Opting out of the Performance Edition

[JakeP]

As much as I want the Performance, the 19" wheel/tire issue (maintenance, expense, practicality in the Northeast) really drove me to stick with the Standard 85. I have driven both, and they are both exhilarating. Plus one of my current cars, a 2000 Porsche Boxster (standard 217-HP), always gives me mad acceleration off the line, at each and every stoplight...and that is 0-60 in 5.7 seconds. If a standard is rated at 5.6 and in practice can do 5.0, I don't think I will be disappointed.

[kinddog]

Assuming constant acceleration, the difference between 5.6 and 4.4 seconds is 0.49 versus 0.62 g's.

this is why i love this forum.

[wstuff]

I commend you, you are very far ahead of the depreciation curve than I will ever be, wish I had some of your ( IRRATIONAL TENDENCY) , which I find to be totally rational, good for you. I think you are very wise. Hoping this car will inject some of that behavior into me.

[kinddog]

So I repeat: there is no need for a Performance version of this car.

But I'm getting it, and wouldn't have it any other way. Why? I want it, and I can afford it without making undue sacrifices.

my feelings exactly.

there is no reason to get Performance. I am getting Performance.

it's an ego tax, for sure...

[wstuff]

Sorry my last post was to Bosgig. R

[ClearwaterBchSteve]

my feelings exactly.

there is no reason to get Performance. I am getting Performance.

it's an ego tax, for sure...

Can't agree more

[Zextraterrestrial]

my feelings exactly.

there is no reason to get Performance. I am getting Performance.

it's an ego tax, for sure...

and it helps Tesla out a little too,

I like everyone's rationale here

[rcc]

Agree with all suppositions, I am really torn on performance. I'm pretty sure I'm going standard. I read the above threads and laughed how many cars I bought with the rationalization that I will keep the car 10 years or 15 years or this is the last car I will ever buy. Then 3 years down the road a new cheerleader hits the streets and I'm in love all over again. I'm pretty sure my next car will be Tesla as well, but who can predict, every time I sell my stock it goes higher , every time I buy it goes lower. I think my point is I'm going to be practical and configure my S as non perf, 85kw, Blue, Tan, piano, Pano, sound and Tech with dual chargers. I think the dual chargers may be the the best ( performance ) option in the future. I'm thinking as charging infrastructure evolves the next owner of my car may be looking at charge rate as opposed to 0 to 60 times. I can now see the salesman saying twin chargers, OH you can completely refuel this car in 17 min instead of waiting the whole 30 min. I envy all of you getting the PERFORMANCE, I'm OLD and have to be rational sometimes.

Why dual chargers? Right now, there are very few if any places in the US where you can DC charge at > 10KW that's not a supercharger. And you can always add the second charger a few years from now if it looks like you want it.

Why not wait?

[brianman]

Why dual chargers? Right now, there are very few if any places in the US where you can DC charge at > 10KW that's not a supercharger. And you can always add the second charger a few years from now if it looks like you want it.
Why not wait?

1. "Twin Chargers" is irrelevant for Supercharger.
2. "Twin Chargers" comes into play for home 220 use and/or HPWC use.
3. Some (all?) of us think it will naturally be more expensive to install the 2nd charger as an upgrade rather than as part of initial vehicle construction.

[bosgig]

Personally, I'm not doing the HPWC because I don't see ever needing that charging speed at home, and I haven't found a J1772 in the path of any of my conceivable road trips that operates at more than 30 Amps. So I'm likely to pass on the twin chargers. It may indeed be more expensive down the road, but I figure the odds of my ever needing the second charger are slim. Just my two cents based on my driving and the area in which I live.