I know they're keeping track of all exceptions and it costs them extra money to maintain the limited-60 portion of the software. This portion of the software must be considered, validated, and tested with every software release. Given that the number of 40's must be around only 100-200 I think Tesla would save money even if they provide the upgrade for free.

For me to purchase it, somewhere near $500 seems like a fair price because they did a similar thing for the 60/75 crowd ($500). We were early adopters and our cars are now 4+ years old so a little preferential treatment would be reasonable.

Regarding range, I tested my car in 2013 an confirmed it would travel 147 (actually tested to 157 by mistake) so the reduction to 125 is significant.

 

[eAdopter]

Adding one more opinion: I think the 147->125 range reduction alone could justify a free upgrade from 40 to 60. We purchased a car with EPA-rated specifications and Tesla broke the promise with absolutely no justification or notification. It will cost Tesla almost zero to remedy the situation because our cars already contain the 60 kWh battery and Supercharging hardware. Only a software update is needed, and Tesla has already developed the software.

 

[MP3Mike]

For me to purchase it, somewhere near $500 seems like a fair price because they did a similar thing for the 60/75 crowd ($500).

I thought the 60->75 upgrade was reduced to $2,500. The $500 upgrade was for the 70->75 upgrade.

Using that pricing a 40->60 upgrade should cost around $3,000. (Even with the Model 3 a ~25kWh upgrade costs $9,000.)

 

[eAdopter]

I thought the 60->75 upgrade was reduced to $2,500. The $500 upgrade was for the 70->75 upgrade.

Thank you for the correction.

 

[Maximilien]

I thought the 60->75 upgrade was reduced to $2,500. The $500 upgrade was for the 70->75 upgrade.

Using that pricing a 40->60 upgrade should cost around $3,000. (Even with the Model 3 a ~25kWh upgrade costs $9,000.)

It was actually reduced to $2,000 not $2,500. Although there was a tax like ~$200...

 

[eAdopter]

Again, thanks for the clarifications.

Another way to look at it:

I don't know how many 40's still exist, but to keep the math simple, let's assume there are still 200 because many have already been upgraded or traded-in.

To bring the remaining 200 cars up to 60 kWh and activate the Supercharging hardware
200 * $13,500 = $2,700,000 current retail cost to customer / maximum Tesla benefit
or
200 * $60 = $12,000 retail cost to customers/Tesla if charged at $60/hour to enable both items at Service Centers

Because we know the hardware is already installed, and assuming about 200 units, the maximum* hit to Tesla is $2.7M.
On the other hand, the maximum hit to each owner could be as little as $60.

*probably much less because many 40 kWh owners won't upgrade unless the cost comes down a lot

It's probably safe to assume that Tesla has/will spend more than $2.7M to maintain the additional software.

Free 40->60 upgrades are a win-win for both Tesla and customers.

 

[fluxemag]

Far far easier than that might be getting someone to root the car and unlock the rest of the pack capacity. I also suspect the BMS, which has it's own firmware and is in the pack, would prevent you from doing what you describe above.

There's a member on here who can, but won't, do that.

I bet a lot of 40 owners would pay the $2500 for supercharging if the battery were unlocked for free. I know I would have.

 

[sandpiper]

There's a member on here who can, but won't, do that.

I bet a lot of 40 owners would pay the $2500 for supercharging if the battery were unlocked for free. I know I would have.

I'm sorry but just can't see that this will ever happen. Tesla will make a good bit of the $$ just rebadging traded 40s and reselling them as 60s. And doing a free upgrade would only serve to delay the date of those trades, and so could potentially cost them money. Further, I could see that doing a free upgrade would raise expectations for owners of other software limited vehicles that are out there.

I'm just not seeing a case for doing this that benefits Tesla in any way.

 

[sandpiper]

I thought the 60->75 upgrade was reduced to $2,500. The $500 upgrade was for the 70->75 upgrade.

Using that pricing a 40->60 upgrade should cost around $3,000. (Even with the Model 3 a ~25kWh upgrade costs $9,000.)

The $2,500 or $500 or whatever had nothing to do with the cost of the battery, and you can't extrapolate from it. Those prices were offered to keep peace with recent buyers of the software limited vehicles, just as the lesser range vehicles where being discontinued, and as the price of the longer range vehicles was being lowered.

Tesla doesn't follow any $/kw rule when incrementally pricing larger batteries. They use market pricing (a.k.a., what they can get). The added cost of the 100kw batteries over the 75kw is also something like $25,000 - which is completely absurd. But, they can get it, and when they can't the price will drop.

 

[eAdopter]

I'm sorry but just can't see that this will ever happen. Tesla will make a good bit of the $$ just rebadging traded 40s and reselling them as 60s. And doing a free upgrade would only serve to delay the date of those trades, and so could potentially cost them money. Further, I could see that doing a free upgrade would raise expectations for owners of other software limited vehicles that are out there.

I'm just not seeing a case for doing this that benefits Tesla in any way.

The trade delay is possible. However, I thinks it's more likely that the upgrades will make the cars more marketable. Owners could then trade/sell the cars and purchase a newer Tesla model. This would benefit Tesla. The new 60 owner is also brought into the Tesla world and this may expand the customer base.

Yes, there are some minimal downsides. But I think the overall benefit seems much larger.

 

[sandpiper]

The trade delay is possible. However, I thinks it's more likely that the upgrades will make the cars more marketable. Owners could then trade/sell the cars and purchase a newer Tesla model. This would benefit Tesla. The new 60 owner is also brought into the Tesla world and this may expand the customer base.

Yes, there are some minimal downsides. But I think the overall benefit seems much larger.

There's no shortage of 60s out there. Anybody who wants one can get one. And while individual circumstances vary, the 40s (maybe a few hundred left???) are getting long in the tooth. I expect that most of them have already been traded & rebadged by Tesla, and that almost all of the remaining ones will be traded in the next 3 years, irrespective of locked or unlocked battery.

There is a benefit, certainly, to the 40 owners. Tesla.... I'm struggling to see it.

But who knows? Maybe Tesla will offer it cheaply as a thank you gesture to some early owners.

 

[jpw1116]

Can anyone verify that the S40 was sold for US$55,000 or less, new?

Someone on YouTube is contesting that any Model S ever sold that low.

Thanks~

UPDATE: I found via Model S Options & Pricing | Tesla Motors that the 40's starting price is listed there as "49,900 After $7,500 Federal Tax Credit."

 

[eAdopter]

Yes, the lowest base price was $57,400.

 

[eAdopter]

Update: Tesla dropped the 40->60 upgrade price from $11,000 to $2,500. The upgrade doesn't included Supercharger access which remains an additional $2,500,

 

[bkp_duke]

Update: Tesla dropped the 40->60 upgrade price from $11,000 to $2,500. The upgrade doesn't included Supercharger access which remains an additional $2,500,

FAR more reasonable pricing.

 

[Krash]

Any 40 owners willing to contribute an iOS Powertools runlog or Android Dashboard for Tesla runlog to the Updated Performance Metrics Tracking? Either 0-60 or quarter mile? It would be great battery unlocking karma for the group. [/Thread Hijack]