2017 Tesla Model S P100D

8

The additional driving range is welcome, but the range-topping Model S's increase in performance is overkill, even if it is very entertaining

Alan Taylor-Jones
Alan Taylor-Jones
23 January 2017

What is it?

The Tesla Model S P100D gets its moniker thanks to the addition of a 100kWh battery. It's a hardware upgrade for Elon Musk's company, which can usually be relied upon for an almost constant supply of revisions and software upgrades over the air.

If the official figures for the Model S P100D are to be believed, a range of 381 miles is available from a fully charged battery. Even taking into account the kind nature of official NEDC tests, the real-world range of this electric vehicle should comfortably exceed 250 miles if you drive carefully.

The trouble is that being careful is trickier than you might think. As well as increasing the range, Tesla has increased the Model S's performance to hypercar-hassling levels. A software update for cars with the Ludicrous Speed upgrade (standard on the P100D) now means you can access Ludicrous Plus mode.

Related Tesla Model S 2013-2021 reviews

This additional technology comes at a hefty price. Allied to a recent 5% price hike blamed on Brexit, the P100D costs £132,700 not including the Government green car subsidy. In other words, it costs nearly twice as much as the basic rear-wheel-drive Model S 60 model.

Dsc 4331

What's it like?

We could start this section by talking about the increased range, but let’s face it: face-bending acceleration is far more interesting. Three power levels are available: Sport if you’re ferrying your in-laws around, Ludicrous if you want to scare your passengers, and Ludicrous Plus if you want to give someone a mild panic attack.

To engage Ludicrous Plus, you need to hold the icon for Ludicrous mode on the touchscreen for a few seconds before releasing it. You then get a Star Wars-style animation of what a warp drive might look like. Select the ‘Yes, bring it on’ icon (not the one marked ‘No, I want my Mommy’), and you can finally get full power.

At this point, it doesn’t really matter if you use launch control or just flatten the throttle pedal, because the way the Tesla gains speed is borderline scary. If you’re not careful, your head is thrown back against the seat's head rest violently as your mind attempts to make sense of what’s happening.

You feel the mountain of torque’s effect on both ends of the car. The steering wheel might not be writhing in your hands, but you have to add some lock as the nose of the car starts drifting to one side under full-bore launches.

Advertisement

Latest Reviews

AC Cobra GT Roadster tracking 2
AC Cobra GT Roadster
AC Cobra GT Roadster
Skywell BE11 front three quarter tracking
Skywell BE11
4
Skywell BE11
Mercedes Benz CLE 300e review 2024 01 front panning
Mercedes-Benz CLE 300e Coupe
8
Mercedes-Benz CLE 300e Coupe
01 Mercedes G500 G Wagen 2024 review lead driving front
Mercedes-Benz G-Class
8
Mercedes-Benz G-Class
ford explorer review 2024 01 front tracking
Ford Explorer
7
Ford Explorer

View all car reviews

Back to top

On the road, you barely have to touch the accelerator pedal to make reasonable progress. If you think you can use anything close to full performance, you’re much mistaken. Even the briefest of heavy pedalling results in the car charging forward with instantaneous response. The acceleration tails off the faster you go, but there isn’t much that could keep up in a straight line.

The Model S has strong regenerative braking that lends itself to a relaxed driving style. With some forward planning, it’s possible to only touch the brakes when you’re coming to a stop or if an obstruction suddenly appears. This manner of driving conserves the battery's range, too.

The ride isn’t quite as relaxing. With standard-fit air springs, the Model S tends to ride better the faster you go. While it deals with crests and compressions well, potholes and pimply roads reveal a secondary ride that’s quite busy and lacking the fine damping of, say, a Porsche Panamera.

Tesla might explain that this is because the Model S is a sports saloon, but it doesn’t quite hit the mark here either. The steering has plenty of weight in Sport mode without being too heavy, but you won’t find any feedback as you load it into a corner. If you’re hoping to use all that power for some sideways shenanigans, forget it. The stability control can’t be turned off, or switched to its own less-intrusive Sport mode.

Inside the car there are plenty of rich feeling materials, but Tesla still hasn’t quite worked out how to put them together yet. There was the odd squeak from the interior trim when on the move, and some very large gaps around a cubbyhole’s lid. Mind you, at least you do now get a cubbyhole and some additional storage between the front seats - the tray that used to live there was very good at sprinkling the interior with your belongings as soon as you drove in a spirited manner.

Dsc 4495

Advertisement
Back to top

Should I buy one?

If the question here was simply ‘should I buy a Tesla Model S’, then the answer might well be yes. There may be a few bits of questionable trim inside, but it’s still a fine way to travel. Given the range, low running costs and addictive rush of instant torque; it makes a tempting luxury saloon.

Recommending this P100D derivative is trickier, however. Ignoring the fact that the name evokes memories of the old Ford pickup, you can’t even scratch the surface of what this car is capable of on the road. If you attempt to, the available driving range also tumbles heavily. Extended periods at motorway speeds don’t help, either – we used around half of the battery’s capacity in about 110 miles. No doubt near-freezing temperatures wouldn’t have helped either.

Then there’s the price. A Tesla 100D that has more range but can ‘only’ crack 60mph in 4.2sec is just under £91,000 before incentives. Adding the P reduces range and brings the price up to an eye-watering £132,700. The P100D is good, but not £40,000 good.

2017 Tesla Model S P100D

Location West Sussex; On sale Now; Price £132,700; Engine Twin electric motors; Power 603bhp (total system output); Torque 713lb ft at 0rpm; Gearbox Single-speed, direct drive; Kerb weight 2239kg; 0-60mph 2.4secs; Top speed 155mph; Range 381 miles (NEDC tests) CO2/tax band 0g/km, 7%; Rivals Porsche Panamera Turbo, Mercedes-AMG S 63 Coupe
Advertisement

Join the debate

Comments
17
Add a comment…
ChesterDMace 28 July 2018

Re:

Thanks for the great post.

whalefish 24 January 2017

Range tumbles heavily

When was the last time a motoring journalist said "MPG tumbles heavily" when driven hard, about a ferrari etc.
The 100kWh battery is more than enough
Range tumbles in all kinds of cars if you drive them hard, its obvious
bowsersheepdog 27 January 2017

whalefish wrote:

whalefish wrote:

When was the last time a motoring journalist said "MPG tumbles heavily" when driven hard, about a ferrari etc.
The 100kWh battery is more than enough
Range tumbles in all kinds of cars if you drive them hard, its obvious

The difference is that a Ferrari can be refilled in three minutes and doesn't require hours of downtime (not counting the many more which would be spent queuing if more people were dumb enough to buy electric cars). Even more so running dry so on a deserted road miles from anywhere, where a five gallon container will give a petrol car anything up to a couple of hundred miles more range in a minute or two, but there are no electric sockets to be found. Electric cars are going nowhere.

WDavis4692 29 January 2017

bowsersheepdog wrote:

bowsersheepdog wrote:
whalefish wrote:

When was the last time a motoring journalist said "MPG tumbles heavily" when driven hard, about a ferrari etc.
The 100kWh battery is more than enough
Range tumbles in all kinds of cars if you drive them hard, its obvious

The difference is that a Ferrari can be refilled in three minutes and doesn't require hours of downtime (not counting the many more which would be spent queuing if more people were dumb enough to buy electric cars). Even more so running dry so on a deserted road miles from anywhere, where a five gallon container will give a petrol car anything up to a couple of hundred miles more range in a minute or two, but there are no electric sockets to be found. Electric cars are going nowhere.

You're completely naive - and plain wrong. A Tesla does NOT require 'hours of downtime' to recharge. It requires about 40 minutes to get a FULL recharge. With a range of 200-300 miles, this really isn't as bad as it sounds and it certainly suits the vast majority of British drivers.

Your lovely cherry-picked example of running dry in the middle of nowhere is also fantastic. What, in the UK? Very few people actually carry jerry cans of backup fuel with them - they plan their route instead of foolishly getting themselves stranded. And I'm not talking about EVs here. I'm talking about petrol or diesel. The same applies to EV owners -- they don't use the vehicle for a purpose it isn't intended for, and if they do, they take backup precautions precisely SO they don't end up stranded.

"Electric cars are going nowhere." -- This is perhaps your most clueless and ignorant comment of all. It doesn't take a basic studying on EVs and their news to realise that they've actually been growing year-on-year exponentially, they ARE the future, batteries ARE getting roughly 20% better in terms of capacity and cost-effectiveness each year, AND most automakers realise this. Electric cars ARE the future. It's that simple, and it doesn't take a half-blind fool to see this. Mark my words, a tipping point is rapidly approaching. Most of the auto industry have penned the tipping point somewhere around 2025.

bowsersheepdog 30 January 2017

WDavis4692 wrote:

WDavis4692 wrote:
bowsersheepdog wrote:
whalefish wrote:

When was the last time a motoring journalist said "MPG tumbles heavily" when driven hard, about a ferrari etc.
The 100kWh battery is more than enough
Range tumbles in all kinds of cars if you drive them hard, its obvious

The difference is that a Ferrari can be refilled in three minutes and doesn't require hours of downtime (not counting the many more which would be spent queuing if more people were dumb enough to buy electric cars). Even more so running dry so on a deserted road miles from anywhere, where a five gallon container will give a petrol car anything up to a couple of hundred miles more range in a minute or two, but there are no electric sockets to be found. Electric cars are going nowhere.

You're completely naive - and plain wrong. A Tesla does NOT require 'hours of downtime' to recharge. It requires about 40 minutes to get a FULL recharge. With a range of 200-300 miles, this really isn't as bad as it sounds and it certainly suits the vast majority of British drivers.

Your lovely cherry-picked example of running dry in the middle of nowhere is also fantastic. What, in the UK? Very few people actually carry jerry cans of backup fuel with them - they plan their route instead of foolishly getting themselves stranded. And I'm not talking about EVs here. I'm talking about petrol or diesel. The same applies to EV owners -- they don't use the vehicle for a purpose it isn't intended for, and if they do, they take backup precautions precisely SO they don't end up stranded.

"Electric cars are going nowhere." -- This is perhaps your most clueless and ignorant comment of all. It doesn't take a basic studying on EVs and their news to realise that they've actually been growing year-on-year exponentially, they ARE the future, batteries ARE getting roughly 20% better in terms of capacity and cost-effectiveness each year, AND most automakers realise this. Electric cars ARE the future. It's that simple, and it doesn't take a half-blind fool to see this. Mark my words, a tipping point is rapidly approaching. Most of the auto industry have penned the tipping point somewhere around 2025.

Why all the random capital letters? You may as well have written it in crayon. You're correct on one thing though. Half-blind fool is the standard to which those who promote the adoption of electric cars aspire. Electric cars are going nowhere.

Geramox 18 February 2018

Idiot

you are a neoluddite niddynot. ICEs are going to be phased out in a couple of decades. Their tech has pretty much plateaued. rudimentary battery technology already batters even the most exotic & expensive supercars. Not long to wait until Bmw & Porsche etc. have properly developed electric cars. I done the bad grammar and punctuation to parody your intellectual cretinism 

Cobnapint 23 January 2017

Ok Tesla, you've made your point...

You can produce cars that give you neck ache, make your passengers feel stressed or sick (or both), and have put an ordinary looking saloon on the road that other people are far more likely to pull out in front of because they weren't expecting it to hyperspace from where it was when they first looked at it, to where it is now, 1.5 seconds later. It's time to really push the EV boundaries/saleability and make this a viable proposition by limiting the Santa Pod willy waving capabilities and give us what we all really want - a vast reduction in the likelihood of suffering range anxiety.
abkq 24 January 2017

Cobnapint wrote:

Cobnapint wrote:

You can produce cars that give you neck ache, make your passengers feel stressed or sick (or both) ... give us what we all really want - a vast reduction in the likelihood of suffering range anxiety.

As I understand (I might be wrong) the greater the battery capacity, the longer the range, and the better the performance. The insane performance might just be the side benefit of improving range. I suppose the closer the driver is to a charging point, the more he can exploit the car's performance.

Geramox 18 February 2018

Dummy

 I don’t see you making similar comments regarding performance cars with sub 300 mike ranges. Electricity sockets are far more common than fuel pumps