Forums

Okay it's 2015 let's hear something or see the X

Okay it's 2015 let's hear something or see the X

At least a picture.

aljjr2 | January 1, 2015

LOL, can they at least have the Holiday Off...

Tomorrow, Tomorrow, the Sun will come out Tomorrow...maybe even "Soon".

David Trushin | January 1, 2015

I think that they might have some news at the end of january. That's when they expect to have resolved the range issues with the d. IMHO range issues are what's holding up the x.

teslabayarea | January 1, 2015

Elon is busy at the moment with his personal life. You will have to wait!

NumberOne | January 13, 2015

Elon stated during his Detroit speech that Model X will be launched this summer. In other words, deliveries will begin this summer. September is Fall, so that only leaves July or August.

georgehawley.fl.us | January 13, 2015

Red Sage may be vindicated at last.
Elon also tanked the stock in after hours trading by mentioning poor sales in China.
2015 is going to be another exciting year for Tesla no doubt, cupholders or not.

David Trushin | January 13, 2015

Yeah, it looks like the doors are the problem.

ian t.wa.us | January 13, 2015

jlawson - Thanks but that is NOT the production X. Welcome to last year. Literally.

That is the very same display model they showed LAST year at NAIAS in Detroit and is the same as the concept shown at the original unveiling a couple years ago.

georgehawley.fl.us | January 15, 2015

A watched 'bot never toiled. Let's all look the other way and let Tesla surprise us.

georgehawley.fl.us | January 15, 2015

This is the photo on the Model X section of the website, such as it is:

>

The only problem is that this is not what the Model X looks like.

Someday soon this will all get better.

ian t.wa.us | January 15, 2015

Well, the general shape should be correct. Maybe we just look at a profile line. Haha! ;-)

elizabeth.gottfried | January 15, 2015

i hope it doesn't look like the Honda Crosstour... :[

aljjr2 | January 15, 2015

Gremlin Hatchback. Retro Styling

Red Sage ca us | January 15, 2015

Yes, the Honda Crosstour does give the Porsche Panamera a run for the money when it comes to WTF status on styling and utility.

ian t.wa.us | January 16, 2015

Neither compare to the Pontiac Aztek though! ;-)

Red Sage ca us | January 16, 2015

The Pontiac Aztek is surpassed only by the Volkswagen Vanagon in terms of pure WTF awesomeness personified.

andrew.d.davis | January 16, 2015

Hey! I had a Gremlin.

ian t.wa.us | January 16, 2015

The Vanagon was pretty awesome but I never thought it looked funny. Practicality personified! ;-)

Red Sage ca us | January 18, 2015

I think the Aztek was GM's attempt to meld the practicality of the Vanagon with rugged good looks. They missed. I would not mind if Tesla Motors gave it a shot.

mhgross | January 23, 2015

There's been a lot of speculation about rear view side mirrors vs. cameras. Does the picture of the Model X on Tesla's 'Model X Reservation' page tell it! I don't see any mirrors do you? Fact?

timf2001 | January 23, 2015

No, the picture on the reservations page is of the original prototype design. The photo in the most recent reservation holder update email from November shows a teaser of the production model which clearly has conventional rear view mirrors.

mhgross | January 23, 2015

Thank you. You're right. It's really a shame that those of us who have been waiting over 2-years and who are now within 6-9 months of finally getting the car still have to wonder about these things. The Musk we've all been led to know would be putting a retrofit kit into the mirror design so that when the DOT finally approves mirror-less cars, it is easy for us to convert. Also, what happened to the 400 mile Roadster commitment. Anybody hear any specifics? And, why not communicate what that really might mean for the MS and MX models at year-end. What's the problem?

mhgross | January 23, 2015

PS 'timf2001' after taking a closer look at the photo in the 'reservation holder email' I'm not convinced. The appearance of side mirrors in that photo does add to the artistic effect but in my opinion could go either way. Additionally IMHO, I think the inability to commit to a 400 mile MX at year-end is strategically necessary to protect MS shipments in the interim. The high-end SUV market is heating up and Tesla will have to continue to do more to maintain their lead.

vandacca | January 23, 2015

@mhgross, I hate to burst your bubble, but those are old-school mirrors in the Model-X teaser. If you have a high-enough resolution image, you can see the outline go up a number of inches from the body where it's connected and then across a number of inches.

I too am hoping for a miracle and a mirror-less Model-X, but you can't ignore the significance of that teaser photo. Not looking good.

ian t.wa.us | January 23, 2015

@mhgross - The 400 mile Roadster battery upgrade means nothing for MS and MX because, as was stated in the announcement for said Roadster upgrade, this is just bringing the most current (read "already what's in the MS and will be in the MX") battery chemistry to the Roadster.

The very first line of the blog post on the Roadster 3.0 (found here: http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/roadster-30) states:

"The Roadster 3.0 package applies what we've learned in Model S to Roadster. No new Model S battery pack or major range upgrade is expected in the near term."

Cheers!

ian t.wa.us | January 23, 2015

Although, as has been shared over at tmc (http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/34067-Where-is-the-Model-X...) and here (http://my.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/inside-info-no-nosecone-6085kwh-p...) it does seem that Tesla has improved battery energy density by 20%. This is likely what they're putting in the new Roadster batteries though.

mhgross | January 23, 2015

@ian t.wa.us - Thanks. So is the take-away that an 85kWh MX battery with a 20% energy density increase will weigh ~200 to 300 lbs. less and simply be an offset for the inefficiencies caused by the increase in wind resistance and the weight of a second drive motor in the MX?

ian t.wa.us | January 23, 2015

That seems to be the consensus. Some of us are really hoping for them to stuff in some extra batteries too though! ;-)

georgehawley.fl.us | January 23, 2015

The "big" battery pack will be 85 kWh. Even if it weighs 150 to 200 pounds less, it will only increase the range by a few miles. Better to have same weight with 20% more energy storage capacity--maybe 40-50 more miles but not likely to happen any time "soon".

Svenssons | January 24, 2015

But a Model X with the exact same battery as a Model S will not have the same weight as a Model S. Therefore it's not as simple as more energy capacity will give longer range. Think if you had a car with 850 kWh battery with the same battery technology as in Model S. Would this car have 10 times longer range? No, because the car would weight about 7 000 kg and would have hard times going 0-100 km/h, would take much longer time to break to 0 and would not be classed as a normal car in most countries.

From both range, security, maintenance and regulations viewpoint, it's important to not have a too heavy car. In Sweden you would not be allowed to have a heavier trailer than around 750 kg total weight (trailer+goods) towed by a 7-seated Model X with the same weight as a Model S. Only a trailer with total weight of 600 kg would be allowed if Models X is 150 kg heavier.

Red Sage ca us | January 24, 2015

Early in 2014, the Model X was shown on its page here without mirrors. Then, suddenly, all the photos were changed to show it with mirrors just like those on the Model S. Within a few weeks, all the photos with mirrors were replaced, so that only exterior rearview cameras were displayed online. That may have been around the same time there was an announcement that several manufacturers, including Tesla, were lobbying the US Department of Transportation to allow exterior cameras instead of mirrors. I believe Tesla Motors really wants that to happen.

NumberOne | January 24, 2015

My opinion of the battery issue is that they are maxing it out at 85kWh not only because they (Tesla) feel that 85kWh reaches peak efficiency, but also because batteries are in short supply, and if they start producing larger packs now, it will have the effect of reducing the number of cars they are able to manufacture. I am sure many people think the range should be even higher, but I rarely drive more than 250 miles at a stretch. I drive no more 40 miles per day on average, although my daily driving will likely double once I have my Model X.

If Tesla starts to put 20% more cells into each car, their total production will decrease by 20%. I think availability of cells also held back the release of Model X. Of course there were other things too. Just a thought.

Brian H | January 24, 2015

"would weigh about" is the correct usage.
Common Euro-English error.

Remnant | February 7, 2015

@ vandacca (January 23, 2015)

<< I too am hoping for a miracle and a mirror-less Model-X, .... >>

If they are not in the mirrors (but, say, under the fender logo insets), the side rearview cameras might be in place already.

If so, once mirrorless cars are allowed, you just remove the mirrors.

georgehawley.fl.us | February 7, 2015

Let me try to explain again: a battery pack that weighs the same but has 20% greater storage capacity will enable whatever platform to go 20% further. A battery pack that has 20% greater storage capacity but weighs 20% more will increase the weight of the car by less than 5% and will enable the car to go further but maybe only 15-17% depending on speed. If you drive south in Sweden with a heavier car in the winter you have to be careful not to slide down into Denmark, if the car is heavier.:-))