What to Order -- X 75d, X 90d, X 100d

[MXWing]

New vote just came, and a very important one:

100d = 7.5, 90d = 1, 75d =1.5

Wife weighed in. She thinks new cars depreciate too fast (she's right). She likes the price of the 75d, the tax credit, etc.

We are now talking about range and our expectations with the 75d

I would analyze the numbers a different way:

1 - What is the monthly payment difference between 75D and 100D each month? The extra outlay versus the potential regret?

2 - 75D depreciates anyway. The marginal depreciation in the 100D is less as the battery won't fade at the same rate as the rest of the vehicle. 75D you pay for the MX. 100D you pay for the battery.

3 - The 100D is a clear delimiter of gen 1, gen 2 or gen 2.5 Model x. I bet it helps on the resale market if it were to go there.

 

[Dr Doom]

I would analyze the numbers a different way:

1 - What is the monthly payment difference between 75D and 100D each month? The extra outlay versus the potential regret?

2 - 75D depreciates anyway. The 100D marginally depreciates less as the battery won't fade at the same rate as the rest of the vehicle.

3 - The 100D is a clear delimiter of gen 1, gen 2 or gen 3 model x. I bet it helps on the resale market if it were to go there.

I did the number crunching between a 60D and 100D- so take this with a grain of salt. let's say you're doing a 78 months loan- the difference in monthly payment is about 300 dollars give or take between the different battery pack sizes. I am willing to pay the 300 dollars difference and have the flexibility of the bigger battery pack. Like everyone keeps saying- range is king.

 

[MXWing]

I guess what has concerned me is that when I buy it, it will be the only car I have. I have no issues with a trip to Mammoth, it should be fine, Tahoe even. It's the trip to Montana, or Chicago, originally 2 days one way, now 3. I suppose that might even be the case with the 100d...

The cold and the uphill climb will destroy your range. A round trip to big bear kills all 205 miles of range on my MX60D even though the round trip is only 120 miles on paper.

 

[DSGChina]

The cold and the uphill climb will destroy your range. A round trip to big bear kills all 205 miles of range on my MX60D even though the round trip is only 120 miles on paper.

Wow. Crazy thing is that even with the 75d or 90d on 22" rims, it would still kill your range.

I guess what I was saying is that Mammoth is a 6-7 hour drive from San Diego in an ICE. Doing it in a 75d will take 2 hours longer, but for all intents and purposes, it's still a day-long drive, albeit with stops in Lone Pine...

But at least it's free!

 

[DSGChina]

I would analyze the numbers a different way:

1 - What is the monthly payment difference between 75D and 100D each month? The extra outlay versus the potential regret?

2 - 75D depreciates anyway. The marginal depreciation in the 100D is less as the battery won't fade at the same rate as the rest of the vehicle. 75D you pay for the MX. 100D you pay for the battery.

3 - The 100D is a clear delimiter of gen 1, gen 2 or gen 2.5 Model x. I bet it helps on the resale market if it were to go there.

Those are good points. There is probably an actuary or, because Tesla is a Silicon Valley company, more likely a statistician or engineer in the bowels of the company that is already working a model of depreciation for Teslas. Although we only have 3.5 years of data (shouldn't count the roadster), it would be interesting to see if depreciation will follow average industry standards of 19% - 15 -15 -15 and so on until the curve flattens.

Another area where Tesla may upend the car industry: since it is a tech company, and the new innovations are faster than the auto industry historically, will they affect depreciation not only within the EVs and Tesla gen 1, 2, 3 ... x but also the car industry itself?

There is a counterpoint and that is depreciation by dollar amount. Even if the 100d depreciates at a rate which is slower than the 75d, by dollar amount, you may lose more money at the 3 year mark due to the high price.

Another is the $7500 tax credit which will soon disappear with the launch of Model 3. There won't be as much of reason to buy new vs. CPO/used except for improvements in range, driveability, tech, etc.

I will say that navigation and autopilot upgrades should maintain value of Teslas over competing brands. I don't get "updates" on my beemer.

I can say this: when you see used 2014 Nissan Leafs for $6K, it is a real world example: if you don't manage battery lifetime/performance properly, the depreciation will kill you.

 

[DSGChina]

I would analyze the numbers a different way:

1 - What is the monthly payment difference between 75D and 100D each month? The extra outlay versus the potential regret?

2 - 75D depreciates anyway. The marginal depreciation in the 100D is less as the battery won't fade at the same rate as the rest of the vehicle. 75D you pay for the MX. 100D you pay for the battery.

3 - The 100D is a clear delimiter of gen 1, gen 2 or gen 2.5 Model x. I bet it helps on the resale market if it were to go there.

Sorry, didn't answer your original question:

1 - About $300 with no additional money down.

 

[MXWing]

Those are good points. There is probably an actuary or, because Tesla is a Silicon Valley company, more likely a statistician or engineer in the bowels of the company that is already working a model of depreciation for Teslas. Although we only have 3.5 years of data (shouldn't count the roadster), it would be interesting to see if depreciation will follow average industry standards of 19% - 15 -15 -15 and so on until the curve flattens.

Another area where Tesla may upend the car industry: since it is a tech company, and the new innovations are faster than the auto industry historically, will they affect depreciation not only within the EVs and Tesla gen 1, 2, 3 ... x but also the car industry itself?

There is a counterpoint and that is depreciation by dollar amount. Even if the 100d depreciates at a rate which is slower than the 75d, by dollar amount, you may lose more money at the 3 year mark due to the high price.

Another is the $7500 tax credit which will soon disappear with the launch of Model 3. There won't be as much of reason to buy new vs. CPO/used except for improvements in range, driveability, tech, etc.

I will say that navigation and autopilot upgrades should maintain value of Teslas over competing brands. I don't get "updates" on my beemer.

I can say this: when you see used 2014 Nissan Leafs for $6K, it is a real world example: if you don't manage battery lifetime/performance properly, the depreciation will kill you.

Its amazing that Teslas are still so new that we don't have a lot of history or a good model on depreciation. I can be wrong but my gut tells me the X holds its value longer than the S just because it can fulfill more functions. Even if you lose more dollars at year 3 for a 100D vs 75D, the 100D still has more utility value because you can amortize the lack of needing to stop for SCs and general comfort of less range anxiety over the life of the vehicle. It's hard to model that but you will see that when you make those ski trips.

It matters to me too but why I considered a 90D versus the 60D was the 90D has better performance. Ultimately went with 60D just because it was such a bargain and I can live with the limitations. With the 60D out of the picture, 100D is the best car for the money. I would trade any other option such as PUP to stay with that.

The neat thing about the Model X is it seats 6. That allowed me to remove both an Audi SUV and a Honda Odyssey from the car fleet. No matter what vehicles come and go later, the Model X will always be a nice people and cargo carrier. It will reach a certain point where the depreciation curve will flatten. And it will be many multiples above a leaf for two reasons:

1 - It's a Tesla SUV
2 - It's not a Leaf.

A Model 3 will be added to the family when its available and I can forsee that 3 being replaced again before the X is.

The 100D battery will be in good shape for a long time, you can charge to just 90% for the almost the whole life of the car.

AP2 hardware once fully mature from a software perspective should be "good enough" for autonomy. AP3 of course will be better but only marginally. AP2 was a huge leap over AP1 so that creates a good "break point" to buy and go long on a Model S or Model X purchase today.

I'm glad you did not mention leasing. It can work for some people in very specific situations but overall I feel the numbers are HORRIBLE.

 

[Tam]

100d = 7.5, 90d = 1, 75d =1.5

Range is king!

If you can afford it, you should get 100D.

If not, you can get a lesser range but less time savings, more stops for charging, less flexibility when you need extra miles (detours, road closures, faster speeds, cold weather...)

 

[DSGChina]

Its amazing that Teslas are still so new that we don't have a lot of history or a good model on depreciation. I can be wrong but my gut tells me the X holds its value longer than the S just because it can fulfill more functions. Even if you lose more dollars at year 3 for a 100D vs 75D, the 100D still has more utility value because you can amortize the lack of needing to stop for SCs and general comfort of less range anxiety over the life of the vehicle. It's hard to model that but you will see that when you make those ski trips.

It matters to me too but why I considered a 90D versus the 60D was the 90D has better performance. Ultimately went with 60D just because it was such a bargain and I can live with the limitations. With the 60D out of the picture, 100D is the best car for the money. I would trade any other option such as PUP to stay with that.

The neat thing about the Model X is it seats 6. That allowed me to remove both an Audi SUV and a Honda Odyssey from the car fleet. No matter what vehicles come and go later, the Model X will always be a nice people and cargo carrier. It will reach a certain point where the depreciation curve will flatten. And it will be many multiples above a leaf for two reasons:

1 - It's a Tesla SUV
2 - It's not a Leaf.

A Model 3 will be added to the family when its available and I can forsee that 3 being replaced again before the X is.

The 100D battery will be in good shape for a long time, you can charge to just 90% for the almost the whole life of the car.

AP2 hardware once fully mature from a software perspective should be "good enough" for autonomy. AP3 of course will be better but only marginally. AP2 was a huge leap over AP1 so that creates a good "break point" to buy and go long on a Model S or Model X purchase today.

I'm glad you did not mention leasing. It can work for some people in very specific situations but overall I feel the numbers are HORRIBLE.

I don't think your gut is wrong. I have an uncle that had like an '84 Bronco for 20 years. At some point, it becomes a utility vehicle. Trucks are the same way, they just stay in service longer versus your Ford Escort because they can haul something.

I think that my wife will go for the 75d, mostly because it is more economical and a great deal. We are now at 18+ years married and I've learned, buying the 100d without her 100% buy-in would be a lot worse than just getting the 75d and go from there. My guess is that she'll go top of the line for the next round and it won't be an issue.

 

[DSGChina]

Range is king!

If you can afford it, you should get 100D.

If not, you can get a lesser range but less time savings, more stops for charging, less flexibility when you need extra miles (detours, road closures, faster speeds, cold weather...)

Yes, another vote for the 100d. RANGE. 'nuff said.

I think I can borrow my dad's Murano for the road trips if I have to

 

[abikepeddler]

We are a San Diego family as well and my wife jumps in her MX 75D every other weekend to take our daughter to volleyball tournaments in Orange County and even LA. She makes it round trip on a single charge (but stopped last time at the San Juan Capistrano Supercharger just to try out supercharging for the first time...). We have not done any long roadies just yet as we just got the car salty this month but from what I understand it is a non issue with the 75Kw cars as they make the jumps between S-charge just fine. Yea, the larger batteries charge faster and that is of interest to someone like me who is of a pedal down, "let's make great time" when on a road trip. But the car is so fascinating to pilot around you do get caught up in the whole lifestyle (for lack of a better word) and I actually like stopping to steal free juice. I'm not even talking about Supercharging. We were at Sycuan Indian Casion this past weekend (don't ask) and on the second floor of their parking structure they had a FREE Chargepoint charging station! Both my wife and I were so amazed we were getting free go-to juice... It just made things so... Fun. Like we were some sort of Eco Bonnie & Clyde stealing from a Casino.... And it felt GOOD!

But the main argument I have for the 75 over the 90 or 100 is the money you save. The price gap I think is around $13,000. That is serious money. Like another poster said earlier... $300 a month on a car payment... To me it's really a no brainier if your like me... You sleep well knowing you got maximum quantity for the minimum money. That to me is the 75d. The 100d is compelling especially when it costs just $3000 more then the 90d. In the end, comparing the 75D to the 100D you get 58 more miles for $13,000. That's a lot of dough... If you can afford the 100D, go for it. I vote 75D for the cheap bastard alliance.

My last comment is something I learned while hunting for reasonable auto insurance on a Tesla MX. The insurance rates tend to be higher for cars with purchase prices above $100k. Our pimped out MX 75D (AP2, 6 seater, SAS, tow, winter package) ended up at like $94,500 if I remember correctly. The insurance company we ended up going with (Geico) ended up not inquiring about the vehicles cost, but others did including Costco/Ameriprise Insurance. And for what it's worth rates ranged wildly with AAA being far and away the most expensive.

 

[gangzoom]

Surely it simply depends on how much the $$$ you can spare?? and just how much more range you need??

Who wouldn't want more range?? But luckily I live on the tiny island that is the UK, so in reality even just 150 miles of range is more than enough.

For us when we ordered our 60D, the price differential to a 90D was something like $20K+ for extra range we will rarely use. Given in the next 2-3 years we'll need to replace my wifes car with probably a Model 3, the cash saved by going for the cheaper car now will be enough to pay for 1/2 the cost of a optioned up Model 3, also given our daughter is not yet 12 months old and we're about to move house saving some cash to use in other aspects of life is more important to us right now. But if you can afford it than why even bother asking the question, just go for the 100D, it's quicker with more range so is clearly the 'better' version to go for.

 

[Tam]

...the UK..

I guess you don't take the 300 mile trip daily through the chunnel to go from London to Paris

 

[Yinn]

Here's my view from a current MS 60D owner and future MX owner.

We have had minimal issues with our MS 60D. The only time it comes into play is during road trips where we might have to stop more frequently. Depending on where you're going, it may also alter your course and add time. But day to day, we've never had an issue. You get into the habit of charging it up every night and for 99% of the time, it's perfectly fine. It was also a fantastic deal for what we got. If we had to redo that purchase again, we would buy the MS 60D every single time.

Now, as a MX shopper. First, I was disappointed I missed out on the MX 60D. I personally do not think the upgrade from a 60D to a 75D is worth it. But given that I had a starting point of a 75D, it's what I had to work with. When it was 75D vs 90D, it was a bit of a no brainer. If the 60D to 75D wasn't worth it; the 75D to 90D was even worse value for me in. The performance on a 75D is adequate for me, and the range increase seemed minimal. But the 100D changes the game...

60 to 75: $1,127.45/kwH, 15% Price Premium for 18% additional range
60 to 90: $1,108.25/kwH, 29% Price Premium for 28% additional range
60 to 100: $680.56/kwH, 33% Price Premium for 47% additional range

I can not stress enough just how good of a deal the 100D is in comparison. If you were shopping for a 75 or 90, it would have to be discounted $6-7k to hit that same price ratio.

Now despite the value, if you never use the extra range; it's worth $0. If you think you might need the range, and you can afford it. Do it.

 

[MXWing]

Here's my view from a current MS 60D owner and future MX owner.

We have had minimal issues with our MS 60D. The only time it comes into play is during road trips where we might have to stop more frequently. Depending on where you're going, it may also alter your course and add time. But day to day, we've never had an issue. You get into the habit of charging it up every night and for 99% of the time, it's perfectly fine. It was also a fantastic deal for what we got. If we had to redo that purchase again, we would buy the MS 60D every single time.

Now, as a MX shopper. First, I was disappointed I missed out on the MX 60D. I personally do not think the upgrade from a 60D to a 75D is worth it. But given that I had a starting point of a 75D, it's what I had to work with. When it was 75D vs 90D, it was a bit of a no brainer. If the 60D to 75D wasn't worth it; the 75D to 90D was even worse value for me in. The performance on a 75D is adequate for me, and the range increase seemed minimal. But the 100D changes the game...

60 to 75: $1,127.45/kwH, 15% Price Premium for 18% additional range
60 to 90: $1,108.25/kwH, 29% Price Premium for 28% additional range
60 to 100: $680.56/kwH, 33% Price Premium for 47% additional range

I can not stress enough just how good of a deal the 100D is in comparison. If you were shopping for a 75 or 90, it would have to be discounted $6-7k to hit that same price ratio.

Now despite the value, if you never use the extra range; it's worth $0. If you think you might need the range, and you can afford it. Do it.

As an MX60D owner I completely agree with your analysis. Couldn't justify the 75D or 90D premium for my situation but would of taken the 100D at its price point were it available. Also, the 100D has better performance than the 60D or 75D.

Would you have gotten the MS40? I would take that over the Bolt.

 

[DSGChina]

We are a San Diego family as well and my wife jumps in her MX 75D every other weekend to take our daughter to volleyball tournaments in Orange County and even LA. She makes it round trip on a single charge (but stopped last time at the San Juan Capistrano Supercharger just to try out supercharging for the first time...). We have not done any long roadies just yet as we just got the car salty this month but from what I understand it is a non issue with the 75Kw cars as they make the jumps between S-charge just fine. Yea, the larger batteries charge faster and that is of interest to someone like me who is of a pedal down, "let's make great time" when on a road trip. But the car is so fascinating to pilot around you do get caught up in the whole lifestyle (for lack of a better word) and I actually like stopping to steal free juice. I'm not even talking about Supercharging. We were at Sycuan Indian Casion this past weekend (don't ask) and on the second floor of their parking structure they had a FREE Chargepoint charging station! Both my wife and I were so amazed we were getting free go-to juice... It just made things so... Fun. Like we were some sort of Eco Bonnie & Clyde stealing from a Casino.... And it felt GOOD!

But the main argument I have for the 75 over the 90 or 100 is the money you save. The price gap I think is around $13,000. That is serious money. Like another poster said earlier... $300 a month on a car payment... To me it's really a no brainier if your like me... You sleep well knowing you got maximum quantity for the minimum money. That to me is the 75d. The 100d is compelling especially when it costs just $3000 more then the 90d. In the end, comparing the 75D to the 100D you get 58 more miles for $13,000. That's a lot of dough... If you can afford the 100D, go for it. I vote 75D for the cheap bastard alliance.

My last comment is something I learned while hunting for reasonable auto insurance on a Tesla MX. The insurance rates tend to be higher for cars with purchase prices above $100k. Our pimped out MX 75D (AP2, 6 seater, SAS, tow, winter package) ended up at like $94,500 if I remember correctly. The insurance company we ended up going with (Geico) ended up not inquiring about the vehicles cost, but others did including Costco/Ameriprise Insurance. And for what it's worth rates ranged wildly with AAA being far and away the most expensive.

I'm rolling all votes into this post, and it's now:

100d = 9.5, 90d = 1, 75d =2.5

Thanks for the local context. As a card-carrying member of the Cheap Bastard Alliance, this is the meat of it for me.

Time to get super nerdy...

I put roughly 25K miles on my BMW this last year. Taking about 7K miles off the the top because of "circumstances" (38mi commute one way from Jan to April), my driving patterns have now settled down and I estimate 15-18K for next year, including road trips. I would guess that 85-90% of my miles will be "in-town" driving. Extrapolating that over 5 years, you get an upper-bound of 90K miles, with 78.75K of those in-town driving.

That's just 11.25K miles on road trips. Assuming you stop more often for SuperChargers than you would gas stations, almost 3x more, I would say (I stopped about every 300-400 miles in my ICE), then it's simple math. Over the 5 year life of the vehicle, an ICE driven by me would stop during road trips about 32 times. Let's say it's 90 times for the MX 75d. At an average of 30 min per stop for the ICE, that's 16 hours. For the 75d, it's 45 hours, which seems like a lot. Difference is 29 hours. I think that over the 5-year life span of the car, it would mean 3-4 days longer spent on the road than at your destination. With the 100d, I would expect somewhere around 1.75 more stops than an ICE, bringing the difference down to about 12 hours (28-16). Spread over 4 or 5 road trips, you may have an additional day, maybe not.

So for the 75d vs the 100d, it's 17 hours. The price difference I am looking at is 108.5K (new 100d) - 82.5K (new inventory vehicle 75d) = $26K.

$1,529 per hour. Not bad in terms of savings.

We could enter a vortex where we throw in the finance charges as well, along with resale value (which is nebulous at this point) but there is no financial analysis that would favor the 100d. The points in favor of the 100d would be: reducing range anxiety, and 1.2 sec faster 0-60 time, plus a top speed of 155mph.

 

[DSGChina]

Here's my view from a current MS 60D owner and future MX owner.

We have had minimal issues with our MS 60D. The only time it comes into play is during road trips where we might have to stop more frequently. Depending on where you're going, it may also alter your course and add time. But day to day, we've never had an issue. You get into the habit of charging it up every night and for 99% of the time, it's perfectly fine. It was also a fantastic deal for what we got. If we had to redo that purchase again, we would buy the MS 60D every single time.

Now, as a MX shopper. First, I was disappointed I missed out on the MX 60D. I personally do not think the upgrade from a 60D to a 75D is worth it. But given that I had a starting point of a 75D, it's what I had to work with. When it was 75D vs 90D, it was a bit of a no brainer. If the 60D to 75D wasn't worth it; the 75D to 90D was even worse value for me in. The performance on a 75D is adequate for me, and the range increase seemed minimal. But the 100D changes the game...

60 to 75: $1,127.45/kwH, 15% Price Premium for 18% additional range
60 to 90: $1,108.25/kwH, 29% Price Premium for 28% additional range
60 to 100: $680.56/kwH, 33% Price Premium for 47% additional range

I can not stress enough just how good of a deal the 100D is in comparison. If you were shopping for a 75 or 90, it would have to be discounted $6-7k to hit that same price ratio.

Now despite the value, if you never use the extra range; it's worth $0. If you think you might need the range, and you can afford it. Do it.

There is no doubt about it, unless you can get a discounted inventory vehicle for your 90d at around $95K, you just don't get the 90d now that the 100d is out.

I think when the 120kwh version is out, you are now into parity with ICEs and there is no range anxiety. Game over. No wonder Detroit is in a panic. And if they aren't, they should be.

 

[Saghost]

Your complicated math assumes you'll drive the Tesla the same amount that you drove the BMW.

Most of us find ourselves driving the Tesla a lot more than past cars it seems. I'm over 10k in less than five months, including two long roadtrips - on a path for twice as many miles as the last car.

You're also assuming a Supercharger stop is like a gas stop - down time when you can't do anything. Unless you were in the habit of going through drive throughs and eating while you drive, the impact to your trip length will be less than you think. You can get a pretty full charge while you're eating dinner...

 

[DSGChina]

Your complicated math assumes you'll drive the Tesla the same amount that you drove the BMW.

Most of us find ourselves driving the Tesla a lot more than past cars it seems. I'm over 10k in less than five months, including two long roadtrips - on a path for twice as many miles as the last car.

You're also assuming a Supercharger stop is like a gas stop - down time when you can't do anything. Unless you were in the habit of going through drive throughs and eating while you drive, the impact to your trip length will be less than you think. You can get a pretty full charge while you're eating dinner...

I don't do fast food really, and certainly not in the car. We always stop and eat and/or pack stuff to nibble on.

It's possible that we'll drive the Tesla more. It's not a perfect analysis by any means. It might end up being $1200/hour or $900/hour.

By no means did I intend for math above to make a case for an ICE vs. a Tesla. I'm just trying to further rationalize the 75d purchase versus the 100d. The case against the ICE is the other 78K miles you are driving in town where you can charge at your house and avoid 10-20 minutes 1-2x a week to fill up. That's like 40-50 hours and many times more expensive, well over $15K over 5 years.

 

[DSGChina]

We could enter a vortex where we throw in the finance charges as well, along with resale value (which is nebulous at this point) but there is no financial analysis that would favor the 100d. The points in favor of the 100d would be: reducing range anxiety, and 1.2 sec faster 0-60 time, plus a top speed of 155mph.

All of these are actually good reasons to get the 100d. Frankly, if I didn't have a wife, I would probably get the 100d over the 75.