-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Derek Kessler
Active Member
- It's 218 miles (60D) vs 294 miles (90D), an increase of 34.8%.
- The 90kWh battery pack weighs more than the 60kWh battery pack — the extra capacity has to come from somewhere — thus there's not a 1:1 increase in range per kWh.
- Tesla knows that when people pay that much for a car the expect improved performance, even if it's not a P model. The larger capacity of the 90D's battery pack can provide greater peak power to the motors, thus Tesla sacrifices some range for a car that is faster off the line and faster overall than the 60D.
gmontem
Model S P01707
You may want to factor in the weight of the batteries in the 90D vs the 60D. I don't have the answer to that myself, but that may be one reason why the range is not 50% larger
The small battery Teslas have been consistently more efficient due to their lighter weight (though not as much in the newest cars as the older ones.)
However, both of those numbers are somewhat suspect. The 60 should have the exact same weight as the 75 and 80% of the usable capacity - which means it should have a ~190 mile range (237*.8). As mentioned above, that seems to suggest it has more available power than listed.
The range on the 90 is a subject for much discussion even since the rating came out - comparison to the rest of the fleet of X and S models suggests it should have a ~265 rating. Some speculate that Tesla didn't want to show a much higher number than the P90D cars, but there's never been any proof of that.
However, both of those numbers are somewhat suspect. The 60 should have the exact same weight as the 75 and 80% of the usable capacity - which means it should have a ~190 mile range (237*.8). As mentioned above, that seems to suggest it has more available power than listed.
The range on the 90 is a subject for much discussion even since the rating came out - comparison to the rest of the fleet of X and S models suggests it should have a ~265 rating. Some speculate that Tesla didn't want to show a much higher number than the P90D cars, but there's never been any proof of that.
2virgule5
Member
The first hint comes from the cars themselves: 75D (and I believe 60D as well) are rated 315 Wh/mi, the 90D is 345 Wh/mi. Most of the difference is battery weight and also more powerful motors. More powerful motors will consume more, in particular at low speed i.e. city driving which is a significant part of the EPA rating.
For the 60D in particular it brings even more range vs 75D while motors are the same and so is their weight ; It should have been less than 190 miles for a 'real' 60D. One can suspect that Tesla wanted to have a nice round number - 200 miles which it claims is the beginning of the sweet spot for EV and also to presents the 60D (both model X and S) as an alternative to waiting for model 3 with a range slightly above 200. So they probably gave a bit more than 60KWh in order to reach that magical number, which is easy to do as it is software control over what is a 75KWh battery.
That effectively makes the X60D the best deal in term of cost/usable KWh/range.
Model S suffers a bit less than the X because its aerodynamic is better and its weight is significantly less. Still, a 60D makes for 218 miles and the 90D is rated 294.
For the 60D in particular it brings even more range vs 75D while motors are the same and so is their weight ; It should have been less than 190 miles for a 'real' 60D. One can suspect that Tesla wanted to have a nice round number - 200 miles which it claims is the beginning of the sweet spot for EV and also to presents the 60D (both model X and S) as an alternative to waiting for model 3 with a range slightly above 200. So they probably gave a bit more than 60KWh in order to reach that magical number, which is easy to do as it is software control over what is a 75KWh battery.
That effectively makes the X60D the best deal in term of cost/usable KWh/range.
Model S suffers a bit less than the X because its aerodynamic is better and its weight is significantly less. Still, a 60D makes for 218 miles and the 90D is rated 294.
Last edited:
The P90D has a larger rear motor, but the 90D has exactly the same motors the 75D has according to everything I've read.
2virgule5
Member
Yes that is correct, front and rear motors are the same on 60, 75 and 90D (corrected my post implying different motor weight). When fed higher voltage and current from the 90 battery they give more power (i.e. faster 0 to 60 time) but are also less efficient in converting this energy into movement.
I'm always perplexed that the jump from 60 to 90 is $19,000. Back in 2013 the jump from 60 to 85 was only $10,000, which price also included Supercharging. That extra 5KWh is $9,000!
Perhaps I should see it the other way around - it's not that the 90 is expensive, but that the 60 is $19,000 cheaper.
Perhaps I should see it the other way around - it's not that the 90 is expensive, but that the 60 is $19,000 cheaper.
It is mostly that way. When they jumped 60->70, they didn't raise the price at all. Both the 70->75 and 85->90 added $3k to the price - then 60 subtracts $9k from the 75 - making it $6k less than the old $60k (while including supercharging and AP sensors and unlimited warranty and standard Navigation and a bunch more new stuff) while the 90 continues to be $3k more than the 85.
There is no indication that the batteries weigh less on 60/75D vs 90D.. I have been told multiple times that they just put empty cells so to keep curb weight and certification the same...which is strange since there could easily be a 200lb weight saving.
Look at the Wikipedia curb weights here (lots of independent sources that I've seen, but they mostly don't group things neatly like this):
Tesla Model S - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The original S60 is a good 300 pounds lighter than the original S85, and a 70D is over 200 pounds lighter than an 85D.
I hope you are right on the X as well. Just never been able to get a real number out of the Forums.
ccutrer
Active Member
1. This is the Model X subforum; those numbers are for Model S.
3. The motors are the same for a 60D, 75D, or 90D (it is larger with a P90D). As long as you don't actually floor the accelerator on a 90D, there's no reason it would allow more current to the motor than a 75D would, and thus get the same efficiency. (though yes, the reason a 90D can be faster is it's possible to draw more energy from the battery at once).
Also note that a 100% charge on my 90D Model X is 260-261 miles. 90% charge is 233 miles. Doing the math - 261-233 = 28 miles for 10%. Times by 10 - 280 miles for 100%. Huh? I've given up on figuring out how Tesla comes up with rated miles, or comparing my current efficiency to "rated" (cause who ever drives exactly at rated??), or even looking at my projected range based on my efficiency over the past 30 miles. I'd switch my battery display to show percentage instead of rated miles, but I like the higher precision that 100%=261 gives me. I think what you should instead do is go to evtripplanner.com or evtripping.com and try out some hypothetical trips you would take that you would be concerned about mileage, and see how well each model would do for you. I recently took a road trip (that will probably be fairly common) that between super chargers, I charged to ~85-90% on my 90D, and I still had to slow down ~5-7mph slower than the speed limit (of 80mph) in order to make it to the next supercharger with 15% charge left. I could cut it closer, but boy would I be having anxiety about making it at all, and/or having to slow down significantly in order to make it. I also tow periodically, so wanted as large of battery as possible for that. I went on a day trip on saturday that there was a possibility I'd be towing some four wheelers. I ended up not, and I was grateful - I ended up the day with 108 miles of rated range, after starting with 260 miles. I haven't pulled a trailer long distance yet, so I'm still very nervous how much of a hit I would take. If it's 50%, I wouldn't have been able to make that trip. Even a smaller hit of 30%, and I would not have been able to with a 60D or 75D.
Similar threads
