Raven vs. non-raven: huge difference, or not?

[manttium]

I'm in the market for a Model X, and am looking between a used 2017/2018 100D, and a new Long Range Plus. Naturally, the Raven build, Model 3 front motor, better efficiency, improved suspension, full warranty, etc. are attractive, but at the same time, I'm having a hard time justifying the ~$20k price difference.

I currently have a used 100D on order from Tesla, for which I paid $63k for. It has 80k miles (!) on it, but since Tesla is selling it to me, I'll still have 2 years / 20k miles of warranty on it. It has all of the options I want (6 seater, white on white), plus others I don't care much about (22" onyx wheels, FSD). Battery health appears to be good, with no measured battery degradation (in fact, based on the current stated miles remaining and % charge, projecting out to 100kWh shows the range is 300mi - 5mi better than spec!). Since the biggest concern about high mileage in a Tesla is usually the battery, I'm not too worried about the high mileage in this particular vehicle. Pictures reveal that this is a nice, clean, well maintained vehicle.

I'm expecting to take delivery of this vehicle next week, but I keep reading about the difference between efficiency and ride quality between 2017/2018 models and raven, and it's nagging in the back of my mind. Efficiency and range differences are clear to me, but cabin feel is very subjective. I've heard people say the difference in suspension and noise is enormous in older models vs. Raven (e.g., a reddit thread yesterday suggested it was like riding on a magic carpet), whereas some people say they can't tell the difference. Curiously, I've also heard some people claim that the ride is quieter in older models (though not as smooth suspension), perhaps due to the heavier sound insulation.

There's been a few discussions on here about this topic, but no real consensus was reached - thus I pose the poll below to get some feedback. Please only answer if you've actually spent time in both raven and non-raven vehicles, ideally with the same kind of wheels on both for fair comparison.

P.S. I'm coming from a P3D with 20" wheels, so any Model X will feel like a magic carpet compared to that! I should also mention that I am planning on swapping the 22" onyx wheels with stock 20" wheels when I receive delivery.

 

[Bigriver]

Battery health appears to be good, with no measured battery degradation (in fact, based on the current stated miles remaining and % charge, projecting out to 100kWh shows the range is 300mi - 5mi better than spec!

I think this is highly suspect. An 80,000 mile battery will have some degradation. I’ve only seen Tesla used listings identify the original EPA value. Tesla provided you screen shots of the readout from the car? It sounds to me like ideal miles, not rated miles, must have been selected.

 

[TigerNinety]

I think this is highly suspect. An 80,000 mile battery will have some degradation. I’ve only seen Tesla used listings identify the original EPA value. Tesla provided you screen shots of the readout from the car? It sounds to me like ideal miles, not rated miles, must have been selected.

Ditto on the range. I have learned I’m lucky to have only ~5% degradation on my 2016 MS at about 19k miles.

 

[manttium]

I was wondering about this as well. The calculation I did with the used vehicles sales rep was the following:

Current battery charge: 48.5kWh
Current displayed range: 145.8mi

Assuming a 100kWh battery, this would result in a range of 301mi. Now, of course this assume the displayed range is correct, and that the pack is really 100kWh...so who knows.

Is there any way to determine real range more precisely than this, without charging it to 100%?

 

[Bigriver]

The battery doesn’t have 100 kWh of usable capacity. Never did. You need to know what charge % the 145.8 miles corresponds to. Then just divide miles by %.

 

[EV bud]

I'd recommend going to Tesla to test drive a Raven so you can experience first hand. We went from a 2017 75D to a 2020 LR+ and in addition to the range increase (which is huge), the ride is noticeably more compliant IMO and worth the upgrade. But I think you would have to decide for yourself so you don't have that nagging feeling for even spending the $63K. Good luck.

 

[posey_mvp]

that range is highly suspect for a 80k miles with little to no degradation.. I would get a raven if you can afford it..

 

[AhwatukeeDad]

I will go a different direction. I have had a P3D for about a year and about 2 months ago I finally gave in to the wife and got her a Raven X LR. The X is really nice but I always feel home when I get back into my P3D...

I thought for a little while about trading in my 3 for an X because it it just so cool but now I know I will be keeping the P3D for a long long time. It’s just that good...

 

[Bigriver]

@manttium, the crux of your question is non-raven vs a raven. But I see your choice more as the difference between an older vehicle with 80,000 miles and 20,000 mile/2 year warranty or a new vehicle with no miles and a 50,000 mile/4 year warranty. Even if they were exactly the same, I would have a hard time going with the used one in this case. Especially for a model X. My experience has been that there have been a lot of things with my 2017 model X that need to be fixed. The complexity of the electronic doors, for example, does not have the reliability that it should although they are features that I love. In contrast, absolutely no issues with my 2018 model 3.

More than $20k is a lot of money, but percentage wise not really so much. Obviously depends on your planned usage and budget, but I would be very cautious regarding the older one.

 

[Yinn]

Ditto on the range. I have learned I’m lucky to have only ~5% degradation on my 2016 MS at about 19k miles.

My 2016 with over 60,000 miles has 6%...

I'm in the market for a Model X, and am looking between a used 2017/2018 100D, and a new Long Range Plus. Naturally, the Raven build, Model 3 front motor, better efficiency, improved suspension, full warranty, etc. are attractive, but at the same time, I'm having a hard time justifying the ~$20k price

As a high mileage owner, I’m not concerned about the battery or the motor. Yea there’s some degradation, but I haven’t noticed anything truly upsetting or limiting.

For $20k; better or not is subjective. I’m in the camp that prefers the way the older cars handled and drives. But objectively, what does that $20k get you?

1) Failed or upgrading to MCU2 will cost $1500-$2500 before tax depending on if you want to upgrade.

2) A Tesla extended warranty for 4/50k costs $4500. Half that period is available on the used car, means the raven is getting $2250 in extra warranty.

3) Maintenance items. Sure, they were inspected, but they’re inspected for working condition not new condition. But just as an example 6/32 on a tire is still considered in good condition. Passable and sellable. But that’s used 70% of its tread life. A new set of 22” tires Direct from Tesla is easily $3500 (don’t buy from them) Brakes? $700. Wipers? $200. It’s in good condition now but tough to know what it’ll need and won’t need 6months.

Those things are closing the gap fast on the $20k savings and makes the used car a terrible value compared to a new raven.

 

[ColdWeatherEV]

Just as a reference point, my 2017 X100 with 51,000 miles has about 5% range loss. I think that is pretty typical degradation for my mileage and time. I haven't driven a Raven, but I've sure been thinking about upgrading. As other have noted, the Raven comes standard with many features that were options when I bought my car. My 2017 doesn't have heated rear seats, bio filter, MCU 2, auto open doors, or the new and improved suspension. The Ravens can supercharge at a higher rate, are more efficient in wh/mile, and regen to a complete stop. For me, an upgrade is tempting, but what I really need is a larger battery for increased winter range in my cold climate.

 

[JohnSnowNW]

Our 2017 MX90D has <1% degradation after 29k miles. That said, like most have stated, that range at 80k is questionable.

Range aside, there are other things to consider with older Model X:
1. Frame was redesigned due to paint wear caused by the FWDs on the side of the frame (not sure when it went into effect).
2. My Model X dash screen lags when booting up often...not sure if it will get worse or not, and since my lease is up in July I won't find out.
3. Depending on when the MX was built in 2017 you could be missing some significant AP/Infotainment features (e.x. sentry mode, Netflix).
4. Air suspensions, in general, are notorious for aging poorly, and not cheap to fix out of warranty. (So, a younger one is better, IMHO)

 

[gaspi101]

I think this is highly suspect. An 80,000 mile battery will have some degradation. I’ve only seen Tesla used listings identify the original EPA value. Tesla provided you screen shots of the readout from the car? It sounds to me like ideal miles, not rated miles, must have been selected.

I’ve got a 2017 X 100D with about 45k miles, miles usually read 294-296, andin real world driving at 60-65mph regularly get 320-340 miles of actual range out of a charge....At 55mph I can go maybe 380 miles....I’m not sure OP is very wrong here. The BMS on the X seems to be a lot more accurate than my M3P which routinely varies the range by 20 miles or so and shows 8% degradation at 23k miles.

 

[Bigriver]

I’ve got a 2017 X 100D with about 45k miles, miles usually read 294-296, andin real world driving at 60-65mph regularly get 320-340 miles of actual range out of a charge....At 55mph I can go maybe 380 miles....I’m not sure OP is very wrong here. The BMS on the X seems to be a lot more accurate than my M3P which routinely varies the range by 20 miles or so and shows 8% degradation at 23k miles.

I also have 2017 100D. Standard 20” wheels. My numbers are nowhere in that ballpark. Although I consider myself a conservative driver, I’m not regularly on roads that it would be safe to go that slow. My summertime efficiency is around 95% (95 actual miles for every 100 rated miles). Because I don’t go 100% to 0% charge, the max I ever use is 80% of the battery capacity, which has degraded 5% since it was new. So my real world summer range is 295 miles * .95 * .95 * .80 = 213 miles. Winter range is much less.

You are saying you get 108% to 115% efficiency, and could stretch that to more than 125% at slower speeds. That sounds wonderful but so outside my experience that I wonder why the difference. It would be very interesting if we could drive the same course with the same conditions.

 

[Yinn]

I also have 2017 100D. Standard 20” wheels. My numbers are nowhere in that ballpark. Although I consider myself a conservative driver, I’m not regularly on roads that it would be safe to go that slow. My summertime efficiency is around 95% (95 actual miles for every 100 rated miles). Because I don’t go 100% to 0% charge, the max I ever use is 80% of the battery capacity, which has degraded 5% since it was new. So my real world summer range is 295 miles * .95 * .95 * .80 = 213 miles. Winter range is much less.

You are saying you get 108% to 115% efficiency, and could stretch that to more than 125% at slower speeds. That sounds wonderful but so outside my experience that I wonder why the difference. It would be very interesting if we could drive the same course with the same conditions.

Even pre-raven it’s quite easy to get 250wh/mi. It’s also quite easy to consume 450wh/mi.

To start, HVAC can easily increase your usage by 100-150wh/mi depending on temperature. When you factor in that you’re in Pittsburgh and @gaspi101 is in Miami, a large amount of that difference is made up there alone.

Without getting too much into HVAC design, the gist of it is that in Miami there’s almost no need to heat. You’d think there would be a tremendous amount of cooling but there’s about. 20-25 degree delta on design of cooling.

Compared to Pittsburgh where the design cooling need is a 18 degree delta AND the design heating delta is 61 degrees. The later of which it spends the majority of the year doing. So basically whenever it drops below 50 degrees, you’re requiring more heat than he/she requires in air conditioning and you’re automatically running less efficient.

We haven’t even touched air density, battery warming, friction from rain snow, ice disturbance to aerodynamics, avg traveling speeds..

I wouldn’t be too concerned about it. This coming from someone who averaged both 200wh/mi and 850wh/mi in the X on trips.

 

[Bigriver]

To start, HVAC can easily increase your usage by 100-150wh/mi depending on temperature. When you factor in that you’re in Pittsburgh and @gaspi101 is in Miami, a large amount of that difference is made up there alone.

I am quite aware of the effects of cold ambient temperatures and the use of the heater. That is why I quoted my summer efficiency. And although I live in Pittsburgh, the model X is my traveling car and most miles are elsewhere.

I wouldn’t be too concerned about it. This coming from someone who averaged both 200wh/mi and 850wh/mi in the X on trips.

I’m not particularly concerned by it. But I wanted to provide a contrasting voice to dampen range expectations for a non-Raven model X for anyone who might be looking to buy a used one.

 

[manttium]

Just to follow up on the battery degradation issue, I was able to get in touch with my used sales advisor and run some additional numbers:

The current state of charge of the 100D on order is 44kWh, and the stated range is 132.7mi. Projecting this out to 100kWh shows a range of 301mi. This was the original calculation the sales advisor did for me. But, I also asked to see what the current battery % was, arguing that the actual battery capacity is very unlikely to be 100kWh, as pointed out by @Bigriver. It wasn't immediately obvious to the SA where this information was, so we looked into my P3D, and were able to find the appropriate database entry location, and found the stated battery percentage was 51.2%. This corresponds to a range of 259mi. This represents a ~13% degradation (or 87% of remaining charge capacity), and is much higher than average based on the mileage and the following chart, which shows a vehicle of this mileage should be more in the ~94% remaining capacity range:

A look at Tesla battery degradation and replacement after 400,000 miles - Electrek

This is very disappointing to me, though I suppose a little unsurprising given it was a lease return. Now I am very much on the fence about taking delivery this week.

P.S. I should mention that both ways of doing the calculation for my P3D resulted in approximately the same range (~305mi), assuming a 74kWh battery.

 

[manttium]

<start rant>

Since learning about the less-than-stellar battery degradation issue yesterday, I've been digging into the used Model X market to see if I can get a vehicle with slightly less miles. I'm willing to pay more than $63k, of course. However, the used Model X market is ludicrous! (pun intended) You can get a new 2020 Long Range Plus with Raven and 0 miles for $80k, and yet many dealers, private sellers, and even Tesla are offering 2017 and 2018 100D's for $80k (or sometimes more!). I get that some of these have more options (FSD, more seats, etc.), and that the price they originally paid is far higher than what the equivalent models go for now, but I can't imagine who in their right mind are buying these. I tried to negotiate with a dealer who had a 100D with 6 seats (no other options) down from $83k, but they wouldn't budget and said they had plenty of interest. It boggles my mind.

This is making my 2017 $63k 100D (with 6 seats, white interior, and FSD) pending purchase all the more attractive, even with the poor battery health. I just worry I'll regret it and should just pony up for a new one. Or maybe I should just wait until the used market comes more in line with better prices given the cost of a new one?

<end rant>

 

[travwill]

<start rant>

Since learning about the less-than-stellar battery degradation issue yesterday, I've been digging into the used Model X market to see if I can get a vehicle with slightly less miles. I'm willing to pay more than $63k, of course. However, the used Model X market is ludicrous! (pun intended) You can get a new 2020 Long Range Plus with Raven and 0 miles for $80k, and yet many dealers, private sellers, and even Tesla are offering 2017 and 2018 100D's for $80k (or sometimes more!). I get that some of these have more options (FSD, more seats, etc.), and that the price they originally paid is far higher than what the equivalent models go for now, but I can't imagine who in their right mind are buying these. I tried to negotiate with a dealer who had a 100D with 6 seats (no other options) down from $83k, but they wouldn't budget and said they had plenty of interest. It boggles my mind.

This is making my 2017 $63k 100D (with 6 seats, white interior, and FSD) pending purchase all the more attractive, even with the poor battery health. I just worry I'll regret it and should just pony up for a new one. Or maybe I should just wait until the used market comes more in line with better prices given the cost of a new one?

<end rant>

Yeah, The X (and S) have really dropped in brand new pricing over the years. Our 90D that was $115K new back then is comparable to a brand new Long Range around $87K now, even $82K if you don't do the 6 seats. That has the same/better AP, but not FSD, but still, more car is about $25K cheaper now - thus a lot of people hate to accept that depreciation on a used X.

 

[posey_mvp]

<start rant>

Since learning about the less-than-stellar battery degradation issue yesterday, I've been digging into the used Model X market to see if I can get a vehicle with slightly less miles. I'm willing to pay more than $63k, of course. However, the used Model X market is ludicrous! (pun intended) You can get a new 2020 Long Range Plus with Raven and 0 miles for $80k, and yet many dealers, private sellers, and even Tesla are offering 2017 and 2018 100D's for $80k (or sometimes more!). I get that some of these have more options (FSD, more seats, etc.), and that the price they originally paid is far higher than what the equivalent models go for now, but I can't imagine who in their right mind are buying these. I tried to negotiate with a dealer who had a 100D with 6 seats (no other options) down from $83k, but they wouldn't budget and said they had plenty of interest. It boggles my mind.

This is making my 2017 $63k 100D (with 6 seats, white interior, and FSD) pending purchase all the more attractive, even with the poor battery health. I just worry I'll regret it and should just pony up for a new one. Or maybe I should just wait until the used market comes more in line with better prices given the cost of a new one?

<end rant>

there was some nice demo long range and long range plus but they go pretty fast.. you have to keep an eye out for it.. that’s another alternative