TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

What type of Roadster battery pack upgrade would you choose?

Discussion in 'Roadster' started by pharma5, Jan 12, 2014.

?

What type of Roadster battery pack upgrade would you choose?

  1. -HANDLING: 56 kwh 203/260 ideal miles, ~180 lbs lighter, ~$31k

    18 vote(s)
    32.7%
  2. -RANGE: 80 kwh 266/342 ideal miles, ~50 lbs heavier, ~$40k

    13 vote(s)
    23.6%
  3. -MID-KWH: 68 kwh 235/302 ideal miles, ~55 lbs lighter, ~$35k

    11 vote(s)
    20.0%
  4. -MID-WGT: 64 kwk 225/289 ideal miles, ~90 lbs lighter, ~$34k

    7 vote(s)
    12.7%
  5. -ALL NEW DUPLICATE: 56 kwh 190/244 ideal miles, same weight, ~$25k

    3 vote(s)
    5.5%
  6. -None of these

    3 vote(s)
    5.5%
  1. pharma5

    pharma5 Roadster F#25

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2011
    Messages:
    454
    Location:
    central NJ
    This is a hypothetical menu of Roadster battery pack upgrades - please choose which would best meet your needs from the list above.

    Notes:

    HANDLING: reduces weight the most with new cells, down to original 56 kwh.
    RANGE: max range using same count of newer cells, with minor increase in weight.
    MID-KWH: half-way between Handling and Range choices, by kwh
    MID-WGT:half-way between Handling and Range cases, by weight
    ALL NEW DUPLICATE: uses same capacity cells as originals, but less expensive today than, say, 2008.

    Range has simple adjustments for kwh and weight. Cost is anchored on assumption of $40k for a pack with 6831 of "today's cells" (~$10k fixed for frame/bricks/sheets/drop&swap).

    Thanks to all for participating.
     
  2. Jackyche

    Jackyche Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    Messages:
    319
    Location:
    Seattle
    I voted none of the above, because I wouldn't "pay" for any pack TODAY. Not to say the options aren't enticing.
     
  3. bart513

    bart513 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    Messages:
    979
    Location:
    East Hampton
    Pharma,
    This is assuming that one NEEDS another battery pack, or one has the option to purchase one of these?
    Thanks!
     
  4. jbadger

    jbadger Roadster #506

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Messages:
    272
    Location:
    San Jose, California, United States
    I wouldn't pay today unless my pack stopped working completely and I had an unusable vehicle. That being said, I voted for the Mid KWH option. I would like additional range as my Roadster is my daily driver and only car. I also do not have a charging station at home, so weekends can get iffy until I can get to work to charge.
     
  5. Doug_G

    Doug_G Lead Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    15,852
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    I voted for handling, because of the way I'm currently using the vehicle. But if you asked me before I got the Model S I would have said range. It's moot because I'm not going to replace the pack until it needs it.
     
  6. thefortunes

    thefortunes Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    355
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    Although I chimed in with a desire for more range in the other thread, I voted for the Handling battery in this poll since it has the best perceived value for me. I don't think 60-70 more miles of range is worth an additional $9k unless you SOMEHOW (I know, I know) can access supercharging.

    One thing no one has brought up is that our current batteries would have 'some' trade-in (or open market) value. If I could get $25k for my 155 CAC pack and only pay $6k to upgrade, then THAT would be something I would consider currently.
     
  7. bart513

    bart513 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    Messages:
    979
    Location:
    East Hampton
    I'm with you on that!!! ++
     
  8. Doug_G

    Doug_G Lead Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    15,852
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    I'm assuming any "upgraded" packs would actually be "refurbs", because otherwise Tesla has to start manufacturing Roadster battery packs again, and I sincerely doubt they are going to do that.
     
  9. pharma5

    pharma5 Roadster F#25

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2011
    Messages:
    454
    Location:
    central NJ
    Not "today" per se

    I realize it says "today's cells" in the OP explaining the costing assumptions, but this question is NOT anchored to today.... please think of it as next-few-years-ish timeframe, and feel free to vote (or not) for the style of upgrade that (eventually) would be appealing. Specs are hypothetical, but meant to show different feature combos.

    I would put more info in the header and question, but the character limit gets in the way of long caveats. Although there were two related poll questions out there, they are not really interconnected. This is not 'How do you put a giraffe in the refrigerator?'.:wink:
     
  10. Pantera Dude

    Pantera Dude Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    468
    Location:
    Long Beach, California
    I voted for the Handling option. For me, it's the better acceleration that is most important. I could also use the added range. If this package was available tomorrow, I would seriously consider spending 15K out of pocket, factoring in a battery exchange. Thanks pharma5 for doing this!
     
  11. pharma5

    pharma5 Roadster F#25

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2011
    Messages:
    454
    Location:
    central NJ
    With n = 29, we've got 17 "at the ends" (Handling or Range), 8 for the two mid-packs, 2 for an all-new unrefurbished copy of the original pack, and 2 for none.

    Hopefully we can get these numbers up closer to the 90ish we saw on What is the 'something special' for Roadster owners from Tesla in 2014?.

    For those who selected "none", what type of features would you want in a pack? (Supercharging? Something else?).
     
  12. djp

    djp Roadster 2.0 VIN939

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,108
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    If Tesla doesn't build a new pack and only offers refurbs, I wonder how many owners with the battery replacement option will actually go ahead with the replacement.

    With the degradation rates we're seeing it's possible we won't need new batteries after 8 years, and it may be safer to stick with your old pack rather than taking a chance on a refurb.
     
  13. bart513

    bart513 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    Messages:
    979
    Location:
    East Hampton
    Does the mid KW take longer to charge than the 80KW? and is the heavier battery for the 80 KW going to take away speed versus the lighter mid KW?
     
  14. Pantera Dude

    Pantera Dude Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    468
    Location:
    Long Beach, California
    Adding weight will make the car slower. IIRC one hundred pounds will add or subtract about one tenth in 0-60 time. Will you feel it? One way to test is to put people of different weights in the passenger seat and see if you can feel the difference. I can feel the difference with a 180 pound friend in the passenger seat. I don't know how I just changed my style of type? Oh well, my technical acumen at work. :biggrin:

    - - - Updated - - -

    I don't think you will feel a difference of 50 Lbs.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I should have said, I don't think you will feel a difference in acceleration with a 50 pound difference. Handling, I don't know?
     
  15. pharma5

    pharma5 Roadster F#25

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2011
    Messages:
    454
    Location:
    central NJ
    Assume similar ideal miles added per time charging. But from empty to full, bigger bucket takes longer to fill. Weight increase on 80 is 2% in this hypothetical case so maybe 0 to 60 goes to 4.0.
     
  16. tomsax

    tomsax Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2008
    Messages:
    867
    Location:
    Sammamish, WA
    I like the HANDLING option because it would presumably also improve acceleration and energy efficiency (hence the slightly improved range). That said, I'm in no hurry with our current pack still yielding 180/233 IM.

    The trip from Ellensburg to Spokane is already pretty tight and it's going to get more challenging as we lose more range. Fortunately, we don't do that trip very often and I'm hopeful we'll get 70A charging somewhere in the middle in the next year or two.
     
  17. wiztecy

    wiztecy Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    2,721
    Location:
    Santa Cruz, California, United States
    But wouldn't having the "More Range" option raise the capacity of the pack which in turn gives you more performance with acceleration? I'd suspect a larger pack would have more punch than a lower capacity pack that makes the car lighter. Also with the future of cells the pack will most likely drop in weight anyways.

    I like more Range since its easier on the pack in the long run and each cell is under less stress, you can accelerate harder and have a lager yield above 50% SOC than what our current pack offers.

    I think the Roadster handles extremely well once you get the right shocks setup and dialed correctly with the proper camber. Unless its being raced at the track it really holds its ground on the street through corners and twisty turns.
     
  18. pharma5

    pharma5 Roadster F#25

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2011
    Messages:
    454
    Location:
    central NJ
    I've seen it suggested that a new PEM and/or motor would be needed to get better acceleration from more "juice" in the pack... this poll assumes pack upgrade only, and the motor/PEM pull from it in a similar manner as now. I suspect many people would reconsider their votes if the 0-60 could also drop... and a full powertrain upgrade (with warranty) is kinda the holy grail.

    Gotta say I'm a bit surprised there isn't more response on RANGE thus far - when I look at the idealized range vs. velocity plot it reminds me how sustained highway driving can quickly take 244 ideal miles (range mode, new) down to 150 miles.... a bigger pack means watching speed only for speed limits (and not for range) on longer trips...
    Range vs. Speed - Roadster & Model S.jpg
     
  19. bart513

    bart513 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    Messages:
    979
    Location:
    East Hampton
    I"m surprised about the range option as well given my commute. I'm guessing that most Roadster owners don't drive far enough to make range an issue, or have Model S's for long drives.
     
  20. Doug_G

    Doug_G Lead Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    15,852
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    Right. If you had asked before I got my Model S, I would have said range. A year after getting my Model S I'd rather take it on a long road trip because it is so much more comfortable. Especially in winter when you can stay toasty as opposed to getting chilled out while wearing a parka and long johns.

    The Roadster does have one big advantage for road trips. If you don't have access to Superchargers then the Roadster charges 50% faster than the Model S does, on a range basis. That's simply because it takes less power to move the car. So if you need to stop for J1772 charging, you'll cover significantly more distance in less time with a Roadster.

    Since I got the Model S I've exclusively used it for road trips. With the exception of a couple of EV events where I was asked to bring the Roadster! At the same time I've been using the Roadster for autocross so that's why I'd prefer weight reduction.
     

Share This Page