Tesla cuts 60kWh Model S, entry-level Model S is now 70D.

[anticitizen13.7]

Wow, I had a busy day and didn't get to check out all the new options until just now.

My observations:

1) It seems like Tesla is trying to encourage most customers to buy the Dual Motor vehicles. Making Dual Motor standard on the least expensive Model S is a pretty big move.

2) Making many of the old "Tech Package" features standard, while separating out the "Autopilot" stuff makes sense from a manufacturing standpoint. It's simpler to build all cars with substantially similar hardware, and have buyers pay for the software unlocks (in this case, the Autopilot features).

3) Tesla screwed up the Premium Package. A 5 grand package is required for a power lift gate? Wtf. The premium package is almost all aesthetic stuff, while the lift gate is a real functional necessity for some people. Also, Tesla says the Premium Package means better interior materials, but doesn't say exactly what is better. This lack of specificity is dumb. As a lifelong Honda driver, this is the kind of thing I would expect from Honda, not Tesla (Honda has a nasty habit of requiring customers to upgrade to a trim level to get a useful feature, and the trim level upgrade often comes with a ton of useless stuff).

4) Love the new colors!

5) Overall I'm glad the S60 has been retired. The 70D will provide a better highway travel experience and handle better on local roads.

6) Put the "cash price" on top. If I'm buying a car I want to know what I'm paying out initially. It's ok to list estimated fuel and tax savings, but put those as deductions UNDER the cash price.

So for example:

$84,500 Upfront Cash Price + $1200 Destination/regulatory/document
- $7500 Federal Tax Credit
- $XYZ State Credit <select state>
- $ABC fuel credit <gallons used per year> * <price per gallon>

Overall this is a nice upgrade for the baseline product, but I hope Tesla re-evaluates the Premium Package and the way the pricing is presented.

 

[scaesare]

You are making two assumptions that are difficult to accept--that they'd necessarily use the same number of cells and that they'd go backwards with battery tech. Consensus was that they used the Model S cells and not something more advanced.

I'm not sure what consensus you speak of, but the most thorough discussion I've seen here on the forum was the Roadster 3.0 Thread, which I've read a couple of times, and participated in along the way.

If there's any consensus it's that they aren't likely using Model S cells, even if we don't know the exact specs of the replacement cells.

Might want to take a read. Note the very first post which quotes Tesla: "We have identified a new cell that has 31% more energy than the original Roadster cell."

Depending on if the Roadster eventually had a 2.4Ah cell (rather than the 2.2Ah one originally surmised from in the Tesla Battery Blog), that still only yields a cell of 2.9-3.1 with a 31% improvement, not the 3.3-3.4Ah cell that likely comprises the S pack.

 

[P85DBeast]

70D

Leave it to electric-car maker Tesla Motors to spring another surprise on the world.

This morning, it announced a brand-new version of the base model in its signature battery-electric luxury sedan lineup.

The Tesla Model S 70D is an all-wheel-drive Model S with a 70-kilowatt-hour battery pack, rated at 240 miles of range and priced at $75,000 before incentives.Tesla quotes a 0-to-60-mph acceleration time of 5.2 seconds for the new Model S 70D, along with a top speed of 140 miles per hour. Will we get this?????

 

[bonnie]

Discussion here: Tesla cuts 60kWh Model S, entry-level Model S is now 70D.

 

[Thud]

There are plenty of people who prefer RWD. Myself included.

I suspect the 70D-S85 range difference to be more like 25 miles or more...I have yet to see the current D models meet their touted range estimates although Tesla keeps promising software to do so. I have my doubts.

I also would prefer the RWD option if only for the additional storage space. But now they've made it so the only RWD Model S is also the slowest one (if you believe the performance specs on the web site). Sigh. It's a matter of time before RWD is phased out completely.

 

[Bighorn]

I'm not sure what consensus you speak of, but the most thorough discussion I've seen here on the forum was the Roadster 3.0 Thread, which I've read a couple of times, and participated in along the way.

If there's any consensus it's that they aren't likely using Model S cells, even if we don't know the exact specs of the replacement cells.

Might want to take a read. Note the very first post which quotes Tesla: "We have identified a new cell that has 31% more energy than the original Roadster cell."

Depending on if the Roadster eventually had a 2.4Ah cell (rather than the 2.2Ah one originally surmised from in the Tesla Battery Blog), that still only yields a cell of 2.9-3.1 with a 31% improvement, not the 3.3-3.4Ah cell that likely comprises the S pack.

The best figures I've been able to ascertain were 2.4 Ah for the Roadster and 3.1 for the Model S, which would yield just shy of the 31% quoted improvement. It's by far the most likely explanation in my mind, but I'm happy to agree to disagree.

What Goes Into A Tesla Model S Battery--And What It May Cost
New Roadster Goodies for 2014 - Page 102

 

[SMF]

Does anyone know where the new pumped up 40hp to 422hp for the S85D posted today comes from? Are new order cars coming wit different front and rear motors than the ones delivered a month ago? Or were they always rated at 422hp? Or is there a future SW update that does the magic? Or does some future hardware fix need to happen?

 

[Stoneymonster]

Does anyone know where the new pumped up 40hp to 422hp for the S85D posted today comes from? Are new order cars coming wit different front and rear motors than the ones delivered a month ago? Or were they always rated at 422hp? Or is there a future SW update that does the magic? Or does some future hardware fix need to happen?

Nothing definitive. Someone said a Tesla service source (I'm dubious about things I hear from Tesla service) said it's coming in an OTA. Power measurements I took today and my butt dyno (compared to my S85) make me think we are already there. I highly doubt the hardware has changed a few weeks after the first 85Ds rolled off the line.

 

[Bighorn]

Does anyone know where the new pumped up 40hp to 422hp for the S85D posted today comes from? Are new order cars coming wit different front and rear motors than the ones delivered a month ago? Or were they always rated at 422hp? Or is there a future SW update that does the magic? Or does some future hardware fix need to happen?

It's presumable the same motor they've used all along in both the S85D and in the front of the P85D. The 211HP rating was quoted for the P85D from the get-go. Apparently, there's a firmware update that can unleash more potential from the inverter--in essence, it was firmware limited on the S85D.

 

[UncaNed]

No Hand control?

The rear next-gen seats have gone backwards in time too. Now looks more like the original seats.

Did you say there is no hand control available for those who can't use pedals? That is always after-market equipment, isn't it? How do you know this?

- - - Updated - - -

What about the single charger vs. Dual onboard charger option? I don't even see that mentioned anywhere. Do we know anything about that?

 

[Robbo]

Does anyone know where the new pumped up 40hp to 422hp for the S85D posted today comes from? Are new order cars coming wit different front and rear motors than the ones delivered a month ago? Or were they always rated at 422hp? Or is there a future SW update that does the magic? Or does some future hardware fix need to happen?

I understand there has been no change to the battery pack or drive motors on the S85D. Any performance improvements are software related and will presumably be rolled out to all existing S85Ds as well.

 

[zibaji]

When can we test drive and order one

 

[stopcrazypp]

Probably just filled the rest of the 60kwh pack modules. Below is a pic of a 60kwh battery module(note the blank spots).
View attachment 77281

This is kind of OT, but where did you get that picture from and is there more where it came from? I'm most interested in the actual (non-blank) cell count of the 60kWh modules. This has been a huge mystery for some time, since we have known that the 60kWh has 14 modules, but the math doesn't match up with the 16 modules of the 85kWh.

There were 3 possibilities: either less cells in the modules, lower capacity cells, or both. This picture shows there are less non-blank cells per module (although it doesn't necessarily eliminate the possibility of lower capacity cells, without knowing the cell count).

 

[brucet999]

Well this is exciting! I can't wait till I try repricing how I want a 85. Given the change in options, I may just go ahead and pull the trigger on the order now. Something nagged at me not to do it last month and I'll be glad I waited!

Check out the new prices.

The S85 I was looking at has now dropped in price by $2800! Buyers whose orders have not yet been confirmed may re-order under the new pricing. Those already confirmed but not yet in production may be able to re-order with a $500 change fee; might still be a cost reduction.

Now, do I go ahead with the same configuration at $2800 less or upgrade to 85D for $2200 more?

 

[PeterK]

When I go to the Design Studio, I only see the choice of 70D, 85D or P85D - no RWD 85. Am I missing something?

- - - Updated - - -

Never mind - I see that you can remove the AWD for a $5000 savings. Shows the direction Tesla's driving, so to speak.

 

[brucet999]

I'll speculate (as I did in the Investor's area):

The S70D uses a new battery chemistry with higher energy density, so the battery pack has the same dimensions and similar weight as the 60.

Once the supply of these new battery cells is sufficient, the 85 kWh pack will be replaced by a 85*70/60=100 kWh pack. Same enclosure, similar weight as the 85.

I can't wait to see what the performance times of a S100D will be....

I think the difference between 60 and 85 packs was simply that in the 60 some of the cells were inactive or actually dead (essentially ballast). That way the handling and collision characteristics would remain the same and would not require re-qualification testing. To increase to 70 kWh would then require simply increasing the number of active cells. That, of course would mean no 90 or 100 packs until such time as improved battery chemistry comes out of the Mega-battery plant.

 

[goneskiian]

Did you say there is no hand control available for those who can't use pedals? That is always after-market equipment, isn't it? How do you know this?

- - - Updated - - -

What about the single charger vs. Dual onboard charger option? I don't even see that mentioned anywhere. Do we know anything about that?

They made the dual charger a service center installed accessory a few weeks ago at least. Nothing new there.

 

[vgrinshpun]

Exiled 70D discussion

So far this is pure speculation and we have no evidence whatsoever that this is true.

The evidence is circumstantial, but it is there. The 70D added as standard the following features:

Tech package ($4,250 option)
Dual Motor ($5,000 option)
Supercharging ($2,000 option)
Extra 10kWh battery (implied cost $3,200 - 10 * (10,000-2,000) / (80 - 65))

So total value of options that are now standard is $14,450. The price increase, however, includes only $5,000 adder to base price and $2,000 for autopilot convenience features, for a total of $7,000. The discount is more than 50% - just to large if one assumes that TM is not reducing their margin. If they introduced next generation of cells, the quantity of cells will stay the same as in 60kWh battery, with approximately the same cost. So total discount in this case would be more palatable - under 37% 1-[7,000 / (14,450-3,200)].

I just do not see how they can maintain their projected margins if cost of the battery goes up by almost 17%, but they are providing this additional battery free of charge. I also do not see Panasonic dropping their price on the cells they supply by almost 17%. The only way to have such drop in price IMO is to have the same quantity of cells as in 60kWh battery, at approximately the same price per cell, but with each cell holding 16.7% more energy - hence the conclusion of the likely usage of next gen cells.

 

[brucet999]

Showing the "fuel saving" on the order page as part of the price is pretty hokey. They shouldn't do that.

+1

Moreover, those "savings" are predicated on low PoCo kWh rates. Buyers in CA pay at least twice the national average (SoCal Edison average $0.29/kwh), making "fuel" cost/mile about $0.10; roughly same as a 25mpg ICE.

- - - Updated - - -

Anyone know how the obsidian black differs in look to the regular black? Is it a blacker black w/metallic flake?

I saw it on a color panel today. Instead of pure black it has some metallic flakes in it similar to the dark blue.

 

[the dude]

I think the difference between 60 and 85 packs was simply that in the 60 some of the cells were inactive or actually dead (essentially ballast). That way the handling and collision characteristics would remain the same and would not require re-qualification testing. To increase to 70 kWh would then require simply increasing the number of active cells. That, of course would mean no 90 or 100 packs until such time as improved battery chemistry comes out of the Mega-battery plant.

do they need to do re-qualification every time a pack is changed

the cells for the model 3 will be larger then 18650 cells and I assume once the giga factory is up and running the model S will use the same cells