It's only moot in one direction. But yes, I agree it's moot in the direction you stated.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
DrTaras
R254->R725->S->X->M3->M3P-->R2020?
At the new Century City Tesla showroom, in the garage where the Tesla parking is, there is a Model S charger, but NOT a Roadster one. I'm just saying...
I don't know, if some are being valued as low as the mid $50k now with life left in the battery, by the time they need a new battery, battery replacement at 40k could total the car. Thus, they become 7yr disposables.
djp
Model 3 Performance
At $50K they're tempting to buy just to have a spare battery and PEM lying around!
ipdamages
Roadster Sport 835
The only thing that they must do at some point, is a replacement battery pack. They pre-sold replacement packs to a large number of Roadster owners, and they can't use the original cells because they are no longer manufactured. So they have to re-engineer the Roadster battery pack at some point.
My guess is that this is the replacement Roadster pack. Since the new cells have higher power density they can (will have to) make a new pack that is more powerful / longer range / lighter / smaller - in some combination or permutation.
Doug - to continue your thought process, if they go to the newer cells for the battery pack, could that also open the Roadster to SuperCharger access assuming the wiring harness can be modified? I know that's a lot of "what ifs", but I don't see the original Roadster surviving long term without this access. Just speculating.
I have noticed a big difference between the acceleration and handling with just me in the car and with various sized (weight) passengers. Seems like the car would be amazing if the battery was 300# lighter. Probably would make the weight distribution close to 50/50. Those of us with the adjustable suspension could probably take care of the difference and maybe need stickier tires?
i think they should build an in-between: say: 60 kWh and 200# less. That is my vote.
dhrivnak
Active Member
A lighter pack will not only help handling but acceleration as well. But realistically even in best case they will not redice pack weight by more than a couple hundred lbs. The back is 400 lbs heavy right now.
Last edited:
I would like to get the the charger from Model S, even limited to 10kW charging with 3-phases speeds up my travel (did 145.000km within 2 1/2 years).
Second is the problem to cool the PEM. I consumed 10 fans (old style), 3 fan with twin rotors (the last replacement was because a bearing defect).
Got now a cage with a metal maze around the twin-rotors.
Only a liquid coold 3-phase PEM ould help.
Third is the motor which easily overheats as well.
best
Eberhard
Second is the problem to cool the PEM. I consumed 10 fans (old style), 3 fan with twin rotors (the last replacement was because a bearing defect).
Got now a cage with a metal maze around the twin-rotors.
Only a liquid coold 3-phase PEM ould help.
Third is the motor which easily overheats as well.
best
Eberhard
Possibly; however, I suspect they won't want to do the extra engineering required.
- - - Updated - - -
Agreed, liquid cooling all around would be great, but I am not expecting that level of engineering to be done. Tesla absolutely has to concentrate on Model S and future cars.
If they don't do a new battery pack, they will have to drop support for the Roadster and orphan all the cars on the road. They cannot do that. They'll not just get egg on their face; their opponents will have a field day in the press. "Don't buy a Tesla because in five years your car will be useless."
For these reasons I expect a new battery pack to be developed for Roadster, and not much else.
djp
Model 3 Performance
Highly unlikely they'll do the engineering to replace the charge port, add DC bypass and upgrade the firmware to support Supercharging. That's a lot more work than building a drop-in replacement for the battery pack.
Timbrewer
Roadster Signature #29
Of course everything has it's analyst price point...they may offer different options for different prices..it seems very TESLA to give a very afforable upgrade but for $k more add the option for supercharging...just my observation which I resonate with BTW
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
I agree it would be very cool to have multiple battery options. But it's so much work to do, and there will be so few sold, I suspect we'll get just one middle-of-the-road option. A little lighter, a little cheaper, a little more range.
Everybody at Tesla that I have heard talk about the possibility of DC charging has been negative. It is clearly possible, but it is also clearly a LOT of work, will cost a lot of money, and they don't want to do it for a low-volume car especially given that most owners take a gas car or Model S on long trips.
Everybody at Tesla that I have heard talk about the possibility of DC charging has been negative. It is clearly possible, but it is also clearly a LOT of work, will cost a lot of money, and they don't want to do it for a low-volume car especially given that most owners take a gas car or Model S on long trips.
I like the math of reducing the number of cells by 1/3. Change from 6831 cells to 4554 cells ( that have at least 50% more capacity )
Each brick is reduced from 99 cells down to 66 cells.
If you upgrade a 2200 mAh cell to a 3400 mAh cell then the pack capacity goes up slightly ( from 56 to almost 58kWh ) while the weight of the cells and hardware to mount them, fuse them and connect them comes down by 1/3. The new battery pack could be 250-300 pounds lighter.
If the upgrade was 2200mAh cells to 4000mAh cells then the new pack would be about 67 kWh instead of the old 56.
If Tesla offered a 67kWh pack that was 300 pounds lighter I would start looking for reasons to spend a pile of money to replace my perfectly good pack.
Each brick is reduced from 99 cells down to 66 cells.
If you upgrade a 2200 mAh cell to a 3400 mAh cell then the pack capacity goes up slightly ( from 56 to almost 58kWh ) while the weight of the cells and hardware to mount them, fuse them and connect them comes down by 1/3. The new battery pack could be 250-300 pounds lighter.
If the upgrade was 2200mAh cells to 4000mAh cells then the new pack would be about 67 kWh instead of the old 56.
If Tesla offered a 67kWh pack that was 300 pounds lighter I would start looking for reasons to spend a pile of money to replace my perfectly good pack.
ipdamages
Roadster Sport 835
I agree with you, Chad. I think there was a time when Roadsters were occasionally used for longer trips, but it was a novel thing to do - to show that it is possible. And by the way, it wasn't very convenient. The car for road trips and long-distance travel is the Model S. Elon said as much in the most recent quarterly call, saying that the Roadster wasn't very comfortable for long trips. So Supercharger access probably isn't a priority, at least as they perceive it, and making that part of the upgrade might force Roadster owners to invest more in charging infrastructure to support their new Model S connectors - in order to access Superchargers that few will ever use. I'd say it would just be easier to add in some NEMA 14-50s for our UMCs.
In the other threads on this issue (New Roadster Goodies for 2014, Potential battery pack upgrade for Roadster using Model S cells, Roadster - new options), we seemed to have identified many of the relevant issues, and honed in the combination of:
- weight savings
- range
- motor upgrade
- supercharger access
- price
And we recognize that they will not sell thousands of these in the next few years, so they can't really make $$ with a big technology and tooling investment. It would be more of a cool thing to support the early adopters and to show that they are loyal and aren't looking to bail on their customers.
The interesting questions to me are:
- whether they will offer a battery pack upgrade that uses the even newer battery technology of Gen 3 (the technology that is supposed to be better than Model S)
- whether they will make this car with upgrade 2.X for 0-60 fast (presumably that means with a new motor)
I was prepared for wait for Roadster 3.0 to go that fast, but it appears that they have the technology to do it now. As I wrote in another thread, I read that the Model S 60 kWh has been clocked at 5.1, and P85s have been clocked under 4.0. Put that kind of pack on a Roadster, and a motor to handle it, and holy schnikies! holy schnikes - YouTube
I suppose it is interesting as there are CPO buyers and others who are now buying the car for less than the price of a new 3-series (with some bells and whistles - 2013 BMW 335 Pricing). But in general I'd say that the early adopters were a mix of techies, greenies, and the affluent. So offering a pack/motor upgrade that made the car relevant and newsworthy, even at $40K-$45K, would seem more consistent with Tesla as a company, the Roadster, and the customers (at least the first Roadster buyers).
Of course, the upgrade from a 3.7 to 2.9 0-60 is a bit extreme. Who really needs that? Then again, who needs it in a Ferrari or McLaren to drive around in traffic? On the other hand, a handling upgrade from a lighter pack would address the greatest performance weakness of the car (depending on your definition of "performance" - one might say that cargo storage or road noise or range fall under "performance").
Anyway, I guess the news is that there is no new news from Teslive on this topic. My "news" on this was reassurance from Tesla employees when I was buying a CPO that Tesla isn't bailing on the Roadster, but that wasn't a specific promise of a particular type of option or upgrade.
I agree. That sounds like a yummy mix to me. That said, I'm not sure at what point a new motor is required. Thoughts?
Last edited:
Similar threads
