Roadster 3.0

[Mark77a]

Agree with the majority here - a huge thank you to Tesla & Elon

I am SO impressed and pleased that Tesla has not 'forgotten' the roadster, even though the company and sales have grown exponentially. Other car co's (BMW/Porsche/Audi etc) say 'tough', 'buy new, fix yourself or find a specialist' when their cars are 6 years old. Its a milestone that Tesla are not only fixing, but also upgrading their earlier product.

 

[dpeilow]

That might address some that are disappointed, but not all. Supercharging-capability, lighter pack, and more all have been mentioned by multiple people. Sometimes we need to manage our own expectations.

Publicity stunt? It's a bit more than that. It's a LOT more than that. I appreciate the company squeezing every possible value out of every thing that they do. And as a Roadster owner, I appreciate the fact that we have not been left behind. They didn't need to do this, any of this. We had plenty of discussions here on this forum about what the real world miles would be. We all manage our own perspective of things, mine is that I just received something I wasn't expecting.

But those other things were never mentioned by the company. The 400 mile range was mentioned by the CEO.

Even by the company's own blog post, they don't reach 400 miles using the same 2 cycle EPA methodology as the old Roadster 244 miles range was measured by. As we know, that was optimistic and replaced by the 5 cycle test.

I think people were prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt and use the original test for a side by side comparison, but it's clear that test falls short so Tesla should not have claimed 400 miles range. Are we making our own tests up now?

Driving an expensive sports car at sub EPA test speeds just to say it can be done is not useful in the real world and will be jumped on by EV naysayers. It is a publicity stunt at best.

Regarding the battery pack upgrade: They did need to do this. People have contracts obliging them to. They can't buy the original cells any more so they had to reengineer it.


As I said up thread, I'm happy they came through with a better pack and other upgrades. Just don't try to sell it as something it isn't.

.

 

[JST]

All Tesla has an obligation to provide is access to replacement parts of original specification, including the battery. I am jumping for joy at anything that improves my car in any way because I know Porsche would never dream of it. By offering retrofitable batteries with increased range, Tesla is doing something other OEMs have been unwilling or unable to do for over 100 years. I actually hope they don't invest too much into this type of activity as I would much prefer to see progress on future tech and vehicles.

OTOH, Porsche will happily sell anyone parts for an out of warranty or salvage car. Tesla still won't do that...

 

[Mitrovic]

I am happy with the announcement! I think Tesla has outshined other car manufacturers again. So what does this to me? I will probably go out and order a Model X, even if I had no test drive possibility ( something I never did before with a car ). Tesla is a company which cares of their products and their customers, that is what this announcement means to me!

I think it is extraordinary that they developed the roadster further. A car they no more sell! It looks like simple development, but development! May be they also don't have any supplies left of body parts, and Lotus will not reproduce them, so now they developed some parts which they can fabricate themselves!

Battery: I m happy with 70 kW, it probably makes it more affordable then 85 or more, but it is still a huge improvement to the original 55 kW.

Now I would like to know how much the upgrades will cost, when will they be available and when will we know the answers for those two questions?

 

[qwk]

Agreed and thank you for your post. I am amazed at the number of complaints and expressions of disappointment, as well as the continuing delusional belief by some that Tesla should be investing resources into re-engineering the cars to support Supercharging.

Tesla has very kindly invested resources into creating and offering upgrades to a 6 year old car! No other auto manufacturer has ever done that, to my knowledge. In response, a remarkable number of Roadster owners are complaining and asking why Tesla didn't do more or acting like they know more about the cars engineering than Tesla and they would have made various changes that are likely quite unrealistic.

To be fair, and look at both sides of the story, Tesla sold replacement packs to owners when the car was new. Since the original Roadster cells are obsolete, and IMPOSSIBLE to buy new, Tesla HAD to use better cells. They really had no other choice. If the old cells were still available, you can bet that Tesla would have just used those. For those that will disagree, just look at how many Tesla HPC's have been taken down in the last two years, with no effort to make the Model S connector compatible. That isn't exactly supporting the Roadster owners.

- - - Updated - - -

But those other things were never mentioned by the company. The 400 mile range was mentioned by the CEO.

Even by the company's own blog post, they don't reach 400 miles using the same 2 cycle EPA methodology as the old Roadster 244 miles range was measured by. As we know, that was optimistic and replaced by the 5 cycle test.

I think people were prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt and use the original test for a side by side comparison, but it's clear that test falls short so Tesla should not have claimed 400 miles range. Are we making our own tests up now?

Driving an expensive sports car at sub EPA test speeds just to say it can be done is not useful in the real world and will be jumped on by EV naysayers. It is a publicity stunt at best.

Regarding the battery pack upgrade: They did need to do this. People have contracts obliging them to. They can't buy the original cells any more so they had to reengineer it.


As I said up thread, I'm happy they came through with a better pack and other upgrades. Just don't try to sell it as something it isn't.

.

You beat me to it. Looking at this from an unbiased point of view shows another case of over promise and under deliver. Tesla has been like this from almost day 1, and it will never change. Having said that, they are still galaxies ahead of the existing manufacturers in almost every category.

 

[richkae]

The arrival of the upgrade battery pack signals the possibility of the used battery market.

What if I have a battery pack with an almost-new 97% capacity ( 238 miles ), and I want to trade it in for a new 321 mile battery? How much will I pay?
Will it be a lot less than the person who needs to trade in their very tired 70% capacity ( 171 mile ) pack?
My almost-new pack is a valuable source of replacement sheets for anyone who has not upgraded.

If not, then maybe there is someone I can find who has a very tired battery ( 171 miles ) who doesn't want to pay for the 321 mile pack. What if I swapped my 238 mile pack to him for 1/3 the cost of the 321 mile pack.
Then I trade that 171 mile pack to Tesla for the new 321 mile pack - and I have defrayed my cost.

The Roadster market may be too small for this to happen. There may not be 2 parties interested in such a trade within a thousand miles of each other.
But in a few years when the Model S upgrade battery packs start to appear, and there are three orders of magnitude more Model S on the road than Roadsters - it certainly will.

 

[JRP3]

As I said up thread, I'm happy they came through with a better pack and other upgrades. Just don't try to sell it as something it isn't.

.

I agree with this. There is a tendency of Tesla to stretch numbers, remember the early Model S cost of ownership calculator, and the 300 mile range Model S? I did point out from the beginning that Elon said "probably" and "around" when saying 400 miles but it's looking as if it's not going to be near 400 miles in what most people would consider normal highway driving. Hence the disappointment. Plus now every news outlet is talking about 400 mile Roadsters, and everyone reading that is thinking 400 miles at their normal road trip speeds. Announce a 350 mile pack, and then surprise some people by going farther on some specific route to show what's possible. Surprise on the upside, not the downside.

 

[shrink]

Low rolling resistance tires

I'm sure these will come with tradeoffs in grip, handling or road noise.

+ 1

I'm not sure I want low rolling resistance tires on my sports car. I understand they want to maximize range and all, but I had LRR tires on my old LEAF, which needed all the extra range possible, and they were awful. LRR seems appropriate for the LEAF, but not the Roadster.

Depending on cost, I will certainly consider the new battery, body kit, and brake adjustments. I'm just skeptical about those tires.

 

[qwk]

There is a tendency of Tesla to stretch numbers, remember the early Model S cost of ownership calculator, and the 300 mile range Model S?

To be fair, when Tesla touted a 300 mile range, the EPA cycle was yet to be implemented. The 300 mile Model S range was on the same cycle as the 245 mile Roadster range. That was no fib.

 

[JRP3]

Fair point, bad example on my part.

 

[andybm3]

My biggest disappointment with this whole announcement is that ANY of my Roadster owning brethren could possibly have anything to complain about. This may be the first time in history an OEM has invested ANY resources into upgrading/retrofitting a previously made model, even one they are still producing let alone one that is discontinued. This is absolutely unprecedented support and to be anything but grateful is a bit absurd. Porsche/BMW/MB would simply say "if you want the new features, buy the new car."

OK - I have just gone thru all the 3.0 posts, some funny, some good and this is the best post I have read, thank you PokerBroker for grounding everyone. This is a great car and the fact that Tesla is stepping up to make incremental developments for an out of production car for a maximum of 2,500 people is astounding, we should all say a BIG thank you.

 

[wiztecy]

I do have to agree with some of the points people have made which I think threw them back some like me.

When Tesla announced sometime back that the Roadster will be getting an upgrade that will allow it to go 400 miles, I personally thought it was going to be a pure battery upgrade. I didn't see the plural of the word upgrade(s). I do agree if Tesla uses vague words or allows the consumer to assume things, it will not fair well over time. I understand Tesla has been doing this from the start, but I would have to agree that should change. I don't know how long the consumer will allow it. We saw with the release of the Model-S and P85D that consumers are becoming tougher on Tesla's words and what they're going to deliver. All Tesla had to say to clear things up was to say, we're looking to make an upgrade to the battery and use modern cells that will work with the Roadster as well as working on some other improvements that will allow the Roadster reach almost 400 miles. Looking at Elon's wording, he did say almost 400 miles. Not 400 miles unless I missed that in one of his posts. Or just say we're working on a set of upgrades that will allow us to gain more range in the Roadster. Then nobody can assume things that you're not accountable to that were drawn up by anticipation and stretching the words. If Tesla had a pack that came close to 400 miles, even 360 miles, then were able to gain 40-60 miles using smart efficiencies like areo and rolling resistance, then breaking the 400 mile barrier then I think I and others would have had our expectations met or even surpassed. But now my expectations are sitting in this odd limbo state.

I do agree that there was a contractual agreement that Tesla was obliged legally to follow through, and that was with the replacement pack purchase at time owners opted for it during the time their original purchase. If that was not legally binding I'm not really sure if a new battery pack update would have come out of this.

As for the upgrades, I'd really warn Roadster owners who have the stock non-adjustable suspension/shocks who opt in for the low rolling resistant tires. That may turn out to be a dangerous problem. Being that the Roadster is a rear weighted sports supercar, the rear tires are practically right behind your but, but worse, the stock non-adjustable shocks just suck and are not setup right for the Roadster. I can really see an owner getting into trouble after the sticky Yokohama's come off and these harder compound tires to achieve lower rolling resistance are put on by Tesla, then the owner pushes the Roadster through a turn where they're doing 45-65mph, the road dips, the springs compress, the spring then pogos the rear end taking the weight off the rear, and then the Roadster is in an uncontrollable tail spin. With that I hope Tesla will put more awareness in the safety aspect of the Roadster when putting those tires on some cars. Many Elises as well as some Roadsters have already met this fate with the sticky tires. And then how's the performance of these tires in the rain as well as snow which Roadster owners do drive on. If one does select to run these tires, or buy the full package with them, I'd for sure exercise them with caution and learn them very well.

---------------
Range-Increasing Low-Rolling Resistance Tires Falling Out of Favor with Drivers | Inside EVs

"The survey further suggests that some potential customers are put off by low-rolling resistance tires because they believe them to compromise traction and safety in exchange for only a slight improvement in gas mileage. Several test have confirmed this to be true by proving that most low-rolling resistance tires have long stopping distances at high speeds and lack grip in the corners, both of which could ultimately lead to accident that the same vehicle equipped with a more capable tire might of avoided."
---------------


Looking at comments in the online news stories they do look positive, the public is very happy that Tesla is supporting a vehicle they no longer produce and look forward to seeing more Tesla's on the road. With that Tesla should see how much of a marketing tool supporting the Roadsters and a legacy product does for them. Its free marketing/advertising that only costs Tesla the R&D as well as testing of the upgrade. I know companies can drop millions easily in advertising their company name as well as their product. Well if you do it right, its free! So I hope they can recognize this and use it to their advantage by utilizing it correctly.

 

[PokerBroker]

I won't be changing the tires on my Roadster... I enjoy driving it the way it is supposed to be driven

 

[Alan]

I won't be changing the tires on my Roadster... I enjoy driving it the way it is supposed to be driven

If you enjoy driving it the way it is supposed to be driven you will be changing your tires - every 4000 miles or so :biggrin:

 

[apacheguy]

So Roadster 3.0 won't be SpC compatible? Surprising...

 

[rlang59]

So Roadster 3.0 won't be SpC compatible? Surprising...

Why? They have been very clear that the Roadster wasn't going to get Supercharging. More clear than they have ever been about almost anything.

 

[dhrivnak]

If this all works out, and has supercharging, I might have to pick up a roadster

Supercharging is VERY unlikely. As a person who has built a few conversions there is a big difference in the electronics between AC and DC. Because the Roadster uses the PEM as both a charger and to run the car it would require a complete redesign which is not easy or inexpensive. Besides with a 350 mile battery and the ability to charge at HPWC (Thanks to Henry Sharp), there is not a great need for SuperCharging.

So please give this a rest - NO SUPERCHARGING - . If by chance you are a lot smarter than I and it seem Elon himself you can make some money to providing Roadster owners with a supercharing upgrade.

 

[apacheguy]

Why? They have been very clear that the Roadster wasn't going to get Supercharging. More clear than they have ever been about almost anything.

Nope. That was for the old gens. Don't recall them ever specifying that for newer gens.

So please give this a rest - NO SUPERCHARGING - . If by chance you are a lot smarter than I and it seem Elon himself you can make some money to providing Roadster owners with a supercharing upgrade.

No. You misunderstood too. I'm not referring to the upgrade route.

 

[ecarfan]

To everyone who is upset or disappointed that the new Roadster battery pack will not provide over 300 miles of range, or even 400, because your interpretation of Elon's tweet about the Roadster "upgrade" would enable the car to go 400 miles on a charge, you need to be honest with yourself and admit that you assumed the "upgrade" was just a higher capacity pack and not a collection of changes to the car! You made an incorrect assumption.

As usual, Elon and his engineers were thinking on a bigger scale than many forum members, including myself. They looked at the entire car and found multiple areas to improve and optimize.

And again, no other car manufacturer has ever offered these sorts of fundamental upgrades to a car whose design was essentially finalized seven years ago!

Keep in mind that people reading this topic who cannot afford to spend anywhere near the price of even a $60K used 1.5 Roadster, to say nothing of a new Model S, are quite likely to get the impression that Roadster owners are primarily a bunch of spoiled rich people who are bitching that their used Roadster sports car isn't being retrofitted to match the capabilities of a new $100K Model S, a car that is completely out of reach of 95% or more of Americans and Europeans, and 99.9% of the rest of the world.

 

[rlang59]

Nope. That was for the old gens. Don't recall them ever specifying that for newer gens.



No. You misunderstood too. I'm not referring to the upgrade route.

What newer gens are you referring to? This whole thread is about an upgrade.