“Nobody”? More accurately “not you.” And I don’t have that kind of cash either. But amazingly enough some do have that kind of cash to plop down on a car that performs with that instant throw you back torque. And have been very happy with their purchases so far.
The Model S has more oomph than that Porsche Cayenne. And possibly of more importance to those who spend that kind of money, is a lot better looking and will turn many more heads. With its 17 mpg combined some might take a different vehicle than the Porsche Cayenne for the long drive. You get a car that can go for a family interstate road trip seeing the largest ball of string (something I picture everyone who spends that much on cars doing all the time) but compromise mightily on other aspects.
Tesla did not assign an article to Broder.
As for Tesla’s desire to build and promote their plans for a brand specific supercharger network … stupid. A poor marketing ploy.
As someone who routinely drives in -30 degree temperatures, I have to ask how the hell are you freezing in a car under 72 in cold weather? Are you from California or something? Real people in real winters wear outdoor clothing in their cars when driving in winter, and 72 would be horribly uncomfortably hot. Long trips I’ll generally discard the parka for driving, but still be dressed too warmly for 70.
According to Broder, “The test was initially proposed by Tesla to Times editors, and the company arranged the timing, which came during a cold snap on the East Coast.”
Well then granted, a dumbass marketing ploy. Or arrogant overconfidence in how impressive their partially built out brand specific superchargers would be. Even at its best that network might make the Tesla something that you can manage to get between cities. But planning on a half hour coffee break every two to three hours to get your car to where you want it to be is not playing to how this vehicle appeals to its demographic. No one is buying this car to routinely travel between distant cities; that supercommuter has much wiser choices.
The temperature was selected by the author for comfort. The temperature recorded by Tesla is not the temperature attained by the driver. I routinely bumped up the temperature on my digital display until I felt comfortable because the sensor was located on the dashboard and would continuously dial back the heat before it reached the temperature I wanted. I’d then dial it back for the duration of the trip.
Actually, this is a quirk I’ve noticed with my Volt. The heater really doesn’t want to use much energy, and on really cold days you have to crank that baby up to like 75 or so to get the actual temp up to 65.
So how do you like your Volt so far? I’ve wanted to steal a ride to experience the acceleration of an electric motor. If I had the money I’d build a beater electric to play with.
Well, this is clearly bullshit. What limitations are you talking about. The Tesla doesn’t have a 55 mph governor, and neither is the heating system incapable of preventing anybody from “freezing”.
I didn’t say the car had a 55 mph governor or couldn’t heat the passenger. Not sure how you even arrived at that conclusion. These are the conditions Tesla gave the reporter in order to do the test. They are unreasonable conditions to make of the reporter and by extension, the consumer.
That is one of the open questions. Given that he apparently wrote he turned down the heat when he actually turned it up … was his motivation to provide for his comfort or was he trying to create a more interesting story, not knowing that his falsifications would be found out? His editor has tried to handwave away Broder’s false statements as “Problems With Precision and Judgment, but Not Integrity” taking only "casual and imprecise notes along the journey " – believing instead that Broder was just stupid (not doing the typical things normal Tesla drivers do for a longer drive, like putting the car in “Max Range setting” during charging, and leaving it plugged in when not in use) and sloppy, not falsifying in order to create a more interesting story, and maybe she believes it. But boy. Owners make that trip just fine. The CNN crew does. He made untrue statements.
It looks and smells like a hatchet job. Maybe he was just dumb and sloppy, as his editor claims. But the former seems more likely to me.
Proscrustus, how bad is your EV only range hit in the cold, especially if you need to use defrost? How much is it turning on the ICE to warm things up even when you have a full battery?
News item yesterday - the Tesla company is still bleeding money (although it claims to foresee a first quarter profit on the horizon).
Conspiracy theorists might, instead of arguing the Times was out to get Tesla, think of an alternative reason why Tesla reacted with such outrage over the road test story.
No conspiracy theory has been suggested by anyone. One reporter attempting to “arrange things” to make for a more interesting story does not a conspiracy make. Just bad journalistic ethics.
And no mystery as to why Tesla would react vehemently. They’ve been the subject of misleading hatchet jobs before when Top Gear made it look like the car had run out of electricity when it never had. Tesla tried to sue then btw, but proving libel is tough – they lost. And they witnessed how Fox’s and other media’s hatchet jobs on the Volt impacted its hoped for place as a halo vehicle.
Nah, straight up they don’t like hatchet jobs and will aggressively fight back when media gives bad press based on untrue statements. They’d do that if they could actually keep production and deliveries up with orders (and thus make a profit) just as much as now running a loss while they are unable to. They have before and they will in the future.
The owners’ responses are another thing. They have been very vocal mainly because they know that the car performs differently than how Broder characterized it so long as you are not trying to make it fail. Or an idiot.
Statements like that, along with ones earlier in this thread about how the Times had an “agenda” and that the reporter was shilling for the oil industry, sound very much like conspiracy-mongering.
Meantime, Broder isn’t the only one who’s found a problem with disappearing driving range in the Tesla.
*"Last Friday Consumer News, a free website operated by Consumer Reports, joined New York Times reporter John Broder in maliciously reporting, “Winter chills limit range of the Tesla Model S electric car.”
In an informal test that was obviously devised to do the villainous John Broder one better, a Consumer Reports test driver took their fully charged Tesla Model S Performance Edition home for the night believing the “240 miles on the car’s range indicator … would be more than ample juice to cover the distance, plus some nighttime errands, the morning drop-off at school, and then my 75-mile return trip to the track.”
When the test driver got home after driving 80 miles the car showed a remaining range of 140 miles, suggesting that 20 miles of range had mysteriously disappeared during the trip.
When he started out the following morning after an unplugged seven hour overnight park, the remaining range had plummeted to 65 miles, less than half of the range he had at bedtime…While we’re all used to reading “actual results will vary,” I think a variation of 27% from projected and 41% from advertised matters."*
I think you are confused about what “conspiracy” means. No, no one is imagining an organized plan to destroy EVs as an industry. Just some biased reported by individuals who already have a conclusion and are looking to confirm their bias even if they have to stack the deck to do so.
This is no surprise to any of us. Cold is hard on batteries and heat/defrost draws a shitload of power. But the car “predicted its range fairly accurately” and still gave 176 to 182 miles on a single charge under what the writer states were “the most adverse conditions for any electric vehicle.” (Including not using the “Max Charge” option in advance of an atypical long drive and leaving it unplugged overnight in bitter cold, which no real owner would do.) The SeekingAlpha writer misrepresents the CU article. It did NOT underproject by 27%; it was within 3 to 7% on two runs. That’s the sort of unfair reporting bias I am talking about.
The CU article OTOH is a fair report. And something I have experienced with my small battery plug-in hybrid (a C-Max Energi) in Chicago. The car will turn on the ICE in bitter cold and needing the defrost on. The range of EV only when just cold and not needing the defrost is much less than on milder days.
That isn’t a 3-7% shortfall in range. But maybe I’m part of the multimedia [del]conspiracy[/del] hatchet-job agenda-driven deck-stacking oil industry plan to make Tesla look bad. :rolleyes:
I have nothing against electric cars. If I had a pile of money sitting around to sink into a snazzy-looking electric commuter car, I might do just that. But I need a car that I can take on medium-sized and even long trips, without worrying about substantial amounts of charge leaking out of the battery if I don’t have the opportunity to keep it plugged in at a motel overnight. If the Tesla is a real improvement on other EVs, it still falls considerably short of my needs, and my driving requirements are far from unique.
[QUOTE=DSeid]
leaving it unplugged overnight in bitter cold, which no real owner would do
[/quote]
This sounds like a weird variation on the no-true-Scotsman ploy.
In warm weather I get 35 to 38 miles on a charge. In cold (Seattle cold, no Chicago cold) weather I get around 25. I drive around 30 miles per day usually, and I can recharge at work if I need to, so I don’t typically use any case regardless of the temperature. Defrost doesn’t seem to be a big drain. Mostly I think it’s the efficiency of the batteries in the cold. Given my driving habits, I’m getting 173 m.p.g. lifetime, and it doesn’t vary much by season.
There is no way (that I know of) to turn on the gas engine unless the battery is out. The Prius, by contrast, will rune the ICE a lot more in cold weather to keep the heater running warm.
I really love it. . Nice smooth and quick acceleration, of course. It’s not for everyone. It seats only four, and if you routinely have to go more than 50 miles per day, I think a traditional hybrid would be a better choice.
From some of the debate over the N.Y. Times test, you’d think Broder drove the car in horrendous arctic conditions, outracing sled dog teams (it was actually in the 30s during the day and went down to 10F overnight).
That may be “frigid” for the mid-Atlantic East Coast, but it’s pretty routine winter cold for much of the Midwest, where truly frigid conditions imply sinking to zero or well below. Apparently “true” Tesla aficionados faced with the prospect of actual winter would insist on their cars always being kept in a heated garage, constantly plugged in or both. Which is fine if the facilities are available, but they aren’t in many common driving situations.
and the statement that doing it again left 6 miles to spare. The article makes a point of noting that “projected range,” which “takes into account ambient temperature and driving style, and it provides a more accurate estimate than the default display.” The 240 number was not the projected range.
Of course your need for your car to be able to be regularly used for “medium-sized and even long trips” is not unique. And a Tesla is a poor choice for that need. But just as true is that not having that need is not unique. Yup, if you cannot plug in at night, and in Chicago winters need to use that car to travel even more than just 150 miles in a day, it is not the luxury sports performance/able to serve as a minivan vehicle for you.
A CU tester is not a real owner. This one specifically stated he was doing things that a real (“typical”) owner would not do:
What Broder did, at least according to his editor, was state untruths and use the car in a stupid way. The editor does not believe he meant to say things that were untrue and was not intentionally stupid. Just sloppy and dumb, not unethical.
Pure BEVs are not ready to be the cars for all drivers’ needs. If you are a supercommuter, hundreds of miles a day, even a plug-in hybrid is not a good choice. Go hybrid or diesel maybe. But each are good choices for some.
