Options / Pricing gripes for 160 mile version

[EVNow]

If I'm told of a '160 mile version' of the vehicle, then I expect to get 160 miles out of it in a charge, give or take a little bit within reason.

Well, if there are people who reserved thinking 160 mile meant - 160 miles at highway speed, then I've to say Tesla didn't do a good job of communicating.

Ironically a Tesla exec bashed Nissan for their 100 mile claim (even though Nissan always said 100 miles was in LA04 city cycle).

 

[EVNow]

What's making you think that?

Because I don't see anything else listed in the "facts".

What makes you think they might offer a QC other than SuperCharging ?

 

[jimbakker666]

I always saw this as a car suitable for upper middle-class buyers, not middle class. (And of course that middle class standard is dropping and getting smaller.

I don't know many people who consider themselves middle class and drive around BMWs and Audis...I think they'd be considered upper middle class.

I actually am upper middle-class, I just don't see the need to buy expensive cars unless I see a real reason. Tesla is, or maybe was, that reason.

 

[Todd Burch]

Because I don't see anything else listed in the "facts".

What makes you think they might offer a QC other than SuperCharging ?

To be fair, there's a lot of info we still don't know. But I read: "Comes with 110 volt standard household outlet adapter, 240 volt dryer outlet adapter, and J1772 public charging station adapter. Other outlet adapters available for purchase."

Those "other outlet adapters" could be for a NEMA 14-30, but it could also be for CHAdeMO.

I won't assume something's not supported just because it's not on the initial options and pricing rollout webpage.

 

[EVNow]

Those "other outlet adapters" could be for a NEMA 14-30, but it could also be for CHAdeMO.

I won't assume something's not supported just because it's not on the initial options and pricing rollout webpage.

While anything is possible, DC charging requires some extra hardware including probably bigger wires. So, I think it is a reasonable assumption that base S won't support QC - if it doesn't support SuperCharging - even if they make a CHAdeMO adapter. For eg. Leaf without QC option can't be dealer upgraded to support QC. I'd love to be proved wrong.

 

[Todd Burch]

While anything is possible, DC charging requires some extra hardware including probably bigger wires. So, I think it is a reasonable assumption that base S won't support QC - if it doesn't support SuperCharging - even if they make a CHAdeMO adapter. For eg. Leaf without QC option can't be dealer upgraded to support QC. I'd love to be proved wrong.

I suppose time will tell...

 

[qwk]

I actually am upper middle-class, I just don't see the need to buy expensive cars unless I see a real reason. Tesla is, or maybe was, that reason.

I agree with you on some of your points like the acceleration, QC issues for the base model, but nowadays a $50k car is not that expensive if you are upper middle class. Car/truck prices have gone way up in the last 10-15 years.

Since Tesla is the only EV maker that makes a decent EV(I know I will catch hell for this), I'm sure they know that they can extract a certain $ amout for them until there is an alternative. That's the price to pay for being an early adopter..

 

[EVNow]

I don't know many people who consider themselves middle class and drive around BMWs and Audis...I think they'd be considered upper middle class.

Class is a rather vague subject. Afterall McCain thought you were middle class if you made less than $5,000,000 per year !

I've a bunch of friends/colleagues who drive BMW/Lexus but consider themselfs middle class. I doubt they'd pay $70K to get nav & qc

 

[Todd Burch]

I actually am upper middle-class, I just don't see the need to buy expensive cars unless I see a real reason. Tesla is, or maybe was, that reason.

I'm upper middle-class as well...I would never have seen myself spending this much either. I drove a base Saturn for 10 years, and currently drive a base Toyota Corolla. I've never owned a car with power windows. Yet I feel compelled to splurge on this car, for so many off-topic reasons.

Regardless, I still don't think it's ever been viewed as a car for the middle class. That's why it's always been compared to Audis, BMW 5 series and touted as a luxury car.

 

[stopcrazypp]

If I'm told of a '160 mile version' of the vehicle, then I expect to get 160 miles out of it in a charge, give or take a little bit within reason...

I agree with you that the missing 1 hour charge ability was a huge disappointment (although it is something Tesla may change their minds on if enough 160 mile orders are effected) and that the lower acceleration was something Tesla never hinted at (although some of us here already said it might happen when talking about the different pack sizes; it's not something that can be reversed because there are technical limitations that make it that way).

However, I disagree that Tesla ever gave the impression the 160 mile was anything but a very rough estimate of the range. Given Tesla says it's at 55mph, that is exactly the same cycle that they rate the Roadster range at. So it's consistent (side note: it's also more conservative than the Leaf's advertised 100 mile range on the LA4 cycle, which is basically just city driving).

 

[dsm363]

I'm glad Tesla is stating battery pack size (kWh) now and then saying the mile range estimate is at 55mph. Just saying '300 mile' pack leaves out so many variables and will be confusing to the general public since they'll feel mislead if they drive 75 mph and don't get exactly 300 miles in range. Not realistic but that doesn't stop people.

 

[jimbakker666]

I'm glad Tesla is stating battery pack size (kWh) now and then saying the mile range estimate is at 55mph. Just saying '300 mile' pack leaves out so many variables and will be confusing to the general public since they'll feel mislead if they drive 75 mph and don't get exactly 300 miles in range. Not realistic but that doesn't stop people.

They're still somewhat misleading. On the options page, the mileage is estimated @ 55mph. However, on the features page, it's estimated @ 60 mph: http://www.teslamotors.com/models/features#/performance

So what should my understanding be? There's obviously a mistake here somewhere...should 55 actually be 65?

 

[Doug_G]

There's obviously a mistake here somewhere...should 55 actually be 65?

I'm sure it's 55. That's what the Roadster's range is based on.

 

[neroden]

To be fair, there's a lot of info we still don't know. But I read: "Comes with 110 volt standard household outlet adapter, 240 volt dryer outlet adapter, and J1772 public charging station adapter. Other outlet adapters available for purchase."

Those "other outlet adapters" could be for a NEMA 14-30, but it could also be for CHAdeMO.

Correction. The dryer outlet is the 14-30. Amazingly, it seems the 14-50 will not come standard. Unless we tell Tesla how ridiculous that is. Nickel. And. Dime.

 

[EVNow]

So it's consistent (side note: it's also more conservative than the Leaf's advertised 100 mile range on the LA4 cycle, which is basically just city driving).

Leaf actually gets 100 miles in combined cycle, even though they only promised in LA4. That is how the 70% adjustment gets the 73 mile rating.

 

[Doug_G]

Correction. The dryer outlet is the 14-30. Amazingly, it seems the 14-50 will not come standard. Unless we tell Tesla how ridiculous that is. Nickel. And. Dime.

"Dryer outlet" is pretty vague, actually. That's written for the general public, who doesn't know that dryers and ranges have different outlets. Also some dryers do have NEMA 14-50.

I'd bet it's really NEMA 14-50, or that they'll let you choose.

 

[neroden]

It would really not be good if the 160 mile model was entirely incapable of fast charging. If they get it so it charges at 45 kW on the Tesla Supercharger (as opposed to the larger battery's 90 kW), it would already be faster than any other charging option available to it. And 160 owners would just be *irritated* to have no access if one happens to be in the right location for their trip.

But Tesla has got a year to fix that. Or they may just cancel the 160 entirely and refund people's money; they seem to have been having troubles with the design.

Glad to see exactly what speed the mileage is rated at. Guess that means I'll get the full mileage or better.

 

[EVNow]

They're still somewhat misleading. On the options page, the mileage is estimated @ 55mph. However, on the features page, it's estimated @ 60 mph: http://www.teslamotors.com/models/features#/performance

So what should my understanding be? There's obviously a mistake here somewhere...should 55 actually be 65?

Note that range depends on a lot of things - nobody drives at a constant speed in real life.
- Altitude changes / hilly terrain
- Use of A/C or heater
- Acceleration / braking
- Speed

In highway driving using a/c, I think you'll get about 110 to 130 miles.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Leaf actually gets 100 miles in combined cycle, even though they only promised in LA4. That is how the 70% adjustment gets the 73 mile rating.

Looking back at the FOIA documents, you are right. The Leaf gets 104 miles on the combined, 110 miles on the city cycle. The difference isn't that huge.

 

[JRP3]

I understand some of the disappointment but base models of many vehicles have lower performance and fewer features so it's hardly surprising. I don't know what the final max charge rate will be but of course it can't be at 90kw because of the pack size, but because the pack is so much smaller it would only take about half the power to fill in the same time.