Options list on Model S

Options list on Model S

I hope the Model S options don't get nickle and dimed to death,like on the 3 German lookalikes....I have cked.all three....and also Jaguar...has the best come as standard with barely 4 options....after adding up the options,on the G/3 the Jaguar was 10 to 15k lower...I refer to the MB E550,BMW 535I,Audi A6....and the Jaguar xj was by far the better would be a shame to do that to the Model S..

David M. | 1 March, 2011

Nothing says interior luxury like a partially WOOD steering wheel and leather seats. My Lexus has both, and both are Standard (love it)! I'm also hoping for a really nice stereo system and online radio, plus Pandora access - Standard, so I can pull the plug on XM. Icing on the cake would be 32Gig storage for MP3s - Std. For a reasonable upgrade price, I will get the 230mi battery (160mi won't cut it). When purchasing a car for $60K and up, nobody should utter the word "Upgrade". You've paid enough already. (larger battery excluded).
KEEP WORKING GUYS! I CAN'T WAIT TO GET MY MODEL S (with the original grille with T logo in the grill).

Vincent D Jovino | 1 March, 2011

agreed,thanks for your input

Volker.Berlin | 2 March, 2011

Honestly, I have no idea, but I came up with the following theory: Tesla's promoted entry price happens to be *exactly* in sync with entry prices for MB E and BMW 5 series. At least here in Europe. Striking coincidence, particularly since Tesla touts the Model S as a competitor to the 5 series with regard to driving experience/dynamics, comfort, build quality etc. I expect the Model S to come with similar stock features as the BMW 5 or the MB E, and I expect the prices for even basic options to be similarly shameless.

Need another hint? Look at what they did with the Roadster: Kept the official base price at the same rate, but increased the cost for a comparable vehicle by at least 10% simply by turning stock features into options...

jkirkebo | 2 March, 2011

I hope they do not make to much "luxury" features standard, I don't want any wood or leather in my cars please. I'd hate having to pay extra to "upgrade" to some carbon fibre interior pieces and microfiber seats. Just make black plastic (or aluminium) interior pieces and cloth seats standard please, and let the luxury people pay extra for their wood and leather...

Peak Oil bruin | 2 March, 2011

I'm in your kamp, jkirkebo. Leather and wood is like granite counter tops. When everybody wants it, it's not important. As a vegetarian, don't need the cow.

Brian H | 2 March, 2011

But the cow needs you! If not for us carni/omnivores and leather users, there'd be few cattle around. Your self-denial is costing a few cows a chance at life!

ChristianG | 2 March, 2011

Well I've rather more options on the same price then less ^^so put everything in, in that starting price please ^^

jkirkebo | 3 March, 2011

I'm not against leather in any way, I just want it on my wife and not in my car ;)

ckessel | 3 March, 2011

I seem to recall in some presentation about pricing, that the Roadster and Model S base price could go up by something like 50% based on options selected. It's part of the profitability/margin stuff. Whether than nickel and dimes you with a thousand options or has just a few big options, I have no idea. My suspicion would be the latter. When you're producing 20,000 cars a year it's likely more feasible to have fewer combinations to deal with than when you produce 200,000 cars.

vouteb | 3 March, 2011

I hope that the mirrors will fold (automatically when you shut the car down).
Hate the black plastic 'nose'.

Vincent D Jovino | 4 March, 2011

I am going to Annapolis,on Sat.12th,,a Tesla event will be held there,at the Westin Hotel,,,from 10-11,I know not much time..however I hope to get more information on options..lets face it at these prices,,,we all want as much as we can get,for the money,I don't know anyone who doesn't....
Vincet D Jovino

msiano17 | 5 March, 2011

just a rumor as of now but I had heard that an option list will be out sooner than we think. they have been paying attention and realized that what options that are going to be available are a key aspect to purchasing a car ... so rumor has it that they will be submitting available options soon this year

mb | 7 March, 2011

I certainly hope that "well equipped" does not mean nickel and dime for features expected as standard in this caliber vehicle.

Tom A | 7 March, 2011

In these situations, the fact is that you're paying for the technology. There's nothing like it at any price point (except their own Roadster).

I'm not familiar with luxury vehicles, because I'm not willing to spend more than the $30k that I paid for my 2010 Mariner hybrid. As a result, I wouldn't know what people expect to be standard on a $56k+ vehicle.

From my point of view, I would expect responsibility from a green car manufacturer - standard features including cloth or microfiber seats made from recycled materials (like the seats are in my Mariner), no standard wood or leather. However, seeing the clientele they wish to attract and the money that comes with it, I'm sure leather, etc., will be standard.

It would be safe to assume that the glass roof will be an option, as well as the 3rd row child seats.

I have been wondering if those awesome-looking turbine blade rims are standard. They should be, as far as I'm concerned. It's part of the distinct persona of the car. I haven't seen any other designs, nor any hint of another design. The Roadster does have a few rim options, so I wouldn't be surprised if the Model S will, also.

Tom A | 7 March, 2011

In fact, if you look at the Roadster options, interior and exterior, that's probably a really good indication of what to expect for the Model S.

Vincent D Jovino | 8 March, 2011

Tom A....spending 30K or less on a car,there is not a lot of options,spending 60K or more,there are more standard items,than on most cars,that could be called options,,,make it simple...go on line and open any auto site,,,and compare 4,,and you will see the difference,,,,enough said....
Vincent D Jovino

jkirkebo | 8 March, 2011

Many of us that want the Model S wants it for the long range and interior space, not for it's "luxury appeal". Thus we don't want or expect "luxury" features being standard. I seriously hope they aren't as there are several of them I positively do NOT want, like leather, electric adjustable seats, massage seats, sunroof, automatic parallell parking, wood interior pieces (or CF), DVD "entertainment" system etc.

All this stuff adds cost, weight and complexity (more stuff to break). I'm pretty sceptic about the automatic opening hatch too...

They should do what VW does, offer a base trim level, medium trim level and high end trim level.

Sudre | 8 March, 2011

About the only options I'd want are power windows, power locks and alarm.

Power locks and alarm so Saint Louis won't live up to it's reputation too easily.

Windows because it's REALLY hard to reach across to the back rear window and roll it up at 65 miles per hour when a typical mid-west storm blows in out of nowhere in seconds.

Jeremy | 8 March, 2011

I am concerned by the proposed pricing for the upgraded battery packs on the model S. I was expecting around $2000 for each step up in capacity so you can imagine the proposed $10000 for each was quite a shock. Part of the allure of the Tesla is that it is the only pure EV with a range that makes it a practical car to own. The 180 pack is really only good for city use unles DC charging stations become more widely available. I hope that by rollout the price for the upgraded battery packs will have come down.

William13 | 8 March, 2011

Jeremy, sorry to hear you were hoping for $2000 for each step up in battery packs. Unfortunately this is ten years or so off. If it were that easy or cheap the majors would not have the volt with less than 40 miles or the leaf with less than 100 miles of range. The 160 mile base pack is still way over the leaf and cold weather tolerant.

Timo | 8 March, 2011

$10000 is still much. It means around $400-$500/kWh battery price. I assumed Tesla gets batteries cheaper than that now and a lot cheaper in the future.

Nicu | 9 March, 2011

Timo, Tesla has not only to use different assembly techniques for different batteries, they HAVE to make a PROFIT. That is what a company does ! If you do not want to see it this way, think this is money that will later allow them to produce cheaper cars, and that sooner than later.

Think Apple, they charge $100 on the iPad for the difference from 16GB to 32GB and the same from 32GB to 64GB, so definitely this is not in direct relation to the cost of materials. It is rather in connection with the appeal for the user of the different value propositions.

William13 | 9 March, 2011

$30,000/90 kWh =$333/kWh for new Panasonic batteries.

$40,000/90 kWh =$444/kWh

$20,000/65 kWh =$307/kWh. For old batteries. The bank analyst estimated cost to Tesla of $200/kWh for batteries. This seems reasonable to me. The need to test and pack the batteries still.

Timo | 9 March, 2011


$20000 is what you pay extra to get from 160 to 300. My estimation is that 160 is 40-45kWh battery, 90kWh at 300.

So: $20000/45kWh = $444/kWh

That's $5000+ extra / battery capacity increase, if $200/kWh is their real price. 10000 for 300 mile version. Tens of thousands of profit / car. From batteries only they get several million dollar profit from signature series only.

That doesn't sound "profit" to me, that sounds like greed. You probably lose customers with that high price increase. It gets even worse if the battery is actually smaller.

It actually sounds like "lets get early adopters to buy excessive priced 300mile battery pack by delivering them first, then we can drop the price where it should be to get rest of the crowd buy our car too".

I hope that is not the case. Maybe Tesla batteries are not that cheap after all, and they really need to pay $400/kWh for them.

searcher | 9 March, 2011

I know I wont be forking down the big bucks for the car but from my vantage point the very biggest option is that you are drving an all electric car {a trailblazer in auto history} with longer range than any electric car in the world. That should be option enough, plus you will probably save a ton of dough if you keep it for the long haul and newer, better batteries are coming down the pike that will probably fit right in your car.I am also very proud this company chose to name their car after a true heroic genius who did not recieve his just due for his contributions to humanity in his lifetime as sadly has been the case too many times in history.

searcher | 9 March, 2011

I would just add my very best wishes to you folks buying this car. You are doing something rather heroic to since I am apparently in a heroic vein with these posts. You are putting your money where your mouth is to. Most of you are leaders and you are doing a great job leading ths planet to a better automotive solution. Many thanks to you. You are blessed and I sincerely hope you will continue to be so as the one who blesses has been probably been very wise concerning you.

Douglas3 | 9 March, 2011

Timo, what makes you think that's all profit??? There's more to the battery pack than the cells; there's the physical structure, electronics, wiring, cooling, not to mention assembling and testing the entire system. Oh and amortizing the engineering and the factory and equipment, overhead, financing, ...

In the real world, the raw "Bill Of Materials" or BOM cost is only a fraction of the final price of a product. Even when selling direct to the end user (no middle man) a BOM cost of 1/3 the selling price is considered aggressive.

They're not going to get rich on the Signature edition; that will just be a small start on paying down their investment. They're going to have to sell tens of thousands a year to make a profit.

Timo | 9 March, 2011

Compared to other battery packs those other things are pretty much same, their material cost is the same and their manufacturing cost is the same. What differs is the cells themselves. So all the difference between what they cost to Tesla and what they cost to person buying the car is a profit.

Vawlkus | 10 March, 2011

How can the costs be the same timo? Different batteries, with different size and shapes, with different cooling systems & hookups in the same sized case!

There's a world of difference there timo, and there's still the difference in electronics in the pack to consider. I mean, the sensors that regulate pack temperature, the overcharge protection, and the cutoffs to isolate bad cells; all that has to be different as well, plus theres probably more that we don't know about in there.

Personally, I think Tesla is making very little profit per car on this

Timo | 10 March, 2011

Cells are all same size. Amount of them may vary. There is differences how you arrange them, but, besides amount of batteries, material costs are same, arrangement device costs are same etc. It might even be cheaper to produce bigger battery pack than smaller one. There are differences, but they are so small that you can't say which is more costly. It definitely is not direct "add 70miles, get $10000, add another 70miles, get another $10000", unless the price is directly the battery prices.

It gets even weirder for 230-300 mile change, because there the battery chemistry changes, everything else stays the same. same amount of cells, same voltages, same output amps, only Ah changes. I don't think battery price change happens to be exactly $10000 for that.

That $10000 is very artificial number, not dictated by minimum profit. More like "out of the hat" number that most options have. Like different rims and colors or interior materials.

Nicu | 10 March, 2011

You forget that we are talking about cutting edge tech, no matter how you slice it. Tesla invested $500M at least in developing Model S, how much of that (plus interest) has to be priced in every car ? Do you want to wait 4 or 10 years for your Blue Star ?

There is no right price for anything is this world other than what the demand / offer tells you. If they could sell about the same number of cars at double the price, they would do it in a blink of the eye. A company does not have to justify in any way a price that is too high. But it has to justify to its investors and fired employees a price that is too low. Basic economy tells you to sell at a price that makes you the most profit you can in your target time frame, considering goodwill, BOM, production capacity, competition etc.

Timo | 10 March, 2011

That's the point, I don't think they make most profit in putting extra mile price so high, I think they just lose customers. Especially in Europe where you put additional 20% VAT + other % taxes on top of that.

There are other incoming EV:s like that do the same. For example Saab has EV with 150mile range coming with AFAIK less expensive price than Model S.

Model S lost its appeal to me when I heard its dimensions. I just plain can't use a car that has 11cm ground clearance. It was supposed to be every day family car, but apparently it is tarmac road only sport car designed for smooth highways that just happens to have some interior space. I wouldn't buy it even if they would sell it in unprofitable prices. H*ll, I probably couldn't get it out of our garage here without scraping the bottom of the car.

Douglas3 | 10 March, 2011

I learned a long time ago... if no one complains about the price, you've set it too low.

Timo, you can always wait for the Bluestar.

dashrb | 10 March, 2011

Yep, and if everyone complains about the price being too high (and you're not selling enough), you can lower the price, and see your sales increase. Sure, the public will complain (see Apple, Inc.) but they get over it pretty quickly with acceptable lingering animosity. You can hide behind spin such as, "we lowered the price because we are such an awesome company, we achieved better-than-expected efficiency from our awesome workers and procedures, and want to pass the savings on to you!" This even makes the public feel *good* about the company!

It's much harder for the public to accept the situation that you decided the initial price was too low so you raised it. That creates unacceptably high lingering animosity.

In capitalism, the right price is as high as the market will take.

jkirkebo | 11 March, 2011

Personally I'm hoping for air suspension, at least as an option, with adjustable ride height. That would be awesome, and remove any reservations people might have about the ride heigh.

Volker.Berlin | 11 March, 2011

I do not expect air suspension in the first version of the Model S. The decision for air suspension would have been made long time ago, before the alpha build, i.e., Tesla must already know for sure if air suspension will be available. According to Tesla they are currently programming/optimizing the traction control (besides other things), and suspension is probably an important factor for this.

Assuming that they know whether or not the Model S will offer air suspension, why would they not tell us? Until now, Tesla has never been shy to brag with their cars' features long before they were actually visible or touchable by the average human. Since I have not heard anything in this regard, I can only assume that Tesla will use classic springs and shock absorbers for suspension.

Brian H | 11 March, 2011

Or maybe superconducting magnetic levitation of the body over the chassis?

Tom A | 11 March, 2011

Geez, Timo - where do you live? Here in the US, there's paved roads everywhere. Even some of the dirt roads that I've been on were fairly well maintained with no serious potholes and such - no problem for the minivan or sedan or compact to travel safely.

Then again, I may have been a bit spoiled: I grew up in Pennsylvania, the state that has the most miles of paved roads in the US (as of 1990, anyway). Even back-woods rural roads near my childhood home, that didn't even have painted lines on them and were not wide enough for two vehicles to pass safely, were still paved smooth enough for a sedan or a compact to drive over without fear of scraping the bottom.

I saw the Alpha Model S at the DC showroom when the store opened, and I didn't notice anything unusual about the clearance. I never once thought "That looks a bit lower than normal." Looked like a normal sedan to me, with great styling. They had a Roadster sitting next to it, and the tiny clearance under the Roadster was quite obvious.

William13 | 11 March, 2011

Tom A,

Timo is referring to the published spec of 4.46 inch clearance in the FAQ. I measured the Roadster and it is about 6 inches and very flat. I measured the Model S expanded skeleton at Detroit and it was about 6 inches and very flat. The prototype does not realy count as it was built on a MB chassis. There were a few tiny suspension/brake parts that may have been lower, or they may be adding air dams, side fascia or a rock guard below the battery. South Bend Indiana gets 72 inches of snow average yearly. I was once concerned about ground clearance but in spite of 100 inches this year my Prius with 7 1/2 inches never had an issue.

David70 | 11 March, 2011

Tom A,

I don't know where in the U.S.A. you never encounter potholes or speed bumps. I've gone over plenty of speed bumps where signs say you should be going 15 mph, but I've bounced hard on many of them if going over 5 mph.

cablechewer | 11 March, 2011

It doesn't have to be potholes that do you in. Near my parent's cottage they were doing some repairs to the gravel roads in the area. The grader had left a handful of rocks across the road. I thought they were pretty small until one of them put a 10cm hole in the oil pan of my diesel Golf. The rock with a splash of oil on it actually fit under the car quite nicely, so I am not sure what bounced it up. Maybe it was sitting on something else...

Sudre | 11 March, 2011

If you take out the super car part and the luggage space it gets to the point of why I don't want a car that sits on the ground. These kinds of situations are all over the world.... and it's just funny to watch.... WATCH.... I don't want to be the one being watched.

Klaus | 11 March, 2011

Listen to you guys. I've bought and owned everything from a 1970 Beetle to a BMW525 and lots in between. And I never worried or even asked how much profit the manufacturer was making on the cars or the options. I was more concerned about what I was getting for my money. In this case, a Model S is what I want, what I will get, and what I will pay for. It's the cutting edge of innovation and I want to be part of it. If it's too much for you, then wait for something cheaper to come along. An electric Beetle perhaps? I put my deposit down back in 2009 and have stuffed away as much cash as possible for the day I will have to shell it out for my "S". In the mean time I'll wait for the options price list to come out and maybe even bump up to the Signature. So my point is, either buy the car or not but stop speculating in whose pocket the money is going. You're just wasting hot.

Klaus | 11 March, 2011

Oh and Timo you must have one crappy garage if the clearance on a standard sedan can't make it out without scraping the bottom.

Sudre | 11 March, 2011

Klaus, Timo is using the only spec he has from Tesla, 4.46".
That's not a standard sedan clearance.
Everyone can measure the Alpha all they want.
Tesla says the clearance is 4.46".

Right here:

If they have changed it they need to update their specs or at least clarify them.

Leofingal | 12 March, 2011

@Timo I was pretty concerned about the 4.46 inches of clearance also, but then I checked the specs on my Audi TT (granted this is not a high ride) and it is 4.4 inches. I have been driving this car all over the Northeast US (which in Winter is nothing but potholes) and the only issues I've had with clearance is when the roads haven't been plowed yet, and I end up plowing it for them. I actually think this is adequate clearance for most areas. There is a one lane bridge with a cliff-like dropoff by my office and I have never bottomed out on it and everyone drives very tentatively on that bridge. Just check out the clearance on other vehicles, and you may feel much better about this, I know I did.

Timo | 13 March, 2011

Audi TT is very short car. That means you would have much less problems with steep inclines with sharpish angles. However that is already too low to clear sidewalk border rocks cleanly IE too low. But enough of this, that ground clearance is too small for me for several reasons. Period.

I'll wait something else.

Tiebreaker | 13 March, 2011


Aftermarket upgrade?

Vincent D Jovino | 16 March, 2011

Gentleman! a neautral corner please!!!!
Having had 4 sailboats over a 20years....batteries are always a hot topic....look back on how far cell phones and flat tv's have come...price comes down when the public creats a demand....As much as many company's try to add to thair bottom line..reality sets in if they want to make money,and enjoy public support...hopefully smart money will prevail....back to options....not being able to make the March 12,event in Annapolis,Md.I did speak with local dealership,in D.C. At that time was still not able to give any more info. on options,and hoped they would be able to at 11:00.....
still a fan
Vincent D Jovino

Vexar | 17 March, 2011

To Timo
My number one concern with ground clearance isn't off-roading, it is getting stuck in the snow. As for snow performance, living where I do, I have given this a lot of thought. Here are my observations:

The weight is much more evenly distributed by virtue of the battery being long and low/
The under side of the vehicle is smoother, not tangled with an exhaust system
The ground clearance is less than 1/4 inch difference with my existing vehicle, which almost never gets stuck

Your post really messed with me for a couple hours. I went out to my car with a ruler, wasn't satisfied I knew what I was doing, then ended up looking for the information online.
When people make large financial decisions, they do a lot of talking, audible or otherwise. I made the reservation after only talking to a select number of people on a narrow subject band. I could fuss about there not being enough insulation on the all-glass rooftop in a cold climate, or I could say "I'll dress warmly for that experience!" My main reason for my keeping this decision on the down-low is because people will not always be able to give you feedback without their own emotional bias. What if you ask someone who can't afford it because they just bought something else? I have one friend who lobbied hard against me getting an electric car, and I still don't know why, other than he's not an early adopter sort. My best transition with owning this car will be "I remember gas stations!"