Tesla Makes It Official: Model S 70 Upgrade To 75 Costs $3,000

1 year ago by Eric Loveday 37

Range Upgrade Costs $3,000

Range Upgrade Costs $3,000

Refreshed Tesla Model S

Refreshed Tesla Model S

Yesterday, we were able to confirm that all of the refreshed Tesla Model S 70 kWh models actually had a 75 kWh pack that’s upgradeable to 75 via an OTA software update that will cost $3,250.

Today, Tesla updated its  website to list the 75 kWh range upgrade for buyers who’ve yet to place a Model S 70 kWh order.

The range upgrade at point of sale costs $3,000 and is currently listed as available for both the RWD Model S 70 and the AWD Model S 70D. Pricing is the same for both versions.

With the range upgrade, Tesla says electric range will increase by 15 miles per charge.  Using the EPA figure for the 70 RWD, which is listed at 234 miles per charge, this  upgrade would bring total electric range to 249 miles.

Tesla lists the 70D AWD model at 240 miles of range, so the upgrade would bump that figure up to 255 miles, but this looks to be a site update error, as Tesla has previously confirmed 259 miles of range (EPA) for the 70D.

Check out the range upgrade at Tesla’s configurator site for the Model S here.

75D Range Upgrade

75D Range Upgrade

 

Tags: , , , , ,

37 responses to "Tesla Makes It Official: Model S 70 Upgrade To 75 Costs $3,000"

  1. Walt says:

    OTA emblem upgrade? J/k. But really, wonder if the 100 kwh battery is released, “software” limited to 90k.

  2. Pete says:

    Shows that Tesla is also greedy for money, for software update 3000 $ where you can get 24 kWh for 5400 $ at Nissan and then people complaining Nissan didn’t allow to upgrade…

    1. Aaron says:

      Nissan also requires a core return (e.g., you don’t get to keep the old battery).

  3. evcarnut says:

    RIP0FF!

    1. Leeper says:

      I thought so as well, but on second look it does make sense. Instead of having to build 2 different similar batteries, they now only have to build one and instead of forcing everyone to buy a 75 kW battery they can leave that an upgrade option. If you never upgrade, you get a free 5kW of buffer.

      1. evcarnut says:

        Should be $1,200 to $1,500 More At worst case Senario…

        1. Nick says:

          They need to keep the margin up on the S so they can build the Model 3 and other affordable EVs.

    2. TedFredrick says:

      They can charge whatever they want! You don’t have to buy it. I think this kind of thinking is better for Tesla’s long term viability. Previously they gave everything away for free.

  4. pjwood1 says:

    Interesting. We now have an intersection between P85D’s rated 253, and the 10kwh smaller 75D’s 259.

    If I had to hypermile past a supercharger, I think I would still rather do it with 85.

  5. georges says:

    600$/kwh?

    Too much money. Hopefully we see a reduction for M3.

    I’m hoping for another 20 kwh on my M3 to be less than 600$/kwh.

    We already know they are paying 190$/kwh all in pack price. A 2 times markup seems fair.

    around 400$/kwh would be reasonable. That would make the 20 kwh option on the M3 8000$

    1. Tech01x says:

      This upgrade isn’t adding additional cells. This upgrade has a newer version of all the cells. Therefore, the math isn’t what you are showing. You are buying more expensive cells across all 6,216 of them.

      1. VazzedUp says:

        You’re not purchasing anything physical, the batteries are already in the car, you’re just getting access to that 5kWh extra capacity.

        So if none of the 70 drivers take this option then each is driving round with $3k worth of Tesla batteries they have not paid for.

        1. sven says:

          If Tesla takes a non-upgraded 70 as a trade-in, they can sell it as a CPO 75.

          Plus, the non-upgraded 70s will have a higher resale value on the used car market, because of the ability of the second owner to upgrade the car to a 75.

          1. ffbj says:

            True. So without taking any action on the owners part the car just became more valuable.

            1. Vexar says:

              Tesla upgraded all the the Model S 40 they received and put into the CPO program. In all my travels, I’ve never met a single Model S owner with a 40kwh battery.
              I can see the price dropping in the future. the ChaDeMO adapter used to be $1000 and came down to $500.
              Tesla is getting dinged in the market for not being profitable. Can anyone blame them here? They have a few factories to build, improved Model X third row seat latches to buy, and someone needs to build Elon Musk a proper bed at the end of the assembly line.

              1. ANewHope says:

                Technically there never was a 40Kwh model, take rate was so low none were ever made. They were all 60Kwh with option to software upgrade to 60.
                http://insideevs.com/entry-level-40kwh-tesla-model-s-cancelled-60-kwh-cars-all-get-supercharging-hardware/

                Personally I think th3 $3K upgrad for 5Kwh is too much, but then again I am not in the market for a Model S, Model 3 will be plenty for me.

          2. Speculawyer says:

            But you still have to pay $3k for the upgrade. So the 70s won’t be more valuable.

            1. sven says:

              I would think the book value of an upgradeable 70 would have a higher book value than a non-upgradeable 70. After this announcement, all non-upgradeble 70s take a hit to their book value, while all upgradeable 70s don’t take a hit to their book value.

  6. Speculawyer says:

    On disk DLC.

    Gonna raise lots of anger.

  7. Peter says:

    How long before someone hacks s 70 to upgrade it free of charge?

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      If they do so, will Tesla notice that and refuse to send them any more OTA updates?

      I have no doubt that someone will do it. But they may not like the consequences.

  8. Jonathan B says:

    If the extra capacity is in the 70kwh pack, then wouldn’t it be better for the life of the battery to not unlock the capacity and keep it there as a buffer (likely at the top and bottom of the charge?). In fact, I wonder if the software is designed to allow the car to eat away at the unused capacity in order to maintain 100% perceived capacity and range over the years? If this is the case, then you should keep your $3000 and let the car free up the range for you over the next 100K miles.

    1. Leeper says:

      I was thinking the same thing. Free buffer for people that don’t want the extra range. I wonder if they will give the option , in the future, to rent the extra range for a week or weekend. This would be great for the occasional vacation/road trip.
      Or how about an emergency built in spare tank. Don’t quite have the range to make it to your charger, just press the range booster for a $5 fee to get you there. Then again, a lot of people hate getting nickel and dimed.

  9. Voltec says:

    On the Italian version of the Tesla website they made a mistake I guess.. They mention an upgrade from 85 KWh to 90 KWh for 3400 Euro.

  10. Speculawyer says:

    So if you run out of charge on a long trip out 15 miles from civilization, can you call up Tesla, pay $3000, and then start driving again?

    I can see that really annoying some people.

    1. eloder says:

      Assuming that would even be the case, how’s that worse than running out of a gas car and having ***zero*** options to increase the size of your fuel tank right on the spot?

      It’s extremely likely, however, that those 5 kwh are not not actively charged pre-purchase. That seems like a great way to ruin the battery, have 5 kwh of battery cells that’s at 100% charge at all times.

      1. DL says:

        The equivalent analogy is that your gas car stops running, but with half a gallon of usable gas still in the tank that the car’s software won’t allow you to use. Yeah, that would make me pretty angry.

  11. alohart says:

    What other auto maker charges for a software upgrade that cost the auto maker almost nothing?

    When Japanese cars invaded the U.S., they came much more fully loaded than U.S. cars which were stripped unless extra cost options (hardware) were ordered. By installing what was normally optional hardware on every car, the cost of the hardware and producing cars, each of which was different due to different options, was reduced substantially allowing the Japanese to offer nicely-optioned cars for less money than U.S. cars with similar options.

    Tesla has already spent the money installing optional hardware (e.g., a higher capacity battery pack), so why not charge all buyers slightly more rather than some buyers a lot more (i.e., $3,000) for only 5 kWh of battery capacity? Same thing with installing Supercharger hardware, autopilot hardware, etc., on every car but then charging only some owners a considerable sum to “unlock” this hardware. This really leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

    1. Lou says:

      If you don’t want the upgrade, they are not forcing you to pay for it. At least you have the option.

  12. tom911 says:

    Get ready – this is only the beginning of in car purchases!

    1. eloder says:

      Good riddance to old ICE cars where the idea of USB ports, extra cupholders, and slightly more luxurious leathers are considered the absolute pinnacle of upgrades available to new cars / newer generations of cars.

      Bring up valuable services found in the car of the future!

  13. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    I’m quite surprised to see all the negative comments here.

    When Tesla has offered an upgrade at a fairly low cost, they have gotten complaints from recent buyers who weren’t offered the option. So here, Tesla charges a significant fee, which surely is set high in part so as not to upset recent buyers… and y’all are castigating Tesla for doing that.

    Definitely a case of “Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.”

    🙁

    1. floydboy says:

      Yep!

    2. Lou says:

      Exactly! Be thankful you have the option. Early i3 owners have been stuffed by BMW. You would think they would take car of us 1st! No concept of customer appreciation ?

  14. Bob says:

    What a fail in costs. But without competition Tesla notice they can get prices for X and S they want.

  15. leafowner says:

    Agree they are asking too much. $1500 to $2000 would make more sense and I believe would make most current owners move forward with it….

    Sounds like the buying a beer at the ballgame for $10+ Captive audience…

  16. Lou says:

    Yet another reason to buy Tesla .. They support their buyers! BMW i3 owners get the shaft in North America ?