Jan 30, 2013
igor I have to configure my car and need some help from owners. I like to be able to accelerate quickly. For that reason I am considering the P. I will likely only drive to work and back (10 miles). Supercharging is not as important because I feel that this will not happen in my area (Miami/Ft Lauderdale) for some time.
The dilema is....is that 4.4 seconds on the peformance worth the extra 20k over the 60 kW 5.9 seconds? I do not have the capabilty to drive the 60KW here. I have test driven the P and fell in love.
The price tage for the P is hefty. The question is........Is the P that much faster and more powerful than the 60?
It seems like the 60kw is a better deal considering that I do not need supercharging. I can always add that later, correct?
Also, what do owners think about resale and battery degradation. It seems like the 60kW is a better value in that regard as well.
Thanks for any advice�
Jan 30, 2013
Doug_G There's no way to "justify" the Performance. You either want it or you don't. It is noticeably faster.
You cannot add supercharging later.
Degradation will be less on the bigger pack. Tesla knows this and provides a better warranty on the bigger packs.�
Jan 30, 2013
Alpha I'm in the same boat. Having a tough time getting my mind to stop wanting the performance.
I did get a chance to ride in a non-performance though, and the acceleration is also out of this world.
It really is!
I still haven't decided though.
Ultimately it comes down to the money.
Compare the 0-60 time on the 60kWh to any other car you have owned. It's likely faster.
Even if the pure 0-60 time is not faster, likely the 0-40 and 0-30 will beat just about any non-EV on the road because of the extremely high torque at low RPM that an ICE car cannot touch -- that's where it counts too- accelerating on an on-ramp, or passing a car.
Why would the resale on the 60kWh be better? That doesn't make sense, it's less range.
Also if you don't get supercharging you would really be hurting the resale value.. in my mind.
That's the main reason I won't (and many others) touch the 40kWh - I want the supercharger access
(even though it's going to be a commuter car 95% + of the time)�
Jan 30, 2013
William13 My rule is only go expensive (P) if you are paying cash.
It is very fast. I have a lot of trouble avoiding going too fast. I floor it several times a day. Always in safe areas. I have never done this before. It is addicting. Smooth and fast like a metal roller coaster.�
Jan 30, 2013
igor Thanks Doug and Alpha.
I presently own an Audi S5 and do enjoy going 0 to 60 quickly. Maybe I meant to "justify" the price difference. Its a huge price dif for the 4.4 seconds. Not being able to test drive the 60 Kw makes it tough. Also difficult is that fact that many say that in reality the velocity curve of the 60kw and the perf is very close in the 0 to 60. Its after that where the Perf is a better car. The reason I think that the perf has less resale is that it is so much more expensive. The sheer price difference makes the perf depreciate more in terms of actual dollars.
A lot of bloggers say that the 85 is the best value because of the range and the supercharger included.
Has anyone drivern both? What are your thoughts?�
Jan 30, 2013
Alpha That's probably a good rule to follow... trouble is, the mind keeps coming up with all kinds of justifications on why I should get the P...
But ultimately I won't do it if I can't really afford it. Still working on my financial projections - have to decide by 2/8
- - - Updated - - -
Igor, when do you have to finalize by? I've found that if you get involved with the local Tesla club, it's pretty easy to get opportunities to ride in them and even drive them.
Just yesterday I got to drive a roadster ... (first time, that was a rush!)
Also got to drive a perf. -- I'm trying to get a test drive in a non-perf as well before finalizing -- I think I will be able to.�
Jan 30, 2013
igor I have 3 months to finalize. How would I go about getting involved in the "local club"
- - - Updated - - -
Sorry....three weeks�
Jan 30, 2013
ToddRLockwood Why not split the difference and go with the 85kWh non-performance version? 0-60 in 5.6 seconds. You'd have better range than the 60kWh version.
The Model S Performance is akin to a BMW M5. If you were buying a BMW would you go for the M5, or would a slightly lesser 5-series do the trick?�
Jan 30, 2013
Alpha I started here on TMC actually, and asked around about local people - pretty quickly I was pointed to the appropriate threads for Atlanta area - and then found the Atlanta facebook group - I joined that, and started going to the events, and meeting the locals - went to the 3rd and largest event just yesterday (about 10 Model S's showed up!) Pics here: Tesla Motors Fans - Atlanta, January 2013 - Meetup Event (Jan. 29th))
I'm sure there is something similar in your area (Miami/Ft. Lauderdale.)�
Jan 30, 2013
igor Actually the 650 i gran coupe seems more like the perf to me. I would think that 65 K for 60kw is a better value giving 5.9 sec. The 85kw is 5.6 but costs 10k more, for an additonal 3 sec advantage may not be worth it.�
Jan 30, 2013
Alpha Because the Model S is a pretty rare car, I would think it would not depreciate like a normal car.
But then again, if they ramp up production a lot more and the price of the battery pack falls (or 2nd gen Model S is a huge improvement) I could be wrong.
Main reason I want perf. fully loaded is because I plan on driving it for a very long time and I want to get the best car I possibly can because I will be driving it for many years. Also just want that ego satisfaction of being able to smoke all those M5s, Panamera, etc. when I feel like it. Kind of immature I know, but it is what it is :smile:�
Jan 30, 2013
dsm363 That would be a good solution.
The performance is crazy fast but fun. Worth is of course subjective so if money is tight or you'll be financing a large chunk just to get the Performance then you'd be plenty happy with at least the 85 kWh. Haven't driven the 60 kWh but I'm sure it is more than adequate from what owners of the car have posted. I've driven the standard 85 kWh as well and it is plenty fast. You'll still really enjoy it so I wouldn't feel like you were missing out on the Performance. Now if you just have to have the performance then that's a different story. It is a blast so if that's what you want, go for it.�
Jan 30, 2013
Alpha By the way, I agree the 60kWh is probably the sweet spot as far as value goes - it's more efficient too (almost 200 pounds lighter) that makes the range not as far off as you might think. But I would get supercharger for sure.�
Jan 30, 2013
igor I'm in the same boat as you Alpha. I have an S5 so I like the speed. Really dont try and smoke the other cars, but It is nice. Did you test drive the 65KW?�
Jan 30, 2013
Francis Lau I have my non-performance 85kWh for 2 months now and prior to that, I have test driven the perf MS couple of times. For reference, I have an Audi A4 and have driven the Audi A7 and Porsche Panemera but have never driven super high end cars like Ferrari's.
Here is my opinion and recommendation.
If you need to think about the money (which I did) and you are fine spending in the 80-90K range. However, you would like to have the perf speed but cringe on spending 90-105K, don't!
I drive my non-perf 85kWh everyday and have taken several road trips, the speed and acceleration is very fast. It feels faster than the A7 and Porsche - especially when you can have the same acceleration from 0 to 60 and 60 to 90
And with an EV, the tradeoff is the range so that is where you should avoid skimping on. 270 rated range is not reality due to cold weather and elevations. So unless you will never have road trips greater than 150 miles, you should go with the 85kWh.
So my recommendation is 85kWh non-perf if money is a consideration and you will have road trips. Also, consider that I have taken more road trips than ever because the MS is so much cheaper and more fun to drive!�
Jan 30, 2013
bosgig Personally I got the P85 even though I didn't really need it, and I never really considered the 60kWh because I wanted maximum range flexibility. There's a lengthy thread on this here:
Performance vs. Non-Performance an extra $10K�
Jan 30, 2013
Alpha As someone said on that thread:
"If you can afford the performance - get it. Doesn't seem complicated to me :wink:"
That seems about right....�
Jan 30, 2013
napabill Or my mantra, if a little's good, more's better.:biggrin:�
Jan 30, 2013
montgom626 Yes, do it.�
Jan 30, 2013
jd3 You've probably gotten more feedback than you ever wanted; but, as you can tell by those who have their Model S, we love to talk about them.
So,
I have a Sig Perf and have to admit that the performance is a DRUG! And, not a bad one, it is a reassurance that I will never have to worry about Merging in traffic or accelerator response! It is the aspect of the car that really puts the TESLA GRIN on peoples faces when you give them a ride! It is the absolute FUN part of the Model S!
On the other hand, the bigger battery is the VALUE part of the Model S! That is...it eliminates the Range Anxiety for everyone you talk to; it will clearly give you better resale value because it is true VALUE. Regardless of the motor performance, you will run into situations where having the bigger battery reduces you anxiety or enables you do go somewhere that you might not otherwise be able to do! The impact of weather, vertical travel, AC/Heater usage, etc. are all mitigated by having the bigger battery.
I know you said you wouldn't expect to ever use the SuperChargers; but, I would guarantee that eventually you will or whomever gets the car after you will! Since Use of the SuperCharger is FREE for LIFE of the vehicle, ability to use that service will clearly add resale value...
So, as much as you would truly enjoy the Performance (it actually makes me smile almost every day); the bigger battery has to come first.
AFAIK,
Good luck and congrats on joining the Tesla Family (soon).
jd3�
Jan 30, 2013
jed-99aggie Igor, I replaced my Audi S4(v8) with the 85kWh non-performance and have been very happy. The model S is certainly quicker than the S4. I would do it again without regret.�
Jan 30, 2013
steve841 I'm in your neighborhood .... It's simple economics. If you can afford the perf model, get it. If you are scrounging to afford a 60kw then then don't.
I budgeted $85k +/- before pricing was announced and ended up $30k over that. So my kid will have to get a job at 15.....�
Jan 30, 2013
Cattledog Motor Trend tested the Performance at 4 seconds and non-P 85 at 5 seconds, so I'd bet the the 60 will come in at 5.5 or under. Pretty great to have three amazing choices!�
Jan 30, 2013
derekt75 If you like performance, and you can afford the performance, get the performance.
It has noticeably more torque at the low end (443 lb-ft compared to 325 lb-ft for the 85 kWh and 317 lb-ft for the 60 kWh). Of course, you need sticky tires and decent pavement to make good use of that, but the performance is clearly faster from 0-30 when going to the performance. (In contrast, the nonperf 85 kWh isn't that much faster 0-30 than the 60 kWh).
Personally, I would have paid more if I could have had more performance.
I would have paid less if I could have had the performance with a smaller battery pack.
If you do spend the extra money, I wouldn't expect that it will come back in resale value. I firmly believe this car will depreciate at least as fast as any car. What will my 2012 Model S be worth in a few years when Tesla has a new model selling for less that has similar performance, adaptive cruise control, collision avoidance, etc.?
Incidentally, the first question that everyone asks me when I tell them that my car is electric is "but how far is its range". It's nice to tell them it's EPA rated at 265 miles. That's one nice benefit Tesla got by only selling 85 kWh batteries at first.�
Jan 30, 2013
kvietor Go here, Florida Tesla Motors Club - Tesla Motors Club - Enthusiasts & Owners Forum, to hook up with local (Florida) owners/club members.�
Jan 30, 2013
joefee I pulled my hair out just like you on the 60 (all i needed) vs P85 .... Very happy with the P85!�
Jan 30, 2013
ggr People keep saying 4.4. But with the most recent software, the number is definitely about 3.9. The 60kW is probably better than the advertised 5.whatever, too. It's plenty fast, if all you want is plenty fast. But if you want FAST...�
Jan 30, 2013
brianman Until Tesla adjust their public 4.4 number, I'm calling it 4.4.
Just one opinion.�
Jan 31, 2013
Alpha It's 4.4 without rollout, 3.9 with.
I read somewhere that most automakers quote their 0-60 times with a rollout, but Tesla show their 0-60 times starting from a complete standstill for some reason.
So- both number are right depending on how you measure. Any way you slice it though, it's like a bat out of hell!!�
Jan 31, 2013
markwj So, 0-60 in 4.4, and 3-60 in 3.9?
I never really understood the 0-60 with rollout label. By definition, a rollout means it is not zero.
(Then again, a quantum physicist would argue about the standing start being zero as well�
Jan 31, 2013
Alpha Yes, rollout means you are moving just a tiny bit when the test starts, so there is no delay from your foot coming off the brake and going to the accelerator- actually a little more accurate I would think as it helps remove some of the human delay.
Hey, here's someone who just clocked 5.4 on his 60kWh: 60 kWh 0-60mph time
Not bad at all!!�
Jan 31, 2013
kinddog seems to me the 85kWh non-performance is your answer.
- - - Updated - - -
also, if you have to ask yourself (or full-on debate yourself) whether or not you can afford the Performance model, then you can't.
(and very likely you shouldn't be buying 60kWh or 85kWh either, but whatever...)
- - - Updated - - -
no, there's a video rolling around of it being 3.9 from a standstill.
I agree that we should officially stop saying this is a 4.4sec car. It has proven itself to be much faster than that. SO WHY ARE WE ALL SO HESITANT TO GIVE THE MODEL S THE GODDAM RESPECT IT IS ENTITLED TO?!?!?!?!? :cursing:�
Jan 31, 2013
NigelM Mod note: Title appended for clarity.�
Jan 31, 2013
ToddRLockwood The real advantage is range.�
Jan 31, 2013
Plug Me In My $.02 - For my daily driver a 40 kWh is more than enough but I'm getting the standard 85 because I want to do road trips. You won't need a Supercharger for daily driving IMO, unless you live in an apartment complex or otherwise overnight charging is a problem. I'd be willing to bet a Supercharger near Miami, if not in Miami, will be coming soon, as the I-95 corridor and big population centers looks to be the priority for development. I don't have much opinion on the Performance as I'm not much of a fast car guy, but the standard 85 is -plenty- fast for me.�
Jan 31, 2013
igor Thanks for all of the insight.
Im getting somewhere. It seems that off the line....all three models are similar. 60, 80, and perf. I think the difference will come in after the first 30 MPH. I feel like thats when the perf will crush the 60. In my mind it seems like the value is in the 60, but the true umph of the Tesla is in the Perf. I cant, in my mind, see the advantage of the 85kW....short of range.....which I dont need. It also seems the resale will be a little better for the 85kw because people will need range down the road. I will prob need to seek out a 60 and/or 80 owner and try to get them to take me on a drive. Have three weeks....wish me luck�
Jan 31, 2013
Eberhard The true more value of the 85kWh pack is the higher mileage you will get with the bigger pack. Its not 42% more, indeed it will be near the double. Why? You are going to put less stress on the pack. The load/unload swings are smaller and at the end, you can degrade the 85kWh pack down to 42% ending with the same capacity left while the 60kWh pack degrade down to 60%.
best
Eberhard�
Jan 31, 2013
GlennAlanBerry I too have been pondering the Performance vs. non-performance model. I currently have a 2012 Acura TL SH-AWD with a 6-speed MT. It weighs 3858lbs, and the 3.7L engine is rated at 305HP @6300rpm and 273lb/ft @5000rpm. According to which road test you believe, it has a 0-60 time of anywhere from 5.2 to 5.5 seconds. It is decently quick. On the other hand, I live in Parker,CO, where the elevation is 6000 ft, so the higher altitude definitely affects a normally aspirated ICE. That is one big advantage of an electric motor that I don't see people talking about that much, but I think many people on the forum live at lower altitude.
I want something noticeably quicker than my Acura. I have had two quick test drives of a P85 at the Park Meadows Tesla Store, and it is most definitely much quicker than the Acura... I just wish I could drive a non-perf 85 to see how it feels before I finalize (I only have 13 days till my deadline expires).
I am 99% sure I will get the P85, as I have been intending to all along, since I still like to have the capability to smoke most other vehicles if I want to (call me immature...).�
Jan 31, 2013
dgmanny
This might seem like an odd question, but it is difficult to manage the acceleration on the P85 vs non-perf 85? e.g. Can you drive it easily with normal acceleration? Some high performance cars are hard drive day to day. Thanks�
Jan 31, 2013
mnx Based on my test drive it is a piece of cake to drive the MSP. Very smooth and good for day to day driving. Nothing like your typical sports car.�
Jan 31, 2013
dgmanny Bq
A as.P�
Jan 31, 2013
kinddog i agree...�
Jan 31, 2013
brianman No, it's not difficult. You just have to learn to let go...of the accelerator. I refuse to do so though.�
Feb 1, 2013
Alpha Another thing I love about the P85 is this:
"Model S Performance accelerates from 0 to 60 MPH in 4.4 seconds. But, if driven the same way as a Model S, both cars achieve the same efficiency."
Of course, you wouldn't get the performance for the purpose of NOT using it-- but I want to be able to use it when needed on demand, or when I'm feeling like a thrill
So it's like a no compromise car (other than the $$$) -- you would NEVER get that in an ICE - the really fast sporty models just always suck up tons of gas, even when you aren't punching it.�
Feb 2, 2013
derekt75 The 40, 60, and 85 are all similar off the line.
The Performance is much faster. (35% more torque).
After 40 mph, the performance is faster than the non-perf 85 (15% more power), and 60 (38% more power).�
Feb 3, 2013
jkirkebo Also consider which interior you want. Me, I hate wood and don't like glossy finishes so the CF interior was the only one I found nice-looking. The performance seats also looks better than the standard ones, and I really like the dark grey wheels. These were my main reasons to go P85 instead of S85, not the extra performance.�
Feb 3, 2013
Cool-Model S It comes down to what one can afford and personal preferences. I went with Performance because I could use it when I wanted it but realistically I don't need 4.4 secs (or 3.9 secs) most of the time. This is more for bragging rights. I wanted all options. I am typically a rational and careful spender but in this case, I wanted fully loaded for fun. May be getting close to midlife crisis!!�
Feb 3, 2013
Al Sherman I was always getting a Model S,and I was always getting the longest range pack available. I never cared about speed, or luxury. These have never been something I've cared much about.When it won COTY I just figured I might as well have the COTY. The 20k might be more important to you. Totally understandable. I must say also that I drove the non P and it was super fast/powerful. If you're a guy who drives like me (old man in a Prius) you wont ever know the difference.�
Feb 3, 2013
jackstesl Not to piss anyone off, but I am coming from a heavy modified Audi S4 that can spin all four tires upon launch and the P85 seems a little slow at start�
Feb 3, 2013
Al Sherman "Heavy Modified" obviously being the operative phrase otherwise the stock P85 would crush it.�
Feb 3, 2013
Elshout I'd forget the performance model for several reasons. Isn't 0 to 60 at about 5.4 sec fast enough? The performance model tires wear more quickly and the ride is harsher. I'd add the supercharger as adding it later is much more expensive. And why not get the 85 kWh batter for "only a few pennies more". You maybe are not aware that Tesla recommends only charging to 80% of battery capacity which means on a new 85 kWh battery you only get 240 miles, similiar reduction would occur with the 60 kWh battery.�
Feb 3, 2013
dsm363 I agree that the performance isn't necessary for most people but it sure is fun. The 85 kWh goes 0-60 in 5.6 seconds according to Tesla. The performance model only wears out tires more quickly if you drive it like it was meant to be driven (and it comes with softer summer performance tires as well). You can put all season tires on a performance model if you want. The ride in the performance model should be better than a stock 85 kWh car as the performance model comes with the air suspension and that is an option on the 85 kWh model.
Tesla recommends a standard charge on a daily basis which is actually a 90% charge (90% of EPA 265 rating is around 240 miles as you said).�
Feb 3, 2013
rlpm The 85kWh battery option (performance or not) comes with supercharging, it's optional with the 60kWh battery. And you cannot add supercharging later as it requires heavier gauge wiring from charge port to batteries bypassing onboard chargers.
Did you mean you'd add twin chargers? The second charger can be added later, but at a greater cost than adding it at build time.�
Feb 3, 2013
smorgasbord Do we know for sure that Standard Mode is 90% of Range Mode? I thought Standard Mode is 90% of Capacity, and that Range Mode is 95% of Capacity. That's different.�
Feb 3, 2013
dsm363 I may have that wrong (entirely possible) but that's what I understood to be the case. Does anyone know for certain?�
Feb 3, 2013
dsm363 Now that I think about it actually, they are the same thing. The EPA is just a different way of measuring that same capacity and attaching a range number to it, right?�
Feb 3, 2013
jackstesl LOL no it is not that "heavy modified". The tesla can still smoke it 0-60 however not the same "punch" that you get flooring a car at rpm being able to launch a car with so much traction that all 4 tires slip!
After initial launch model S will win with strong linear acceleration! My S4 probably 0-60 upper 4's. so model is should be faster! I also hope the model S I test drove performance didn't have the latest software.
Jack�
Feb 3, 2013
brianman I don't think we know anything "totally for suresies" given the car is still relatively new (especially in the statistical data sense), but 265*0.9 = 238.5, and it's rare for me to see above 239 for my (always) standard charge.�
Feb 3, 2013
dsm363 I think range gives you 100% of available capacity too (265 EPA range).�
Feb 3, 2013
smorgasbord I don't think so, unless Model S is different than Roadster in this regard. First, some homework for you: Tesla Motors: A Bit About Batteries, which states:
What's not completely clear is whether Tesla's limit is for Standard Mode or Range Mode.
The question is: Is Range Mode indeed going up to the full 4.2volts/cell in Model S? If not, how far does it go?
Unfortunately, Tesla is letting its previous Roadster blog pages break down. The Roadster Efficiency and Range page, for instance, now lacks images. It mentions range mode going to 55kWh on Roadster's 56 kWh battery pack. So, that's more than 95%, but not 100%. Then again, we don't know what Tesla really means with its capacity ratings, and whether they're the sum of the ratings Panasonic has on the cells, or Tesla's own independent metric.
If Model S Range Mode is indeed 100% of 85kWh, then an EPA mile consumes about 321Watt-hours. Note that the EPA says it takes about 380Watt-hours, so the 60Watt-hour difference is charging losses. It would be even more if Range Mode is not 100% of the 85kWh.�
Feb 4, 2013
dsm363 We will probably split this discussion off but Tesla doesn't seem to give you access to the full 85 kWh (I think someone determined it might be around 81.5 kWh). They seem to save some at the bottom (so when you go to zero you have time to plug your car in) and I'd imagine they protect some at the top of the cell too like the Roadster so even a full Range charge doesn't actually charge each individual cell all the way. That was my understanding. I meant to say that a Range charge in the Model S gives you 100% of the range Tesla lets you have access to and a standard charge is 90% of that range.�
Feb 4, 2013
igor Help Interior
Im debating between the perf and the 85 kw. Does anyone know if they would do the perf interior with Napa Leather and no the performance interior?
I'm not a big fan of the pipping and the sections of the front seats that are not leather of the perf.
Any advice/insight would be appreciated.�
Feb 6, 2013
brianman Agreed.
- - - Updated - - -
I would contact Tesla to find out. If you start out your e-mail with...
"I'd like the Performance package for mechanical reasons, but prefer the non-Performance interior. Can Tesla accomodate me (even for the standard Performance package price)?"
If I were in Tesla's shoes, I would find it hard to say no to that request unless there are serious logistical problems with the request.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét