Join The Community

60kW battery range with superchargng... and more!

I have been thinking about the SC for the 60kW battery. In reality isn't the 85kw battery just getting 42.5Kw of juice added in 30 minutes. Do you think the 60kW will only get 30kW?

I ask because realistically the 42.5kW charge is not going to be 150 miles. We all know that depends on the driver. It will probably be more like 110 miles with the A/C on at 70MPH on level ground. I come up with this from a post I read somewhere from R&B about that speed and A/C giving the 85kW battery a range of 220 miles. Naturally I just cut it in half.

Hopefully the 85kW battery is getting more like 50kW for an added distance of 130 miles at that speed. Then the 60Kw would possibly get 35kW for an added distance of 90 miles. Just using proportions to come up with those numbers and rounding.

Either way I don't see the 60kW battery getting to another supercharger. They will be spaced too far apart. I am calculating the distances (based of R&B's numbers) for the 60kW battery at 70mph with the A/C on is around 160 miles at best and a supercharge will add 90 more miles for a total distance of 250 miles..... at best.

This is actually very important to me. I might call and see if I can get my battery upgraded now that we have actual numbers for the 85kW battery. This is why I was hoping for this announcement before I had to lock in. The production ramp delay might have been a good thing.

Do my number seems realistic for the 60kW battery?
Too low?
Too high?
Thoughts in general?

@ Mark K

Those airplane models use different chemistry, most likely LiFePO4, which allows for very high charge and discharge rates. The downside is the energy density. Tesla had to use those batteries in order to offer the highest possible range, and you can see that the maximum power to the motor on the smaller packs will be less than the power on the 85kWh. This means that the battery cannot take more than about 4C discharge, non-continuous, and this is probably pushing it. The A123 LiFePO4 batteries in the same 18650 form-factor have 1.1Ah capacity, tesla uses 4Ah batteries in teh same size i believe. Not to mention the voltage on those is quite a bit higher than with the A123. So if tesla used those batteries instead, the battery pack would have less than 20kWh energy, and even at 10C wouldn't provide more power to the motor.

It was a bait-and-switch anyway you look at it, it was lame, but even lamer is the explanation that activating some some pre-installed hardware costs $1000, this is pure BS. No way flashing a piece of software costs $1000, this is the same as charging for flashing and testing the software that comes with the car, like the browser, the infotainment, nav etc. Why not charge a nice round sum for the water-proff testing at the end of assembly, say $500? That would look nice in the SEC filings. Investors will say "oh look, a nice stream of revenue!"

There is a fee for final testing, "Final inspection, prep, and coordination $180.00" it is on my MVPA. At least it's not the $500 you suggested.

Vall, just in case you didn't know: Water-proof testing does cost some non-trivial amount per car, but since it is non-optional, it does not have its own line in the contract. If you don't like the SC option or think that it's not worth the price that Tesla attached to it, then don't get it. End of story.

And by the way (just in case I did not mention it earlier), there are two other threads dealing with this topic in some detail. No need to turn this thread into the same direction.

Please go post your sentiments there... Wait a moment, you did that already? You must be seriously suffering if you feel the urge to restate your opinion in every single thread that is only remotely related.

this thread had already taken that direction even before my first post, so I can take no credit for hijacking it. You see, even if you say end of story, that doesn't end the story, a lot of people are affected by that decision and are expressing their opinins.

GB states the setup of SC requires detailed hands-on balancing for each car, in factory, before delivery, not just a ROM flash. I guess he's lying, as you know more than him.

Or not.

Oh, no doubt he knows more than me, but I still think he is lying, it's his job to sometimes lie.

On the "Design" page, it now says that I last made changes on September 29th. I did not. I have had the 60 battery for months now. Because this "update" shows the 29th, it also shows the cost as being $2,000. Funny, I wasn't even home yesterday, and I haven't changed anything in months. Tesla, the $1,000 difference will cost you over $80,000. Did you think I wouldn't notice? If this is how your business operates prior to getting the car....Anybody else experience this on their design page? Better check! It feels a little slimy.

It's interesting that tesla has absolutely no problem of giving you the preinstalled SC hardware FOR FREE if you opt-out or not even order it in the first place. $1000 worth of hardware. But they cannot give away the $1000 they supposedly need for calibration and testing to the customers who ordered when the website said "included". They will only go as far as charging half the price, $1000...

I don't understand why they didn't call it a "pre-paid SC plan" or "SC use fee".
It would be easier to sell that than a back charge for a BS software activation and testing.
As far as pricing goes, a $1,000 would buy you a lot of gasoline.
Even at $80 to fill up and 300 miles range (on a low MPG car using premium gas), that's still about 4,000 miles worth of driving.
Considering the SCs are for occasional use and not even accessible to most customers in the next couple of years, I don't see the point for 60kw owners to opt-in for it unless Tesla makes it free like they did for the 85kw cars.

Give it up. It is not just "software activation and testing". The individual cables have to be fine-tuned and adjusted to that car's particular geometry to prevent battery damage with the 100A feed,

Did you just make that thing with the geometry up? What tolerances is the production line churning out, so that there will be such substantial difference in geometry, that the cables need to be fine tuned for each individual car? It is either the batteries in the pack can take 100 amps or they can't, once the pack is sealed, the batteries are there to stay. Either the pack is designed with 100 A in mind or it is not, which would mean there are two separate packs with two different charge current ratings. Which there aren't. If the cables are rated for the voltage and current, then they are rated for the voltage and current. If there is any difference in length, it will be a few centimeters at most, and they could get it down to millimeters. Which translates to a few milliohms difference. And since voltage sensing is most likely done at the battery terminals, this difference and the voltage drop it causes has no influence to the voltage that the battery pack terminals see. 100A is a lot, but it is not something extraordinary that would require some unbelievable technology to achieve. Testing after assembly is certainly needed to verify everything works, but it is also needed for everything else.

From the 'faq email' sent out 9/28:

No. Superchargers charge at a rate 4.5 times faster than our next fastest charging solution. All that power must be safely routed through your Model S using special cables that bypass onboard chargers, and must be extensively calibrated and tested during production. We cannot add Supercharging to your car after you take delivery.


True, and from the website at the same time and prior, in the 60's the hardware was included.

What point exactly are you trying to make? I don't think anyone here is aguing that the hardware should be able to be installed at any time after build.

But as an interesting thought experiment, what if a SC component became defective or was subject to recall? Or crashed? Would the car be considered a "total" loss? I suggest that there would be a way to fix it.

Now, to be honest, adding it later might be cost prohibitive. Say 2K now, or 9K later, but these things have a way of getting done. Better to say that, I think.

GB's original email, adjusted/corrected later?, indicated activation had to be done at the factory at time of manufacture. That has consequences! In any case, I think the issue of 60s using the network is a borderline possibility for most. (And it would take >10,000 miles of highway travel powered by the SCs to break even on reduction of gas costs.)

Most are going to find that SC for 60s is more trouble than it's worth, I suspect. The overall impact of the n/w in the end is going to be a big push to the sales of 85s (and maybe long-range GenIIIs, which should be appearing about the time the bulk of the network in the US is filled in -- 2016-7.)

I think to be cost effective, yes, it does. It would be a bit like buying a new Ford Mustang with one motor or say an automatic transmission, and swapping it out after delivery with a different motor, or putting in a manual transmission. Can it be done? Well, yeah. Does it make sense to do? Expensive as hell. Does not compute.

Actualy, I live in the Northwest which is where I planned on staying when I reserved the car, but will relocate a stones throw from Fremont in the next year based on recent events. And I have family on both sides of the bay and in LA, so this actualy is a major game changer for me. I would have prefered the 85, but I'm already pushing my limit with this one. I think even with the existing stations, I can easily get around.

So you get the no-sales tax delivery in the NW and then move to CA!. Verrry clevah!

Aye, true. Wasn't quite planned that way, but it seems to be heading in that direction. I guess I'll have to pay for license plates twice in less than a year. And I'll have huge ugly prius lane stickers on all four corners of my car eventualy.

I've been really lucky here. We had one of the early stores (now our service center) and they opened a retail branch in Bellevue in the last year. So we've been kind of early adopters, and I drank the kool-aid and found it to be good pretty early. Wish I would have plunked down some Bens earlier, and I might be looking at November. Ah well.

X Deutschland Site Besuchen