"Seemed" was the right word, until the reshuffling for 70D.
Now:
http://my.teslamotors.com/models/design said:
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Model S battery replacement $12,000?
- Thread starter aaeverett
- Start date
Now:
TomServo
Active Member
I can see 60kW cars opt for a battery upgrade in a few years just for the additional range. Regardless of cost, they were already ahead by $10K. And considering 60kW cars are the "odd man" out pre-owned prices could fall faster than say 85's.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
You're assuming Tesla will offer battery upgrades when it has gone out of its way to deny upgrades to those who have requested them.
Tesla has made no promises about being able to replace batteries with anything but same capacity. In fact, they've hinted in a few places that we shouldn't assume otherwise.
That's true, but at some point it doesn't make sense to maintain inventory of a battery that doesn't exist anymore...
There are several people that asked specifically about the ability to swap and upgrade the battery when they bought their car and they got 'yes' as an answer.
Reeler
Decade of Pure EV Driving
I wonder if someone bought a salvaged 85KW battery from a junk yard could they put it in their S60/70 and have Tesla do the firmware etc. They would have to consider the warranty for the battery differently from the car.
Roadrunner13
Member
I wouldn't do that until I'm completely out-of-warranty on the car otherwise they will likely declare any remaining warranty void when you installed the salvage pack...
For sure Tesla won't install it in the first place as I even doubt you could convince them to do any firmware update for it.
The battery is kind of central to this whole EV car thing
...so I'd have a hard time arguing with them about the cancelled warranty in this scenario.Agreed.
I suspect this is the real reason the Roadster 3.0 was announced. With those cars getting towards 8 years old, trying to find cells originally designed in 2005 must be a challenge.
I know it's not exactly like for like, but the c.75kWh pack in the 3.0 at $29,000 (where Tesla are claiming to make no profit), really doesn't stack up well for a $12,000 Model S pack.
There are only a bit more than 2,000 Roadsters worldwide and only a fraction of those owners need or will pay for a brand new battery. So Roadster 3.0 battery volumes are very small, require many hours of labor to build, and therefore very expensive. Not a remotely comparable situation to the 100,000 and growing number of S and X.
I agree with you that the original Roadster battery cell type is likely no longer available and Tesla had to find an alternate that is currently in production.
I agree with you that the original Roadster battery cell type is likely no longer available and Tesla had to find an alternate that is currently in production.
@ecarfan, Yep for sure they aren't directly comparable. I guess my point is $17k is a lot to find in labour and bulk savings IF* the 3.0 cells are broadly as expensive per kWh.
Also blurring the lines is Tesla are claiming to do this at "cost", highly unlikely an S battery would be offered on the same basis.
All in really just another data point as to why I think it's highly unlikely we will see a $12k Model S battery (at least any time soon).
(* a very big if I know, but right now without the GF fully operational, we have no idea how much discount Tesla are receiving for the MS/X cells and whether they only apply to the exact ones in the S or it's more open ended.)
Also blurring the lines is Tesla are claiming to do this at "cost", highly unlikely an S battery would be offered on the same basis.
All in really just another data point as to why I think it's highly unlikely we will see a $12k Model S battery (at least any time soon).
(* a very big if I know, but right now without the GF fully operational, we have no idea how much discount Tesla are receiving for the MS/X cells and whether they only apply to the exact ones in the S or it's more open ended.)
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Tesla signed a separate lower volume deal with LG Chem to get the cells for the Roadster upgrade. That's going to affect the price a bit. However, even if Tesla stayed with Panasonic (assuming they had a similar cell to offer), I'm guessing the pricing probably won't be much better. The volume is going to be low anyways.
Keep in mind that the cells used in the Model S are different (optimized to cut costs). The end caps are not the same and they are not a drop in replacement for the Roadster cells, so Tesla can't just use the same cells in the Roadster.
Keep in mind that the cells used in the Model S are different (optimized to cut costs). The end caps are not the same and they are not a drop in replacement for the Roadster cells, so Tesla can't just use the same cells in the Roadster.
@StopcrazyPP I agree and realise the differences (though in fairness didn't know they'd gone to LG, thanks for that bit of info).
Real back of an envelope stuff, but let's say it's two weeks to build a 3.0 pack, two guys working on it. Providing they have enough order coverage to do 26 packs a year. Employ 2 guys @ $100k per year and that puts each pack at around $7k in labor. This leaves $22k for cell purchase.
So even if they are paying half for the Panasonic S batteries compared to the LG chem, there is still no margin in it for Tesla.
Now of course this is full of assumptions, there is always the possibility that the 3.0 batteries are priced so high because actually Tesla don't want to do the work, and when they say they are doing it "at cost" they have worked out the labor cost number on the basis of getting JB to wire the packs up himself
This $12k figure is really just a hangover from the Roadster launch, where Tesla pushed forward a figure that aided in the theory that battery costs would have declined to this sort of level by now, as well as remove a valid concern of owners that continued service would be well supported.
Now the GF might make the former happen, but I'm still not clear how it will help in ensure ample supply of cells using today's battery tech in 8 years time, as surely Tesla will have moved onto better chemistry by then.
The truth is I fully expect the S packs to outlast 8 years, but effectively be a lifetime item of the car. Ultimately if a pack costs more than the value of the car (which will likely happen for 8 year old S's), then it becomes somewhat moot.
Real back of an envelope stuff, but let's say it's two weeks to build a 3.0 pack, two guys working on it. Providing they have enough order coverage to do 26 packs a year. Employ 2 guys @ $100k per year and that puts each pack at around $7k in labor. This leaves $22k for cell purchase.
So even if they are paying half for the Panasonic S batteries compared to the LG chem, there is still no margin in it for Tesla.
Now of course this is full of assumptions, there is always the possibility that the 3.0 batteries are priced so high because actually Tesla don't want to do the work, and when they say they are doing it "at cost" they have worked out the labor cost number on the basis of getting JB to wire the packs up himself
This $12k figure is really just a hangover from the Roadster launch, where Tesla pushed forward a figure that aided in the theory that battery costs would have declined to this sort of level by now, as well as remove a valid concern of owners that continued service would be well supported.
Now the GF might make the former happen, but I'm still not clear how it will help in ensure ample supply of cells using today's battery tech in 8 years time, as surely Tesla will have moved onto better chemistry by then.
The truth is I fully expect the S packs to outlast 8 years, but effectively be a lifetime item of the car. Ultimately if a pack costs more than the value of the car (which will likely happen for 8 year old S's), then it becomes somewhat moot.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
That's something I've been pondering too, esp. given the talk of Model 3 moving to different size cells. However, it seems Tesla's 10kWh Powerwalls might be keeping the same type of cells, so that extends the "life" of the cell supply at least 3-4 years, if that is true.
I think however if Tesla designed the Model 3 cells to be same height (or close), they can possibly make modules that can fit inside the pack enclosure of the Model S. It's a continuity problem Tesla will have to address, since I don't imagine that by the time gigafactory is running regularly that Tesla will be making two different cell formats (although not impossible). It'll also be too early for a full platform redesign for the Model S/X.
It will be water under the bridge by then.
No one bats an eyelid when a 10 year old BMW worth $5k needs a new $20k engine. It's just scrapped. (one of my company fleet drove through a puddle, and would have been totalled if it wasn't < 24 months old)
The high mileage ones they'll honor under warranty, but 9 year old ones, well I suspect you'll be on your own.
Average age of US cars is 11 years, EU cars less. By the time the 3 comes out the S's will still be under warranty and no one will care. Sell bucket loads of 3's and they will be worth peanuts by 8 years old.
Call me a cynic, but if the X and 3 were out per original timescales, even the Roadsters would have been in warranty and this "loyalty to the early adopters 3.0" (which AFAIK still hasn't actually materialized a year after announcement) wouldn't have happened.
Buy the car over an eight year lifetime, and go back to Tesla for a shiny replacement.
This isn't just a Tesla thing btw, I can't help but think modern cars are designed with a lifetime of less than 10yrs. A careful balance of reliability vs built in uneconomic failure. I've had a couple of 7 year old Audi's and they are money pits!
It's water under the bridge when a 10yo ICE craps out because that's old news. I may be a bit more cynical, but I don't think an eager journalist or anti-Tesla goon would pass up such a story on a Model S. There are more than a few people in this world who aren't willing to let a simple thing like reality stand in the way of their agenda...
Unrelated, and from a purely idealistic personal perspective, I'd love it if the Tesla 'change personal transportation' charter includes a means to keep otherwise functional BEVs on the road [beyond the mandated timeframes].
Unrelated, and from a purely idealistic personal perspective, I'd love it if the Tesla 'change personal transportation' charter includes a means to keep otherwise functional BEVs on the road [beyond the mandated timeframes].
I'm obviously even more cynical
In 5 years time the current Model S will be old news. All eyes will be on the 3 or Y or R or Sv2.0 ... who knows.
None of the journalist / anti-Tesla goons have picked up on the fact Tesla weren't going to offer 1.5 Roadster owners batteries, or that not a single confirmed upgrade has been done a year after announcement. OK the volumes are higher with the S, but it will still be legacy product, and not likely to get much click through advertising revenue
Idealistically I agree with you, this disposable nature of things, not just cars is not a good thing.
Similar threads
