1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Tesla Model X P100D

Discussion in 'Motors' started by peterattheboro, Feb 27, 2019.

  1. Nasher

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 22, 2006

    Posts: 11,907

    Well they do have until 2040, so no rush :p

    Petrol isn't going anywhere for a long time. They haven't even figured out how they are going to tax EVs to death yet.
     
  2. HEADRAT

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 17,839

    Location: Cambridge, UK

    I think it’s taken “traditional manufacturers” time to catch up so to a certain extent Tesla has had no real competition in their niche.

    Problem is the 2019/20 will see lots of the big boys move into electric, Tesla will certainly “feel the pinch” of more competition.
     
  3. Doobedoo

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jul 24, 2016

    Posts: 1,739

    Location: South West

    This is why I think hydrogen will end up being the go to future go-go juice.

    It can be taxed and money can be made from the production and supply of hydrogen. All the existing petrol station can be converted to hydrogen supply so the infrastructure already exists.
     
  4. Nasher

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 22, 2006

    Posts: 11,907

    The plans for hydrogen at the moment is a new fuel for big things like trains, ships, aircraft. But it's not all that certain yet.

    If we have a breakthrough in fusion power generation then we probably will stick with electric. If there is a breakthrough in hydrogen harvesting (and storage) then it might go that way.

    Hydrogen is a better fuel, but it takes way more energy to collect than you get back from burning it.
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2019
  5. Doobedoo

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jul 24, 2016

    Posts: 1,739

    Location: South West

    Both Toyota and Hyundai have cars you can buy and others are already developing

    https://www.nextgreencar.com/fuelcellcars/
     
  6. Doobedoo

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jul 24, 2016

    Posts: 1,739

    Location: South West

    Until Electeic vehicles can charge in under 5mins and its battery pack last longer it’s always going to be inconvenient for the majority.

    It’s got a bit of catching up to do but as with any new tech the quicker they start to sell the quicker the tech will advance.
     
  7. Jonnycoupe

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 19, 2002

    Posts: 11,554

    Location: N.Warks

    Until the myth is largely proven as incorrect that might be the case, truth is they are already suitable for the majority of people’s use.

    If I have to charge in 5 mins in order to do 200miles a day I would sooner change my job than car....
     
  8. Doobedoo

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jul 24, 2016

    Posts: 1,739

    Location: South West

    It depends on the person. If your a mum for example your only going to the shops, picking up the kids so for that it’s absolutely fine. If your using it for your daily commute which is a 50 mile round trip then that’s fine. If your a sales rep or like me a service engineer that can easily do 2-300 miles a day the last thing me or my boss wants it to have to stop somewhere between jobs to have to charge my vehicle for however long it takes. If you have to do any kind of long distance driving then it’s an inconvenience.

    Also how much strain is it going to put on the grid as more and more people begin to use ev’s. How many more power stations will need to be built and who is going to pay for it all. I imagine the cost per kwh is going to rise quite a bit.
     
  9. Scania

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 25, 2004

    Posts: 23,150

    Location: On the road....

    Absolutely, BMW, Ford, GM, Nissan & the rest undoubtedly are just sitting back and watching - and learning - Tesla may well not have much competition currently but by God, they soon will have and I doubt - from their current offerings - they will have much in the way of an answer.
     
  10. ahar

    Hitman

    Joined: May 6, 2011

    Posts: 689

    Location: Nr Watford

    Just specced each one up on the website - 90k Vs 71k. Seems the price on the model X has only very recently dropped a lot. Still 19k more for a car that looks like a Citroen MPV.


    No. As I mentioned in my previous post, for the great majority of people cars are substitutable between segments as well as within them. A 90k model X competes with range rovers , Volvo XC90, Porsche Cayennes etc etc, as well as Audi RS6 and panameras. That's how the car market works - you can see this by how carefully manufacturers set their range and options within even their own brand to try not to cannibalise sales.


    Remind me how many cars Tesla sells compared to the other manufacturers? Tesla is very successful, but when EV (pure EV, not hybrids) are around 1% of sales (UK SMMT figures, Nov 2018) it's a bit of a stretch to say traditional manufacturers are struggling to compete.
     
  11. pioneer2000

    Soldato

    Joined: Jun 20, 2004

    Posts: 5,314

    Location: Essex

    Nope, £80,200 for a model x with the premium pack (so directly comparable with an I-Pace, which I make as £72,455)

    Looks are totally subjective but the model X is much more of a looker than the confused Jaguar offering.

    Not sure if you’re being intentionally difficult about the choice of vehicle, if someone is looking at a Panamera they’re going to be more interested in what a model S is like than a model X...!
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2019
  12. Steedie

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Jun 29, 2004

    Posts: 19,429

    Location: Oxfordshire

    I wouldn’t say any of the Tesla range are lookers, they are all bland and lacking in any character.

    I think the Jag is by far the more appealing car, even if it’s not the better performer
     
  13. b0rn2sk8

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 9, 2003

    Posts: 4,075

    They are struggling with price/cost though, it's no secret GM lose thousands every time a Bolt is sold, at the moment they are having to eat the difference and sell it at a loss.

    https://electrek.co/2019/02/09/tesla-model-3-cost-surprise-porsche-audi-reverse-engineering/

    Zoe makes a profit per car when measured on 'variable cost' what ever that means, probably doesn't include development costs so its meaningless.
    https://europe.autonews.com/article...-to-keep-zoe-competitive-in-growing-ev-market

    That compares to Tesla's massive margins per car, particularly on S, X and M3 AWD/Performance.

    There is no doubt the i-Pace is a better looking car but there is more to it than that when considering EV's like charging. Tesla auto pilot is starting to get really good in the states, only a matter of time for Europe.
     
  14. Desmo

    Soldato

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 6,498

    Location: Chillin' on the Boat

    See now I think that's the other way around. They're currently inconvenient for the minority. It just takes a bit of time to get your head around owning, running and charging an EV. I genuinely believe that for the majority of people, a long range EV would suit them just fine. It's just that they go looking for the extreme journey they make once a year and say how inconvenient charging is.
     
  15. lordrobs

    Capodecina

    Joined: Sep 30, 2003

    Posts: 14,663

    Location: Mulbarton, Norwich

    Worried about the effect that this had on his almost one year old Model S the guy at work with one got a valuation on his against a new model... the depreciation worked out at just over £7... for every mile he's driven it. :eek:

    As for electric being suitable for everyone, I agree to an extent. I could shift my work day around to accommodate fast charging an EV with a decent range. My problem would be my overnight stops, would I be confident that the one charging point at my hotel for the night will be working and free to use? Once that issue is sorted I'd have one... well, I wouldn't because my employer would much rather me be in a Focus or something but you get my point.
     
  16. Nasher

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 22, 2006

    Posts: 11,907

    I wouldn't want to be a private buyer. Depreciation is now insane and it'll be near impossible to sell on after a few years.
     
  17. satchef1

    Mobster

    Joined: Apr 17, 2009

    Posts: 3,844

    Toyota, Hyundai, and Honda remain the only major manufacturers to actually release HFCVs though. And they aren't exactly selling brilliantly; as of the end of 2017, cumulative HFCVs sales hit 6,500 worldwide. At the same point, BEV sales were at 1.9 million.

    What about the power demands of refining hydrogen? How many power stations will we need for that? Who is going to pay for it?

    In a perfectly efficient system, it takes 32kWh of electricity to produce 1kg of hydrogen from water. That 1kg is enough for 100km of propulsion. So 3km per kWh. Convert to miles, and that's roughly 2 miles per kWh. An EV will typically get at least 3 miles per kWh, including transmission losses. So if we had perfectly efficient electrolysis, the electricity demands of running transport on hydrogen would be 50% higher than BEV. But we don't have perfectly efficient electrolysis. The best I've seen on a research paper is around 45kWh per kg.

    As for generating electricity, National Grid have stated in the past that they have no immediate concerns about being able to power EVs. Their focus is currently on developing a "smart grid" to smooth out demand, rather than just building more and more capacity to cater for the few "peak demand" hours per year.

    Could you explain the process of "converting" a petrol station to hydrogen? I'm assuming it involves ripping out the existing refuelling equipment and installing new equipment, meaning the infrastructure doesn't "already exist" at all. Only the sites do.

    You've also missed the infrastructure needed to produce the hydrogen fuel. Or does that "already exist" as well? I guess oil refineries can be knocked down and replaced with hydrogen production facilities?

    Fuel cost, according to an Engadget article from last year, is around $12 for 100km worth of fuel, subsidised. So roughly £10 for 100km, or £16 per 100 miles. That's 25% more than a typical petrol car despite the subsidy and without adding tax, the cost of infrastructure, or profit. Given the amount of tax on petrol, it seems like some serious economies of scale (or a major breakthrough) are needed to get the cost of hydrogen anywhere close to reasonable.
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2019
  18. ahar

    Hitman

    Joined: May 6, 2011

    Posts: 689

    Location: Nr Watford

    Only if you add no other options to the model X, which isn't going to happen. 90k is a realistic figure given a few options like better wheels and autonomous driving.

    Rubbish. Manufacturers know that substitutes for their cars cross types (i.e. consumers at these prices don't just look for a saloon, or an SUV, they consider both), which is why they design their models and options carefully to avoid too much cannibalisation.
     
  19. jpaul

    Soldato

    Joined: Mar 1, 2010

    Posts: 7,141

    As early adopters, they did not really think about the reduced production costs, in that respect it's not dissimilar to oled tv's, had the lease/pcp companies figured out the tesla risk though.

    [ the elektrek article linked, is vague about battery cost advantage Tesla have versus audi/porsche
    - https://electrek.co/2019/02/09/tesla-model-3-cost-surprise-porsche-audi-reverse-engineering/ ]
     
  20. pioneer2000

    Soldato

    Joined: Jun 20, 2004

    Posts: 5,314

    Location: Essex

    Why would you add autopilot being a feature the I-pace doesn’t have?

    The standard wheels are the equivalent wheels to the I-pace.

    If you want to compare apples to apples, an equivalent S is better than a Panamera and an X is better than a Cayenne.