Tesla Launches Model S P100D & Model X P100D, Up To 315 Miles Range, 60 mph in 2.5 Seconds

8 months ago by Eric Loveday 138

P100D

P100D

Tesla CEO Elon Musk got the speculation ball rolling earlier today with this Tweet:

Elon Musk Tweet

Elon Musk Tweet

Well, it’s now past noon California time and as promised, Tesla did make a product announcement, the long-awaited and much-leaked P100D is launching now.

Tesla is highly focused on the “Quickest Production Car in the World” title, which requires loads of power, but range is important too and as we see from the specs (added below), the Model S P100D easily exceeds 300 miles of EPA estimated range, making it the range winner out of all production electric cars.

0-60 mph for the top of the line 100 kWh Model S?  Just 2.5 seconds; while the P100DL Model X now hits 60 mph in 2.9 seconds.

Here’s a breakdown of the specs for both the Model S and Model X P100D:

Model S P100D
  • Range: 315 miles (EPA Estimate) / 613 km (NEDC Estimate)
  • 0-60 acceleration: 2.5 seconds
  • Price: $134,500 (a $9,500 bump over the older P90DL)
Model X P100D
  • Range: 289 miles (EPA Estimate) / 542 km (NEDC Estimate)
  • 0-60 acceleration: 2.9 seconds
  • Price: $135,500
Top of the line Tesla P100DLs set 0-60 mph times of 2.5 and 2.9 seconds for the Model S and X respectively...but perhaps more importantly stronger high speed metrics too

Top of the line Tesla P100DLs set 0-60 mph times of 2.5 and 2.9 seconds for the Model S and X respectively…but perhaps more importantly stronger high speed metrics too

On the conference call after the announcement CEO Elon Musk said that the two new models in just the high end (P100D with Ludicrous mode) were available for order now, and the company is targeting to make about 200 per week.  The 100Ds will come “several months” from now.

“These are really profound milestones, and I think will help convince people around the world that electric is the future and it’s time to move to sustainable transport,” – Tesla CEO Elon Musk

The CEO also stated that the company is at its “theoretical limit” when it comes to how much capacity can be shoved into the Model S/X’s current housing on this chemistry (and while still using the current 18650 batteries – the new 21-70/21700s); but that the 100 kWh cars have a new cooling system and battery pack architecture – although dimensionally the same.

“It’s a pretty big change in the battery module and pack technology.  It’s a complete redo on the cooling architecture.”  JB Straubel, CTO from the conference call

…which of course means that upgrades are available for all those new P90DL owner out there.  In this case, the price tag is $20,000 due to the full pack replacement and upgrade needed.  Basically at this price we feel Tesla is attempting to both provide an option of owners to upgrade, but also saying at the same time, “we’d really rather not do it”.   For those with a P90DL on order, but not yet received – $10,000 will let you move up to the new hotness.

When it comes to the additional performance of the P100DLs, acceleration improvements are entirely to do with the improved battery, as the drivetrain is unchagned.  Tesla notes that the most noticeable changes will be felt at the higher end, in highway-passing speed, where the car was previously more limited by power.  So yes, much better quarter miles are also en route.

Here is the info via Tesla in its entirety (with important parts bolded by us):

New Tesla Model S Now the Quickest Production Car in the World

The Model S P100D with Ludicrous mode is the third fastest accelerating production car ever produced, with a 0-60 mph time of 2.5* seconds. However, both the LaFerrari and the Porsche 918 Spyder were limited run, million dollar vehicles and cannot be bought new. While those cars are small two seaters with very little luggage space, the pure electric, all-wheel drive Model S P100D has four doors, seats up to 5 adults plus 2 children and has exceptional cargo capacity.

The 100 kWh battery also increases range substantially to an estimated 315 miles on the EPA cycle and 613 km on the EU cycle, making it the first to go beyond 300 miles and the longest range production electric vehicle by far.

The larger battery pack is also available on the Model X, making the world’s quickest SUV even faster. Model X P100D with Ludicrous mode accelerates to 60 mph in 2.9* seconds and travels up to 289 miles EPA and 542 km EU on a single charge. Model X is also a pure electric SUV and can seat up to seven adults.

Model S and Model X are engineered to be the safest cars on the road and to have the highest ratings from NHTSA. Both have access to the Tesla Supercharger network for the freedom to travel long distance for free. And every Tesla will improve over time with free over the air upgrades.

Tesla customers who have ordered a P90D Ludicrous, but not taken delivery, can upgrade to the 100 kWh pack for $10,000. Existing P90D Ludicrous owners can also upgrade to a 100 kWh pack, but for $20,000, as their used 90 kWh pack will have to be recycled.

While the P100D Ludicrous is obviously an expensive vehicle, we want to emphasize that every sale helps pay for the smaller and much more affordable Tesla Model 3 that is in development.

Without customers willing to buy the expensive Model S and X, we would be unable to fund the smaller, more affordable Model 3 development.

* Expected value using max power mode and Motor Trend benchmark

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

138 responses to "Tesla Launches Model S P100D & Model X P100D, Up To 315 Miles Range, 60 mph in 2.5 Seconds"

  1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    So, Tesla finally drops the other shoe just as GM seems to be gearing up advertising for the 200+ miles of range Bolt, including pointing out that the Model S100 will have more than 300 miles of EPA rated range.

    Coincidence? Hmmm… no.

    Go Tesla!

    1. Bro1999 says:

      OK, this is when GM finally announces final Bolt specs/ordering details…. right GM? Hello?

    2. Sublime says:

      It’s fairly common for consumers to cross shop cars that cost 3x as much. This will obviously kill Bolt sales.

      1. sven says:

        Actually, over 4X as much as the $35,000 Chevy Bolt after the $7,500 federal tax credit is taken into consideration.

        1. Vexar says:

          The Bolt is $37,500. list price.
          Makes it more expensive than the Model III. Way less expensive than the “cat ran across the keyboard a few times” version Model S.

          1. Raymond J Ramirez says:

            The Model 3 has no “list price” because it hasn’t started production. Come back next year and see how much you are mistaken!

        2. JIMIJON says:

          Yes! ,,Three times as much money..But the Tesla is twenty times the car..there is no comparing , other than they’re both EV”s & the Bolt is a Carbon Credit Compliance EV,(((((An excuse so GM can apply the Credits to Build More Gas Guzzling MONSTER TRUCKS))))) while Tesla is the True Real Mc Coy! ..

        3. RexxSee says:

          You took in consideration the 7500 for the Tesla don’t you? 😉

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Sublime said:

        “It’s fairly common for consumers to cross shop cars that cost 3x as much. This will obviously kill Bolt sales.”

        *Chuckle*

        No; I’m pretty sure the demand for the Bolt will be more than Chevy can make, at least in the first year or two. But that isn’t going to stop Tesla from trying to keep media attention focused on Tesla. Since Tesla doesn’t use paid mass advertising, it has to keep generating media attention.

      3. wavelet says:

        Cross shop across a 3x price spread? On buying ~$1 products, maybe… On cars? What color did you say the sky was on your planet again (-: ?

        I’d be surprised if it’s >30-40% on ICE cars. A bit more than that for EVs, due to the small range of models, but certainly <2x .

        1. Timmy says:

          I’m pretty sure you missed the sarcasm. Note to commenters: you might want to include the begin or end tag when you don’t really mean what you are saying!

          ps. Great commenting system, insideevs…
          ( )

        2. Timmy says:

          begin or end sarcasm tag, that is. This sad commenting system removed my two meaningless tags, thinking they were actual html.

    3. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      This announcement sounds great, but suggesting that potential Bolt buyers will now jump for ordering $135k vanity cars is a bit out of touch with reality to speak mildly.

      1. sven says:

        Pu-Pu drives an ICE minivan and refuses to join the EV revolution. But to compensate for his ICE Driver Guilt Syndrome, he waves his Tesla pom poms harder than anyone.

        1. Big Solar says:

          haha good one

        2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          What a troll. Not a single part of sven’s post is true.

          1. Big Solar says:

            Now that I can believe!

        3. BullEconomy says:

          This is the greatest comment ever lmao! XD

        4. Bill Howland says:

          I’ve not criticized Pushi on this point since he has stated he is not allowed to drive, so – I can’t expect him to part with hard earned money to purchase even a cheap used ev he’d never drive.

          As far as ‘appeal’ of the BOLT, I’m a former Tesla owner who is very interested in it.

          So saying no-one will cross-shop is overstating the case, since I’m sure I’m not alone.

      2. Peter says:

        Two diffrent customers and stratergys. The Bolt is targeting model3 people that do not wish to wait. So Bolt will soon be sold out for the next two years production. And as the Bolt evolves it will sell even more. And so will model3 Tesla has a more complete setup with SC and design that will appeal even more when deliverys begin.

        The new 100 kW Tesla is going for all expensive ICE cars. People that can afford to buy a car from $ 100.000 and up to 300.000 without bending backwards. 2.5 seconds means a lot to these customers.

        1. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

          No.

          The Bolt is targeting ride-sharing and people who just want a practical, electric urban/suburban people mover.

          The Model 3 is targeting people who want more performance and/or who want to be able to drive their BEV over long-distances.

          GM can’t compete directly with Tesla’s long-distance BEV model without heavy commitment to BEV and they and LG aren’t yet ready to commit to it, so there’s no point trying.

          It avoids direct competition and will help overall sales.

          1. Raymond J Ramirez says:

            The Bolt EV has performance. and for the next two years it will be the fastest BEV under $40,000.

    4. David Murray says:

      Since those cars are not even in the same league I’m not sure why you even make the comparison other than you just don’t like GM. I mean that’s like a new Ferrari coming out and then complaining that Nissan needs to increase the speed of their Versa to compete…..

      1. Clive says:

        Great point.

        0-60 in 2.5 sec, wow!

        For the money Tesla is baller.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        “I’m not sure why you even make the comparison other than you just don’t like GM.”

        May I gently suggest that you go back and read what I actually wrote, and not what Tesla bashers sven and zzzzzzzzzz said I wrote, which is a result of their reality-distortion goggles.

        My comment was only about the timing of Tesla making this announcement. As I have said many times in previous comments, I’m sure GM will sell all the Bolts they make, and then some. The Bolt looks like a compelling EV; my main complaint about it is that GM is clearly not going to make nearly enough of them to meet demand.

        Yes, I’ve certainly written GM bashing posts. I’ve certainly bashed them for backing that bill in the Indiana legislature to ban Tesla sales in the State. I’ve expressed my frustration that GM hasn’t put Voltec into more cars, because Voltec is by far the best PHEV powertrain available today.

        But I think you go too far when you say I just don’t like GM. I have praised the engineering and reliability of the Volt many times. To dismiss me as a mere GM basher is trying to stuff me into a pigeonhole where I most definitely don’t fit.

        1. Ziv says:

          We won’t know how many Bolts GM is willing to build until March at the earliest, and probably May will be when they max out their Bolt production rate.
          GM got burned by overstating the number of Volts they thought they were going to sell. They seem to have learned at least one lesson.
          Underpromise and overdeliver.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            Yes, I understand why GM is being cautious about making the Bolt. As you say, they overproduced the Volt in its early years, and I would guess GM did not think they got a good return on their high-profile marketing of the car when it was new.

            But from what I’ve read about the Bolt, it seems to be a compelling EV, and I think GM would be able to sell far more than the 25k-30k that one of their vendors says they’re planning to make in the first model year.

            I’ll be keenly interested to see any indication that GM is planning on ramping up production in future years. But I don’t expect GM to be able to make all that many, even if they want to (which itself is questionable), unless they build their own battery factories.

            LG Chem has shown a surprisingly little expansion of their production capacity this year. And I find that very surprising indeed, considering LG’s rapidly growing list of customers for its new, lower-priced cells. So it appears that even if GM wanted to significantly ramp up Bolt production, it wouldn’t be able to, at least not for the first couple of years.

            1. Bill Howland says:

              I do remember you were hard on GM and said categorically there was no way the upcoming BOLT would have anywhere near a 60 kwh battery for the price they’d charge.

              Of course, then GM promised this would be the stats, which forced a retraction out of you.

              One might not want to be so strident.

          2. LOL says:

            The only way GM could get the exoneration is building an EV that bears no batteries. At this point in time no producer can launch such a vehicle, hence no forgiveness. Ten years from now we may have way better solution, once all players come to realize that batteries are not quite an effective means for combating the environmental chaos, at least as they believed it would be. The time is running out …

  2. JyKiaNiroPHEV says:

    Yawn.

  3. Bro1999 says:

    So much for hidden capacity unlock upgrades. 20k for 90 to 100 upgrade…..OUCH.

    1. Andre says:

      They change the pack, it’s not a software upgrade….

  4. Rich says:

    Awesome. Keep pushing the boundary! I’m looking forward to part 2 of the Model 3 reveal.
    On a side note:
    “Without customers willing to buy the expensive Model S and X, we would be unable to fund the smaller, more affordable Model 3 development.”

    Hopefully this is just a factual statement and not a cry for help.

    1. Rob Stark says:

      How else would Tesla fund Model 3?

      Without strong gross margins on Model S and Model X they could not raise capital on Wall Street.

      1. Rich says:

        As I said, hopefully this is just a factual statement and Model S & X sales are doing fine.

  5. pjwood1 says:

    Congrats Tesla!

    Autopilot just went up, from $2,500 to 3,000. $3,500 if retrofitted. Not seeing other changes, yet. Model X page is down. Anyway, looks like some other pricing adjustments are afoot.

    1. James says:

      Thanks to this website, some forums and another big Tesla booster site – we know that the current cars off the Fremont line are wired with some new toys to hook up Autopilot 2.0 with. Surely that cost is baked into the new prices…

      It’s all good ladies and gentlemen. It’s alllll goooood.

      Next down the line is more rollout of the new look/format Superchargers with 20 or so charge points and a new arraingement…and that slow wait to the big M3 Reveal Part Deux.

      It’ll be an art form to dribble out info and teases of the M3 long enough to add square footage, equipment and finely-trained workers to Gigafactory 1. Reminds me of the longgg waits and sometimes dry info deserts waiting for the reveal and then christening of the Chevy Volt. Those were looong dog days!

      Hindisight being 20/20, it was well worth the wait. Surely the M3 will rock the world.

      Just think of 20-50,000 Bolt EVs on the road ( a great thing! ) vs. 250-450,000 M3s cruising around our roads. Big difference!

      1. Peter says:

        Production of Bolt will soon be ramped up. For sure 500.000 Bolts world wide in 2018 and we will also see a lot more i3 and EV cars from all brands with 250 mile range and at a even lower price tag.
        This is like the time when cameras had a roll of film inside. We’re is Kodak today ?

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          Peter said:

          “For sure 500.000 Bolts world wide in 2018…”

          Not unless GM or LG Chem is hiding a Gigafactory sized battery factory somewhere!

          It’s just not possible. They don’t have access to that many batteries, and GM is depending on LG Electronics’ new, inexperienced auto division for the complete EV powertrain. Again, very unlikely to see a ramp up to 500k units in only two years.

          GM could make that many Bolt gliders. But GM is pretty clearly signalling they don’t plan on ramping up production quickly. If they were, they certainly wouldn’t farm out the entire EV powertrain to a company with no experience mass producing them.

          And GM is showing no sign at all of building the large-scale battery factories they’ll need to build if and when they get serious about building long-range PEVs in large numbers.

        2. Ziv says:

          Peter, we are talking a GM small car here. There aren’t that many people willing to forgive GM for their years of building crappy small cars for the Bolt to find 100,000 buyers a year, let alone a larger figure. Unless gas goes back to $4 a gallon and stays there.
          GM will probably sell 20-30k Bolts in 2017 and if they get over 40k in 2018 they will be doing well. Remember the Volt has only sold 23k in its two best years and the Leaf only sold 30k once.
          If GM can sell 25k Volts and 30k Bolts in 2017 they will be doing well.
          If they get the MSRP for the Bolt under $35k they might ramp up sales a bit faster, but it will take another year or two for LG Chem to build production capacity to produce more than 60k Volts/Bolts. Given the fact that the Volt uses 18 kWh and the Bolt 60 kWh, I think we know which product will get the nod when it comes to production increases.

    2. Peter says:

      New autopilot hardware that will bring Tesla closer to fully self driving cost more so the price just increased.

  6. Ge says:

    Do you have to give the 90 kWh old battery back to get the new one or can you keep it? If you give it back Tesla will sell it as powerwall, than its a bad deal.

    1. Yogurt says:

      People who can afford a 135k car and a 20k upgrade are probably not that woried about giving the pack back…

      Per comments from Tesla execs they dont think reporposing packs for storage is worth it…

      If the did give the pack back that is 200 per kWh at the pack level including instalation…

  7. ffbj says:

    Elon Musk like Bullwinkle, doing the Hat Trick.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRW7pITY5Cg

  8. Rob Stark says:

    Model S P100DL is $134,500

    including Smart Suspension

    IF you want a quicker production car you need to spend $850k on Porsche 918 Spyder.

    The other option is $1.25M on a LaFerrari.

    1. pjwood1 says:

      It’s getting weird, how a cerebral crowd like Tesla buyers can fixate on drag strips.

      Most P100DL owners won’t drag their cars, and most production sports car owners will go to a track long before a drag strip. That’s certainly not the first place a LaFerarri, or a 918 owner would go.

      Let’s not talk about where they’d go. Form follows function. If you aren’t headed for the track regularly, a P100DL probably will be fastest/quickest. A stop light is a whole lot more like a drag strip. So, have at it. Buy the new King Kong.

      1. Nix says:

        Most Porsche and Ferrari owners don’t drag race their cars either.

        Most Football and Baseball fans don’t actually play football or baseball either. Yet they like to see their team win anyways. It is just fun to watch.

        No difference.

        But to be more analytical, the massive success of very fast EV’s benefits the EV industry greatly. Not only do fast Tesla’s act as a Halo car for all EV’s, driving broader acceptance, it also puts heavy pressure on gas car makers to build better EV’s themselves.

        So every time you see a video of a fast Tesla blowing away a gas car, think of it as a metaphor for the future of EV’s passing gas cars.

      2. MikeM says:

        “It’s getting weird, how a cerebral crowd like Tesla buyers can fixate on drag strips”

        Ahem! – Just one opinion here, but: Tesla buyers don’t generally fixate on drag strips.

        The whole Performance/Insane/Ludicrous/Drag strip thing is simply a smart ploy to help get past the “EV = golf-cart” mentality still prevalent in the wider world.

        Once cousin Bubba mentions that a production electric sedan gave his tuned up Hellcat a good run at the strip, then a few more people take notice.

        That does leave an open question though:
        Just who are these people (the Tesla owners) that are O.K. with doing this stuff? More power to them, I guess.

  9. Yogurt says:

    Does anyone know what insurance would cost for a sub 3 second car??

    1. Murrysville EV says:

      Given its 5-star safety ratings, maybe not as much as you think.

    2. Loboc says:

      A ‘sub-3-second-car’ would mean that it does the 1/4 mile in less than three seconds. That’d be in top-fuel dragster territory.

      You’d need a g-suit so as not to pass out.

      1. flmark says:

        Amen to that! I did not get the P version with my Model X, so I don’t have the L thing either. Nonetheless, my wife yells at me when I don’t warn her before I accelerate. She said she almost got whiplash (exaggerating, of course, but point made) when I passed a car a couple weeks back. I am just fine with my toned down version and can only imagine how the G-suit comment must apply to the latest acceleration numbers– or maybe a vomit bag, at least.

      2. Priusmaniac says:

        Not at all, passing over is at 7 to 9 g, here we are just above 1 g, so don’t worry. But you will be trapped in your seat just like if the car was in a vertical position. This can sure surprise unaware passengers.

        1. RexxSee says:

          Exactly! Good description.

    3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Good question. What happened in a few of the fatal accidents in Tesla Model S’s certainly indicate the danger of driving a high-performance car. Plunging over a cliff at excessive speed, and engaging in a high-speed chase with police resulting in a spectacular crash, are incidents that are likely to not have occurred if the driver was driving, say, a Leaf.

      Contrariwise, as “Murrysville EV” pointed out, the car has a superior crash rating. Perhaps those two factors cancel out to some extent?

    4. jelloslug says:

      When I added coverage for my recently purchased 60D they first put it in as a P90D. The coverage was about $10 a month for the P90D vs the 60D.

  10. speculawyer says:

    These high-end models are genius. They provide a great way for Tesla to get some really high-margin sales from people who don’t have to worry about the price. Well done, Tesla!

    I hope they sell a lot of them!

    And for us normal folks, this brings more nice used Tesla cars to the used market. 🙂

    1. Bsweet says:

      I agree 110 percent now maybe I can find a nice p85 red 2013 in a model 3 price range

  11. DangerHV says:

    I’m looking forward to seeing the EPA range on the Model S100D. This should set the benchmark for all EV’s to strive for, maybe in 2020 and beyond. 0-60 at 6 seconds is a race car to me. I’ll take the range over speed any day. A 325 mile rating should = 250+ in the winter in southern New England.

    1. Joshua Burstyn says:

      Agree 100%. Ill take my 100D in pearl with the works. (Hold the jumpseats.)

      1. James says:

        Put Hillary and The Donald in the jump seats in back – and go out to play on the freeway on Autopilot – annoying Tahoes and semis…

        Yeah – dat’s it!

  12. TimE says:

    Anyone else notice that the AutoPilot features before this announcement was $2500, after the P100D announcement it’s now $3000.

    Have to wonder if they’ve added additional AutoPilot hardware too that will be later enabled…

    1. ffbj says:

      Good eye. Maybe a couple additional sensors.

      1. sven says:

        And two additional cameras.

  13. ffbj says:

    I thought the idea was to start with the high buck luxury, performance, vehicles, and work your way down into the mid-priced range. Tesla seems to be going in the opposite direction, at least at this juncture.

    I suppose the demand is there and 100 is like the volume going to 11. Someone had to do it, so Tesla wanted to be first.

    1. Acevolt says:

      They recently release the 60kWh models, so they are going for both ends of the Model S/X market.

      1. ffbj says:

        Expanding the market in both directions. Yes, that is true.

        1. What would be the effect if they pushed even lower, with a 45 kWh choice, as a software limited 75 kWh pack? AND offered a 2 step capacity upgrade option: 1st step – opens the pack to the current 60 kWh; 2nd step opens it up to 75 kWh!

          Think of the 45 kWh Option, as the new draw, to pull more Model 3 Reservation Holders forward! And to scoop BMW i3 buyers! And to continue offering lower cost EV’s!

          I would think 45 kWh could deliver about 145-170 miles range, depending on single or dual motor variants! Also, if offerer at a cost more competitive, it could qualify for more or larger buyer rebates, especially in places like certain Canadian Provinces!

          1. jelloslug says:

            I think the biggest issue with pushing the range lower is that the car would have a hard time jumping from Supercharger to Supercharger.

          2. Mr. M says:

            Since tesla is below 200$/kWh at pack the difference in production cost for a S 60 and S 45 is less than 3000$ maybe 5000$ retail. I don’t think reducing the battery more than to the 60 kWh really makes a important price difference.

  14. John says:

    Gas car owners are not going to be happy when these start rolling to 1/4 mile races.

    1. Mister G says:

      Gas guzzling corvettes, charger Hello Kitty, mustangs, Porsche, McLaren, Ferrari, Lamborghini etc..are gonna be destroyed by a family sedan lol P100D.

  15. Kdawg says:

    I wonder if I can get a 100kWh pack in a Model 3 (without all the cowbell)?

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      I think it’s unlikely Tesla will give any trim level of the lower-priced Model ≡ a greater range than the highest trim level of the Model S. And putting that large a battery pack in a smaller car would give it a longer range.

      So… my prediction is that M≡ battery pack sizes will always lag behind MS/X pack sizes.

      1. Priusmaniac says:

        There is 20% less space in the Model 3 so the battery must be smaller too but I would not bet there would never be a Model 3 with better range than a Model S because the Model S has a Cd of 0,24 and the Model 3 goes for a Cd of 0.21 which is 14% less. Adding the smaller cross section of the Model 3 the CdS is even better, the there is lower weight as well, so in the end it all adds up and it could be that the range ultimately becomes better especially at higher freeway speed like 75 or 80 mph or 100 mph on the autobahn. It will be interesting to see the, within Tesla, competition between best Model S and best Model 3 on range. Bets are open but at high speed I would see the Model 3 get a bit further, the super top version at least.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          I’m not at all saying Tesla can’t make a Model ≡ with longer range than the top trim Model S. I’m saying that Tesla won’t undercut sales of the top trim levels of the Model S by offering as long a range (or longer) in the Model ≡.

          A marketing decision, not an engineering limitation.

          1. Priusmaniac says:

            I understand what you mean, it could be kind of embarrassing to tell a Model S customer that his car has less range than a cheaper Model 3, but isn’t that exactly the situation they already have now between the higher priced Model X and the lower priced Model S, so perhaps customers would not bother so much if a Model 3 had a little more range than a Model S. The Model S P90DL is also more expensive than the Model S 90D, which also has a notch more range. I agree that certain customers would find it strange especially if it is a very big 50 miles difference, but 10 or 20 miles swaps between Model S first then Model 3 first would be understandable by most generally rather well informed Tesla buyers. That is also the kind of difference there is now between the S and the X.
            In a way I would find it strange to cap the S so that it doesn’t have more range than the X, so doing that between the S and the 3 would be strange too. It would also private Tesla s and 3 teams (although likely the same for most of it) of a somewhat fun and dynamizing little internal challenge, which would be too bad to miss as a positive emulation. If we ever notice an everlasting 10 miles gap always in favor of the S (and X) between the two we will know the marketing versus engineering decision.

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              Priusmaniac said:

              “…isn’t that exactly the situation they already have now between the higher priced Model X and the lower priced Model S”

              I see your point: That a Model S with a 75, or 90, or 100 kWh pack has a longer range than the Model X with the same pack.

              I guess it depends on how you view the MX. It started as a variant on the Model S. As it was developed, it became rather different; even the wheelbase is longer. But if Tesla still sees the MX as merely the CUV version of the MS, then I suppose it doesn’t at all bother them that the MS has a longer range than the MX.

              Contrariwise, the Model ≡ is a completely different and significantly lower priced platform. A much bigger difference.

              Of course, all this is merely speculation on my part. I’ve given what I think are sound reasons for my prediction, but Tesla has certainly surprised me many times, and may do so again regarding this subject.

              1. TomArt says:

                The range differences between MS and MX are marginal, when compared to what you are buying the vehicles for – an SUV format vs. a sedan format.

                1. Kdawg says:

                  I’ll just take a 300 mile range Model 3. I don’t really care how many kWh that takes, as long as it fits.

                  1. Priusmaniac says:

                    315 miles for the Model S P100DL, so if there is such a thing as a marketing 10 miles penalty that would still allow for a 305 miles Model 3 PXXDL. So there you have it.

                    I estimate that if 55 KWh bring the Model 3 to 235 miles the 305 miles would take a 75 KWh battery. That’s actually on the low side of the biggest battery I would expect. 80 KWh would be great and that would, if not limited by marketing, prop up the Model 3 to about 340 miles of range; 25 miles more than the Model S 100. Just all loud out guesses for what it’s worth.

                    1. Kdawg says:

                      The 2nd part of the reveal will be very interesting, that’s for sure.

              2. Mr. M says:

                Most of the BMW 3 series have more range than the BMW 7 series, but i never hear complaints about that. As long as there are a lot differences between Tesla Model 3 and the Model S no one will complain if the range is equal or a little higher.

        2. Rick Danger says:

          They won’t do it for the same reason Porsche gimps the Cayman to keep it *just* a little slower than the 911.

  16. Indy says:

    Is it the new 2170 battery cell inside?

    1. Ambulator says:

      No, according to Electrek.

  17. Priusmaniac says:

    That is a really great announcement, the first production ev to pass the 100 KWh mark, today august 23 2016.
    I was really waiting for a come back on the battery focus instead of the self driving stuff. It is fine if some people want to have the AP or self driving option, but not when it takes all the attention at the detriment of charge speed and battery energy focus, even less when I ear the specter of banning manual driving, which act as a true repellent on people that love to drive. On the other hand I would be very interested in a self driving charging plug. Snake, inductive or pantograph, just let it come.
    But for now congratulation with that new 100 KWh threshold. That will now for sure increase the speculations on the high end Model 3 battery. Go Tesla!

    1. DJ says:

      FYI – there are plenty of other EVs out there with a 100kWh battery. Some even have 300 kWh+ 🙂

      1. Priusmaniac says:

        Well, I mean first sedan ev.

      2. jamcl3 says:

        Light duty (passenger cars) with 100 kWh? Who? Busses and trucks yes. Pass cars, no.

        1. You says:

          So a bus and a truck aren’t vehicles??

          1. bogdan says:

            Of course they are. Ships and airplanes are vehicles too you know.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Priusmaniac said:

      “I was really waiting for a come back on the battery focus instead of the self driving stuff.”

      Yes, I confess I don’t understand why InsideEVs focuses so much attention on self-driving cars. Seems to me that’s a separate thing. Self-driving cars could be gasmobiles almost as easily as they could be pure EVs.

      That’s not to suggest that InsideEVs should ignore the way that the self-driving car revolution seems to have become linked to the EV revolution. But like you, Priusmaniac, I’d far rather see another article on the technology of EV powertrains than another article on incremental advancements in driving autonomy.

  18. DJ says:

    How exactly can they justify $10,000 for 10 kWh worth of battery.

    At that price the battery makes up what $100,000 worth of a $135,000 car.

    I mean hell on the 60kW version you only have to pony up $8,500 and you get an extra 15kW!

    Suckers… 🙂

    1. Did you notice – it is not just 10 kWh more, but a whole new engineered cooling system, and the Smart Air Suspension, as well?

      1. Oh, also it has the Premium Seats included, which are normaly a separate extra cost option!

  19. georgeS says:

    I want to know what changes they have made to the reconfigured pack and cooling system. The first thing that comes to mind is that they need to remove heat better. Also on the other hand it would be nice to be able to squeeze some more cells in there.

    Getting more cells in the same volume would probably be beneficial to the new Model 3 also as they don’t have as much area under the model 3 due to its smaller size so this pack geometry/architecture/cooling configuration will hopefully be in the model 3 also.

    Here’s what the current cooling configuration looks like:

    1. James says:

      Some cooling strategies could come in the form of NACA inlets on the underside of the car or more aggressive ducting on the bodywork, possibly in bigger bulges at the quarter panels front and rear – air inlet behind/around the front wheels, exiting out the rear and into some ductwork to the pack. Also more cooling fans with intercooling amped up around and in-between the cells.

      MS P100DL needs new cooling strategies to keep up with all that power. Plus, I love curves and inlets, don’t you? Air management 201.

      What do you think, George? Maybe you can prototype some cooling experiments on your MS?

      1. James says:

        * should I say fans and fins…aluminati…lol

        You’re the engineer…But I have some ideas that could really be a game changer. Can I experiment on your MS?

        I’ve always wanted your opinion on my pet idea. I can’t tell you here – or I’d have to kill you! 😉 … I have an idea that could mean a large increase in EV range. And my idea could also assist in cooling the pack and power electronics too.

    2. Priusmaniac says:

      How they cool it is really their best knowledge so it sure is difficult to say how to improve it.
      Basically there are not that many options. The glycol can be replaced with an improved liquid of some kind, the ribbon can be made thinner to pack more cells, the flow speed can be increased to compensate, the hole pack can be filled with a more conductive gas or liquid so that more heat also flows between the ribbon and the cell surfaces that are not directly touching it, perhaps a non conductive fluid could also cool on the above and under contacts sides. Alternatively, you could have a perforated plate up and down with the holes falling between the cells and then a totally submerging fluid with a vertical flow from bottom to top to cool. That fluid would need to be non conductive, non combustible and have a good heat capacity and rather low viscosity. Either a liquid or a supercritical fluid. It also need be benign and unharmfull for the environment. Not to costly as well. That’s a nice job exploring for the best possible solutions that sure takes some long testing and trial and error. But apparently Tesla is doing it outstandingly.

    3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      From the picture we recently saw showing the cooling loop in the battery pack, the tube is in contact with less than half of the height of the battery cells. Seems to me the easiest way to increase heat exchange would be to add a second tube in contact with each cell, doubling the ability to transfer heat. In fact, from the picture linked below, there might actually be room for three tubes, for triple the heat transfer.

      If that’s still not sufficient, Tesla could take a page from the Volt, and add a secondary cooling system using refrigerant. The Volt 2.0 uses a refrigerant-based cooling system and a glycol/water cooling system. Of course, that would make the pack more expensive and more prone to leaks from the cooling system.

      http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?23745-Inside-Tesla-s-battery-pack

      1. Priusmaniac says:

        Those are very nice cooling ribbon pictures.

        Indeed enlarging it appears as a very first good way to improve cooling. If they make it thinner they could go around single lanes of cells instead of double lanes which would give two contacts with each cell instead of just one like now. That would half the maximum heat drain distance which would allow to make still larger diameter cells. On its turn that would make more energy dense packs because active material to cell packaging ratio would further increase. Interesting, possible progress is not over at all apparently.

  20. Fabian says:

    Go TESLA Go!

  21. Bsweet says:

    I wounder if I can replace my 85 with a 100 and if so how much

  22. Four Electrics says:

    The range boost is unexplained: the Model X P85D has a range of only x; the battery size goes up by 11.1%, but the range is boosted from 250 to 289, or 15.5%. Is this battery substantially lighter?

    1. koz says:

      They didn’t say it but maybe they mean 289 (and 315 for the S) is on the EPA Highway cycle. That would make more sense for the X but 315 seems low for the S100D on EPA highway cycle.

    2. Doggydogworld says:

      Note that Model X 90D range is only 257 vs. 237 for the 75D. So 16.6% larger battery only delivered 8.4% extra range. Then a small drop to 250 for P90D, followed by a big jump to 289 for P100D. There are obviously other factors at play in addition to stated kWhs.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Doggydogworld said:

        “There are obviously other factors at play in addition to stated kWhs.”

        Yup.

    3. Priusmaniac says:

      It is 11.1% from 90 KWh to 100 KWh but going from 85 KWh to 100 KWh is rather a 17.65 % increase.

  23. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    “It’s a pretty big change in the battery module and pack technology. It’s a complete redo on the cooling architecture.” — JB Straubel

    Hmmm. I wonder if this means the pack has been redesigned to use the new cells from the Gigafactory? Seems a bit early for that, though.

  24. Bacardi says:

    Price is not including $1200 or the $3000 AP…Including those the price is $138,700…If anyone cares about the lease price, you can option out a P90D to $139,000 which with Tesla’s config works out to $2500 ordering fee, $7,605 drive off and only $1837/mo which includes L.A. county taxes

  25. flmark says:

    Note to GM…you could have made some $$$ if you had given gen1 Volt owners the option to upgrade the battery, as discussed herein

    …but then again, this goes along with 20th century car manufacturer mentality. The car you drive off of the dealer’s lot will only grow more obsolete over time. Tesla WILL shift the mentality of car buyers. Even if they don’t like the optional upgrade’s price, buyers will at least note that the car COULD get better a year from now. Can any of us have said this about ANY of our vehicles before Tesla came along?

  26. floydboy says:

    I wonder how this bodes for range for the upcoming 100D? A potential 350 mile car?! Wow!😀

  27. Rick Bronson says:

    Makes sense to pilot this Spaceplane (Model-S P100D) with family and orbit the Earth with a range of 315 miles / 504 km rather than buying million dollar 2 seater polluting gasmobiles that went out of production.

    Bravo Tesla. 0-60 (0-100 km/h) in 2.5 seconds is really awesome.

    Next will be P120D which will spring 0-60 (0-100 km/h) in just 2.1 seconds.

    Keep it up.

  28. Taser54 says:

    upper-tier Tesla owners need a better bodystyle to distinguish them from the unwashed masses with their 60kwh versions.

    It’s human nature.

    1. Foo says:

      Bring back the matte black lower trim. I think the new-style glossy “monochromatic” trim look is not as good, and makes the car appear “thick”.

  29. Warren says:

    So did the dad racing his son have the newer battery in their 10.8x sec P90D? What was the actual reason for the newfound speed in their P90D? Not only did they turn a 10.8x qtr mile,but Dragtimes turned a 2.6x 0-60 time. Is that going to be exactly what the P100D is capable of, or is the P100D actually quicker than the recent more powerful P90D numbers? If not, those recent P90D owners got a real good bonus!

    1. Warren says:

      And yes, if the P100D is quicker even, then bring on the new videos of it racing exotic machinery.

      1. viktor says:

        They haven’t start deliver any car with 100 kWh battery so this car schould do even faster when this 10.8 times and 2,65 sec.

  30. Texas FFE says:

    These are just pay toys for the rich. Still, someone needs to push. Tesla needs to figure out whether they want to cater to the rich or sell affordable cars, they can’t do both and be good at both at the same time.

    Chevrolet has Cadillac, Ford has Lincoln and Volkswagen has Porche and Audi. Designing cars for the rich and building mass volume affordable cars takes completely different skill sets. If Tesla really wants to sell large volumes of electric vehicles they need to spin off a separate division that focuses on doing just that and let the design team they already have focus on selling cars just to the rich.

    1. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

      BMW global sales, 2015: 1,905,234
      BMW 3 series MSRP from $33,450
      BMW 7 series MSRP from $81,500

      Tesla is not trying to build a mainstream segment BEV. It’s trying to build an _affordable_ long-distance BEV, which would be a competitor in the same space as the 3-series.

      If it succeeds it’ll sell a lot of them, and it’ll help massively to improve economies of scale in batteries and PEVs. Maybe at some point in the future Tesla would considering pushing further downmarket, but given that it’s trying for autonomy, there’s not really much point, since autonomy would really hurt the mainstream market the most anyway.

      If people are willing to pay a high price for the extra 10kWh, then great, because that means more of the Model 3 R&D is paid for. (Because this battery redesign will no doubt be used in the Model 3 as well.)

  31. Texas FFE says:

    $10,000 for an extra 10 kWh. What’s that a 500% markup on the$200 per kWh batteries? To all those 400,000 people that put down $1,000 thinking Tesla is going to sell them an affordable 200 mile electric vehicle, Suckers!!!

    1. Mister G says:

      Wait a minute, I’m one of those 400,000 people and I don’t expect a $35,000 model 3, I’m ok with a $50,000 model 3 with 200 mile range and 0-60 in 3.2 seconds. No sucker here. Lol

      1. Texas FFE says:

        Okay, you’re excluded from the sucker list.

    2. mjp462 says:

      Texas, A goal of mine is not to be a sucker. So, what can I expect to pay (before incentives) for a base Model 3?

      1. Texas FFE says:

        Well of course $35,000 is the base quoted MSRP. There’s no telling whether Tesla will hold to that price but it’s a given that the base model will be a very basic model, no supercharging, no autopilot, no ludicrous mode, trailering, nothing. And since Tesla is going to focus on selling the higher price Model 3s first it may be many, many years, if ever, before Tesla actually sells a $35,000 Model 3.

        So $50,000 is probably a good guesstimate for an entry level Model 3 that might be sold anytime in the near future.

        1. Matt Paskow says:

          Shoot, maybe I am a sucker. 🙁

          But I do have a year to reassess the situation. If Tesla confirms your point of view, I can put my deposit toward a Bolt.

          1. TomArt says:

            If you want genuine advice, you’re asking the wrong one. This guy acts as a bitter troll more often than not, and in this thread, he’s just about rabid.

            The base price is $35k, before incentives. It has to be – they have been promising for so long, and sticking with the price, that they really can’t renege on that. It would be a PR disaster that they cannot afford.

            However, if Tesla Motors stays true to form, most of the higher optioned orders will be filled first, particularly the maxed-out models (performance versions, larger battery pack, etc.). Statements Musk has made pretty much guarantees this delivery priority.

            If – if – they actually do start deliveries by the end of 2017, I cannot imagine that it will be many…probably less than 10k. They will ramp up production throughout 2018 and into 2020.

            For myself, I was within the first 118k reservations (globally), right before the reveal started. I would be getting a non-performance version, most likely with the larger battery pack, supercharger access and perhaps a few other things. Based on Musk’s comments so far, that would run about $45k before incentives.

            Being on the East Coast of the US (deliveries prioritized west to east in the US, then slowly roll out globally), and given the timetable I gave above, I would not expect the e-mail to configure my vehicle until Q2 of 2018.

            Now, if they actually fit my expectations, which is first deliveries in Q2 of 2018, then I wouldn’t see my car until at least Q1, probably Q2, of 2019.

    3. TomArt says:

      You’re not paying attention – it is a new, and significantly redesigned pack with different cooling configuration. Also, it says that they are passing on the cost of recycling the old pack to the customer.

      It is my guess that the new cooling scheme will be used in the M3 and future MS & MX packs across the board. Let them try to recoup R&D now rather than in 2017 or whenever the M3 ships.

      1. Texas FFE says:

        Oh, Whatever! You could buy an entire Spark EV after encentives for the price of this battery upgrade. When are you going to admit that Tesla sticks it their customers (not to mention everybody else) every chance they get?

        1. TomArt says:

          They do? That’s news to me. I’ve been following the company closely since 2008, and the value:performance ratio continues to be off the charts. Their service has been exceptional, overall. I don’t understand what you’re talking about.

          As far as the upgrade goes – the base model gets really good range (over 200 miles EPA), so they can charge whatever they want for upgrades as long as they have paying customers. The demand is still strong, despite the fact that most of us can’t afford one.

  32. Joshili says:

    Anyone know what the actual capacity in the P100D is? Everyone assumes it is 100 kWh, but that isn’t necessarily true. The Model S 85 pack was measured and calculated to be 81kWh before the 4 kWh safety buffer was accounted for. I saw someone’s calculations putting the P100 pack at 96 kWh before the safety buffer. If true, wouldn’t it be closer to 95 than 100 for the naming purposes? Neat trick in perception Tesla does with those car names.

    1. TomArt says:

      AFAIK, there is no accepted convention on EV model names. On engineering specification sheets, the precise details are set out, such as nominal capacity and usable/buffer capacities.

      Whether you are using 90kWh or only 86kWh is irrelevant insofar as the cited range is accurate.

      It’s an interesting engineering question to know exactly what the nominal pack rating is and how the control software manages the pack.

      But for a model name, it’s not an issue. You want nice round numbers, preferably divisible by 5 or 10.

  33. HVACman says:

    Goody! Now even more acceleration! Can’t wait for the photo post of the first P100D and it’s time for zero-to-through-the-restaurant-wall due to “unexpected acceleration”.

  34. Adam says:

    How long for the 100D version for people without Penis envy?

  35. Snowdall says:

    Whatever the implications for GM and Tesla and the EV world … the main thing is to think about what this level of performance really means.

    When you get into the sub-3 to 60 realm, you are talking about a handful of cars made … EVER. And nearly all of them tiny two-seater limited production exotic super-sports cars costing close to the 7 figure range.

    And now for a much lower sum (relatively speaking of course), you can get a mass-produced (again relatively speaking) car that can perform better than most exotics. And not just that … but its a 5000 pound luxury sedan with standard seating for five!

    That alone is impressive!

    1. TomArt says:

      Agreed – truly awesome engineering