Tesla Talk

slave1

I know there is a EPO VIN lookup but is anyone aware of a website where I can put in a specific non CPO Tesla VIN and verify the car details.....

unkel

What's the VIN?

jhegarty

You will get very little detail , unless the car was CPO at some stage in the past.

Black_Knight

Lay some knowledge on me (or link me to something to explain it)

What's the differences between all the S versions, for 2014-2015 aged cars?
I know there's a 60, a 70, an 85 and a 90. Some have dual drive motors versions, some have performance versions, which are pretty self explanatory, but is the difference between the 60, 70, 85 and 90 just the usable battery size?

Following that, aside from obvious extra range, is there anything which makes one more desirable, or undesirable, than the other?

Gumbo

Black_Knight wrote: »

Lay some knowledge on me (or link me to something to explain it)

What's the differences between all the S versions, for 2014-2015 aged cars?
I know there's a 60, a 70, an 85 and a 90. Some have dual drive motors versions, some have performance versions, which are pretty self explanatory, but is the difference between the 60, 70, 85 and 90 just the usable battery size?

Following that, aside from obvious extra range, is there anything which makes one more desirable, or undesirable, than the other?

60 - 60 kWh battery
70 - 70 kWh battery
P - Performance
D - Dual Motor

Bigger battery = higher “horse power” too.

KCross

Gumbo wrote: »

60 - 60 kWh motor
70 - 70 kWh motor

Thats wrong.

It refer to battery capacity, not motor. You've mixed the two actually because you cant get a 70kWh motor!

ELM327

And it doesnt even apply to battery capacity usable, it refers to notional gross capacity. EG the S90D had 82kWh usable when new, which was nerfed to 78kWh via recent upgrades.
The first S60/D had 58kWh usable, the software locked 60 (75kWh gross) had ~61kWh usable. The S70/D had less than 70 usable.

It is still the same. I think the S/X 100D has ~92kWh usable.

Black_Knight

So why is there so much hate for the 60?

Comparing a 70 to an 85, they could be the exact same spec, just one has a smaller battery pack? Correct?
Seems everyone only considers the S85 as a bargain in the bargains thread. Never see a 70 there, and 60s always get ripped into (hence my question above).

slave1

First gen 60 battery pack supposed to be muck

ELM327

It was a lower voltage, they charged slower, had much less range, much worse deg, less warranty (mileage limited vs unlimited on others), you had to pay for SuC capability.

Mainly the low range and the increased deg and the lower spec (as the only reason to get one was because you couldnt afford the S85).

Gumbo

KCross wrote: »

Thats wrong.

It refer to battery capacity, not motor. You've mixed the two actually because you cant get a 70kWh motor!

I’m usually the first to correct people that make that mistake

unkel

I'd have no problem owning a Model S 60 if I could get it at the right price. Still fast charges faster than most other EVs in the market and still has more range than most. And still does 0-60 in 6s. That's faster than 99% of cars on the road today. It's a Tesla Model S as much as any other.

ELM327

Range is about 200-250km 100-0% so 200km real world.
Not bad in 2014 but not so good now

Sabre Man

There's slightly more to it than just battery size. For instance, early models could have panorama roofs (required for roof boxes) or metal roofs. Now they all have glass roofs.

70 kWh models could also be upgraded to 75 kWh.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Mike9832 wrote: »

Can we make this a general Tesla chat thread?

Tesla seem to be in free fall

Under 200 a share now

Anyone bought stock at this price?

Almost lowest in 5 years

Just bought 2 shares for the craic :pac:

Won't hold on to it for long lol, too volatile

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Tesla-Faces-Herculean-Task-As-Share-Price-Tanks.html

I think this could be it for them

Sad if it ends like this, like there cars

We've been saying it for years, so who knows

Elon will have to go?

He's gone awol recently

Delusional taxi fleets/autopilot crap (that won't happen for at least 10 years).

A truck that can't possibly be made with current battery tech.

List goes on and on

Less than a year from now if VW are serious ( they might be ) this is going to leave Tesla as a smudge on the road.

First post on this thread....interesting to reread.

mrbongo

Daniel Round Metronome wrote: »

First post on this thread....interesting to reread.

Holy **** .... I'd better sell all my shares now and flog my M3 on the used market quick before I'm left with a car I can't sell

Silent Running

Daniel Round Metronome wrote: »

First post on this thread....interesting to reread.

It wasn't all that interesting to read when it was first posted, never mind now. :P

I noticed that Mike/Y2K/Thiery has shed his skin yet again. Anyone pick up on his latest incarnation?

Gumbo

Silent Running wrote: »

It wasn't all that interesting to read when it was first posted, never mind now. :P

I noticed that Mike/Y2K/Thiery has shed his skin yet again. Anyone pick up on his latest incarnation?

He seems to be flying under the radar at the moment.

unkel

Because of boards getting threads backwards all the time recently, I stumbled upon a thread about the Tesla Model S recently. The first thread on this forum (it is from many years before this forum started but it looks like it was moved here later)

Post from 29/03/2009, over 11 years ago!!!

That is one sweet looking 4 door car :eek::eek::eek:

http://www.autobloggreen.com/photos/tesla-model-s-live-reveal/1455049/

Much nicer than their first car, the roadster.

Autoblog wrote:

Some other fast facts:

• The car fits seven people and their luggage: five adults and two children in rear-facing seats under the hatch inside, with luggage in the boot up front.
• If not people, it can fit a mountain bike with its wheels still on, a surfboard and a 50-inch television at the same time.
• The dashboard screens were installed to rid the interior of buttons. The 17-inch main display is fully 3G and Internet capable.
• The 300-mile range is possible (vs the Roadster's 244-mile range) because the S has 8,000 battery cells vs. 6,000 in the Roadster, the batteries have been improved in mass and volumetric performance, and there is more advanced cell chemistry in each cell, and the S has a cd of about .27 vs. the Roadster's drag coefficient of .35.
• On a 220V outlet, the car can be recharged in 4 hours.
• Option packages are being decided, with the only initial option being the battery pack. Customers will also be able to buy the 160-mile pack and rent the long range pack for a trip.
• They are finalizing the warranty, and expect it to be 3-4 years for the car and 7-10 years for the battery pack. They expect replacement battery packs to come in at "well under $5000" according to Elon.
• The quickness: the standard S will get to 60 in 5.5 to 6.0 seconds. A coming sport version will get to 60 in "well under five seconds," Musk says.
• The car will get a single-speed transmission.
• The body panels and chassis will be primarily aluminum, with a total weight of just over 4,000 pounds, about 1,200 pounds of that being battery mass.
• For infrastructure, Tesla is working with a government-affiliated partner to set up battery changing stations at various locations. They will be able to change the battery in 5-8 minutes, "quicker than filling up your car with gas."

Linky

macnab

That's nonsense, I fit a 65" TV in my Model S........

unkel

I don't think 65" TVs existed back in early 2009 :pac:

Talk about Musk the eternal optimist. Swap the battery in a changing station quicker than filling up with gas? A replacement battery for less than USD5k, installed and all? Recharging the battery at home in 4 hours on granny charger?

Lumen

unkel wrote: »

Recharging the battery at home in 4 hours on granny charger?

In fairness it didn't say "granny charger". Doesn't the onboard AC charger in the S do 22kW? So a four hour charge from AC seems possible.

ELM327

Silent Running wrote: »

It wasn't all that interesting to read when it was first posted, never mind now. :P

I noticed that Mike/Y2K/Thiery has shed his skin yet again. Anyone pick up on his latest incarnation?

Friends EV, you forgot that one


He's been under the radar if he's back.

unkel

Lumen wrote: »

In fairness it didn't say "granny charger". Doesn't the onboard AC charger in the S do 22kW? So a four hour charge from AC seems possible.

Of the billion or so 220V sockets in the USA, how many do you think are capable of providing 22kW?

ELM327

unkel wrote: »

How many of the 220V sockets in the USA do you think are capable of providing 22kW?

They have a lot more home charging >7kW than we have here.
You can get 80A/220v at home there for 18kW. I also believe that there was a 100A home charger too.


In EU you generally have 7kW in most countries and a max of 11kW (16a 3phn) in more sophisticated countries like Germany.

unkel

I'm not disputing it's possible. Just saying that it would be very uncommon for any home anywhere, be it in Germany or the USA or wherever, to actually have a 220V socket that can provide 22kW

Out of interest, what car does Musk drive himself as his daily driver? I know he took delivery of his McLaren F1 when he was only in his 20s probably paid for with some PayPal earnings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3tlVE_QXm4

ELM327

I think it's easier to get "faster" AC charging in the US compared to here. certainly the ratio of >10kW home chargers in the US would be many multiples to 1 in the EU.

He's been seen driving the cybertruck prototype... if I were him I wouldnt be driving anything else!

unkel

True and an average American household uses a multiple of the electricity that we use. Air conditioning alone!

slave1

In the US the "garage/dryer" socket is high amperage at 30, as posted above 80amp/100amp consumer units not at all unusual whereas we are stuck at 60 for our entire house. Even if not fitted it's cheap to get installed at around $150

AndyBoBandy

unkel wrote: »

Of the billion or so 220V sockets in the USA

you mean 110V??