Quote :

"Batteries... The same. Not to mention if being a freebie weenie the battery disposal is worse then the emissions from a car in the same time frame not to mention if you get power from a coal plant you aren't gaining anything anyway. Then these solar panels also poisonous when their life cycle is over..."

You have unfortunately bought into the hype that the only problem electric cars help to solve is the environment. And in framing your rebuttal with extremes (power comes strictly from coal and isnt balanced by other sources, the batteries are just going to be tossed into the environment and not recycled) you show that your not really interested in the truth... just rhetoric.

Electric cars aren't the solution. They are part of a solution to get us diversified from an oil intensive society.

And as the only person (I think) on this site that has an electric car, I can say there is nothing sub par about the way my car performs or handles. Is it a BMW? No. It is vastly superior to the average car that is sold? Yes.

If you want links to the a major study on the emissions comparisons between gas cars and electric based on diversity of power sources in various regions across the US, I will provide them. If you want information on the toxicity of EV batteries and the plans for recycling, I will also post them.

[Edited on October 22, 2012 at 1:22 PM. Reason : .]

10/22/2012 1:15:07 PM

Soemthing has to be done about the limited supply of oil that will run out, better to get the electric car out there now and work out all the issues before gas is $10 a gallon. We will all benefit from this, as others have mentioned before, and is basically being done privately and ahead of schedule. Who is complaining? Of course the charging grid will get built, give it some time.

10/22/2012 1:58:16 PM

I dunno about you, but I highly doubt we'll come even close to running out of oil during my lifetime.

However I agree that to make that possible we need alternatives

[Edited on October 22, 2012 at 3:28 PM. Reason : k]

10/22/2012 3:22:58 PM

Quote :

"As an engineer who's seen solar projects fail time and time again it's worthless tech until a huge breakthrough comes even with the nc subsidy it's still a losing tech. People think pv cells make power from the sun.. And they do.. Sorta... They are more like sun activated batteries and are only worth a shit for a short period an cant be recharged. All I'm saying is that these current technologies need to be flushed out more. Automotive electric motors are sub par right now because no one has really tried to develop light 100hp motors. Batteries... The same. Not to mention if being a freebie weenie the battery disposal is worse then the emissions from a car in the same time frame not to mention if you get power from a coal plant you aren't gaining anything anyway. Then these solar panels also poisonous when their life cycle is over... And I'm fine with subsidizing labs to do the research and shit but I just feel like everyone buying an electric car right now is buying snake oil. I guess subsidizing the sales of a flawed product is not ok but subsidizing the development of a good one is ok, in a public setting like universities not funding the development of a private company that WILL FUCK EVERYONE OUT OF THE TECH LATER. But yeah I'm the idiot.. "

No one said you were an idiot, it's just that you have a very skewed looked at the issue, similar to the one I see with conservative media outlets.

First of all, these cars (other than Fisker Karma) do not directly use PV technology to charge. Renewable electricity can come other sources such as hydroelectric power. It can also come from non-renewable, but domestic sources such as nuclear and coal, for those who don't care much for long-term inpact on environment, but care about US reliance on foreign oil. Will PV be the answer to solve our energy crisys eventually? Yes, because it captures energy we receive from the sun directly, while everything else is a derivative of that energy. As you know, energy is lost at every step of conversion, and some conversions lose much more energy that onther. It will take time for solar to catch on, and the first massive solar installations are not PV but a steam-turbine type.

Automotive electric motors are actually smaller, more simple, more quiet, and carry a better power to weight ratio than their internal combustion counterparts. I don't see how that qualifies them as "subpar". They will get even better as they become adapted to the automotive applications. I think you're upset because you can't put a turbo on one of them

Battery weight is still an issue, but battery technology in the past two decades leapfrogged forward. Batteries do require rare earth elements, but they can be recycled, something that you forgot to mention. ICE efficiency improved during the same time (in large part due to government regulations) as well.

Public universities do receive funding for improving technology, but without someone taking them on the wide scale commercially, they will never make an impact on society in a meaningful way.

Government is not funding a private companies, they issued a low-interest loan for a beneficial cause, for similar reasons that they make your low mortgage interest possible. Government offers tax subsidies directly to consumers, so the benefit is split among taxpayers and manufacturers, which by the way can be publicly traded companies as well, and which you probably partially own via your retirement fund. At this point this is an emerging, but proven technology with weak, but existing infrastructure (while most other alternative propulsion techniques are either unproven or have NO infrastructure).

Quote :

"I dunno about you, but I highly doubt we'll come even close to running out of oil during my lifetime"

I sure hope we don't deplete millions of years of carbon deposits within a few decades worth of time, but we are certainly on the way of running out of oil in particular withing a few centuries, which is still a speck on the timeline of Earth's existence, or even on human existence. If we thought of resources as only valuable during one's lifetime, our planet and species would have no future, and our lives would be governed by very different principles

[Edited on October 22, 2012 at 4:00 PM. Reason : .]

10/22/2012 3:50:23 PM

I'm all for hydroden power and alternate fuels all i'm saying is we're just not there.

And PV is a fucking scam... if you want solar you need a collector & a boiler.
wind, water, and fuck even nuke is "clean energy" but coal and fossil fuels still dominate energy production... so burn it at your car or elsewhere it's still getting burned.



fix infrastructure, while developing the tech to make electric cars a viable option and then move forward.

and sorry, my skewed view is from actual projects and complete actual numbers not hopeful projections and highlights that don't show the whole story. (you know the shit no published in magazines and on tvs)

and yes their motors would be "ok" if they didn't require another 900lb battery bank to get 200miles out of (600lbs for a 20 gallon tank of gas) the benefit is not needing a transmission

Hipa drive was the only electric company with any decent kW/kg ratio (~2) for their electric motors... keep in mind the old m5 v10 is 5.5.

all of this is coming from the stand point of wanting to build an electric Karman Ghia and after $25k in parts and still not happy with the 3000lb theoretical curb weight of a formerly lightweight car it was ditched.

parts are over priced, over hyped and just generally not worth the trouble right now. They either won't have the power, or won't have the reliability until some sort of cooling system is employed.



[Edited on October 23, 2012 at 8:12 AM. Reason : .]

10/23/2012 7:55:24 AM

Quote :

"fix infrastructure, while developing the tech to make electric cars a viable option and then move forward"

It's chicken-or-egg problem. It would be nice to have a massive overhaul of infrastructure first, but something has to trigger that overhaul. Are you saying it would be smarter to build a network of 480V chargers, and THEN think about electric cars? Who should front the money for the chargers, the government? In my opinion, this is similar to asking for high-speed internet to be deployed in the 80's. Even if we had it, the machines had no way to take advantage of that amount of information. Computers became faster, and the Internet developed from a [government-sponsored] experiment to an mass commodity. Right now, 110V chargers DO have a capability to provide enough current to charge a current electric car for an average American's daily commute. So we may be still in the age of dial-up, but as slow as the system may be, it actually works.

And as far as the argument that electric cars can not yet be sole vehicle for every person everywhere, I say that applies to any other special-purpose vehicles, such as coupes, trucks, motorcycles, RVs, and fucking airboats. But happily co-exist with other vehicles, and sell very well.

Quote :

"all of this is coming from the stand point of wanting to build an electric Karman Ghia and after $25k in parts and still not happy with the 3000lb theoretical curb weight of a formerly lightweight car it was ditched"

Just because you as a consumer do not have access to the latest tech, doesn't mean large companies won't. I saw some fool trying to sell a handmade electric bike on CL that ran on lead powertool batteries and had a range of something like 5 miles, and the dude wanted over 1k for it, while even the cheap chinese e-bikes from walmart get 3-5 times that.

10/24/2012 12:43:57 AM

Quote :

"2013 Motor Trend Car of the Year: Tesla Model S Shocking Winner: Proof Positive that America Can Still Make (Great) Things The 2013 Motor Trend Car of the Year is one of the quickest American four-doors ever built. It drives like a sports car, eager and agile and instantly responsive. But it's also as smoothly effortless as a Rolls-Royce, can carry almost as much stuff as a Chevy Equinox, and is more efficient than a Toyota Prius. Oh, and it'll sashay up to the valet at a luxury hotel like a supermodel working a Paris catwalk. By any measure, the Tesla Model S is a truly remarkable automobile, perhaps the most accomplished all-new luxury car since the original Lexus LS 400. That's why it's our 2013 Car of the Year. Wait. No mention of the astonishing inflection point the Model S represents -- that this is the first COTY winner in the 64-year history of the award not powered by an internal combustion engine? Sure, the Tesla's electric powertrain delivers the driving characteristics and packaging solutions that make the Model S stand out against many of its internal combustion engine peers. But it's only a part of the story. At its core, the Tesla Model S is simply a damned good car you happen to plug in to refuel. "

http://www.motortrend.com/oftheyear/car/1301_2013_motor_trend_car_of_the_year_tesla_model_s/viewall.html#ixzz2C6rsZEoc

[Edited on November 13, 2012 at 8:40 AM. Reason : bbb]

11/13/2012 8:40:32 AM

Big fight between Tesla and New York Times, in case you missed it. In short, NYT reporter takes Model S for a drive from DC to Boston, runs out of juice towards the end, writes a scathing review. Tesla, who learned from a previous incident with Top Gear, analyzes data logs from the drive and releases a summary with analysis that claims that the journalist did not follow the instructions, willfully tried to sabotage Tesla, and flat out lied about the speed he was driving and that the fact that the car completely ran out of juice in the end. Journalists denies faking the story, editor requests raw log data from Tesla, Tesla does not respond. Tesla loyalists and Tesla haters fight on the sidelines, Tesla's and NYT's credibility are both undermined at the moment.

Original article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/automobiles/stalled-on-the-ev-highway.html?ref=automobiles&_r=0

Tesla's analysis of the data:
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive

Journalist Broder responds to Tesla's allegations:
http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/14/that-tesla-data-what-it-says-and-what-it-doesnt/

NYT editor stands by the journalist so far, but says NYT is investigating
http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/14/conflicting-assertions-over-an-electric-car-test-drive/

CNN Money completes the same trip successfully under slightly differing conditions, films the entire thing:
http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/15/autos/tesla-model-s/index.html

I'd love to hear the final outcome, as the allegations mirror many of the doubts about EV's voiced in this thread. I am appalled that this experienced auto journalist did not think to document his journey in a way that could substantiate his claims ($300 GoPro camera set to timelapse mode and a $50 portable GPS unit on the dash would have been all it took to save his journalistic integrity, if his story is in fact true). I am also concerned about the fact that Tesla has not released raw data yet, but this may be attributed to the fact that they may not want the public to know what types of data the car is collecting.

2/16/2013 5:29:54 PM

DRAG RACE? BMW? TESLA?

2/17/2013 9:33:59 AM

^^igorski, in your thoughts, why are we not seeing more 'wealthy' car nuts out there trying to verify the performance of the tesla - either good or bad?

2/18/2013 7:54:53 AM

Quote :

" I am also concerned about the fact that Tesla has not released raw data yet"

So what Tesla responded with is not considered raw data? I'm confused here. Looks like Tesla wins.

[Edited on February 18, 2013 at 8:05 AM. Reason : .]

2/18/2013 8:04:54 AM

^^ they did, not all made it

2/18/2013 8:12:14 AM

^^Agreed. Also I'm a bit surprised that the left leaning NYT would try bashing the best EV on the market to date.


As to Tesla S vs BMW M5, surprisingly enough I've seen a LOT more Model S's than M5s driving around.

2/18/2013 8:22:44 AM

Saw my fist Tesla S this weekend. What a great looking car!

2/18/2013 8:42:50 AM

What about the raw data makes Tesla win? I didn't find it convincing.

2/18/2013 9:58:57 AM

Quote :

"why are we not seeing more 'wealthy' car nuts out there trying to verify the performance of the tesla - either good or bad?"

They did: http://fearlessbit.com/2013/02/18/taking-a-road-trip-in-the-tesla-model-s/
https://twitter.com/teslaroadtrip
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/13905-Recreating-the-NY-Times-Road-Trip-We-re-on-This-Weekend!/page50
The people dtownral probabaly refers to that "did not make it" the whole way, left the convoy early due to other commitments, not because they ran out of juice.

Quote :

"So what Tesla responded with is not considered raw data? I'm confused here"

Tesla responded with marked-up graph plots of the data. I think what NYT would like to see is the original binary file from the data logger, to see if it has been tampered with and to check for themselves how it lines up with Broder's story.

Quote :

". Also I'm a bit surprised that the left leaning NYT would try bashing the best EV on the market to date"

It should not be about left or right, it should be about honest journalism. But articles are rarely free of some sort of bias, this particular journalist has been critical of EV's in general in his prior writings. Also worth mentioning that previous articles by other NYT journalists about Model S has been favorable. NYT and Tesla agree that the scope of this article was originally intended to be the functionality of the East Coast supercharger network, and not so much of the car itself. However, in this case the question is not whether the article was biased, but whether the story does not match the facts, which is a whole another ballgame.

Quote :

"What about the raw data makes Tesla win? I didn't find it convincing."

If the charts are indeed true, they show that the Broder was not truthful in his article, discrediting his journalistic integrity. In that case Tesla would "win" in a sense that the facts would be on their side. I would like to see a third-party analysis of the raw data logger files to settle this once and for all.

But since this thread is about drag racing a Tesla, we have digressed. So here is Tesla vs Viper 1/4mile:

2/18/2013 11:12:02 PM

Quote :

"If the charts are indeed true, they show that the Broder was not truthful in his article, discrediting his journalistic integrity."

my point is, where do you see that he is not truthful in the raw data? you all are falling for your bias towards someone offering raw data and assuming the conclusion of the person who provided them is true. what about the data makes them true?

2/18/2013 11:18:33 PM

Quote :

"I turned the climate control to low — the temperature was still in the 30s — and planted myself in the far right lane with the cruise control set at 54 miles per hour (the speed limit is 65"

Quote :

"The displayed range never reached the number of miles remaining to Milford, and as I limped along at about 45 miles per hour I saw increasingly dire dashboard warnings to recharge immediately."

2/19/2013 12:05:37 AM

Broder never states precisely when he does those things, Tesla did. So if you look right past the tags that Tesla made, what he says is true. Says he cuts climate control, cuts climate control to 65. Says he sets cruise control to an indicated 54, does logged 60 which is definitely within reason. Says he limped home about 45 (indicated), limped home 50-52.

None of this is "gotcha", its inline with what he said. Tesla also tried to call him out at one point for trying to kill the battery by driving back and forth... he was in the parking lot finding the charging station. They said it had battery power when he said it died... neutral tow truck driver said definitely dead and not working when he got there. Tesla did not win this on even a technical level, and on the PR front they lost badly.

Tesla admitted it as a draw, and that was pretty generous of themselves.

2/19/2013 12:14:51 AM

^The data shows that he never fully charged the vehicle at the Supercharger station. So the car running out of juice proves nothing.

Given that 6 privately owned Tesla Model S's did this trip over the weekend without incidence is all the proof I need. My opinion of Tesla hasn't been swayed by this at all.

2/19/2013 10:22:37 AM

electric car has infinitely variable traction control... thus doesn't need driver mod....

A viper with a driver would win every time.

2/19/2013 10:51:25 AM

the one thing where Broder's explanation made more sense than Tesla's interpretation was the time the car was circling the parking lot for a long time.

It's more reasonable that Broder was looking for a charging station that wasn't well marked than intentionally trying to run the battery down.

While I'm a huge fan of the model S and Elon Musk in general, i think it was a horrible move to publicly call the NYT and Broder out. I think that did more damage than the article itself.

2/19/2013 10:54:15 AM

What I'm more concerned about is if this car actually datalogs all this information all the time. That would be pretty disturbing. Hopefully it was just specially equipped for a journalist drive, as they sort of hint at with reference to Top Gear.

2/19/2013 11:03:32 AM

We all know that you are concerned that it has EDR

I'd assume it logs everything, the techs can work on the car remotely and probably need that data.

Quote :

"^The data shows that he never fully charged the vehicle at the Supercharger station."

and he states that this is what he was instructed to do, so again its not a gotcha. you are falling for the raw data bias.

Quote :

"• “The final leg of his trip was 61 miles and yet he disconnected the charge cable when the range display stated 32 miles. He did so expressly against the advice of Tesla personnel and in obvious violation of common sense.” The Tesla personnel whom I consulted over the phone – Ms. Ra and Mr. Merendino – told me to leave it connected for an hour, and after that the lost range would be restored. I did not ignore their advice."

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/14/that-tesla-data-what-it-says-and-what-it-doesnt/

2/19/2013 12:47:36 PM

Not specifically EDR; this is way beyond that if all Tesla S cars record all that data all the time.

2/19/2013 2:57:50 PM

^EDR equipment is present on all Model S cars. It does not seem to record the GPS coordinates, but does record speed and some vehicle vitals. The customer have to give Tesla an explicit permission to turn on data logging. However, they leave it on for all media test-drives since the Top Gear episode. To put it in perspective, if you own a smartphone, it can collect about the same information about your driving habits in a non-EDR car. It can also collect way more information about who you've been talking to and what it was about. Even current vehicles with emergency and info tech such as OnStar, should we be concerned that they have a GPS chip and a mic built into the cabin, with a cellular antenna ready to be turned on at any time from the other side? Credit card transactions track what you've been buying, and where. Usually we pay for convenience with our privacy.

^^I agree that Tesla did fail themselves by giving a permission to Broder to drive with the minimum charge that was left after the cold night, but it is also worth noting that Broder, once he knew he was in trouble, did not pull into the closest charging station and get enough juice as indicated by the range meter to get him to Milford, something he had a chance to do (i realize that Tesla suppor told him the range indicator may show increased miles once he starts driving). While charging at the Supercharger, he technically exceeded the range he needed to get to the next point of his trip, but he did not completely charge the car up. This is similar, in my opinion, to not topping off a internal combustion car, but only adding enough gas to get you to the next destination using EPA gas economy estimate. Some would argue that completing the electric charge would take extra time, which the driver may not have, and therefore this scenario does not mirror the real world. I would argue with a conventional car, the driver may not have enough money to top off the tank, but you don't see the testers trying to mirror the real world by filling the car halfway before heading out on a drive up PCH. This drive went wrong due to cold weather, incorrect advice from overoptimistic Tesla tech support, and a driver who could was not quite as determined to complete his trip as much as a regular owner would have. I agree, after looking at all the facts, that it is hard to prove that Broder intentionally lied with a malicious purpose, but there are definitely some strong hints of bias present in his original writeup.

For some comic relief, here is a parody review article that turns the tables to on ICE cars:
http://www.solidstategroup.com/page/6277/a-review-of-the-new-fangled-petrol-powered-car


[Edited on February 19, 2013 at 3:32 PM. Reason : .]

2/19/2013 3:17:01 PM

Quote :

"The customer have to give Tesla an explicit permission to turn on data logging. However, they leave it on for all media test-drives since the Top Gear episode."

That is what I was curious about.

2/19/2013 3:24:50 PM