Hey guys,

Got an email from TESLA.

looks like the 160mile will be 49500$ USD after tax rebate.

The 230mile will be 10,000$ more and 300mile will be 20,000$ more.

Now this is going to be the shocker...... THE 300mile versions will be delivered first! The opposite of
what everyone thought. Followed by the 230mile and finally the 160mile by late 2012. Deliveries start mid-2012.

All the information above can change without notice.. but expect the prices to be very close... I just hope the Canadian pricing is about the same considering our dollar is almost on par. (was last week)

What i want to know is, since the 300mile variant cannot be quickly charged.... does it really have any advantages aside from long distance trips? since leaving the TESLA on charge everyday with a 160mile variant would keep it topped up at all times.. compared to a 300mile variant that might need a full day or longer to charge it full (without any fancy 480v)

Volker.Berlin | 7 mars 2011

Leaving the Tesla on charge everyday with a 300 mile variant would keep it topped up at all times, just as with the 160 mile variant. It's only when you drove the 300 mile battery to depletion, that it takes longer to reload -- which is still a lot better than not being able to drive such a distance without recharging in the first place.

dasky4eva | 7 mars 2011

I read the speculation on these forums that the 230 mile version would be $5,000 more than the 160, so I was disappointed that the increase would be double that. Considering options, taxes and other charges, I'm beginning to feel like this car is out of my range, even with gas nearing the $4 mark in my area. :(

Mike_ModelS_P457 | 7 mars 2011

Was anyone else surprised by the order of shipments. I expected the signatures would come first, but why the 300 then 260 then 160s? Isn't the battery swapable? Why would that impact the production schedule?

BYT | 7 mars 2011

Did you European drivers see this post?

"Oh, and should you live in a market that requires a right-hand drive model you have about a two year wait ahead of you. That's what you get for driving on the wrong side of the road."

t7n7 | 7 mars 2011

true if you don't drive it as much but, lets say I make a nice round trip from my work (downtown Toronto) to where I live now (Markham)... a good 160KM roundtrip.... then head to Weston/HIghway (lets say another 100km roundtrip) to hang out with my bimmer club... that's 260KM for the day. If I left it charging overnight, then next day, I wouldn't be able to do the same thing unless I had the 480v installed which would cost more than gas. (plz correct me if i'm wrong) .

Though my example maybe a bit extreme on estimation... eventually, my 483KM (300mile) will come to a point where I will have to drive it like a 240mile variant .... eventually driving it like the 160mile version..... until doing a full recharge which might take a day or 2...

t7n7 | 7 mars 2011

what i'm trying to say is, unless we can charge the 300mile version just as fast and efficiently as the 160mile, it ends up being a huge disadvantage. I read somewhere that, it would take almost 30hours for a battery pack to be recharged via 120v.. not sure which one (i think the 240mile variant) . and would take 18 hours on 240v or something like that.

i dunno, for those that only have 1 car, 18 hours might be too long.. and you can't get 480v everywhere. Sure, you might be able to install it at home.. how about when your on the road at charging station? .. will those be 480v fast charge stations or your standard 120/240?

Something to really think about :)

p.s: going back to the battery/weight, i favor performance so i'll be sticking with 160mile unless the 240 can offer that!

jkirkebo | 7 mars 2011

Why would you need anything more than 240V for overnight charging ?
Lets say the 300-mile pack is 90kWh. You drain it completely and need to recharge completely in one night (8 hours). That is 11.25kW, divided by 240V equals 47 amps. If you can only spare 30 amps a full recharge will take 12.5 hours but it is unlikely that you drain it completely. 72kWh would take 10 hours on a 30A EVSE.

With the 70A HPC a full recharge is only ~6 hours.

BTW, forget 120V, that WILL take forever, or at least about 2 days.

And if they support 63A 400V three-phase, europeans will be able to fully charge in two hours without access to DC Quick Chargers.

Mehdi | 7 mars 2011

I'm confused, how can you assign production numbers and then say delivery is based on the battery pack size?? That just doesn't make sense.
Tesla is usually good at making sense and I'm sorry to say this one just doesn't.

ckessel | 7 mars 2011

@Mehdi. In exactly how many threads do you intend to post the exact same rant?

Douglas3 | 7 mars 2011


Why would a larger pack be a disadvantage?

In reality, on a normal day's driving you don't come anywhere near the full pack capacity. My Roadster has rarely been below half full. It's often 3/4 full at the end of the day.

Ignoring for the moment how easy it is to get a 240V NEMA 14-50 installed in your garage, suppose you do charge at 120V and it takes a couple of days to fill it. So what? For normal driving, you just top it up each night. Even if the pack were empty, you'd be able to put more than enough electrons in the pack to drive it the next day. Over a few days regular usage it would get topped up fully.

As for long trips, you're going to need some higher power charging at the other end, so you can get home. That's a charging infrastructure issue. But the thing about charging infrastructure... there's electricity everywhere. That problem will resolve itself in due course.

Ron5 | 7 mars 2011

I'm very confused. So, if I don't want a 300 pack I lose several hundred (or thousand) spots in line?

I'm also unclear if the 230 option will be available after Signature or not? The dealer today told me that 300 and 230 would both be available mid-year. But that's not how I read the newsletter?

Timo | 7 mars 2011

I'm guessing that they don't have assembly line ready for lower kWh batteries yet. That is why 300 mile versions first, Signature is 300 mile version, so they just keep same line running for other 300 mile versions.

When they have lower kWh battery assembly lines ready they start producing those.

Remember, this is not some garage conversion we are talking about, they make these in mass-production. What that factory can or cannot do can have impact on deliveries.

msiano17 | 7 mars 2011

I think everyone needs to just relax a bit about this whole deal. Think about it everyone who has a reservation number is willing to wait a year or so already for their S. So if you have to wait 12 months will 13 months kill you?

Honestly guys, it is how business works, especially starting business where their life is on the line. (IF you haven't noticed Tesla's credibility as a company is on the line with the Model S and how it can compete with the cars makers of the world)

I am a bit shocked it will be a $10k upgrade to the 230, which is the one I want, but I have the feeling it may drop. Looking at MB or BMW its only a $6k or so upgrade from each model in the 5-series.

SO everyone relax a bit you are still looking at getting an amazing vehicle... now if they also nickle and dime us on the options then ya we can be pissed.

Ramon123 | 9 mars 2011

I seriously doubt that the various battery pack options will
have any effect on the production line. All packs are contained within the same envelope and are temperature controlled using the same apparatus. Remember, they said they can swap out a pack in short order. As to exactly why Tesla choose this method of starting their manufacturing line, you'd have to ask them. Part of the reason I think is that so many prospective buyers were eager for the 300 mile battery pack, that Tesla figured it would be better to start with those. Also, the automags will want some to
test, and I'm sure Tesla would like to show off their most competitive model for their reviews. As to pricing, I was led to believe that their battery costs would have resulted in a premium
of less than $10K for the 300 mile variant. However, when you stop to think about it, that price wouldn't make much sense, considering that the extra batteries would be almost 50% bigger
than those of the Leaf, and you know the Leaf batteries can't possibly cost around the $7K or so that such a cost structure would indicate.

Brian H | 9 mars 2011

Here's another consideration: Doing the 300s first, then 230s, then 160s minimizes the wait time for the next in line. The 300 run will be the shortest, then the 230, etc. Doing the 160s first would make for a very long wait for the others.

dashrb | 9 mars 2011

Some people talk about the extra weight of the 230 or 300 mile battery. Do you also fill your gas tank only a couple of gallons at a time? How does the weight of 15 or 20 gallons of gas compare to the weight of an extra 70 miles worth of batteries? (I'm trying to understand whether the weight delta will be significant in the S, compared to the last generation technology (ICE) cars).

I'm just not sure whether it makes sense for me to buy the bigger battery (most trips are short), and whether the "extra weight" really matters.

Timo | 9 mars 2011

IIRC Tesla batteries use around 185Wh/kg energy density which means for 20 or so kWh about 108kg. 20 gallons of gas weights approx 56kg.

260 and 300 mile battery packs weight almost exactly same (same amount of cells, different chemistry AFAIK).

Effect would be rather small.