Model 3 with 400 mile range

[TMThree]

The option might be possible in the next year or so. I don't think most buyers would pay for it though, at least the smart ones. Opportunity cost is easy in this case.

Say that the 400mile battery is 5k more than the 325 mile battery. Unless you hit that 400 miles on a frequent basis you are paying for something you use a few times a year. So if it saves you 2 hours a year in charging times on longer trips, congrats. You just paid 5k in cash to save you 10 hours over the next 5 years. I don't know about you guys, but my time is worth way less than $500 an hour.

You can think of the extra capacity as dead weight, or useless if not being used, but it still has benefits even when not being used to the limits.

Larger battery pack means you can stay at higher voltage longer. It means you can draw power down faster and charge up faster with less stress on the cells. It means you can limit charging to 30-70% SoC and have less degradation than if you had to utilize more of the capacity.

It also means as your car ages and you lose 10, 15, 20% capacity, your vehicle will still enjoy having range to spare.

 

[afadeev]

You can think of the extra capacity as dead weight, or useless if not being used, but it still has benefits even when not being used to the limits.

Larger battery pack means you can stay at higher voltage longer. It means you can draw power down faster and charge up faster with less stress on the cells. It means you can limit charging to 30-70% SoC and have less degradation than if you had to utilize more of the capacity.

It also means as your car ages and you lose 10, 15, 20% capacity, your vehicle will still enjoy having range to spare.

All valid pro's, but there are also significant con's to consider.
Extra battery capacity adds weight, literary, and that comes with significant costs and handicaps

• extra (dead) battery weight kills handling and performance - your acceleration will take a hit, and so will car's responsiveness during emergency lane change maneuvers
• extra (dead) battery weight leads to longer stopping distances - a detriment to safety
  
• extra (dead) battery weight costs a good chunk of money upfront

Personally, I would not pay extra $$$$ for the above con's, because I don't view my 310 mile range as in any way insufficient or limiting. For longer trips, I need to recharge somewhere anyway. For shorter regular commuting, either 240 or 310 miles is a massive overkill (I recharge once a week).

Having 400-mile or 500-mile battery options, with all of their con's, would not change the above driving scenarios, and thus wont benefit me in any way.

Frankly, I would have preferred the lighter, more nimble, and cheaper 240 mile battery in my TM3-Performance. But Performance cars can only be had with the larger, heavier battery. So that's what I'm stuck with.

a

 

[Krazaak]

There will always be some people who need more range than any EV currently offers and some who need far less. I don’t think there is any perfect range.

 

[daniel]

... i'm sure 90% tesla owners would really love a battery to last 400-500 miles no matter what the cost and time to recharge is

Your just not a road warrior so it wouldn't fit in for you but there are a lot of us that like driving hard and fast dawn till dusk

There are certainly people such as you describe. But very definitely not 90% of Tesla owners. Right now I know a lot of people who would love to be able to drive electric but who cannot afford a Tesla. Batteries that are cheaper per kWh would allow Tesla to sell a 300-mile car for less money than the present Model 3.

The fact is that there are people who only need 100 miles (look at the success of the Leaf) for their daily commute. There are people who need 400 or 500 miles. And nearer the middle of the bell curve are people who need 200 to 300 miles.

I am sure that 90% or more of Tesla owners and prospective Tesla owners would rather have a less expensive car, and save their money for other things, than have more than 300 miles or even 200 miles. Note that if your statement were right, nobody would ever buy a short-range Tesla. People buy the SR because they would rather pay less than have more range.

 

[rickdogg82]

I don't know where you travel but when I head upstate for a 200 mile hunting trip I want to hunt not look for a power source I travel the back roads and burn a lot of miles doing it time is a factor sometimes I travel back and forth in the same day I don't even shut off the car when filling up in my travels Try and find a power station in the middle of nowhere time is a factor for me

I am basing my opinion on the future. When charging times are reduced to near re-fueling times or something reasonably close, there will be more refueling options. Gas stations could have a bank of chargers, making looking for a charge in the back woods as easy as finding a gas station - which is not the case now.

After 4 months with my LR Model 3, I realize that the SR+ would have been perfectly suitable for my needs and would have cost quite a bit less.

 

[Nocturnal]

You can think of the extra capacity as dead weight, or useless if not being used, but it still has benefits even when not being used to the limits.

Larger battery pack means you can stay at higher voltage longer. It means you can draw power down faster and charge up faster with less stress on the cells. It means you can limit charging to 30-70% SoC and have less degradation than if you had to utilize more of the capacity.

It also means as your car ages and you lose 10, 15, 20% capacity, your vehicle will still enjoy having range to spare.

Fair, I'm mostly focused on cost myself.

 

[TMThree]

All valid pro's, but there are also significant con's to consider.
Extra battery capacity adds weight, literary, and that comes with significant costs and handicaps

• extra (dead) battery weight kills handling and performance - your acceleration will take a hit, and so will car's responsiveness during

It goes back to how fast you can draw power out of a cell, and then having enough cells to cover the power requirements.

The reason why the SR doesn't have P acceleration is because the higher draw from the smaller number of cells would be detrimental to their longevity.

So accelerating taking a hit only applies if you're able to draw the same power from fewer cells, something Tesla isn't letting you do. Hence the extra cells (weight) allows for higher performance / acceleration.

Also if you think 75kwh batteries are bad for performance, wait till you see the roadster 2 with 200 kwh cells. I'll trade you my LR M3 for a roadster 2 with "lower performance and terrible acceleration" any day.

 

[killua]

now that we are all dreaming, i see your 400 and raise it to 500.

 

[daniel]

It goes back to how fast you can draw power out of a cell, and then having enough cells to cover the power requirements.

The reason why the SR doesn't have P acceleration is because the higher draw from the smaller number of cells would be detrimental to their longevity.

So accelerating taking a hit only applies if you're able to draw the same power from fewer cells, something Tesla isn't letting you do. Hence the extra cells (weight) allows for higher performance / acceleration.

Also if you think 75kwh batteries are bad for performance, wait till you see the roadster 2 with 200 kwh cells. I'll trade you my LR M3 for a roadster 2 with "lower performance and terrible acceleration" any day.

A bigger battery will not hurt performance. You are correct there. But it sure as hell will affect the price. $200,000 for the 2020 Roadster. $250,000 for the Founder's Series. That's too rich for my blood.

 

[TMThree]

A bigger battery will not hurt performance. You are correct there. But it sure as hell will affect the price. $200,000 for the 2020 Roadster. $250,000 for the Founder's Series. That's too rich for my blood.

Yeah, not cheap. But if you compare it to similar performing hypercars, this thing is a bargain.

 

[daniel]

Yeah, not cheap. But if you compare it to similar performing hypercars, this thing is a bargain.

There are no similar-performing hypercars. The 2020 Roadster will be in a class all by itself. Nothing will touch it except a top-fuel dragster, which intentionally destroys its clutch on every run and needs a new engine every few runs. And according to NHRA burns 15 gallons of nitromethane fuel in a quarter-mile race. Or maybe the rocket car that Whoopie Goldberg's character drives in Rat Race.

 

[afadeev]

A bigger battery will not hurt performance. You are correct there.

You are missing it.
Bigger battery weights more, a LOT more.
Weight kills performance and handling!

There are no similar-performing hypercars. The 2020 Roadster will be in a class all by itself. Nothing will touch it except a top-fuel dragster...

That's not actually true.
You can buy Porsche 918, Lambo Huracán, LaFerrari, or GT-R Nismo today, and achieve comparable (or even quicker) acceleration, and much batter handing on track.

2020 Roadster's acceleration #s keep creeping up, and it is still n/a for customers, so the best thing we can say about it is that it might be a performance bargain, and that it will be one quick and stylish EV.

The rest is pure conjecture.

a

 

[Dan203]

The P100D is 0-60 in 2.3, seems like it should be no problem hitting 1.9 in a much smaller, much lighter, roadster. If they can’t then I think they're going to have a lot of p*issed off pre-orderers.

 

[Krazaak]

The P100D is 0-60 in 2.3, seems like it should be no problem hitting 1.9 in a much smaller, much lighter, roadster. If they can’t then I think they're going to have a lot of p*issed off pre-orderers.

I'm not sure how much lighter it's going to be with a 200kWh pack. If they weren't concerned with the top speed, they could get away with the lighter pack, but they need the horsepower to push 250+.

 

[Dan203]

I'm not sure how much lighter it's going to be with a 200kWh pack. If they weren't concerned with the top speed, they could get away with the lighter pack, but they need the horsepower to push 250+.

I read somewhere that they were going to use different gears in the front and rear motors and then shift how much power each motor was getting as you increased speed to get essentially the same effect as a transmission but without having to use a mechanical transmission.

 

[daniel]

You are missing it.
Bigger battery weights more, a LOT more.
Weight kills performance and handling!

The battery weighs more, which hurts acceleration. But it also can deliver more amps, which more than compensates. Bottom line, the car with the bigger battery can go faster, providing the motor and PEM are suitably designed.

You can buy Porsche 918, Lambo Huracán, LaFerrari, or GT-R Nismo today, and achieve comparable (or even quicker) acceleration, and much batter handing on track.

A quick Google search turns up nothing quicker than 2.2 seconds to sixty. The 2020 Roadster supposedly will do it in 1.9 seconds. Tesla never delivers anything on time. But when they do deliver, they meet the promised specs. As for track handling, I have no thoughts or opinions. I've never been on a track and I've never visited a track. I once tried to find an instructor who would teach me high-performance driving techniques in my Roadster, but couldn't find anyone. The local ones listed on line never returned my calls or emails.

I stand by my opinion, that nothing short of a top-fuel dragster or rocket car will touch the 2020 Roadster. (Or whatever year it ends up coming out. Probably 2022.)

 

[Krazaak]

I read somewhere that they were going to use different gears in the front and rear motors and then shift how much power each motor was getting as you increased speed to get essentially the same effect as a transmission but without having to use a mechanical transmission.

Gearing doesn't get you past the horsepower requirement though. Without going to a higher pack voltage, that meant higher amp draw by nearly double and with the same cells, that meant more battery by basically double.

 

[afadeev]

You are missing it.
Bigger battery weights more, a LOT more.
Weight kills performance and handling!

The battery weighs more, which hurts acceleration. But it also can deliver more amps, which more than compensates. Bottom line, the car with the bigger battery can go faster, providing the motor and PEM are suitably designed.

Weight is a handicap not just during acceleration, but even more so during braking and cornering.
Battery chemistry may, or may not, support increased acceleration from bigger battery (please site your sources to confirm this). Bigger and heavier battery will absolutely inevitably result in longer stopping distances, slower slalom speeds, slower response during emergency maneuvers, and slower speeds through turns.

A quick Google search turns up nothing quicker than 2.2 seconds to sixty. The 2020 Roadster supposedly will do it in 1.9 seconds.

Not anymore.
Tesla has given up on sub-2-second 2020 Roadster acceleration claims for 0-60. Causes not publicly shared.
I remember reading new 2.1-2.3 second time 0-60 estimates. I guess, we will find out once it is finally released, as the car is still in development.

For 1/4 mile, 0-100, or Nurburgring times, Tesla's have done OK, but never at the top of the pack:
Car 0-100 mph times list - List of Fastest Production Cars 0-100mph Ever in Order, Figures, Specs, Information, Top Speed and More

List of Nürburgring Nordschleife lap times - Wikipedia

Tesla never delivers anything on time. But when they do deliver, they meet the promised specs.

Agreed on the first point.
w.r.t the second, there was some slippage with 2020 Roadster performance expectations. Again, not sure why. Wish someone who knew would share...

As for track handling, I have no thoughts or opinions. I've never been on a track and I've never visited a track. I once tried to find an instructor who would teach me high-performance driving techniques in my Roadster, but couldn't find anyone. The local ones listed on line never returned my calls or emails.

I took every car I ever owned (other than minivans) to autoX and track to safely learn how it feels near limits of adhesion, and how the car communicates to you that it is approaching those limits. I would never feel safe driving a performance car otherwise.

If this resonates with your, consider the following organizations that will be happy to hook you up:
www.bmwcca.org
www.pca.org
www.scca.org

Enjoy your car either way!

HTH,
a

 

[daniel]

I no longer own the Roadster, and other than flooring it from stoplights on dry pavement, I never drove it at its limits of handling. It was my daily driver, as I bought it for being electric, not for being a sports car. At the time it was the only electric car I could buy to replace my Zap Xebra, which had only 40 miles of range to dead empty, and a top speed on level ground of 35 mph. So lessons on the track were never really necessary, though I would have liked to do it.

I don't feel the need with my LR RWD Model 3. I drive it more sedately, when I'm driving it at all. Mostly, it's driving itself. For some reason, I never feel in a hurry when the car is driving itself. And tires will last much longer with the 3 than they did with the Roadster. That thing really went through rear tires. But those quick starts were fun.

As far as battery size, it's obvious that a bigger battery can deliver more amperage and more amperage means more torque. The Model S with the 100 kWh battery is quicker than with the 85 kWh battery. But these are all moot points for me since I moved to Maui. I cannot make use of range or speed here. 55 mph is the fastest speed limit on any road I am ever on here. Not sure if it's the fastest limit on the island. And that's only if I go to Kahului. Otherwise I'm normally on 45 mph roads and below. And I could drive the long way around West Maui from Wailea to Hana and back on one charge and have plenty left over. Something I'll never do because the road to Hana makes me severely car sick even if I'm driving.

 

[Krazaak]

As far as battery size, it's obvious that a bigger battery can deliver more amperage and more amperage means more torque. The Model S with the 100 kWh battery is quicker than with the 85 kWh battery.

In the most basic sense yes, but it all determines how the battery is wired. kW output directly translates to horsepower output. Amperage is half the equation, voltage is the other half. You can double the voltage or double the amperage and therefore double the kW/horsepower. If one assumes that the roadster prototypes probably shoehorned Model S/X battery modules into every space they could fit one and they kept the same pack voltage to retain compatibility with existing charging infrastructure, then they probably just doubled the number of modules in parallel and beefed up the HV wiring so they could double the amperage. It's pretty clear that the 600+ mile range of the Roadster is a side-effect of the power requirements, not the design goal.