The structures and energies of axial and equatorial conformers and rotamers of 4-substituted tetrahydro-2H-thiopyran-1,1-dioxides (tetrahydrothiopyran-1,1-dioxides, thiacyclohexane-1,1-dioxides, thiane-1,1-dioxides, and 1,1-dioxothianes; CH3, CH2OH, CHO, COCH3, CN, F, Cl, Br, and OCOCH3) were calculated using the hybrid density functionals B3LYP, B3P86, and B3PW91, as well as MP2 and the 6-31G(d), 6-31G(2d), 6-31G(3d), 6-31G(d,p), and 6-31+G(d) basis sets. MP2/6-31+G(d)/ /HF/6-31+G(d) [−ΔG° = 1.73 kcal/mol], B3P86/6-31G(d) [−ΔG° = 1.75 kcal/mol], and B3PW91/6-31G(d) [−ΔG° = 1.85 kcal/mol] gave conformational free energy (ΔG°) values at 180 K for 4-methyltetrahydro-2H-thiopyran-1,1-dioxide which were similar to the reported experimental values for methylcyclohexane (−ΔG° = 1.80 kcal/mol), 4-methyltetrahydro-2H-thiopyran (−ΔG° = 1.80 kcal/mol), and other 4-methyl-substituted heterocycles. All levels of theory showed that the conformational preferences of the 4-methanoyl (4-formyl), 4-ethanoyl (4-acetyl), and 4-cyano substituents were small. The HF calculations gave conformational free energy (ΔG°) values for 4-chlorotetrahydro-2H-thiopyran-1,1dioxide which were closer to the experimental value than the MP2 and density functional methods. The best agreement with available experimental data for 4-bromotetrahydro-2H-thiopyran-1,1-dioxide was obtained from the HF/6-31G(2d), HF/6-31G(3d), and B3LYP/6-31G(2d) calculations, and, for 4-acetoxytetrahydro-2H-thiopyran-1,1-dioxide, from the HF/6–31G(3d) calculations. The conformational free energies (ΔG°) and relative energies (ΔE) of the conformers and rotamers have been compared with the correspondingly substituted cyclohexanes and tetrahydro-2H-thiopyrans and are discussed in terms of dipole–dipole (electrostatic) interactions and repulsive nonbonded interactions (steric) in the most stable axial and equatorial conformers. The axial S=O bond lengths are shorter than the equatorial S=O bond lengths and the C2–C3 bond lengths in the substituents with carbon-bonded to the ring are shorter than the C3–C4 and C4–C-5 bond lengths. In contrast, the C2–C3 bond lengths in the 4-halogen and 4-acetoxy substituents are longer than the C3–C4 and C4–C-5 bond lengths.