More power, more range, together with increased speed and acceleration is a lot to brag about?

The AWD will be another plus, specially in snowy places like the northern mid-west and eastern States, Norway etc.

Will driving (cruising) with one e-motor ONLY increase e-range?

I'm more impressed by a 30 mile range increase than the benefits of AWD. That increase is nearly half the total range of several mainstream EVs at freeway speed.

The other OEMs have a lot of catching up to do.

electric-car-insider.com

If you lived where it snows a lot and there are mountains, you might want AWD. I live in Utah and would have a hard time without AWD or 4WD. I have had to chain up all 4 and use low range but admittedly that was for driving on unpaved roads in inclement weather. Anyway, AWD drive would make the Tesla much more attractive here.

Good point, sd. No doubt AWD is useful, even necessary in some regions. I'm just pointing out that Tesla's incremental increase in range is quite significant in light of the competition's capabilities.

Vehicle weight is a number that most drivers will be oblivious to in daily driving. An 11.3% increase in range or shaving a full second off an already blistering 0-60 time, and AWD handling and stability are a significant accomplishment.

I think it would not be overstated to call it a "wow factor".

Slightly off subject but I was surprised not to see an article on this Green Car Congress. Apparently GM has announced that they will have a new electric vehicle. This is from an article in today's NY Times

"According to a report by Automotive News, the car — which is expected to appear in 2017 — would be based upon the Chevrolet Sonic and have a range of about 200 miles."

Obviously not a competitor for Tesla but it will probably be more affordable for more people.

Henrik,

I think that I can explain why the S60D and S85D out accelerate the S60 and S85. If you have sufficient power to induce wheel spin, you can launch faster with AWD. After the initial launch power when you no longer have enough power to spin the wheels, power to weight is more important.

Tesla has now been making cars with autopilot features for two weeks. Every car coming off their line.

And we were speculating whether we'd see self-driving cars in a few years or never.

The Teslas self-drives itself on private property. It can't legally do so on public roads. The will stop in your driveway and let you get out. And then they will open the garage door and park themselves. In the morning they'll meet you at your door with the AC/heater running and your music playing.

Next step, according to Elon, is plugging themselves in. Of course there's always wireless charging.

Thank you Chris. I wondered because electric motors should have maximum torque from 0 rpm and up so hp and torque should be the same (proportionally at least) for electric motors using a single fixed gear ratio as model S does? Now that I have given it more thought the reason must be that Tesla has used another gear ratio providing more combined torque for the Model S Ds. The same could be the case for why S85 is faster despite being heavier and with less (peak) hp. The larger battery of the S85 may be better suited to provide higher sustained hp in model S85 than in model S60 so that could also explain the higher top speed for model S85 that should be based on what the car can keep doing until it runs out of electrons.

SD I buy the spinning explanation as well. I think the only way you can make the Tesla spin is to deactivate the anti spinning system. It could be that the anti spinning system prevent the motor from ever delivering the peak 380 hp in order to achieve max acceleration. With 4 wheels working in principal twice as much power should be possible to move the car than just 2 wheels regardless of peak hp provided that peak hp will spin the wheels.

Another thing is that Tesla's 4WD in combination with the most sophisticated autopilot system and a top crash rating should also make the Model S the safest car in the world.

Found this interesting; http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1092373_aerodynamic-tesla-model-s-electric-car-wins-the-wind-tunnel-wars

Great!
Now, I can propose a potential replacement for the planned lower-cost and smaller-sized Model III.

For the next model, please base it exactly on existing full-size Model S and X to reduce development cost, down to the last details.
Now that there is a differential unit in the front axle, the next step is to replace the front e-motor with a 1-liter-3-cylinder-turbocharged engine capable of 90-100 kW of power.
Then, remove nearly all battery capacity and leave behind only 10-15 kWh of battery. About 1000 lbs worth of battery can be removed. Downsize the rear motor from 188 hp to 120 hp to save more weight and cost, as well as reduce the weight from the wheels, tires, and suspension to save even more weight. Try to keep the final curb weight down to 3500 lbs from the original 5,000 lbs, while keeping the car the same size in order to maintain customer appeal for big cars.

Next step: Cancel Model III development to save money. Model III is too small for wide appeal, and priced too low to get enough profit out of it!
Do sell this full-sized but lightened-up and lowered-cost PHEV version at a price point closer to that of Model III to realize vast growth in customer base while still maintain high profitability due to the low cost of the engine and fuel tank.

So, rich customers will still be offered all-electric 85-kWh models for exclusivity, elegance, and status, while less affluent customers can get something of the same size, same design, same range, and same performance for 1/2 the cost. A win-win-win formula for everyone!

Porsche did a Tesla model S with a combustion engine and an electric motor. It is the 2 wheel drive Panamera S E-Hybrid starting at 96,100 USD in the US. It does 0 to 62 mph in 5.2 sec. The Model S 85D also does 0 to 62 in 5.2 sec but it is 4WD starts at 85,070 USD in the US. Which car do you prefer. The polluting more expensive, less safe and comparatively poorly handling Porsche or the Model S?

Porsche currently builds the cars of the past whereas Tesla builds the cars of the future today. As Tesla gobbles up the global market for performance cars their production of battery cells expands and that is the most important thing that is needed in order for Tesla to start moving into long-range BEV that cost less.

What I can tell from Tesla's new prices is that they can add a 188 hp motor and 4WD for only 4000 USD extra. That suggest the two EV motors and transmission cost as little as 10,000 USD for a 4WD system with 376 hp. A comparable combustion engine would need to be 450 hp and with a 4WD setup you can't do that for less than 25,000 USD.

I think we will see Tesla launch the smaller Model III 50(kWh) in 2018 that starts at 37,000 USD for a 5.9 sec to 60mph with an EPA rated range of 200 miles. A 45,000 USD Model III 70 will have 280 miles range and do 5.4 sec to 60mph. A performance edition Model III P70 will do 0 to 60 mph in 4.2 sec for 55,000 USD. All these models will be 2WD. However, a 4WD Model III is in my opinion a certainty. The Model III 50D will cost 40,000 USD and do 0 to 60 in 5.7 sec, the Model III 70D will cost 48,000 USD and do 0 to 60 in 5.2 sec and finally the Model III P70D can do 0 to 60 mph in 3.2 sec and cost 67,000 USD. Yes, I believe Tesla can sell 500,000 units of these Model IIIs per year starting in 2020 or 2021.

The 4000 USD for the dual motor drive is for everything that makes the 4WD possible including the new 188hp front motor. The rear motor is the same across all model versions but in version D it just gets half the current which is split evenly between the two motors. The power electronics is the same for S60, S60D, S85 and S85D so total hp stays approximately the same. The power electronics and the motor cooling system is upgraded for P85 and additionally upgraded for P85D this is why their hp increases. My point is that performance cars are less costly to manufacture when they are done as BEVs even when they come with a long-range 85kWh battery pack and the reason is the large savings on the motor and transmission that cost much more in a high performance gasser than in a high performance EV.

I do not believe for a moment your cost estimates for a Tesla PHEV with Model S performance, size and utility. Porsche did it and their 96,100 USD asking price speaks for it selves. If Porsche could make it less costly without compromising the 5.2 sec requirement or anything else that matters like top speed and ability to drive in mountains at speed for hours they would have done it as that would have made their car more profitable or more competitively priced. Porsche should do as Tesla does and that is drop gas engines and multi-speed transmissions entirely and focus on long-range performance BEVs.

I am not entirely against PHEVs. I think the Outlander is a good example of an area where PHEVs currently has a cost advantage to what is currently possible with long-range BEVs. That area is large non-performance vehicles. For instance, Ford should do a PHEV F150 in my opinion and all automakers should have a 0 to 60 mph at 10 sec large SUV PHEV for sale.