[Poll] Given the Trade-offs, What's the Minimum Acceptable Range for a Tesla?

[FutureShock]

The trade-offs (if you need to reminded), are that more batteries = more weight, higher cost, and less interior space.

As weighed against more range, which to some folks = nirvana.

And 'range' is the EPA-rated range, if you have to ask.

Finally, I don't think this question is terribly price-dependent. Unacceptable range is unacceptable range, regardless of whether it's a 3, an S or an X, or some future cheap sub-$25K Tesla (maybe you just swear at it a little less if it's a *cheap* unacceptable-range car ).

.

 

[Tiger]

Price isn't an issue if there is sufficient range and performance. One can only whish for great build quality to go with it

 

[ccdisce]

The trade-offs (if you need to reminded), are that more batteries = more weight, higher cost, and less interior space.

As weighed against more range, which to some folks = nirvana.

And 'range' is the EPA-rated range, if you have to ask.

Finally, I don't think this question is terribly price-dependent. Unacceptable range is unacceptable range, regardless of whether it's a 3, an S or an X, or some future cheap sub-$25K Tesla (maybe you just swear at it a little less if it's a *cheap* unacceptable-range car ).

.

for highway driving 350mi range would be nice so I can use the battery 25%-75% for fast re-charging thermally managed well with the current spacing of superchargers .

for city commuting 100mi range would be nice thermally managed well to handle daily recharges at home or partial top off with destination charging if needed in wide range of temperatures for battery longevity.

so as I see it 1 model S 100D
1 model 3 short range
or ionq not a fan of the styling tho

 

[NewTMSMan]

I would also add performance as a trade-off related to weight. I would accept a sub-300 mile range on the new roadster if it had better handling and 0-60 < 2s.

 

[mspohr]

Depends on individual use. For daily use only needs to cover your commute. For trips I've found in California that Superchargers are close together so I only charge to about 200 miles.

 

[Nick B]

I picked 250 miles as you typically lose around 25% in very cold weather (like here in Montreal) and some days I need that full remaining mileage for work.

 

[DriveMe]

"Minimum acceptable" is hard to define. Given a choice, I would want at least 250.
However, if 200 was the only available option, would I still buy a Tesla? I think I would!

 

[Viking1]

I put 200 miles as minimum. If this question was asked 1 year ago I would probably respond with 300. However, now I'm more comfortable with the car and supercharging. If asked what is my desired mileage at a "reasonable" price it would be 400 miles. That would cover me for the <1% cases. For example, I'm making a trip this month to an area (national park) with only level 1 charging. I will staying in this area for about 4 days. If that is not enough I'll need to make a special charging trip of 30 miles to a level 2 or 70 miles to a supercharger.

 

[FutureShock]

For myself, I put 300 miles, because 1) I forgot for a sec there was a 275 miles option, and 2), '300 miles' sometimes isn't really 300 miles, when you consider things like cold weather, heater usage, AC usage, headwinds, rain/wet roads, hills and mountains, a full load of passengers, aged batteries, etc. etc.

Things just don't always work out optimally IRL, y'know?

Then there's the fact that full charges and full discharges are not nice to Li-ion batteries.

Finally, there is competition. GM has already fired a shot across the bow with the Bolt's 238 mile range in a relatively cheap vehicle (and outranging a Model S in a real-world-test Consumer Reports showdown).

No doubt others will try to compete with Tesla on range, with 'the bigger number WINS!!!' -type marketing. A number of makers are probably going to try to play Samsung to Tesla's 'iPhone', trying to win on specs, though probably not quality/overall package.

.

 

[csphili]

Can I drive to Grandma's house two states away with only 200 miles range? Yes I can, using superchargers.

As long as they keep building more superchargers I think people will get more and more comfortable with reasonably "medium" EV ranges like 200. I did.

 

[boaterva]

I put 300 because that's what I have/will have . But with all the Superchargers coming and assuming you are in SuC territory, less might work.

I agree you end up with about half of total range using a good battery 'range' of 20-70 or whatever and heating/cooling, etc.

 

[ucmndd]

200 has been perfectly acceptable for me over the last 25k miles.

That said, we have a second ICE car in the family. I think the minimum range for me would be closer to 300 miles if it was our only car.

 

[FutureShock]

I would also add performance as a trade-off related to weight. I would accept a sub-300 mile range on the new roadster if it had better handling and 0-60 < 2s.

Sub-2 second 0-60 times?!

I think that'd put my spleen in the next state.

.

 

[Electroman]

For me range is king. I selected 450, because during bad weather that is reduced to 300 at highway speeds, which is what we get in an ICE.

 

[whitex]

The trade-offs (if you need to reminded), are that more batteries = more weight, higher cost, and less interior space.

As weighed against more range, which to some folks = nirvana.

And 'range' is the EPA-rated range, if you have to ask.

Finally, I don't think this question is terribly price-dependent. Unacceptable range is unacceptable range, regardless of whether it's a 3, an S or an X, or some future cheap sub-$25K Tesla (maybe you just swear at it a little less if it's a *cheap* unacceptable-range car ).

.

Ok, so what are the trade-off you are talking about for each of the voting choices. Most of them are not available so you must provide the information if you want people to make an informed decision. How much heavier, how much more Wh/m, how much lower or higher acceleration, how much more money? Unless you have all this available for all choices, you cannot make any informed votes.

 

[GSP]

For me range is king. I selected 450, because during bad weather that is reduced to 300 at highway speeds, which is what we get in an ICE.

If 450 miles is the "minimum acceptable range for a Tesla," are you going to sell your S85 and wait for a 450 mile range model to become available? Perhaps you mean 450 is what you want, not the "minimum acceptable" for any Tesla buyer.

I voted for 200 miles. Telsa supercharger spacing is designed to make this work. Tesla has sold supercharger enabled cars with as little as 208 mile range, and buyers have been very happy with them. I think this proves that 208 is enough for the minimum acceptable range.

Everyone has different needs, and I would not be happy with 200 miles myself. I do find the 270 mile range of my S85D to meet my needs nicely. I think 300 would be even better for me, but beyond that the drawbacks of cost, weight, and size outweigh the marginal benefits of making fewer supercharging stops.

GSP

 

[Electroman]

Perhaps you mean 450 is what you want, not the "minimum acceptable" for any Tesla buyer.

Understood and thats what I meant. At 450 that basically covers 90%+ folks. You can take your S without hesitation on a sub zero snowy morning with no range anxiety even if you are stuck on the highway for hours. You can do your trips with very minimum planning. Destination chargers are added value, but not a critical need as long as there superchargers along the way.

 

[FutureShock]

If 450 miles is the "minimum acceptable range for a Tesla," are you going to sell your S85 and wait for a 450 mile range model to become available? Perhaps you mean 450 is what you want, not the "minimum acceptable" for any Tesla buyer.

I voted for 200 miles. Telsa supercharger spacing is designed to make this work. Tesla has sold supercharger enabled cars with as little as 208 mile range, and buyers have been very happy with them. I think this proves that 208 is enough for the minimum acceptable range.

Everyone has different needs [emphasis added], and I would not be happy with 200 miles myself. I do find the 270 mile range of my S85D to meet my needs nicely. I think 300 would be even better for me, but beyond that the drawbacks of cost, weight, and size outweigh the marginal benefits of making fewer supercharging stops.

Just to clarify, the poll is asking what's the minimum acceptable range to YOU, the poll voter (and I think most ppl did understand it that way).

As you yourself say, everyone has different needs. So it's more about your own personal needs, rather than what you think would be the minimum acceptable range in general/for most other people/in theory.

It's about what YOU want or need. 'Cuz ppl tend to spend money based on personal needs, not theoretical ones or what someone else needs.

(And based on that, seems like 275 miles was probably the poll choice for you, since you say you wouldn't be happy with 200 miles yourself, but that 270 was working out nicely for you).

.

 

[mspohr]

Understood and thats what I meant. At 450 that basically covers 90%+ folks. You can take your S without hesitation on a sub zero snowy morning with no range anxiety even if you are stuck on the highway for hours. You can do your trips with very minimum planning. Destination chargers are added value, but not a critical need as long as there superchargers along the way.

I voted for 200 miles.
My experience has been that this is more than adequate to get me from one Supercharger to the next for all of the driving and vacation trips I do (traveling around Western US and Canada).
As far as winter, stuck on highway, etc. my experience worst case is the few times I have been stuck for hours in huge traffic jams going over Donner summit during winter storms, 200 miles of charge is sufficient to get me up and over the summit (7000 ft elevation change) plus sitting for hours at a standstill on the snow covered road. 200 miles is what I usually charge going from the SC at Rocklin to my home at Lake Tahoe. If I'm short of charge (never actually happened), I can charge at one of the Truckee SC before driving the last 30 miles to my home.

 

[whitex]

Just to clarify, the poll is asking what's the minimum acceptable range to YOU, the poll voter (and I think most ppl did understand it that way).
.

Yes, but the question also states "Given the Trade-offs" which changes the question. Since the 500+ Tesla doesn't exist today, we have to assume what those trade-offs are. So if I assume the battery technology will be much better and for $2K over today's price I can get 500+ mile car as, and it will only be 100lb heavier costing me only 0.1s for 0-60, then the Trade-offs are definitely worth it. 600mile range Model 3 for $37K, definitely worth it, even is 0.1s slower 0-60 than the $35K version.