Foren

ZUR TESLA-COMMUNITY
REGISTRIERENEinloggen

Model III vs Model S 60

Hi Folks,

As I am thrilled to see this Model III Specs, I am also dubious regarding the range.
Indeed, I was looking to buy a Model S 60 next year, however, the range is almost the same between the two cars.

Is there info if the range of the 60 will be raised so the Model III doesn't canibalize Model S 60 ?

Or will Model S 60 disappear in 2 years ?

Thanks for any thoughts/insights.

Have a good day !

Expect MS60 to be gone once Gen3 is out.

Don't expect model s 60 to be gone. Once superchargers are widespread you might expect drop in 85 kWh demand. You don't need 85 for daily use... just trips.

And it's model 3 not III. So it still looks like an E. Model S-3-X.

Now that the Model 3 is semi announced, I am "all in". I do have range concerns with the Model 3. I live in Colorado Springs, and work in Denver. My commute is about 65 miles one way. My work does not have any charging infrastructure, although I am going to be discussing it with the building manager. So with a 130-150 mile commute, would it be too much of a risk? There is a super charging station about 10 miles from work, so that is always an option.

Thoughts?

Why would not the Gen 3 have much better than 200 miles of range. Using all the arguments from the MX, which is expected to be lower in range than a MS:
1. Gen 3 lighter
2. Gen 3 has smaller frontal area
3. Gen 3 should have a better battery than MS
4. Gen 3 should have the same or better drag coef
5. Gen 3 inverter technology should be better

So where does the loss of range come in? Is it a 45 kWh battery or something?

Sin Gas

200 miles minimum is what Elon has been saying to us. Minimum. They probably offer several variants of Model 3.

@Kleist
I fully agree - 60kWh will not be a "reasonable" option any longer - I rather expect a 135kWh battery for the MS and an 85kWh option of the G3:
G3(60,85) vs MS(85,135)

Range again:

I'm really excited that the range issues comes up even in this thread - obviously I'm not alone :-) 200miles is not a "minimum" (as Timo says), but definitively "sub-minimum".

shankbone gave a realistic, "reasonable" (not in any bad sense :-)) example: 150miles is not that much for an G3-driver. And you do want to drive in summer and in winter, day and night, without any "cold sweat" (the next SC is 50miles away, huh!) - and, it definitively is not "AT" the road, but miles away… And, maybe, you want to pick-up a colleague and/or bring him home?

So, 250 is a minimum in this case.

We should take these concerns serious, even if they are "irrational" (as some fans say). A colleague of mine brought me home after a company party and he did not dare to put the heat on (because of the range) - he drove (like always as an EV-driver) with a coat, but I didn't -> I caught an "EV-cold" (no joke!)

@Sin_Gas
I would like to put one more question to your magic ones:
- how can Tesla achieve the expected 40k goal?

As far as I understood, the 85kWh is around 30k€, 30% of the 90k MS. Than, the G3 battery can cost only 15k (assuming that you can produce the rest also 50%) - how can Tesla reach that (without substantial loss of performance)?

Official date now 2017 (first 2016), people will receive their first cars late 2018-2019.

Hello German_Tesla_Fan

We have been hearing that the battery in the Gen III may be the 60kWh one. If it is, I cannot see how the range can be as little as 200 miles. Its got better weight, lower area, better battery, lower drag coef? and more efficient inverter? It does suggest that the battery may be a lot smaller, and these things will drop the range to 200 miles.

For me, my BEV has a range of 74 miles, and that's fine for my work use. I work on an island, 10 miles across, and a charge lasts nearly all month. My next BEV has to make an effective 258 mile jaunt without SC's--in the winter--up hill, in the snow, AWD, etc (EV Tripper says its 85 Kwh trip). Not going to stay over for a J1772 charge overnight--non starter. That is why I am harping on range. Most folks who go skiing in New England, from NY, NJ, Conn and Mass have the same problem. That is a big chunk of market. I am not alone. It also sounds like the German market has similar needs for range.

Sin Gas

So when can we put down our deposits? Heck, why not give all the money to Elon to make the system work? I think of it as an investment for the future.

Knowing Elon Musk, We will be getting some good surprises when the final specs are delivered. As he always under estimates and over delivers, we may see a 300 mile range, using a 60 KWh battery on a lighter, less draggy chassis. Remember, battery energy density gets better by 8% a year, that is 24% increase in range or decrease in battery size and weight. And then the cost will come down 30% or better, while the whole thing will be designed from scratch.

I would say that it behooves him to say "... at least 200 mile range". He won't say the actual range till its ready for the factory floor.

Another good thing about low-balling the range is to set the mark for competitors low, that it will be easy to eclipse it! Mr Musk is pretty brilliant.

There are two possiblities regarding the statement "at least 200 miles"

1) Either the statement is an underestimation of actual range.

2) The battery needs to be reduced to bring down the cost.

Actually there are 3 possiblities

1) The statement describes real world range. Currently the 60 kwh has a EPA rate range of 208 miles. At least 200 miles of real world range would be an improvement for the 60 kwh battery

2) The statement gives epa rated range and underestimates it on purpose.

3) The statement gives an accurate assesment of epa rated range as the battery size has to be reduced.

"Cannibalizing" is a moot issue; GenIII is the real game, MS and MX are just preparatory, a means to an end -- a mass market car. They will continue, but will never make up a significant fraction of the total auto market.

Model S 60 going away.

Base III will have a 60 kWh pack, and Model S and X base will be 85 kWh.

The battery is the single most expensive component. For a price starting at $35K they will almost certainly use the smallest pack they can get away with and still get around 200 miles. Not sure why people think smaller car size and better battery chemistry will get them more than 200 miles. Tesla is obviously setting a 200mi target and then will use every trick/advancement they can to get the cost down.

Range Assured...

265 divided by five yields 53.

53 times six equals 318.

Model ☰ will get 318 miles using an 85 kWh battery pack. Under extreme conditions (Drive it Like You Stole It or In-climate Weather) range may drop to ~223-270 miles.


208 divided by five yields 41.6 ...

41.6 times six equals 249.6 ...

Model ☰ will get 250 miles using a 60 kWh battery pack. Under extreme conditions (Drive it Like You Stole It or In-climate Weather) range may drop to ~174-212 miles.

Thanks for your comments, but I still have the question in mind.

I feel like the investment on the Model S60 is no more worth it with what is coming in 2 years. That doesn't balance the 80k$ (with some options), the wear and loss of value when the gen3 will be out. And as I do not need (and do not have the money to go for) a 85 or 85P, Model S60 is my option.

That's why, regarding Gen3 announcement, I do not what to do on april 2015. Buying Model S60 or waiting for Gen3 ?

Options:

1) Save your cash patiently until Model ☰ arrives.
2) Get a Model S 60 and drive with miles of smiles, while saving money to upgrade to a better battery pack at some point in the future.
3) Invest what you would have put toward either of those in TSLA and hope for the best, while others enjoy the cars, and you keep buying gasoline.

It is your decision to make. Not ours.

@ mike adams

"The battery is the single most expensive component. For a price starting at $35K they will almost certainly use the smallest pack they can get away with and still get around 200 miles. Not sure why people think smaller car size and better battery chemistry will get them more than 200 miles. Tesla is obviously setting a 200mi target and then will use every trick/advancement they can to get the cost down."

Couldnt have said it better. Getting the cost down to 35k is a huge task. Batteries advance at a slow speed. To get down the costs tesla needs a smaller car and a smaller battery as well as cheaper cells.

Better Than the Best of the Worst...

mikeadams wondered, "Not sure why people think smaller car size and better battery chemistry will get them more than 200 miles."

Let's make a distinction between the terms 'battery pack' and 'battery cells', shall we? Currently, a battery pack that delivers 85 kWh of energy storage contains ~7000 battery cells. By 2016, it may only take 60% as many battery cells to store the same amount of energy. That would be around ~4200 battery cells.

◾Simply by reducing the quantity of the cells, your price point has dropped by 40%, as has the weight.
◾The price point can drop an additional 30% per battery cell once they are supplied from the Gigafactory.
◾That effectively means that by 2017, the ~4200 battery cells used in an 85 kWh battery pack would cost the same as ~2940 battery cells cost today.

Using this set of calculations, an 85 kWh battery pack would be reduced by 58% in cost by 2017, and reduced in weight by 40%. Those numbers exceed both the 50% reduction in cost, and the 20% reduction in weight that is presumed to be necessary for mass market adoption of electric vehicles to begin. They will only improve as the years go by.

When it comes to Battery Electric Vehicle range... There will be a certain point that is considered 'enough'. It will be different for people based upon their driving needs, and driving styles. There will never be a point that is considered 'way too [DELTA] much'.

There will definitely come a point where the range and economy of the very best ICE example will pale in comparison to the lowliest BEV offering. No one will care how long it takes to 'fill up', because 25% or less of BEV range will eclipse 100% of ICE range. That will probably not happen by 2020. But I assure you that 'enough' will come well before that year arrives.

Of the retail price of $35k the battery can only retail for $7.5k, $6.5k the motor, inverter, charger etc. Leaves $21k retail for body, paint, seats, etc...

$7.5k for 50 kWh that would $150 per kWh retail. To make a profit the cost has to be close to $100 per kWh.

Tesla will make the battery itself so it never goes retail for its own cars, and is a straight cost scenario. No?

I think that the 'retail' cost of a 60 kWh battery pack will represent 30% or less of the Model ☰ base sale price. The dollar value per kWh comparisons mean nothing in relation to what other auto manufacturers pay.


X Deutschland Site Besuchen