Because 40kwh and 60kwh use the same pack. Just apparently software constrained.
<div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Martin WINLOW via EV <[email protected]> </div><div>Date:08/29/2014 7:54 AM (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: Willie2 <[email protected]>,EVDL Post Message <[email protected]> </div><div>Subject: Re: [EVDL] EVLN: As EV battery prices fall> ?More range or lower 100mi EV cost? </div><div> </div>"Why make an effort to sell lower priced 40kwh cars?" - Right now, I agree, but ... because, as I previously stated, in Europe and much of Asia, long distance is not the issue, it's car cost and range anxiety. If you can sell a car for $10k less without the buyer having to worry about range anxiety (because there is a good rapid charge infrastructure - SC or something else) then you'll sell more cars. I appreciate that T is concentrating on supplying as many MS as it can at the moment... but what about 2 or 3 years time. I would much rather buy an MS with 150 mile range than a Gen3 with the same range even if it cost $10k more. I think lots of others would, too. We just don't need 300 mile range, or 200 for that matter, 95% of the time. Why cart around all that unnecessary weight and why pay for it, too, in the first place? MW On 29 Aug 2014, at 12:16, Willie2 via EV <[email protected]> wrote: > On 08/29/2014 03:36 AM, Martin WINLOW via EV wrote: >> Now the dust has settled somewhat, does anyone has the insider knowledge of >> why Tesla abandoned the 40kWh pack and why, more interestingly, it didn't >> come with a supercharger option? >> >> I still think it would have a market, particularly in Asia and Europe where >> shorter average journeys are the norm - but only with an SC option. >> > The SuperCharger network is intended primarily to facilitate cross country > travel. To cost effectively implement the network, node spacing needs to be > maximized. That means the network is lowest cost when it is configured for > longest range cars. I am astonished (and EXTREMELY pleased) that Tesla has > made such rapid progress in the SuperCharger network. A network for shorter > range cars would necessarily develop much more slowly. > > At this time, Tesla is supply constrained; they have little interest in > selling lower priced cars; they are selling all the 85kwh cars they can > produce. Why make an effort to sell lower priced 40kwh cars? > > In the future, we may well see much more closely spaced SuperChargers. For > now, Tesla is pursuing the right course. IMHO. > _______________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20140831/2d615693/attachment.htm> _______________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
