wiztecy
Active Member
Note they did do under their 400 miles with the heater on during portions of the trip, so possibly the goal is still achievable.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Note they did do under their 400 miles with the heater on during portions of the trip, so possibly the goal is still achievable.
The 400 mile range will certainly be possible at a slightly slower speed. Note that Tesla's blog post about that Roadster 3.0 trip said: "On the highway, we set cruise control to stay right around the speed limit. " For that particular trip that would have been 65 mph. I suspect that at 60mph 400 miles of range would be easy on a flat road with no headwind. Of course, in the U.S. at least, no Roadster owner wants to go 60 mph on a freeway or open highway.
Tesla stated that they ended that 340 mile trip with 20 of range remaining, and as @wiztecy noted and Tesla stated in their trip report, they used the heater for 40 mins. So the total range possible on that trip was likely around 370 miles, and the route included two sections with substantial elevation gains which would have imposed a range penalty.
Also, an EPA test of a Roadster 3.0 could quite possibly result in a 400 mile range rating, or very close to it.
At this point it appears to me that Tesla has likely met their goal of 400 miles of range for the 3.0 upgrade. Now they just need to make available all the components of the 3.0 package: the aero modifications, the improved wheel bearings, the parts to reduce brake drag, and tell us what tires they used! The last item seems like something they could have informed us about by now.
Tesla stated that they ended that 340 mile trip with 20 of range remaining, and as @wiztecy noted and Tesla stated in their trip report, they used the heater for 40 mins. So the total range possible on that trip was likely around 370 miles, and the route included two sections with substantial elevation gains which would have imposed a range penalty.
Also, an EPA test of a Roadster 3.0 could quite possibly result in a 400 mile range rating, or very close to it.
At this point it appears to me that Tesla has likely met their goal of 400 miles of range for the 3.0 upgrade. Now they just need to make available all the components of the 3.0 package: the aero modifications, the improved wheel bearings, the parts to reduce brake drag, and tell us what tires they used! The last item seems like something they could have informed us about by now.
Last edited:
smorgasbord
Active Member
This is Tesla - you have to parse each word carefully. For instance, "right around the speed limit" - I bolded the operative word: 60 is "around" 65. Hwy 5 has some 70 MPH limit sections, but I wouldn't be surprised if they kept the speed at 60.
As for the EPA, the EPA test has changed since Roadster was first sold (from 2-cycles back then to 5-cycles somewhere near 2012). The 245 EPA range of 2008 would not be the 2015 EPA range. Tesla itself believes it achieved a 2-cycle EPA range of 320 miles for Model S (85kWh, 2WD) back in 2012. But, the 5-cycle test resulted in only 265 miles. So, you need to multiply by about 0.83 to get the current EPA range rating. That means Roadster would have a current day EPA range of about 203 miles. Tesla says the new battery range is about 35% better, so that's an EPA range of 275 miles.
If you think about the aerodynamic changes needed to bump overall efficiency by 10% just to get to 300 miles, you'll realize that it isn't just a new nose. They'll need to do something about the roll bar/rear window drop-off (which creates eddies) and the rear wing. Even the mirrors would have to change. So, what happens to rear visibility, compatibility with the hard top, etc.?
So, the EPA rating for Roadster 3.0 will certainly be under 300 miles. Even if aerodynamic and wheel bearing changes come (and they'll cost extra $$), that will maybe get it to 300 miles. And 400 miles is a 25MPH non-practical possibility. Yeck.
All in all, this is very disappointing for Roadster owners: more expensive, and less range than we were told by Elon. The only good thing is that Tesla isn't completely forgetting us.
I'm sad.
Plus the new wheel bearings, reduced brake drag, and new tires.
smorgasbord;1141654II'm sad.[/QUOTE said:
In the Elise the idea was not to create eddies, rather to create a low pressure area to help draw heat up and out the louvers above the engine, so it was probably a little superflous on the Roadster, and probably why the Detroit and Dodge EV designs opted for traditional slanting engine covers.
I really can't see that being offered though, it would effectively need a whole new (and very expensive) rear CF clam to make it look right.
I think that's a no. Eventual replacement is kind of obvious, the question seems really to be about whether this is what you've been waiting for.
Bonnie has posted here Roadster 3.0 that according to a reliable source the 1.5 cars cannot be upgraded to the 3.0 battery.
moezilla
Member
I think just the opposite would be great as well. A 100 mile range Roadster weighing 500 pounds less would be fantastic. We do fine with the 68 mile range i3.
But academic as we had a sudden change in housing situation and must pass on the recently acquired very orange 2.0 car to a new home at cost or put it in storage for at least two years.
But academic as we had a sudden change in housing situation and must pass on the recently acquired very orange 2.0 car to a new home at cost or put it in storage for at least two years.
Yes it does now, but a week ago it did not state which Roadster versions could upgrade, it did not mention any versions so everyone assumed the 3.0 battery could be installed in any Roadster.
Chickenlittle
Banned
Yes this has been mentioned several times in discussions you have participated in. I believe tesla thought that it would work in the 1.5 as well (at least the sales personnel). Nobody was attempting to deceive you and when realized deposit was returned. I guess we can try to locate the guilty party to punish them but I am sure the crime does not rise to that level
Yes. Though I cannot contain my disappointment that my battery with 12,000 miles on it will get no more credit toward the 3.0 battery than somebody else's battery dead or near death. :/ But look at the website roadster order items. A vast majority are sold out, and if you ask when they will be in stock, they claim they have no idea. There is no ETA for roadster out of stock parts. So it's cute and all it's not a "limited time" offer for the 3.0 battery, but this is Tesla, and any assumption that if you wait it won't be one more item on the long list of "sold out" "No ETA" items "for sale, except not" for roadsters I believe is pretty brave. I figure put the 5K deposit down now, so if this is tesla schedule as usual (e.g., model x deposits) , I'll get the call that my battery is ready to install around 2+ years from now, allowing me to get more use out of my current battery. I'd put a winkie there, except for, well, I'm not kidding.
Botbldr45
Member
992 just went over 40,000, CAC around142, idea miles around 168-170, doesn't hold Preformance Mode very long after initial acceleration, PEM is running a little hotter than earlier in its life, every day driver, last range charge was a around 220. Still drives like it always did and wows the bystanders. I would like to get the upgrade but as long as I can make the Sedona to Scottsdale SC run I can't afford it. I hope this replacement option doesn't go away! I am sure I will need it in another 20K or so. I voted " still thinking about it"
I just hope they let us know if they decide to discontinue it.
I just hope they let us know if they decide to discontinue it.
I hope it does for everybody else, too. But quite honestly, that's the only reason I'm buying now. I don't want to go to the website one day, want to hit the button, see "out of stock," ask them for an ETA (which they won't post, because well, they don't on any other parts), and be told "no ETA" as I have been on several upgrades or parts I would get but now cannot.
Would have preferred to have gotten it years from now, but for those who hold off, and it (or a better one) is available then, terrific.
spaceballs
Member
Sounds like the cooling fan needs cleaning --> Did my own annual Maintenance found my lower blower shroud broken before removing it.
I am considering this. I have asked my local service guy to ask about when the unit will be available if I sign today, AND what the warranty will be on this very expensive unit.
If there is a crappy warranty there is no point, but if there is a 10 year or a lifetime replacement then this is the way to go.
Best,
T
If there is a crappy warranty there is no point, but if there is a 10 year or a lifetime replacement then this is the way to go.
Best,
T
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
I agree it would be a lot more interesting if it had an 8-year, unlimited-mile warranty like the Model S battery. But the warranty on the 3.0 Roadster battery is 3 years. There will also be a "small" warranty on the PEM modifications (just the piece that is modified, not the whole PEM).
I was told they are "looking in to" offering an optional extended warranty.
I was told they are "looking in to" offering an optional extended warranty.
Well then, I shall wait until they are finished "Looking into" the extended warranty.... No sense jumping the gun.
stevejust
T E S L A x (≡)
Has anyone actually done the update yet? I tried looking through the 132 page thread and didn't see any reviews of the process.
Similar threads
