60 kWh vs 85 kWh packs

[stealthnhawk]

Similar story for me, just in AZ. As my wife and a friend have both said though, $8500 (the diff between 60+SC and 85, with tax) can cover lots of car rentals for trips that are beyond the 60 range. If you don't make such trips that often, the better strategy might be to stick wit the 60 and rent cars when you need to take such trips. Yes, it'd be nice to take the S all the time, and maybe with SC and a widening charging infrastructure that will be possible. But for now, I'm fine with saving the money and renting when needed.

Lol same for me.
I am struggling between 40kwh and 60kwh/sc. The different is 12k+tax. That's a lot of car rental or a good down payment for a minivan. I really wish tesla allows sc for 40kwh. Arg... What the heart wants and what's reality.
I am planning to buy either 2014 is350 fsport or tesla 40kwh. They should come out the same price after 5 years. My daily work commute is around 35 miles but I want sc for some weekend trips. Arg. I don't want to drive minivan around during weekends. Help!!! lol..

 

[mbcaffe]

Drove my 60 today from Newark, CA through the East Bay Hills to Livermore, then doubled back across the San Mateo Bridge to make multiple stops in the Peninsula (up in Emerald Hills and such) before heading home.

Stats:
- Started with a full Standard charge showing 185 miles rated
- 118 miles driven
- 40 kWh consumed
- Consistently did 70-80 mph even in the hills
- Quick freeway on-ramp getaways every time (prompting my wife to chide me every time)
- Came home with 41 miles to spare while grinning ear to ear

Bottomline:
- No Range Anxiety with my 60 even when driving as hard as I ever would through taxing terrain and probably the most miles that I would do in a day
- Had loads of fun doing all that while enjoying all the double takes, tailgating paparazzi and the really-rewarding thumbs-ups from the kids and teenagers

If anyone should be debunking range anxiety of any degree or kind, it should be TMC-ers!! I rest my case for a 60 over an 85 for those who want to get a lot of bang for their buck while still keeping their finances sane

thanks. your report makes me feel better about driving from the factory to Harris Ranch. I did not want to make a short stop in Gilroy.

 

[weccman]

Okay, while I truly Think most folks will be truly happy with a 60kWh battery, and may be laughing as they swap for a 400-plus mile, 125kWh battery in six years, I went for the 85 after much thought and suggest it strongly if your budget can accommodate it. I am 2,300 miles into ownership, so developing some perspective. My 85 kWh opinion is ESP true for two reasons I may not have anticipated. First, as above, the car begs to be driven and watt hours per mile will be way above 300 average for any moderately aggressive driver. Second, if you live in cold weather be aware range is affected significantly. Sitting at work one cold day the car ate up 25 miles just keeping the battery warm. Third (I know, I said two reasons), the 60kWh battery I doubt will make it easily between superchargers. Fourth unlimited miles on the 85 warranty, but note the battery warranty is vague anyway. Fifth, remember that your rated range with a regular (non-max) charge with an 85 is 235-240 miles. With a 60 it'll be - what about 180-190 miles - I forget but had a good estimate of this in hand some time ago. I would go only about 75 miles each way (without a charge), 90 miles each way with a range charge, and feel totally safe with that. Especially in cold weather Sixth, the 85 is faster. Which is good for intentional whiplash injury (this car is fast!).

Consider bagging a second charger, maybe bag the paint armour, and suddenly you are $7500 from the 85 if you are already at 60. That's just $750/ year or about $2/day for ten years. Or $4/day for five years. And without the supercharge fee you are looking at a $5500 difference or $3/day for five years. Skip that Starbucks habit and you go Zoom.

Without making light of the significant cost, if it can fit your budget, I believe the 85 is worthwhile for most. The one argument against it is that you will not need the extra miles an 85 offers often. Still true, but I think I'll have needed it more often than I'd have thought.

If 60 is your choice, you will adore this car and I am sure not look back, as long as the above caveats have been considered. My opinion is just that and, I am sure, if I'd gotten the 60 I'd make it work great for our family.

I agree with all of this. I have the 85 and after three months of driving the Model S, I have already wished I had a bit more range. I can't wait for that 125 kWh battery! And remember that these batteries are expected to degrade in charge-holding capacity by about 30 percent over seven or eight years. So today's 240 standard charge (or 185 for the 60 kWh pack) will gradually become 170 (or 130) and the range charge will become 185 (or 150). Hopefully the expansion of supercharger infrastructure will make that okay. But I agree with those who have said if you can possibly afford the 85, do it.

 

[hans]

Posted my first 0-60 mph time on the delivery thread. Probably should put the discussion here in the future. 6.03 seconds with 3 people in the car and in a slight drizzle of rain. If I loose the extra 400lbs of baggage I bet it will hit 5.9 seconds or better.

First 60kWH delivery notice or email - who will it be? - Page 43

 

[pilotSteve]

Drove my 60 today from Newark, CA through the East Bay Hills to Livermore, then doubled back across the San Mateo Bridge to make multiple stops in the Peninsula (up in Emerald Hills and such) before heading home.

Stats:
- Started with a full Standard charge showing 185 miles rated
- 118 miles driven
- 40 kWh consumed
- Consistently did 70-80 mph even in the hills
- Quick freeway on-ramp getaways every time (prompting my wife to chide me every time)
- Came home with 41 miles to spare while grinning ear to ear

Bottomline:
- No Range Anxiety with my 60 even when driving as hard as I ever would through taxing terrain and probably the most miles that I would do in a day
- Had loads of fun doing all that while enjoying all the double takes, tailgating paparazzi and the really-rewarding thumbs-ups from the kids and teenagers

If anyone should be debunking range anxiety of any degree or kind, it should be TMC-ers!! I rest my case for a 60 over an 85 for those who want to get a lot of bang for their buck while still keeping their finances sane

I started a thread 'learning to love Rated miles' talking about my 85kW driving 170 miles each way up over then down a mountain pass, with temperatures 21°-35°F. My experience has been to lop off 20% of the Rated mile estimate for cold weather losses. I ended up with 30-50 miles Rated remaining. With a 60kWh battery I could not have made that trip on that weekend due to the cold; in the summer it probably would have been doable with 10-20 miles remaining.

All depends on what you need/want to do. I'm happy having an 85 even if most of my driving is less than 100 miles before recharging.

 

[ddruz]

Received email confirmation of 60 kWh curb weight and battery cell type today from Tesla:

"The curb weight of the 60kWh Model S is listed at 4464lb. As for the battery cells, the 60kWh uses the same cell type as the 85kWh battery, but less of them."

Recapping the 85 kWh vs the 60 kWh car:
-Curb weight: 4647 lbs 85 kWh, 4464 lbs 60 kWh
-EPA miles per charge: 265 miles 85 kWh, 208 miles 60 kWh
-EPA MPG electric equivalent: 89 MPGe 85 kWh, 95 MPGe 60 kWh
-Battery cells: Both cars use Panasonic 3.1 ah 18650 Li-Ion cells, the 60 kWh cars use fewer.

 

[hans]

Received email confirmation of 60 kWh curb weight and battery cell type today from Tesla:

"The curb weight of the 60kWh Model S is listed at 4464lb. As for the battery cells, the 60kWh uses the same cell type as the 85kWh battery, but less of them.".

Thank you for asking, and thank you for sharing. Mystery solved! Now everyone can speculate on the weight of the S40.

 

[qwk]

The 3.4 ah has to be a mistake. It should be the 3.1 ah cells.

 

[hans]

The 3.4 ah has to be a mistake. It should be the 3.1 ah cells.

Why do you say that?

 

[stopcrazypp]

Why do you say that?

http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/23/panasonics-3-1ah-batteries-to-be-used-in-the-tesla-model-s-hav/

3.4Ah version (NCR18650B) started production in mid-2012 and started hitting the market in June 2012. First Model S from factory was in late June 2012. There's not enough time for Tesla to test the cells properly and they wouldn't have any cells for the prototypes.

 

[ddruz]

The 3.4 ah has to be a mistake. It should be the 3.1 ah cells.

Yes, it was a typo on my part. Documented reports all indicate that the cells are 3.1 ah. I will correct the original post.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Recapping the 85 kWh vs the 60 kWh car:
-Curb weight: 4647 lbs 85 kWh, 4464 lbs 60 kWh
-Battery cells: Both cars use Panasonic 3.1 ah 18650 Li-Ion cells, the 60 kWh cars use fewer.

Edit: 85kWh-60kWh = 25kWh (I used 20kWh previously, thanks to GSP for checking my math)

25kWh/(3.6V * 3.1Ah / cell) = 2240 cells
Each 3.1Ah cell weighs 45.5g = 0.10031 lb

2240 cells*0.10031 lb = 224.7lbs
4647lbs-4464lbs = 183lbs.

So there's some other overhead for the 60kWh pack (41.7lbs more than expected).

 

[4sevens.com]

60kwh = BMW 528
85kwh = BMW 550
P85 = BMW M5

if you have the money, at least get the 85kwh.

hahaha AWESOME!

Get P85 and be done with it. Coming from an M5 I wouldn't go lower than that.

 

[Alpha]

Received email confirmation of 60 kWh curb weight and battery cell type today from Tesla:

"The curb weight of the 60kWh Model S is listed at 4464lb. As for the battery cells, the 60kWh uses the same cell type as the 85kWh battery, but less of them."

Recapping the 85 kWh vs the 60 kWh car:
-Curb weight: 4647 lbs 85 kWh, 4464 lbs 60 kWh
-EPA miles per charge: 265 miles 85 kWh, 208 miles 60 kWh
-EPA MPG electric equivalent: 89 MPGe 85 kWh, 95 MPGe 60 kWh
-Battery cells: Both cars use Panasonic 3.1 ah 18650 Li-Ion cells, the 60 kWh cars use fewer.

Finally! I have been waiting for this info for a long time!
So we are talking about a weight difference of 183 pounds. Not huge, but probably enough for a slight efficiency gain for sure - that's like carrying around an extra passenger everywhere you go...
I wonder if you could reduce the weight even more, by maybe using lighter aftermarket wheels or something. Seems like Tesla would have considered everything though and any half baked measly attempt by one of us at improving range or efficiency would probably not amount to much...

 

[jerry33]

I wonder if you could reduce the weight even more, by maybe using lighter aftermarket wheels or something.

Light aftermarket wheels are 23 lb. vs. 31. lb. so ~32 lb. of savings. Because the wheels rotate, the effect is more than the actual weight reduction. How much more depends on where the weight has been removed: near the hub, not so much. near the rim, quite a bit.

It's probably more effective--and certainly more cost effective--to use the pizza pan method. Post #385

 

[Alpha]

Light aftermarket wheels are 23 lb. vs. 31. lb. so ~32 lb. of savings. Because the wheels rotate, the effect is more than the actual weight reduction. How much more depends on where the weight has been removed: near the hub, not so much. near the rim, quite a bit.

It's probably more effective--and certainly more cost effective--to use the pizza pan method. Post #385

I was googling some carbon fiber wheels. That would make a pretty big difference, but the price is crazy, like $15K for a set... You'd be better off putting that kind of money into a bigger battery...

 

[FredTMC]

Finally! I have been waiting for this info for a long time!
So we are talking about a weight difference of 183 pounds. Not huge, but probably enough for a slight efficiency gain for sure - that's like carrying around an extra passenger everywhere you go...
I wonder if you could reduce the weight even more, by maybe using lighter aftermarket wheels or something. Seems like Tesla would have considered everything though and any half baked measly attempt by one of us at improving range or efficiency would probably not amount to much...

Yes, waited a good while for this data. I'm happy to see it weighs less than the 85kwh and that the battery is identical between the 60kwh and 85kwh car. "Less of the same cells" was my guess.

 

[Alpha]

It's probably more effective--and certainly more cost effective--to use the pizza pan method. Post #385

Thank you for pointing me to that thread. Very impressed with the pizza pans! We ought to get together and engineer and have built, a slightly better looking more professional version with some small vents- A 5-7% gain could be worth it on the smaller battery configurations!

 

[Doug Martoccia]

I live in Dallas and the extra range of the 80 would allow me to get to Austin or Houston on a single charge. However, I don't really do that very often and if I do, I'd just use my wife's SUV. I suspect most people have a gasser as their second car, so really your Tesla can be relegated exclusively as a commuter. I'm fine with that. They likely will build superchargers on 1-35 I suspect between Dallas and Austin and Austin and San Antonio which should allow the trip should I really want to avoid using the SUV. As for speed, 0-60 in 5.6 vs 5.9 is negligible. Both are fast as heck for a massive sedan.

I wonder how many folks follow this string of logic and opt for the supercharger as well. If you want a supercharger, you need at least the 60. At this time, anyone outside of California is placing their bet with Tesla that they will continue to deploy more supercharging stations. I'm sure that they will, but they aren't there yet and Tesla seems quiet on the rollout plan. I'm getting the SC and crossing my fingers that Tesla installs them in or around Oceanside, Riverside, Fresno, Oakland, Santa Barbara, Palmdale, Bishop, Stateline and Reno. That would just about cover 99% of my driving.

 

[hans]

I started a new thread in the driving dynamics sub-forum but if anyone is interested I just got 0-60mph time of 5.4 seconds on my 60 kWh Model S.

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/13290-60-kWh-0-60mph-time?p=264251&viewfull=1#post264251

I would love it if someone else could validate these numbers.