Tesla Slashes Prices. But Is It Worth It?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 сер 2023
- Tesla just made the Model S and Model X $10,000 cheaper in exchange for less range. Is that worth it?
Watch full episode: bit.ly/wvfrmep182
Shop the merch:
shop.mkbhd.com
Twitters/X's:
/ wvfrm
/ mkbhd
/ andymanganelli
/ adamlukas17
/ ellisrovin
Threads:
Waveform: www.threads.net/@waveformpodcast
Marques: www.threads.net/@mkbhd
Andrew: www.threads.net/@andrew_manga...
David Imel: www.threads.net/@davidimel
Adam: https:www.threads.net/@parmesanpapi17
Ellis: / ellisrovin
Instagram:
/ wvfrmpodcast
Shop the merch:
shop.mkbhd.com
Join the Discord:
/ discord
Music by 20syl:
bit.ly/2S53xlC
Waveform is part of the Vox Media Podcast Network. - Наука та технологія
Watching Marques internally battle with the concept of ownership is something else.
It doesn't bother him that Tesla is doing this because he can easily afford it lol
@@DRG2Boss he'll never have to, he gets free telsas based on just referrals alone
Liked cuz pfp
Can you imagine if the iphone 16 comes with a 4amp/hr battery but they block out 20% of it and makes you subscribe to a monthly plan for the rest if your battery. This is insane.
Imagine buying an ICE car from a traditional automaker, and they disable a couple cylinders through software and sell the car for lower price, lmao
Not possible
People would buy it.
I believe something like this exists for certain Dodge Hellcat crate engines. They hold back about 20HP until you fulfill some kind of requirement. I believe the requirement is not financial and certainly not a subscription. I think you just need to sign a waiver.
Heated seats subscription...
@@joshuaomatsuli Cars have been deactivating cylinders while crusing on the highway for dacades where have you been?
I wish there will be a way through third party to jailbreak Tesla and unlock the battery for 1/5 of the price
Well if there is Tesla would ban you from updates and from using their chargers etc.
If apple could control iphone chargers, they would have made the charger to not work for jailbroken iPhones. The difference is Tesla can do that, but only with superchargers, not the one you have at home.
A group of students in Europe I believe figured out how to jailbreak it and unlock features
@@Mikivli that cool if Tesla not limiting the car from of ant features
@@TheBoxingNinja that may be true
This whole conversation grinds my gears. Paying for something that is already there. I'm so tired of this trend.
The just buy it at full price. If you want to save 10K…what’s the issue?
This feels like something that should be regulated. Where's Pete Buttigieg? Isn't this his gig?
@@dupre7416
Why is this something that needs to be regulated?
@@JJohnson313 Because it's the same exact hardware. If you bought the hardware you should be entitled to use all of its functionality.
How this is an acceptable practice to you is beyond me.
@@LightTheForgiving the full hardware is available at full price. What don’t you understand about that? But you don’t have a Tesla anyway and don’t plan on buying one so this whole thing doesn’t even matter. You just want a theoretical argument
Why would I carry the extra weight of a battery and use only 80% of its charge ? Does not make sense to me.
Because you pay 10k less. I hope I helped.
If it's a lithium ion battery pack, then you'll actually increase the lifespan of your battery by quite a significant amount. And considering how expensive a battery replacement is... I'd say it's worth it
Just buy a used one, save the 10k and still get the full battery capacity 😜 🤷♂️
Yep! It's unbelievable that anyone would so gleefully accept & overpay for all this BS manipulation!!!
imagine how many hybrids or PHEVs could be made with that chunk of battery. And imagine all the child lithium miners working just for filler space in a car thousands of miles away
If the battery is there, don't you get to use it eventually as the battery degrades? If the battery capacity degrades to 80% of the original capacity, but you've been limited to that 80% the whole time, you just get a longer period of time before experiencing any degradation?
It really depends how the software is configured. It could very well be that you have longer lasting battery + faster charging near the top. Or not :D . The negative is that is weight that negatively impacts performance.
Tesla is 100% still making a profit on the software limited version. The “unlocked” version is the same exact vehicle, and cost them the exact same amount to manufacture. These things together, simply show that you are getting FLEECED when purchasing the “unlocked” version. Tesla is making way more money off of you, while still providing you the exact same physical product it’s providing to everyone else.
Yep and given the telsa hacker community it's only a matter of time till you can just get the battery back by paying a tuner a few hundred dollars.
@@GreenBlueWalkthroughAnd you lose access to the supercharger network... sure.
Besides these are probably binned batteries that didn't meet the standard and they software limited them to keep them consistent in range.
Of course they're making a profit. They're just making less profit. Which means the people at the top don't get as many billions as before.
lol. Get it now?
@@lachlanB323there are binned batteries?
@@elith6930 Batteries that don't meet the standard. Similar to how apple has cheaper MacBooks with the same chip but less cpu/gpu cores because they're binned chips and didn't meet the standard.
The battery lockout feels bad because of the psychology of loss aversion. It feels much worse to lose something you had/have (a complete battery, with some of it taken away), than it feels good to gain something (FSD) - even though they are equivalent in price.
This is the same reason that Marques always says how bad it feels when something free has a pricetag added to it - because it's being taken away from people.
In economics this is a component of prospect theory
Around 1980 I used a disk cartridge that came in either 5MB or 10MB sizes. Physically the two sizes were identical. The difference was a jumper wire. So the idea of having a single product with multiple price points and field upgradable has some history.
same with iPhones storage. (please correct me if I'm wrong.) super annoying
@@CloserYouwhat, no. The chip is different for different storage options.
Locking a part of the battery behind a software lock is the definition of wasting resources. Pretty surprised that this wasn't mentioned, at all.
Companies should be heavily fined for stuff like this.
This is a horrible practice that they should absolutely be getting called out for.
A. It's a complete waste of resources for the so-called "green" thinking mentality this company gloats over.
B. There's no hardware reason for doing this, meaning that instead of decreasing the price of the "base" S/X, they're instead selling you it with a "fuck you" lock on the range/acceleration. This is even more obnoxious when you realize that the S and X have had overinflated prices now for a while, and the selling price of this new "standard range" WAS the normal price for the S and X for some time.
C. Think of what precedent this sets. It's another step towards not owning the hardware you purchased. Especially for a company with margins per sale as HIGH as Tesla already.
D. This is more of a response to the other comments I've seen in this thread. While you can technically charge to 100% reliably, you could also just charge to 80-85% on the traditional model and get even more range. It's still a net negative in range. This doesn't even address the acceleration lock, which imo is even more BS. They're quite literally locking you out of using the hardware you own in a way you see fit because you didn't give them enough money. Pathetic.
E. More battery and same heavy motors = more weight. Making your car less efficient and worse at handling than if they actually had a hardware reason for the reduced range/acceleration.
The solution is simple. Don't buy a Tesla. Take your money and shop elsewhere.
@@Hiluxtaco the thing with that though is that for people on a modest budget, Tesla has relatively reasonable entry level prices for EVs
@@FaZaFurhod The Chevy Bolt EV is far cheaper than anythingTesla sells..
I think they used binned batteries. So these cars use batteries that don't meet their standard and they just chuck a software limit to keep the cars consistent.
@@Hiluxtaco they don’t sell that anymore.
How is it legal to software limit the range??? That seems so predatory
What gets me is they can sell two versions of the same car, but one is 10k cheaper due to a software lock. The vehicles other than that are the same. Why can they discount one vehicle when it costs them the exact same to produce each vehicle. That is what bothers me. Why not just lower the price of the vehicle by 10k since it costs the same to make? GREED.
Nope. It’s likely the sales of long range model S and X are dropping off. People are buying Model Y or Model 3 Long Range instead. By knocking off 10k new customers get the same vehicle for less. Tesla have reduced or prices for vehicles before just not by this amount. They had to do something to not piss off the customers that already bought a long range model S.
Simple buy the lower model. After warranty jailbreak it and unlock the full capacity later 😂
A company is greedy :O
Wow :O
I wonder how musk became a billionaire selling things for what they're worth 🤣🤣🤣
Nice joke
@@elith6930 love poor people defending a billionaire😂 so American
Tesla really isn't a premium product. They were just first to mass produce EVs the price drop is warranted and needed
I'd say it's a premium product compared to another car of the same price. You get power, low operating cost, and a ton of software that makes the car more useful than a traditional gas car. Such as dog mode.
@@BenefitOfTheDoubtInquiry Not really all you get is a battery you don't get a ton of features even mainstream cars have at the same price like all other BEVs... Like the 20% battery tax is so real and hard to un see once you notice it. Besides Musk claimed he wanted to be the first to make a Universal BEV and he now can given the sear profit made on the model 3 given it's age and enfitionces... Like I'd bet he could drop the price of the Model 3 base to just below $30k and still make more then Ford does on the mach e.
Don’t tell the people living in the Bay Area that… they seem to truly think they’re saving the world by driving that garbage. It’s literally the only car I see. Funny tho cus my VW gets near 40mpg; I paid far far far less for my car, and caused far far far far less damage to the third world countries that Tesla steals their resources from to make your basic bitch “I’m super woke and vote Biden” modern car.
This is something a Tesla hater will say. There is nothing out there that is better value for money, whether you like it or not, this is the reality. Go support your brand of choice and maybe one day they will get better
@@colombiankilla01 get trolled. You’re probably 50% underwater on your shi**** Tesla “investment”. You bought into the hype just like the NFT boys did.
You absolutely DID pay for all of that battery. The cost for Tesla to build that car is X amount including the whole battery, they aren't going to lose money on having extra battery sitting there that people won't be using. People are paying for the whole battery for Tesla to be able to afford putting it the car, then people who want more battery are paying *extra* to unlock it. Its literally ripping off both parties.
So carry the extra weight for no reason?
Might maximize the battery usage
As every social media CEO would say: get customers on your side before you even think about making money from them. More Tesla users means more supercharger users and opportunity to charge subscriptions rather than a one time fee, easily justifying the $10000 drop
It's unbelievable that anyone would so gleefully accept & overpay for all this BS manipulation!!!
Another thing to add if the battery is not charging all the way up. Is it going to increase the battery life overall?
Just a thought
People bought petrol cars,filled up their tanks in minutes & went wherever they wanted without really bothering about range/miles & stuffs like that. Now cars are going electric & we now have to contend with charging speeds that can last minutes, batteries that can wear out earlier when compared to petrol cars, possible software limitations/locks,etc. Talk about creating a problem where it's non existent before
I remember this happening in fighting games, specifically. You'd buy a pack of skins, and the download would be ~128kb, because it was just an unlock code for the data already on the disc. We should have never allowed that to happen then.
But that's just data... the product isn't even "real" itself. It's digital, infinitely reproducible. It's not analogous.
If the skins weren't on the disc and instead they sent you the files to download somehow, what would be the difference? Besides you using more data to download them? The skins are still already made. You're paying for access in that case, not an actual thing.
@@elith6930 that's exactly what everyone said then. Now look where we are. You can argue semantics and debate what exact thing led to what, but on-disc DLC was part of the larger movement to strip us of our rights to ownership. It didn't cause the issues that the right-to-repair movement is tackling, and it didn't cause car manufacturers to charge a monthly fee for extra horsepower, but because people threw up their hands and said, "I guess", it led to the inevitable question, "what else can we get away with?".
But maybe you're right. In which case, you're welcome to PayPal me a few bucks for the files that I left for you on your drive. No need to thank me.
My question though like if you chose to say "unlock" the full battery via payment, what happens if the car is factory reset or sold or even say 10 years from now on its third owner
Love the clips idea. Seeing "50 minutes" on a video of Men talking bout tech would have been scary😭😭.
I think the reason why the software lock concept bothers people is because of the whole issue of ownership and also because it sort of calls into question what it is that you're paying for. If I pay more for something I'm expecting that I'm getting more or better, that some value was added that increased the cost. If I'm getting all of the hardware, all of the parts, and you're just preventing me from using some of the hardware, something doesn't make sense. I don't fully own the object in my possession because some part of it exists that I can't access because the company that sold it to me is preventing me from using it.
Imagine this as follows: you buy the whole car apart from the 20% of the battery, which is still Tesla's and you commit to them that you will carry this extra 20% everywhere with you. Or you rent a house and the owner says I have lots of stuff in the garage I can't take it elsewhere, so you can't use the garage. Or your grandpa sells you his beloved muscle car and he makes you promise that you won't go over 6k rpm ever in it.
@@zbyszanna I think we agree?
This could be a good use of battery units that didn't meet the full QA inspection requirement for long range. If 80% of the cells passed the QA test, it can still be sold instead of scrapped. Intel did this years ago to sell different CPU clock speeds.
Except unlike CPUs, a Battery cell that doesn't pass QA is a battery that's more likely to burst into flames. Speaking from experience lol
@@hjc1935exactly
If the Model S is the same battery I wonder if in the lower end model would the battery not deteriorate as fast? For example both models new off the lot have 300 miles vs 400 miles but are both capable of 400 miles. Year 5 of both cars would the 400 mile care only be capable of 350 miles but the 300 mile car still be capable of 300 miles?
That's what I was thinking unless they lowered the software lock as the battery degraded
You get 8 year warranty on that battery from Tesla so it's mostly a hypothetical question.
Imagine that the car always gets 320 miles of range no mater how you drive, even in winter, unless you do a lot of drag strips or something it should have enough capacity to let you do 320 miles under any circumstance, that would be cool
I have a bone to pick with anyone that thinks it's ok to lock out features of something you bought behind a paywall. The arguments that software continuedly gets updates to fix bugs or faults with the existing software seems like a bad excuse to place something behind a paywall. I'll just mention that my router gets "firmware updates" and is ot placed behind any sort of paywall to do so, however companies like Cisco deem that they don't care about your safety so if there is a major venerability (EG: KRACK) that your router gets an update for but you don't pay for a "support ticket" then you are not entitled to the software to fix the bug. It just doesn't seem right to do so.
And how long exactly are they supposed to pay for your software updates? You do realize it costs them real money to support your router with any patch. Whether it's a good deal or not will come to specifics like initial price, price of the updates, how long you get free ones and so on, but in principle, there is nothing wrong about it.
Can you imagine having 3 cameras on your phone and being able to use only one? And others for subscription or some other payment? Damn...
When someone buys it second hand ( pre owned) is there a way for them to know the true range it was at the time of buy?
I believe that this is accomplishing 2 things, 1 to say that the model S now starts at 80k, and 2 to eventually get those 10k back from the owner. Once you have the model S for a while (let's say 1 year) you are gonna 100% consider to invest 10k to have a more powerful version
The only part that bothers me about the software locks is the fact that they already parted ways with the hardware.
So serious question,
Since the Teslas are software range lock, does that mean you can charge to 100% and it not ruin your battery since it's basically 80% not the full 100%?
They talked about it but didn't dive deep on that 🤔
Also, you can't own a Tesla?!?
It makes no sense whatsoever to not sell the full version for the lower price. It makes no difference for them, but it does for the customer
4:48 I would rather have the less weight/performance of lower compacity battery then pay less money for power I can't use until it degradeds. Plus Musk could say they can make more cars with less lithum this way.
Funny thing is that i bought my Model S for $80k as a pre-order. So i have a long range for the same price as a Standard range now. No complaints here.
It means you would not see battery degradation for a very long time because it would just have a spare 20% to always keep the range dead on 320 miles
At first I thought software-locking a battery was the dumbest idea ever, but I kinda get the point now.
For customers: Automatically leaving some battery capacity uncharged to make the battery last longer.
For tesla: Charges less for niche customers but still charging more for the majority of customers looking for luxury cars.
Win for both!
The cost to design, manufacture, and get crash, etc... testing on a low production vehicle is not worth it. For the end user, it is identical to if the battery had actually been removed (better actually, thanks to reduced degradation)
I think it’s ok because your battery should last longer right?
What if it doesnt charges to a 100% like restricting it to 85 just like the current gen of phones do under "PROTECT YOUR BATTERY" feature. I feel like its a neat trick but someone prolly out there is going to find a way outta this and when tesla gets to know about it they going to hire that person
How long tell we get a black market for vehicle software?
You wouldn’t be able to unlock that 20% range if the discount comes from selling you a “20% defective” battery pack (or less defective to have a safety margin)
Could the battery pack have a quality control similar to CPUs where they get binned and sold for less?
Kinda yes, but the cost to develop a procedure for binning batteries probably wouldn’t generate them any savings until the lower hanging fruit of production efficiencies get worked on first.
Especially with solid state batteries now actually on the horizon then it makes sense to sit and watch how the technology evolves before making any sweeping changes to battery manufacturing & assembly
The worlds of cars and computers get closer together each year.
@4:10 tell me you dont own a Tesla without telling me
2:15 SO how easy / hard would it be to hack this?
Why have a battery that's software locked, it's back to the ownership issue. The physical battery you have purchased you should be able to use fully.
Same with new Dodge Charger Daytona. You pay for vehicle but still have to pay for “crystals” to unlock power
If the battery is software limited, you should have a bunch of extra capacity in reserve, so battery should last much longer in years and vehicle miles and compensate to a high degree for battery degradation over time.
Compucorp Model 324G "Micro Scientist", S/N 4201133 has a programming button but button was hidden in unprogammable version in the 70s
also on the topic " but i paid it, and i own it "
a decade ago that topic started between farmer and John Deere as farmer want to repair their tractor themself but some want to tweak the software or develop and instal their own third party software like if it was 1998 and it was a PC computer. But john deere looking ahead, making smarter tractor, started to fell that eventualy they ll have more revenue and specialy income from proprietary software then from physical sale. EV and smart car will bring to the front the same debate. More and more, when you buy something the ratio of what you buy in the transaction vs the user license purchase is going more and more toward the latter. And that user licensing, you just buy the rigth to use it, but aren't a owner of it and agree to use it as the owner see fit.
It should bother you but you didn’t pay for it but like the BMW seat heater the prices aren’t different
Even if a Tesla was $10,000, or $1,000. I would still not buy the Tesla because I very much hate the idea of partial ownership even if the device is capable of more.
I have a very fragmented workflow for this reason. I just hate having to beg one company to "repair" my crap.
intel cpu is all about about looking capability to cover various price range.
there won't be a subscrition on demand acces to the extra battery, because if that lower size pack become popular enougth to warrant some taillored software in subcription for it, it will have got it own specificaly designed cheaper battery pack no longer software limited. Software limit is a way for them to get a feel of the market before investing.
Not nearly as bad as the manufacturers that are making you pay a monthly fee for stuff like the heated seats to work
The point is not to give a buyer a worse product, but to tier the lineup so that more people will make the jump from 3/Y to the lower trim of the S.
Making a new model with 20% less batteries to sell maybe 1000 a year is not worth it
Does battery degradation get artificially transferred through the software limit, or would the battery artificially “last longer” because of the software limit?
The battery will probably last longer but Tesla already gives you 8 years of warranty on it and there are already Teslas on the road with 500 thousand miles on a single battery (and those use 10 to 15 years old battery tech at this point) so this should not be an issue in practice. It's worth knowing that the first year of usage makes the battery "sag" a bit (few percent) and then the degradation is much slower.
My takeaway of this video is that Marques is probably getting paid to normalize the subscription model
Even with the 10k discount, the buyer is paying for the battery anyway. Tesla is not charging less then at least the overall cost. So they are reducing their margin like any promotion.
Like Windows SKUs. You have Home, enter new key and it becomes Pro without any update or anything. I can see some pros in this scenario, but it feels like it creates precedent for weird future where you won't own any thing or gadget and would pay subscriptions for everything. Haven't paid for 10 more miles, out of luck, you are going to work on foot today. That is, if you paid your subscription for pavement..
It feels wrong when someone is marking up a product so much that they can afford to install hardware that you never use. You _feel_ like a price should be determined by the cost of materials + labor + a profit margin, and that's not happening here. They're charging what the market will bear and that just feels wrong. It feels wrong when the cost of production has nothing to do with the price something is sold at.
The batteries might even last longer this way, they degrade over time so do they keep giving the same range (that might be 100% after 6 years) or does your range drop year after year like the regular model...
charging l-ions to less than 100% everytime significantly increases their life but we gotta see if its a cap on the top or bottom, if it charges to 100% everytime and just pretends to die sooner the battery life will be worse because a car will get more charge cycles for a given rang
smart point you got there@@AldenJohnson
When base Tesla have the price around as base price like Honda Civic & Toyota Camry that when they win
I think people has not really thought why Tesla has good reason to not fully use of battery. It’s helps with battery health to have buffer in 100% and 0%, some things in long range have better system like better breaks and battery chemistry.
Awful, anti-consumer decision. That’s like saying, “you bought a 20 gal gas tank, but we’re going to limit it to 16 unless you give us more money.” Of course nobody would like that proposition. And then they could say, “but we’re preventing you from overfilling your gas tank, that’s gonna be healthier for your fuel pump and sensors, that’ll make them last longer!”
Uh huh. Will not be giving Tesla one cent of my money. Reminds me of when Apple was auto throttling peoples phone, but way worse.
The software lock essentially means that you do not own the car.
If car companies have heated seats and remote start on subscription then range is the next logical model for monthly payment
I think..... battery longevity/battery health would be good because it's technically locked around 80-85% .....
This seems like something car manufacturers have already been doing, like Audi A3 and S3 having the same engine but a different tune giving you more power, electronically limited speed, etc.
And it can be looked at two ways, instead of charging everybody more and including software features like FSD, they charge less for the people who dont want/need a feature and charge only the people that want it
That being said.... Screw these corporations, gotta start jailbreaking these cars
the subscription model was not started by Tesla. I just retired from a US auto mfr, their goal is $250 subscriptions / month. This whole thing is sad.
So… what if it’s to sell battery packs where some cells have failed and been disabled? CPU manufacturers have been doing that for well over a decade now. I don’t think they’d take a smaller margin for no reason. They’re just not that dumb.
Tesla should make a hatchback for the European city market as not everyone has space for a full saloon/sedan. It will fly off the shelves for 25-40k
Someone needs to make a jailbreak for that software lock
I'm not in support of this but I feel like it's good for battery health
100%. This will be the million mile battery simply because it has the excessive redundancy built in.
Battery degradation will be so less because of a larger buffer. All cars have a buffer, which they unlocked in Florida temporarily.
Who pays for that on a regular gas car?
If the battery last longer before it needs to be replaced because it cycles in the unused cells then sure I'll Save 10k now so I can delay paying 10k to replace the battery way later
8:05 That's only really a thing with media and software as companies sell you a copy of the lisnce for personal use not reproduction... Passanger Cars are not like that Milltary systems are but when was the last time a car company sent sercert agents after a person for pirating a car and won in court? happens all the time in video games and music but never in the moblity industry.
7:00 😂😂😂
What if when your battery is running very low and Tesla prompts "For £75 you can access more battery to reach your destination" lool
To me there’s not enough difference in 80 -90k for a car. Like if you can comfortably afford it you’ll probably just get the normal one
The idea of software locking batteries really bothers me ... imagine doing that on your cell phone (wait ... no apple!)
Technically wouldn’t it be healthier for your battery anyway to not have access to 100% of your battery?
Tesla has never wanted to be a premium only manufacturer. It's been in their mission statement since the model s was released: "accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy"
To me that reads as accessible to all not only the rich. Yes the model X and model X or expensive. But don't be shocked if they completely get rid of those lines at some point. They're minuscule products in terms of total revenue for tesla.
Price changes to all of their products will continue as long as it's in line with their mission statement.
Soon you'll have to pay an extra subscription for everything except basic driving controls. Entertainment, AC, to open that sunroof, or to open the window... a step too far.
The issue with this is that means that Tesla CAN make the car 10k cheaper, clearly. That's why they did. Actual businessmen sat down and decided that they can slash 10k from the price for the exact same hardware AND go the extra mile of software locking the extra battery. So that means you're paying for the full thing and they were just price gouging you earlier lol. That is why these fucking subscription models for car features will never convince me. In fact, that entirely puts me off buying a Tesla because then it feels like I'm being stolen from lol.
So like a prime subscription.
In IT, we refer to this as Capacity on Demand. It is often related to a license fee for access to more resource. It has a place.
I thought tesla allowed lease buyouts on X and S, just not on the Y and 3. At least they used to…
It would be interesting if tesla gradually unlocked the rest of the battery to maintain the factory new range / speed.
This idea is disgusting if theyre forcing you to carry battery that you'll never be able to use, and will sit dead in your car until you junk it.
It isn't 'dead', the change in charge would still drain/fill all the cells, but they'd be capping them between ~10-90%
Wait so they use software to limit the range unless you wanna pay for it that’s wild asf
No, they offer you a cheaper car that can't use the whole battery. You get 10k USD in exchange for that.
Having more battery that you get cheaper is amazing. Your going to get more battery over-provisioning which will make your battery last so much longer
I honestly expected this to be standard behavior from the luxury brands. Like I can't imagine Mercedes telling their customers to charge to 80%. Full should just be "safe for battery health" full with extra battery to spare for wear leveling and charging performance.
Software limiting is no different then paying a subscription for things like heated seats, it’s all BS
Maybe it will be something like "this batery pack has X amount of cells not functioning so we can't use it on standard model S but we can use it on lower end model S and cap it at 90% so it won't use those broken cells". That's exact same thing that CPU manufacturers were doing for years, they make more 8 core cpu's, some of them are defected on 1 or 2 cores so they lock them and sell it as 6 core cpu
That's the best explanation I heard🎉
Here's a different angle. maybe these are cars with batteries that fail capacity and/or resistance tests. then you are really getting what you paid for. Maybe marginally failed motors, too. The semiconductor industry have been doing this for decades.
Charon’s really gouging the price of ambrosia these days 😢
If I didn' have a home charger, I would go with a hybrid/plugin hybrid.
I ain't gone lie, that software lock is criminal asf 😂.
software limit on bigger battery is good actually !
It means battery cell are never gonna charge fully; so it will able to handle more charging cycles; and less cell degradation
This is not a pay for heated seats kinda thing