Join The Community

10K for every additional 70 mile !!

Now that was a shocker for me. 20K above base price for 300 miles battery pack is very steep pricing option. At this pricing I am not sure what the cost would be to change the entire battery pack, my estimation is at least 40K, not 5-10K that Tesla says.

Might even have a recycling program for batteries by then. Turn in your old pack for a rebate on your new, bigger battery pack

Where is Tesla today with model S?
They have 250 signature reservations (reservation fee US$ 50k, sales price 80k) and 4100 R and P reservation (fee 5k, sales price 57k-77k).
Totals are: 4350 cars reserved, US$ 33m fees paid, US$ 294.7m sales to come.
Production for 2012 is nearly reserved (not: sold). Reservations were between 75/month and 100/week recently. It is plausible that reservations will increase again, when Beta models are available for test drives. Tesla may "sell" complete 2013 production before even starting to produce in mid 2012.

So, price doesn't seem to be a problem here. A LOT of people will want a Model S and are ready to pay around US$ 70k.

If you think that Tesla is just sticking it in your rear for a battery then go to Walgreens (convenience store) when they are having a sale and purchase 12000 1.5 volt, 2450mAh rechargeable AA batteries and build your own battery pack. That will make about a 44kWatt battery.

At $8 for a pack of 4 that would be only $24,000. We'll call that a 160 mile pack altho I doubt it will make it that far.

Your 300 mile pack would then cost you $48,000.

The point of this post is just to give people a perspective on battery costs. Not to insinuate a price that Tesla is paying for batteries.
That's using old tech that's been around for at least 6 years so the costs should be considered cheap...
These AA batteries used to cost $19.95 for a pack of 4.

@ Vawlkus

Tesla already has a recycling program both in US and Europe. Here is the link for the one in Belgium

and here both are better explained

Frankly, I would guess that if I buy my 160 mile S, in 7 years when my pack is down to 70% most likely some 300 or 230 mile packs will become available on some sort of trade in since those owners will need/want to upgrade their battery packs to new or even longer range packs that will inevitably become available by then. a 230 mile pack at it's 7 year 70% level would be like a "new" 160 mile pack, and a used 300 mile pack would theoretically still have a 210 mile range. That said, I'm not sure what the battery life decay curve looks like, but this feels like a viable option for me as I really don't need more than 100 miles per day more than once a year, at which point I can borrow my wife's ICE car, and she can have fun with the Tesla!

In the second and even more likely case, some big advances in battery technology are likely to happen in the 3 - 4 year range, and I would guess that the people who are willing to pay for the 300 mile pack now will be likely to reinvest in longer range packs when they become available. Once again, this means for those of us that are patient, we may get access to "used" 300 mile packs at a very favorable trade in price either through Tesla or owners clubs.

Just remember that many "Early Adopters" of technology also tend to buy gen 2 products as well (think iphone/ipad) and those of us that are not likely to buy a second vehicle so fast may benefit greatly from their upgrading. I really doubt it will be nearly as hard to get your battery upgraded in the long run as people are making it sound.

Seems to me that Tesla has decided to err on the side of overcharging customers for the 230 and 300 mile battery packs. The size, plumbing, sensors, etc. are going to be the same for all three packs (I don't know this for a fact, but it seems very likely). The cost difference to Tesla would only be the additional cells and whatever labor is involved in packing the cells into the packs internal structures. I'd wager that their claim they must initially deliver cars with one pack (300)rather than any of the three is driven by cash flow considerations not manufacturing issues. Bringing a new from scratch car design to mass production is hugely expensive and risky for a company without deep cash reserves. While I don't like getting less range or overly expensive longer range, I'm willing to respect Tesla's cash flow imperatives. The real test will come in the first few years after introduction, when we'll see if they quickly let battery tech improvements and cost reductions trickle down to the customers or continue to soak us.

Leofingal, as an early adopter I would say that you are right. I will be trading my 300 mile pack for a 500 or 600 mile pack when available. Note I did not say " if.".

I continue to be amazed at the comments that say, suggest, or imply that Tesla is overcharging. No one else is making a real attempt at producing long range, full scope of driving BEVs because of the high cost. Thus the cost is high.

@ William13

I agree with the pricing options. They [Tesla] have thrown out an estimate of $10k bump for every 70mile increase in battery power but have not finalized anything. And if it ends up being exactly that, who cares, people are willing to pay that much for one and two just charge your car each night and you'll have 160 miles each morning.

Lastly, Sudre clearly pointed out the cost of having that much battery capacity is $48k .. it may be retail price but it sounds like a pretty close estimate of how much it could be costing since that is the most expensive part of the vehicle.

It is an innovative, never before seen car, initial costs are always high. Its how business works.

X Deutschland Site Besuchen