Tesla Motors

I can’t see that ever working. Electric is pretty much ingrained as an inferior option in every respect, so it should take the one advantage it’s got and run with it - economy. I think if this appealing to the upper end of the market had any value, the Prius would’ve sold a lot better than it has, and we might even have another common hybrid to name. I mean how old is the Prius now? 5-6 years? WHERE is its competition??

Maybe for not making a practical one, for choosing style over substance. In the current car market, economy is finally becoming a real consideration for Americans. The oil price is unlikely to stay so low, and the dollar even less likely to stay strong. The fuel price increases you saw a few years ago might be back with added spikiness, and having cheap practical transport will be understood to be more important than being a well-furnished second apartment on wheels.

It’s been said in this thread before, but I want to make it a little more clear.

The range of an electric car doesn’t matter much once it gets above 50 miles or so.

Let’s look at two drivers. One is a salesman who drives between several towns to make pitches, deliver products, etc. He drives a couple of hundred miles several times a week.

The other driver is someone who lives not far from work, and drives to get groceries, go out to eat, or make a trip to the mall. She drives about 10-30 miles per day.

Driver #1 will not buy an electric car. He isn’t going to pull into a roadside charging area and get his batteries changed or sit there plugging in. He’ll just buy a car that runs on gasoline, or whatever refueling system he likes.

Driver #2 might be better off electric. She can recharge at night, paying very low costs/mile, and she doesn’t need to worry about recharging the car during her trip to McDonalds. For her, the cost of taking Amtrak or renting a car is less than the savings of electric.

If we were planning on saying that only one type of power would be allowed for vehicles, then electric would be a poor choice. But we’ve never done this. you can buy electric cars now, you can get diesel, you can get gasoline, and you can get a host of other fuels, like propane and methanol.

In fact the ONLY question that needs to be considered as a policy matter is how many people are driver #2, and how many are driver #1. If there are enough driver #2s in the world, we are done. We can sell cars to those people and ignore the first driver.

For each driver, there are economic considerations, but they get to make those decisions on their own. Is the cost of gasoline worth the convenience? Is the performance adequate? Note that we already do this, which is why some people drive econoboxes and others drive Caddies.

Demanding that a single design makes sense for everyone is a false dichotomy; we don’t do that now, and haven’t ever done it. Gasoline cars can be a poor choice for a short range driver (I sold my cars and now use the bus). It’s just that gasoline is the only model we know so far.

The upshot of this is that we don’t need a big electric recharging infrastructure. No one (sane) is suggesting we replace all gasoline cars with electric. We already have a good power grid which will do fine for daily drivers charging at off-peak times. The same thing applies to e85 (but not hydrogen!). There’s absolutely no reason why we have to pick a single “best” technology now, when we never have before. There are at least 4 posters in this thread alone who would consider buying an electric car – it’s not as if they are relegated to some tiny niche that will never be profitable and it’s not as if we’re going to come take your Suburban away and force you to drive an electric eggbeater.

Sorry if I came down on you like a ton of bricks over what appears to be a communications break down. I just find the current situation to be very angering on principle anyway. Then last summer was horrid for me due to gas price caused troubles so yea.

Anyway the poster I quoted was talking about needed features more then money, and if you read the OP you’ll notice the OP is talking about the cost of luxury vs utility.

I think what you’re forgetting is electric can also come from coal, natural gas, and nuclear. Which the vast majority of does. Oil is less then 2%. So how much do you think a rise in oil prices going to affect the cost of current?

cite:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat1p1.html

Crunching the 2007 numbers in Excel for percents yields.
Coal:48.51%
Natural Gas:21.57%
Nuclear:19.40%
Top three total:89.48%
Hydroelectric Conventional:5.95%
Other Renewables:2.53%
Petroleum:1.58%
Other Gases:0.32%
Other:0.29%
Hydroelectric Pumped Storage:-0.17%

Now consider efficiency. Hybrids, and electricity use energy much more efficiently then pure combustion engines. Also running electricy makes energy sources vastly more adabtable. You can plug an electric engine into nuclear, you can plug it into coal, biomass, solar, wind. It doesn’t care as long as the electricity is with in it’s designed voltage and amperage range.

This means we’re not licking the Saudi’s ass for dino juice. No OPEC monopoly able to raise our transport costs on a whim.

So explain to me again why an electric, or plugin hybrid car owner should worry too much about a rise in the cost of gas?

No, but you can put a storage tank of liquified hydrogen on the gas station property and add a pump to pump it out and add trucks to deliver it to the stations the same way gas/diesel is delivered today. Add a covered port to put your plug-in car inside of to charge and you have a full-service refueling station, zero infrastructure (outside of manufacture) needed.

You really don’t know what you are talking about, do you?

It is pretty much superior in every respect except two and one of those is the single one you grant it: right now batteries are expensive enough that pure BEVs will cost more, unless gas prices go up substantially from here. And the infrastructure to allow for cross country travel is not there for pure BEV. Otherwise electricity is superior in every other way. Less emissions, more energy independence, less maintenance costs, great performance, etc., etc, etc.

ivn1188, I will give one more person - the high mileage driver member of a fleet - taxicab, bus, garbage truck, delivery van etc. For those companies a fleet of EVs are a great choice, along with investing in a rapid recharge station or two for the fleet. A vehicle with enough battery capacity to handle a shift (say 200 miles or so) with a buffer that works mostly round the clock and that stops into the central charge point once per shift for a recharge. The cost of the battery is paid for with the cheaper fueling and decreased maintenance costs in fairly short order. It does require a significant initial investment however.

ISTM that if they want the technology to gain rapid acceptance (and from there get to mass consumption and lowered production costs), there’s a tried-and true method of doing that.

They need to find a way to fit the tech to the delivery of explicit, high-quality, high convenience porn. Look what it did for the VCR, the Laserdisc, and the DVD.

I have no idea how this could be done. But then, I’m not the freakin’ engineer.

This folks is an example of a very good pun.

Woulda been an even better example if I’d said I’m not the fucking engineer.

Yes. How could you let us down like that?:frowning:

Scruples.

Besides, luci’s been sniffin’ around this corner of the Pit lately, and you know how he gets. I don’t need my neck stretched this weekend.

Go read what I said again. See that collection of characters “ingrained”? I didn’t say electric is inferior, I implied that is the consumer’s preconceived notion. See the difference?

I didn’t say anything about batteries, I said the electric car’s advantage is that they’re economical, and then you listed some reasons why. :confused: shrug

Solar paneled garages would be suitable. Cost would drop a bit.
The battery packs iI have seen on TV show a series of smaller batteries connected. It would not require changing them in a heavy chunk, but one at a time might be manageable.

Then you’ll end up as the subject of the future documentary Who Killed (for) the Electric Car?

A friend of mine on another forum made a great post about how the growth of the solar industry has been unprecedented recently. That it grew 110% in the last year alone after having steady explosive growth for about ten years.

Somehow your implication that it is consumer’s preconceived notions that are “ingrained” was less than clear. And my point is that they are not currently economical - which the one thing you say they are (or that people somehow believe they are). You didn’t mention batteries? Who the hell cares if you mentioned them or not? The reason EVs are not yet economical is the cost of the batteries. Unless you have some damn long extension cords you need them and you need to pay for them.

In pretty much every other way than being economical EVs are superior. That and appropriateness for long distance travel.

If your point was that you believe the public has this false preconceived notion that EVs are inferior but cheap vehicles (so that should be the kind of vehicle manufacturers deliver) … well I think that such a notion is less common since Tesla came on the scene and will be dispelled completely as they actually see real EVs on the road. There is a place for the low power EVs - Neighborhood Electric Vehicles they are called - that are cheap and cannot be driven on roads that have a speed limit over 35mph by law. But that niche is even smaller than Tesla’s high performance segment.

If Tesla sold as many vehicles as Toyota sells of Prius they’d be thrilled, and relatively Prius aint high end. There is big difference between a car that sells for $22 to 25K, and one that sells for more than twice as much. And in who buys them.

I love how people in this thread are using the 160 mile (or 300 mile) figure as being engraved in stone, and anything <160 as being a walk in the park. 159 mile trip NO Problem! Yeah right.
Have none of you ever heard the term YMMV?
Range is always expressed in the most favorable terms. Think downhill with a tailwind.
I would be willing to be that in the real world with stop and go traffic, the need for a heater or AC you would find that 160 mile range cut by maybe 50% Maybe more.
Search you tube for the Top Gear episode on the Tesla. They didn’t get anywhere near the published range. 200 miles? Try 53. (about 4:40 in)

They were also throwing it around a test track (okay, airfield) at high speed. Not exactly a real-world scenario.

Rick: What is your point? The average driving distance a day is less than 40 miles, and I think 90% of people drive less than 20 a day. Mileage will vary, but it’s not going to vary from (say) a 300 mile range to a 18 mile range and leave you stranded if you hit an extra couple of stoplights.

No one is advocating using electric vehicles to replace all other fuels. It’s a product for a (huge) niche: the daily driver. And it’s a contender because your price per mile is going to be a lot cheaper than it is for gasoline.

And of course the pollution would be much less. I wonder how electric cars will work in very hot or cold climates ?

It matters when talking about rapid charging stations or switching out battery packs. An electric car that actually has a 150+ (ideally, 250+) mile range and can be charged/battery swapped in 10 minutes or so is a reasonable alternative to an IC car for long trips. It’s not quite as convenient, but it’s not a total dog. One that goes < 100 miles between charges is unlikely to be considered at all for anything outside of a normal commute.