Buddyroe
Active Member
Good point - and also consider if your optimal route even has a supercharger. Otherwise, you'll have to go out of your way to charge.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Poll about possible long range S/X
- Thread starter Olle
- Start date
Good point - and also consider if your optimal route even has a supercharger. Otherwise, you'll have to go out of your way to charge.
jorobsand
Member
I don't think that's a fair comparison. More range means a higher cost. Most people are going to buy based on their needs in order to save money. For me personally, having extra range on a road trip would be a nice thing, but not a necessary thing. And depending on the price difference, it might not be worth it.
I don't doubt that there are some people who would benefit from the increased range based on their driving needs. My point was to determine if there are enough of those people to warrant the investment on Tesla's end. If there isn't enough interest and the sales aren't there, Tesla could lose money.
And FWIW, I didn't myself buy a P100D because it had the most range, I bought it because it had the best performance.
The more range they offer, the more available the superchargers become. In SoCal, they are completely clogged. Charging speed is dramatically reduced when they are full, not to mention the queue of cars when you pull in.
I say “bring the range.”
Buddyroe
Active Member
Tesla owns about 1% of the market right now in America. The other 99% are holding out for more range.
If Tesla didn't see the demand for more range, why has the S gone from the orginal 40/60/85 model lineup to now only a 100 model? And the thing is, the cost of the S 100D is now less than the S 90D when it came out (when you compare equally optioned cars). So, I think Tesla will continue to increase range as battery costs allow it (to satisfy your point about being able to afford the long range).
Tesla will always be researching and developing battery technology - whether it be faster charging, or higher capacity (more range). They will also continue to tweak software as well as aerodynamics. There are a ton of people in the world that can afford a $100k car. If Tesla has reduced the cost of batteries enough right now to sell a 115D (tho they probably won't call it that) for around the same price as the 100D, they will bring in another batch of buyers who previously could afford the car, but wouldn't consider it due to limited range. I know that to be a fact because I have 2 neighbors who are in that camp.
Trust me, I post on SO many websites and read SO many comments about Tesla, it's nuts (yes, I waste too much time doingit). The 2 biggest concerns are range and charge time. However, charge time worries diminish as range increase, and vice versa. People don't want their 5 hour trips turning into 7 hour trips due to charging. The farther you can go on a charge, the greater chance you can make it to your destination and charge there (at night). Or, if technology ever allows EVs to charge in 5 minutes, and there are chargers available like gas stations, then 300 miles of range is fine. One or the other HAS to improve to bring in the masses. Plain and simple.
f205v
Member
Yes, having a car with a theoretical range of 700 miles, real in summer 600, real in winter 500, would basically mean that 99,99% of the drives will NOT need a stop at a supercharger.
This will have 2 effects:
1) for Tesla owners, charging at night at home: no need to stop for refuelling EVER!
1a) for Tesla owners, with no charging facility at home: availability of SC without qeue
2) for non Tesla owners: the old question "what's the range" will simply be answered as "range? what are you talking about?"
This could be disruptive for competitors as well, imagine 3-4 years from now, when Mercedes, Audi, Ford, etc all have their line-up of EVs with real world ranges similar to today's best Teslas (300 miles) and Elon comes out with the Tesla "model K" that: "doesn't need refuelling along the road"
Basically I'm talking about batteries with double density than what we have today (I'm talking about density per US$ cost, not per Kg)
This will have 2 effects:
1) for Tesla owners, charging at night at home: no need to stop for refuelling EVER!
1a) for Tesla owners, with no charging facility at home: availability of SC without qeue
2) for non Tesla owners: the old question "what's the range" will simply be answered as "range? what are you talking about?"
This could be disruptive for competitors as well, imagine 3-4 years from now, when Mercedes, Audi, Ford, etc all have their line-up of EVs with real world ranges similar to today's best Teslas (300 miles) and Elon comes out with the Tesla "model K" that: "doesn't need refuelling along the road"
Basically I'm talking about batteries with double density than what we have today (I'm talking about density per US$ cost, not per Kg)
As Tesla faces more competition for long range EVs, the major factors will be features, range, performance and cost.
One problem Tesla currently has is differentiating 3/Y from S/X - since the 3 (and future Y) have almost the same feature set as the S/X, but at a much lower cost, with some loss in interior/cargo capacity.
In the near term, we're likely going to see V3 supercharging, which probably needs the newer 2170 battery pack designs. Phasing out the S/X 75 battery packs is likely the first step towards introducing new battery packs for S/X - which will bring S/X to the same level of battery capabilities as 3/Y (right now S/X is using the older technology).
2170 packs are smaller and cheaper per KWh, so that opens the door to lowering the price of S/X 100 vehicles (or increasing profit margin) and possibly introducing a slightly higher capacity S/X battery pack (which would add something to S/X that won't be available in the lower priced 3/Y).
When the new 2170 packs are introduced for S/X, wouldn't be surprised to see the price of the 100 models drop and a larger pack (120?) added at the same price as the 100 models today. This is what Tesla did before when they introduced the 90 and 100 packs.
And they need to do this before they deploy V3 superchargers, or risk leaving out their higher end S/X models from the faster charging. [Of course, current S/X owners may not get the full benefits of V3 supercharging, while all Model 3's may already have the hardware to support faster supercharging).
Also wouldn't be surprised to see Tesla add a few new features to S/X, to further differentiate from 3/Y - so that stepping up to S/X from 3/Y would add range, performance, and features - in exchange for the higher cost.
Though with Tesla's focus on expanding their product family - Model Y, semi, pickup and Roadster 2.0, still seems likely they'll hold off on any major changes to S/X for now, and wait until they are closer to having FSD working before they do a major interior redesign.
One problem Tesla currently has is differentiating 3/Y from S/X - since the 3 (and future Y) have almost the same feature set as the S/X, but at a much lower cost, with some loss in interior/cargo capacity.
In the near term, we're likely going to see V3 supercharging, which probably needs the newer 2170 battery pack designs. Phasing out the S/X 75 battery packs is likely the first step towards introducing new battery packs for S/X - which will bring S/X to the same level of battery capabilities as 3/Y (right now S/X is using the older technology).
2170 packs are smaller and cheaper per KWh, so that opens the door to lowering the price of S/X 100 vehicles (or increasing profit margin) and possibly introducing a slightly higher capacity S/X battery pack (which would add something to S/X that won't be available in the lower priced 3/Y).
When the new 2170 packs are introduced for S/X, wouldn't be surprised to see the price of the 100 models drop and a larger pack (120?) added at the same price as the 100 models today. This is what Tesla did before when they introduced the 90 and 100 packs.
And they need to do this before they deploy V3 superchargers, or risk leaving out their higher end S/X models from the faster charging. [Of course, current S/X owners may not get the full benefits of V3 supercharging, while all Model 3's may already have the hardware to support faster supercharging).
Also wouldn't be surprised to see Tesla add a few new features to S/X, to further differentiate from 3/Y - so that stepping up to S/X from 3/Y would add range, performance, and features - in exchange for the higher cost.
Though with Tesla's focus on expanding their product family - Model Y, semi, pickup and Roadster 2.0, still seems likely they'll hold off on any major changes to S/X for now, and wait until they are closer to having FSD working before they do a major interior redesign.
.. and a price reduction down below $30k levels. It will happen in the next 5 years - 300 mile range for $28k.
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
Lol, no they’re not. 99% of new car buyers aren’t buying Teslas because they don’t go far enough on a charge?
Not because they cost at minimum $50k for a subcompact or $100k for the SUV that everyone actually wants?
Come on.
Buddyroe
Active Member
Let me clarify then - the other 99% aren't considering the car at any price because of the limited range/long charge time.
One of those has to improve greatly - no matter the price point.
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
Sorry, that’s equally silly. I think a huge portion of the population would buy a Tesla tomorrow but the idea of a $50-100k car is not compatible with their reality.
I don’t necessarily disagree but would personally rather see investment in faster and more ubiquitous charging infrastructure than trying to carry around more range with us everywhere we go for 0.5% of our trips. That’s terribly inefficient.
SSonnentag
埃隆•馬斯克
The Model S remains one of the sleekest and best looking cars on the road. Creature comforts can use tweaking, but the exterior design is good for another 10 years in my opinion.
dgpcolorado
high altitude member
I think some of those 99% will be won over when they get a chance to try out a Tesla and realize that the range/long charge time aren't that big of a deal compared to the fun of driving one.
I go for the following
- Interior update but limited exterior update. My thinking is the aluminium body is not so easy to change and it's standing the test of time design wise
- New SuperCharger V3 battery being made standard (based on 2170). Battery approach will be same as M3, Medium Range and Long Range, no kW/h rating given. Something like 300 & 400 Mile range.
- Interior update but limited exterior update. My thinking is the aluminium body is not so easy to change and it's standing the test of time design wise
- New SuperCharger V3 battery being made standard (based on 2170). Battery approach will be same as M3, Medium Range and Long Range, no kW/h rating given. Something like 300 & 400 Mile range.
Exactly my thoughts...I wish they put more superchargers between Bakersfield and the Tracy in Cali! That would be awesome I could speed without worrying about making it to the next network. Especially in my 75D I have to top at least 80% of the battery in order to make it with 7-10% to the next supercharger.
Buddyroe
Active Member
Some simply won't give it a chance. But, I agree with you, except for when I take super long trips. Man, I hate it when I have to go out of my way to get to a supercharger -especially on the way back when I'm really tired. But, I still would never go back to an ICE. Never. But then, I don't travel by car long distances very often.
dgpcolorado
high altitude member
My family lives 1100 miles away so I've made seven 2000+ mile road trips plus numerous shorter ones to visit friends and the service center on the other side of the mountains. That's nothing compared to the real road warriors here! However, I enjoy those trips — I listen to audio books to make the miles melt away — and I make more and much longer stops due to driving an S60 with limited range (currently 181 RM) and very slow Supercharging. Even so, I often find the car ready to go before I am. When I was driving long trips in an ICE car I would stop frequently at rest stops to walk around for a bit. Now it is Supercharging stops.
With a 300 mile range Tesla, my road trips would be really easy. I think people just have to get used to a new way of doing things — some will adapt well and others won't.
Buddyroe
Active Member
I hate to tell you, but speeding to make it to the next supercharger gains you nothing overall. The amount of time you gain speeding is lost at the next supercharger because you have to charge longer to make up for the extra miles you used while speeding. The only time speeding in an electric car pays off is on the last leg of your trip and you KNOW you can make it. I've found that slowing down is actually faster.
If I'm planning a stop at a specific place I'll intentionally speed to reach that stop at 10% rather than 20%. My 85 pack only charges at full speed for the initial part anyway so all that's doing is getting to my stop faster, for no impact on my stop time. I've never come back to a car that wasn't ready to leave before I was and newer cars are much faster to charge than mine.
Tic-tac-toe
Member
Agree. SP100D is amazing. My brother whose daily ride is a Porsche 911 Turbo S admitted that my huge mom car is quicker in every way... except for top speed - which we’ll never get to test, anyway.
I use my P100D mainly for long road trips due to my kid’s activities, think travel sports all year round and 2-3 trips a month. (We were in Charlotte around Christmas - got the first speeding ticket in my life on the way there in VA
Maybe it’s the way I drive but the current range on our S P100D works really well for us. Also, it is a 150k+ car. I expect any increase in range, performance and better technology will not cause the price to increase for future buyers.
