Model X

Inside info: no nosecone, 60/85kWh packs and front seat pano!!

2»

Comments

  • edited November -1
    A 20% or so energy density improvement would let them get from 85kWh to 100kWh without significant penalty. With 100kWh to work from they will do whatever else it takes to get to 300 mile range. Those are magic mindshare numbers.

    They've got everyone else now talking about 200 miles as the target and will delight in seeming to leap-frog and up the ante to 300. 265 just sounds like 200-something, even 285 doesn't impress, anything just almost 300 just doesn't cut it. As I've said before, the next steps will be to 75kWh and that lovely triple-digit 100kWh.
  • dbhdbh
    edited November -1
    @Sin_Gas I haven't actually done a real measurement. But I went from the Bay Area to Tahoe and back with bikes and a glider on the car with no range issues at all. I went as fast as 70 no problem. I think maybe 25% drop in range, but that's a rough guess. It all still works out really well.
  • edited November -1
    @Tstolz: Excellent observations about the drawbacks of roof racks. Fortunately, the Model X will have a FW door mode that will enable one to put a grappling hook in the side window and, ignoring the weight of the person that would ordinarily prevent the door from opening, the door lifts the person to roof height to easily reach the rotating roof rack. It will be a marvel of engineering efficacy and a real marketplace differentiator, especially for the height disadvantaged.
  • jjsjjs
    edited November -1
    Ah george, I see you are at it again. A design worthy of Rube Goldberg. A solution sure to bring smiles to the vertically challenged and those unfairly punished by gravity for their massive mass.
  • edited November -1
    Once Tesla starts advertising, maybe they can hire Leonardo DiCapri and Kate Winslet to fix themselves on either side of the FW doors, with arms stretched wide, as they are lifted into the air, high above the Model-X, all while the theme to Titanic is playing in the background.

    Make sure you add this to your patent-list <i>@georgehawley&lt;/i>. You'll make millions from this one. :)
  • edited November -1
    Millions of groans would be deafening.
  • edited November -1
    Having breezed through the TMC thread referred to above, my BS meter has pegged. The battery pack info is the giveaway. Maintaining 60 and 85 kWh battery pack options with cells that are 20% more efficient does not add significant range as claimed by the OP from Ireland. The weight savings is only about 140 pounds and would add very little to the range of the vehicle, certainly not enough to compare to the MS. There would be a cost savings of $1000 to $2000 , depending on what Tesla pays Panasonic per cell. If Tesla has 18650 cells with 20% more energy capacity in the pipeline, the best way to add range would be to keep the weight the same and build battery packs with up to 7104 of the new cells, making the new packs up to 102 kWh.

    BSBSBSBSBSBSBSBSBSBSBSBSBSBSNSBS etc.
  • edited November -1
    I won't correct the typo.
Sign In or Register to comment.