Model Y Refresh (Juniper) Revealed

[GuyV]

Winter tires get worse range. Unfortunately they also prevent me from dying during the winter, so I need them.

The trip is a day trip, the phantom drain being parked outside a few hours not in use when it is 10 degrees outside is meaningful.

So, worst case is that occasionally you might want to stop and charge up for a few extra miles rather than drive slower. For that, you, not 99% of people, would have Tesla use a larger battery, with the negatives it would entail.

With every model Tesla designers consider the optimal battery/range tradeoff, and of course choose what they think will give them the best marketability. Everyone would like more range if it were free of cost and penalties, but it isn't.

Sponsored

 

[GuyV]

The point, which you avoided, was that the weight differences you calculated were wrong and would be lower.

Since we were talking about 300 vs 400 miles on Y or Cybertruck, not any specific configurations, that is 33% more, so 33% more battery, 33% more weight.

 

[Deleted member 17810]

https://carnewschina.com/2025/01/13...eived-50000-orders-on-launch-day-source-says/

On January 10, when the new Tesla Model Y “Juniper” was launched in China, 50,000 orders were placed that day, according to a Chinese auto blogger 长三角行健者

 

[BannedByTMC]

No one lives in a theoretical world. More expensive and heavier is always worse.

You managed to ignore the rest of my short, concise comment:

As energy density continues to improve and production costs continue to drop, as they have been, eventually you will get more range for the same cost, or less, and same weight, just as the early S had less range and cost more than the newer ones.

 

[BannedByTMC]

Since we were talking about 300 vs 400 miles on Y or Cybertruck, not any specific configurations, that is 33% more, so 33% more battery, 33% more weight.

No, you, incorrectly stated, that the Y and CT were only given 300 miles of range, and I corrected you with the actual figures.

 

[GuyV]

You managed to ignore the rest of my short, concise comment:

So, what are you arguing about, supporting those who want it Right Now? ?

 

[GuyV]

No, you, incorrectly stated, that the Y and CT were only given 300 miles of range, and I corrected you with the actual figures.

It was an approximation because we've been speaking in generalities about how much more range we should be given. Most claims were that we need 400 EPA miles because "real world" range wasn't sufficient for multiple folks' different special use cases. That really gets into the weeds since there is no specific "real world" range. It is actually even possible to get much better than EPA range if you drive to achieve that. Everyone's "real world" depends not just on how it is configured and driving conditions, but also on how they feel they ought to be able to drive in their particular circumstance, citing instances that differ widely from the majority of pickup truck use. 400 miles was just a number pulled out of their ...hats to get them there.

You tried to bring in Model 3, and ignored Model S which is already has EPA 405 miles, and upcoming range extenders targeted at 440 miles. You can't actually nail down an EPA range for Cybertruck because Tesla hasn't. In one place on their website they say "up to 325*" and on another 320. My default FS AWD was less than that and the Cyberbeast still less. It isn't even required to have an EPA range. There have been and will be multiple versions of Model Y with multiple types of batteries. What's inevitable is that whatever improved range Tesla delivers, there will be complainers demanding more. Most buyers would not be happy to make the tradeoffs for that. My Cybertruck cost more than enough.

 

[BannedByTMC]

What's inevitable is that whatever improved range Tesla delivers, there will be complainers demanding more.

Thank you for finally agreeing with me that people want more range.

 

[dalton108]

Thank you for finally agreeing with me that people want more range.

The People: Yes. Yes, we want that!

 

[GuyV]

Thank you for finally agreeing with me that people want more range.

No, I never said they didn't, at least until they learned the tradeoffs. There has been argument on how much more they want and how much they really need it. I initially reserved the tri-motor that promised 500 miles. When it turned out the AWD was going to have more range and cost even more than the tri-motor had been predicted, but still $20K less, I switched since 2.6 second 0-60 was never on my list of needs.

No one has said they wouldn't like more range if it didn't have costs and drawbacks. I don't agree with those who claim Tesla has failed to deliver the truck that most people need. In an alternate universe I can envision the endless complaints about how stupid Tesla was that the bigger original design didn't fit in millions of garages.

 

[GuyV]

The People: Yes. Yes, we want that!

At what cost? ?

 

[BannedByTMC]

At what cost? ?

I'll let you do the math:

https://www.electrive.com/2024/12/11/ev-batteries-now-cost-115-usd-per-kwh-on-average/

 

[dalton108]

At what cost? ?

Well, we just want it. AND we want at no cost to weight, handling, charging speed and least of all moolah (?). In fact, we’d like it for less! Thank you so much!

And you better hurry up too, before China enters the chat! Theeeennnks!

 

[GuyV]

I'll let you do the math:

https://www.electrive.com/2024/12/11/ev-batteries-now-cost-115-usd-per-kwh-on-average/

The costs are more than just the price of the batteries. And that's not even remarkably cheap. We were promised under $100/kWh a decade ago. Though you would pay more for an already expensive vehicle you also pay in weight, size, efficiency and cargo capacity.

Sponsored