CARB Reveals Tesla Model S 75D Edition!

2 years ago by Jay Cole 47

Tesla Model S 75D Looks To Be Arriving Soon

Tesla Model S 75D Looks To Be Arriving Soon (Model S shown here in refreshed trim)

As an automaker, you really wanted to reveal a new product offering on your own terms; but quite often, that just does not happen…even still, you wouldn’t expect the government to be the one spilling the beans!

But such would be appear to be the case with Tesla, and an upcoming Model S entry-level battery upgrade.

As spotted by TeslaPittsburgh (via reddit) this morning, CARB has updated its eligible vehicles for HEV sticker list, and found a “75D” listing for the Model S.

CARB Eligible Vehicle List Shows The Tesla Model S In 75D Trim Level

CARB Eligible Vehicle List Shows The Tesla Model S In 75D Trim Level

New Look For The Model S Arrives This Month!

New Look For The Model S Arrives This Month!

We should note that this doesn’t “officially” announce a 75 kWh version, the revelation could have been in error.

However, Tesla recently announced that the base Model X would only arrive as a 75D (no 70 kWh offering), so this upgrade for the S just makes sense.

With this new information, it seems even more likely that a future rumored upgrade of the premium Tesla trim levels on both the X and S to 100 kWh is more likely.

Today’s Model S 70D has an EPA rating of 240 miles, so we would expect to see the 75D, completed with a refreshed front end, net around 260 miles.

 

Tags: , , ,

47 responses to "CARB Reveals Tesla Model S 75D Edition!"

  1. Trollnonymous says:

    Nice!

    SPOILER ALERT!!!!!

    lol

  2. Get Real says:

    Yeah, Tesla continues to set (and re-set) the standard with continuous and ongoing improvements to its cars. The laggard OEMs should take note like Nissan with its no badly outdated Leaf.

    1. Anon says:

      But hey, Nissan is busy making money from small SUVs to bother with the Leaf right now. 😉

  3. offib says:

    Is it me (or is this fantasy), or are the real wheel drive models being slowly removed? If so, then new buyers couldn’t take the advantage of the large frunk the first crs had.

    1. Peter says:

      “real wheel drive”

      As opposed to fake wheel drive? 😉

      1. RPadTV says:

        No, as opposed to Hot Wheel drive.

  4. Jeffrey Songster says:

    So… cool info… sure looks accurate… now in terms of sales and positioning… How about they release a lighter 65 model(old 60Kwh package with newer denser batteries) … lower the price to the barest of base price… Only offer one model with few options at maybe 50 to 60k? and soak up some of the pre model 3 1st time Tesla buyers. That way they capture the sales without waiting 12 to 24 months. Clearly the Model III presale shows how much pent up demand there is under price pressure. Relieve some of that… convert more true believers before GM wrecks them with their lack of DCFC commitment on BOLT.

    1. Rob Stark says:

      Because they can’t currently supply demand for their more profitable versions of Model S.

  5. pjwood1 says:

    Horse has left barn, then. 60 and 85 will end up evolving to 75 and 100kwh. I can think of 15 reasons this was a good idea.

  6. Mikael says:

    So 75, 100 and…. 125? 😛

    I’ve calculated my own personal “fully satisfied” range and that is 600 km (370 miles).
    I did not expect any company to be close to that for another 5 years at least but at this pace Tesla will be there fairly soon.

    1. Aaron says:

      When EVs had 70 miles range, people wanted 100 miles. When EVs had 100 miles range, people wanted 200. When EVs had 200 miles range, people wanted 370.

      Ugh. You don’t NEED 370 miles of range.

      1. Someone out there says:

        If EVs are to replace ICEs completely we do need 300+ mile cars. Everyone doesn’t need 300 miles every time but it needs to handle the unusual situations as well for it to be a proper replacement.

        1. Speculawyer says:

          Nah, 300 miles is not needed. Make it available for those with the money to blow on it. But 200 miles plus a really good DC fast-charge system is enough. With daily driving, very rarely go more than 200 miles. Above that, treat yourself to a meal while fast-charging. Above that . . . pay extra for the big battery or drive a hybrid.

          300 miles in an EV raises the price by many thousands of dollars for something you only use some 1 to 2% of the time. There is a big difference between being able to fill up every night while you sleep versus having to go to a filling station to fill-up all the time (which makes you want more range).

          1. Mikael says:

            200 miles is not enough. It’s the bare minimum.

            200 miles comes with a lot of compromises and is way inferior to any ICE.

        2. Trollnonymous says:

          Yet we still see ICE cars on the side of the roads with the driver walking with gas cans.

        3. Moose says:

          Still… Subzero weather, highway speeds north of 80 mph, battery degradation, hills, etc.

          You’ll need 300miles+ if you want to convert the masses.

          1. Anon says:

            Yes. Cross country drives, while rare, do certainly happen to me. And they would certainly benefit from 300ish mile range capability in a variety of situations and environments.

      2. Speculawyer says:

        It is more like:

        EVs promised around 100 miles range but they delivered ~83 miles range. But we sucked it up and bought them.

        Tesla came out and said 160 to 270 miles range. That’s it. And they are expensive!

        Then most of us just pined for 120 to 150 miles range plus DC fast-charging. Nissan, Ford, and BMW delivered 107 to 114 miles range.

        Tesla said forget 160 miles . . . 208 to 300 miles. And nothing less than 200. And they are expensive. But we are working on it.

        Then GM promised 200 miles and we were happy! And then Tesla said 215 miles in a sexy car that can be Supercharged . . . and some 400,000 of us signed up for a Model 3. 🙂

        (Nissan, Ford, VW, and BMW are going to REALLY struggle to figure out how to sell their 83 to 114 mile EVs.)

        1. alohart says:

          Those of us who don’t need 200 miles of range and who don’t want to drive the resulting heavy car will still be in the market for a light, efficient, compact EV with less range. The Bolt is heavy compared with the i3 BEV, and the Model 3 will be even heavier. Many of us don’t need or want a drag-racer and feel that designing a car to be a drag-racer is silly. As evidenced by the large variety of cars on the roads today, not everyone wants or needs the same type of car.

          1. If you don’t need 200 miles range, but you want a light, quick EV, I can re-build “my Electricfly” for you – and give you great performance, and 4 seats, at about 1700 lbs, for maybe 35 miles, or pretty good performance and just two seats at about 2,000 Lbs, and maybe 85-100 miles range! Just needs a whole new rust free floor pan swap before the upgrades! Bump up the Motor to an AC one that weighs half as much, and move to A123 Cells for Power! Cost – Only about $15,000 +/-!

        2. Priusmaniac says:

          The 600 km (370 miles) would be good for me too since in Europe freeway speed is 80 mph, so it takes more energy for a same distance at that speed. Add some cold and bad weather plus some battery aging and you can round it up at 400 miles, that is when I will be ok on range. So we are getting closer but we still need a few years of improvement to get there.
          Oh yes, I also dare the megacharger desire so I can really recharge in 10 minutes.

      3. Rob Stark says:

        370 EPA miles means 250 real world miles in the dead of a Boston or Oslo winter with interior at 68 degrees F and the radio on.

        That is a real need for many people.

        1. Anon says:

          Agreed. You have to account for thermal losses and temporal degradation of the lithium chemistry over the life of the vehicle…

      4. Yup says:

        Huh? No, I think most people have been saying 300 miles all along. Nobody except for die-hard EV fans has ever thought that ~80-100 miles was enough.

        Beyond that though, a couple of very good reasons why we need 300+ mile range cars are renters (50% of the population) and lack of fast chargers. 300+ mile range cars make EVs practical for renters because you can charge once a week, or once every other week, which is important when you have to go way out of your way to charge, and the “just grab a bite to eat on your long trip” excuse doesn’t work. 300+ mile range cars make the lack of fast charge infrastructure much more tolerable too, because the longer the range, the less need for infrastructure, and it’s a rapidly diminishing need too. A 100 mile BEV would require probably 10x as many charging stations as a 300 mile BEV, because longer trips are far less frequent than shorter trips.

        So yeah, 300 miles is a great initial target, and the more the merrier.

    2. Eric says:

      You really want/need to be able to drive 600km/370 miles without stopping? Wow. You either live in the jungle, or have a humongous bladder.

      1. MikeG says:

        Or want to drive 200 miles with cabin heat in the winter snow and slush at highway speeds between charges.

        Something all ICE vehicles are capable of today.

        1. Speculawyer says:

          You really shouldn’t be driving highway speeds in slush.

          1. Rob Stark says:

            You can safely drive through slush at highway speeds with AWD.

            1. Anon says:

              Wish I had AWD while driving down that terrifying hill in Flagstaff during the winter…

              I will, with a Model 3. 😀

            2. tosho says:

              And how exactly does the AWD help you stop or break better on slush

        2. Priusmaniac says:

          On the autobahn, at 125 mph, that is only a 3 hour drive, so a normal bladder can hold double that.

      2. Mikael says:

        Even if it could do 600 km at highway speed it’s still like 4-4,5 hours of driving. I feel sorry for you if your bladder can’t handle that.

        But it’s more like 300 km range then, especially if it’s a bit cold outside. Or two hour of driving. Can your bladder handle that? 😉

        Then after that if you charge it to 80% then it’s another 240 km. Or just over 1,5 h of driving.

        Imaging trying to do something like a regular ICE can do like towing a trailer or caravan, what do you think happens then?

        The only reason why we accept inferior range is because there are no better options and/or way too expensive.

  7. Tom says:

    I have an S85. Even though it’s only 18 months old it’s like ancient technology in Tesla years…..geez….

    1. Speculawyer says:

      The joys of being an early adopter. Hey, at least you are not driving an ~80 mile range EV like many of us. 😉

      1. Tom K says:

        Actually, I traded in my 75 mile LEAF I owned for 3 1/2 years on my Tesla…

  8. Lunks says:

    Probably not a mistake as RWD 75 is also listed. Most likely they updated specs for 90 and 75 together now. Soon they run out of old cells and 70 comes 75

  9. Mister G says:

    How much for base 75D?

    1. jelloslug says:

      I would guess $78,000 based off of the Model X pricing.

  10. Bacardi says:

    Makes sense in a lot of ways…Will probably make the RWD S75 $75K, $80K for the S75D…

    More range across the model line up means you can built fewer supercharger sites further and further apart…Also can slightly reduce the “need” for person to use superchargers if the slight bump in range results in you being able to make it home…

    The interesting question is what’s next? Is this the new norm, that every six months Tesla will kill the smaller battery size, increase it by 5kWh-10kWh but charge you thousands more for it?

    1. jelloslug says:

      My guess would be to bump the “small” battery and then later bump the “large” battery.

      1. Bacardi says:

        S base went 40kWh axed, 60kWh to 70kWh now to 75kWh…Higher option, 85kWh to 90kWh and now we’re hearing the 100kWh yet do not know if the 90kWh will be on the chopping block in the near future…Maybe we’re a year away from the base being 85kWh…

    2. Daniel Zorrilla says:

      They need a new low end model S to fill the void and convert some of those Model 3 deposits to sales. If they could make a +/-55 kWh battery that could go +/-200 miles, they could make a much lower entry level price for the Model S and drive down market before the Model 3 starts shipping. They sold a ton of 60 kWh’s that went 208 miles, so they should be able to do 200 miles with less kWh than that now with the better aerodynamics and lighter weight.

      1. Priusmaniac says:

        Yes that is a good idea, 3 battery choices is not very different from the 3 engine choices in an ICE model. A Model S 55 would be much cheaper and indeed the better aerodynamics and other elements of the improved Model S should enable it to still do 200 miles, especially with a battery weighting less.

  11. goodbyegascar says:

    I wonder if this means the eventual return of Model S 85 kWh, but this time as an entry-level car.

    1. Bacardi says:

      I believe so but don’t think they’ll be the same battery…The 85kWh to 90kWh stated it’s the same core cells with a different chemistry…Also Tesla keeps it’s useable kWh # a secret although there’s lots of information on the TM forums…They may have reduced the buffer…

  12. Dan says:

    Tesla has now confirmed this. $3000 extra at 259 miles

  13. jimstack007 says:

    Range so everyone can get the right car for the right job. I have friends who love the iMEV that only goes 50-60 miles. They only go 20-30 99% of the time.
    So with the model 3 with 215 or so will fit a lot of commutes .So want AWD others don’t. Some can spend more and some want the lowest price.
    Super Chargers are every 100 miles on every major highway. 200 seems like plenty for most. a few want 400 or more. It’s coming.