P100D Coming Soon

P100D Coming Soon

There's a report that the firmware has references to a P100D model, including an image. It could just be that the software guys were told that was the next model, so they went ahead and put in the codes for it. My guess is that it will be announced at the March 31st event.

carlk | March 5, 2016

It's pretty muched debunked at TMC as a baseless speculation.

EVdoublepro | March 5, 2016

where in that thread was the debunking?

there is another thread there were apparently the person's firmware was downgraded.

Of course it may be that the alleged P100D may just be a placeholder name and not available for a year, so "coming soon" may not be true.

TaoJones | March 5, 2016

We're about due for a pack update announcement with shipping expected by Q4. I could see such an announcement (100 kWh) coming at the 3/31 event just to sweeten the pot for the existing product line. Smart move.

carlk | March 5, 2016

Not only a place holder means nothing but it's also illogical for Tesla to release and ship a few X Model 90D and then release the 100D soon after. It will do nothing but to piss off everyone who bought the X.

EVdoublepro | March 5, 2016

Upgrades and changes are a fact of life. There will always be someone who ordered the previous version right before the one comes out. Same thing happened with Autopilot.

People who paid for the X90D, will get what they paid for.
Some people who wait will get other options.

Tesla can't sit around and not advance the industry because they sold some of the older models already.

EternalChampion | March 5, 2016

Look at the new 19" wheels shipping standard on the S. I paid 2500 extra for the Cyclones, as have some that just received their vehicles. The continual upgrade process at Tesla is a good thing.

Buy the car you need when it's available. Don't look back. Ask Orpheus how it works out.

TaoJones | March 5, 2016

Might also want to take the TMC talking ^H^H^H typing heads with a grain of salt.

After all, some of those same geniuses asserted that we would never have back-up lines in the rear camera view with the current hardware. Yep.

Announcing a 100kWh pack as an option six months hence, and at a premium, no less, will not upset the current apple cart. It also helps bolster the base; one of the bigger concerns going forward will be to mitigate a demand warp (slowing demand) for the Model S as the Model 3 nears. We who are familiar with the Model S may not see all that much of a conflict - but as it stands today, the majority of car buying folk still don't know a Tesla from a turnip.

While I would much rather a used Model S than a brand new Model 3 (each in the $40K net range in early 2018), a whooooole bunch of people will want those shiny Model 3s. A 120kWh pack option for a new Model S at that time would be pretty darned compelling if one wanted to juxtapose leasing a new Model S versus buying a used Model S versus buying a new Model 3 with less range and fewer goodies.

Haggy | March 5, 2016

Tesla would have a very good reason to put out a 100 ASAP if they can do it. It won't hurt existing customers who can go as far as before. What it would do is offer a range of 320. It's about how many miles I was able to go on a tank of gas with my last car before I needed to fill it up. That's not with the needle below empty and doesn't represent the theoretical MPG times the tank's capacity in gallons. But reading that an EV will go just as far on a charge as my ICE went on a tank of gas is a much better starting point.

It would also mean that I'd be able to take a 500 mile trip easily with a single stop for lunch and not have to worry about needing a second stop. It would mean that a single stop would be enough to get me to my destination on such a trip with an adequate reserve and no need to find a place to charge immediately upon arrival.

But it will also come at a cost. Tesla is putting in more and more superchargers, and the more there are that are spaced properly for a trip, the fewer stops I'll need to make. It's at the point that I might be able to make the longest trip I've taken so far with a single stop, while before the chargers weren't spaced in a way that made that possible. So I don't see existing owners being stuck with obsolete tech. Even if I tried the trip and didn't make it on one charge, I'd also be passing three more chargers on the route, so I wouldn't be stuck and might need another 10-15 minute charge. If I have to do that a couple of times a year at most, it might add up to five hours over the next decade. I have to ask myself what five hours of time is worth and whether it would warrant a $10K upgrade. Each owner would have to answer that on his/her own.

SamO | March 5, 2016

Elon confirmed "white hat" exploit reveal.

AoneOne | March 5, 2016

Given the relatively few deliveries to date of the Model X, it would be great for Tesla to start shipping the 100, first in the Model X (which needs it most) and eventually in the Model S. Bigger batteries are certainly coming and, predictably, when that happens, there will be lots of griping from new owners who "missed out".

There's no question it will happen "soon". Maybe it will happen soon. | March 5, 2016

My guess is that a 105'kwh pack is coming, not with new technology but with slightly bigger cells built in NV. The capacity could be as great as 108 kWh using the existing box and plumbing but 105 is a nice conservative number. Think 20700 cells instead of 18650. Probably in early 2016. Adds about 150 pounds or so to the pack (3% overall weight increase) but that will result in an increase in rated range of 15-17%. At the same time the cost to build the pack will be about 1/3 less than that of the 90 kWh pack.

negarholger | March 5, 2016

Just some guy trying to be a smart a$$...

"I discovered your secret"... as if Tesla working on a larger battery would be a secret. The only secret is when will it be available for purchase. My money is ready waiting for the day... | March 6, 2016

When is not a secret.

"Soon" as we all know.

Chunky Jr. | March 6, 2016

In 5 years everyone on this forum will be talking about how the 100 kWh is not enough range and if only they would have a 120 kWh, then it would be ideal.

In 10 years everyone on this forum will be talking about how the 120 kWh is not enough range and if only they would have a 140 kWh, then it would be ideal.

In 15 years everyone on this forum will be talking about how the 140 kWh is not enough range and if only they would have a 160 kWh, then it would be ideal.

and so on...

lar_lef | March 6, 2016

300 mile range would be the great tipper.

negarholger | March 6, 2016

160 kWh times 70% remaining = 110 kWh.... that is desirable as battery degradation becomes virtually meaningless.

200 mile real world range with home charging works like a charm

Without home charging 300-350 miles is much better ( that is what most refill station dependent gas cars have )

Bigger battery = bigger market

krissu | March 6, 2016

60 vs 85 was 8000 premium for 25 kW, with supercharging enabled, now 70 vs 90 is 13000 for 20 kW. So the 70 is the deal to grab.

carlk | March 6, 2016

There might be truly a 100D or there might not be one. A new battery might come tomorrow or might come next year, or even later. We already knew for suer there will be a higher capacity battery in the future. That guy got his 3 minutes of fame but changed nothing. Nothing to see here.

Mark K | March 6, 2016

Just like death and taxes, you can count on tech inevitably advancing. If it doesn't, something is wrong.

What we don't know is when.

What the hacker did was to try to stir up attention on the indistinct future with the specific intent of making it harder for Tesla to manage their business.

In effect, an inverted form of FUD.

How is that helpful?

I am quite certain that at some point we'll see vtol jets from the same gang, in effect, flying cars. So do you not want to benefit from the currently available advances for the next several years because this will eventually come in the indistinct future?

By the time we're dead, I'm sure the latest models will be awesome. How exactly will we enjoy those?

Haggy | March 6, 2016

I don't really think this will go on forever. Once we got to a 125, we'd be close to the limit of how much driving most people would want to do on a single trip without stopping for the night. The discussion would be good for those who drive for a living or businesses that use cars in shifts, but charging infrastructure would be more widespread. Some people would still argue that they'd like to be able to eliminate the 15 minute stop if the drove from San Francisco to Los Angeles, but most people would still want to stop for at least a snack. When you get to 150 it will be like SD cards for video cameras. The question of how much you need to make sure you won't run out of capacity for the day is no longer there.

JAD | March 6, 2016

But if the new 125 kw battery weighs 10% less than the old 125 kw battery, that would also be huge. Better range, better acceleration, better handling, better everything. There is no end to this game...

JAD | March 6, 2016

But if the new 125 kw battery weighs 10% less than the old 125 kw battery, that would also be huge. Better range, better acceleration, better handling, better everything. There is no end to this game...

SamO | March 6, 2016

@Mark K,

"What the hacker did was to try to stir up attention on the indistinct future with the specific intent of making it harder for Tesla to manage their business."

Um not really. Here are the facts:

The P85D "owner" found something in his car's code showing a P100D was coming. He sent a hashed message to Tesla which was subsequently broken.

He then refrained from releasing additional information found inside the code. Go read the thread on TMC.

carlk | March 6, 2016


Althogh replacement battery pack has to maintain the original weight because it will change driving dynamics and safety certification.

222 | March 6, 2016

Someone who thinks outside the box suggested that the Plaid version would be when they release the 141Kw battery version.


interesting thought.....

inconel | March 6, 2016

And a good reason for not having the 100 kw battery is P100D = PLOOD could be pronounced as "Pollute".
Maybe Tesla should wait for the 105 or 110 kw :-) | March 6, 2016

If they can reduce the weight of the car by 1,000 pounds (tall orde), one wouldn't need more than 135 kWh of available energy. This would enable >300 miles between charges with about 30 minutes or so of charging time. Driving at 75 mph would rival road trip performance of gas cars. It will help to boost the Supercharger maximum power to 150 kW for faster charging.

ram1901 | March 6, 2016

@wk?? over at TMC has sorta recanted his original post about supposedly having a Tesla update rolled back on his car and his car only after publicly reporting that when he hacked the code in that update he found info that lead him to believe a 100 Kw battery was coming.

I say recanted, because in a later post he appears to be trying to ask for forgiveness from Tesla after making the allegations against them. He claims to be one of their top five bug finders. But his disclosure of 'new information' went beyond him privately reporting bugs to Tesla and for that he believes Tesla punished him by rolling back his update to an earlier version.

Is anyone on a version higher than v2.12.126? That's the last one pushed my car. The white hat hacker claimed to have had a higher version removed by Tesla after his disclosure of the 'proprietary' information.

SamO | March 6, 2016

I love your version of WK "sorta recanting".


Bighorn | March 6, 2016

I skimmed 26 pages worth of posts at TMC regarding purported retribution by TSLA and I didn't perceive any recanting of the facts by wk. Cooler heads prevailed with the passage of time, but the fact remains that the P100D data was embedded in recent firmware. He acknowledged short-sightedness in not salting the encrypted code, but he didn't shout the secret from any mountaintops and the message was only revealed by hackers would could decode his tweet.

TaoJones | March 6, 2016

This was a tough love win for Tesla. Their first suboptimal oops was letting something into the wild prematurely, and they then doubled down by getting caught trying to take it back on the down low.

The other win here was wholly earned and well-deserved by wk. Tesla might just make him an offer yet. And wk would be perfectly justified in working on Project Titan instead. Although in a perfect world, everyone sings kumbayah and comes together in perfect 3-part harmony.

The only losers here are the usual crowd of TMC apologists who actually attempted to justify Tesla's behavior due to hurt feelings. The sad part is that at some level, that sycophantic asskissing must provide some benefit. Tres lame.

Red Sage ca us | March 6, 2016

Wouldn't it be fun if the base Model ≡ has a 100 kWh battery pack for $35,000...?

And then a 70 kWh version were released 18 months or so after it, for only $25,000...?


krissu | March 7, 2016

Then I already go with 40 KW for 15000!

thranx | March 7, 2016

So...20kw for $5000, and 10kw for free?

This is why I got out of advanced math early.

Haggy | March 7, 2016

Tesla has a lot more to gain by telling people that the entry level Model 3 will have a range of 200 miles and then offering larger batteries than the other way around. If Tesla had plans to sell the Model 3 with a 100 kWh battery, they wouldn't claim a range of 200 miles unless they said it would start at $25K.

bt456 | March 7, 2016

The new sensor suite for AP that Musk has already confirmed, and probably won't happen until late 2016, is way more important than an extra 10kw for the battery.

flight505 | March 8, 2016

I wonder if upgrading from a P85D with Ludicrous to a P100D with Ludicrous would jump the horsepower and torque again?

Mark K | March 9, 2016

Samo - advertising it as "I know your secret", on Twitter, with weak hashing that he knows high school kids can crack with a free online app.

How does this suggest any trace of good faith intent to somehow benefit tesla as a supposed white hat?

Anyone who manages product road maps knows how much hassle it is to navigate transitions.

Ask George Lucas or in Abrahms what travails they went through to manage the release of many years of work.

Every innovator makes plans long before they are ready to hatch, and relies on discretion until they're able to actually deliver.

Every company that innovates would blow up if their private roadmap were routinely compromised, and mixed with a generous dose of disinformation.

We have a great car because these guys work hard. This kind of stuff simply makes it harder for them.

I wouldn't cheer on someone who seems to want to hurt them.

Mark K | March 9, 2016

Bighorn - Twitter reaches far more people than any shouts from any mountain on earth.

Which is why it's Elon's channel of choice. He knows it's the most effective medium today.

Intent is intent, and it's unmistakable here.

The guy can't do what Tesla does, so his frustrated ambition expresses as trying screw up their work.

He's simply a punk, without conscience, and doesn't deserve any encouragement from us.

SamO | March 9, 2016

Well everyone is entitled to their opinion but not your own facts.

You ascribe motive and avoid that Tesla left this information inside the car available for anyone to find. I'm waiting for your denunciation of Tesla for being so reckless.

As far as encouragement . . .who elected you the thought police?



mark | March 9, 2016

Steady on fellow Tesla drivers.

It's alright going for the extra battery packs, but don't we have to consider the weight, suspension changes etc. Air Suspension might get away with it! Coils could be a different matter. Would be interesting to find out from a Tesla engineer specializing in that field. Could be new coils and shockers all round if you going for the big one 60 ---> 100Kw/h! Might not be allowed.

UnshodBob | March 9, 2016

@mark - I thought of the possible weight difference, too. Ideal situation would be for (40)/60/70/??? batteries to weigh the same as each other, and 85/90/100/??? batteries to also weigh the same as each other, but heavier than the smaller batteries, as I believe is the case in current cars. (The ??? kWh values are placeholders for the next generation.)

@flight505 - I think the larger battery would mainly just give more range, along with possibly quicker supercharging from a low mile SOC to a higher SOC, even around, say, 250 miles of range, which is near 90-100% SOC for the current large batteries.

OneDrive | March 9, 2016

Is time for a conversation about what we know and don't know about P100D Quintuple Speed......

UnshodBob | March 9, 2016

@BaggerTreeElite - did you notice the error in the article?

"You can tell a car that has Ludicrous Mode enabled because the underscore bar beneath the model designation on the rear will be red instead of chrome."

There are no red underscore bars. No underscore bar means no ludicrous and chrome underscore bar means ludicrous.

damonmath | March 9, 2016

If the P90DL put out a 0-60 2.6-2.8. What's that P100DL going to do?

Tropopause | March 9, 2016

A bigger lithium battery is capable of more output at a given "C" rating, ie- a 100 kWh battery has 17% more output ability at 1C vs. an 85 kWh. The supporting contacts, cabling, cooling, invertor etc must also be capable of this increased current. Assuming the later is true, then a P85D/P90D with Ludicrous would have more hp with a 100 kWh battery.

100 kWh Battery:

1C = 100 kW for 1 hour
2C = 200 kW for 30 minutes
3C = 300 kW for 15 minutes

Tropopause | March 9, 2016

"15 minutes" should read "20 minutes"

Haggy | March 9, 2016

The new sensor suite for AP that Musk has already confirmed, and probably won't happen until late 2016, is way more important than an extra 10kw for the battery.

I somehow doubt that Tesla would tell the people on the battery team to go work on the AP team for a while since the priority is higher. There's no critical path here with respect to future upgrades for existing vehicles. But concurrent development in both is important for future vehicles, and future upgrades.