Rumor summary: Blind-spot cameras, Rain sensing, Level 3, Big battery, Interior/HUD

[P100D_Me]

I must confess I don't know the technical merits behind this idea, but could they even offer a short range 'P' model with less battery capacity but with P100 performance? So keep the max power but cut the battery size down (to drop significant weight).
I'd be tempted for a Model S with say 200 - 250km max range but with the weight reduction it could dip in to the 9's down the 1/4 mile.

 

[verygreen]

I agree HW3 is "imminent". But to clarify: When you say "we", do you mean you and I as existing Tesla owners... or the new buyer?

new buyers, of course.

Retrofits are going to be a different matter altogether. While S/X retrofit should be relatively easy (unless Tesla goes for the monoblock solution post refresh synchronized with hw3), model3 is another matter. The replacement is not simple and not a plug in at all.

 

[MXWing]

What about late 2016 AP2.0 with paid FSD? The reason I bought FSD was to have “any necessary hardware or upgrades” be prepaid.

Or they will have to offer a very attractive program price to trade in for a functioning FSD vehicle for current owners. Yet another likely reason they stopped selling FSD.

Late 2016 Tesla’s are my favorite. Can’t find another that qualifies for HW3 yet have transferable FUSC, and FLTE.

2.0 / 2.5 are all eligible for the upgrade to HW3 according to Tesla.

Musk said last two years in August 2018 but he really meant cars as of mid Oct 2016.

It would be fantastic to get a new MCU, sensors and internal camera but that is asking for the sky probably with the HW 2.0 cars.

 

[MXWing]

I must confess I don't know the technical merits behind this idea, but could they even offer a short range 'P' model with less battery capacity but with P100 performance? So keep the max power but cut the battery size down (to drop significant weight).
I'd be tempted for a Model S with say 200 - 250km max range but with the weight reduction it could dip in to the 9's down the 1/4 mile.

Tesla knows where the premium margin is at - performance upgrades.

Tesla at one point was charging $11,000 for a software setting to shave one second off one second on a Model 3 0-60.

Some will debate me saying it’s just a software switch but I believe it’s Tesla’s best interest to not waste time part sorting. I am not against the practice. Tesla needs to charge whatever they can for as much as they can to be a viable entity.

I’ll take a 0-60 2 second Tesla with 50 mile range. Just like my Volt for 90% of drives.

 

[daktari]

I think the speculation on Supercharger V3 is interesting. Audi is showing ccs-charging at much higher power than Tesla SuC at the moment, and these CCS chargers are being deployed quite rapidly in the EU. Tesla will surely not let them take the lead here? Source: Charging with an Audi e-tron

How to refresh the S/X? New headlights, new motors, thermal mgt and charging tech from the 3?
And a new dashboard and door panels of course.

 

[verygreen]

Late 2016 Tesla’s are my favorite. Can’t find another that qualifies for HW3 yet have transferable FUSC, and FLTE.

2.0 / 2.5 are all eligible for the upgrade to HW3 according to Tesla.

Musk said last two years in August 2018 but he really meant cars as of mid Oct 2016.

It would be fantastic to get a new MCU, sensors and internal camera but that is asking for the sky probably with the HW 2.0 cars.

hw2.0 is a much worse candidate for hw3 than hw2.5: it lacks efuse box, has somewhat worse radar, supposedly inferior camera sensor filters (RCCC vs RCCB) and who knows what else.

 

[Unpilot]

I emailed Tesla about the option of buying FSD after I owned the car for a year. Some have said they honor the original price but I have yet to hear back.
I am sure if they sort out FSD they will be swamped with people wanting the retrofit.

 

[conman]

I must confess I don't know the technical merits behind this idea, but could they even offer a short range 'P' model with less battery capacity but with P100 performance? So keep the max power but cut the battery size down (to drop significant weight).
I'd be tempted for a Model S with say 200 - 250km max range but with the weight reduction it could dip in to the 9's down the 1/4 mile.

Not the same performance, and it would drop off very quickly with state of charge. Part of the reason for the performance is that there are so many batteries in parallel that can provide such a huge surge of current to get that performance. The P100 is quite a bit slower by the time it drops below 50% SOC, but it's still quite a quick car, and there are still many more batteries in parallel than would exist in a 50kWh battery.
Tesla P100D Ludicrous Testing 0-60 MPH vs Battery State of Charge from 10% to 100%

 

[lunitiks]

hw2.0 is a much worse candidate for hw3 than hw2.5: it lacks efuse box, has somewhat worse radar, supposedly inferior camera sensor filters (RCCC vs RCCB) and who knows what else.

Let’s hear the counter arguments against this!

 

[conman]

Let’s hear the counter arguments against this!

We got to have our cars for longer?

 

[MXWing]

hw2.0 is a much worse candidate for hw3 than hw2.5: it lacks efuse box, has somewhat worse radar, supposedly inferior camera sensor filters (RCCC vs RCCB) and who knows what else.

It's either going to be good enough or not good enough. Tesla will need to address FSD development for those with AP2 vehicles.

Calculations take an x amount of time on y processor.

You can solve the calculation quicker by either optimizing code or throwing more power at the same code.

Even if the sensors are inferior on AP2, HW3 has to be able to compensate for it.

We will see what happens in 2019. We'll also see if HW3 does not include enhancement to the sensors in HW2.5 cars.

Let’s hear the counter arguments against this!

It's just money. Worst case Tesla refunds AP2 FSD purchases and some other consideration.
AP1/AP2 cars are practically small batch runs compared to the scale of what the Model 3 and Model Y will be.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

new buyers, of course.

Retrofits are going to be a different matter altogether. While S/X retrofit should be relatively easy (unless Tesla goes for the monoblock solution post refresh synchronized with hw3), model3 is another matter. The replacement is not simple and not a plug in at all.

I agree AP2/2.5 HW3 retrofits may face a delay after HW3 introduction at factory, unfortunately. I also agree Model 3 retrofits may be harder due to the cooling system. I wonder if that played at all into Tesla's decision to limit FSD sales this autumn with the Design Studio removal. After all, the grapevine says Tesla was working on the HW3 retrofit parts around that same time...

I don't see how Tesla going for a monoblock solution post refresh would make Model S/X retrofits significantly harder, though. Surely the Model S/X interior refresh happens only after HW3 introduction, or at least near it, and existing pre-refresh AP2/2.5 Model S/X gets a different non-monoblock retrofit unit, one that indeed is easy to swap.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

One more thought: I think Elon Musk's comments represent interesting time-capsules into Tesla's plans at various points in time. From the likes of the ones preceding "AP 1.5", to the spaceship controls widely believed to have been related to an augmented reality HUD intended for Model 3 (then clumsily changed to refer to AP2), to the FSD features in 3-6 months back in early 2017, or that Model S/X will always remain the flagship (only then for them to fall by the wayside)...

Many of these simply never come to fruition. Many of them probably were real for a time, or at least aspirational, then plans changed or reality intervened, but Elon never acknowledges that change in his ever-evolving commentary... He just moves on to the next big thing.

Unfortunately this also means things like the augmented reality HUD, once likely planned, may well have fallen victim to other things like the AP2 debacle (if it relied on forward object recognition for example), then the Model 3 production hell with the rest of the Model S/X interior refresh (Tesla had bigger worries), and then simply the passage of time together with things like the rear roof camera or the rear radars, once seen in materials and photos. The more time passes, the less likely comments from year or two ago matter at all, even if they were never retracted (like Elon's FSD features comments or other AP2 commitments).

But those Elon Musk quotes, including the occasional Freudian slip, still remain interesting snapshots in time of what Tesla likely was working on then and there.

With that once more Happy New Year, TMC! We shall see what 2019 brings.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

So, Tesla did this in China (unlike Electrek says I don't think it is Chinese + Tesla connector but actually two Chinese connectors, but it is still illustrative):

Any thoughts as to whether Tesla might do a CCS + Tesla connector combo in the U.S. to tap into all that Electrify America goodness and to finally retire the need for an AC adapter?

Is this what a Model S too might look a year from now (charger connector setup depending on the market of course)?

1st: Supercharger V3
2nd: Autopilot HW3
3rd: 2170 battery in Model S/X
4th: Model S/X interior refresh
5th: HUD (uncertain)

 

[lunitiks]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooooo

 

[AnxietyRanger]

@lunitiks Here is my mock-up of what a Tesla charge port with dual ports could look like in the U.S.

On the left a proprietary Tesla port and on the right a U.S. CCS Combo 1 port. Of course in the case of Model S/X this would require similar expansion of the charge port area as illustrated here.

 

[lunitiks]

Hey that actually almost looks kind of real! Great work dude. Plenty of space it appears

 

[Nda721]

Would there be any interest in leaving the normal tesla connector on the left and putting the other standards on the right side of the vehicle? Yes I know it would require more cabling but...

 

[MorrisonHiker]

Would there be any interest in leaving the normal tesla connector on the left and putting the other standards on the right side of the vehicle? Yes I know it would require more cabling but...

We wondered the same thing when the 3 was first unveiled back in 2016.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Here are some pros and cons to my speculation above, that Tesla could consider or introduce a Model 3 like flap in Model S/X, as well as dual Tesla + CCS connectors underneath in the U.S. for S/X/3 (in Europe of course only CCS as we know, but U.S. is a bit different...):

Cons:

- Dual connectors would add complexity and cost. Tesla could just as well just go for a CCS adapter in the U.S. for those that need one, like they have promised in Europe.
- CCS proliferation in the U.S. is much less than it is in Europe. This difference between U.S. and Europe is only made bigger by U.S. Supercharger and Destination Charger coverage, where U.S. is superior to Europe.

Pros:

+ Pretty much everyone else is gunning for CCS, at some point Tesla owners might be left behind with just the Tesla connector and a potentially dying CHAdeMO.
+ Tesla simply has so many Superchargers, Destination Chargers and HPWCs in the U.S. that retiring the existing Tesla charge port would not be as easy or as quick as it may be in Europe, so going just CCS would not necessarily be so lucrative either.
+ Dual connectors would allow Tesla to retain existing Supercharger, but also Destination Charger and owner's HPWC investment, the latter two not a problem shared with Europe, because European CCS is already compatible with local Tesla Destination Chargers, HPWCs and Mobile Connectors.
+ Tesla might need an updated charge port for Supercharger V3 anyway, in which case going for CCS for Supercharger V3 (with existing proprietary Tesla connectors retained at Superchargers for existing cars using existing charging speeds) could be a solution. Dual connectors would ease this transition, if needed, though dual ports could still make sense even if Supercharger V3 used Tesla's own port for the above reasons.

@miimura also offered this point why the Chinese scenario differs from the U.S. one. Fair point, though not something I am convinced would alter Tesla's plans if they really thought dual connectors would make sense for them. But it certainly could add cost and add to cons if it were a coin toss for them...

The difference is that the implementation you pictured above requires additional high power DC switching and AC switching. The Chinese ports are dedicated AC and DC connectors, so no switching is required. One port goes to the onboard charger and the other goes straight to the battery with simple on/off switching, not A/B/Off switching.

Keep up the great analysis and speculation!