Blog I Like Big Batteries And I Cannot Lie

[skilly]

I don't understand how you end up finding the difference in price between MX 75D and P100DLX, and somehow assigning all of that price difference to increase in range alone. That is ludicrous - pun not intended.

A good part of the $50k price you pay extra is for the 'P' and 'L'.

You should compare a base MX 75D ($79.5k) with base MX 100D ($96k). I believe the price difference is more like $16.5K for an additional range increase 58 miles - or around $275 per mile for the additional range.

Worth every penny.

Similarly for Model S, the price difference between base MS 75D ($74.5K) and MS 100D ($94k) is around $19.5K, for an increase in range of 75 miles - or around $260 per mile for the additional range.

Worth every penny.

Funny how perspective is everything. First, Im not complaining about my purchase - Im responding to the thread and saying "if" one were to buy purely on range, the differences in price are expensive and I'm not convinced the specs on range are accurate as bigger motors, or simply bigger batteries are applied. Ive only owned two Tesla's; both of which were P&D vehicles (P85D and P100DLX) - I didnt buy it for range....so "worth every penny". But in both cases, what they advertise as range vs what one can achieve in what I think is normal driving seems way off.

The discussions are largely about range - and 'bigger is better'. my point was, bigger is more expensive, and only marginally better - your 'worth every penny' examples are a personal opinion. Plus youre quoting mileage that Tesla advertises, which as it goes up into the heavier but higher capacity batteries seems to be off, unless you measure it going downhill in a tail wind.

 

[Electroman]

My S85 tracks perfectly or better for range when I maintain 70 mph or less, as long as there is no headwind. I get around 270 kw/mile which beats the official 285 kw/mile that I need to be on par with the rated range.

 

[KarenRei]

My S85 tracks perfectly or better for range when I maintain 70 mph or less, as long as there is no headwind. I get around 270 kw/mile which beats the official 285 kw/mile that I need to be on par with the rated range.

Indeed, which is expected behavior for that speed.

I look forward, when I have my M3, to writing an app to try to pick apart exactly what makes up every bit of every person's energy consumption at every point in time, with enough accuracy that - if there something actually is wrong with the car that's making it underperform - to be able to estimate roughly where in the process the losses are occurring. As well as being able to tell what affect various options and aftermarket hardware will have on energy consumption.

It'll take a very large dataset, however, and probably simultaneous phone data as well as vehicle data (e.g. you can't get accelerometer data as a proxy for surface roughness from the Tesla JSON API, but you can from a phone) and lots of external data (aka, recent weather data to get a sense of road conditions and possible icing on vehicles). One thing that occurred to me that might be rather nifty to collect at the same time is magnetometer data from the phone - I wouldn't be surprised if the phone's magnetometer can "see" the fluctuating fields from the drive unit.

 

[SageBrush]

range is only as good as your worst case scenario.

My worst case scenario is renting an ICE, and it is a whole lot more likely to happen from EV failure than SC failure.

hmmm

OK, Seriously, I'm tolerant of some inconvenience related to a smaller battery.