Model S/X deliveries drop off cliff, down 56%

[divesturner]

I wonder if Tesla has a supply contract for 18650 batteries that must sunset before they can abandon the current design generation. It's difficult to see why the flagship would be stuck with old tech. Tesla makes changes all the time so its curious why they are holding firm to the story that there are no plans to change the battery tech.

 

[mrbulk]

In the US, sure, most are down by not by as the S and X are down: UPDATE 4-U.S. March and Q1 auto sales drop in weak start to 2019.

Well we could always compare year-to-year S/X sales PRIOR to the introduction of the Model 3. Its cannibalizing effect on the higher priced models cannot be ignored. BMW sells way more series 3 than any of their pricier cars.

 

[wdolson]

S and X are actually made on the same production line. I did a factory tour last year. It was very cool. But they can definitely shrink down parts of it if production slows. Paint is their biggest bottleneck.

I thought line 1 and 2 were Model S and X production? Each line was reconfigurable to make the other car, but one was making S and the other X.

Not too appealing when customers loose upto 60k in a year on their vehicle. Especially on the high end models. Will question my purchase next time if other models exist outside Tesla. It's hard to stomach a 60K loss in a year. For some of us it's much much more than 60k when you factor in luxury tax on these high end vehicles. It's more like 100K in a year. JM2C... If Tesla does refresh and release another model.... I probably will upgrade

Compare the Model S and X to other cars in the same price range, the initial depreciation is very steep for those cars. The only expensive cars that don't depreciate fast are very limited production super cars with a very limited supply.

The Performance model of the S/X has always had the steepest depreciation. Some people with more money than sense have upgraded every time a new Performance model came out, so the used market for Performance cars is glutted. Non-Performance model cars hold their value quite well compared to other new cars, especially expensive ones.

If Model S saw 60K depreciation every year, after two years most Model S owners would have to pay someone to get rid of their car, which isn't the case. The cheapest Model S for sale within 200 miles of here is $31K USD and it's a 2014. Most of the dual motor cars are over $40K and the 2017 non-Performance cars and newer are in the $70Ks with some in the $80Ks.

 

[dbldwn02]

I thought line 1 and 2 were Model S and X production? Each line was reconfigurable to make the other car, but one was making S and the other X.

I actually saw a few Xs moving through the same line as the S. It was surprising to me which is why it stood out. I did hear the talk about 2 assembly lines though.

 

[buttershrimp]

Just picked up a new model x. Yay. I'm single handedly saving Tesla.

 

[MTOman]

Just picked up a new model x. Yay. I'm single handedly saving Tesla.

Congrats on the new whip! And thanks for saving Tesla this month, too

 

[dhrivnak]

I wonder if Tesla has a supply contract for 18650 batteries that must sunset before they can abandon the current design generation. It's difficult to see why the flagship would be stuck with old tech. Tesla makes changes all the time so its curious why they are holding firm to the story that there are no plans to change the battery tech.

There is no old tech. The battery formulation has changed and improved with time. The current 18650 cells are still state of the art it is just they are of a slightly different form factor.

 

[wdolson]

As far a we know the chemistry in the Model 3's 2170s and the 100KWH packs for the S and X are the same. After the long term issues supercharging the chemistry for the 90KWH packs Tesla probably wanted to get the chemistry for the Model 3 out in the world at least a year before the Model 3 went into production to make sure there were not going to be problems.

The Model S and X have old design parts in them, but most of the old parts are mechical, not electrical or electronic. Most of that has been updated to the same generation as what the Model 3 is using with a few exceptions. The Model S/X still use the older motor design and the form factor for the battery cells is older, and some things that aren't shared with the Model 3 like servo motors that operate doors and such, but AP hardware is the same, and the MCU is the same generation, though a bit different design. I recall Tesla replaced the inverter and I believe the charging electronics on the Model S/X with Model 3 designs around the time the Model 3 entered production.

 

[dark cloud]

There is no old tech. The battery formulation has changed and improved with time. The current 18650 cells are still state of the art it is just they are of a slightly different form factor.

I can't believe Nissan are still producing leaf's with batteries like this:

 

[dhrivnak]

I can't believe Nissan are still producing leaf's with batteries like this:

View attachment 394003

I was specifically talking about Tesla. Yes other EVs can and do use other technology and with Nissan I think their main issue is they have not embraced thermal management of their cells.

 

[dark cloud]

I was specifically talking about Tesla. Yes other EVs can and do use other technology and with Nissan I think their main issue is they have not embraced thermal management of their cells.

I know, I am confirming with you there is nothing outdated about the "old" 18650 cells or the battery Tesla builds them with, compared to others that need to catch up.

 

[dbldwn02]

I wish my car could charge at 250kw.

They really need that in the Model S/X right now. Having a car that costs half as much but yet can charge twice as fast doesn't bode well for their premium line.

Still, I'll take My S over a 3 any day.

 

[dhrivnak]

I wish my car could charge at 250kw.

They really need that in the Model S/X right now. Having a car that costs half as much but yet can charge twice as fast doesn't bode well for their premium line.

Still, I'll take My S over a 3 any day.

I think this has more to do with wiring in the car than with the cells used. They just did not design the ports for that much power. Hopefully that will soon change.

 

[DanCar]

I think this has more to do with wiring in the car than with the cells used. They just did not design the ports for that much power. Hopefully that will soon change.

What is taking so long? They have had two years to do it?

 

[asrose]

With my 2016 MS that I purchased on 9/29/2016, had I known that the AP 2.0 would be available just days later, obviousLy I would have waited.

Since there's no entry point with model years, and the depreciation is so atrocious, how can anyone buy/trade for a new MS when it may have relative obsolescence (with the attendant huge increase in depreciation) shortly after purchase? To me, the analogy of a technologically superior M3 to the flagship MS, is clear.

Unmistakably, I love my car, but I wish that there was a more thoughtful, measured approach to updates - flagship MS with the latest and best technology after thorough testing and hardware model year releases. After spending a $100k on a new car, you would like to feel that you have the newest hardware for the next year - not just a few days or weeks.

 

[vickh]

Atleast the MCU should have been designed for EZ upgrades MCU 2.X would be snappier

I do like the MS timeless design, esp the new nose cone compared to the M3. That I believe can be swapped for the new one

 

[hallcp]

It's hard for to grasp how Tesla could do a major update to the S/X with so much else on their plate. And do they even have enough 2170 cells for S/X/3/Y all at once?
And then there's Tesla's stated goal of moving everybody into EV's. The 3 and the Y do that in spades, but I'm not sure the S & X are really necessary. I love my X, but I'm going to give the Y a close look some day when I can sit in it.

 

[eAdopter]

It’s only my opinion, but I think the two primary reasons for the S/X sales drops are:

1. Prices for a new S or X have risen significantly. For example, the lowest-cost S is now $85k, and much more if a few basic options are added. p.s. Opinion: Things such as paint should not cost extra on a high-end car.

2. Model 3 sales gave buyers an option within acceptable price ranges well(!) below $85k. Combine that with S/X price increases and a reduction in S/X sales seems normal.

I don’t think any of this was a mistake my Musk or Tesla. On the contrary, I think it’s their intentional strategy to sell the Model 3 which probably has higher margins. I expect we’ll see similar S/X/3 sales reductions when the Model Y becomes available.

It’s all part of the master plan. Genius.

 

[PhilDavid]

It’s only my opinion, but I think the two primary reasons for the S/X sales drops are:

1. Prices for a new S or X have risen significantly. For example, the lowest-cost S is now $85k, and much more if a few basic options are added. p.s. Opinion: Things such as paint should not cost extra on a high-end car.

2. Model 3 sales gave buyers an option within acceptable price ranges well(!) below $85k. Combine that with S/X price increases and a reduction in S/X sales seems normal.

I don’t think any of this was a mistake my Musk or Tesla. On the contrary, I think it’s their intentional strategy to sell the Model 3 which probably has higher margins. I expect we’ll see similar S/X/3 sales reductions when the Model Y becomes available.

It’s all part of the master plan. Genius.

Also they removed the sunroof and made interior choices boring. If you order a performance Model S, you only have two interior color choices. Just black and white. And you can no longer order a sunroof at any price.

 

[Chris Engineer]

We need a 350+ mile range S/X and a 450+ mile range S/X.

S needs a redesigned back end. Interiors need some door pockets.

And it still needs to be 15% cheaper.

Totally agree on the range issue.