Confirmed: Tesla Model X Powertrain Indentical To Model S 85D

2 years ago by Eric Loveday 79

Tesla Confirms Several Model X Features Via Email To Reservation Holder

Tesla Confirms Several Model X Features Via Email To Reservation Holder

Tesla Model S 85D Specs

Tesla Model S 85D Specs

Details are trickling out on the Tesla Model X.

This email to reservation holders confirms that the base Model X will feature the same powertrain found in the Tesla Model S 85D and that the Model X will be tow-capable.

We already knew that the Model X would be all-wheel-drive only, but we didn’t know for sure if Tesla would directly carry over the newly-announced Model S dual-motor setup into the Model X.Β  Now we know, which allows us to speculate the specs for the base Model X:

  • 376 hp motor power
  • 188 hp front and rear
  • 8 year, infinite mile battery and drive unit warranty
  • Supercharging included

We suspect that the base Model X will be slightly less quick off the line than the Model S 85D, so figure a 5.5 second time for the Tesla Model X 85D in the 0 to 60 MPH dash.Β  Additionally, the Model X’s range will be a bit less than the S 85D (listed by Tesla at 295 miles at 65 MPH), so we’ll peg that figure at 275 miles at 65 MPH or perhaps in the ballpark of 250 miles when rated by the EPA.

We further suspect that the 85D will be the base Model X, which leaves room for either the P85D or, more likely, the 110D and P110D (110 is just a guess, maybe it’ll be 105 or 120?).

Something else was confirmed in the email sent to reservation holders: tow capability.

Tesla Model S Fitted With EcoHitch

Tesla Model S Fitted With EcoHitch

However, if you read closely, you’ll notice that Tesla states this in such a way that we assume a minimal rating with a focus more on being able to transport loads that would typically be carried rooftop (the Model X’s falcon doors prevent carrying cargo up top):

“We can also reveal that Model X will be the first electric vehicle with towing capability. The optional tow hitch will support accessories and racks to transport skis and bikes with the minimum effect on aerodynamics.”

We’ll take a stab at tow rating: 2,500 pounds or less.

As details continue to trickle out, the Model X is taking shape.Β  Do these announcements/confirmations make you more/less inclined to consider the Model X?

Hat tip to Mazen Kara!!!

Tags: , , ,

79 responses to "Confirmed: Tesla Model X Powertrain Indentical To Model S 85D"

  1. Andrew S says:

    Honestly, I appreciate the effort with the falcon wing doors… but I think the Model X would be so much sexier with normal doors.

    1. Benz says:

      I disagree.

    2. Mike says:

      I agree, I don’t know how that’s going to fly on the east coast with actual rain and snow.

      1. Mike says:

        And cup holders, how’s that going to work.
        I love Tesla.
        But, this really should be an option.

        1. kdawg says:

          That would be expensive for the automaker to make it an option. They are already trying to whittle down all the options.

        2. Mikael says:

          Easy…cup holders goes between the front seat and for the front seat only.

          There is never a valid reason for cup holders in the back seat of any car ever.

          1. Foo says:

            What? Why? People in the back seat don’t have drinks?

            1. Mikael says:

              People in the back seat should not have drinks. And if they need to be hydrated then there are waterbottles with screw caps.

              Kids don’t need nor should have sodas or coffee and if you’re driving around with a lot of adults then you are probably driving a short distance or if you’re on a longer trip a coffee break and stretching the legs outside the car is perfect.

              I’d pay extra for a car without rear seat cupholders (and a total max. of 2 cup holders in the car). And in my opinion there must be a correlation between a lot of cupholders and less…hmm…let’s say enlightenment in lack of a better word. πŸ™‚

              But that’s just my take on it.

              1. Blueberry Blipblop says:

                You seem less enlightened right now.

          2. QCO says:

            You mean so the kids have nothing to spill on the seats? Hmmmm…. That actually might a good idea in practice!

      2. vdiv says:

        How do any cars with sun roofs? Gutters and drain lines. In the case of the Model X the gutters can just drain on the side.

        Besides a little bit of snow falling in and getting the rear seats wet will not be the end of the world πŸ˜‰

        1. Aas says:

          You wipe the snow off the roof before driving any car do you? It just add up weight and screws aerodynamics.
          I don’t know how it’s in US, but in my country you get a ticket when driving with snow on roof.

    3. Priusmaniac says:

      Well that is sure a big question mark. In a sense the doors make it further unique, but since it already is it is true that normal doors could have been good as well, although falcon doors as an option would still have been cool. Now it kind of would be the other way around, for some it would be cool to have the option of standard doors. In a sense that could be in the future since it actually would be possible to retrofit normal doors. But then again if you double the number of versions production and maintenance gets more complicate. Perhaps there could be a market for an external company.

      1. kdawg says:

        Maybe that company that is converting Model S’s to coupe convertibles will also do something for the Model X.

    4. Whatever says:

      I disagree. The falcon wings make it stand out, if they were removed it would just look like a slightly shortened model S.

    5. pjwood says:

      I’m beginning to wonder if the fail-safes to opening when iced, are really that hard to design. Cabriolets can’t be more mechanically complex. Then again, cabs don’t do ski country. Ultimately, Musk is pushing upon winter owners (and tight garages) some limits and labor workarounds, else things break.

      I can see them taking a brash position, at roll-out, expecting owners to absorb some prescribed inconvenience. IMO, this its flat screen fever all over again. It was so cool to learn how to do everything I once did blind, in a new multi-step, not-tactile way (/sarc). Falcon wing doors will be awesome, just like that screen, to witness.

      1. Foo says:

        By flat screen, I assume you mean touch screen.

    6. EVer says:

      This just makes no sense

      sexier without the awesome doors? How?

      ROFL smh

    7. Spec9 says:

      I think the Falcon doors are sexier.

      But some normal doors would be a heck of a lot more practical for a lot of people . . . like people that want to use roof racks.

      I’d like to see them make both door types available.

      But I think Tesla flew a little too close to the sun with these Falcon-wings, if I may use an Icarus reference.

  2. Mark says:

    Would be nice to have a 60 as a less expensive option.

    1. Mike says:

      A 60 with options can still cost $90,000.

      But, at least we can see why the 60D has been dropped: The Model X needs those engines.

      1. Mike says:

        Also, don’t think my wife and son should be behind the wheel of a car with 0-60 in 5.0 seconds, for their own good.

        1. kdawg says:

          Is there a setting to adjust this? Seems like there are situations where you would want to limit the torque.

          1. Foo says:

            Well, Musk (on the Model S D variants) did say there would be three software settings: Normal, Sport, and Insane.

        2. Spec9 says:

          Yeah, they really need to have default settings that don’t have so much torque.

      2. pjwood says:

        Good point! Same motor, front and rear.

  3. kdawg says:

    I think they should just standardize on AWD for all their vehicles, including the Model 3.

    1. Mike says:

      The Southern US Stated don’t need it.

      1. kdawg says:

        But it’s more efficient, and quicker off the line, and it prevents Tesla from having to satisfy so many different versions.

        1. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

          It also provides superior handling under all conditions (thanks to vectoring diffs) and a bit of redundancy in case of a single motor failure.

          I also think that AWD will end up being a standard feature on S and X, and will get 50%+ uptake on the III if offered.

      2. TeslaMoscow says:

        RWD is lot’s more pleasure to drive in comparison with AWD. AWD is of course more effective especially in slippery conditions… but it’s not that fun to drive and also has different behaivior under diff circumstances (i.e. starts in RWD than its FWD and than it’s AWD in a drift – hard to catch).

        1. TomArt says:

          That may be true for ICE versions, but with a separate electric motor dedicated to the front wheels, it could be a whole different story – it may be better, even subjectively, than an AWD ICE.

    2. Sublime says:

      I have a feeling, to keep cost of the base down, the 3 will have only one of these 188hp motors.
      I think it’s in their best interest to eventually develop larger diameter, higher torque motor that can drive a single wheel directly. This would allow them to ditch the transmission/differential altogether.

      1. kdawg says:

        I like that idea and bring it up every once in awhile, but whenever I do, someone chimes in with “unsprung weight”. From what I read, the unsprung weight is not as much as it used to be and can be taken care of with proper suspension. This would also allow more trunk/passenger room, not that the Model S needs that, but the Model 3 may.

        1. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

          Quad inboard motors with short shafts are more likely, and also likely more reliable.

          1. Sublime says:

            Yes, definitely inboard. Hub motors just don’t make any sense for cars. From the motor’s perspective, you’re expecting it to manage over 1/4 of the weight of the car flailing around on the bearings with fractions of a mm wiggle room.

            1. kdawg says:

              Adding link shafts is just one more thing to go wrong IMO. I prefer the KISS method and just put them right in the wheel.

              The in-wheel motor assembly weights are on par with a standard wheel.

              Here’s a good vid/interview with ECOmove. 50HP per wheel.

              And there’s also Protean doing good things.

    3. Whatever says:

      There’s no need to do that for a “standard” car, it’s better to cut the cost of the extra motor.

      1. kdawg says:

        Apparently Subaru thinks otherwise as all their cars are AWD.

        (And I think they sell a few in the non-winter parts of the country)

        1. MDEV says:

          And AUDI

      2. QCO says:

        It’s pretty clear that the net benefits favor AWD in an electric drivetrain, unlike an ICE AWD which incurs energy sapping drivetrain losses.

        A four motor system would provide the most precise traction and skid control opportunities, but since wheel motors are not really there yet, choosing a two motor system provides most of the efficiency and control benefits without too much cost burden.

        I think Tesla is likely committed to the point that the Gen 3 will have AWD for the benefits and to help differentiate it from other lower end EVs.

    4. Spec9 says:

      I don’t think that is a good idea. They need a low cost base model that cuts out everything that is not absolutely needed. Leave the AWD for those willing to pay more for it.

      1. TomArt says:

        I would agree with that, except that its more efficient, and if all models were AWD, then the overall cost increase of vehicle production would be minimized.

  4. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

    I reckon the X could have tow ratings comparable to other unibody SUVs such as the Grand Cherokee, at least a Class III hitch. It’s not like it doesn’t have the torque or traction.

    1. Eric Loveday says:

      That would be 7,000 pounds then. As we know, the Tesla Model S enters reduced power mode often when pushed hard at a track. With the same powertrain, how would the Model X be able to overcome this issue? Worse possible scenario would be entering reduced power mode when hauling 7,000 pounds up a mountain pass.

      1. Mint says:

        You don’t need to be going 0-60 in 5s to get a tow rating. The biggest limiting factor is accelerating from a stop, which is why low power diesels get better tow ratings than high power gas engines.

        The Cherokee gets that rating from an engine with only 240hp output. I doubt that’ll cause overheating in dual motors.

        1. pjwood says:

          They might get the rating, but what 7k lbs, in tow, does to mpg’s would be a lot worse than what winter does to BEV range.

          Towing is a task best left for energy density. Consider the average tow trip, versus car trip. My guess is it is longer, as well.

          1. kdawg says:

            Maybe the trailer could have a bunch of batteries in it too? What about an E-assist trailer? It would be expensive, but imagine pulling 2 tons in something like a Chevy Spark. πŸ™‚

      2. Anon says:

        We we sure the cooling system’s not been revamped from the original Model S configuration, to accommodate dual motor AWD and towing?

      3. QCO says:

        Towing that kind of weight would cut the range dramatically, likely to the point of being impractical.

        The towing capability is clearly designed to support sporting accessories, like bike carriers and maybe a light weight canoe or hobie trailer.

        1. kdawg says:

          But it would be a great picture of a Model X towing a pickup truck out of a ditch (or down the road). πŸ™‚

        2. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

          Plenty of reasons why you might not care about intercity travel with trailers. For example:
          * tow motorcycle to the shop
          * trailer ATVs or Jetskis to local areas
          * rent a U-Haul for intracity moving
          * tow BBQ rig to a tailgate

          1. QCO says:

            Yes, those come under the general category of light weight sporting accessories, all less than 1000 lbs.

            The Model X will not be hauling a big, heavy camper trailer across the country, like a 7000 lbs capacity Cherokee!

        3. FSJ says:

          Towing a 2000 lb camper with our Ford Escape hybrid only cuts our range (measured as mpg) by about 20%. Granted this is not exactly apples to apples, but I’m hanging my hat, and my plans on that data point.

    2. JakeY says:

      I thought non-existent tow rating on the Model S was mainly because of the use of aluminum for the chassis. I’m not sure if the Model X would be able to match the steel chassis of the Grand Cherokee.

  5. JRMW says:

    Importantly: the letter states that they are building the beta versions now.
    good news: they are building a beta version. (Confirmed)
    Bad news: they are only now building a beta version.

  6. Priusmaniac says:

    In a sense the tow hitch for racks to transport skis and bikes confirm there was no solution for a roof rack on the model X. The falcon doors are clearly preventing this, although I thought they had found a solution to that perhaps based on a further elevation of the roof rack when a door was opening, but apparently that is not the case.
    Recently a video where Elon was talking about cars he liked in the past hinted that the Gullwing Mercedes with falcon doors could be the origin of the Model X doors.

    1. Sublime says:

      When you put things on the roof, you increases the frontal area and probably also increase the drag coefficient. This could drastically affect range. By putting bikes/skis behind the car, it can only affect the drag coefficient and if the car is designed (like Elon is saying the X will be) to have an air pocket behind it, it won’t affect the drag coefficient much at all no matter the shape of the cargo.

      1. Anon says:


        Sometimes, science tells you where you have to put your stuff. πŸ˜‰

      2. Priusmaniac says:

        Yeah that can be an explanation but it won’t fit for the canoe, long pipes or whatever else that is more than 2 m for which the roof rack is the only option if you don’t want to tow a carriage.

        1. kdawg says:

          Maybe a small trailer would work for canoes.

        2. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

          So, engineer a hitch-mounted parallelogram lifting frame that has a rotating top mount, so you fold it down to hitch level, mount the large thing, lift it up, then rotate it into position.

          1. Priusmaniac says:

            That’s a track. Actually I though of my own idea as well. It took the shape of a roof rack but mounted on something similar to a pantograph which would be down in normal condition and rise when one of the doors would open. I had thought Tesla was going to come with a similar idea so I was wondering what Tesla was going to come up with, but apparently they just dropped the whole thing.

      3. DaveMart says:

        That is the first rationale for the falcon wing doors I have seen which makes any sense.

        Many thanks.

        1. Priusmaniac says:

          Except that it doesn’t hold since a roof rack is proposed on the Model S. So that not the explanation.

      4. MTN Ranger says:

        Yes, much better on aero. On my SUV, hitch mounted bike racks and shelf are much easier to load/unload too.

      5. Josh says:

        I have been thinking about the same thing all along. Not sure about low drag design for autos, but if you look at it like an airfoil.

        Adding a trailer increases the chord length, lowers your thickness and would allow for lower Cd (not total drag though). A properly designed trailer could also use the gap between the vehicle and trailer for doing some sort of active or passive flow control, improving the highway handling.

      6. Smeghead says:

        If Tesla wants to build cars with great drag coefficients, great. But they shouldn’t consider it their responsibility to ensure that said coefficient can’t be affected in a negative way by putting cargo atop the car; that’s the owner/driver’s problem.

        So, while having the ability to tow with a hitch is nice to have, it shouldn’t be a requirement due to the falcon-wing doors.

  7. Mikael says:

    The lack of towing (I hardly consider a bike rack or so towing) is very disappointing.

    Bot spokespeople from Tesla and Elon Musk have once spoken (or in Elon’s case twittered) that the Model X would have class leading towing capability.

    Not even being able to tow a caravan or a smaller boat is very disappointing.

    I wonder what the main reason behind the decision of this failure was.

    1. QCO says:

      It’s a practical issue of stored energy and range, not any electric drive limitations (assuming they would engineer in adequate motor cooling and bearing capabilities).

      You can’t expect to carry the equivalent weight of 3 Model X (the towing Model X plus 10,000 lbs) and not expect a dramatic reduction in range to the point of being impractical.

      However towing a 1000 lbs hobie cat to a nearly lake isn’t that bad a hit on range. Nor is a bike carrier or kayak trailer.

      Now if a purpose built heavy trailer had its own battery that plugged in through the hitch to supplement the main battery, that would be interesting….

    2. Tech01x says:

      There is no concrete information about the towing capacity, so it is all speculation at this point. No reason to be “disappointed” and if you do care about the issue, make sure to email/talk to Tesla about it.

  8. Doesn’t that EcoHitch thing ramm into the ground, when you drive up on a steep ramp?

      1. QCO says:

        I suspect the kind of people who do that ain’t the first in line for an EV (at least in Texas)!!!

  9. jmac says:

    Musk said we would be surprised at some of the new features when the new Model X came out.

    I’m wondering exactly what those surprises might be.

  10. TeslaMoscow says:

    I have 5+ MXs ordered and I have not received this letter. Is it a fake? Or TM is playing “legal” games? 90% of those who have preordered X will get D instead of X IMHO.
    Maybe I’m saying bad things, but it really sucks to get such a delay after all that sleazy marketing?
    I’m greatly disappointed and I think TM will loose customers at the end. Really once we get one more player in the field of premium electric cars – will change the game, now it’s unfortunately one way and unfortunately TM is playing it against it’s customers.

    1. Delta says:

      You are right. Tesla is has a monopoly on super fast and super safe and super efficient sedans. And it looks like all other the car companies have no car to compare with the Model S or Model X for the foreseable future.

      So you have no option but wait a year or more. But what a wonderful car it will be. You will be driving a vehicle that will make history.

  11. Alan says:

    Am I the only person annoyed by the misspelled word “Indentical” in the headline?

  12. Mr. Electric says:

    Parking at a busy ski resort is bad enough; towing a hitch, it would be almost impossible. I don’t want to own a car which must park in motorcoach spots when biking or skiing. Ugh.