Tesla Model X

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
GRA said:
sparky said:
Love that last pic.
Glad your X is working out. Thinking of LEAF + S to 3 + X route myself.
Think how much better the view would be if he got out of the car! ;) Having once owned a convertible, everything else falls into the also-ran category, view-wise.
Great comment about getting out of the car while in a national park. :D You can't beat the views from the hiking trails (unless perhaps you're a serious rock climber).

That said, we do enjoy the large sunroof ("pano roof") in our Model S when driving at moderate speeds through scenic areas. I'm sure we'd also appreciate the views from the Model X. But that wouldn't be a key reason for us to buy the vehicle; we see these things as nice perks.
 
Tesla owner asks for $1 million after Model X caught on fire in crash and Falcon Wing doors wouldn’t open

Tesla is currently investigating an accident that happened in February in Guangzhou where a Model X crashed on the highway and caught on fire. The owner of the vehicle and her boyfriend were sitting in the second-row seat and they claim that the Falcon Wing doors were not opening after the crash resulting in them being stuck in the backseat while the car was starting to catch on fire.

They managed to exit through the front door just as the vehicle went up in flames, but not without injuries and now they are asking Tesla for 8 million Chinese yuan (~$1 million) in compensation...

They started to hear the battery cells explode and managed to exit through the front door. A few seconds later, the Model X went up in flames.

Here’s a video of the aftermath (warning it’s graphic – and vertical):..
https://electrek.co/2017/04/23/tesla-model-x-fire-crash-falcon-wing-doors-stuck/

Tesla Model X Owner Pulled From Car After Falcon Doors Don’t Open In Fire

...Here is the dramatic video of the fire, posted Sunday by Electrek and showing Lee’s face bloody from what she says is a broken nose. By her own account, she had it easy; her driver, she claims, was hospitalized for more than a month after his airbag didn’t deploy.

Tesla’s official comment is even-handed but still cites the owner, saying that all cars can catch on fire so this isn’t a big deal...

http://jalopnik.com/tesla-model-x-owner-pulled-from-car-after-falcon-doors-1794592884


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztOSChyNtVM
 
GRA said:
Think how much better the view would be if he got out of the car! ;) Having once owned a convertible, everything else falls into the also-ran category, view-wise.
How about at 80 mph, the speed limit on a lot of highways nowadays? I never understood the attraction of convertibles.
 
abasile said:
GRA said:
sparky said:
Love that last pic.
Glad your X is working out. Thinking of LEAF + S to 3 + X route myself.
Think how much better the view would be if he got out of the car! ;) Having once owned a convertible, everything else falls into the also-ran category, view-wise.
Great comment about getting out of the car while in a national park. :D You can't beat the views from the hiking trails (unless perhaps you're a serious rock climber). That said, we do enjoy the large sunroof ("pano roof") in our Model S when driving at moderate speeds through scenic areas. I'm sure we'd also appreciate the views from the Model X. But that wouldn't be a key reason for us to buy the vehicle; we see these things as nice perks.
Love the views to/from my way to the trails. Heading to Glacier National Park, MT in the Model X in the near future.

From the last time I was there ...

qN1IVVe.jpg


The Tesla FindUs ( https://www.tesla.com/findus ) map now has planned future (2017) SuperChargers on it. Here are the Montana ones (see GREY).
Glacier National Park is right between the top to grey pindrops.

dQWwDyV.jpg
 
dgpcolorado said:
How about at 80 mph, the speed limit on a lot of highways nowadays? I never understood the attraction of convertibles.

They certainly aren't for everyone. Or even most. But my old S2000 was remarkably quite in the cabin even on the highway. A properly designed convertible directs the airflow over your head, keeping a pocket of "still" air in the cabin. And by "still", I mean it feels still to the driver since it is traveling at the same speed as the car.
 
dgpcolorado said:
GRA said:
Think how much better the view would be if he got out of the car! ;) Having once owned a convertible, everything else falls into the also-ran category, view-wise.
How about at 80 mph, the speed limit on a lot of highways nowadays? I never understood the attraction of convertibles.
I once drove my Datsun 2000 up to Mt. Shasta via I-505 and I-5 averaging 85 most of the way, and that car lacked the modern aero mods that have eliminated most of the draft around the driver and passenger. No problem at all, beyond the lack of air conditioning and the 80-90 temps (I'd gotten an early start to avoid the afternoon triple-digit temps. As this was around 1980, I didn't have access to another car with A/C). It's true that a convertible's advantages are often quite climate/season/condition-specific, but I think everyone would enjoy trying one once for the experience when the weather's nice. In fall, I often used to take mine out onto the twisting rural roads in Marin County early on Sunday mornings, dressed in a wool sweater, a hooded windbreaker, watch cap and driving gloves, with the tonneau covering just the passenger side, the windows rolled up and the heater on. Worked fine, at least for my then ca. 20 year-old self, and I gave the car and myself a good workout when no one else was out there who could be injured if I boobed.

I didn't even own a convertible top for mine for some years, although I had the frame for it. Most of the time I just used the tonneau cover with one or both sides folded back as needed, and in winter I put the hardtop on. As the 2000 was a Japanese attempt at building a 1960's British sports car, putting the convertible top up or down took far longer than it should and really benefited from having two people to do it, so the tonneau was the easy choice. A car like that's best for a hard 1/2 or 1 hour drive, but I drove it up to Yosemite, on ski trips etc. as well as using it for commuting. I could easily see myself owning an S2000, or a dark metallic green BMW Z3 roadster (never been a fan of the Z4's looks) like this one: https://www.google.com/search?q=gre...=su7_WMu1G8XRjAPOsrDQDw#imgrc=h8rWEc_oxe1a3M:

if I wanted to have more than 1 car.
 
scottf200 said:
Love the views to/from my way to the trails. Heading to Glacier National Park, MT in the Model X in the near future.

<snip>

The Tesla FindUs ( https://www.tesla.com/findus ) map now has planned future (2017) SuperChargers on it. Here are the Montana ones (see GREY).
Glacier National Park is right between the top to grey pindrops.

dQWwDyV.jpg
I saw that when they put up the 2017 map, and it's about damned time they provide access to Glacier. Here's hoping they actually build these before the summer vacation season rather than after, as happened with Jackson and several other N.P. access SCs over the past two years or so. I've been asking them for SCs on the approaches for about 3 years now, although Kalispell and Shelby are a bit far from the park and each other (although O.K. if they put some L2s inside) - I would have preferred West Glacier, Browning and/or St. Mary, and then there's the still idiotic location of the I-90 SC in Superior rather than St. Regis or somewhere west of it, imposing an entirely unnecessary 28 mile (round-trip) detour for eastbound I-90 travellers to Glacier. And this all assumes that they actually build them this year. IIRR, both the I-15 SCs and Kalispell as well as the I-94 SCs were on the 2016 map, and I-94 was also on the 2015 one. While I've often said that I think I-94 west of Fargo should be the very last segment of primary interstate to get SCs, the failure to provide convenient SC access to all of the major western national parks and monuments at a much earlier date has always struck me as a curious blindspot at Tesla.
 
Via IEVS:
Consumer Reports Downgrades Model S, X – Tesla To Respond With OTA Update
http://insideevs.com/consumer-reports-downgrades-model-s-x-tesla-to-respond-with-ota-update/

For the Tesla Model X, the score drops to 56 from 58, moving it to near the bottom of the luxury midsized SUV category.”

The Model X’s low score is largely due to reliability problems, linked almost entirely to the Falcon Wing doors. . . .
More details in the Model S topic, but Tesla is apparently uploading AEB starting now. Nothing like a little bad PR to get them off their butts.
 
edatoakrun said:
Tesla owner asks for $1 million after Model X caught on fire in crash and Falcon Wing doors wouldn’t open

Tesla is currently investigating an accident that happened in February in Guangzhou where a Model X crashed on the highway and caught on fire. The owner of the vehicle and her boyfriend were sitting in the second-row seat and they claim that the Falcon Wing doors were not opening after the crash resulting in them being stuck in the backseat while the car was starting to catch on fire.

They managed to exit through the front door just as the vehicle went up in flames, but not without injuries and now they are asking Tesla for 8 million Chinese yuan (~$1 million) in compensation...

They started to hear the battery cells explode and managed to exit through the front door. A few seconds later, the Model X went up in flames.

Here’s a video of the aftermath (warning it’s graphic – and vertical):..
https://electrek.co/2017/04/23/tesla-model-x-fire-crash-falcon-wing-doors-stuck/

Tesla Model X Owner Pulled From Car After Falcon Doors Don’t Open In Fire

...Here is the dramatic video of the fire, posted Sunday by Electrek and showing Lee’s face bloody from what she says is a broken nose. By her own account, she had it easy; her driver, she claims, was hospitalized for more than a month after his airbag didn’t deploy.

Tesla’s official comment is even-handed but still cites the owner, saying that all cars can catch on fire so this isn’t a big deal...

http://jalopnik.com/tesla-model-x-owner-pulled-from-car-after-falcon-doors-1794592884


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


ahhh whats a little fire as long as I got all that range!! :)

But then again, the fire overcame the savings of 1500 Teslas in the carbon war....
 
Managed to get not-quite one m/kWh until the X overheated and cut the kW/speed...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojUFPKgs6iI

Tesla Model X Driven At 125 MPH For 40 Minutes – Video

...After 28 minutes, I started seeing dotted line. This is probably due to battery overheating. The stators would overheat much quicker if I did full accelerations.

After the run, I calculated a whopping 7 kWh heat loss that was not counted in the trip meter. This was due to battery and motors heating up due to high power output. So the real power consumption was actually 630 Wh/km, 1014 Wh/mi....
http://insideevs.com/tesla-model-x-driven-125-mph-40-minutes-video/
 
edatoakrun said:
Managed to get not-quite one m/kWh until the X overheated and cut the kW/speed...
Apparently, the OAT was just above freezing and it is not clear that the power was limited due to overheating. If the calculation of 630 Wh/km is correct, that means that the power draw from the battery was about 125 kW and that 63 kWh would have been drained from the battery during that first 30 minutes. Tesla owners report that their cars actively limit the output power below about this SOC in order to protect the battery, regardless of temperature:
jlewisthe3rd at Tesla Forum said:
Yes acceleration/torque is reduced as the SoC is reduced. The approximate percentage is ~60% when it becomes noticeable. I've tested both Dual Motor and Single Motor and its the same. So enjoy your peak performance from 100% - 85% starting to taper from 84%-65% but not terrible noticeable. Then your noticeable decrease is (~60%) - 30%. Then anything below 30% is the protective battery mode where your power is visibly limited on the power gauge.
In the video, the power limit (at over 200 kW!) came into play at 31% SOC.
 
Tesla's Model X missing out on America's voracious hunger for SUVs, crossovers

While Tesla Inc.’s Model S has been a hit and thousands lined up to order the upcoming Model 3 sedan, the Model X crossover hasn’t met the CEO's expectations. Model X deliveries have yet to keep pace with the Model S, as Musk predicted, and U.S. registrations of the vehicle have slipped the last two quarters, according to IHS Markit.

Musk has chalked up challenges with the Model X to making the vehicle too complicated. Features including the double-hinged falcon-wing doors have constrained production and contributed to a costly $82,500 starting price. For Tesla, the lack of cheaper and easier configurations has meant missing out on roaring demand amid America’s SUV and crossover boom.

“Luxury SUVs are really hot right now, and the Model X should have been a big hit and broadened Tesla’s audience,” said Michelle Krebs, an analyst with Autotrader.com. “You don’t hear a lot of buzz about the Model X, and when you do, it’s the negative stuff.”...
http://www.autonews.com/article/20170526/OEM05/170529875/teslas-model-x-missing-out-on-americas-voracious-hunger-for-suvs
 
That's awesome for X sales. Go Elon and Tesla!

I hear a lot of positives about the falcon wing doors and pano windshield.

Every owner I talk to loves to show these things off.

Seems there are some really happy X owners out there.
 
lorenfb said:
GetOffYourGas said:
Meanwhile, in actual US sales ...

In the first four months of 2017, the Model X was the 2nd best-selling BEV in the US. Right behind the Model S.

http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/

Old news! Thursday's data should provide more meaningful info, i.e. without the typical Tesla "distorted" Q1 production/delivery
output.

Yes, it's old news. But the facts are in stark contrast to the opinion that "You don’t hear a lot of buzz about the Model X, and when you do, it’s the negative stuff."

May is always a slower month for Tesla's domestic sales. They have always focused on international deliveries earlier in each quarter. You really have to look at Tesla on a quarter-by-quarter basis. Otherwise, you will drive yourself crazy; they're way up! they're way down!
 
GetOffYourGas said:
May is always a slower month for Tesla's domestic sales. They have always focused on international deliveries earlier in each quarter. You really have to look at Tesla on a quarter-by-quarter basis. Otherwise, you will drive yourself crazy; they're way up! they're way down!

Right. At some point though, e.g. 5 months into 2017, YTD results become indicative of how the year will play out.
 
lorenfb said:
GetOffYourGas said:
May is always a slower month for Tesla's domestic sales. They have always focused on international deliveries earlier in each quarter. You really have to look at Tesla on a quarter-by-quarter basis. Otherwise, you will drive yourself crazy; they're way up! they're way down!

Right. At some point though, e.g. 5 months into 2017, YTD results become indicative of how the year will play out.

True. So at 4 months into 2017 (which is all we have today), the Model X is up 57% compared to the same period in 2016 (5015 to 3195). Again, just US sales which in itself is misleading. But it's what I have available to look at.

In 2016, Tesla sold 18k Model Xs to US customers. What is your guess for 2017? A 57% gain is 28k. I think that 25k is entirely possible.
 
GetOffYourGas said:
In 2016, Tesla sold 18k Model Xs to US customers. What is your guess for 2017? A 57% gain is 28k. I think that 25k is entirely possible.

Very possible. Again, the key is the total number for both S & X in '17 (3 not considered a factor for '17) and how that
relates to Tesla's growth trajectory, i.e. '16 deliveries ~ 76K. Ideally, market may want to see a 50% growth over '16
(~ 115K deliveries for '17). So by 7/1/17, about 50K - 57K total (U.S. ~ 37K). Anything less than 45K - 50K leaves too much
of a sales catch-up for Q3 & Q4 and/or for a late production "push". But again, Elon does "pull hat tricks".
 
The numbers are in for Tesla from: http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/

Summary YTD for U.S.:
S - 8845, X - 6745, Total - 15590

Assuming 65% U.S. then WW - 24K, or assuming 50% U.S. then WW - 31K

Assuming that Tesla plans to achieve in excess of 100K sales for 2017 (2016 - 76K), then Tesla needs to deliver
worst case about 76K or in the best case about 69K. That amounts to an average combined S & X delivery rate
of about 11K units per month WW worst case or about 10K best case. The highest delivery rate occurred this
year in March (U.S. ~ 5.6K, @ 50% WW 11.2K). So if Tesla can achieve for the balance of the year, a delivery rate
exceeding March '17, then Tesla may achieve 100K deliveries for 2017. Good luck Elon!

Note: Above assumptions based on Model 3 being insignificant for 2017.
 
Back
Top