Jun 25, 2011
Mycroft For those wanting a Model S, are you needing the sport/performance option?�
Jun 25, 2011
dsm363 I would love to get a sport model but if they don't offer it at launch, it probably won't be for another year before they get around to it. I really don't see why it can't be done at launch or included with the Signature Series (maybe as an option).�
Jun 25, 2011
Mycroft I'm sure hoping the option is there at launch. That would be so awesome!
If I could have the Roadster too, then the regular 300 mile sedan would be fine for me. But sans Roadster, I want some juice!�
Jun 25, 2011
kgb Depends, depends, depends. Depends on how much, how fast, and what else is on the market. Right now, I am leasing the Roadster until I buy the Model S, but... I might just switch out the (2nd car) Lexus LS460 for the Model S, and keep the Roadster until they have a Model S "Sport." But all those decisions depend on what the marketplace looks like at the time I need to make the decision.�
Jun 25, 2011
richkae You need a faster 0-60 than 5.6 seconds?
I have never seen a sport option defined.
What exactly is it that you want in a sport/performance option?�
Jun 25, 2011
Mycroft More! :biggrin:�
Jun 25, 2011
Mycroft From the poll so far, it looks like the majority is happy with 5.6 seconds. And frankly, if the test drive come February WOWs me, then I agree, the sport package may not be that important.�
Jun 25, 2011
Norbert February?�
Jun 25, 2011
Mycroft Why not? A good a guess as any.�
Jun 25, 2011
TEG 0-60 in 4.4s was considered a target.
Check this out:
MODEL S - Sport 0-60 in 4.4s? AWD options? | Forums | Tesla Motors�
Jun 26, 2011
Norbert Elon Musk mentioned having goals for a performance version with acceleration in that range as recently as April this year. (Didn't mention AWD, though). No target date given.�
Jun 26, 2011
Eberhard The easiest way for a sport is a smaller drivetrain in the front (150kW is enough) for better recuperation while offering 4-Wheel drive. This drivetrain could be used later in the bluestar model.�
Jun 26, 2011
richkae I don't think that developing another drivetrain and the system to control 2 of them would necessarily qualify as the easiest. That sounds complex to me.
In the Roadster acceleration is PEM/motor limited until about 50mph, above that it is battery power limited.
If the Model S is similar, then there isnt a lot of extra battery power for the 2nd drivetrain except below 50mph, so just adding another one may not improve performance at all above 50mph.
I am completely happy with Roadster 0-50, its the 50-100 that needs improving to run with supercars.
Adding a 2nd powertrain will give you the AWD you want, but its not clear that it is the best path to improved performance.
The extra weight just hurts you when you are battery limited.
The "easiest" way to improve performance is to reduce the weight of the car. That improves performance at every speed.�
Jun 26, 2011
jkirkebo The 300-mile battery is 70% bigger than the Roadster-battery, so theoretically it should be able to prove about 70% more power too. That is just about exactly 150kW...�
Jun 26, 2011
Eberhard by adding AWD you increase the acceleration within the lower speed-range (up to 50mph). the roadster has a 1/3 front 2/3 rear, this helps a lot for single drive. Hope, Model S is better balanced like 45%/55%. Then only AWD helps to improve acceleration.�
Jun 26, 2011
dsm363 No one needs anything that fast of course but no one needs the Roadster's speed too. I just think it would be a smart thing financially for Tesla to offer it at launch as an option. Would be a lot of fun too.�
Jun 26, 2011
Adm While there is a market for a Model S sport or AWD, I think Tesla would be wise to keep it simple and first get "standard" Model S production going in a reliable fashion. It will be tough enough to get that right time wise but also financially. Let's remember this is Tesla's second model and the first one coming of a production line.�
Jun 26, 2011
smorgasbord Range.
300 miles is OK, but doesn't get you from San Francisco to Los Angeles (need 400 for that).
Once you get to 500, Range Anxiety becomes as extinct as a Dodo bird.
Once you get to 600 you don't even have to worry about a quick charging infrastructure and the whole hybrid thing will have fulfilled its technology bridge purpose.�
Jun 26, 2011
Mycroft I agree smorgasbord, once the range is 500 and the price is < $40k, we're going to see a revolution.
For me, 300 is a nice sweet spot. On the rare occasions that we need more than that, perhaps once a year, I know several people who would love to trade cars for that period. :biggrin:�
Jun 26, 2011
richkae The 2011 Corvette ZR1 is RWD with 51% front / 49% rear and has a 3.4 second 0-60 with ridiculous 335 width rear tires.
The BMW 550i is RWD 50/50 and has a 4.8 second 0-60 with little 275 width tires in the back.
The Lexus LFA is RWD 48/52 and has a 3.6 second 0-60 with 305 width rear tires.
Having more weight on the drive wheels helps you get maximum traction out of your tires, so you can accelerate hard with smaller tires, but I dont think it is necessary at all to have AWD to improve the 0-60 time.
Of course AWD will give you better acceleration when wet and your tires cannot achieve maximum traction, and it helps you corner hard on a racetrack.�
Jun 26, 2011
richkae If the sport option was available on day 1 would I buy it? Maybe. I passed on the 0.2 second improvement in the Roadster for $20k.
If it was a 1 second improvement in 0-60 and a corresponding power improvement at higher speeds for a LOT less than $20k, I would consider it.
Do I think they should risk delaying the launch of the car to do it? No way.
Once they have the production line cranking, should they work on the sport version? Yes.
Once they have the production line cranking, should they work on the AWD version? Obviously yes. They need to figure that out for the Model X anyway.�
Jun 26, 2011
ckessel No, unless it was pretty darn cheap by comparison. Maybe 10k. I'm not buying a super car, so killer 0-60 is a nice to have, not a requirement. Even at 5.6s, the Model S is equivalent to or better than most in it's class.�
Jun 29, 2011
neroden Would actually actively avoid a "sport" version. "Sports suspensions" (very hard suspensions) are painful, and this is a daily driver.�
Jun 29, 2011
Jaff Ordinarily I'd agree, but who is to say that if a sport model is manufactured, that it won't have an adjustible supension like the Roadster Sport?...at this point, we just don't know...
�
Aug 21, 2011
Adm Elon Musk in an interview with NPR:
http://www.npr.org/2011/08/19/139790024/spacex-craft-to-head-to-space-station�
Aug 21, 2011
tdelta1000 I feel the Model S is already sporty enough but a tighter suspension or a quicker 0-60 MPH is always nicer. Those items would make the Model S even more respectable in the eyes of the competition.�
Aug 21, 2011
Trnsl8r Buying the Model S is going to sting in the wallet a bit, but if I have the choice of adding $20K to get a 300-mile battery or of losing a few tenths of a second (or even a second) of 0-60, I will upgrade the battery - no question. For me, it's about usability.
My 2 cents for the thread...�
Aug 21, 2011
sprediletto A Perfect Post. I agree 100%�
Aug 21, 2011
kgb I listened to the interview, and I believe I know what Elon intended to say with his "unintelligible" stutter.
With the "um's," and stutters removed, I believe he was saying, "There's a performance version that could beat a BMW M5 around a track."
He was wise to qualify his statement. It seems he was headed down the path of saying, "There's a performance version that's as fast/quick as a BMW M5." But that is vague and can be open to all kinds of interpretations. With his "careful" choice of words, one can infer that the Model S performance model may not have as much acceleration as a BMW M5, but it has handling to make up for it.�
Aug 21, 2011
ckessel The regular 5.6/5.7 speed IS a sport car. Hell, it outdoes my RX8 and many "sports" cars. This poll is really asking about a "super sport" mode.
So, no, I'm not waiting for the sport mode. If it had it, and I was quite a bit wealthier, I might care, but I'm already getting a really quick car as it is with the normal model S.�
Aug 31, 2011
Norbert I understood: "there's a performance version [that's as] we expect to beat a BMW M5 around a track.
Not sure though.�
Aug 31, 2011
AnOutsider I beg to differ (and have in other threads). 5.6 is nice, but not unheard of (again, our S5 is rated at 4.9s). If they could hit 5s I think that would be good for a sedan this size (especially as the A7 does 5.4s)
Yeah, it's hard to tell. I just wonder WHEN that version will be available.�
Aug 31, 2011
ckessel You can beg to differ all you like, but 5.6 is quite fast by most any objective sedan standard. It's certainly not going to compete against the crazy quick cars like the A7s of the world, but the Model S is easily "quick". If it's not quick enough for you, that's perfectly understandable, but to say it's not quick compared to it's average competition (your "beg to differ") is just blatantly false.
For example, see:
Luxury Sport Sedan Comparison - Acura RL vs Audi A6 vs BMW 535i vs Cadillac CTS vs Infiniti M35 vs Jaguar XF vs Lexus GS 350 vs Mercedes-Benz E350 - Motor Trend
�
Aug 31, 2011
AnOutsider I'm sorry, you said:
In which case it should be faster IMO (see, an opinion, which can't be "blatantly false"). This car is often compared to the A7, which is FASTER and it's not even the "performance" version of the car (which would be the S7 next year some time). The S5 definitely faster than the standard A5, but the performance version of any car is, just as we'd expect the SPORT or PERFORMANCE version of the Model S to be as well!
Lastly, maybe I'm just jaded by the cars I drive, but the A7 is not "crazy quick" IMO (which, again, can't be "blatantly false" as you assert) -- the Audi R8? The Nissan GTR? Sure. Plus, it's not hard to outdo an RX-8. Many manufacturers tote the word "sport" around and don't always mean speed. A car the size of the RX-8 should be a heck of a lot faster, but it is quite nimble.
Many cars on your list have sportier versions btw (S6 5.1, CTS-V 3.9 etc).
But I'm rambling now... Let's just agree that 5.6 is fast but that the performance version of Model S should be faster.�
Aug 31, 2011
vfx The numbers only tell part of the story. The feel of an electric is different. That lag that happens when you hit a gas pedal and the quick slowdown that happens for the shift is endemic in a gasoline automobile.
The nonstop ever growing acceleration of an electric has a quite different visceral feel that goes deep. If goes way beyond the per-second numbers.
We all here know that the test rides/drives change perception. The Model S will be the big brother version of that same visceral shift.�
Aug 31, 2011
Todd Burch I agree vfx...it just FEELS faster, whether it is or not.
Not to debate anything said here...but I always look at those 0-60 times as marketing numbers...achievable, but typically by professional drivers...whereas in single-speed electrics just about ANYONE can come very close to the marketed 0-60 time---even grandma!�
Aug 31, 2011
Todd Burch BTW: Grandma....stay away from my Model S.�
Sep 2, 2011
AnOutsider Audi S6, S7 and S8 revealed ahead of Frankfurt debut
Here comes the "other" S models
That's the huge S8 -- that's insane considering the original R8 did that.
So I still say if Tesla can meet a 5.0s 0-60 (at the very least, I'd love to see high 4s personally) on the Sport/Performance Model S they'll be in range. It won't be as fast as the S6 and S7, but as others stated, with that linear acceleration, it would still feel just as good.�
Sep 2, 2011
doug This discussion went here.�
Sep 2, 2011
Norbert What's wrong with 4.4s ? That's the target.�
Sep 3, 2011
AnOutsider i may have missed it, because I didn't know there was an actual target. Naturally, I'd be thrilled with 4.4 (especially if it's available at launch or an upgrade path for sig owners)�
Sep 3, 2011
TEG They mentioned that number a long while back. Hopefully it is still in their plans.�
Sep 3, 2011
vfx Better!�
Sep 3, 2011
AnOutsider I stand corrected :biggrin:
Really hoping for more info by or at the Oct 1 event though. I'm teetering on the edge of getting a sig, and if there's a sport option out the gate I'm 110% for it�
Sep 3, 2011
Norbert Elon keeps mentioning it, and the rest of the company acts like they don't know a thing about it...�
Sep 6, 2011
AnOutsider Well nothing 100% official of course, but heard back from a Tesla rep that stated it's highly unlikely the S will launch with a sport/performance version. He said there's been talks, but nothing "official".
We're also not likely to see packages/pricing until after the 10/1 event as well.
So this puts things in a weird spot... Go for Performance or Signature?�
Sep 6, 2011
dsm363 If the sport model really is just a PEM swap or motor swap, hopefully that's something they could offer as an upgrade down the line. Probably not though.�
Sep 6, 2011
AnOutsider Yeah, it's sort of disappointing. I guess I could always go SIG, back out and put that money towards sport... But it sounds like that'll be at least another year.�
Sep 6, 2011
kgb I will start by saying what follows is pure speculation, but I envisioned for the Model S performance model was also going the 4-wheel drive model. I didn't think that a mild current boost from an upgraded PEM/Motor would make much difference (look at Roadster v. Roadster Sport). I figured the best way to get more power out of the car would be to add a second motor where the front axle is. Twice as many engines could mean twice as much power. I'm just speculating with no background in electric motors (other than "baby circuits for engineers" I took in college back in 1986).�
Sep 6, 2011
TEG If they just geared it differently, for lower top speed, I bet they could get a quicker 0-60 time...�
Sep 6, 2011
ckessel It's probably more than a PEM or motor swap. There may be other parts of the car that'd have to beef up to take on the additional strain of the higher torque. That doesn't mean a retro-upgrade might not be possible, but would probably cost more than the sticker price bump of just buying the sport model down the road.�
Sep 6, 2011
TEG Yeah, 4.4s is a big jump from 5.6s...
They used PEM (and motor?) improvements to get the Roadster (Sport) from 3.9 to 3.7, but over 1s less is a different story.�
Sep 7, 2011
Jaff Not sure I'd agree with this...the Model S is already being engineered & built to state of the art standards.
I'd be surprised if a Model S could not be upraded to include a performance package (retro fit) with a change in software and / or minor changes in hardware...it's the only way to get around the problem of the early adopters agonizing over a "Sig or Performance" decision...why not include the ability to keep all of your (consumer) options open?
Time will tell...
�
Sep 7, 2011
ckessel Cost. There's no point in adding significant cost to the base model to support the small percentage of people that require the sport model.
The question is how "significant" is the cost. Even if it's not a significant materials cost, have they had time to model and engineer the sport solution? If they were going to have the base model capable of handling a sport upgrade, they'd have to know ahead of time to have the parts sourced and ordered, the factory lines setup for it, etc.
Like you said, time will tell, but I can see a variety of reasons why it might be more than a minor change. Not saying it has to be that way, just that I wouldn't be surprised.�
Sep 7, 2011
Jaff Although cost is a factor, I'd side with the opine that the engineering for the Model S is already overbuit from a suspension / torson / rigidity stand point...it has to be as a failure of this nature in the nascent luxury performance EV world is not an option.
�
Sep 7, 2011
ckessel So you think they're going to purposefully overbuild the base model to satisfy the minority of people requiring the sport model? That means they're either A) forced to overcharge base model customers for overbuilt items those customers don't need, thus being less price competitive, or B) eat the additional cost, thus reducing profits. Neither makes much financial sense on their own.
If it makes financial sense to overbuild and eat the cost because they'll make it back on supply chain simplicity, manufacturing simplicity, etc, then it'll happen. If it doesn't, they'll have to create a slightly different model specifically for sport customers. Lacking expertise on auto manufacturing, I really don't know how that'll end up going.�
Sep 7, 2011
AnOutsider Or, overbuild simply for future expansion. To use my current car as an example, Audi has boosted the HP in the R8 a couple times without any physical changes. I've personally added over 100HP to it, with no issues. In the V10, other than the engine, the major change includes a stronger clutch. It seems manufacturers build cars, detune, then add more to them as the model years go. Not saying this is the absolute case here, but it wouldn't be crazy to think it.�
Sep 7, 2011
TEG Looking at other / different car models for precedents, sport models often have beefier brakes, 'grippier' sport seats, maybe stiffer suspension, maybe stickier tires, maybe a rear wing. Comparing Roadster Sport to base Roadster it does have a stiffer suspension, stickier tires, and probably could have used some better brakes. Not sure what a Model S sport would have besides more power, but there are some 'upgrades' they might consider.�
Sep 7, 2011
ckessel I know sport models often have beefier stabilizer bars as well. They often have stronger drive train components too, though with an EV all-in-one motor that doesn't really apply as you'd swap out the entire motor. Which, with the Model S, I think means swapping out the entire rear axle, though that's quite possibly a good thing as it makes for fewer things that would differ between sport vs. regular.�
Sep 7, 2011
Norbert The platform is designed to allow using it for SUVs and MiniVans, so why shouldn't it easily support a performance version? Many cars have performance versions.�
Sep 7, 2011
Doug_G Assuming they can beef up the existing drive train - more IGBT's, bigger motor, gear box changes, thicker drive axle maybe - then I don't see why they'd have to change much else. They could beef up the brakes, and maybe make the suspension adjustable. Then they would likely add some fluff features to help them support a higher price point, like they did for the Roadster Sport.
If they need to add a motor up front, then the changes would likely be very substantial.�
Sep 7, 2011
smorgasbord The Model S is supposed to have adjustable air shocks. The Santana Row store has an aluminum exoskeleton with them on front and rear.�
Sep 7, 2011
Jaff Absolutely!
They will be overbuilding not to satisfy the needs of the "few" who want extra performance...(BTW, I don't think it will be a few...I'd bet there wll be a large portion of the current reservation holders would want a performance mode)...the vehicle will be overbuilt to show the toughness & superiority of Tesla's electric performance sedan, period.
TM will not be "overcharging base model customers" for overbuilt items...it will simply be that the base model will be robust enough to handle a "performance package" motor / pem / software.
�
Sep 7, 2011
ckessel When I buy the non-sport model, it has a basic set of materials cost. If that cost his higher than required to support the base model, who exactly do you think is going to pay for those overbuilt items I don't need?
And they're not building the car simply for the current reservation holders, they're building it for the tens of thousands to be produced after that. People requiring a sport model are always in the minority of any automotive product line. If it were otherwise, then the manufacturer completely misjudged the market to being with for their base model.�
Sep 7, 2011
SByer I'm thinking that with upgraded components, the PEM could handle needed additional power without needing much, if any, extra space. The motor, same thing, especially with the liquid cooling. The parts in between the motor and the wheels I would think could handle anything extra without blinking. I would assume that the sport would only come with the largest battery. A bit of a stiffer suspension, and that low COG helps handling. I really don't think it takes much 'overbuilding' to allow for sport headroom in a EV - the platform is just naturally superior and more scalable that way.
Of course, we're all just geek armchair quarterbacking.�
Sep 8, 2011
AnOutsider See again: future upgrades. It's a platform they expect to be around for a while. Also as someone else pointed out, the platform has to support an SUV and other variants.
I think you're under the impression that there's a lot that would need to be done JUST to make it "faster" compared to just make it a strong, safe car. If the upgrade is just a new motor, brakes and software (which, again, is the most common thing done when a performance model is created), the structure wouldn't need to be touched -- ergo: it wasn't over-produced for just a sport's model.
As mentioned, most manufacturers do motor, software, brake and suspension upgrades in a sports model. They also add visual accents to the interior and exterior. None of that requires structural change. The only way I could see a core change needed is if the power going through the "transmission" (or the EV-equiv) was too much for the stock build to handle and needed to be upgraded (often seen as a clutch upgrade in ICE cars). Again though, it requires no structural changes. Simply component swaps.�
Sep 8, 2011
ckessel Actually, no. My exact words were: "I can see a variety of reasons why it might be more than a minor change. Not saying it has to be that way, just that I wouldn't be surprised."
"I wouldn't be surprised". Which is entirely different from: "It'll be a HUGE deal!"
The impression I'm hearing offered is the reverse expectation, that it'll be some simple part swap and software toggle. Which, if true, I think they would have already announced it. We'll see what the 10/1 announcements bring.
People have mentioned the platform frame will support other cars. Anytime you can reuse a framework in any industry, that's a huge R&D savings. But that's just the frame vs. everything that goes on the frame for an individual car. I really doubt it's going to be like Legos where you could take a Model S and swap a few items and create the Model X.�
Sep 8, 2011
Jaff I agree SB, we won't know til the rubber hits the road here...as you say, the critical components (outside of an adjustable suspension) are all housed in the rear axle assemble & cylinder...I don't see the logic of offering a performance version that demands major upgrades in other areas...swapping out the rear axle assembly & component cylinder shouldn't be that difficult...to me, I think TM designed it this way with the component swap out capability in mind. The ability to swap out (design redundancy)seems to be high on TM's engineering list...(swap out battery pack...ability to (re)use the design of the Model S chassis on future models / etc).
�
Sep 8, 2011
Jaff Agree completely AO!...
�
Sep 8, 2011
vfx I thought the performance version was a offhand quip from Elon, (along the lines of) "that might be possible". Now as often happens after a few dozen posts, it's a bonafide option.�
Sep 8, 2011
TEG MAX 2009 Design - Reinventing the Driving Experience: The Tesla Model S | Adobe TV
Also, page 7 here:
http://keizai.org/events-files/Teslapresentation_Keizai1009.pdf
Page 35 here:
http://asia.stanford.edu/us-atmc/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/ee402s-04022009-tesla.pdf
For an "offhand quip" it sure got around...
---
By the way, a 4.4s 0-60 would match the 2012 Mercedes S63 AMG:
2012 Mercedes-Benz S63 AMG Car news and car pictures�
Sep 8, 2011
vfx I stand (sit actually) corrected.�
Sep 8, 2011
William13 I expect a sport version will have an extra motor on the front wheels with an extra PEM. This would be easiest to do as they eventually plan a four wheel drive version. Just keep the rear motor the same.
The suspension is supposed to be a sports type anyway and thus I think the antisway bar is the only piece of suspension needing replaced. Most cars can be "improved" with more horsepower and minor other changes. Tires,brakes,and software for traction control and power distribution.�
Sep 8, 2011
Norbert That'd be cool, if it isn't too expensive, adding front regen as well.
IIRC there was talk about Brembo brakes being optional, yet recommended for the 300 mile pack. I'd think they'd dimension them sufficient for performance.�
Sep 13, 2011
kgb aol..�
Sep 17, 2011
neroden Good news. I can get them adjusted for a soft ride.�
Oct 1, 2011
JimmWilks Twitter says that Elon Musk has just confirmed the existence of a sport version in the pipeline with 0-60mph sprint in 4.5s:
@carrosmagazine #Tesla topman #Elon #Musk kondigt sportversie van #Model-S aan. hondersprint in 4,5 seconden #TwitPict twitpic.com/6tli86
Yes, it is in dutch, but google translate tells me it says:
"Tesla CEO Elon Musk announced sport version of Model-S. hundred sprint in 4.5 seconds" - assuming hundred sprint means 0-100 km/h.�
Oct 1, 2011
Mycroft JimmWilks posted this link in a different thread, but I thought it matched better here:
Green Car Reports: Breaking: Tesla Making Faster 2012 Model S, 0-60 in under 4.5 seconds
How cool would that be!?! We're going to need a new poll. How much would you pay to add that option to the Signature edition? I would go $20k easily!
4.5 secs would kick the Audi A7's ass and the non-turbo Porsche Panamera too.
The base price on the 4.0 sec Panamera Turbo is $137,000.�
Oct 1, 2011
JimmWilks Sorry it does, what with all the new info coming in and wanting to get to sleep I put it up quickly in the news section. Personally I wouldn't pay for it as 5.6s is fast enough for me, but I am glad they're doing it purely to see some genuinely interesting and innovative competition for the all-pervasive BMW M5 and as something to wave at the Top Gear heads.�
Oct 1, 2011
Mycroft Absolutely! 4.5 secs is about the same as my tiny two-seater SLK 55 without burning through 18mpg! I'm totally over the moon if I can get this!!!!�
Oct 2, 2011
W.Petefish Sport option is official. Announced hours ago by Elon Musk himself.�
Oct 2, 2011
cinergi And available at launch.�
Oct 2, 2011
doug It was pretty comical when he came running back out... "Oh yeah... I forgot something... NO, not 'one more thing' [Steve Jobs reference]. I really forgot!"�
Oct 2, 2011
TEG It is sort-of re-announcing it, or even just confirming that the idea still exists, as they have been talking about it since the beginning.
Anyone get a definitive word if all SIGs would be sports, or only as an option?
Also any details of what exactly is different about a sport?
(e.g., can we 'put to bed' the speculation that Sport would be AWD?)�
Oct 2, 2011
doug Well the real news was that it would happen at the start of production. Not some months or years later.
I really doubt all Signature vehicles will be performance, and would guess it's an optional err... option. Probably expensive.
AFAIK it's not AWD. Main difference is more power from the motor and PEM.�
Oct 2, 2011
TEG Were the test ride models Sports ?
---
By the way, it seems the Sports announcement is the headline for a lot of stories:
Yahoo autos: Tesla Model S - "Will Be Faster Than A Porsche 911"
Charging Point Story: Tesla announces Model S performance version
Autocar story: Hot Tesla Model S to rival M5 - Autocar.co.uk
�
Oct 2, 2011
AnOutsider TEG they had 2 betas and one engineering car. Pretty sure they weren't sports, but didn't really get the chance to time the sprint. I suspect driving it will provide more insight as to how the car really performs vs riding�
Oct 2, 2011
Tempus I asked that one. Was told that no, the test rides were not sport. I also asked if they had actually built any betas with the sport specs, and he could neither confirm nor deny. (thought that was a bit atrange). This was one of the bodyworks guys. He was pretty excited about it though.�
Oct 2, 2011
dsm363 I asked too. Was told it would probably be an option, even for the Signature cars.�
Oct 2, 2011
JRod0802 Not sure if this has already been posted, but here's an interview of Elon from yesterday (I believe with the press):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvNEzfiL4_0
Anyway, he mentions that the sport version will only be available on the 300 mile version, not the other two versions. Skip to 3:35 for the part where he talks about it.
�
Oct 2, 2011
dsm363 Awesome. Guess we need a new Sport option thread now that it's official?�
Oct 2, 2011
Mycroft Done!�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét