Review: A Tesla Model X Hauls A Trailer On A 1,000+ Mile Trip

JUN 15 2016 BY JAY COLE 87

Model X Hits The Stage With A Airstream, A Bunch Of Passengers And Some Luggage

When The Tesla Model X Debuted, It Did So Hauling An Airstream Trailer

We get our first impression of how the Tesla Model X fares hauling around a teardrop trailer for a 1,000+ miles thanks to a recently completed road trip by Edmunds.

One can check out the full, moment-by-moment, blow-by-blow account of the adventure on Edmunds’ road trip diary here (it is very thorough), but below are the condensed highlights and statistical review for the sake of brevity.

The Model X in question is a P90DL with 22″ tires, which means the hauling capacity of the all-electric SUV is limited to 3,500lbs (down from the 5,000lbs capacity with 20″ wheels).   And as the trailer is a light weight teardrop trailer (1,260lbs), the X has no issues hauling the extra weight, and performs admirably when it came its ‘on road’ performance, handling and comfort.

3,500 lb Towing Capacity on 22" Wheels For Model X (via ScottF)

3,500 lb Towing Capacity on 22″ Wheels For The Model X

Where Edmunds does find issue with using the Model X as a recreational hauler, is in regards to travelling any more than a couple hundred miles;  specifically in using Tesla’s Supercharging infrastructure in conjunction with a reduced range while towing.

“…the Model X itself served up an abundance of power, stability and grade-climbing ability. The driving experience was effortless.  Effortless, that is, until it came time to charge the blasted thing. That’s where this towing exercise turned into a real drag.

The problems are numerous: towing speed, range, recharge time and the physical incompatibility of Superchargers when you roll up with a trailer. The first three issues are interrelated. That last one stands alone.”

Supercharging can sometimes being tricky when you are hauling a trailer (InsideEVs/A. Wai)

Some Tesla Supercharging sites can be tricky to navigate when you are hauling a trailer (InsideEVs/A. Wai)

When the trip started, the first Supercharge was without a trailer, so the Model X had the full use of its ~250 mile range, and there was no issues using a back-in spot.  However, future stops with the trailer attached would require nose-in spots, or having to blocking other stalls/roadways, or disconnecting the trailer entirely.

As for the trip itself and the Model X’s power consumption, the combination of highway driving and pulling a wind-sail behind the all-electric SUV took its toll.

The Model X ranged from consuming 484 Wh/mile to 676 Wh/mile, with one 40 mile stretch into “fierce headwinds” spiking consumption to 923 Wh/mile.    For reference, an unburdened Model X P90D requires ~380 Wh per mile travelled.

The final trips stats were:

Towing distance: 1,003 miles (1,033 total)
Number of Supercharger stops: 11
Average stop time: 1 hour, 34 minutes
Average Energy consumption: 612 Wh/mile
Travel time: 40.25 hours (23.02 hours driving, 17.23 hours charging)
Average travel speed: 24.9 mph

Tesla Supercharging station In Maidstone more Model X w/trailer friendly

Tesla Supercharging station In Maidstone more Model X w/trailer friendly

Edmunds takeaway from the trip?

“Unless you’re merely towing across town, these issues (charging time/ease, speed) conspire to make the Model X a very poor tow vehicle.

Bottom line: the Tesla Model X is not something I’d recommend if you plan on towing. Any other vehicle with a 5,000-pound tow rating would be a less painless and ponderous alternative that wouldn’t chew up nearly as much travel time.”

Edmunds, Hat tip to Jim I!

Categories: Tesla

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

87 Comments on "Review: A Tesla Model X Hauls A Trailer On A 1,000+ Mile Trip"

newest oldest most voted

The difficulties charging at a supercharger with a trailer was foreseeable, while some gas stations have similar challenges, superchargers are far less prevalent.

Owners of the Model X will have the additional burden of having to research which superchargers actually allow trailers to be connected while charging.

I pulled a camper in my past Ford Expedition and it was not very hard and take that long to unhook the trailer. In the X I would get a 12v electric trailer jack so you wouldn’t even break a sweat!

Pullthrough gas stations definitely help when fueling a truck/trailer combination. In a busy station, you occasionally get a yahoo that wants to back in in front of you, which laying on the horn will solve.

Taser54 said: “The difficulties charging at a supercharger with a trailer was foreseeable. . .” Not as foreseeable without hindsight is the difficulties charging at a supercharger with a trailer-hitch bike rack. Apparently, a Model X with a bike rack or ski rack can’t back in close enough to a Supercharger for the cord to reach the charging socket. One Model X owner with a bike rack took up three Supercharging spots, rather than removing the bike and backing into the Supercharger spot. The bike appears to be locked to the bike rack with a cable lock, which means the bike could have been taken off the bike rack and locked to the Supercharger with the cable lock while the owner went to eat or use the restrooms. But the Model X owner couldn’t be bothered to do this, and instead pulled the douche bag parking maneuver. Once again the form-over-function design of the Model X results in less utility and functionality than the Model S. Those darn falcon-wing doors and non-folding pedestal seats prevent the Model X owner from carrying the bike on a roof rack or folding down the seats and carrying the bike inside of the Model… Read more »

More pics of the parking job can be found on the Worldwide Tesla Owners Facebook page and in the article below:

Seems like a relatively easy fix for the “the Supercharger cable won’t quite reach” problem is a short auxiliary “extension cord” cable. For that matter, a longer extension cable would solve the problem of the MX towing a trailer needing to be head-in to the Supercharger stall. If Tesla doesn’t currently offer a Supercharger “extension cable”, they certainly could. However, where Tesla is using liquid cooled charging cables on their Superchargers, an extension cable would limit the charge rate. So not a complete solution, but still probably better than taking the time to unhook the trailer and hook it back up every time you recharge on a road trip. However, overall I certainly wouldn’t argue with’s conclusion that the Model X isn’t the car to pick for towing a trailer long distances. I read just the other day that when a gasmobile is used to haul a sizable trailer, it cuts the MPG in half. If that’s true, then we should expect the MX’s range to drop by half. If the MX loses half its range at highway speed, that makes depending on Superchargers for constant recharging at least problematic, if not impossible. * * * * * From… Read more »

Or, the Tesla designers could have done something absolutely revolutionary and put the plug in the front.

I never have this problem with my Leaf.

I like that about my Kia Soul EV, too. Always easy for the cords to reach.

TESLA, If you are reading this: Please Put a second input X Plug in the Front!


Its a brilliantly simple and cheap idea! Please don’t take out the back port, just hide a second input port to the front, say under the Tesla emblem forward of the driver’s door. Both front and back would connect up to the same chargers.

That does seem like the ideal solution, presuming there’s no engineering problem with having two plugs.

Doesn’t help those who already own Model X’s, though.

Totally agree. There is certainly enough empty space on the front fascia and enough talent in their design studio to figure it out. Shout out to Audi’s popup logo. Also, driver side ports make curbside chargers almost useless.

Not enough brains on the part of owners to not somehow plug both connectors in at once.

For reference look at the brainless one with the bike rack.

The problem you raise, of someone trying to charge both ports is easily fixed by a software update to the Superchargers and car software. Very simple.. All they have to do is a safety check. Its already done now during the “handshaking” that goes on between the car and the Supercharger. If the handshake reveals problems, charging won’t start. So its an easy fix to say, if the car is already charging, attempting to plug in a second should halt all charging on the car, as a safety precaution, until both are unplugged and just one is plugged back in.

Lensman said: “Seems like a relatively easy fix for the “the Supercharger cable won’t quite reach” problem is a short auxiliary “extension cord” cable. ”

And what happens to the IR drop and heat dissipation in that auxiliary cable at such high currents? There is a reason the SC cables are kept short. At low current, the long cable works. Not for SCs.
Too bad the charge ports are at the back of these cars.

It’s not clear to me if Tesla superchargers have heat sensors in the charging cable or not. If they do, then it’s not really a problem; the system will simply reduce the current if it starts overheating.

OTOH, given reports of the charging cables getting too hot to touch (apparently when the contacts get dirty), there may not be any such sensors. In that case, there would have to be some sort of software switch to tell the supercharger that it needs to use reduced current.

Since Superchargers use a “smart” interface, I presume that this could be implemented for all Supercahrgers with a software upgrade. But I could be wrong on that point.

I grew up in a trailer-towing family. Our SUV that normally got 10-12 mpg only got about 6 when towing the trailer. (hey, it was a long time ago)

In this case what saves your butt is having gas stations all over the place. With the Superchargers relatively far apart this makes this more of an issue.

The solution would be more superchargers and more pull-through superchargers, and definitely an adaptor to allow fast charging in campgrounds.

As more people travel in S60 and Model 3 vehicles, this will be more and more necessary.

It’s not just that you have to stop when you’ve only gone half as far. It’s that you also have to spend twice as many hours per day waiting to charge.

And this isn’t even a very large trailer!

I agree with on this subject. The MX may be perfectly fine to pull your boat trailer down to the local lake, but it’s not the right vehicle to use for long-distance travel pulling a trailer.

And yes, I realize the particular MX in question wasn’t optimized for towing. For instance, it had the larger wheels. But altho the smaller wheels enable towing a heavier load, I doubt it make much difference on how much towing reduces range. And with a larger (greater wind resistance) trailer, the range hit would be even worse.

Bottom line: BEVs are, at best, struggling to compete with gasmobiles for convenience in long-distance travel. Towing long distances is a job that should wait for some (hopefully near) future time in which BEVs have battery packs with significantly higher capacity, and can be recharged faster.

Sounds reasonable. This is another reason why we want/need bigger batteries before EVs become truly mainstream.

What? This is a boneheaded comment. The range would have to be 10,000 miles before this became a non-issue. What needs to happen is to build charging stations that actually work for the cars, or even something crazy, like putting the plug at the front of the car.

I think you need something like a 5-10 minute stop every 2 hours, for this to make sense, which still needs a bigger battery, and faster charging.

Spending 40% of the time of your trip in charging is not OK no matter where the charge port is, or how the supercharger stalls are laid out.

I entirely agree with “Someone out there”. If towing reduces the range of a BEV by roughly half, then we need BEVs with double the range of the current Model X to enable long distance travel as fast as you can get today if you’re not pulling any trailer.

And larger capacity battery packs can be charged faster (more miles added per minute), too.

No 10,000 mile range BEV needed, thanks.

Things are a bit more reasonable with a 90D with normal tires, P90DL with larger tires is kind of the worst case for towing.

You could tow your hot ice race car to the drag strip, then leave it on the trailer, and beat almost everyone with you tow vehicle, just to mess with peoples heads.


This is a good use-case for a PHEV SUV. Something with the new CT6 drive gear would be good. Or a VIA-motors drive train.

This trailer is tiny. It could be hauled with most mid-sized cars or CUV.

The worst thing about pulling a trailer would be that autosteer (autopilot) is disabled. In my recent ~3400 roadtrip I used autopilot 95% of the trip. It was outstanding and rock steady in the center of the lane … much more than other cars I was around!


Minivans aren’t exactly the best vehicle for towing. Just pile the kids in and go. Leave towing to trucks and SUVs.

Almost 50% if the travel time was spent charging. Maybe you could cat nap in the trailer for those 17 hours.

I don’t think it would be as a big a hassle as they portend. So you do travel sight-seeing during the day. So you stop at Dinosaur Park, charge up, and at night pull into a RV park, charge while you sleep.

I agree you would have to plan more, as charging is not as ubiquitous as gas stations.

Apologists Gone Wild! This was with a tiny trailer, half the size of a typical holiday one, and they had to spend nearly as much time charging as they did driving. Clearly saying that it’s “challenging” is not being harsh, in fact quite the opposite.

As much as I love EVs it’s plainly obvious they are at a disadvantage with respect to how often they must be refueled and how quickly this can be done. Those disadvantages are most significant when consuming a lot of energy such as towing a caravan on highways for long distances. Anyone who thinks electric cars aren’t handicapped for this task, even the crazy-expensive Model X, needs to take a good look in the mirror and ask if they are trying as hard as they can to see things as they are…

It’s not really a problem. Batteries are still improving fast and will keep doing so. Not that many people tow caravans anyway, and with just one percent market share BEVs can grow a *lot* while we wait for some that are suited for the camper crowd.

I guess cat napping in the trailer is better than going to get a bite to eat and returning to find out that someone drove off with your unhitched trailer.

Just like any other piece of personal property, you can lock it up:

LOL! With the advent of cordless angle grinders, any lock can be easily defeated in a matter of seconds. Just ask bicyclist or motorcyclist who regularly locks up their ride on the mean street of NYC. Besides, many of the locking devices in your link rely on pad locks, which can be easily defeated in seconds by old-school theft tools like bolt cutters to cut, pry bars to creat leverage, auto-body dent pullers to yank, or freon to freeze and smash the lock. The locking devices in your link will only prevent a crime of opportunity by a passerby or amateur thief.

Oops, accidentally hit return and typed over my screen name.


Oddly I think I like dent pull better.

It’s not like nicks are 100% reliable here anyway…

Sven said:

“Oops, accidentally hit return and typed over my screen name.”

I’ve done worse. Copied someone’s post to respond to, and pasted the entire thing into my screen name field! Fortunately the website’s software truncates it, but still… Not good.

If I saw someone grinding a lock off a trailer I would probably make a quick phone call to the local constabulary.

I would hope someone would do that for *me*.

A 10 dollar padlock on the hitch receiver will solve that problem easily.

As usual for reviewers, they chose the worst X model. They didn’t have to, the article would have been more useful and still had good conclusions if they had used a 90D with 20 inch tires, which is what people towing are more likely to use.

BTW, while full lane keeping auto pilot is disabled, TACC (traffic aware cruise control) still works, so that’s still pretty good.

Between the 90kWh cars the variance is less than ten percent. Adding the trailer reduces the variance further. Maybe it’d be “more fair”, but I’m confident the findings would have been identical.

Sounds like one of those “you CAN do it, but….you really want to?” type deals.

I COULD make it from MD to my mom’s house in CT in my Spark EV….but who in their right mind would do that?

It seems that the best use case for towing with a Model X is someone who lives 50 miles or less from the towing destination. For example, someone who tows their boat to a boat ramp 30 miles away from their home. There are quite a few people in that situation, but towing long distance looks like a real pain. And this was a small trailer.

There is a retired couple taking a trailer across Canada with a Model X, so it’s certainty possible. The cool thing is, their custom trailer has 800 watts of Solar Panels on the roof.

If you are retired and camping with the trailer do you really care about some of these issues?

There is no hurry.

Retirees will like the “free” travel.

Unhooking the trailer isn’t that big of a deal.

612 Wh/mi * 1000 miles = 612 kWh
612 kW / 17.23 hrs charging = 35.5 kW

There’s something wrong. How could it charge even slower than SparkEV? Did they charge to 100% each time? Even then, it’s hard to believe 35kW average power. Maybe they charged overnight for 12 hours at L1 or L2?

“How could it charge even slower than SparkEV?”

Because they range-charged every time (full charge). The taper charge on a Tesla is as low as 10kw.

10 kW on 90 kWh is hard to believe. SparkEV is 9 kW at 99%, surely 90 kWh X will be at least 17 kW, 72A EVSE rate. I’m still skeptical of the charge time.

What’s up with the wheel/axle combination on that trailer?

It is for more rugged camping. Think being pulled behind a 4×4 wrangler/jeep.

It’s a “Rebel Off Road” trailer.

But how strange to see a trailer with larger tires than the vehicle that’s pulling it!

The Edmunds writer mentions that he took the Model X and trailer down a dirt road. Does the Model X SUV have the same prohibition from Tesla against driving on dirt roads (off road) as does the Model S? Is it forbidden and warranty voiding? Or did Tesla design beefier ball joints for the Model X to handle not just the larger and heavier tires/wheels, but also to handle dirt roads and light off-roading?

Oops, accidentally his return and typed over my sceen name.


Good to know who dent pull is..!

“…his return…” is not yours. He should have locked it, if he didn’t want to share.

Oops. That should be “hit tab,” not “his return.” I’ve got butter fingers today. 😀

Sven (aka “dent pull”) said:

I see sven is exhibiting symptoms of TES (Tesla Envy Syndrome) again. Have you sought treatment, dude? I understand that selling your TSLA stock shorting position usually leads to instant relief of this malady. 😉

The anti-Tesla smear campaign, which you’re referring to, doesn’t concern any real issue with driving a Tesla car on dirt roads. The issue is driving a luxury (or “premium”) car in an area where you should be using an offroad vehicle; where you risk damaging the suspension if you drive a car not built for offroad travel.

So, sven, stop pretending that this problem is somehow out of the ordinary just because the luxury car has a “Tesla” badge on it.

And do seek help for your TES. You’ve got a pretty bad case of it.

“Tesla envy happens when other people have, ahem, long positions and yours is too short.” –Jim Whitehead

Hmmm, well, it would have helped if I had actually copied the Tesla-bashing part of sven(“dent puller”)’s post, to which I was trying to respond:

“Does the Model X SUV have the same prohibition from Tesla against driving on dirt roads (off road) as does the Model S? Is it forbidden and warranty voiding?”

You didn’t answer the question and instead posted an ad hominem attack.

Can you take the Model X off road without voiding the warranty?

Most other luxury SUVs are very capable off-road vehicles. They are designed to easily handle grueling off-road driving (when proper tires and rims are swapped on), and driving them off-road does not void the warranty. The Lexus LX570 is just a Toyota Landcruiser (an off-road legend) with a fancy interior, and is used by the United Nations and Red Cross in the third world to travel on some of the world’s most inhospitable unpaved roads and on treacherous terrain off-road. Likewise, the Lexus GX460 is just a Toyota Landcruiser Prado (short wheelbase) with a fancy interior. The Mercedes G-Class SUV is an absolute beast off-road with it’s front, rear, and center locking differentials. The Mercedes GLS SUV is a capable off-roader as well. The Land Rover Range Rover, LR4, LR2, and Discovery Sport are all legendary off road vehicles that their owners take off-road across vast desserts, through undeveloped jungles, and on safari in Africa.

As a former owner, I can personally vouch for the Lexus GX460’s off-road ability, durability, and reliability.

Those tires on that camper certainly didn’t help their range.

I’m not trying to say the test is somehow invalid because of the tires, but they certainly lost range with that choice.

Sadly, many mall-crawler Jeeps drive around 24/7/365 with those oversized All-Terrain tires and lift kits just for the macho look, while reducing their MPG on an already low-MPG vehicle. 🙁

Time for a tesla caravan with 100kwh battery in the bottom that charges the car while you are driving. Off course you can supercharge the caravan as well, it’s a tesla!

I think that would be a viable product, especially if it had fold out Solar Panels for the roof and ‘Porch’. Maybe an additional hookup for a small top-mounted fold-out wind generator?

That actually is a pretty good idea.

The size of the battery could be based upon the size of the camper. 100 kWh for a smaller camper, maybe 150 kWh for a medium sized camper?

Tesla would definitely need to build dedicated chargers for that though. That would be the hard part to solve.

IDK, but I’m guessing the cost of doing this is still prohibitive. But a decade from now it may well make sense. And make that 200 kWh 😉

This is one proof that we need hydrogen ASAP from renewable sources if we want to continue to having fun on this planet without burning pollutant gas, diesel, for towing, plane trips, cruise ship… Lithium Ion Batteries and Supercharger are not magic such as liquid fuel or gas are.

Hydrogen has far more limiting issues to deal with, than BEVs. First off, Hydrogen is highly corrosive. You need to use rare elements like gold or platinum to coat components and prohibit this. This is also a big reason why HCVs are so f’n expensive. Hydrogen leaks thru the tiniest spaces in metals, carbonfiber, ceramics, etc. There are no leak proof hydrogen valves. Hydrogen requires 7 atmospheres of dangerous compression (usually in two tanks), to get enough usable energy density / range and tanks small enough, to fit on a passenger vehicle. This also takes significant additional energy to accomplish, just fueling the damn things. Assuming the pumping station is operational or capable of a full charge. Hydrogen is an energy carrier. It is NOT a form of energy in and of itself. It must be converted FROM something else, to be usable. And that typically takes more energy than you’re going to be left with. So why bother? BEVs already work fine, today. And they’ll be even better in the near short term. As many are fond of saying: “Hydrogen is the the future, and always will be.” And for many of the issues I’ve elaborated on. I could… Read more »

Not just 7 atmospheres… 700 atmospheres pressure.

10,000 psi.

Dominic Matte said: “This is one proof that we need hydrogen ASAP from renewable sources…” Most definitely not. Compressed hydrogen gas is very nearly the worst possible choice to power vehicles, unless they’re rocketships. Very nearly anything else will be more practical and less wasteful of energy. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I don’t want to turn this into a debate on hydrogen fuel cells, because I just think that they’re extremely silly. There’s multiple rebuttals of it online. It’s just very difficult to make hydrogen and store it and use it in a car. Hydrogen is an energy storage mechanism, it’s not a source of energy. So you have to get that hydrogen from somewhere. If you get that hydrogen from water, you’re splitting H2O. Electrolysis is extremely inefficient as an energy process. If you took a solar panel and used the energy from that solar panel to just charge a battery pack directly—compared to try to split water, take the hydrogen, dump the oxygen, compress the hydrogen to an extremely high pressure—or liquefy it—and then put it in a car and run a fuel cell… it is about half the efficiency. It’s terrible. Why would you do that? It makes no sense.… Read more »

This test is irrevelant. A real test would have been with a 3500 lbs trailer. An old used Toyota Prius can easily tow 1000 lbs on many hundreds of miles. A Camry hybrid too. Yes, this is out of spec and Toyota do not reccomands it, but these hybrids can tow without worry. See Prius Trailer Yahoo group. 1000 lbs or 1260 lbs trailer is a joke for a big SUV…

I wouldn’t say its a bad test at all, its a small trailer that went 1,000 miles and has stats/figures along with it.

Sorry everyone doesn’t max out the specs every time they go someplace?

There’s a simple reason: A Prius carries about 500 kWh in the tank.

I would rather have seen a test with a moderate sized, or moderately small, popup trailer; something that might actually be practical for a road trip of several days. A popup trailer would have a reduced frontal area, minimizing wind resistance, just like this trailer; but unlike that ridiculously small one used in this test, once you open up a popup trailer you can actually stand up inside it.

But I suspect the results would be similar. I’m not convinced the extra large wheels really impact range that much, altho certainly they must increase the drag (wind resistance) some.

I think I will hold on to my F-150.

I hope you die slowly and in great pain.

Well, maybe it’s unfair to judge you based only on this one piece of information. But surely the F-150 is mainly just a way to tell the whole world to shut the f up and crap in our drinking water (poison our air)..?

Sometimes I wonder why I even care at all. I don’t have kids and I generally don’t like people much anyway…

Having children implies getting someone to like you well enough to breed with you.

This explains much.

It’s not unreasonable to want an EV for daily driving and to keep a truck around for utility use. I regularly drive long distances, tow a trailer and camp in my truck. Other people live on ranches, have service businesses or work construction. You can’t do that with a LEAF.

That’s why trucks are the best selling vehicles in America and it’s going to stay that way until they make useful BEV or EREV trucks. Nobody is going to stop 11 times to tow a teardrop trailer 1,000 miles.

Maybe in a low carbon world, we give up the idea of hauling around tiny houses when we travel. Just drive your Model 3 and stop at a hotel. You will save so much on cost to buy a 3 vs. and X plus trailer that you could pay for more hotel nights than you would ever save by hauling a ridiculous trailer around the country just to sleep in.

Especially an off-road trailer like this one, since Tesla doesn’t want you to take your Model X on the type of off road trails and terrain for which this particular trailer is designedto tackle.

What a joke. It was obvious from the release day, you can’t haul a trailer when your plug is in back, but charger parking often requires front plug. It is not SUV for road trip, it is glorified minivan aka “Chelsea tractor” for driving around the city and posing how “green” and superior you are wasting ton of resources and trashing environment.

If you need to go on a road trip to Florida, just hire the damn diesel powered flatbed with driver as most affluent people do, put your X on it and when you arrive to your destination by plane, you can still pose with your X. Autotrains also exist for some destinations. Problem solved.

And then, just who solves the Diesel Problem?

Clearly a very severe case of TES (Tesla Envy Syndrome).

I recommend getting treatment fast, ZZZZZZZZZ. Exiting your short stock position in TSLA will give instant relief!

“Tesla envy happens when other people have, ahem, long positions and yours is too short.” –Jim Whitehead

Just add it to another thing on the list of reasons why I think Model X sucks…

Model S is awesome, why does Model X suck so much?

I really think when X was being laid out, they got a room full of Soccer Moms together, and asked them, “If you were buying a Crossover, what would YOU want it to be like?”

The limited interior cargo design in Model X, just isn’t something a guy who hauls stuff in his vehicle would ask for.

But if you have a hoard of kids, and your arms are full, the seats move easily out of the way, the doors all open magically, and you never miss out on seeing famous landmarks on family road trips– life is awesome. It makes sense.

If you want to haul a trailer, or put some plywood 4 x 8’s in there for a woodworking project, tough 3h1t. Gotta wait for Model Y, ’cause that’s not the target demographic Model X (or Model 3) was tailored for.

So we wait here, for Godot.

It’s certainly true that the Model X was optimized for moms and grandmas hauling the gang around, and not for guys hauling their stuff around.

Personally, I think Tesla should have tried harder to make the MX appeal to both groups. No good reason to put in 2nd row seats that won’t fold down out of the way.

As it is, the MS actually can haul larger items more easily than the MX.

I haven’t heard anyone use that reference in a long time +1

Musk said from the very beginning that they were designing the X for women (or, more appropriately, for the daily needs of family life), that is to say, for pretty much 90% or more of an SUV’s use.

And, the X does that very well – by sacrificing the utility of the other 10% of use.

Bluntly, the Model X tow hitch is for hauling your recreational boat from the house to to the lake, not for a cross-country trip. For hauling your boat, it’s perfect.