With The 100D, Tesla Expands Its Lineup To 11 Versions of the Model S and Model X – Graphs


Tesla Model S & X

Tesla Model S & X

Tesla Motors recently introduced 100D versions of its two current offerings – Model S 100D & Model X 100D.

Costing just ~$3,000 more (over the 90 kWh series) for 10 kWh more battery capacity, these two latest Teslas are longest range all-electric vehicles in their classes:

  • Tesla Model S 100D – 335 miles (EPA est.)
  • Tesla Model X 100D – 295 miles (EPA est.)

As you can see on the price comparison (above and below), there is huge premium in play to upgrade to the performance version P100DL – $42,000 in case of the Model S and $37,000 in case of the Model X.

That makes the Ludicrous acceleration ludicrously expensive, and strengthens the 100D as the best Tesla bang for the buck in our mind.

The graph makes it easy! Tesla Model S and X comparison for U.S. (January 27, 2017)

The graph makes it easy! Tesla Model S and X comparison for U.S. (January 27, 2017)

Category: Tesla

Tags: , , , , ,

21 responses to "With The 100D, Tesla Expands Its Lineup To 11 Versions of the Model S and Model X – Graphs"
  1. AddLightness says:

    Only 20k to upgrade from 60D to 100D. That’s not bad at all considering the 117 mile range boost, and 1 second drop in 0-60 time.

  2. leafowner says:

    Why the bigger jump in range from the X-90D to 100D versus the X-75D to 90D?

    1. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

      Mainly because, as Jason Hughes (Tesla hacker extraordinaire) has calculated, the 75, 90 and 100 batteries are actually:
      75: 75kWh
      90: 85.8kWh
      100: 102.4kWh

      1. speculawyer says:

        Cool. I love hackers!

      2. Robster says:

        You also know the exact capacity of a late 2014 85 kWh?

        1. Nathanael says:

          I don’t remember, but it was 81.something

  3. leafowner says:

    Also – why offer the 90’s any longer? For 3 grand you get much better range….in this price category it does not make sense….I see the 90’s going away real soon.

    1. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

      I assume that it’s to encourage purchase of the P100DL. The 90D in the design studio hides the 100D.

  4. mx says:

    Interesting the 100D outselling the P100DL.
    1) Because it’s cheaper, and you’d expect more sales.
    2) Because range is still the most important consideration for some buyers.

  5. Taylor Marks says:

    Prior to the 100D, Tesla was pricing range increases as if batteries were still as expensive today as they were in 2012.

    I think the price between the 90D and the 100D gives us a realistic idea of how much battery upgrades for the Model 3 will cost. I’m expecting the base will have 50 kWh and that a 100 kWh option is going to cost you $15K or less more. Heck – maybe it’ll only be $10K more. And given the car is smaller and has a lower drag coefficient, that 100 kWh pack might get you over 400 miles when paired with a dual motor.

    1. floydboy says:

      Completely disagree with that assessment, both on pack size and cost. The availability of a 100 kWh pack for Model 3, while extremely desirable, isn’t likely.

    2. Malevolence says:

      Thanks for pointing that out. That’s an interesting data point – putting the incremental retail cost at $300/kWh (and who knows what the profit margin is on that). Incidentally this is exactly what I paid for prismatic battery cells about 5 years ago – for just the cells, no bus bars or anything else, that are a lot less advanced than the current Tesla stock (much less what they’ll be putting in the cars soon from the Gigafactory). In all fairness, I’m guessing there is actually minimal additional costs outside of the larger capacity cells. Prices are starting to get there.

      I assume the difference between the 90 and 100 cells may even just be batch “sorting.” In the solar and microprocessor industries, batches are sorted and poorer quality ones are used for one rating and better quality ones for another. Does anyone know if Panasonic does the same for their cells?

    3. JB says:

      I think the configs will be 55 kWh and 75 kWh.
      And that the range upgrade will cost $6K.
      I don’t think there will be a 100 kWh version.
      And my latest crackpot theory is that every car will ship with a large battery, software-unlockable, so that all cars will rapid charge quickly and free up Supercharger spots.

  6. Ron Levinsohn says:

    A Tesla picked me up in Paris going to Versailles hotel. What model would
    That be?

    1. pjwood1 says:

      Model S, and if it was a cab ride it would probably have felt the same no matter the battery size.

  7. speculawyer says:

    Nice to have so much market segmentation.

    But we are all REALLY looking forward for the more affordable Model 3. And personally, I’m not a big fan of large cars at all. I was driving a friend’s Volvo which is a nice car . . . but I just hate large floaty vehicles.

  8. TM says:

    Great set of Graphs Mark!
    It is nice to see these features plotted side by side.

  9. ct200h says:

    I’ll take less range (said no one)

    Yeah these electric cars would be great to bad they dont have 300 miles of range. (said all the car mfr’s)

  10. Malevolence says:

    A completely pointless comparison, but interesting none-the-less, to note how the performance of the Model X 75 closely matches the Chevy Bolt. Though the X is a smidge faster 0-60 (0.4 seconds best I can tell), it has the exact same range. Apparently to pull that off, it takes about 25% more energy and about 64% more power (246kW vs 150kW) to pull around the much larger X versus the Bolt.

    1. mx says:

      The X has a higher top speed, 4 wheel drive, and more capacity. You’re comparing mice to elephant.

  11. pjwood1 says:

    The same 4.2 seconds for the 90D and 100D seems so shameful. You just know there’s more “in the can”. At least, Ludicrous comes with the P100D upgrade, now. Hopping from a car that does 4.2 seconds and into one that WILL do 2.5 is a mind-shattering difference.