Opting out of the Performance Edition

[Cattledog]

Let's not forget that Motor Trend tested Performance at 4 seconds and Standard at 5 seconds, so proportionately similar. But think about a non-performance as a 5 second car, there are very few production sedans that top that. Add in the silence and instantaneousness of it all and I'll argue it makes both cars feel a second faster still!

 

[Anzir]

Some tests had it at 3.8 seconds, which is faster than this car (pic attached).

And that's my segue to my point: with Ferraris, if you have to ask how much it costs to maintain it, it's probably not the car for you (although maintenance on a F430 is less than $1500 a year).
With the MS Performance, if you have to ask if you need it, it's probably not the car for you.

 

[bosgig]

Does anyone think there's any validity to the argument that the supposedly better wiring in the performance version will be able to better take advantage of whatever technology/power exists when we all have to replace our batteries in 8-10 years?

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

Does anyone think there's any validity to the argument that the supposedly better wiring in the performance version will be able to better take advantage of whatever technology/power exists when we all have to replace our batteries in 8-10 years?

hell ya. and at least 1% of the reason I'm going performance. not sure the other 70% .. 29% air suspension and leather. (probably 70% insanity, like my mother said. I guess she was a little bit right)

 

[brianman]

The Performance option is about want, not need. I still want(ed) it.

I forget who, but somebody upthread (page 2 I think) hinted: One of the "problems" with fast acceleration is that you reach the speed limit very quickly. I blame the speed limit not the Perf.

 

[bosgig]

I've pretty much concluded that I'll need 19" winter tires regardless, so needing those in addition to the 21" perf tires is no longer a hassle factor or incremental cost for me. And I'd definitely do the leather upgrade and probably the air suspension upgrade, so the cost delta becomes around $12k. For that, I see three values: 1) speed, not needed but secretly (or not so) preferred by most; 2) better wiring for future-proofing (questionable--maybe fiction but maybe huge); 3) better retention of value, as I'm told is likely by friends who own and trade classic cars and sports cars (one of whom is now looking at the S because of me!!!). So these latter two aren't really quantifiable prospectively (I'd love opinions), but my gut tells me a reasonable value to put on them is $5k. I'm assigning no value to the other minor upgrades in the perf package. So that leaves me at $7k for speed/bragging rights/thumping my neighbor's Maserati when we drag race down the block (ok, kidding on this one, but if we ever did...). Is speed worth $7k? No. Am I going to do it anyway? Maybe, but if I do I'll know why--because I'll probably have this car for 15 years and I think I might get some enjoyment for that $7k over that time.

 

[Rodolfo Paiz]

Does anyone think there's any validity to the argument that the supposedly better wiring in the performance version will be able to better take advantage of whatever technology/power exists when we all have to replace our batteries in 8-10 years?

I don't. First, there's the "supposedly" part of the argument: it's pure conjecture. And it's just as likely that the wiring is the same in all cars.

Second: In 8-10 years, I'll be buying a new car from Tesla and won't care at all about the wiring in my 2013 Model S.

 

[wstuff]

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. :crying:

 

[bosgig]

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.

My current car is 13 years old. . .I have a completely irrational tendency to become attached to my cars and not jump to the next thing. Silly, really, but it's not so bad given that I own them for the shallower part of the depreciation curve and not just the steep part. So when I say I'll have it for 15 years, obviously I may be wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me.

 

[dsm363]

My current car is 13 years old. . .I have a completely irrational tendency to become attached to my cars and not jump to the next thing. Silly, really, but it's not so bad given that I own them for the shallower part of the depreciation curve and not just the steep part. So when I say I'll have it for 15 years, obviously I may be wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me.

That's the way to do it of course. Buying new cars every 5-7 years like most people do isn't the best use of money. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with doing that just that your way is the better financial decision.

 

[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. :biggrin:

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. :biggrin:

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

Can't agree more :biggrin:

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

my feelings exactly.

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

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. :crying:

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.