Is the range the only difference or is there a speed difference as well? Do you think its worth it?
At the moment, Tesla only confirms the range increase with no mention of any performance improvement. I did opt for the 75 upgrade (75D) and am hoping that when all the dust settles the 0-60 time will be sub-5.0 (4.8 seems about right) vs 5.2 for the 70. Perhaps wishful thinking, but if something like this does come to fruition, I believe there will be many more MS owners who opt for the 75.
@michael.platt but do you think its faster?
I haven't taken delivery yet so no way to know for sure however past range increases have usually been accompanied by modest performance increases as well so I'm hopeful.
The 75D will not have better acceleration than the 70D. It is not enough of an improvement in capacity that would allow for an improvement in acceleration (similar to the bump from the 85D to 90D).
If you toggle back and forth, and do some estimated calculations, it seems that the price and range will be somewhat the same either way. The 'major' differences will be just a bit more room in the frunk with a 75 non-D, and slightly better cold and sloppy weather (ice/snow) traction with a 70D
I saw a refreshed Model S at the UTC San Diego Tesla Store. It had a noticeably smaller frunk than my December 2015 70D. I was told that all the new Model S's would have the same size frunk because of the volume required by the biofilter, whether or not they were D models or actually had the biofilter. Not sure the Tesla Rep knew what he was talking about, since there were some other minor things he had wrong. But...
If in doubt, I would recommend ordering the D version. You'll never be able to add AWD. Later, it appears that you can add the extra 5KWh capacity over the air if you need the extra range.
Does this mean that as an owner of a 70D October 2015 version I can get the upgrade on my existing car? That would mean that the upgrade is strictly software and that the existing 70D battery is already capable of the upgrade and just needs the software trigger... If true, here's my 3K, Tesla.
I believe that is for the new 70 cars that are rolling out now and that does not apply to 2015 70kw cars that were produced but I could be wrong.
No, only the facelift 70's can be turned to 75's via a software update.
@TesMD and PaceyWhitter: Makes sense. Same as Autopilot upgrade on my 70D... Thanks
Pacey is correct. I confirmed with my DS, my April 2016 70D is not upgradeable, only facelifted ones are. He also said as far as he knows there is no performance increase, only range increase.
Oddly, the cost of batteries to Tesla customers seems to be going in the wrong direction.
From the wayback machine of 2013, the cost of added range from 60 to 85 was $10,000 for 57 miles or $400/kWh.
0-60 shaved was .5 seconds.
Current upgrade is 5kWh for $3,000 or $600/kWh.
SamO I agree. To let out that cost per kw is $190 then have a 315% markup. Too much for what is offered but I guess if you can afford the S in the first place 3000 is just a dip in the wives purse. ;)
I understand a lot of the hype and excitement around Tesla and the Model S, but I don't get this at all. First, like any technology, I'd expect the cost of battery technology to go down over time. With costs going down for the tech (but not everything else surrounding it), I would think that Tesla cars would improve in range and technology for about the same cost. A $3,000 upcharge for a very incremental improvement in range doesn't compute for me. It's obvious how they came up with the price; the difference between the base 70D and 90D is $13,000 or $650/kWh. $650 times 5 kWh is $3,250 (the price to enable after the fact). Whereas I can see how a 54 mile increase in range can be justified, I just can't imagine how many people the 15 mile increment between the 70D and 75D would make a difference, especially for $3,000. I think Tesla should have just given this at a minimal charge.
The other thing I don't understand is why some are making a big deal out of the possible increase in acceleration. The 70D does 0-60 in 5.2 seconds, faster than most cars on the market. Does .5 second less really make a difference?
I have not received my 70D yet, scheduled to arrive around May 23. It is the new face-lifted model. It seems a little pricey for $3,000 for less than 20 miles of additional range. Frankly, I feel a little deceived that the upgrade wasn't included for a smaller price with the company knowing the 75KWh was already built in to the product.
An email I got from Tesla because I have a 70D on order. "This week we introduced a 75kWh battery for Model S which provides almost 20 additional miles of range with the Dual Motor option (as compared to the 70kWh battery)."
So there are a lot of discrepancies on range, as the design studio says 15 miles, every article says 19 miles, and the Tesla email says almost 20 miles. I am going to go with 19 miles. $3,000/19 miles = $158/mile. To upgrade to the 90D the difference in MSRP is $13,000 (Tesla says 239 range for 70D and 294 range for 90D). So $13,000/55 miles = $236.
Not sure what the problem is with the upgrade cost. Comparing to the 90D shouldn't be all about range, there are some performance benefits, but all the cars are plenty fast enough in the real world.
Sorry, just hit me that the 15 mile number is for the 70, whereas the 70D benefits a bit more.
Arguing about 19/20 miles additional range on a 70D seems to be 'number of angels on the head of a pin' type of logic. There are very few situations where the extra 19/20 miles is going to make any notable difference in anyone's long-distance driving. If this is about your local driving, perhaps you should be considering the 85.
I drove a 60 around the U.S. in 2014 and had only a couple of situations where I really wished for an 85. Things are much better today and I could in no way justify spending for more than a 70D - based on range.
It would seem the new 70/70D owner today has an advantage over a 75/75D owner. They could charge their software-limited battery regularly to 90%, instead of 80%. This - IMO - more than offsets any range advantage of the 75 and saves you money in the bargain.
What am I missing here - except for the acceleration of the 85/90?
The upgrade from 60 to 85 was $7000, depending on your point of view. At least that's how Tesla presented it in the showroom. "If you think you are going to need supercharging, it's included with the 85, so you'd pay only $7000 more for the bigger battery." Based on that, I'd expect the upgrade from a 70 to a 75 to be closer to $1500.
Tesla might end up changing it. I can't see many people deciding it's worth that much for a small increase, especially considering that one of the reasons to go with a 70 is that it costs less.
@Vistan So, do you think my rwd 70 without bio filter will have a tiny frunk. That was basically the reason I chose rwd...
The RWD will save you $5k, but it won't give you a bigger frunk. It is now the same size as the AWD version with the refresh.
regardless of whether you elect the HEPA filter or not.
Is the huge HEPA filter area simply "dead space" if you don't get the premium package? Seems like a waste.
It must be dead space. I assume they just wanted to streamline the manufacturing process and take that variable out of play. Maybe there will be the option to add the filter at a later date if you choose not to at time of manufacturing.
Tesla has confirmed the uniform trunk size. It's no longer a reason to skip AWD. If you still want AWD, and your car hasn't entered production yet, call Tesla and see if it can be changed.