Supercharging option pricing/60 kWh pack fee discussion

[jerry33]

Supercharging is for those occasions where you want to cover a longer distance. I assume for most people this is rare.

I figure I will use it 15-20 times a year minimum (assuming they are actually built). Depending upon where the stations are located, I might use it more. That compares to about ten fills in an ICE at $35 so over five years that's $1750. Charging (that many times for 150 miles) at home is ~$700.00 over five years. Compared to using an RV park, where the charges might be as high as $25, it's most likely to be a bargain. And it's 30-45 minutes vs. 5 hours.

 

[vfx]

Splitting the price seems fair. to me. Consider that everyone from today on out will have to pay twice the cost that an early reservation holder get, it would be right to consider it a perk of an early adopter.

 

[markb1]

We've known for a long time that the design website stated that supercharging for 60 kWh models was "TBD."

No, most recently, until today, it said "included", not "TBD".

 

[smorgasbord]

I figure I will use it 15-20 times a year minimum (assuming they are actually built). Depending upon where the stations are located, I might use it more. That compares to about ten fills in an ICE at $35 so over five years that's $1750. Charging (that many times for 150 miles) at home is ~$700.00 over five years. Compared to using an RV park, where the charges might be as high as $25, it's most likely to be a bargain. And it's 30-45 minutes vs. 5 hours.

I'm uncomfortable comparing "free" supercharging to gasoline fueling costs, since we're already paying a premium to save money on gasoline - which is the cost of the needing to be replaced battery. I think the comparisons to alternative charging costs is OK, and certainly the time savings are worthy of consideration.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

Don't assume that there will be only an $8k difference in price between 60kWh and 85kWh.

85 kWh pack now $22k?

So far, the design studio might just be glitchy, but it also seems possible that they are preparing to increase the price of the 85kWh as well. If so, then maybe the Sig owners ended up with more value than they expected

- - - Updated - - -

Hmm.. just received this message -

Hi,
The 85 kWh battery pack price remains $20,000 over the base price of Model S, not $22,000. There was a problem in our design studio which we have just corrected. I'm sorry about the confusion.

 

[clindsay]

I am P732 and I just bailed. First it was not including cupholders, which we hear might come later in an opportunity console (opportunty for Tesla to charge that is), then it was $600 wiper blades every year, now $1000 fee for superchargers listed as included and the reason I went from the 40 to 60KW battery. One to many hidden Tesla taxes on this car and we haven't even gotten wind of the data plan or the year 5+ taxes yet.

Nickel and dime = bye bye

 

[Tempus]

I'm uncomfortable comparing "free" supercharging to gasoline fueling costs, since we're already paying a premium to save money on gasoline - which is the cost of the needing to be replaced battery. I think the comparisons to alternative charging costs is OK, and certainly the time savings are worthy of consideration.

Actually, thats exactly the comparison im making. For some of our normal road trips, i was assuming theyd be out of range of the model s, so i was going by what it costs us in our current car. And thats roughly $70 to fill up, with probably 3 fill ups onthe roundtrip. So it doesnt take many of those to get to the $1k cost. Heck, maybe im just rationalizing, but thats the cost difference to me personally between getting the SC and not, assuming they can get charging stations built out here on the east coast soonish.

 

[youlikeadajuice]

This is just getting old...required service fee to maintain the warranty, supercharging included...wait no...$2000 extra. How many more times is this going to happen?

 

[markb1]

First it was not including cupholders

To be fair, there are two cupholders. They just suck.

 

[gg_got_a_tesla]

I'm going to drop leather and get supercharging for $1K. Will be saving some money in the process.

 

[1young1]

Well, we still don't know what the monthly data plan is going to be, how much the annual service fee after 4 yrs, and new battery replacement and...

 

[smorgasbord]

gg, I notice that you're getting the Black Roof. Why that over the body-colored roof?

 

[vfx]

I'm uncomfortable comparing "free" supercharging to gasoline fueling costs, since we're already paying a premium to save money on gasoline - which is the cost of the needing to be replaced battery. I think the comparisons to alternative charging costs is OK, and certainly the time savings are worthy of consideration.

Since the SCing is actually free unlike electricity from home there is a payback for true road warriors.

 

[gg_got_a_tesla]

gg, I notice that you're getting the Black Roof. Why that over the body-colored roof?

Loved the contrast of the very-glossy black roof with the sunset red back at the Fremont and the Palo Alto events. Hoping for the same sporty look with the green as well. A poor man's pano-roof-look if you will. Body-colored roof, IMO, sticks out like a sore thumb.

Okay, wife approved the switch from leather to SC-enablement; she was only too glad to hear me say that we'd be saving $500 I'm thinking that we'll be gaining more "traction" in the seats too!

 

[Discoducky]

FYI. I've asked for an official answer regarding regular use of supercharging and reducing the life of the battery and drivetrain while NOT used in Range mode.

I don't think I can make an informed decision without this critical piece of information being official from TM.

But in general, given the distance between superchargers in Cali right now, I'm not sure they'll be very useful to 60kWh S's after about 4 years/60k miles.

 

[ModelS1079]

GB noted in conversation with me last evening that battery life loss not a significant concern as the cables/software are first-rate at preventing a situation where it hurts the battery. Notes Tesla wanted to be sure supercharging was not looked at as a primary way to charge the car. Still I look forward to your answer when you get - please post!

More $ was tough news for me - I have a change of plans but also need an opinion about the 60 vs 85 - just posted it at New Engalnders' forum here if you have a moment:

New Englanders -- check in! - Page 11

 

[kevincwelch]

No, most recently, until today, it said "included", not "TBD".

Well, obviously I remember it differently.

Nevertheless, it's a reasonable price for the option if you haven't signed in my opinion.

- - - Updated - - -

GB noted in conversation with me last evening that battery life loss not a significant concern as the cables/software are first-rate at preventing a situation where it hurts the battery. Notes Tesla wanted to be sure supercharging was not looked at as a primary way to charge the car. Still I look forward to your answer when you get - please post!

More $ was tough news for me - I have a change of plans but also need an opinion about the 60 vs 85 - just posted it at New Engalnders' forum here if you have a moment:

New Englanders -- check in! - Page 11

Interesting post; thanks for including.

I guess it should boil down to what you need. The SC would appear to benefit you; I'm not sure it would benefit me. So, I'm probably not going to upgrade to 85 kWh for the included SC. If I upgrade, it would be for the performance gain, longer range, and unlimited mile warranty on the battery. SC would be a benefit, although I would likely never use it.

 

[Lloyd]

Super charging for the 60 KW is for THE LIFE OF THE CAR! It is worth it just for the resale of the vehicle. Likely you will not be the only owner of this car. If you don't have it and you can't add it later your resale value will really suffer. IMO it does not matter if you will never use the SC option!

Well, obviously I remember it differently.

Nevertheless, it's a reasonable price for the option if you haven't signed in my opinion.


Interesting post; thanks for including.

I guess it should boil down to what you need. The SC would appear to benefit you; I'm not sure it would benefit me. So, I'm probably not going to upgrade to 85 kWh for the included SC. If I upgrade, it would be for the performance gain, longer range, and unlimited mile warranty on the battery. SC would be a benefit, although I would likely never use it.

 

[AnOutsider]

No, most recently, until today, it said "included", not "TBD".

indeed, here is how the site looked prior to today:

So, I guess there's no actual mention of SOFTWARE, but the SC HARDWARE was definitely marked as "included" and "standard" FWIW.

 

[ModelS1079]

That is correct - 60 said included as of 5pm yesterday EST. Certain.

But to be clear (and I posted this in August - probably about the 12th) Tesla verbally clarified that there would be an ACTIVATION fee for the hardware/software for the 60kWh battery.

My head knows they have huge margins to cover; in my heart, I think it's a bummer. Anyone who is getting a 60kWh battery has cost concerns to begin with. Esp if reaching from a 40 to the 60 so as to get supercharging. Now it's $11-12,000 more than the 40kWh battery...ouch. Love this car, this company, the mission at hand, but suffice it to say that buying a Model S is not for the faint of wallet.