-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Does Model S 60 actually have a 75 battery?
- Thread starter simplesolid
- Start date
I'll chime in as my first post ever.
I'm really grateful for the 60D that actually has a 75 kWh battery.
The 60D with a 75 kWh gives me 15 kWh FOR FREE!
Although I can't use that 15 kWh for the extra range, I CAN use it as a buffer.
It appears this improves charge times and allows me to charge to 100% without having to worry about harming the battery.
All for free.
If I want, I can always pay to access that extra 15 kWh.
If I don't, I dont have to pay that extra cost.
There is nothing shady
Tesla is upfront about the issue.
I get to decide what works best for me.
It's interesting to me how different people perceive things.
I think the 60D with 75kWh battery is the Tesla equivalent of the deal of the century!
Because of that and a few other things, I'm upgrading from a future Tesla Model 3 to a Tesla 60D purchase this week.
This allows Tesla to book a sale in 2016 that they otherwise would not have gotten until probably 2018 or 2019.
This will give me the opportunity to buy something that I otherwise wouldn't even consider.
Win. Win. Win
I'm really grateful for the 60D that actually has a 75 kWh battery.
The 60D with a 75 kWh gives me 15 kWh FOR FREE!
Although I can't use that 15 kWh for the extra range, I CAN use it as a buffer.
It appears this improves charge times and allows me to charge to 100% without having to worry about harming the battery.
All for free.
If I want, I can always pay to access that extra 15 kWh.
If I don't, I dont have to pay that extra cost.
There is nothing shady
Tesla is upfront about the issue.
I get to decide what works best for me.
It's interesting to me how different people perceive things.
I think the 60D with 75kWh battery is the Tesla equivalent of the deal of the century!
Because of that and a few other things, I'm upgrading from a future Tesla Model 3 to a Tesla 60D purchase this week.
This allows Tesla to book a sale in 2016 that they otherwise would not have gotten until probably 2018 or 2019.
This will give me the opportunity to buy something that I otherwise wouldn't even consider.
Win. Win. Win
⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️
Village Idiot
Funny, I feel like I'm taking advantage of Tesla's generosity. Also, I believe the new base 60 is less expensive than the old 60 and a much better car.
This ^^^
I think the OP has this exactly backwards. It costs Tesla the same to make the MS60 and MS75. They are willing forego 8500 on the selling price of the car to make it more affordable, the tradeoff being ~40 mi less range. This is quite a deal for those who don't need or can't afford the larger range. The fact that it can be upgraded later is a plus; the fact that the upgrade is a simple software change is also a plus since it means there is no mucking about with hardware to get screwed up. A point that *could* be made is that Tesla charges more for the upgrade after the original order...but they do this with many (most?) upgrades.
Perhaps the OP would be happier if Tesla did things the way Intel does with their low-end Celeron chips: they cripple the advanced features of a chip in a way that is not restorable and charge less put it into an entry-level machine. If you want the original performance you have to buy a new machine.
Akikiki
A'-Lo-HA ! y'all
I think this is genius. Back when the 40's were built (I am sure everyone already knows this) it was actually a 60. A couple of years later, many of those 400 40's were traded in to Tesla for a newer car with a bigger battery. Tesla just flipped the switch and turned each 40 into a 60 and sold it as a CPO 60. They gave trade-in value as a 40 and with a one bit change, sold them at the value of a 60 value. Brilliant. And I suspect they are thinking about all this buried treasure in the 75/60's they have sold and being able to harvest the embedded value later.
Yes I actually mentioned this exact scenario when Tesla decided to make all 40's a software limited 60 battery. That was to get out of the jam of not delivering a Model S for less than $50K which was a very big selling point in regards to getting all of the free publicity and possibly the government loans. The current plan makes less sense as there was no need to offer it other than for cost considerations and they are making a pretty large assumption they will be getting back a majority of those cars or that a majority of buyers will ante up for the 75 during their ownership. Sure the majority of lease cars will come back but purchased ones are much less likely to be traded back in and those they gave away the extra capacity for nothing unless those buyers do decide to upgrade to the 75 at some point.
It's next week actually that the price is going up. This could be simply because too many people are buying the 60 and the upgrade rate is lower than they expected.
Akikiki
A'-Lo-HA ! y'all
Very good points. I suspect you have read on the TM forum over the last few years, there's been more than a little whining by 40 owners that TM should flip the switch and give them both the rest of the battery and Supercharging for free - simply because its there.
I can't say I specifically recall that but just like the OP here I can see that some people would expect something for nothing. Still I bet it's more likely now because we have moved away from the earliest buyers who were more enthusiastic and open to the roller coaster that goes along with being an early adopter. This is why Tesla needs to have QC and service scheduling improved drastically before the model 3 is released or we will see lemon law claims galore.
The_Mike
Member
Exactly this. The announcement of the 60D allowed my wife and I to buy directly in to Tesla with our Model S. Our plan had been to buy / lease a Bolt for the next three years until the Model 3s finally hit the East Coast. We needed the ~200 mile range as an upgrade from her lease-expired Leaf and always wanted a Tesla, but the price was just a bit too high. Suddenly with $8500 off, we were in the game.
Plus, we can charge to 100% every day we need to, and even usually Supercharge up to 95-100% due to the limited tapering. And because we bought now, we get free supercharging for life. It was a win all around.
And we've had it for six weeks and already put in 4000 miles and three road trips.
Akikiki
A'-Lo-HA ! y'all
JOEV1
*****joe
Exactly this. The announcement of the 60D allowed my wife and I to buy directly in to Tesla with our Model S. Our plan had been to buy / lease a Bolt for the next three years until the Model 3s finally hit the East Coast. We needed the ~200 mile range as an upgrade from her lease-expired Leaf and always wanted a Tesla, but the price was just a bit too high. Suddenly with $8500 off, we were in the game.
Plus, we can charge to 100% every day we need to, and even usually Supercharge up to 95-100% due to the limited tapering. And because we bought now, we get free supercharging for life. It was a win all around.
And we've had it for six weeks and already put in 4000 miles and three road trips.
Thats interesting what OP mention about tapering (current) which normally happens during the last 20% of a full charge.
Until now I was not sure that a 60D MS actually has a 75 kWh Battery.
As the cell voltage reaches a certain level the BMS must reduce the current.
Whithout the (necessary) tapering, the current stay much higher even towards the end of charging und should be quite noticable and therefore the times are also shorter for a full charge.
If it also offers a buffer as "JRMV" posted above, might be true, because the BMS prevents "bricking" and might resort to the 15% which is physically present in the 75 kWh version.
As for the policy to install one size Battery for two different models might be a manufactoring reason. (one size case, Nr of sheets etc.)
I have a 60D and yesterday it asked if I wanted to upgrade to 75. I declined. The 60 is a great car and has enough range for me and was $17k cheaper (I'm in Victoria). Manufacturers of diesel engines for trucks and tractors have been setting the HP by software for years, you just pay for what you want and it make it cheaper to to manufacturer and purchase.
Hah. You try to support your point with what you think is an outrageous analogy from the computer industry that you think people would not accept...but...um...computer companies have been doing exactly that for a long time. Mainframe computer makers have been offering systems where the processors have X number of cores, but only some of them are unlocked for use. If the customer pays the upgrade fee, they can get the other cores unlocked for use for more speed. Processor and memory companies don't want to have to manage many extra designs and part types internally. It simplifies production and manufacturing quite a bit to have fewer parts that can operate at higher or lower speeds or have certain features enabled. Also, since it can take a couple of months to produce, it helps to have the flexibility later in production to sell it as a higher or lower end part. And this is especially true in the computer chip industry that most of the cost is in the total steps of processing the wafer and how many total chips you can fit on it. Speed and functionality don't make much difference in the cost. So they would prefer to build for the highest target, and if some don't quite meet the highest speed grade or there is more customer demand for the lower priced ones, they can downgrade mark them as a lower product and sell them that way.
This is also done in software all the time, even Windows. You mean you'd be upset if you had to pay more to unlock a software license to be a full featured "pro" version versus a home version that sold for less. Same code, same software just limited by "software"?
You'll get the benefits of the 75 pack in the software limited 60. If they actually made a real 60kw pack at the same price, you'd see sub-200 miles at 90%, supercharging taper would mean charging to 100% would take far longer and the performance would likely be slower. Be glad you're actually getting more for less.
What would happen in 2 weeks if Tesla decided to just make a true 60kw pack to keep their margins intact, would people rather have that instead?
You'll get the benefits of the 75 pack in the software limited 60. If they actually made a real 60kw pack at the same price, you'd see sub-200 miles at 90%, supercharging taper would mean charging to 100% would take far longer and the performance would likely be slower. Be glad you're actually getting more for less.
What would happen in 2 weeks if Tesla decided to just make a true 60kw pack to keep their margins intact, would people rather have that instead?
⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️
Village Idiot
The_Mike
Member
For a datapoint on the limited tapering, we see approximately 35kW charging at 100% on the 60D.
Similar threads
