Oct 24, 2013
MartinAustin My first post to the Model X forum!
Elon Musk just said this at the London store-opening event... like, about 5hrs ago.
Check this video at the 24:10 mark. (horrid bandwidth video, but you can hear what he says)
Tesla London Store Opening reception with Elon Musk - YouTube
Perhaps this is for the U.K. market only? The web site still says RWD will be available.�
Oct 24, 2013
Citizen-T I caught this too. Very interesting.
Here is a direct link to the question so people don't have to seek for it. Tesla London Store Opening reception with Elon Musk - YouTube�
Oct 24, 2013
Discoducky No RWD drive option in the US? Not like I was going to take that option but that should raise the base price of the car about 4 to 6K presumably. Seems odd to not offer RWD as I can't imagine that the motor wouldn't be powerful enough.�
Oct 24, 2013
MikeL Wow. Once again, you heard it here (TMC) first folks! One less option to choose, AWD is the reason I'm waiting for the X. So at least it won't cost "extra", but it sure will cost "more" ! :tongue:
ML
I'm thinking maybe the complexity of the AWD makes the 2 wheel & 4 wheel models so different that they have decided to just go w the more advanced option, at least to start. A lot of people in LA, Atlanta, etc. pay more for 4WD they don't "need"�
Oct 24, 2013
wts13 I don't like this at all. Lower range with same battery size (I'd assume) compared to a 2WD, and higher cost.
For those of us who live in sunny California and never encounter snow or any challenging driving conditions, I'm not sure why it's a good thing that we have to pay more in up-front cost and in energy usage.
I'm increasingly concerned that the Model X is going to be insanely expensive for what it is. Hope I'm wrong :/�
Oct 24, 2013
bonnie Some of us who live in sunny California encounter snow and other challenging driving conditions and were planning on AWD ... so this is a non-issue for me. But I'm sure it's an issue for others.�
Oct 24, 2013
aronth5 Clearly not the only reason but I believe Tesla has determined that without taking advantage of AWD they cannot get enough range out of the larger and heavier Model X. Elon is dead set on a minimum 200 mile range and I don't think the 60 with rear wheel drive can achieve that without leveraging different gear ratios (I know that is the wrong terminology but you get my point).�
Oct 24, 2013
MikeL Re: more power draw from 2 motors
There was a thread (which I will now go look for) in which it was argued that the X will use more power, but only because of its weight, NOT due to having to power another motor for the front wheels. Each motor works less, sharing the work, but the same amount of work, so no extra draw (or negligible extra).�
Oct 24, 2013
Palpatine I think there is likely some savings by reducing versions.
Having to build AWD and RWD versions of the Model X is likely more expensive for both. If they decide to make all of the Model X line as AWD, there might be more overall savings because there is less development work (one instead of two versions) and higher volumes for the AWD.
Their think is likely, if someone does not want AWD, then buy a Model S.�
Oct 24, 2013
andrewket Actually an AWD model X may be more efficient. The two engines can be geared differently, and the car can shift which one is propelling the car. It doesn't always have to be about traction. Similarly, it may be more efficient on regen and less stressful on tires.�
Oct 24, 2013
wts13 I'm certainly not an expert, so if this is true, that's definitely a good thing. Hope it doesn't drive up the price too much.
I still hold out hope that we will see a slight bump in battery capacity for the X. Anything less than the range of the 85kw Model S makes it a non-starter for road trips especially if a trailer is involved - something that SUVs are used for far more often than cars.�
Oct 24, 2013
qwk There is going to be severe sticker shock when the price of the model x is finally announced.�
Oct 24, 2013
andrewket This is what I'm afraid of as well.�
Oct 24, 2013
Citizen-T As you might recall, there was "severe sticker shock" when the price of Model S was announced.�
Oct 24, 2013
brianstorms On the Great Britain site, at http://www.teslamotors.com/en_GB/modelx the message is that it'll be available in 2WD, AWD, and AWD Performance versions. So either something has changed and the site doesn't reflect that yet, or Elon's wrong.
�
Oct 24, 2013
brianman Yah, they need to update the US website also:
Model X | Tesla Motors
- - - Updated - - -
�
Oct 24, 2013
ecarfan Elon does not say the X will "only" have AWD, he says it "will" have it. There is a difference. He may well mean that AWD will be an available option.
He also says it "will" have two motors, not that it will "only" be available with two motors.�
Oct 24, 2013
brianman This is the exact quote (around 24:20):
So...yah, he kind of did say "only".
�
Oct 24, 2013
Yggdrasill It may be more efficient, in that it gets more work out of each kWh, but the required energy to propel the Model X will be higher. This is due to two reasons:
- The Model X will have a larger aerodynamic area.
- The Model X will be heavier.
The most important reason is the first one. More interior space = increased energy consumption.�
Oct 24, 2013
doug My guess it's more an issue of time, resources, and priorities. They need to deliver an AWD version, and that's the version the Model X is essentially being designed to be.�
Oct 24, 2013
Yggdrasill True. We should put this in the same box as getting rid of the 40 kWh Model S. Earlier, Tesla clearly felt the need to compete on price, but as there is no lack of demand, they can do what they want to get higher profits and really show off what electric cars can do.
Tesla does need to focus on price when it comes to the Gen III, though.�
Oct 24, 2013
doug Basically. Though, I'm thinking less about profits and demand and more about engineering focus. Tesla seems to do what I've come to call "just-in-time engineering". For example the 85 kWh US spec Model S was job one. Engineering decisions on other versions of the car (e.g., EU charging, 60kWh version, 40kWh version that never saw the light of day) seemed to come rather late in the game. My guess is the Model X was hardly even being worked on till recently.�
Oct 25, 2013
NigelM ^^^ This.
And the fact that it's good business: get your top of the line cars (with best margins?) out first and use the cash to finance the trickle down versions.�
Oct 25, 2013
AnOutsider Neither of those are caused by having 2 motors though (ok maybe the extra motor adds a bit of weight, but the x is likely already heavier than the s).
Like Bonnie, I'm unaffected because I was all in for AWD, but sticker shock indeed...�
Oct 25, 2013
Yggdrasill I think I wasn't quite awake when I wrote that post. I thought you were saying that the Model X would be more efficient than the Model S. Which is actually possible, but the Model X will still have less range due to being a larger vehicle. There would be little difference between an AWD Model X and an RWD Model X.�
Oct 25, 2013
ItsNotAboutTheMoney Hmm.
(1) Extra motor, controller, cabling
(2) Falcon-wing doors
(3) Extra body and glass
(4) Additional suspension control?
(5) Extra front protection?
Total cost? How does it compare to the Model S P option?
I wouldn't be surprised to see it 4WD-only since:
- Most buyers would want 4WD anyway
- The additional cost of the front motor and drive might not be that significant as part of the whole cost.
- As someone noted, they have the option of using different reduction gearing to improve efficiency
- They can always change their minds later�
Oct 25, 2013
Newscutter What does he say right after the "dual motor AWD"??? Something that sounds like either "suspension" or "package" and "3 or 4" but I can't make it out--- and it seems to be further justification for why the price would be slightly higher.
I thought maybe he was saying something about only having air suspension? But the "3 or 4" doesn't make sense in that context. Anyone have better ears?�
Oct 25, 2013
NigelM Ditto on the "all in" part but not so certain that there will be sticker shock. I know what my Sig Model S cost and prepared for that plus "slightly more" (quote from Elon) so unless we start speculating on what "slightly more" really means.....�
Oct 25, 2013
brianman Best I can do (on hearing through the noise) is:
�
Oct 25, 2013
AnOutsider Well, with the P+ stuff going around, unless they make that standard on a performance X, it's likely looking like 130k to get something like a Performance+ AWD X�
Oct 25, 2013
NigelM So no shock then. I'm guessing that's about right if P+ is included.�
Oct 25, 2013
Yggdrasill I think he says:
"... will only be offered as AWD. So, it will be dual motor AWD. So, to be clear, low single digits percentage more expensive than the (the) S because the ... "
And he's talking about starting price.�
Oct 25, 2013
AnOutsider So, if we say 6% is his definition of low single digits, then the starting price would be about 75k (current base S is 70k right?)�
Oct 25, 2013
TylerCA I really do hope a larger cap battery is offered since it's 4wd�
Oct 25, 2013
stopcrazypp I think this is the side effect of Tesla controlling its R&D budget to keep investors happy (esp. with Elon's promise of quarterly profit without factoring ZEV credits).�
Oct 25, 2013
SteveG3 On pricing... I realize it's not huge dollars, but I think when X comes out S may have a refresh that lowers costs (Elon suggested 2-3 years for a refresh at Teslive). What if this X and an S refresh incorporate some of the 5-8% annual battery improvement Tesla talks about, and they pass a few thousand dollars in savings to the consumer. Of course, it might also result in same price, but, somewhat bigger batteries for the price.�
Oct 25, 2013
Yggdrasill I think it would make sense for Tesla to reduce the cost of the Model S with the introduction of Model X. There should be a gap that's greater than a mere 5%, as you get a lot more car with a Model X. Maybe the Model S is reduced by $4k to $66k, and the Model X is introduced at $74k. An $8k difference would make sense, to me at least.�
Oct 25, 2013
ElSupreme Yeah people in Atlanta love their 4WD. I mean we have hills, and potholes, and mountains. But even in snow we don't venture out in our 4WD. And those who do leave their cars abandoned on the side of the road after they slide off.
Even leveraging two gear ratios you aren't going to coax much efficiency out of the drive setup. So no real increased range. You could improve the speed range, or acceleration range. You could perhaps induce higher regen braking force. But your efficiency gairs will be very small, to where they won't really be noticeable.
I saw severe sticker shock in that it was lower than I expected. Granted the Sig people had some real sticker shock I admit.
But the Model X is going to definitely come with some sticker shock, no doubt.�
Oct 25, 2013
vfx This comes as no surprise and does not mean much in the overall scheme re pricing. I will be looking for the Model E AWD before buying that dream car.�
Oct 25, 2013
RobStark The Model X will have AWD not 4WD.
4WD vs AWD: What's The Diff? - Tech Feature - Motor Trend�
Oct 25, 2013
ElSupreme I think the Model X will be able to claim all of the above. AWD and 4WD. With two motors it could replicate a true 4WD system, or a highly advanced AWD system, or ever a FWD or RWD system. That is why the potential of a dual-motor electric drive gives you.�
Oct 25, 2013
RobStark It is not only capabilities but how it is done.
There is no need for a dedicated low range gear since all the torque is available instantly for example.
AWD seems the logical way to go plus that is what Elon and everyone connected to Tesla have been saying.
There is no point in going exclusive FWD or RWD mode if the next second requires a torque split.
It almost certainly will be a highly advanced AWD system.�
Oct 25, 2013
ecarfan My apologies, you are correct, he said "only" AWD and two motors in the X! Wow, that will be awesome.
I wonder if in the future there will be a similar AWD drivetrain for the S.�
Oct 25, 2013
brianman I think what some are wanting/suggesting is an "Eco" mode that keeps the front motor in (effectively) neutral (or perhaps regen-only) mode. Or something like that. It wouldn't be something that the car would switch out of while increasing speed.
Heck, if I was getting an X that feature might be great if it has a significant impact on energy consumption for longer trips.�
Oct 25, 2013
JRP3 My thoughts: I've been thinking they can use a smaller motor up front since there is no need for two motors the size of the current S motor to provide enough power for the X, especially since the pack could not provide full power for two S sized motors. By going with AWD only they can now use two smaller motors, instead of one larger and one smaller, or instead fitting one large motor for a 2wd version and two smaller motors for the AWD version. This makes manufacturing easier and allows a single platform and suspension setup. This smaller motor could also be used alone in the 2wd version of the Gen3, and the AWD version of the Gen3 using two of these motors, if it happens, could be a real screamer and/or the basis of the next gen Roadster.�
Oct 25, 2013
Doug_G I'm willing to bet that it will be less efficient. More moving parts = more friction. Maybe there will be some electronic efficiency advantage, but I doubt it.
In any case the difference is likely inconsequential. Considering that the vehicle is both larger and heavier, it will get less range than the Model S for the same energy.�
Oct 26, 2013
rdalcanto Since higher capacity cells already exist, I am willing to bet the X will come as an 85kw and then something higher (100+kw) in order to make up for the loss of aerodynamics that goes with a taller vehicle. I think the Model S refresh will also include the higher capacity cells for increased range at the price of the older versions. This gives better range/performance at the same price, and better margins for Tesla. With current world wide demand, Tesla should not drop the price of the Model S any time soon as that will affect margins directly.�
Oct 26, 2013
JRP3 Possible problem, as far as I know the higher capacity cells, 4ah, are volumetrically more dense but not gravimetrically, so that larger pack will add some weight, and hurt efficiency.�
Oct 26, 2013
aronth5 JRP3, if you had to guess do you think the net affect of using the higher capacity cells vs the added weight would result in higher or lower range?�
Oct 26, 2013
JRP3 Higher range, but obviously with some penalty for the added weight. Long distance driving where range is most important is less affected by weight, the higher aero drag of the X will likely cause more of an issue at highway speeds.�
Oct 26, 2013
Palpatine For Tesla Motors to focus only on one version of the Model X likely involves significant costs savings.
1) less engineering, development and testing time and effort.
2) less risk of customer disappointment with different experiences.
3) less complexity in the production line by only have one AWD version.
4) higher volume of single AWD version likely will lead to lower overall production expenses.
Two different types of RWD and AWD would have been a much more complex process throughout the system.
If someone wants a RWD car, Tesla can just guide that customer to the Model S.
I think making the Model X AWD only makes a ton of good sense for Tesla.�
Oct 27, 2013
Paul Carter +1 (especially the underlined above). I'd be driving a Model S right now otherwise, despite constantly wanting it!
Must. Not. Hit. Order. Now. Button.�
Oct 28, 2013
mnx So if they're going AWD only on the Model X to save money by only having 1 configuration.... Why not go AWD only on both the Model S and X? (I don't remember seeing anyone else theorize this yet).�
Oct 28, 2013
JRP3 For one thing that means they wont have a RWD vehicle for those who want it.�
Oct 28, 2013
AnOutsider Also, if it is a cost-saving measure wrt crash testing, RWD crash testing has already been done.�
Oct 28, 2013
dsm363 For the Model S though. Can they carry that over to a new Model?�
Oct 28, 2013
Lloyd The Tesla engineer I spoke to at the release event said two motors will be more effecient as power can be directed to each motor as needed, and as the parameters dictate. One motor will be more effecient at low speeds, and the other keeping the car moving at higher speeds. With two motors you can have the best of each.�
Oct 28, 2013
JRP3 The problem is you are probably only talking about small differences in efficiency. If one motor is say 93% efficient but two allow an average of 95% efficiency that may not be an actual gain if it doesn't overcome the added weight and rolling resistance.�
Oct 28, 2013
Shumdit Could he be referring only to the "P" version?�
Oct 28, 2013
60TTuC No, he is referring to starting point. Here's the question:
Tesla London Store Opening reception with Elon Musk - YouTube�
Nov 4, 2013
domenick Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but that doesn't quite make sense to me.
You're saying the 4 ah cell is smaller and heavier, but the cells are still 18650 format so the size doesn't change. I suspect there is a gravametric improvement. In the London video, Elon speaks to batteries becoming more energy dense gravametrically, saying that he sees a clear path, over the next 5 years to around 280 Wh/kg. It's common to here of gravametric improvements, but quite rare for anyone to mention watt-hours per liter.�
Nov 4, 2013
JRP3 I'm not saying they are smaller, I'm saying they are the same size, 18650, but hold 4ah, so the volumetric density improves, but the weight increases, so the gravimetric density does not improve. I also may be operating with outdated information, Elon might know of better advances to come.�
Nov 4, 2013
Discoducky Just now hit me that with AWD (2 motors) the regen force could be pretty heavy. I'm sure TM will tune it appropriately, but after driving a Prius all week (rental) I can't wait for the regen of the S again and AWD super-regen of the X.�
Nov 4, 2013
bareyb So any rumors as to the price? I read on another forum that the cost will be about the same for the Model X as it is for the Model S. Not sure how true that is, but sounds like it's gonna be another $100k vehicle. Which isn't really a surprise. Especially with two motors.�
Nov 4, 2013
Lloyd Elon has stated that the cost of the model X will be 'slighly more than the model S'. I don't believe there is any infomaiton more current than that.�
Nov 4, 2013
drees Yeah, you could regen at up to Supercharger rates (120kW) or more instead of "only" 60 kW.�
Nov 4, 2013
brianman Weird that I never correlated these two metrics as "comparable". For some reason, I always thought of them as mismatched like "feet" and "ounces".�
Nov 5, 2013
JRP3 I think Elon recently said something like a small percentage increase in price. I figure it has to add around $3-$5k.�
Nov 5, 2013
domenick Elon quantified a slight increase by saying the price difference is a "low single digit percentage." So, if the base price of the S is $71,070, an additional 2% is $1,421, 3% is $2,132, 4% is 2,842 etc.�
Nov 5, 2013
JRP3 Do we know if the X will be offered in a 60kWh version?�
Nov 5, 2013
domenick That was the claim during the initial reveal. I personally think it would be wiser to offer an 85 kWh and a 100 kWh version, though it would suck for those who need the lower price of the 60 kWh to get any Tesla SUV at all.
I think that, though the range hit might be small, it would be better to offer longer range than shorter. A 100 kWh version might sell even better than the S85. Especially if performance is improved.�
Nov 8, 2013
forKevin AWD? That would be wonderful.�
Nov 8, 2013
aronth5 We'll just have to see but I suspect if the 60kWh is offered it will be much less popular than the Model S 60kWh due the lower range.
Of course for now all we have is the Tesla web site which still shows both battery options but that is too old to be reliable. Just have to wait and see.
�
Nov 9, 2013
MikeL The 2WD has vanished from "drivetrain configurations" at TM. Tried to copy it over here - fail -
While you are there: From a Model S owner in Tennessee | Blog | Tesla Motors
good blog post from . . . well you know�
Nov 10, 2013
spleen And yet, in the text above that, it says "Model X is offered with optional Dual Motor All-Wheel Drive." (emphasis mine)
You'd think that for a high tech company, they could get website refreshes correct ... (grumble, grumble)�
Nov 10, 2013
mikevbf Did you catch that duel motor comes at a "low single digit percentage" over the price of the S. I was always expecting the the Model X to cost more than the Model S and then the Dual motor to cost 5-10k even more over that. According to my calculations 4% of 71k starting price of the Model S is less than 3k. This is Great news! Now if they can keep the cost of options under control, I am all set.�
Nov 10, 2013
vfx Thinking back to Elon's reasoning for canceling the 40kWh Model S he sounds like he just want's to make exceptional cars. That may mean once they master the tech of AWD that all Teslas will be AWD. Even the Model E. They have certainly found that customers like upgrading their cars and maybe 100s of thousands of Es will be maxed out cars in the 60,000 dollar range. Tesla might be able to say tha the low end one is a $39,000 car but look how awesome it is.�
Nov 10, 2013
ItsNotAboutTheMoney Well, it would depend on the cost of differentiating., especially on cheaper models. But certainly, efficient 4WD would be another awesome win for BEV.�
Nov 10, 2013
vfx Yeah so it comes down to would an owner rather have leather, or pano roof, premium sound or AWD? And what if Tesla says AWD is mandatory? That's what I think may happen if the can get the price to the $2K range.�
Nov 10, 2013
JRP3 As long as I have the option to turn off the front motor for rear wheel power slides on the E :biggrin: However I don't expect AWD on the E because the cost difference can be more easily buried in the X. Considering "low single digit percentage" over the S price, which S? If you're starting at the "base" price of a performance + model and then adding 3-4% on top of that it's quite a bit different than if you're starting with a basic 85 and adding 3-4%.�
Nov 10, 2013
MikeL I figure that when, without warning, Elon drops the little 'AWD only' bomb in London, some overworked Tesla IT guy got 'update the website - again' added to the bottom of his long to-do list.
Though they may reflect badly, in a small way, on a cutting edge company, these overlooked website mistakes serve to remind me of how many pans these guys have going on the stove right now and how impressed I am at what they have accomplished, so far. ML�
Nov 12, 2013
MartinAustin You have a very kind outlook. Admirable
Also I came back to this thread when I was reminded of Elon's comments about increasing battery size over time. Domenick already nailed it -
I think 100KWh might be revealed late in the Model X marketing cycle (but before it's too late for Signature buyers to get it), and offered as a way to assuage critics who are looking at the increased weight and drag of the larger body work and complaining about decreased range. 60, 85 and 100 batteries would be available.
(the 100KWh would be offered on the Model S as well, whose base price would lower, but if you get the 100KWh battery it would end up costing the same as a current 85KWh battery Model S. it's my guess that they will continue to charge about the same amount for Model S even though battery capacity/range increases)
I think they are only doing AWD because to have sufficient acceleration out of a single RWD motor would require a larger motor/invertor. AWD allows you to use two smaller motors/invertors, that are the same inventory part - so you don't have to keep track of larger and smaller motor/invertors in Model X inventory. I believe that for any given 0-60 (and any given accelerative press of the pedal), two smaller motors drain the battery in a more efficient way than one motor driving two wheels.
IMO, this AWD business on the Model X will make it really hard for them to charge ten thousand bucks just for a higher-power invertor on the P85 Model S - when you get two invertors in the Model X.�
Nov 13, 2013
scottf200 You may want to browse through this thread and comments.
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/22357-Front-motors-smaller-(less-powerful)-than-the-rear�
Nov 18, 2013
Herbys I see it somewhat differently. Many years ago, when I bought a cordless phone (rare at the time) my father asked why would I want a cordless phone. I replied "why would I want a cord"? I've seen this in many other areas (e.g. when I got my first phone with a color screen, and people wondered why I would want color in a phone screen). It all sounds obvious now, but at the time it usually wasn't. And here it is the same: a 2WD car is an imperfect car. Yes, doing 4WD involves tradeoffs, but a car on which only two wheels push and two wheels are dead is intrinsically less perfect than a car where all wheels work. The difference may be big for some uses and small for others, but it is still there. Tesla is set out to build the most perfect cars out there, and the 2WD version may be cheaper, but it is definitely further away from perfection than a 4WD version. My bet is that they decided that the tradeoffs were small enough to make it not worth to offer the less perfect version, like it would have been not offering electric windows or air conditioning.�
Nov 20, 2013
hileyms On another thread someone posted a video of JB Straubel giving talk in September (about 1 month before Elon was in London). JB Straubel | [email�protected] SLAC 2013 - YouTube At 17:06 there is a diagram of the 2 drive units of the Model X - Elon did not drop bombshell - he just told us what Tesla had already decided.�
Nov 20, 2013
JRP3 We knew they would offer AWD, we didn't know it would only be AWD.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét