Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Model X Update Email 11/18/2014

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
haha, ya I saw that, did the conversion and sat here like "what's the big deal? 300 real world miles isn't too far off from what the Model S originally promised anyway"

300 miles is ideal rated range (at 55 MPH), however, I have to consider that I'll have 4-5 adults, AC on a hot August day, 40 litres of gas (for the boat!), a cooler of food and overnight bags amounting to about another 250lbs of cargo and so there's no way I'd achieve 300m range. I'm thinking more like about 200 miles max (333km) which would get me one way (206km trip) very comfortably.
 
Perhaps the larger battery pack discussion that popped up here merits its own thread (actually, probably already exist a few times over), but, for me as a consumer, bigger battery? yes please! I'd jump at +25 kWh for the $8K it cost to go from 60 kWh to 85 kWh on the Model S (backing out the SuperCharger $2K value that comes with upgrading to an 85 kWh S... though, I'd happily pay the full $10K for a 110 battery upgrade). I see this delivering a battery I can drive 250+ miles in January, at real highway speeds, and not waiting at SuperChargers for the last far slower 20% of a charge.

That's just me individually as a consumer. Of course, I've not done market research on this... but I've thought about it as an investor. From reading the forums (but nothing directly from Tesla) I believe Model S orders have been roughly 80% 85 kWh, 20% 60 kWh, and when Tesla nixed the 40, I seem to remember them saying under 5% of orders had been for the 40. Moreover, while definitely anecdotal, I've seen multiple 60 owners say they'd get the 85 if they could do it over again, I've never seen an 85 owner say they wished they'd gotten a 60. To me it seems short of an engineering challenge, rolling out a larger battery is a very good bet for Tesla.
 
Last edited:
No confusion here.

Then, not sure why you would think that 300 miles of real world range would be hard, expensive or unneeded? I'm about 120 miles away from NYC, and head there often for business and family. No SC on the way (even if there was, I'm not going to make a 2 hour drive worse by stopping). 300 mile real world range would work for me 2-3 times per month (though in my case, 250 would also work, but 300 is better for the weather buffer). I'm sure the same would be true for many others.

Given that the S has received a bump in range (as reported by tesla) with the D and weight savings, I don't think seeing real world 300 mile range is that far out of the realm of possibility for the near future.

300 miles is ideal rated range (at 55 MPH), however, I have to consider that I'll have 4-5 adults, AC on a hot August day, 40 litres of gas (for the boat!), a cooler of food and overnight bags amounting to about another 250lbs of cargo and so there's no way I'd achieve 300m range. I'm thinking more like about 200 miles max (333km) which would get me one way (206km trip) very comfortably.

Right, that's why I mentioned 300m real world range. When the weather is nice, I can probably count on somewhere in the area of 210. Being able to count on 300 in nice weather, and say 210 when it's bad out would be a welcome change.

Moreover, while definitely anecdotal, I've seen multiple 60 owners say they'd get the 85 if they could do it over again, I've never seen an 85 owner say they wished they'd gotten a 60. To me it seems short of an engineering challenge, rolling out a larger battery is a very good bet for Tesla.

Agreed. There's no harm in a buffer, especially to bring you up to the round-trip ranges that are far more common today than decades ago with sprawling. If the price was right, I'd be all over it.
 
Then, not sure why you would think that 300 miles of real world range would be hard, expensive or unneeded? I'm about 120 miles away from NYC, and head there often for business and family. No SC on the way (even if there was, I'm not going to make a 2 hour drive worse by stopping). 300 mile real world range would work for me 2-3 times per month (though in my case, 250 would also work, but 300 is better for the weather buffer). I'm sure the same would be true for many others.

Given that the S has received a bump in range (as reported by tesla) with the D and weight savings, I don't think seeing real world 300 mile range is that far out of the realm of possibility for the near future.

I did mention that there were some people, because of location, that DID need additional range. Obviously people with trips who exceed the current range (even if by only a few miles) with no supercharger option and no option to charge at the destination, would fall into that category. Like you.

The post I was responding to was talking about getting a larger battery and was planning on getting a Model X 'similar in price' to a Model S. My point is that additional features bump up costs. It is no longer 'similar in price' when you have a larger capacity battery. And then of course, you need to assume that it will be similar in price to S85D, as a base. Plus the battery. Etc.

None of this stuff is going to be free.
 
View attachment 63952[/QUOTE]

The head rests are also unlike the prototype and the current Model S integrated rests. They appear to have more of an A frame than the vertical prototypical ones.

Also, +1 on the squared off roofline. It is really dramatic when you look at where the roof starts again after the door opening. Maybe this was the issue with the lateral instability of the doors during driving, and squaring it off helped to add stability to the corner interfaces?
 

The head rests are also unlike the prototype and the current Model S integrated rests. They appear to have more of an A frame than the vertical prototypical ones.

Also, +1 on the squared off roofline. It is really dramatic when you look at where the roof starts again after the door opening. Maybe this was the issue with the lateral instability of the doors during driving, and squaring it off helped to add stability to the corner interfaces?[/QUOTE]

I don't see any headrests in any of the posted pictures. Can you indicate what you are referring to please ?
 
Also, +1 on the squared off roofline. It is really dramatic when you look at where the roof starts again after the door opening. Maybe this was the issue with the lateral instability of the doors during driving, and squaring it off helped to add stability to the corner interfaces?

Hm, I didn't notice it too much at first, but when you focus, it definitely is very squared. It's possible that the doors will soften/round out the corners a bit (at least on the side there) though.

I don't see any headrests in any of the posted pictures. Can you indicate what you are referring to please ?

You can VAGUELY see them in the edited pic.
 
Looks like there might be some kind of covered storage in the lower part of the doors. Maybe the covers even fold out as cup holders.

I guess a problem with cup holders in the falcon wing doors is that you might forget you have a drink in there and then open the door.
 
Cup holders in falcon wing doors would be a design flaw, imo.
LOL!

Looking closer at new pic (Beta) vs old pic (prototype), some thoughts:
The doors:
The doors have much better clearance to walk in/up to the car then the old.
The only thing that the door can have are speakers - (besides a handle/buttons to open and un/lock)
The door does seem to stop higher then the prototype - maybe my scaling is off. But any sensors that would be needed can be in the handle assembly, which minimizes wiring and other complexity with having additional sensors.
Overall the doors looks much cleaner then the old ones.

The cabin:
The headrests look way better.
The dashboard does not stick out for the center console screen.
To me, looks/feels spacious.


modelx-new_vs_old-prototype.png
 
No cup holders at all would be a serious design flaw. Maybe Tesla will surprise you with gimbal mount cup holders in the falcon wing doors.

(Sheesh, nobody has any imagination anymore....)

Who said anything about 'no cup holders'????

(Sheesh, really? Gimbal? Overthinking. Just .... overthinking. One more thing to break. There is elegance in simplicity...)

:)
 
No cup holders at all would be a serious design flaw. Maybe Tesla will surprise you with gimbal mount cup holders in the falcon wing doors.

(Sheesh, nobody has any imagination anymore....)

As long as the second row cup holders are not the same as the post production ones for the S I am OK with gimbal; slide out cup holders in the second row captain's chair arms......:biggrin:

Also, I would be shocked to see a bigger battery initially and no 'P' version and would not be shocked to see an '85' only option for battery size
 

Classic example of the headline and actual article completely at odds with each other.

From the article
"Yesterday, Tesla Motors had news for all those waiting for its Model X SUV: be patient, it’s coming. In an e-mail to customers with reservations for Model X, Tesla announced that deliveries won't take place before the third quarter of 2015, but the company said it's hard at work developing and testing the new vehicle."
 
Perhaps "the best rack and accessory companies in the world" will come up with something EVEN MORE elegant than this !:
image.jpg
image.jpg
Whoa, I saw this guy on the road & when he pulled into the same parking lot, I couldn't resist. Here's to a fine hitch rack solution ! (Once again, I'll be putting my stuff INSIDE) ML