Performance vs. Non-Performance & an extra $10K

[steve841]

- - - Updated - - -

I am on the fence because it is a lot to pay for car. I can afford it, but I don't normally purchase very expensive blindingly fast cars.

Jess

Clearly perf is not needed. You will likely use the 0-60 a handful of times after the newness wears off ...

But, its a damn good feeling to push that pedal and get the mental "ahhhhhhh" effect.

I've been on the fence before and have had many "did I make a mistake" after thoughts... this purchase wont kill me, but it is a substantial dent that any common sense person would pass on.

However, everyday you hear about those you grew up watching on TV passing away, the brave guys and gals coming back from war all mangled up, the country out of control spending money and sinking in debt, those strange pains and weird moments that make you realize your days are numbered as well ... and you say to yourself, "I've worked all my life and it's time to treat myself to something special" and George B smiles as you reserve your S Perf model.

If you can afford it, do it. You only live once.

 

[dsm363]

Buying the performance is also advertising for people you take for rides although 5.6 seconds still impresses people. Gun the performance and people realize EVs aren't slouches.

 

[Robert.Boston]

Or, save the $10k and be able to retire a month sooner. I didn't get the performance upgrade because I suspect that this car will become my wife's, and she drives conservatively. I'll apply the $10k to an upgrade on the GenIII that I get for myself. ;-)

 

[dsm363]

Or, save the $10k and be able to retire a month sooner. I didn't get the performance upgrade because I suspect that this car will become my wife's, and she drives conservatively. I'll apply the $10k to an upgrade on the GenIII that I get for myself. ;-)

That's a rational argument though. Buying the performance makes no sense but sure is fun:smile:

The performance almost has too much power for the tires that come on it though. For it to perform like the Roadster, I think stickier tires would be needed but it still does quite well.

 

[KenEE]

The Performance option is by far the best value! The equivalent upgrade on German usuals is well over Tesla's premium so perf is better value vs. non-perf. For example a Porsche Panamera 4 (0-60 in 5.8 sec) starts at $80k and the Panamera GTS (0-60 in 4.3 sec) starts at $111k.

 

[Cottonwood]

The Performance option is by far the best value! The equivalent upgrade on German usuals is well over Tesla's premium so perf is better value vs. non-perf. For example a Porsche Panamera 4 (0-60 in 5.8 sec) starts at $80k and the Panamera GTS (0-60 in 4.3 sec) starts at $111k.

If you can swing it in your budget, the Performance is a joy! I drive a lot of 2 lane mountain roads with short, occasional passing zones. I don't know what the 50-70 time is, but it is a true joy to whish by slower cars in my S as I pass them. :biggrin:

 

[westerndh]

I went for non-performance not only because it's plenty fast enough already, but when I let people drive the S, they will see that the phenomenal base acceleration totally rocks which hopefully makes their buying decision a no brainer no matter which battery pack they can afford.

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

Or, save the $10k and be able to retire a month sooner. I didn't get the performance upgrade because I suspect that this car will become my wife's, and she drives conservatively. I'll apply the $10k to an upgrade on the GenIII that I get for myself. ;-)

Or spend the $10K and live 10 years longer ;>
..but your reasoning is solid

 

[olanmills]

The Performance option is by far the best value! The equivalent upgrade on German usuals is well over Tesla's premium so perf is better value vs. non-perf. For example a Porsche Panamera 4 (0-60 in 5.8 sec) starts at $80k and the Panamera GTS (0-60 in 4.3 sec) starts at $111k.

This is how people can justify buying almost anything. You can frame almost anything as being a bargain of something else. "Honey, this 65" TV is only $500 more than the 55" one! The difference between the 45" and the 55" is $1000! The 65" is a bargain in comparison!"

This kind of comparison makes sense only if you're in the market to buy a car that goes that fast in the first place.

I think the real conisderation for most people in this thread is that they want a Model S (and aren't really considering alternatives at this point), and instead, are wondering if the $10k extra (or more if there's inclusions with the Perfomance that you don't even want) is worth the ability to accelerate faster.

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

If you want the leather and air suspension and 21" wheels it is a hell of a deal!
+ bigger wires for posibilities

 

[KenEE]

This is how people can justify buying almost anything. You can frame almost anything as being a bargain of something else. "Honey, this 65" TV is only $500 more than the 55" one! The difference between the 45" and the 55" is $1000! The 65" is a bargain in comparison!"

This kind of comparison makes sense only if you're in the market to buy a car that goes that fast in the first place.

I think the real conisderation for most people in this thread is that they want a Model S (and aren't really considering alternatives at this point), and instead, are wondering if the $10k extra (or more if there's inclusions with the Perfomance that you don't even want) is worth the ability to accelerate faster.

Well I don't see how you can ignore that the M5 is somewhere between $25,000 and $40,000 premium over the 550i. So $10k for the perf is a *deal*.

Face it, the non-perf is a lot of cash. Why not have something truly special for another $10k? (that was my internal process - I thought the non-perf was great, but the perf? WOW!)
And the reality is that you get the equivalent of a $25k-$40k premium for $10k.
And the botttom line? I mentioned that Porsche and BMW charged at least twice what Tesla charges for their performance versions and she jumped at the Model S Perf.

 

[Brian H]

...
Energy required to //accellerate// accelerate mass x from 0-30mph should equal energy >>> 30-60mph. The system does not care what the initial velocity is in either case, only that the mass needs to be //accellerated// accelerated an additional 30mph in a particular direction. Thus, all other things being equal, the Perf_S should do the deed quicker than the Non-Perf. And since air resistance is greater 30-60mph, even more reason.
--

Oog. That reasoning comes to the right conclusion through entirely wrong steps! Disturbing.

e=mv^2
30 mph, m x 30^2 = 900m
60 mph, m x 60^2 = 3600m

900 - 0 = 900
3600 - 900 = 2700.
3 times as much energy required to get from 30 to 60 as from 0 to 30.

 

[Princeton96]

I struggled a bit with the performance vs. non-performance decision as well. With the options I want (21" wheels, air suspension, etc.), the price difference between a performance and a non-performance works out to $8,500. I prefer the carbon fiber and I also prefer the grey performance wheels, but those two items aren't worth $8,500 to me.

I ultimately decided on the performance for reasons that aren't entirely rational and analytic. My belief is that the performance will retain its value a bit better, although I have no data to back that up. I was going to get a Sig but had to defer due to my travel schedule. The price difference between a non-performance Sig and a production performance is only a couple thousand dollars due to the Sig premium. The "I was going to pay that amount anyway." thought process was definitely a factor.

Bottom line, I guess, is that I can afford it and I want it. It's not rational or even particulary practical, but you only live once. It's my 40th birthday present to myself anyway, so might as well go all in!

 

[dsm363]

Bottom line, I guess, is that I can afford it and I want it. It's not rational or even particulary practical, but you only live once. It's my 40th birthday present to myself anyway, so might as well go all in!

Sounds reasonable to me. Congrats and happy birthday.

 

[Grendal]

I'm not sure if this has been brought up yet. So here goes: Now that there have been both performance and non-performance cars given out, has anyone tested the 0-60 of a non-performance to confirm its number? The performance actually seems to be a little better than anticipated. A lot of people test driving said that they could hardly tell the difference. Anyone test the difference? Officially. Just curious.

 

[EarlyAdopter]

Best advice I saw on here was this:

"If there's another car that would make you happier, buy it."

I was stuck between the 40kWh and 60kWh+SC. In the end, I realized that yes, there was another car that would make me happier: the Performance. And there is no other car I know of that would make me happier than a Performance Model S. So the deal is done. MVPA signed.

 

[sublimaze1]

Performance versus non performance.

For me, this was the issue that got pushed back and pushed back, and missed the cut.

I originally had the 60, no active air, no pano.

I drove at the Amped Dallas, and went to the 85 (Dallas to houston travel). I got the Air (didn't want to wait) and the pano (needed rear headroom and wanted points on top in case I needed to lug something on a rack.

So that visit put me ~$30K over where I was originally, another $10 for higher thrust would have been nice. I simply drew the line. I live very very rural. Should I decide to punch it in my neighborhood, I am going to kill a deer or end up in a ditch. (I am trying to justify, please bear with me). I would have liked to have the performance, don't get me wrong. I would also like to have a 1957 BMW 507, be able to speak Fluent Japanese, and dive the barrier reef next year. Some things have gotta give. Sadly.

 

[Cattledog]

Sublimate +1. Sounds like a new thread...If you didn't spend 15K on the Performance, what would you spend it on?

Life has lots of choices.

 

[Brian H]

... be able to speak Fluent Japanese, and dive the barrier reef next year. Some things have gotta give. Sadly.

10K could probably get you either of those!

 

[kinddog]

my two cents:

my first test drive was in a Performance. i don't know if i was overwhelmed by the whole circus that was the Get Amped event in Gaithersburg, MD, or because we were sitting in traffic the whole time, but i wasn't WOWED by the power of the car. it was definitely fast, but for whatever reason, it didn't seem like a 4.4 0-60 car.

my second test drive was in an 85kWh. again, probably due to the circumstances (non-circus environment, no traffic, longer test drive), but i was blown AWAY with the power and acceleration!

probably a mental thing. i'm sure if i went back and drove a Performance model in similar circumstances, it would leave me speechless. but the point is... the 85kWh put a huge grin on my face and i was amazed at how fast the acceleration was, even at high freeway speeds (60-80mph).

both cars felt very smooth on the choppy roads, so i didn't detect any positive or negative to either the 19 or 21" wheels in terms of comfort or performance.

my opinion: if you have ANY financial concerns about affording this car, then you should absolutely positively get the 85kWh. the P85 is solely for bragging rights... to be able to say you have a super-car on par with the fastest sedans and sports cars out of Germany. nobody "needs" that level of speed and power, especially when you can get 90% of it with the 85kWh option.

however, if money is not a concern, then go ahead and get the Performance model. That's what I'm doing. But i'm self-aware enough to realize it's nothing more than an ego tax. :redface: