May 30, 2011
richkae We should do a poll on what battery size people are planning to buy.
Of course the membership here is probably skewed but it may be interesting in any case.
( If somebody knows how to do a fancy poll that would be great. )
Otherwise I will start:
300 mile ( signature )�
May 30, 2011
Doug_G 300 (sig)�
May 30, 2011
tomanik 500km (sig)�
May 30, 2011
EV_de 230 miles = 370 kilometers is more than sufficient for me ....�
May 30, 2011
kgb I usually like to gather as much information as I can before making decisions. As a result, I usually make decisions close to the deadline in the event I learn a new piece of information. I'd like to test drive this vehicle and compare it to other vehicles that may be released in the intervening year. That said, I am leaning toward at least one of the 300 mi. I might get another of 230 miles... it depends. It also depends on whether I give up the roadster... which I am leaning towards at this point as well.
ADDENDUM: Since this is a poll. I have ruled-out the 160 mile battery. These "ideal miles" are more like city miles. Where I live (Houston, TX) most driving is hwy miles. So I need that cusion. A 230 mile battery gives me the piece of mind to avoid range anxiety. I haven't experienced it yet, but if I were to miss a charge one night, and have only a 160 mi pack, then the next day, I would be nervous.�
May 30, 2011
ckessel 300, not because I need 300, but with the estimated battery life of 70-80% after 10 years I'll still have as much range as I need for my longer trips (~240 miles in a day). Based on what I can tell, there's almost zero chance batteries would increase capacity and reduce price sufficiently in just a few years to make it a better deal to get 230 and upgrade later.�
May 30, 2011
Adm 160mi, but it will depend on pricing...�
May 30, 2011
scole04 160miles�
May 30, 2011
Jkam Living in Hawaii, I only need the 160 mile battery, but I have a signature so I get the 300 mile one.�
May 30, 2011
Jaff 300 (Sig)�
May 30, 2011
Jaff Don't worry, you'll save on snow tires...:wink::biggrin:
�
May 30, 2011
dsm363 With standard mode you'll start out with around 240 ideal miles which will maybe give you 200 estimated miles. Might be more than you need but this will give you plenty of buffer. Especially 5+ years from now when the battery has lost some of it's range.�
May 30, 2011
jkirkebo 300 (non sig)�
May 30, 2011
Todd Burch 230mi unless I inherit some extra cash
�
May 30, 2011
ibcs 300 sig.�
May 30, 2011
Thumper 230 mi. P3807�
May 30, 2011
Lloyd I need more information before deciding. Performance differences, weight, charge profiles, projected longevity etc. of the newer cells. 160 will not be enough, but 230 may do.�
May 30, 2011
NigelM 300 (non-sig)�
May 30, 2011
Cobos 160 miles should be enough and budgetwise anything larger is right out...
Cobos�
May 30, 2011
markwj 230miles. Goldilocks rule.�
May 30, 2011
widodh 300m / 480km
Still doubting about upgrading to sig�
May 30, 2011
cinergi 300 (sig)�
May 30, 2011
doug So where's the actual poll??
I went ahead and added one at the top of this thread. Please vote. :smile:�
May 30, 2011
vfx Same here. Handling? Features tied with mileage? Service plan? Tire costs?�
May 30, 2011
William13 Sig 300. I am glad the bigger pack will be available. Seven years, fast driving, cold weather. 300 miles* 70% capacity*70% fast driving and security=147 miles. By that time if there are any range issues left new batteries should be much better and a good deal cheaper.�
May 31, 2011
widodh Same here, I like to drive a bit faster, so on a shorter drive I can 'hit the gas' if I want to.�
May 31, 2011
Hache 230 miles. 160 miles won't be enough for some longer trips I do from time to time a year. And extra 10K for the 300 miles battery seems to much for me, moreover since we know that deterioration should be quicker for the 300 miles pack for the 2-3 first years.�
May 31, 2011
mnx 300 (sig). Do I need the 300 for 99.9% of my driving? Of course not, but I want to be able to take it everywhere. Roadtrips, the beach etc. One of my favourite beaches is 222km from my house. That might be pushing it, we'll see.�
May 31, 2011
Tempus barring further info/developments from tesla, i'm looking at the 230 mile pack. Mileage is irrelevant for my daily commute, or just driving around town. Normal "longer" roadtrips are roughly 180 miles, which the 230 might be ok for (would like to hear more about practical range though for each type of battery). That plus the significant cost increase of the 300 is the basis of my current thoughts.�
May 31, 2011
Todd Burch Just wanted to point out, as someone alluded to earlier, that we need to keep in mind that the results of this poll are going to be biased heavily toward the 300 mi end of the spectrum.
A good number of the active users on this site are existing Roadster owners--and therefore are financially well-off (especially if they're lucky enough to ALSO be getting a Model S!)--so their capacity to afford the 300 mi pack is going to far exceed the typical population.�
May 31, 2011
loganss I already can't "afford" the 160 Tesla Model S base price but to cover myself for the occasional long trip the 230 fits me better.
So I'm aiming to get the 230mi pack. A test drive will solidify my purchase.�
May 31, 2011
Iz 230. It would have been so cool if the 300-mile pack was the base model.
Even a $5k increase instead of $10k increase for pack sizes would have been nice too!�
May 31, 2011
gg_got_a_tesla 160 miles given my daily 55-mile-roundtrip commute (mixed city/hwy). Good enough for those sporadic 100-mile weekend trips as well. Will fall back to my wife's Mini Clubman (or a Hertz rental) for looonger trips!�
May 31, 2011
shark2k Pretty sure the 300 mile battery is an extra 20k from the base price and the 230 mile is an extra 10k, FYI.
-Shark2k�
May 31, 2011
herbvdh I have come to the conclusion that a 160 mile battery will be more than adequate for my driving. When I analyzed my worst day of driving I found I was under 60 miles which really amazed me as I thought it was more like 75 to 80 miles.�
Jun 29, 2011
neroden 300 (sig). Again, not because I need the 300. I'm never going to use it; I'll only need the 230, and even then only for a "safety margin", as 160 would actually cover all my routine round trips, barely. But I finally concluded the extra cost was worth it to get the Signature (and therefore get the car earlier). I've been chomping at the bit to get an all-electric car since about 2008 (but the Roadster was simply unsuitable) and my family would appreciate fewer months of having me complain "It's not OUT yet" daily.�
Jun 29, 2011
WhiteKnight I thought 160 miles but then I read that the batteries drop to 70% capacity in 7-10 years. Also if you like to really accelerate or you're driving at highway speeds (85mph here in ATL) then you're not getting 160 miles you're getting something less. If you look at Tesla's Roadster spreadsheet (I know it's apple to oranges but it's all we've got) it's 55kwh battery has a range of 243 miles at 54 mph but if you crank it up to 76 mph the range drops by 33% to 163 miles. And then you figure you want to have some juice in reserve for a trip, plus they don't want you pulling below 10% on a regular basis (or topping off above 90% - I think). So now it seems like the only option for me is 300 mile pack (maybe squeak by with 230 miles) since 300 x 70% x 67% x 80% = 113 miles. And I haven't even trid to factor in having the car full of my big fat relatives.�
Jun 29, 2011
Mycroft Yep, better too much range than too little. You'll also get the car faster with the 300 battery.�
Jun 29, 2011
Todd Burch Although for most driving where range is important (highway speeds) drag is the overwhelming contributor to a loss in range, keep in mind that the Roadster (I believe) has a drag coefficient of .35, whereas the Model S is said to be .27, which is 23% smaller. Since air resistance is proportional to the drag coefficient, the loss in range due to faster driving should be about 20ish% smaller than is seen with the Roadster. So keep that in mind. Using the Roadster chart is going to be strongly on the conservative side.�
Jun 29, 2011
smorgasbord The drag equation:(see Wikipedia)
shows us that total drag is from the drag co-efficient (Cd)multiplied by the surface area (A). The Model S is wider and taller than the Roadster, so that will negate some of the advantages of the lower drag co-efficient.�
Jun 29, 2011
Todd Burch Smorgasbord, good point...I guess saying it's significantly conservative would be a stretch. We don't have width/height info, although I'd be surprised if frontal area for the Model S is more than about 15% larger than the Roadster...so there should still be probably 5-10% savings. But just a guess.�
Jun 29, 2011
smorgasbord From TeslaMotors.com:
How much should we subtract off for the mirrors? What is the frontal surface area of the Roadster?�
Jun 29, 2011
Todd Burch Here's what I found:
Roadster:
Width: 72.9" without mirrors
Height: 44.4"
Ground clearance: 5.1"
Model S:
Width with mirrors: 86"
Mirror width (estimate): 8" each side
Height: 56"
Ground Clearance: 4.5"
Roadster area: 72.9" x (44.4" - 5.1") = 2865 in^2.
Model S area: (86" - 2 x 8") x (56" - 4.5") = 3605 in^2.
So the Model S is about 25% larger in frontal area, 23% smaller in Cd.
So I stand corrected...they're probably pretty similar, although I've heard rumors of the Model S Cd being .25, which would make its Cd 29% smaller than the Roadster.
Does anyone know if aerodynamic effects such as ground clearance are considered in the vehicle's Cd? I assume it is, but you never know. I think smaller ground clearance results in less drag. (NASCAR fans, correct me if I'm wrong...)�
Jun 29, 2011
donauker So according to your calculations the Model S width will be 3 inches narrower then the Roadster?! Good luck with that three adult rear seat!�
Jun 29, 2011
Todd Burch I have two four-door sedans by different manufacturers. The width of the side mirrors on both of them are approximately 9", so 8" is not a crazy estimate.
I'm going off of published widths of the Roadster (without mirrors), along with the published width of the Model S (with mirrors). If you consider that the car tapers out perhaps a few inches from the mirrors, then maybe subtracting 8" is a bit more than necessary, but if you can find more accurate numbers, please enlighten us.�
Jun 29, 2011
aviators99 I would have gotten the 160, because I think that's all I need and because of swapability. However, because of the changes in the way things are being assembled, I guess I won't have a choice, and will have to get the 300. (I am R140).�
Jun 30, 2011
William13 The most important thing is the velocity is squared. Going at 60 mph has half the drag of going 85 mph. The main use of electricity is going against the drag. You can't go as far if you are speeding along.�
Jun 30, 2011
Eberhard What is really as important as the size of the batterie, is the speed of the onboard charger. 150mile range with 22kw charger brings you quicker further on a long distance ride then a 3.5 kW charger (16A) with a 300mile pack�
Jun 30, 2011
Doug_G Assuming there are any charge points whatsoever in existence, which is not the case here.�
Jun 30, 2011
neroden
Exactly. The closest thing to a charge point in much of North America is an RV park with 240 V 50 amp service. Consider that the maximum, and notice how far apart they are.�
Jun 30, 2011
Eberhard everywhere in Europe, you can find 32A 3-phase sockets, offering 3x32A = 96A = 22kW�
Jul 1, 2011
jkirkebo Not everywhere. Most of Norway is only 230V 3-phase, not 400V. Thus 3x32=55A, 55A*230V=only 12.6kW. 22kW is still way too low to be usable on a road trip, I'd consider 44kW (3x63A) the bare minimum with a preference for 62.5kW CHAdeMO (probably around 60kW for the Model S, depending on battery voltage (I suspect around 480V)).�
Jul 7, 2011
Eberhard 3-phase 32A is 230V phase to neural. 400V is phase to phase. the charging is always done at 230V phase to neutral. If you have 230V phase to phase you have to calculate 32A * root of 3 = 55A�
Jul 7, 2011
jkirkebo Norwegian 3-phase is 230V phase to phase and 130V phase to ground (never used).�
Jul 20, 2011
gg_got_a_tesla Hmm.... having second thoughts about this. Given all the input I've seen about the 160 miles really being the very-ideal range (with new batteries, no lead-foot driving, no "showing-off" acceleration, warm enough weather, no hilly terrain etc. etc.), I wonder if those 100-mile weekend trips will be possible in just 2-3 years after I get the car (if the range drops to 80 miles at that point with all those factors in there).
It doesn't make sense if I cannot take this people-and-stuff mover for say, Newark, CA -> Santa Cruz, CA and back without having to recharge in Santa Cruz. In general, I'm quite wary of leaving the charging cable out there for vandals to target (just because they can) even if I can find a charging station to begin with - I can't babysit it through the charging period, of course.
Gosh, got to push my budget to get the 230-miler if not the 300 one while hoping that the current low auto loan interest rates last for another year or so :frown: On to weaving a story to convince the wife :tongue:�
Jul 20, 2011
Mycroft And there are the option$ as well. You're right, this 1.1% auto loan deal can't last forever.�
Jul 20, 2011
dsm363 A 230 mile pack should be more than enough for the occasional 100 mile trip, even after a few years. Just an estimate, but charing in standard mode and driving at normal highway speeds with air conditioning...etc, you should have around 150 miles of range (at least with the Roadster as a guide). Of course if you charge in range mode for your trip, you'll get more.�
Aug 16, 2011
joefee 160
I'm betting range and price will improve significantly in 5 yrs when you may need a new pack. Also, I may do a lease if terms are good.�
Aug 17, 2011
robaross How can you decide on pack size when you don't know how it will affect performance. If the 160 is like a V6, the 230 like a V8, and the 300 like a V12, you've got to go with the 300. If performance is not affected by the pack size then a smaller range may suffice. I know I was thinking small since my commute is 65 miles round trip and that's the longest trip I would take except on a very rare occasion when I'd use the wife's ICE. Now I may rethink it and go bigger if that means extra oomph.�
Aug 17, 2011
qwk Exactly....�
Aug 17, 2011
vfx So the extra weight of the 300 mile battery will slow the car down?�
Aug 17, 2011
TEG I am sure you know that more weight hurts acceleration given the same power output.
What is yet to be seen is if the 160/230/300 mile versions all have the same power output.
I am assuming that they will all share the same motor. But with less cells, the smaller pack may not be able to output the same max current so they may have to 'detune' the motor on the lower ranger versions.
So, does this all end up as a 'wash' and they all accelerate the same? I dunno. It will be interesting to see if the different range packs result in different performance.
Handling is probably affected as well.�
Aug 17, 2011
Lloyd My bet is with fewer cells there will be more coolant keeping weight relatively constant. I'm sure that they do not want to redesign suspension, crash and safety testing etc. for the sake of a smaller battery at this stage of development.�
Aug 18, 2011
GSP I think Tesla has said that both the 230 and 300 mile packs will have 8000 cells, and the 160 mile pack will have 6000 cells. However my memory is somewhat suspect. If so, only the 160 mile pack would have a noticeable weight advantage. I am assuming that the highest energy 18650's will not be necessary for the 300 mile pack, as they are significantly heavier than the 2200 mAh cells.
GSP�
Aug 19, 2011
TEG That may be rounded. There were some earlier hints that it might be 7800 vs 5500.�
Aug 20, 2011
gg_got_a_tesla It'd be weird and counterintuitive for the sigs to be slower off the blocks than the entry level config...�
Aug 20, 2011
NigelM The cells (and power usage) will be more efficient so there will be less cells than the Roadster on a like-for-like basis.�
Sep 1, 2011
ckessel Well, I was committed to the 300 because my wife's job was going to occasionally involve about 240 mile trips in a day. Looks like she's shifting jobs and that won't be necessary anymore, so now I'm probably looking at the 230. The 160 just won't quite cut it to see the relatives that are 120 miles away. I mean, it would initially, but it'd require charging in range mode each time and after a few years degradation that'd get pretty tight on range.
There was, originally, a blurb on Tesla's Model S FAQ saying each range would have a Sig option and non-300 Sig people would just get theirs early in the run of each battery size. But I'm not seeing that now, so maybe I won't be able to get a Sig when the time comes.�
Sep 1, 2011
gg_got_a_tesla To my knowledge, there never was such a blurb. The sig was an unknown commodity (except that it'd be limited and pricier) till they said that it's going to be priced above all configs of the base Model S and will carry the 300 pack alone (to justify that and more).�
Sep 1, 2011
TEG If anything I think there was a suggestion that the 300 mile pack might come after the 160+230, but I gather they got the 300 mile range technology sorted out quicker, and the rest of the car a little slower.�
Sep 1, 2011
markwj The last info I have is:
Sigs (all 300 mile)
Then 300 mile general production
Then 230 mile general production
Then 160 mile general production
In that order.�
Sep 1, 2011
ckessel I suppose it all depends on what the Sig really means as far as options and price. Though odds are I'll end up bumping down the delivery list and getting a non-Sig 230. Pointless to blow $10,000 on an extra 70 miles of range if I'm almost never going to use it.�
Sep 1, 2011
Larry Chanin Hi,
I need more information, but I'm leaning toward the lower battery range pack sizes.
At first I thought I'd need to upgrade to at least the 230 mile range battery pack just to make it to the Tesla store for service. However, the store manager said he believed Tesla would be offering a 5 year, 50,000 mile warranty and that Ranger mileage would be free during that warranty period. Since I have been a low mileage, short trip driver maybe I can get by with less battery range. Of course in 5 years there is also the possibility of a new store being located a lot closer.
Another factor influencing my decision is the likelihood of cheaper advanced battery technology being made available in the next 5 years. A case in point is this recent article:
This Breakthrough Will Soon Slash EV Prices Drastically
So if this article is to believed these advanced batteries would only cost $2,200 to achieve the extra 140 mile rangel that $20,000 will currently buy. Perhaps a more credible scenario involves the Panasonic collaboration which is expected to yield higher performing, less expensive batteries. Although it is not likely that the Panasonic batteries would be fully tested and available by the initial roll-out of Model S, it is certainly not unreasonable to expect them to be available within the next five years. So being a low mileage driver one strategy would be to go with the 160 mile range batteries initially and save the $10,000-$20,000 for a few years later when cheaper, higher performing batteries will be available.
Then there is the question of leasing. If attractive leasing options are available, either leasing the batteries or leasing the car, then the issue of periodically upgrading to higher performing, presumably less expensive batteries, would be addressed with the conclusion of the lease. I don't usually get a new car every few years, but for a Tesla the prospect of trading it in for a new model is very appealing. :biggrin:
Larry�
Sep 1, 2011
Doug_G Get confirmation on that! I don't think that is official policy. They seem to do some initial warranty work without charging, but I don't think that is guaranteed. They definitely did charge Ranger fees for my annual service.�
Sep 1, 2011
Larry Chanin Hi Doug,
Thanks for the heads up.
I guess this will have to be one of many issues to be confirmed when the options are finalized. :wink:
Larry�
Sep 2, 2011
efusco A coworker used the exact same logic yesterday while we discussed the Tesla and I admit it isn't something I'd previously considered. Depending upon cost I think I will probably be most interested in the 300mile version for that very reason. I tend to keep my cars at least 7 years and honestly anticipate longer with an EV (fewer moving parts to go bad, etc.) I'll need/want at least a solid 200 mile range at the end of that time and 300 miles would offer a lot more flexibility on longer drives.�
Sep 2, 2011
Citizen-T I'm leaning toward leasing as well. I think that since the EV technology is developing so quickly, there may be a good argument for upgrading after just 3 or 4 years. More like you do with a computer than with a ICE car. Its not just the battery either. What if the first version of the Model S only has 3G, but the Model S 2.5 gets 4G? What if they come out with a Model S Sport?
I think that the art is evolving too quickly to expect to hold this car for 10 years, and if that is true, leasing (at least with the first Model S) is attractive.
Only downside is that I won't get to keep this piece of history, and in 50 years when it is worth big bucks for being the car that changed the world, I'll just have pictures. :tongue:�
Sep 2, 2011
ckessel Yep, I'm still a firm believer in my logic
I was going to get a 300 because:
- My wife's business trips would fit in the range (the 240 mile trips I mentioned). We'd make a serious profit on the billable mileage!
- I could visit my family about 120 miles away, stay overnight, and come back without needing a charge (actually, the same city my wife's trips would generally be to)
That's changed though because my wife is switching jobs and won't be making that trip. For my trips to see the family, my stepdad said he'd put in a NEMA 15-40 for me, so as long as I can get there, which 160 should do, I'd be good. Also, I'm seriously considering the Model X for my wife down the line and we could get the 300 for that car instead and use it for long distance trips.
At this point, it all depends on what the Sig comes with (e.g. non-battery options I don't want to pay for) and whether or not Tesla throws Sig folks a bone with some sort of price break with the uber options package.�
Sep 2, 2011
Larry Chanin Hi,
Could you please elaborate?
Tesla Motor's chief technology officer, says battery costs have been steadily declining at about 8 percent a year.
Don't you believe that the Panasonic collaboration with Tesla will result in improved performance at less cost? What makes you think that this technology won't be tested by Tesla and ready for production in just a few years?
Thanks.
Larry�
Sep 2, 2011
ckessel It'll decrease, just not fast enough to overcome the cost of throwing away your initial battery. Some of the calculations on battery cost have put it pretty high (can't remember the article now, but it's something like "back of napkin battery calculation cost"). I'm going to invent some numbers for the sake of illustration.
Today:
160 price = $10000 (granted, rolled into initial car purchase, but you are paying for it).
300 price = $30000 (Remember here I'm talking "go buy a new battery", not the $20k option upgrade price)
Let's say you upgrade from 160->300 3 years later and battery costs have dropped 25%:
160 price = $7500
300 price = $22500
So, if you bought the 300 mile straight off, you'd pay an extra $20k more than if you bough the 160.
If you buy the 160 right off, then upgrade to the 300 later you're paying $22.5k to upgrade. The key question then becomes, how much can you sell the old 160 battery for? Remember, it's old technology now and it's had degradation. Can you get enough that it was really worth waiting 3 years to upgrade to the 300?
The more expensive the base battery (say costs were 20/30/40k instead of the 10/20/30k I used), the better it is to upgrade right away rather than wait. If the battery cost curve drops more rapidly over time, say 20% a year rather than 8%, then it swings back the other way.
So, all that was my thinking. From what I can tell with the knowledge available today, it's better to just go big on battery right from the start.�
Sep 2, 2011
Lloyd I disagree with this. I used to run a lease company! If a sport come out in two years, and you have a 4 year lease. It will likely cost you for early termination to change to the new car. Most lease companies will 'bury' the cost of the early termination in the new lease, but you still pay for it. Also, if you hold your vehicle to the end of the lease and it is an open ended lease, you may be liable for any deficit to the value of the car at the end of the lease. Thus if technology increases quickly, the vehicle being turned in may not be worth as much as they had anticiped at inception of the lease. Close ended leases cannot charge you extra if the mileage and condition of the car are within normal wear and tear. Owning the car gives you better freedom to sell you current car, and trade up to another model when the time is right for the sale of the old model, and when you want to trade up. Additionally the total cost of financing is lower for a purchase as well in most cases.�
Sep 2, 2011
Doug_G I think it is extremely unlikely that Tesla will simply throw out old packs and sell us new ones.
They will extract the worn-out cells and sell them to a recycler, who will extract the Lithium. The rest of the pack - structure, plumbing, electronics - will be refurbished as needed and largely reused. This not only makes sense for Tesla and for the environment, but refurbished packs will be less expensive for the customer.
I'm sure they'll offer brand-new packs at a higher price as well, so the consumer can choose either a refurb or a brand-new pack.�
Sep 2, 2011
Larry Chanin Hi Lloyd,
Thanks for your insights.
So is there ever a situation where leasing has advantages?
Larry�
Sep 2, 2011
ckessel Definitely. From the viewpoint of a customer upgrading, apart from warm fuzzy feelings of reuse and environmentalism, it's just part of whatever used market there will be. I'm really curious what the used and refurbished market will look like. That'll have a pretty big impact on how people trade in batteries at some point.
In the near future though, it's sort of a non-factor as it'll be years before that market matures, probably too late and too unpredictably to consider it in any sort of "ugprade now or later?" calculations.�
Sep 2, 2011
Trnsl8r For me, two reasons to go max out to 300:
1. Better to have it and not need it. If this is to replace my current family car, I need the distance - not for the daily drive, but for the once a month trip out to the coast or when we have visitors that want to see the sights. (You guessed it, I'm in Tesla's home neighborhood.)
2. Resale value. Not that I'm planning on selling it, but I have a suspicion that the 160 mile model will be like the 4GB model of the first iPhone. Eventually it got dropped because nobody wanted it...
It's all about the range... at least until there is a charging infrastructure in place, and that'll be a while yet.�
Sep 3, 2011
NigelM 3. "Size anxiety" when talking to ICE owners. :wink:�
Sep 3, 2011
W.Petefish I guess we'll see at the factory tour. 27 days and counting.�
Sep 5, 2011
Larry Chanin Hi William,
I don't think if a competing battery technology is less expensive to produce than Tesla's that Tesla's replacement battery packs will drop by an equal amount. However, I do believe, as Tesla management does, that the general cost of batteries is trending downward. I also believe that the new Panasonic batteries that Tesla will eventually be using will be less expensive to produce than the current Tesla battery packs. Will Tesla pass some or all of these economies on to their customers? Sure. Why, because there is real competition developing in the EV and Hybrid arena. So if Tesla expects to remain a viable player, especially as they roll out lower priced, higher volume EVs, they will have to pass along some of those reduced production costs. Even in the luxury EV niche market the model S won't remain the only player for very long.
Larry�
Sep 5, 2011
vfx While I don't expect batteries to be half price (though I'm hoping). I do think that all eyes are on Tesla so if they get too crazy with pricing it will play poorly for the EV movement.�
Sep 6, 2011
NigelM If Tesla lives their guiding principles, it wouldn't make any sense to keep battery prices artificially high.�
Sep 11, 2011
bonnie Perhaps. But they will also factor in how that might impact future sales. Price will be dependent upon a number of factors such as actual cost and what other car manufacturers are charging (which helps set expectations). If the price significantly exceeds expectations, it will negatively impact future sales.�
Sep 11, 2011
Larry Chanin Hi William,
Thanks for the clarification, but here is what you posted:
I agree that in 5 years battery pack replacements will still be expensive. However, the thrust of your remarks was that Tesla would not pass along savings due to economies of scale and technology improvements because they are the exclusive supplier of their battery packs. Is that still your key point as to why the replacement packs will be expensive in the future?
Thanks.
Larry�
Sep 11, 2011
dsm363 You may be right but they also can't price it too high otherwise angering current owners might drive away future owners. They have to find the right balance between maximizing profit and attracting new customers.
Oh, just saw I posted the exact same thing as Bonnie. So I guess..I agree with Bonnie.�
Sep 11, 2011
Larry Chanin Hi Bonnie,
I completely agree.
Folks make purchase decisions primarily considering the initial costs, but the cost of ownership also has an influence. When battery pack comprises such a large percentage of the costs of a vehicle their replacement costs will be a significant factor in the buying decisions. If Tesla were to artificially inflate those costs it would materially effect future sales. Repeat buyers would fall by the wayside.
Larry�
Sep 11, 2011
vfx At some point outside battery makers will see the market for sales like printer cartridges. digital media and car batteries. Anything that is 'expendable" will find an outlet.�
Sep 11, 2011
Doug_G I believe that Roadster packs will be more expensive per-kWh than Model S packs, simply because they're hand-built instead of mass-produced. That said, refurbished packs with new cells will be less expensive than all-new packs. So I think the ultimate replacement (refurb) cost will be more than many suggest and less than William3 fears.�
Sep 11, 2011
vfx Maybe they can reprogram their fancy new battery welding machine to do the old Roadster pack.�
Sep 12, 2011
kgb I realize this thread has veered towards battery pack cost, but allow me to go back to the real vs. ideal miles discussion. I recently did a trip from Houston to Austin. From my house to my destination, 168 miles. One would think that would be a no-brainer for a 244 mile pack... let me tell you about my "real world" experience.
My actual plan was to make a couple stops on my way out of town, and I wanted around 10-20 miles left when I arrived in Austin, so I could take care of some business before I had to charge. I mapped my route, and calculated that with all the stops, I needed 202 miles. That's close, but that was everything from outlet to outlet. I got on my way, and I set the cruise control to 50 mph. It is brutally hot here in Texas, so I decided to drive with the A/C. I closely monitored my estimated range and the remaining distance as per the GPS. It looked like it was going to be brutally close, and I couldn't drive any slower! So, I called an RV park I had in the ready, and stopped in there to charge up. This was my first time taking the Roadster out of town, it was a learning experience.
On the way back, I drove without the A/C on. I was determined to prove that my car could go from Austin to Houston. I found that with the A/C off and the cruise control set to around 60 mph, my estimated miles and ideal miles were around the same. I would have made it back with around 50 miles to spare, but I couldn't take the heat any longer and put the A/C on.
The only cities to which I would consider driving are: Galveston (~60mi), Austin (~165mi), San Antonio (~200mi), and Dallas (~250mi). Unless you want to arrive in a shirt soaked with sweat, you need a battery with enough capacity to run the A/C while driving. Given my experience, I think I'd rather err on the side of having extra battery. So I am pretty convinced that I'll go for the 300 mile variety.�
Sep 12, 2011
ckessel Ouch, that is incredibly deflating. Going standard freeway speed (actually, quite less) with the A/C and you're looking at maybe 70% of actual range? I think I just gained range anxiety.�
Sep 12, 2011
Todd Burch It looks like kgb said the route he was taking was 202 miles...so more like 83% of actual range.�
Sep 12, 2011
zack At 50-55 mph my battery pack never fails to deliver at least 220 miles of range (when in range mode, which has reverted to standard from time to time during trips, leaving me worried that somehow I'd miscalculated). Whenever I get a bit anxious I just draft for a while and watch my range freeze and then begin to climb. I haven't noticed the air conditioner affecting mileage much here in Minnesota, where it's been in the 80s and 90s for most of the summer. I'd love to have a 300 mile battery! Of course, a 500 mile pack would be heaven.�
Sep 12, 2011
ckessel Perhaps EVs should have two numbers on their range, such as 300 City / 240 Highway, similar to how ICE's have to show different efficiency rates in city vs. highway. It'd help make consumers aware of the drop in highway range, which is opposite of the ingrained intuition people have from driving ICE's forever where highway efficiency is better than city.�
Sep 12, 2011
gg_got_a_tesla I agree. Seriously, how often do most of us stay under the typical 65 mph hwy speed limit let alone cruise at 50 mph?!! The 160-mile battery pack choice looks weaker and weaker by the moment; from the looks of it, most "244-ideal-mile" battery pack roadster owners are not truly satisfied either so, another 20 grand and the 300-mile battery pack, it has to be for me - quite a stretch in terms of budget but, the range anxiety might be too much to bear in the long term :-(�
Sep 12, 2011
Tempus That's a really good point (especially for those consumers new to the EV arena - really most everyone). I'm still looking at deciding what battery pack to get, and information that would be really useful to have would be something like 'average' range, as opposed to just ideal range - something i would define as driving at 65-70 mph with the AC on, etc... That seems more like standard highway driving behavior than 55 anyway.�
Sep 12, 2011
Kevin Harney As I recall Tesla did put out a range of numbers when the Roadster came out. Highway with AC, average and ideal so that people would have a good gauge. perhaps they will do that again. I think it was helpful and swayed away from the misleading data and things like MPG which is misleading as well.�
Sep 12, 2011
slcasner Actually, with the Roadster I find that my highest mileage results from highway trips when I set the cruise control at 63mph or so. For example, we drove 152 miles from home in Sunnyvale to Harris Ranch on I-5 for the dedication of a charger there, and had an estimated 70 miles left when we arrive. We drove about 60 on the portion before I-5, and 65 on I-5 where the speed limit is 70. Mileage is lower in the city and also lower at higher speeds. Driving slower (50-55mph) would increase mileage further, but is unpleasant.�
Sep 13, 2011
Jaff Bottom line...size matters...:biggrin:
�
Sep 13, 2011
Larry Chanin Hi,
Thanks for your observations. Did you have your air conditioner on?
Larry�
Sep 14, 2011
slcasner No, I think it was springtime.�
Sep 14, 2011
W.Petefish I'd say better to have the extra range and not need it than have an unforeseen little jaunt on the back roads and run out mid-way home.�
Sep 16, 2011
EVFest Way to Go Jaff & Doug_G!! IF - (That's a big if just yet) I were getting one, I would love the get the larger pack, if only to just charge it up on Weekends - so I can charge it any time at the lowest TOU Rate! Also - one charge of the 300 mile / 480 km pack - would often last me a month - so charging it once a week is like a 25% top-up!
Time Share Model S Anyone?? Robert�
Sep 16, 2011
AndrewBissell I just drove 173 miles to a deadline (left at 5:45pm had to arrive by 9pm). All bar a few miles on motorway with 70 mph limit. The car was 90% full in Range Mode when I left.
I drove quite slowly to start, about 55, with open top as it was beautifully sunny and the roads were pretty empty (M6 Toll). I then stopped for 15 minutes to put the roof on (getting cold, and worried about the impact on energy consumption), and to pump up tires to 35/44. Fully inflated
tires make a big difference. (Btw 35/45 was recommended by a Tesla service engineer, but 44 is the max psi marked on the Yokohama tires.)
After that stop traffic was heavier. I chose to drive with the trucks typically just below 60mph, not tailgating but about 2 seconds behind the largest truck going as close to 60 as I could find.
Every so often a large white van would go past and I would see if I could draft them. But what I found was that they tended to be doing 80, and at that speed the drag penalty is too great for the drafting to compensate.
I observed that at 60-ish you can get as low as under 200 Wh/mile (at one point I had 197 Wh/mile for 30 miles). At 80 it's nearer 400 Wh/mile.
Hope these observations add some value.�
Sep 16, 2011
kgb 2 questions: (1) Was the A/C on? (2) When you got there, anything left in the battery?�
Sep 16, 2011
AndrewBissell No AC - it was England in the Autumn (Fall) so temperatures were moderate to cool. I did use heated seats and a little heat.
Yes there was 20% (range mode) left on arrival.�
Sep 17, 2011
neroden The range numbers are interesting. It looks like I may get the full advertised range or better, because the expressway speed limits here don't go over 65 mph, and the non-expressway rural roads limits don't go over 55 mph. When I talked to one of the customer service people in California her reaction was "How can you stand it?" Well, I don't particularly care for fast driving anyway....
...but anyway, people in areas with "faster roads" are clearly going to get worse range than people in areas with "slow roads". I'll need the range anyway for the first few years because there are no charging points anywhere in the region But it looks like I just might be able to do Ithaca to Buffalo and back on one charge, which would be awesome. (I was basing my battery pack choice on Ithaca to Rochester and back.)
Edit: I'm hoping that by the time my pack degenerates in range, people will have installed some charge points and I won't need the range any more�
Sep 18, 2011
vfx Make it a goal to try and get one put in somewhere. Talk to shop owners or builders. Find the main office at the best located malls or shopping centers. They often have suggestion boxes. Hit up your favorite restaurants where you are a valued customer. Calling city planners is pretty easy too. Arm your self with info on at least 3 companies that make charge boxes and any rebates or tax incentives in your region. If you are willing to match funds they might jump at the chance for the green cred of putting in a charge point.�
Sep 18, 2011
ckessel Seems unlikely unless every other EV auto manufacturer agrees to a tacit battery gouging. If Nissan/Toyata/Audi/etc pass on the savings and Tesla doesn't, then Tesla is going to very quickly find itself losing out on the price comparisons.�
Sep 18, 2011
JRP3 I don't see much point in getting charge points installed where he lives, since he'll be charging at home anyway. Ideally he'd get a charge point installed on the highway near Rochester.�
Sep 18, 2011
neroden I'm going to, but Tesla's not helping with this!
Before I start campaigning to get charge points put in, I want to know the most suitable standard(s) to actually charge my car with, so that I can find the most suitable models of charge boxes and explain the most suitable locations.
The lack of information on such details of charging interfaces is problem number one. At this point, I don't expect to have those details until shortly before I'm driving a Model S.
Problem number two is that the places where I really need them put in are, for obvious reasons, *not the jurisdiction where I live*, but rather the ones I visit intermittently. It will probably be rather easy to talk Ithaca into putting a charge point downtown, but that isn't particularly interesting for me (though I may push for it as a public service for people *visiting* Ithaca).
What I actually *need* are points in Syracuse, Binghamton, Rochester, Buffalo, Erie, Indianapolis, etc. How do you suppose I'm going to get there and back to campaign for an installation of charging points? You guessed it, I need to have round-trip battery capability -- I certainly don't intend to go there by *gasoline* car once I have my Model S, and I won't know the necessary information until I'm practically a model S owner. Of course, once there's a point in a city 150 miles away, I can then make it to the next city where I need to campaign to get a charge point, 300 miles away�
Sep 18, 2011
bonnie I think you're making this into a bigger problem than it needs to be. RV parks will be able to supply the charge you need. There is always an RV park. Other EV owners in those other locations can help. I drove approx 1300 miles round trip earlier this month and the majority of the chargers I used had been installed (or supported by) local EV owners (who certainly didn't need them in their local area to charge).
vfx is speaking from experience - he was one of the local EV owners that helped get chargers installed/upgraded in his own backyard (thanks, v!). I helped pay for a charger locally. Many many current EV owners have helped build the infrastructure, not waiting on Tesla or the government.
There is a NY area Tesla owners club on fb, that might be a good place to start looking at options.
And not sure why you're worried about the charging interface ... chargers have been upgraded before, but it's a safe bet that J1772 will be the interface in your area. Adapters are always an option if chargers are no longer compatible.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét