Introduction Of Tesla Model S60 May Shift Some Potential Model 3 Buyers To S

JUN 16 2016 BY STEVEN LOVEDAY 84

Refreshed Tesla Model S (InsideEVs/Michael B)

Refreshed Tesla Model S (InsideEVs/Michael B)

A big announcement came at a recent Tesla “weekend event,” confirming what we already know to be true – the Tesla Model S60 is back. The goal is to offer a lower priced ($66,000), entry level option prior to the launch of the Model 3.

Tesla Model S Interior With Next Gen Leather Seats

Tesla Model S Interior With Next Gen Leather Seats

For those that are impatient waiting for the Model 3 delivery, the Model S60 could potentially suit their immediate needs, and down the road, an optioned Model 3 could be attained for similar pricing. However, a fully-optioned Model 3 with AWD, Autopilot, Ludicrous Mode, HEPA filter, and unlimited Supercharging will cost more than the base S60.

The Tesla Model S had its first full production year back in 2013. That year Tesla built around 20,000 vehicles (400 per week). Just recently, the company has announced that it has hit an all time high with a production rate of 2,000 vehicles per week (104,000 per year). Another inside source put the numbers at well over 2,000 per week as the company hit the 2,000 mark weeks ahead of the quarter’s end.

The Model S is still producing faster than the Model X due to some after assembly issues, but it is starting to now catch up some. On average, 90% of the vehicles coming off the line don’t require any extra work.

The upcoming S and X models will be getting all of the new technologies prior to the Model 3 deliveries. Sterling Anderson, Tesla’s Director of Autopilot Programs, said:

The Model S and Model X “will receive the latest technologies as soon as we have it, we won’t wait for a new model to release new technology. We fundamentally choose to eschew the concept of model years.”

Before the huge influx of Model 3 reservations, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said that the target for Model S and X vehicles in 2016 would total 80,000 to 90,000. When Model 3 reservations soared to the 400,000 mark, Musk said:

The company will aim “to produce 100,000 to 200,000 Model 3s in the second half of 2017… our 2020 target for Tesla Models volume is closer to 1 million vehicles.”

Sources: Tesla Updates, Electrek

Categories: Tesla

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

84 Comments on "Introduction Of Tesla Model S60 May Shift Some Potential Model 3 Buyers To S"

newest oldest most voted

What was the price of the original model s60 version?

If I correctly interpret what Tesla posted at the website linked below, the S60 was introduced at $67,400, and the price was increased to $69,900 beginning on Jan. 1, 2013.

https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/2013-model-s-price-increase

What’s odd is that this blog post repeatedly refers to the S40, which was a $57,400 trim level that I thought Tesla phased out of the order process pretty early on, even before they started deliveries to ordinary customers. (Some few early customers did get an S40 — which was actually an S60 electronically limited to 40 kWh capacity — but only those who had ordered one before that trim level was canceled.)

“However, a fully-optioned Model 3 with AWD, Autopilot, Ludicrous Mode, HEPA filter, and unlimited Supercharging will cost more than the base S60.”
——-

Are we sure about this?

it’s a reasonable assumption that i strongly suspect will turn out to be true. you can pay more for a bmw 3 series than you would for an entry level bmw 5 series. even the s60 can be optioned to cost around $95,000 cash price.

A base S60 is $66,000. If we add all the options to the $35,000 Model 3, using the prices for the Model S, that adds $18,000. Throw in another $2000 for Supercharging and you are at $20K.

$35k + $20k = $55K. This is $11k less than the base S60. And you are getting a loaded car with dual motors, vs. the base S60 with no options and only RWD.

Model 3 is expected to have its own range options, which could help reach 66k.

Well we are comparing a 60kWh car to a 60kWh car. If you start increasing the range on the Model 3, then you need to look at the price of the Model S75.

Why…
The statement said nothing about the range, just about the final price if you tick every box available, it was never an apples for apples statement.

The base Model 3 isn’t necessarily going to have a 60kWh pack. It may be smaller. I can easily a fully optioned 3 with the largest battery pack breaching the $60k barrier. We just won’t know until final specs and pricing is officially revealed.

Tesla has stated as fact that the base Model ≡ will have a battery pack smaller than 60 kWh. Some, including me, are guessing about 55 kWh.

kdawg said:

“Well we are comparing a 60kWh car to a 60kWh car.”

Actually, you’re not. Tesla has stated that the base Model ≡ will have a battery pack with less than 60 kWh. So you’re comparing a 60 kWh car to a probably ~55 kWh car.

The cars probably will have quite close to the same range, though. A smaller battery pack should take the smaller Model ≡ just as far.

Don’t forget the glass roof option, and then the optional mesh sun shield attachment to fix the glass roof’s excessive glare.

neither you or i know what the model 3 offer will ultimately be. we’re both engaging in wild speculation. my speculation is based on the assumption that model 3 pricing will follow those of the bmw 3 series of benz c-class.

Yes, it’s a reasonable assumption, but here it is stated as fact, which seems to be overstating the case.

The source appears to be Tesla Updates, which is linked at the end of the article. But that source states it as an estimate, not as fact:

“It is estimated that a fully featured Model 3 – including Autopilot, AWD, Ludicrous Mode, HEPA Filter, extra range and Unlimited Supercharging package – will roughly match the price of a base Model S 60”.

http://www.teslaupdates.co/2016/06/tesla-is-luring-model-3-reservation.html

Where do you people come up with the vapor info.

They should have

1. taken out supercharging, charge for each use instead

2. Actually put in a 60kwh pack, instead of a 75kwh one

and bring the price down to $62.5k -$7.5k = $55k

+1

Tesla currently allows people to order the S60. Are they flying off the shelf?

No, but I heard the Toyota Mirai is flying off the shelf. 😉

http://insideevs.com/toyota-mirai-order-requests-hit-1900/

I saw a Mirai for the first time (and a second time) the last few days on my commute home. This thing is so ugly it makes the Prius look good.

“virtual” I’d say is important here.

keep in mind that the “discount” model S matches the pricing scheme of the benz-o e-class. so the “discount” model S is still an expensive car.

I have to admit, this is tempting. However getting AWD and Autopilot puts you back an extra $7500.

Then we are out of reach again at 73,500 plus tax. 🙁

You’re also assured to get the full $7,500 tax credit with the Model S60, which you’ll probably will also get if you order a fully loaded Mirai. So that’s a wash, and doesn’t help.

Are you the only Mirai salesman? Or are there others?

:-))

there’s no need for that (i.e. more than one salesman) they intend to produce 3000 cars in 2017 http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/toyota-ramps-up-production-of-2016-toyota-mirai-fuel-cell-to-meet-demand.html

:-))

that’s a gamechanger!!! for such a small comany like toyota to go to 1000 cars, 1500 and then push it to 3000 that shows how viable is the technology.
If a mirai would be on my driveway and they would give it to me brand new for 100$ I would NOT take it. (
Toyota Begs NHTSA For Safety Exemption For Fuel Cell Sedan
http://insideevs.com/toyota-begs-nhtsa-safety-exemption-fuel-cell-sedan/
)
and still some people try to push this bomb.

D’oh! I meant to say a fully loaded Model 3, not Mirai. Facepalm.

Freudian slip?

Ah. What a difference one little word makes…

Why would anyone want a Mirai?

Because there has to be fools otherwise a fool cell car would not sell. It’s simple a supply and demand.

Oops. My bad. Typo.

EVdrive, in my response to you above I meant to say Model 3, not Mirai. Both the Model S60 and fully-loaded Model 3 will get the full fed tax credit, but getting the Model 3 without AWD and Autopilot puts you in back of the line and you run the risk of getting only a partial fed tax credit or having the credit expire and getting no fed tax credit.

Has Tesla directly contacted people on the Model 3 list to let them know that they can get an S60 now?

I’m on the list, and received an email from Tesla about the S60. However it was their newsletter, so not sure if it had anything to do with my having a reservation for a Model 3.

Yes, everyone on the Tesla mailing list got an email. So even if you are not a Model 3 future owner if you have ever given Tesla your email address, you should be receiving emails.

I cancelled my model 3 reservation a few weeks back and I still got the email. It looks like a mass email and not targeted just at their current waiting list.

I got a call and I scheduled a test drive of the Model S…..why not?

The fact that Tesla is putting 75kWh batteries (with 75kWh of cost) in these “S60” cars tells me this is a PR stunt. Tesla is eating the extra cost so they can say they offer “more affordable cars,” and the primary reason they can do that is that Tesla does not yet have accountability and is not required to actually make a profit.

They are also probably banking on the fact that someone will activate the extra battery later, and they can recoup some profit.

Actually, activate later at a $500 premium as opposed to choosing the upgrade option at the time of purchase.

Right.

Plus they will end up with some of these cars back in their CPO inventory and do it for themselves for free.

Indeed. Plenty of opportunities for Tesla to make money off this option in the long run. So again I’m more than a bit puzzled at all the negative comments here.

Tesla is offering buyers another option. Where’s the beef? How is it bad for a company to offer buyers more choices?

I just don’t get it.

I wonder if its really $500 more? When you purchase the car, you pay $8500 plus tax and license fees. When you buy outright, it is probably like the autopilot, no taxes or DMV fees, just $9000. So for a state like California with close to 10% sales tax, buying after the sale could actually be less costly.

So they actually gimp the 75KWh battery to 60KWh?

Outrageous. Someone should hack the upgrade and upload it to bittorrent.

Actually it’s a really go idea to use the 75 battery for a 60 car. You will never be even close to charging it up all the way so it will probably never degrade.

Jacked Beanstalk said:

“So they actually gimp the 75KWh battery to 60KWh?

“Outrageous.”

Tesla offers you the choice of:

(1) Paying for a Model S75

(2) Paying for a Model S60, with the option of an electronic upgrade to S75.

Why in the world would anyone describe that as “outrageous”? If you don’t like it, nobody is stopping you from buying an S75.

The anger here, and it’s not just coming from you, baffles me. Offering you more choices is a good thing, so why are you reacting as if it’s a bad thing?

Or their new batteries get cheaper from year to year so they can easily afford it.

As production capacity increases, a wider range of options and price points increases the appeal to a wider range of customers. It’s just good business sense, and hardly unique to Tesla. Other than weight, there is almost no downside to limiting the 75kWh pack to 60kWh, and many benefits to both Tesla and the owner.

i don’t dismiss this a “PR”, i think it is good business practice. it is probably not worth the extra cost to produce a separate 60kWh model and is much easier, and cost effective, to use software to limit the amount of battery used. since the use of the extra battery capacity does have value, you should pay to “unlock” the feature.

Spider-Dan said: “The fact that Tesla is putting 75kWh batteries (with 75kWh of cost) in these ‘S60’ cars tells me this is a PR stunt. Tesla is eating the extra cost so they can say they offer ‘more affordable cars,’…” Why put such a negative spin on it? Surely you don’t actually think Tesla Motors is actually losing money selling these cars? A more neutral and/or perhaps slightly positive way to describe the offering of the new Model S60: Tesla is offering a new version of the S60, which actually has a 75 kWh battery pack electronically limited to 75 kWh, and which can be upgraded at any later time. By accepting a lower profit margin on this trim level, Tesla is expanding its market to attract those who can’t afford the more expensive versions of the Model S. “…and the primary reason they can do that is that Tesla does not yet have accountability and is not required to actually make a profit.” Sorry to see that you’ve drunk the Tesla bashers’ Kool-aid, and their claims that Tesla “isn’t profitable”. It’s absurd to assert that Tesla doesn’t care about expenditures. You can be sure that Tesla’ accountants, unlike Tesla… Read more »

As others have said, this has to be mainly a PR point to allow Tesla to say it offers cars in this price range, even though it will sell extremely few of them — in the same vein as “the first Model X deliveries will be in the third quarter” — technically true, but intentionally misleading. I’ll wait for my Model 3, nicely optioned at $50,000, and far enough down the production queue for the initial quality problems to be ironed out.

I hope when they send out the invites to order the Model 3’s, that they say which options will cause your car to be made sooner.

I really only want AWD and Supercharging. But if I have to add more “cowbell” to get them to make it sooner, I would like them to tell me how much “cowbell”.

Ans. *ALL*

We’re almost a full quarter into X deliveries and the first 75 was just delivered. The $3,000 cheaper 5-seat default Model X is still a rarity. Forcing air suspension orders, to “accelerate” happened to both Model S and X coil order holders. Others were about a quarter behind. So, honestly I think you’re looking at 3-6 months. Big variability around this, given the task at hand.

I think Tesla will be lucky if 1 in 10 go S-60. That big a price jump, from the 35k range, is just too much.

pjwood1 said:

“I think Tesla will be lucky if 1 in 10 go S-60. That big a price jump, from the 35k range, is just too much.”

Even if only 1 in 100 convert from a Model ≡ reservation to an S60 sale, that’s still 4000 new customers for Tesla, and 4000 sales of a car now rather than maybe a sale later. Most businesses would call that a win!

And my guess is that more than 1 in 50 will convert. If so, that would be more than 8000 in sales, which is nothing to sneeze at.

And obviously the S60 will attract some buyers who were waiting for the Bolt, and the upgraded longer range versions of the Leaf and the i3.

And with an astonishingly high 98% customer satisfaction rating, Tesla can be assured that most of those S60 buyers will go on to buy more Tesla cars in the future.

Please explain why a significantly lower price inhibits more sales of an expensive and desirable product?

At 210 miles of range, it’s about what the Bolt or (rumored) future Leaf range will be, at much lower cost, which cash strapped buyers will notice. Start adding options, and the 60 kWh Tesla costs will quickly stack up; the most likely option is to turn it back into the 75 kWh Tesla. When Tesla sold the 60 kWh model before, albeit at somewhat higher cost, it reportedly sold relatively few of them. I want to own a Tesla, but I’d prefer a smaller, less expensive, vehicle, with fewer whizzbang features to go haywire, thus I’ll wait for the Model 3. I’d bet most buyers will feel the same.

Bolt and Leaf do not have the Brand Cachet that Tesla does.

Bolt and Leaf do not have 120 + kW UltraFast Chargers. Just 50 kw or less CCS or ChaDeMo.

Bolt or Leaf do not seat 7 with optional Jump Seats, like Model S, or 5, like Model 3 can. Both are smaller and hold less cargo than the Model S can. Bolt and Leaf do not have Frunks.

Bolt and Leaf do not have AutoPilot, or the options for larger batteries or OTA updates.

Bolt and Leaf are based off ICE Platforms, modified for BEV drivetrains. Model S is a pure electric drivetrain platform that supports multiple motors. Leaf and Bolt, have no AWD option. Neither have the exciting performance of the Model S.

I just don’t see much comparison between products, frankly. Model S outclasses both Bolt and Leaf in multiple categories.

So, lessor products are similar price. I think you’ve made a great argument for why the Bolt and Leaf won’t do well against the Model 3 but still have not answered why Model S won’t sell better at a lower price– which it most certainly will.

We’ll have to let actual sales settle this, although Tesla is unlikely to help by providing actual numbers. Even Tesla has to be betting (eventually) almost all spend the money to upgrade to 75 kWh, otherwise they’d actually make 60 kWh batteries.

Even Tesla has to be betting (eventually) almost all spend the money to upgrade to 75 kWh, otherwise they’d actually make 60 kWh batteries.”

Not at all. Tesla’s ~22-25% profit margin is comfortably above industry standard, so they can afford to cut int that a bit to attract buyers away from the Bolt, Leaf, and i3… as well as attracting some Model ≡ reservation holders to upgrade.

And every owner who upgrades an S60 to an S75 is pure profit for Tesla.

“Bolt or Leaf do not seat 7 with optional Jump Seats, like Model S, or 5, like Model 3 can. Both are smaller and hold less cargo than the Model S can.”

Both Bolt and LEAF will sit 5. Bolt actually has larger interior passenger volume than the LEAF and the Tesla Model S. So, it will likely to have more interior passenger volume than the Model 3.

That 5th seat in the Bolt will have your knees up in your chest, or splayed out…It’s four seats and one child seat.

3rd row seat in the Model X is a joke. No leg room even with the middle row seats in their most forward position. Middle seat in the second row is also squeezed being extra narrow.

So the Model X is really a comfortable 4 seater.

David said:

“3rd row seat in the Model X is a joke. No leg room even with the middle row seats in their most forward position.”

Ummm… no. I take it you’ve never actually sat in the back of a Model X?

With the “captain’s chair” central post mounting for the 2nd row seats, there’s plenty of room for those setting in the 3rd row to stretch their legs forward under those seats, even if they’re not pushed forward that far.

GrokGrok said:

“I want to own a Tesla, but I’d prefer a smaller, less expensive, vehicle, with fewer whizzbang features to go haywire, thus I’ll wait for the Model 3. I’d bet most buyers will feel the same.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people manage to convince themselves that nearly everyone shares their exact opinions and will make exactly the same buying choices they do.

If everyone had the same wants and needs in a car, then there would be only one model of “light duty vehicle” (cars and light trucks) being sold. The hundreds of different models point to the reality that there is a very wide variety in what people want and need in an automobile.

GrokGrok, you appear to grok very little about the car market.

GrokGrok said:

“Tesla… will sell extremely few of them…”

Wanna bet?

Seriously, I can’t imagine why any informed person would make such a claim. They will certainly get some Model ≡ reservation holders to upgrade to a Model S60, and they’ll also attract at least some who were waiting for the Bolt, the Leaf 2.0, and the upgraded BMW i3.

just out of curiosity, you wouldn’t be one of those people planning to buy a model S at the new “reduced” price, would you?

the point is, the big problem that tesla faces is that there are too many people like you…people who talk a lot of game, but don’t actually buy the stuff. tesla doesn’t need fanboys who post on the internet, they need people to actually buy their stuff.

Obviously demand is soft, which may be due to potential customers holding off for the Model 3. Or the market for $100+ electric sedans may be saturated.

One reason for buying the Model S would be that tax rebates may not be available when the Model 3 is released.

35k base +8.5k-15k bigger battery +2.5k auto pilot + 2k super charging +5k awd +2k dual charger. at this point its 55k-61.5k and already better than base s60. i don’t understand how lower model s can steal from model 3.

a similar optioned s60 –> s75d is 74.5k after rebate. thats 20k more.

I certainly hope so. If I had the money handy, I would certainly be very tempted.

I strongly dislike this s*** move from Tesla! I’ve always hated the kind of segmenting that software-cripples hardware in order to squeeze maximum profits. And I don’t think I’ve ever seen a worse case than this!

Tesla claims their pack cost is now down to $190 per kWh. If so they could have reduced production cost for the S60 by $2,850 by actually putting a sixty kWh pack in there. Which means that with the same mark up they could sell the car $3,500 cheaper, if not more.

And the price they ask for the software unlocking of the rest of the capacity is just shameless! 300% markup? Really?

A sad development if you ask me. With the fluff they’ve brought us in the form of the X and now this I’m feeling a bit uneasy about my reservation.

I’d like to see them become profitable rather than worry with my or your opinion.

You have no real complaint here. Tesla takes a small up front margin hit to do this, as they have done in other instances in the past. If you buy the 60 kWh version, it is better than actually getting a 60 kWh pack in several ways. First, you get most of the charge and discharge performance of a 75 kWh pack. The new 60 kWh version has faster acceleration. It will also likely Supercharge faster. Further, the cell degradation will be far lower. The only issue is carrying around extra weight, but the 75 kWh model gets MPGe of 98 with a highway MPGe of 100. That means the highway efficiency at a steady 70 mph is better than vehicles like the i3 and the Leaf. Further, you can upgrade later… which means you can pay less up front. I don’t see how this isn’t a win-win for a Model S 60 kWh buyer. Note that the 75 kWh battery uses the newer cell chemistry, which means that Tesla is getting a very healthy supply of the new chemistry at a great price. For the 75 kWh buyer, well, the price stayed the same. Yes, you are paying more.… Read more »

Terawatt said:

“I strongly dislike this s*** move from Tesla!”

I don’t think any comments ever posted to InsideEVs have astonished me more than those expressing dismay or even anger at Tesla offering a lower-priced Model S.

Dude! Tesla is offering you more choices. If you don’t happen to like one of those choices, it’s not like anyone is gonna put gun to your head and force you to buy one!

So buy something else. And lower your blood pressure by realizing that offering you more choices isn’t a bad thing, even if you’re are not interested in one of those choices. Other people will be interested; it’s not like that takes anything away from you.

Or, to put it succinctly: Chill out, dude!

Them switching to S is good altogether. Good for those who remain in 3 queue and good for Tesla: more money.

“Good for those who remain in 3 queue”

No, it is NOT.

Not if the S60 sales are in the US and eat into the Federal Incentives available. Many US Model 3 buyers are counting on the incentives…

ModernMarvelFan said:

“Many US Model 3 buyers are counting on the incentives…”

Then they are not informed buyers. It’s been pointed out repeatedly by InsidEVs’ Jay Cole, as well as several of us Tesla industry watchers, that even the earliest Model ≡ buyers getting the $7500 tax rebate is an iffy proposition. However, the full rebate doesn’t disappear all at once. There’s a good chance that at least some early Model ≡ reservation holders will get 1/2 the value ($3750); some later ones will get 1/4.

i tend to agree that many of the depositors are uniformed, because they don’t know exactly what they are getting or when they will get it, but they won’t be “buyers” until they actually buy a car, which they have not at this point. without incentives, the chevrolet bolt and tesla model 3, are priced like a benz c-class or bmw 3 series. it is difficult to make comparisons with the model 3 at this point, but without incentives, the bolt is an awfully expensive car for what buyers expect in a benz c-class or bmw 3 series. so yes, based on information available today, people are pricing in the incentives. that’s not unreasonable, when i bought my volt in 2012, i considered the more than $11,000 in incentives that i would get when i made the purchase because without them, the volt was way too expensive for what you got. it’s not as though people absolutely *must* buy a tesla model 3; if they made deposits and actually intend to follow through on a purchase (as opposed to wanting to participate in the rush of the latest ipad introduction event), they can always change their minds if the incentives… Read more »
What do you want?? Do you want a new 60kwh model S for 66 plus all the add ons….and tesla loves add ons, that’s how they make their money. Oh and don’t forget tax and license. add it all up it’s the same game buying new every time….just wait till your 35K TM3 order is due then you can see what buying a new Tesla is all about. OPTIONS plus TAX and License…even after the 7500 discount you got big bucks on your hands compapered to buying used. I’m perfectly happy with a plain Jane 85 kwh Model S. What I am after is the most kwh per unit dollar, not auto pilot. I’m perfectly happy driving a mid 5 second 0-60 car that I have to steer myself (oh god forbid) 2013 used plain jane 85’s are 50K now….and if you buy from a private party there is no tax. So IMO this new MS60 offer is not that grand of a deal. Oh and as an after thought…. You want a P85 not a plain jane 85?? You gotta have PERFORMANCE? The ones with the higher accel rate–P’s– are also the ones that probably have failed gearbox’s because… Read more »

Not sure why there is so much discussion…. More price point options are always a good thing. Someone in the market for an S or CPO S can’t really go wrong with this new 60 offering. People were speculating a few months ago that they would be raising entry level S/X pricing to create more of a gap when the 3 comes out. They are doing the opposite and we are complaining?

“Introduction Of Tesla Model S60 May Shift Some Potential Model 3 Buyers To S”

Hmmm, I’ll go further, and assert: Introduction Of Tesla Model S60 will shift some potential Model ≡ Buyers To S60. It’s not that this is a proven fact; it’s that this is inevitable.

The article says:

“…a fully-optioned Model 3 with AWD, Autopilot, Ludicrous Mode, HEPA filter, and unlimited Supercharging will cost more than the base S60”

Hmmmm, looks like InsideEVs contributor Steven Loveday is “getting out over his skis”. This appears to be stating speculation as fact.

From one of the linked sources, “Tesla Updates”:

“It is estimated that a fully featured Model 3 – including Autopilot, AWD, Ludicrous Mode, HEPA Filter, extra range and Unlimited Supercharging package – will roughly match the price of a base Model S 60”.

Estimated, yes. Confirmed by Tesla Motors? Not so far as I know.

No way – I’m not about to cancel my reservation for a $35k car, so I can go spend $30000 MORE on something else – no matter how well it is appointed.

Generally speaking, people don’t cross-shop new cars that are 2X apart in price range.

Better buy a Bolt for 37k $ with same range. In a Model S 60 kWh will be tiny in 3 years when you have to sell it.

The 60KWH Model S is certainly a PR drive, it is cost effective because they do not have to design new hardware(battery package) just a software update, so the production line is not disrupted. Basically you are getting a 75KWH for less, and Tesla certainly has calculated the trade offs and contribution analysis for more sales