|
The following is a letter that was sent to Tesla Roadster customers today to review key developments in the Roadster program.
Since we last provided a program update we have achieved an extraordinary milestone - on March 17th, the Tesla Roadster entered regular production. In this program update we will focus on a wide variety of topics that relate to the program now that we are in this new phase, including:
- Production Schedule
- “Powertrain 1.5”
- Warranty
- New “Out of Service Area” Policy
- Store and Service Center locations and timing
- Additional News
Production Schedule
Now that production has started, we would like to provide you with an update on the plan and status of production. Although everyone is eager to receive their cars as soon as possible, it is important in this program, and any automobile program, to start the production line slowly and to increase the rate at which cars are manufactured at a very deliberate pace. This “slow ramp” ensures a high level of quality even with the first cars off the line. Inevitably, there are process and quality issues that come up as one increases the rate of production and a slow ramp rate enables us to address a myriad of issues in a controlled manner – remember that the Roadster is not just a new car it is a new automotive paradigm.
After an initial period of slow production rates, the pace of production starts to pick up until we are producing in excess of 100 cars per month by November. For this reason, the delivery of the approximately 600 2008 Model Year cars is weighted toward the end of this year and beginning of next year.
The data below is intended to provide a guideline as to when we plan to achieve specific milestones in vehicle production. While this data will give you a sense of when your car will be produced, the actual delivery time will lag by about 8 weeks to allow for shipping and finishing. You will be contacted by Member Services 3 months prior to your expected production date to confirm details.
In the past 2 months, we have moved more slowly than our planned pace of 1 car per week. At the time of this writing, we are preparing to put cars number 6 and 7 on the line. This is by our own doing, as we have identified and addressed some minor supplier issues and teething pains. We expect to get back on pace so have not changed the overall schedule.
This is exactly the kind of situation we anticipated and is the reason for the slow initial ramp. In the early going, it is easier to address issues that inevitably crop up and then get back on track without major impact to the overall schedule. One thing is for certain: we will not sacrifice quality or customer satisfaction to force the schedule.
As we have mentioned before, the plan is to stick to a relatively slow pace of production until “Powertrain 1.5” is ready for insertion into the production process. At this time, we can then start to accelerate the production pace.
“Powertrain 1.5”
The development of “Powertrain 1.5” is progressing very well. We have the newly designed PEM (Power Electronics Module) running at the higher 850 amp level in a prototype car being used for durability and other testing. The higher current levels are generating the expected higher levels of torque (~280 lb. ft) that will enable the same 3.9 second 0-60 acceleration with the new single speed gearbox under development. This new powertrain configuration is planned to be inserted into the production schedule in September, at about the 40th car. All cars produced prior to this switchover will be upgraded free of charge as previously discussed.
Warranty
Tesla has established a comprehensive warranty for the Roadster. The 3 year/36,000 mile base warranty covers all aspects of the car for defects in materials and workmanship. The battery pack is part of this comprehensive warranty. Details about the warranty will be covered in your owner’s documentation.
Tesla will offer an extended warranty option at no cost to 2008 Roadster Club members, extending the coverage to 4 years/50,000 miles. Purchasers of later model year Roadsters will be offered the extended warranty at additional cost.
The battery pack is expected to last longer than the warranty period, although repairs beyond the warranty period will be charged at regular part and labor rates.
All high-energy lithium ion cells experience a gradual loss in maximum capacity based on usage levels, time, and other factors. Your owner’s documentation will include information on expected behavior of the battery over time and the factors that affect the rate of wear.
Out of Service Area Service Policy
Based on customer feedback and other practical considerations, the “Out of Service Area” policy has been changed. The original policy required a fee of $8,000 to be paid on delivery of the car to cover additional transport costs over the life of the warranty for customers who are located further than 100 miles from a Tesla Service Center.
This policy has been replaced with a simpler approach. Instead of paying an up-front fee, customers who are located outside a Tesla service area are responsible for the costs associated with transport to and from Tesla Service Centers. Tesla Customer Service will coordinate long distance transport on behalf of the customer if desired.
Store and Service Center Locations
Tesla’s flagship Los Angeles Store is now open to the public. The Menlo Park Store will open this summer, although it will be operational and servicing cars sooner than that.
Over time Tesla Motors will build additional Stores containing both sales/service facilities across the country. For now, the priority is to establish purpose-built service facilities to service cars that are planned for delivery over the next 12 months. Based on the number of cars due to be delivered in various markets, we anticipate opening additional service facilities in the following order:
- Los Angeles – Open
- Menlo Park – Summer 2008
- New York – Q4 2008
- Chicago – Q1 2009
- Miami – Q1 2009
- Seattle – Q1 2009
Specific locations and dates are yet to be established. Additional locations will be announced in the future. We expect to establish service offerings in all major US cities by 2010.
Additional News
Tesla Motors recently announced that the Tesla Roadster would be available for delivery in Europe beginning April, 2009. For the first year, a special “Signature Edition” of 250 cars will be offered for all of Europe. This special edition car, fully loaded and highly customized, sells for 99,000 Euro (excl. VAT). We plan to establish service facilities in key European cities, starting with London, Paris, Munich, Northern Germany, Milan, Oslo, Copenhagen (this list is being finalized). Many of you have enquired about European delivery for yourself or on behalf of a friend or colleague, so we wanted to let you know about this special offer. If you are interested in learning more or want to help us with our European launch, just let us know or email eurosales@teslamotors.com .
We recently announced pricing on the 2009 Tesla Roadster in the U.S. The base price is expected to be $109,000. With all factory options, the Roadster will cost about $120,200. This price increase does not affect any member who has already reserved a 2008 Roadster.
FINALLY !!!! Timely and useful information !!!!! You are to be commended on suppling it in a much better fashion than in the past. Hopefully these GREAT changes will continue in the future !!!!
On a side note - how many cars are there in the Founder’s series ? I have heard between 40 and 100 and from this it seems there are 99 or 100 is that the case ?
Interesting that Washington DC is not close to the top of the list of service centers but I guess NY is close enough if needed until a new store can be opened
Yes!!! Finally. So I guess it’s confirmed? The location is in Miami?
And 280 ft-lb of torque. Wow! When Edmunds estimated powertrain 1.5 to have the kind of power, people were kind of cautious about their estimates, but it’s true.
Thank you for including Munich! Now let’s show BMW what real cars are made of
Thank you for listing Oslo by name, I’ll be waiting for it to open.
Sindre
PS: And if you want someone to scout out a nice location …
Thanks a lot for the much anticipated update!
It’s exciting for those on the outside to see some progress.
Could you explain how you guys define a Tesla model year? Seems that by normal convention, the cars produced after the Signature 100 series (starting October 2008) would just be called the 2009 model year.
As it is, is there any material difference between the 2008 and planned 2009 model year cars? Thank you.
In order for a store to be open in Maimi by Q1 2009 you must have a site selected. If not, being a Miamian, I recommend 2 locations: Lincoln Road area of South Beach (great for international exposure) or Coral Gables Bird Road & Ponce area (fine automobile hub with Lotus, Ferrari, Jaguar, etc in close proximity).
Thanks for the update! It’s great to hear about the progress. It was also very cool to hear Darryl Siry speak at SF Green on Monday (and to see the Roadster that was there). For those of you who didn’t get to go, I posted quite a few pictures of the Tesla Roadster (it was an orange one) here: greenhome.huddler.com/products/2008-tesla-roadster-coupe (just click the view more images button).
Or else check out this forum thread for a look at just a few of the pictures: greenhome.huddler.com/forum/thread/329/up-close-and-personal-with-the-tesla-roadster?replies=6
And if you’re interested in what Darryl talked about, check out this blog post from Gas 2.0: gas2.org/2008/05/15/tesla-roadster-pictures-from-sf-green-pics/
Yes it is great to get a report, and particularly on the schedule so we can stop taking wild guesses. Kevin, if you follow the description of 100 cars/month by November then 80 to 90 cars in October would mean that the last Signature series VIN# would be 110 to 120, so it seems unlikely there are even 40 Founders’ Series. Contrary to normal auto manufacturing it appears that the 2008 model year will extend until March 2009. Is that true?
Powertrain 1.5 = 0-60 in 3.9 sec.
But what does that do to the range?
Roy,
I got the impression that there were 100 of the Signature series from Signature Series 100 being produced in July- October and the Founder’s series was seperate and before those. I do not think the number of one has anything to do with the number of the other…
But from the anticipated start up rate of 1/ week that would mean about 15 founder’s series vehicles in the time frame of March-June. Darryl is this number one that can be confirmed ?
“This is exactly the kind of situation we anticipated and is the reason for the slow initial ramp. In the early going, it is easier to address issues that inevitably crop up and then get back on track without major impact to the overall schedule. One thing is for certain: we will not sacrifice quality or customer satisfaction to force the schedule.”
That is typical textbook theory, but terrible practice. You will be enjoying the worst of both worlds - slow ramp and an even longer lead time to find the real problems that you don’t learn until you’ve made dozens or hundreds of vehicles. Fisker is going to deliver a sedan far earlier than Tesla will, and it will be sourced by an existing Tier 1 supplier. After that, GM will start shipping the Volt, and your window of opportunity will have closed.
The only upside to this approach, is that the manufacturing planners can maintain their image of not making any mistakes, because they didn’t really do anything.
Roy,
Models in the US are typically determined as to when they were SOLD. Therefore, since all of the first 600 were sold in 2008 they are technically 2008 model year. I know that you are going to say that some of them were actually SOLD in 2007. But what was sold then was a membership in the Tesla Roadster Club and then that is applied to your car.
Wikipedia says this :
In the United States, automobile model years traditionally start in the third quarter of the preceding year. So model year refers to the “sales” model year; for example, vehicles sold during the period from October 1 to the next September 30 is considered one model year.
In other cases products of a previous model year can continue production, especially if a newer model hasn’t yet been released. In that case, the model year remains the same until a new model is introduced. This is to ensure that the model will be seen by the public and will actually sell an amount of vehicles before a new vehicle model is produced and people will look at the newer model rather than the previous one.
Not that wikipedia is totally reiable but a good start.
I am so excited to hear about TESLA cars. We are moving over to Texas in late 2009 from United Kingdom. Most certainly we will buy one. Hopefully you will make a passenger car by then as we have a five year old son. He does not want to be left behind in such an exciting car.
Wish you every success
Dee Kini
Dale wrote on May 15th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Powertrain 1.5 = 0-60 in 3.9 sec.
But what does that do to the range?
I suspect that’s easy to answer…. it’s the same as what happens in a Lamborghini when you floor it…. the gas mileage goes out the window.
The key being the fact that “just because you have that much torque, doesn’t mean you have to use it”.
Nice communication. Thanks!
Roger,
Actually rumor is just the opposite. Because of the new power train the motor is actually more efficient and the range is supposed to increase ever so slightly maybe 230 miles per charge or so.
As a supporter of Tesla, I must commend you. After the closing of The Nikola Tesla Museum in Colorado Springs, I was very disconcerted. As an aircraft mechanic, I must say, Tesla would be honored to have such a phenomenal machine named after him.
The increased mileage would be cool!
Heh, not sure about the rest of the “just the opposite” though. One would think that - at best - even with the new design the best you could hope for when you drive the Tesla like a racecar is the same mileage as if you drove it “regular”. To “gain mileage” instead of “loose mileage” would be very very impressive indeed
Just Kidding. I know what you meant when you said opposite. It helped clarify the original question which I mis-read.
RE Planned Production - what happened to January 2009? You guys taking a month off?
Jason Hendler has a good point - you should ramp up faster if you can. You probably can’t, of course. At least the Roadster is differentiated from the other product coming into the market. Which brings up the question…
Whither Whitestar? C’mon, give us a tease.
So exactly how many are in the Founder’s series ?
Kevin, as far as I know there are 24 cars in the Founders’ Series.
That would put it at about 3 / week which is getting pretty good. Especially since 5, 6 & 7 were started this week at the very least. Movin’ on up !!
Re: New deliveries
It’s more than likely that some of those lucky individuals soon to be receiving their Roadsters will have their own websites. That being the case my bet is that its arrival will be mentioned on one or two of them.
I realize their are privacy issues but a few soon-to-be owners have already “spoken” to us via this site so it would seem to me that they would want to continue sharing information once their Roadster arrives.
So if anyone out there gets to hear of such a website posting maybe they could post a link?
Peter J Hedge
Victoria, BC
Bloomberg article on Elon Musk:
Musk Makes Rockets for Stars as Tesla Taunts Ferrari on Earth
www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=a_hfyGPv3sGo&refer=home
Powertrain 1.5 would have no effect on the range. None.
The car is capable of pulling more amps, but that does not mean that its is always pulling more amps.
If the Roadster is going 20mph, and is drawing XXamps with Powetrain 1, then Powertrain 1.5 will also being drawing the same number of amps.
Electric cars don’t work like gasoline cars. A 250hp electric car traveling at 50mph will consume as much as a 100hp electric car traveling at 50mph. This of course, assumes that each car is otherwise identical.
very impressive
thanks a lot for update 
Actually, Powertrain 1.5 should slightly improve range.
First, the new transistors in the PEM have lower resistance, so less power is wasted there. Then, the improved motor thermal management should keep it cooler, lowering the resistance of the copper windings, so less power is wasted there. Finally, the one speed transmission has fewer moving parts, and should be slightly lighter, so less power loss there.
I’m assuming that the improved motor thermal management does not require liquid cooling. If it does, then that will probably use more power than the air cooling in drive 1.0.
Elon talks about Tesla IPO:
www.news.com/8301-11128_3-9946577-54.html
“Elon Musk, the founder of Tesla Motors, said here Saturday that he plans to take his electric sports car company public by the end of 2008.”
Nice to know that you are coming to Europe!!!
“We plan to establish service facilities in key European cities, starting with London, Paris, Munich, Northern Germany, Milan, Oslo, Copenhagen (this list is being finalized”
Please do not forget Portugal or Spain…;) I’ve no doubt that your Roadster would be a success here in the Iberian peninsula. Oil price is raising all the time…:(:(
Cheers
If I might make a humble suggestion: It seems to me that the point at which the Signature 100 cars are finished creates a natural break for Tesla to start labeling the subsequent cars as model year 2009. That would give the Founders’ and Signature 100 Series the extra cachet of being the only 2008 model year cars and allow the next 500 vehicles to be in a model year that agrees with convention.
Congratulations on going into production. This is one cool car. I know that presently a 4-door SUV is in the works and a full range of vehicles to follow in the future. My question is when do you plan to have a competing product to Phoenix SUT? I know I am going to get one when those are available. It would be nice to have more then one option to choose from.
Doug, not a chance! You are crazy to even suggest such a thing! Many of those 500 people have been waiting for over a year already, and by the time they receive cars, it could be over two years. The money those customers paid up front provided a good chunk of the cash needed to complete development. Why would Tesla want to royally piss off 500 good and loyal and very patient customers?
Glad you aren’t in charge of marketing!
Thomas J., thanks for your input.
It’s true I don’t know much about marketing. I’m just gently suggesting what seems logical to me as a scientist and an engineer. There may be some reason why the label of one model year is more desirable than another that I don’t know about. Please educate me. 
If Tesla designates those 500 cars as 2009 models instead of 2008, why should it piss off the customers? It doesn’t at all affect when they actually get their cars. By Tesla’s production plan half of those 500 vehicles won’t even enter the production line before the end of 2008, most won’t be delivered till 2009. Tesla would still honor the current “2008 model year” agreement. Just the label of which model year would change to something that makes more sense (to me anyhow). I believe Tesla had originally planned to call the first cars as being “2007+1/2 model year,” but they changed that when it no longer made sense. What’s different now? Thanks in advance for a more detailed explanation.
Hi there. I think your car is the best thing to ever come along. My question/comment is I work in Fairfax, Va and live in Apex, NC which is about 300 miles apart. This is a little more than the range on the Roadster but I was watching TV and saw a show Beyond Tomorrow or something like it. They were showing a guy who made a car, not a car in the practical sense but good for loading docks and such, using a rotary engine utilizing compressed air. I definitely like everything about the Roadster but most service stations have a compressed air system to inflate tires which would not even bother an attendant working there but plugging into their outside outlet might. Did you ever think about maybe putting a small version of something like the rotary compressed air system in the car to supplement the power supply thus increasing range? I would definitely feel less apprehensive about getting stranded on long trips if I new I just had to fill up the equivalent of a tire, let the system charge itself while I was driving or stopped for an hour to stretch my legs. I wouldn’t think such a system would become the primary in lieu of plugging in my Roadster at night for a full recharge but again, peace of mind that I can utilize the current infrastructure, ie. service stations, currently all over would make me feel warm and fuzzy. Also, compressed air is right in line with the zero foot print environmentally speaking that Tesla Motors is promoting.
Thank you for your time and any other ideas for increasing the range would be great to hear about.
Kudos to the engineers and the design team. Finally an electric with performance, style, and driving range. Unfortunately, the ridiculous price will prevent the average person from every owning one.
As far as what “model year” a given vehicle is produced…. I think this is mainly splitting hairs and exposing a corrupt practice in mainstream automobile manufacturing anyway.
What is significant is if there are some power train or engine differences from one model year to the next. “Typical” practice among automobile manufacturers is that changes in design that call for new parts will be rolled out in the next year’s model…. but even that isn’t true. As a “backyard mechanic” it is often important to know what the month is of production of the vehicle that you are working with. This is important when mid-year engineering changes happen for vehicles while in production… and that can happen for a variety of reasons as well. On the other end of the spectrum, a vehicle like the Volkswagon Beetle was so soundly designed that its part list didn’t change for decades (and one of the reasons why it is still a cult classic for backyard mechanics).
As an engineer too, I would note that making changes to a vehicle that is already in production is something incredibly costly. It is something to wisely avoid unless absolutely necessary (such as the transmission issue on the Roadster).
Still, for the most part the model year is something that is pure marketing fluff. It is something that has little or no relationship to actual engineering practice or even something most customers really need to concern themselves over. Furthermore, for a manufacturer who is just starting up production, it is irrelevant as well. Are you concerned with what model year a DeLorian is if you are trying to purchase a vehicle made by that manufacturer? (Not that I’m assuming Tesla is going to have the same fate as that manufactuer!)
>> “Elon Musk, the founder of Tesla Motors, said here Saturday that he plans to take his electric sports car company public by the end of 2008.”
Elon Musk is NOT the founder of Tesla Motors. This mistakes gets repeaten way to often. It is interesting that he nor Tesla Motos does not mind it…
Good Mornong.
A friend of mine have got a great idia for your car,why not build a dynamo for each weel to charge tne car like on a bicicle dynamo then you would never have to charge it will all be done while driving i am sure this is the way to go let me know please what you thin k.
Besy HH
Ask anyone who owns a 1953 Corvette if they would mind having anothe model year instead, since it is “just a label”.
1953 Corvette for sale: $249,000
1954 Corvette for sale: $99,000
Mark Jungers: 300 miles? That’s a very long commute, most commutes are less than 60 miles. To get longer driving range in an EV, we could add a “range extender” - a generator that produces power to run the can when the batteries get low, or we could use a bigger capacity battery. Both approaches are being developed, both will be used in the future.
I know about that rotary compressed air engine, it was designed for use in a factory or warehouse where high speed and long distance isn’t needed. There is another company trying to develop a hiway capable compressed air car, but it takes air compressed to 4,500 psi, and standard shop air compressors max out at 150 psi. In other words, no free fillups from the tire air pump! Moreover, the energy density of compressed air is less than LiIon batteries, so those expensive ultra-high pressure air tanks would take up more room than extra batteries would, making it totally useless as a range extender.
Hardy: You are not the first (or last) to suggest connecting a generator/alternator/dynamo to the wheels. But Tesla Motors has already figured out a way to switch the electric motor into an induction dynamo that can convert the rotation of the wheels back into electricity and recharge the batteries. It is called “Regenerative Braking”, and it slows the car down as it converts forward momentum into electrical power. You’ve got to admit that it just wouldn’t be practical to try and drive around with the regenerative brakes on all the time!
# >> “Elon Musk, the founder of Tesla Motors, said here Saturday that he plans to take his
# electric sports car company public by the end of 2008.”
A nice gesture might be to allow long-time bloggers to get in on the IPO ahead of the crowd, via options, etc. A lot of Tesla’s buzz is directly traceable not only to the news posted here by Tesla, but also to the reactions and comments generated here by that news. The simple opportunity to purchase stock for the asking price, before the market goes crazy with it, would be a significant acknowledgment of the value that this blog and its community of enthusiast commentators adds to the Tesla brand. I’m just sayin’.
James,
My feelings exactly. The more shareholders who have shown support for the company the better. You wouldn’t want a lot of shareholders who are just interested in a quick buck as they could end up steering the company in the wrong direction.
Alright! Finally a meaty blog post! Bummer about the pace so far…about 2 weeks per car, right? Hope the ramp up goes well.
I’m also interested in this conversation about range/efficiency of drivetrain 1.0 vs 1.5; I can see the points both sides are making here, and I’m not sure how to rectify them. On the one hand, I read Tesla’s press release claiming the new drivetrain was somewhat more efficient, and I can understand why that would be (including the reasons cited by Thomas J), so it makes sense that at a constant speed it will take less energy and have a higher range. But on the other hand, we know that the single gear of drivetrain 1.5 is taller than 1st gear in drivetrain 1.0, and we know that the motor’s torque/power output was increased (by increasing the input current) to meet the same 0-60 time. So we know that more watts are being taken out of the pack at full acceleration under drivetrain 1.5 than with the old setup in 1st gear. Or, put another way, we know that the new drivetrain is going to take more energy out of the pack during the 3.9 seconds it takes to make a 60mph run.
So where does that leave us? I’m not sure, but here’s what I think is reasonable to conclude right now:
1)If you just do 0-60 runs over and over, the new Roadster won’t last as long as the old one.
2)At any speeds over 70mph (top of 1st), the new Roadster will last longer than the old one.
3)In hard driving at low speeds (below 70mph) the new Roadster will probably not last as long.
4)Constant, low speeds are a toss-up.
5)Tesla seems to have indicated that the EPA cycles will benefit from the change.
I’m interested to hear more details on this subject from Tesla…I’m sure it’ll all come out by the time the new drive is shipping.
Bring on that Whitestar info!
Hunter
#Thomas J wrote on May 18th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
#Ask anyone who owns a 1953 Corvette if they would mind having another model year instead, since it is “just a label”.
So I’ve got to ask (since I’m not a huge Corvette fan that knows this minutae)… what is the difference between the two model years of that car, other than just the marketing label applied to it?
Perhaps it is a pure marketing issue (aka one model year is more rare than another, like having a coper penny from 1941 is valuable among coin collectors), or perhaps there was a genuine engineering difference between the two model years.
I still contend that this is something cosmetic and for the diehard fans, and not something that really matters to ordinary customers in the long run. Certainly in the case of the Roadster, the “Signature 100″ group of vehicles is going to have a special distinction. Heck, a vehicle with a serial number less than 1000 is going to be a huge collectible vehicle regardless of the financial success or failure of the company that produced it. Just ask around for an Edsel or De Lorean DMC-12… they are certainly valuable now even though at the time they were made they weren’t considered financial successes.
I’m just saying that for now, it really is just pure fluff to mention what the model year of the Roadster is right now as production is ramping up. In a couple of years, it may be something of importance in terms of owning a Tesla Motors product, but not right now.
It shouldn’t make any difference to the battery load or the PEM in terms of gear ratio below 60 mph. An electric motor in a lower gear consumes more current than the same motor turning slower in a higher gear. What really counts is that the energy to accellerate the car from 0 to 60 in 4 seconds is the same no mater what method is used to propel it (ignoring efficiencies). What does make a difference is the power consumption above 60, since there is no gear change the motor will continue to consume increasing power until it hits the 8500 rpm peak. See Tesla’s power curve here www.teslamotors.com/performance/acceleration_and_torque.php The blue line represents power and since the batteries produce constant voltage, it is representitive of the current draw during accelleraion (up to 8500 rpm). If 13000 rpm represents 120 mph top speed then 8500 rpm = 78 mph. The new car will have better accelleration above 60 than the original. Where the motor power starts falling above 8500 rpm the system is becoming less efficient and the current consumption remains close to flat.
I can’t see how Tesla’s claim to increased effiency can be true. I agree with the above statements about improved effiency of the PEM and the motor, but I doubt that those gains would offset the load of a water cooling pump and radiator fan.
1953 Corvette for sale: $249,000
1954 Corvette for sale: $99,000
… what is the difference between the two model years of that car, other than just the marketing label applied to it?
Robert Horning the Answer is $149,000 US. A bit more than the net value of ” pure fluff ” in my neighborhood!
Roy, I don’t see where you come up with this: “It shouldn’t make any difference to the battery load or the PEM in terms of gear ratio below 60 mph. An electric motor in a lower gear consumes more current than the same motor turning slower in a higher gear. What really counts is that the energy to accellerate the car from 0 to 60 in 4 seconds is the same no mater what method is used to propel it (ignoring efficiencies).”
The new gear is taller, so the old motor/PEM was unable to get the 3.9 second 0-60 time. So, to get that time back, they increased the power of the motor. So, it has to be using more power during that 3.9 seconds…right? Otherwise, why did they need the more powerful motor?
They needed more *torque* to get the 3.9 seconds with the taller gear.
The torque comes at a lower motor RPM, because of the new gear ratio,
Power is torque times RPM. (force times speed) Power stays the same.
>> A nice gesture might be to allow long-time bloggers to get in on the IPO ahead of the crowd, via options, etc. A lot of Tesla’s buzz is directly traceable not only to the news posted here by Tesla, but also to the reactions and comments generated here by that news. The simple opportunity to purchase stock for the asking price, before the market goes crazy with it, would be a significant acknowledgment of the value that this blog and its community of enthusiast commentators adds to the Tesla brand. I’m just sayin’.
It’s not really related to the original topic, but I’d like to second this suggestion. Stock price is strongly controlled by the type of investors you attract, and having a solid base of share holders buying on a long term strategy can really protect you. Well, there’s that, and the fact that I want to get in before everybody else.
# Loren Carpenter wrote on May 20th, 2008 at 11:39 am
## They needed more *torque* to get the 3.9 seconds with the taller gear.
## The torque comes at a lower motor RPM, because of the new gear ratio,
## Power is torque times RPM. (force times speed) Power stays the same.
I don’t think that is right. You are thinking about gas engines with torque peaks at high RPMs where you can change things (like Supercharge) to move the torque peak lower for quicker off the line.
Tesla’s electric motor already has max torque near 0 RPMs, so they didn’t just move the torque “peak” around (it already has a nearly flat torque “curve” from 0-6K RPMs). I think they are in fact moving up the whole torque curve resulting in more peak torque as well as more peak power.
Yet another option would to give some sort of option to people who have been following the roadster’s development, and Tesla motors’ some sort of stock option.
I personally do not have the money to buy a roadster, If I did I would be waiting for one somewhere in the teens. It would be nice to have some sort of registry to sign up for buying the stock ahead of the general pubic.
Just my 2 cents from a poor(literally) enthusiast~
@TEG:
No, Lou is quite right. Power = torque*RPM, and to do 0-60 in 4s requires a certain average power.
OTOH you are also correct that the motor generates max torque near 0 RPM, what the new PEM does is _increase_ the torque at 0 RPM compared to the old PEM, allowing the same power to be generated at lower RPM than the old PEM, hence you can get the same 0-60 with a taller gear ratio than before.
Oops, that shoul be Loren is quite correct, not Lou
OK off topic but I need some help from some of you math wizzes out there. How long would it take to charge an 8.2 kWh battery on a 70 Amp 220 volt circuit ?
# Neilen Marais wrote on May 21st, 2008 at 3:40 am
## No, Loren is quite right. Power = torque*RPM, and to do 0-60 in 4s requires a certain average power.
When Loren said “power stays the same”, I assumed they were talking about peak HP (which is the typically most common quoted power figure for a motor/engine).
If you are talking about “average power” in the full rev range for 0-60 MPH then OK… Yes.
With the old 2 speed (in 1st gear) 0 to 60 would be something like 0-13K RPMs.
With the new 1 speed 0 to 60 would be something like 0-6K RPMs.
The old “1.0″ eMotor already had max torque in 0-6K RPMs. So suggestions that they could “move the torque peak to lower RPMs” wouldn’t help anything there.
The revised PEM will probably boost torque across a wide rev range (not just 0-6K RPMs), so not only will average power at lower RPMs be up, but peak power at higher RPMs will be up as well. The 1.0 eMotor torque curve has peak power coming in around 8200 RPMs (since torque starts to drop off above around 7K RPMs). I don’t know if drivetrain 1.5 will have a similar shaped torque curve, or not. My guess/assumption is that it will be similar (flat from 0-7K RPMs, then starting to drop off evenly toward redline), but that there will be a relatively even (say 20+%) boost in torque at any given RPM.
So, peak power guesses:
Drivetrain 1.0: 250hp ( 160 ft-lb * 8200RPMs / 5252 ) [ Max torque = 200 ft-lib @ 0 RPMs ]
Drivetrain 1.5: 300hp ( 192 ft-lb * 8200RPMs / 5252 ) [ Max torque = 240 ft-lb @ 0 RPMs ]
Again, just educated guesses from looking at their published 1.0 torque curve, and hearing the peak HP might now be around 300.
It doesn’t appear that Tesla has published any final specs for drivetrain 1.5 yet, although various hints have been stated different places.
TEG, as noted in the “Powertrain 1.5″ section of the blog above, “The higher current levels are generating the expected higher levels of torque (~280 lb. ft) that will enable the same 3.9 second 0-60 acceleration with the new single speed gearbox under development.” So it appears that torque has indeed increased substantially.
Kevin Harney: 70 * 220 = 15.4 kW, 8.2/15.4 = 0.53 hr = 32 minutes + about 10% for efficiency losses = 35 minutes.
Kevin Harney:
70 amps times 220 volts is 15400 watts. 8.2 kilowatt-hours divided by 15.4 kilowatts is .5325 hours or thereabouts, so assuming 100% efficiency it should take about 32 minutes. It will actually probably take somewhat longer, and if you have the efficiency of the charge cycle you can easily multiply that through to find out by how much.
But in reality what we usually call a “220 line” (in the US at least) is 240 volts. So, doing the same calculation:
70*240=16,800 (voltsXamps=watts)
8.2/16.8=.488 (kWhr/kW=hr)
It should take about 29 and a half minutes at 100% efficiency. Hope that explanation helps…the calculations are all easy as long as you know how the units are connected.
Roy, Loren, TEG and Neilen, thanks so much! This is all much clearer now, and I can see that I was badly mistaken in my first analysis. Like I said to Kevin, the key is always how the units are connected. In my case, the misconception was in accidentally comparing the new and old motors on the same transmission, when I thought I was comparing the whole new and old setups. So I didn’t properly account for the lower finishing rpms and their effect on the power. In any case, it’s clear now that while it is possible to draw more watts with the new setup than the old, that can only happen when you are doing something that you simply couldn’t do with the old drivetrain (namely accelerate at high speeds quicker than the old setup would allow)…so it’s a win any way you slice it. That’s great!
Thanks for all the math guys !!! Great help. approx 1/2 hour is what I needed but nice to know the cannoections and the math behind it. Has anyone looked at the EVC motorcycle ?
Hunter wrote:
# …so it’s a win any way you slice it. That’s great!
Yeah - I like the new specs much more than the original specs. Not having to shift ever is fantastic.
Although some may disagree, I think the top speed is adequate/appropriate, and being able to get to 60MPH before the torque starts to drop off seems ideal.
Assuming that the new PEM and eMotor are reliable, and the ESS can handle 850 amps OK, this should be truly awesome.
I still wonder if, when and how they might offer adjustable regen since they no longer have two different shift lever profiles.
Some bloggers here have discussed some stock options for those that have shown interest and commitment to the Tesla mission. How about all those that signed up for the newsletter for starters being offered the option of $1000 of Tesla stock? I’ll buy once I see and like the prospectus.
The thing I would not want to happen in a full public IPO is that the shares are purchased either by competitors (e.g. Porche, Toyota) that have limited interest in the Tesla brand and Big Oil that would only wish to clip its wings or shut it down all together. The problem is that full value will only be attained if an unrestricted public sale policy is followed. What happens to Tesla thereafter will depend on the percentage of Tesla being sold and what the founders wish to do - follow the dream or make some quick bucks.
The big problem for Tesla is that they do not have a unique technology. All the big boys can and will build EVs eventually. Scarcity of oil and refined petroleum will see to that. Tesla have a one to two year lead in having a car to market in 2008 rather than 2010 but are dissipating that lead by a slow ramp up of production. They need to build the brand by getting metal en masse on the streets asap. The big automakers have now become deadly serious in their PHEV and EV programs where a year ago they were at best half hearted. That is bad news for Tesla. The IPO, its timing and what they do with the cash is critical.
@TEG
About the specs, I actually remember a while back when Tesla announced the EU sales they had a PDF brochure that specifies higher power than what they’ve been saying up to now, presumably those are the drivetrain 1.5 specs. I’m a bit lazy to find it now, but I’m sure one could get hold of it by browsing the tesla motors website or googling
You also got me thinking about the regen… Since they already have the lever, they can just use it as a regen-braking profile control. Actually there are a bunch of human interface possibilities here… I mean, when driving enthusiastically it’s quite common to use gear shifting to roughly control speed, so it may even be better to “simulate” a lower gear ratio, etc. Perhaps a little silly, perhaps not
# Kevin Harney wrote on May 21st, 2008 at 5:59 pm
## Has anyone looked at the EVC motorcycle ?
Like the “Volta” ? :
www.evc-llc.com/Data/Volta%20Brochure%2010-13-07.pdf
www.evcusa.com/
(The “Volta” name sounds like goes along with “Tesla”)
There are a bunch of new Li-Ion electric motorcycles coming to market soon.
Brammo Enertia, www.enertiabike.com/
ElectricMotorsport GPR, www.electricmotorsport.com/
And the NiMH Vectrix that has been out for a while, www.vectrix.com/
# Pete A. wrote on May 21st, 2008 at 10:55 am
## “The higher current levels are generating the expected higher levels of torque (~280 lb. ft)
So if they really can get 280 lb. ft (assuming at 0 RPM) then that is a 40% gain, well above the 20%+ I heard at first.
If the torque boost is linear across the rev range, then they would bump HP to ~350 ( ~224 ft-lb * ~8200RPMs / 5252 )
But maybe they have to have the high RPM torque drop off faster due to eMotor heat, so they could get 40% low RPM torque boost, but still have less than a 40% peak horsepower improvement.
By the way, I am not sure if it is best to use lb. ft or ft-lb for torque.
Here on this blog they say : (~280 lb. ft)
But on their old torque chart they use ft-lb
www.teslamotors.com/display_data/torquegraph_v2.gif
I guess the “ft-lb” is a “work measurement”, so really the chart probably should have listed “lb. ft” since it is a torque measurement.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot-pound_force
“Pound-foot is used by engine manufacturers in specifying the torque output of an engine.”
Multiplication is commutative. It doesn’t matter if you multiply feet times pounds, or pounds times feet, the torque is the same.
Or, as Shakespeare might put it, “A rose my any other name, would still accelerate as fast.”
Keith
ESS battery system is 366 volts * 850 amps = 311 kw = 417 hp peak less efficiency loses about 8%? = 384hp. So new motor has about 30% more power.
# Keith Hearn wrote on May 22nd, 2008 at 11:18 am
## Multiplication is commutative. It doesn’t matter if you multiply feet times pounds, or pounds times feet, the torque is the same.
So you are saying it takes the same power to move 280 lbs one foot as it does to move one pound 280 feet? ;^)
# Kevin Harney wrote on May 21st, 2008 at 5:59 pm
## Has anyone looked at the EVC motorcycle ?
Yeah… I tried to post some comments about it here but it seems to have gotten held up by the moderators.
TEG, if moving horizontally on a frictionless surface, it uses the same ENERGY.
Well, nobody is wild about waiting for a new toy, I think that this article
www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/wayoflife/05/22/confessions.auto.engineer/index.html
says a lot.
Take your time and get it right. Do the same for the whitestar. That will be my car.
And hopefully, the bluestar allows Teslamotors to join the ranks of the big boys, with a pre-ordained name for quality.
@TEG
“Not having to shift ever is fantastic.”
Here in Europe we consider a good gearshift as part of the art of driving
Have you ever seen an automatic Elise for example?
#
TEG wrote on May 22nd, 2008 at 6:58 pm
# Keith Hearn wrote on May 22nd, 2008 at 11:18 am
## Multiplication is commutative. It doesn’t matter if you multiply feet times pounds, or pounds times feet, the torque is the same.
#So you are saying it takes the same power to move 280 lbs one foot as it does to move one pound 280 feet? ;^)
Duh! Of course. Just like applying 1 lb of force on a lever 280 ft long produces a torque of 280 ft-lb is the same torque as applying 280 lb of force on a lever 1 ft long.
Dave, I’ve been thinking about the gearshift and its relationship with driving more and more lately. I’ve always driven manuals, and love driving them like anyone who really likes driving must. But technology seems to be getting past us. The Roadster is just one example; maybe a more direct case is the recent resurgence of continuously variable transmissions. Typically a CVT model will outperform the manual counterpart in both acceleration and economy…so the real, functional reasons to drive a manual disappear. Same with the sequential boxes in really high-performance cars…they are better in every way, except that you don’t get to do the fun bits yourself.
There’s no way to make the manual better than these other options…there’s a defective part (a human) in the system. From here on out, it’s going to always work better to let the computer control the transmission of power. So where does that leave us? Personally, I’m trying to keep a forward view…cars must evolve and this makes them better. Not that I won’t miss my gearshift when it’s gone. But I wonder whether any old-timers missed their starter cranks…
I should note that the drivetrain change in the Roadster didn’t bring this question up for me at all…there was no clutch in the first place, so the ability to “shift” was pretty meaningless. I greatly prefer the single speed.
TEG:
#So you are saying it takes the same power to move 280 lbs one foot as it does to move one pound 280 feet? ;^)
As long as you do it in the same amount of time
I have been following the development of your car and think what you are trying to do is awesome. I am really pulling for your success. I only wish that i could afford one. I understand why it costs so much in the begining and hope that as your company grows and the demand for electric cars increases that some day I can stop being depressed about the cost of fuel. Anyway, I just wanted to provide words of encouragment and I feel like I represent a lot of people when I say keep up the good work.
Sincerely,
Brian McLaws
Salt Lake City, Utah
Not wishing to split hairs with “OzonelLevel” (but I will anyway) “Torque” is defined as “a measure of how much a force acting on an object causes that object to rotate.”
As using a lever doesn’t necessarily result in a load rotating, the force cannot be refered to as “torque”.
Peter J Hedge
Victoria, BC
>>Peter J Hedge wrote on May 23rd, 2008 at 1:42 pm
>>Not wishing to split hairs with “OzonelLevel” (but I will anyway) “Torque” is defined as “a measure of how much a force acting on an object causes that object to rotate.”
>>As using a lever doesn’t necessarily result in a load rotating, the force cannot be refered to as “torque”.
That perhaps is a bit of a layman’s definition and is not completely accurate. Actually, in the case of the lever, it’s the lever itself which is the “object that rotates” (about the fulcrum). Additionally, the load is also applying a torque (in the opposite direction). But a torque doesn’t necessarily have to cause an object to rotate. Think of a time when you might have had to apply a torque to hold something still. An object is said to be in static equilibrium when the vector sum of all the forces and torques is equal to zero.
Has anyone heard about a company in Cincinnati that is converting Saturn Skys to all Electric? They starting taking orders this week for the initial production run of 300 cars. Seems very similar to the Tesla, not quite as fast, but fast enough and only half the price. Only available in Ohio however. The Sky looks like a pretty solid vehicle.
I did want a tesla but i think i will take a look at the saturn sky electric put out by ampmotorworks.com . a lot cheaper!!
ssb, you mean these guys?
www.ampmotorworks.com/index.html
www.autobloggreen.com/2008/05/23/amp-vehicles-to-convert-saturn-sky-roadsters-to-electric-power/
Pretty cool. I want to know more about what’s going into the conversion…particularly the motor/inverter. The specs page claims over 300hp…I don’t know of any generally-available EV drivetrain with that kind of power. I’d also like to know what cycle the 150 mile range is on, what the weight distribution looks like, the cycle life of the batteries, and the charging method/time.
It looks like they’re asking you to buy the car (they start at ~$26k) and pay them $25k to convert it…I guess that’s how they get around crash testing and EPA cycles and such. Still, if it’s even close to what they claim, it’s an awfully impressive vehicle for just $50k.
Yea, I like the Saturn too. But like Hunter, I have a lot of questions, pratically no real info on their website. I am amazed that over 100 people have signed up with so little information available. I sent them these questions:
Is your electric motor induction or permenant magnetic?
Is the motor AC or brushless DC?
Are there multiple drive motors?
Who makes the electric motor?
Do you have a single speed transmission?
What happens with the original gas motor? Can you buy the new cars without the motor/transmission?
Front engine, rear wheel drive?
You state no power steering pump. Replaced with electric power steering?
What is the size, weight, and capacitiy of your battery pack?
How efficient is your motor controller?
Does the car contan an on-board charger?
How efficient is your on-board charger?
How long does a charge take with the on-board charger?
What voltages and amps can the on-board charger handle.
Do you market a higher power stationary charger? What are its specs, and price?
Does your charge plug conform to Tesla’s standard?
Is any storage space, ie trunk space, lost due to the conversion?
Is the weight distribution of the car unchanged from original?
Is the vehicle weight changed?
If there are changes in the vehicle weight or distribution, what changes do you make to the suspension?
Do these modifications void GM’s warranty on the body/suspension of the car?
What warranty do you provide for your work?
Do your modifications invalidate crash worthiness tests?
Are there any insurance concerns due to the modifications?
Has the 150 mile range been validated with the EPA cycle?
If I get an answer, I’ll post it here.
Roy, that’s a pretty exhaustive list; I hope you get an answer. The only things I’m wondering that your questions don’t cover are related to what vehicles they’ll accept for conversion. Does it have to be a brand-new Sky? If they would accept used Skys, one could pretty easily shave off around $7k…if they’d allow other Kappa platform vehicles (e.g. Pontiac solstice…anybody know why those are so much cheaper than the identical-other-than-styling Sky?) that’s another few thousand. Do your buying right and you could have the whole thing done under $40k. That’s a darn attractive pricepoint.
Someone’s comment elsewhere (TMC maybe?) claimed (without citing a source) that AMP was using 2 motors in the rear. That explains how they’ve got a 300hp+ drivetrain, but also raises questions of how they integrate them (How are they controlled? Where do they put them?), not to mention cost.
Dave:
“Here in Europe we consider a good gearshift as part of the art of driving
Have you ever seen an automatic Elise for example? ”
Think of the constant 100% torque as ALWAYS being in the middle of a good gearshift.
Hunter:
They accept used Skys, but they must be in “good condition”. Conversion is $25,000, $10,000 down.
Roy, If AMP has a good warranty,then most of your questions dont matter to most people. If these guys are straight shooters ,i think they will hit a home run here.
AMP motor works–a website with no details and a company composed of three guys with mediocre backgrounds unrelated to the product. Sounds great, where do I send my money?
Any update on production? It’s the last week in May, giving you just five weeks to build the remaining cars in the Founder / Funder / close-personal-Friend Series.
AMP already has a car counter on their site !!! and they are over half sold !!! If this turns out to be an up and up project it is going to be serious competition for the Roadster at less than half the price …
Any Whitestar news ?!?!?!?! You know we really do need an actual name for it now ….
I’m interested to learn if Tesla will be producing vehicles that “average people” can afford. That is of course, taking into consideration the ramp up of manufacturing, acceptance of vehicle technology etc.. The $109,000 price tag is roughly 2/3 of what my house cost. LOL Is there anything on the table for the near future?
DW,
They are supposed to make an announcement on the next car - code named Whitestar - in about the next 30 days. This one will be a luxury sedan in the $60K range. That is supposed to hit the market in 2010. And the following model - codename Bluestar - will supposedly hit the market around 2012 and that is supposed to be closer to $30K. I am sure one of those will make your budget.
Sounds like real progress is being made. What is the address of the LA store? What are your minimum requirements for investments into your company?
Firstly, having stumbled upon this site by accident, I have spent a fair few hours reading. I agree with several comments especially with regard to pricing. To buy this vehicle in Europe, the car will cost approximately triple the money it costs in the US despite the fact it would be more commercially attractive due to the high cost of oil and punitive levy (and at the time of writing, petrol costs $10 per gallon in the UK).
However, at a price quoted of 99,000 Euro+VAT translates to 118,000 Euros for the vehicle, i.e. approximately $160,000 per vehicle.
Therefore, unless Tesla significantly reduces the cost of the vehicle in Europe, I observe the following:
1. The car will have little, if any, impact on CO2 emmissions;
2. It will remain a “Curio” item of the wealthy;
3. There will be few sales in Europe as most Europeans will feel the price differentai exploitive;
4. Citing London as a centre in the UK is interesting: London has an excellent (and one of the world’s best) public transport systems and few people will be pursuaded to invest $160,000 to commute (that’s several lifetimes worth of public transport);
5. And… You still have the running costs and maintenance: Are we to assume that for servicing, the owner must pay for their vehicle to be transported back to the US (which is what is stated very clearly)?
6. How do you charge the car if you have neither a garage or a house? For example, if you live in an apartment, how do you charge your car when parked on the street? Since London is cited, perhaps a visit might conclude that most Londoners don’t have cars as they don’t have anywhere to park them and the vast majority that own a veheicle park their vehicles on the street adjacent to their domicile. This is clearly going to be a practical problem to resolve;
7. The car looks fantastic, but really should be pitchedto the two-seater sportscar sector (eg to the Mazda MX5, Lotus Elise or similar);
8. I note that GM are alraedy looking to shive their diesel/hydrogen-electric technology with Chrysler: That will allow affordable technology to be brought to mass production. This will have the greatest impact, especially if existing drive-powertains can be superseded by the new 35gCO2/km technology. I also note that Chevrolet and Opel have two very interesting takes upon utilising their new technology;
9. Although the Tesla is a very beautiful and worthy contender for combining performance and efficiency, I don’t quite see how Nikolai Tesla’s achievemnts can be compared to this car. This car will remain the doyen of very wealthy people, who will make spurious claims about their personal green credentials. Furthermore, this limited market will be invariably limited by the wealthy who simply don’t care (and that’s the majority: Make the simple test and judge them by how they live their lives… Do they simply talk the talk?)
I think if you can produce a $60000 car for the US market then charge $160000 for it elsewhere, its all talk and no real walk.
And it cannot really expect to contend with an Aston Martin DB9 or Mercedes SL can it?
A shame really as I think that this could have been very promising. It has some very neat ideas and practicalities to deal with energy and extending the range of the batteries. However, at the huge cost in Europe, it just won’t sell. Instead, it will just be the 2009 equivalent of the steam powered car, circa 19th century: An automotive Dodo.
Dr G:
You seem to have a pretty unstable memory for someone supposedly spending a fair few hours of reading.
The site clearly states that the price of a 2009 Roadster is $109 000 in the US for basic trim, about $120 000 with everything. The European version costs 99 000 + VAT Euro so about a 30% price increase. Compared to other luxury brands as Porsche I believe you will find it similar (just checked the 911 Carrera, $73500 excl tax and £61620 incl VAT). Regardless if you live in London and can afford a $160 000 car you probably can afford a garage or somewhere to charge your car as well.
So all your price comparisons are based on erroneous data. Tesla will by the time they start selling in Europe offer European service centers but you will have to do some transporting since they said they will cover the big cities in the countries they launch the cars in.
About the fact that this car has a small effect on CO2 consumption, sure! That is if you rule out Opel/GMs REEV concept the Volt which was a direct result of what the Tesla Roadster is, and perhaps many of the other majors interest in EVs. Not to mention that within June Tesla has promised to show Whitestar. Teslas next model, a sedan seating 4-5 in a pure EV or REEV configuration and pricing in the US around $60 000.
Dr G Baytung, you are certainly welcome to have your own opinions, but you seem to be off track on a few points.
First the Roadster doesn’t sell for $60,000 US. (How I wish it did!) The base price for the 2009 model is $109,000. Comparably equipped to the special Euro version being offered, the US price is about $120,000. So yes, there is a Euro markup, but not nearly as much as you have stated. If you compare the US and Euro prices of other cars, for instance the Porsche 911, then you will see that Tesla has less of a markup.
Tesla has announced that they will have service centers in many large cities all over Europe. That means that no, you should not assume that cars will have to be shipped to the US for servicing.
I find it interesting that you complain that the Roadster doesn’t compete well against public transportation. I don’t think that was ever the intention, and you must be the very first to even suggest such a bizarre idea. Then you go on to complain that it doesn’t compete against the Aston Martin DB9 or Mercedes SL. I have to ask, do you believe that those vehicles compete well with public transportaion?
Finally, this is only the first car from Tesla, they have plans to introduce a series of cars, at sucessively lower costs and higher volumes, so that in time they will eventually have a great impact on CO2 emissions, and on the car business in general. Lower prices can only be achieved with high production volumes. For a tiny startup to try to produce 100,000 cars at a time would be ludicrous and business suicide. Instead, they have chosen to to do what a small startup can do; produce a revolutionary small volume car that changes peoples perception of what an electric car can be. After experiencing a Tesla Roadster, no one can maintain the belief that electric vehicles must always be things that resemble glorified golf carts.
soy fanatico a los autos deportivos, en realidad la primera vez que lo conoci en television (propuestas para un planeta mejor) me enamore de ese modelo, su diseño, tecnologia, juvenil y sobre todo es ecologico. solo que existe una desventaja sobre ello…no todos tenemos acceso a una suma tan grande a menos que seamos millonarios, estoy de acuerdo que la investigacion y tecnologia es cada vez compleja y por supuesto el costo es elevado, entonces quisiera dar mis mas sinceras felicitaciones de que finalmente estamos contribuyendo para que nuestro planeta respire y por mientras buscaré otras opciones que se adapte a mis bolsillos (y si gano la loteria, no dudaré en hacerles una reserva, con tal de cuidar mi planeta)
I am a fanatic to the sports cars, really the first time that I know in television (offers for a better planet) I inspired love of this model, her design, technology, juvenile and especially it is ecological. Only that exists a disadvantage on it … not we all have access to such a big sum until we are millionaires, I agree that the investigation and technology is every time complex and certainly the cost is high, then I want to give my sincere congratulations of which finally we are contributing in order that our planet breathes and for while I will look for other options that one adapts to my pockets (and if I win the lottery, I will not hesitate to do a reservation to them, so as to take care of my planet)
Excuses me for my english, I from Mexico…thanks
when can ausrtalia expect this fantastic car.can we buy one left hand drive now from usa.perth has many millionaires per capita perhaps the highest on earth.if you are interested i certainly am in bringing tesla to austrailia
Dear Sindra Berg and Thomas J
I don’t really understand why you have to be personal. I apologise for the “errors” in my calculations, as i mis-read the $60000 down payment as the price. The fact that the actual price is even greater frustrates matters even further:
European Spec 99,000 (Euro)+VAT (at 17.5%) approximates to $183,000
Thus… Full Spec $120,000 if bought in the US ($109,000 for Basic model)
Price Differential to European market: $63,000-$74,000
Now, I don’t know what a “small mark up” is, but this is a substantial significance in my book.
Allow me to be blunt: This is a £95,000 car give or take the small change (you still have delivey, road funding, plates, insurance etc) which looks like a Lotus Elise and has a similar interior. And the Lotus starts at £23,000 (yes: £23k new!). Price differential: £70,000:That’s a lifetime’s worth of fuel bills. And you can sell it second hand without worry.
I’m not in competition with the Brand alternatives, and I really don’t care to be honest , as i walk mostly. But simply put, there’s the competition, and the comparison to Porsche, Mercedes and AM therefore needs to be made. It is, after all, £95,000 and not £9,500.
£95,000 is big money and when your battery starts to dwindle and you drive to a garage or rest bay to charge up, is the proprietor going to let you take a 16kWh gulp of juice? How do you even ask? “Er, excuse me, can I just plug my car in?”: I tell you what, I’d like to be a fly on the wall for that encounter. And whilst you while away over two hours in charging, the person in the Carrera flits in, fills up and pays up in less than five minutes. And then they’re on their way, getting on with their time scarce and busy lives.
There’s also the real issue of luxury: So for £95,000, are you getting luxury? Because, you can bet your bottom dollar, that 99% of people spending that amount of money will be thinking solely of that. That’s why the comparison to the Mercedes SL is pertinent.
Furthermore, and for the avoidance of doubt, I did not compare the SL or DB9 to public transport. But I don’t think that Mercedes or AM put on their homepage that the energy consumption in their vehicles translates to $0.02 per US mile either.
I think it’s at this point that you might understand the issue of differential and comparatives.
As for citing cars for the city, urban or metropolitan environments, it is the rural commuter who consumes the most as they have to travel for practically everything. And when a product comes to the market bearing “Green” credentials, allow the honest comparison: This must include public transport. I simply don’t understand how this comparison is “Bizarre”. It is the natural comparison to make in this sector, and the comparison needs to be made or quite simply, don’t allow marketing the vehicle as Green.
Thge logistics of travel vs home charging in London is real. But (thankfully!) this is neither my issue to resolove nor to convince. There simply aren’t many private garages:domiciles within the M25 boundary. And as for New York??? And the last time I went to Paris, all the cars were parked on the street (dans ‘rue!).
In conclusion, this is a strange, fantastic vehicle that I hope does well. But although it might do well (it’s fantastic that 100 have been pre-ordered), it will only succeed in degrees of relativity. However, it will not prove to be revolutionary in its current format. This is a great shame in many ways as the technology Tesla have endeavoured to engineer needs to be commended. I think, by most comparatives, that it is the technology that is revolutionary. But the actual vehicle? Too bespoke, too niche. Perhaps evolutionary but definately not revolutionary.
As for high vs low volumes of production, the essence to business success is to give the public what it wants, not what you think it wants. If an electric alternative to the Smart or MINI range of vehicles was produced, there is no way a small start up could sate demand. Yet, the demand would be so strong that investment would roll in. That’s exactly what Karl Benz did (along with his wife!) in producing the first horseless carriage. Ford took this and produced a vehicle for the masses which the masses wanted, defined production line volume manufacture, which was aped by the industry, including Daimler-Benz.This eventually led to the Mercedes-MacLaren super car.
So Tesla might define a pivotal moment in automotive history by their deployment of electric-power technology: A petroleumless car akin to the Benz horseless carriage. But Mercedes became an automotive leader by mass production and by producing products that the people want. Not simply a niche, bespoke supercar fabricator. Tesla can always licence its technology.
I’m old enough to remember the Sinclair C5 in the 1980’s: Sir Clive Sinclair produced a “revolutionary” electric vehicle for mass consumption. Only, although seminal, it was never revolutionary since people didn’t want it and history records the C5 as a flop, by any evident measure. It is a great pity, since if it had caught on and engendered derivatives, oil would be worth a fraction it is today. However, the cost of electricity? It would probably be nuts. It is a simple extrapolation of the supply/demand continuum that predicts that if electric powered vehicles become the norm, the demand for oil will fall and petroleum based vehicles may one day prove more economical (but not necessarily the least consumptive) if electricity demand materially squeezes its very own supply. Please don’t critcise this conjecture as bizarre simply because it is novel: It is merely discourse.
Tesla can go in several directions: They have their nose to the ground and their finger to the pulse. Ballsy. But, take the technology, give it the third of the torque and a third of the power and cut the capacitance by half, and you will double the range, and slash the running costs further. Put that in a small, lightweight package with smaller brakes and wheels and extend the consumption favourably even further. Finally, price the vehicle at the masses and consider a fuel cell alternative, such as a diesel electric to extend the range even further and eliminate convenience anxiety. That would be a world beater.
Oh, I forgot: That’s the E-Flex, the Chevvy Volt derivative by Opel, i.e. GM in Germany. And what the Germans don’t know about cars ain’t worth writing about: By Jove, they practically invented the halibut things! But give me the Tesla alternative since Tesla are the originators.
Oh, I forgot (again: Must be my “unstable memory”: See Sindra Berg above): Tesla don’t have an E-Flex competitor. They just make bespoke supercars. Hang on though. There’s a Tesla four seat car coming out. $60,000… Which will probably equate to £55,000 in the UK market ($27,500 US). No. Silly me! I’ll buy an Opel. It’ll cost £25,000 (or even less).
As a consumer, might I also be allowed to worry about the residual value in its disposal? Or is resale a trivial worry solely of the less well healed?
However, and might I add, if I could produce 1,000 cars per year yet the demand was for ten or a hundred or a thousand times that, I’d be happy as a pig in muck!
So, let’s get real: An electric supercar! Whoopee!
Big Hook, mate: I use Shank’s Ponies… My legs. And £95,000 is a whole lifetime’s worth of Gourmet meals and suitable outdoor clothing.
So, until the car is developed to the median rump of normality (i.e an average car for an average income), this will have zero impact on emmissions and will prove (unless we choose to sell our homes and live in the thing) to be a bit of a Dodo.
And quit personal criticism: It demeans the argument. I am surprised that the comments in reply to my points have been moderated as cited above viz. abuse. For clarity, my memory is not “pretty unstable”! It’s just that Tesla could be so much more and to this end, history will make its final verdict.
Dr. G;
your arrogant tone and errors in reading and noting information rather invite personal comment. Here’s an instance: the VAT is variable across states, and is not under Tesla’s control. There are taxes of various sorts in the US, too. Compare sticker prices, and you get 120 - 155, which is a 29% markup to the EU market, about the same or less than the difference for other luxury cars sold in both locations. Part of what is being sold, in any case, is the intangible — one of the 1st 250 custom cars. If you don’t think people pay for prestige, you are clueless about marketing. In fact, luxury car owners PREFER the price to be high, as that keeps it exclusive. Believe it or not.
Anyway, if you don’t want the car and can’t afford it, don’t buy it. Simple.
Comparing Tesla Inc. to Mercedes-Benz is so stupid it requires no comment.
Dr G,
Your comments acurately reflect the fact that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Your ignorance is readily apparent to all that read this blog. Your “facts” and completely inaccurate and your opinions - while your are entitled to have them - are not based in any form of reality. This car is not being marketed to anyone that is taking the bus to work. Nor is it being marketed to anyone on a tight budget and pinching every penny. You are comparing prices that do not match like apples to oranges and wondering why they are different. And the fact that you say a car with absolutely no emmissions will not make ANY difference in the world is ludicris. If only one car was made and driven instead of a ICE there would in fact be a difference. The whole point is that we have to start somewhere !!!!! And this is a good place to start as anything else out there - oh wait there is NOTHING else out there - so that makes this even better
Also, it has been said that in EU a car with a range of 220- 230 miles would more than suffice for any type of driving without the worries of running out of power. It has even been said that since the countries over there are smaller that the car is capable of going all the way across the country. Unlike here in the US where the trip is 3000 miles. As to the point you make of the car not being “green” I really don’t see how anyone could say that an electric car with ZERO emmissions could not be as green as they come !!! Also, you misquote that 100 have been preordered. AGAIN you are wrong. 1000 have been preordered. This car is in the super car class not the LUXURY class. They are totally different. super cars are ALL about power and speed not create comforts. The following model - codename Whitestar - will be the car to compare to the luxury class vehicle. It is due out in 2010 and will be about $60,000 USD. Much more in line with the Mercedes etc that you are citing. The entire point of Tesla is to start at the top of the market and move their way down to the masses. MANY of a company have tried to create the cheap flimsy and econobox type car that you suggest. The simple fact is that none of them get bought because they are ugly and unreliable and have insufficient range and creature comforts to survive the marketplace. Your thinking is totally backwards from reality and that has been proven over and over again in the past by companies that have tried it. Hope this helps to clarify many people are taking your comments as arrogant and ilinformed.
Dr G, since you mentioned me by name I suppose i should answer.
“I don’t really understand why you have to be personal. I apologise for the “errors” in my calculations, as i mis-read the $60000 down payment as the price. The fact that the actual price is even greater frustrates matters even further:”
I’m sorry for getting personal, I will try to maintain a more civil tone.
As to the price comparison. The Euro signature edition is similar to the US signature edition which cost $98k when the basic model cost $92 and the accesories where about the same, so the “Signature Ed” carries and extra markup of about 8%. That means similarily speced US version costs $120k * 1,08% markup for Signature * 1,0725 sales tax. Effective comparitive US price about $139k. Euro 99k * 1,175 VAT and using XE currency converter gets you $179k UK price. Using a Porsche as an example makes the Tesla relatively cheap for it’s class. Speaking of UK prices which are in European terms quite low for ICE cars. Using Norwegian prices the Total cost 99k Euro Tesla Roadster has to compete with the MB SL350 Roadster starting at 142k Euro which still only has a 0-100 speed of 6.2 sec.
And that is the other point, comparing fast sportscars you need to use a car that has at least similar accelleration and performance to get any kind of comparison. You pay a LOT for every second you shave off the 0-100 time. Either in compromises in comfort or in increased price or both. Which is why all the Lotus cars performance wise is in a completely different league than Toyota. You are talking Ferraris, Porsche 911 Turbo or similar just to get times below 4 seconds. Anything around 6 is a very different league.
Looking at Norway again it seems the bigger gas station chains will soon allow you to recharge your EV at outlets on thei stations. Considering that 16 kWh of juice in Norway costs around £1,5 to £2 I suppose for a £5 you should be able to get your car fully recharged….
The essence of production is to make a profit, which is why Ferrari doesn’t mass produce their cars because they want to be exclusive. So the Roadster can continue to be made in small amounts and Tesla can survive on that for many years. They have plans for a $60k sedan and a smaller $30k car in the next 5 years.
There already IS a electric SMART as well as an electric Mini, check out Hybrid technologies and some company in the UK testing the electric smart. The electric Mini doesn’t sell more than single digit numbers thus far this year, so demand can’t be that big. The reason that demand is so high for the Roadster is just because it is a 100% green supercar. This itself wont make a big change in emmisions but the proof of concept that the Tesla Roadster represents will.
Interesting you should mention the Volt. The very same car that Bob Lutz a GM VP responsible for the Volt program, has said on record, was created as GMs answer to the Tesla Roadster. If the Roadster hadn’t been made there wouldn’t be a Volt program.
Dear Brian & Kevin,
I just don’t understand why your blogs have to revert to abuse. This site is supposedly moderated for such. However, to be labelled as having an “unstable memory”, “arrogant”, “totally backwards” and “ignorant” is at best rude and at worst libellous.
My points about price are well made and one would have thought that price differentials were subject to censure by the WTO: Ask any Dominican about the case regarding Bananas on sale to the EU vs those to the US, viz. the German market. The US pressured (being lobbied from Chiquita etc) the WTO into stopping preferential pricing to the EU of Bananas from countries like Dominica. This almost caused the collapse of the Dominican economy. Bill Clinton lead the campaign. Ask a Dominican farmer’s opinion.
Thus, the issue regarding the Euro pricing is maybe a type of having one’s cake and eating it.
The issue regarding the £60,000-£70,000 price difference between the Tesla in the US and the same car in the EU cannot easily be explained by the Apples and Oranges response: I’ve cited Bananas in direct response to the reply simply because there has been no adequate explanation as to why the price rests at Euro 99,000+VAT. If the fully specified vehicle costs $120,000 in the US, the why can’t the vehicle be priced at £60,000+VAT (which would round off at approximately £70,000 OTR price. The remaining £25,000 between this price model and the planned European price is made of profit and the VAT apportionment of that profit. But it’s mainly profit, at around £20,000 per vehicle.
Now, if that’s the gross profit margin that is acceptable to a commercial venture before net calculations, then so be it. caveat emptor. However, what I don’t understand is why this profit applies to the European vehicle only. Go and ask a Dominican or German to see if they think this is fair. It can’t be both ways: You cannot argue (as the Clinton adminstration did) that pricing is subject to the purchaser’s country. A banana sold to the US should roughly sell the same as a banana to the EU. If this principle is adhered (and it has been upheld), then I don’t understand the differential to the European market with regard to the Tesla vehicle: It is not equitable.
It would seem to me that this policy is somewhat uneven handed. There has been no adequate explanation via email from the company to explain this.
With regard to the issue of environmental impact, let’s examine the facts:
There are 800,000,000 vehicles globally. Tesla have just made (or plan to make) 1000. That an impact of 1:800,000. This is not significant (by any statistical yardstick) to make any impact on CO2 emissions (but does not diminsh their achievements). Furthermore, Tesla’s will be bought by the very wealthy who can afford to gamble on new, and largely, unproven technology. Please take the time and look at the mass produced Sinclair C5, which cost only £650 some twenty years ago. These same wealthy people will indeed feel great that they have a “Green” vehicle, but they will still keep their Mercs, Porsches and Bentleys.
I note the derisory manner with the word “Cheap”. Cheap simply means affordable to most people and generally only applied as a negative when goods represent poor value. As anyone who lives in “Cheap” housing… Would they prefer their cheap house or to rent or to maybe slum down on the streets?
Bandying around the words “Cheap”, “Flimsy” , “Ugly” and “Unreliable” suggests a cultural elitism that simply has no real qualitative appraisal of the issues I raised. They are simply loaded and subjective terms of reference.
There is no such thing as a zero emmissive vehicle. Even a human being walking has emmissions. If you utilise solar, there’s been a huge amount of CO2 expended in manufacture, transport, installation and commissioning. If you plug your vehicle into the AC mains, then the CO2 is being offest from your vehicle to the coal or gas powered generating plant. As for nuclear, please do not suggest that nuclear derived electricity has no footprint: This would be patently absurd.
Take the issue of electricity supply:demand. If all 800,000,000 vehicles converted to electricity tomorrow, the world would grind to a halt. Hospitals would shut, street lighting would be turned off, airports closed. Unless more powerstations could be fabricated to handle the demand. So, think about China. How many coal fired powestations would it need to build if the nation switched from petroleum to electricity power?
However, I did not state the vehicle was not “Green”. I simply stated that if you are marketing part of your campaign along ecological arguments, it will invariably invite comparisons to public transport. Yet apparently, this comparison is “Bizarre”.
It remains untenable to buy a supercar, of any variant, and boast ecological credentials. I don’t see Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth or the UN citing as policy recommendations that we all purchase supercars to save the planet. Why? Very simple: They are self indulgent and grossly overpowered for the job they need to do. And since k.e. is proportional to the square of its velocity, the faster it goes, the hugely more (dis)proportionate its energy expenditure (and requirement).
For your information, the “all across the country” distance in Great Britain is nearly 800 miles: Lands End to John O’Groats.
Anyway, I had originally visited the site and became very interested in the product and am generally fascinated by the technology. However, the aggressive tone and frank abuse is quite disgusting and deeply offensive, and for this reason, I will not be swapping my car or my wife’s car for a Tesla product.
You haven’t convinced me of your argument and you don’t offer any alternative to the vehicles our family occasionally (as we practically walk everywhere) uses. We are not ecologists, not environmentalists, simply hard working health care professionals, with nearly 30 years experience.
We shall wait patiently for a non abusive & truly ecological manufacturer who understands its customer. You certainly won’t get any of our cash.
Goodbye, good luck and good riddance. There’s enough bullies in this world: It’s just an excuse for moral and intellectual bankruptcy.
If anyone has the time, there is a great deal of material in these blogs which is worth reading. E.g
www.teslamotors.com/blog2/?p=8
While Tesla has no real competitor, they are free to charge whatever they feel will create a “healthy” return on their investment. The price differential between the US and the EU remains a concern. Let’s hope Elon keeps his early promise of using the money from Roadster sales to help develop REALLY cheaper, higher volume electric transportation. Otherwise Tesla will remain a sexy but essentially frivolous niche manufacturer for the wealthy.
Dr G Baytug
Dr Baytug
Lot of good points regarding what is ecological and what may be simply green-washing vanity. Yet marketing eco lifestyle changes to an entire world of unique individuals will require many different approaches to attain sustainability. It seems that you and a few others are taking the opinions here incredibly personally. I personally wonder why someone who appears to be philosophically against the very idea of a performance supercar eg…
Dr G Baytug wrote on June 5th, 2008 at 10:45 am. It remains untenable to buy a supercar, of any variant, and boast ecological credentials. I don’t see Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth or the UN citing as policy recommendations that we all purchase supercars to save the planet. Why? Very simple: They are self indulgent and grossly overpowered for the job they need to do.
-Would even choose to post at this blog site which is a forum to discuss Tesla Roadster transmissions. I’m not sure if your point is that the car is unfairly overpriced in europe or you are making the case that supercars are too self indulgent to be sold regardless of fuel source; but regardless you make some interesting ecological points that should be noted.
How is the pace of ramping going? Is there a rough estimate of how many cars you’ve churned out so far?
With gas prices so high, electric is suddenly looking very, very friendly. If this keeps up, I think you’ll breeze past that 10,000/year goal for the WhiteStars with ease!
# Chris wrote on June 8th, 2008 at 7:05 am
## With gas prices so high, electric is suddenly looking very, very friendly.
## If this keeps up, I think you’ll breeze past that 10,000/year goal for the
## WhiteStars with ease!
Especially in Europe. I just calculated that I could get half of the Whitestar price back in saved fuel costs in about 10 years. That’s assuming Whitestar price in Europe is in same level with US price. Especially because car tax is non-existent in electric cars.That would make Whitestar very very attractive.
Something to think about; SUVs are being killed off quickly by ALL main manufacturers. Now is the time to expand into an easy market.
Create a truck body for sale to yourself and others. But make it a serial hybrid. The reason is that the serial hybrid is perfect for working as a generator. A construction worker can drive to the job site and then use their batteries/hybrid as power for the job sites. It should have enough batteries to last at least 10-20 miles and 2 small generator-motors. The reason for 2 motors is that the likelihood of 2 motors dying are slim. And only one would be needed to cruise a truck with load. From a business POV, it would make sense to buy these if they could reduce their delivery costs or have dual use on them. From Tesla’s POV, the 2 small generators-motors should be the exact type that is going in whitestar. Likewise, use 2 motors taken from whitestar. IOW, few number of unique parts.
Then sell a truck retail, but also offer up the frame, motors, bats and a cabin to other companies to customize. In particular, Delivery trucks such as Schwans, flatbeds, Straight up Delivery trucks, Campers, Busses, etc. There are LOADS of sales available. with only the addition of the frame AND a cabin.
Been doing some sums with fuel prices and electricity costs for the UK market.
Note: all mpg values are for Imperial gallons.
What are the comparable energy costs (in £) between the Roadster and an (entry-level model) Lotus Elise S over 100,000 miles of motoring? (The basic Elise is one of the more economical sports cars to fuel)
Assumptions: the cost of electricity stays fixed at the present night-time rate of 5p per kWh and that (unleaded) petrol stays fixed at £1.15 per litre. (The night-time electricity rate in the UK is between the hours of 10pm and 8am).
The other assumption is modest driving behaviour in both cars in order to achieve the manufacturer’s stated 34mpg (combined) for the Elise S (25 mpg urban / 43 mpg extra-urban) and (221miles/53kWh) = 4.17 miles per kWh for the Roadster. (The Roadster can go 230 miles per charge EPA city amd 211 miles per charge EPA highway)
However, let’s make it harder for the Roadster and assume that it is always re-charged at night at the fastest rate, using the Domestic Fast Charger. This means that the roadster consumes a further 17kWh running the cooling system for the battery while it charges. (Incidentally, setting the car to recharge more slowly overnight requires less power for cooling and so consumes less, cheaper electricity per recharge)
This gives 221miles/70kWh = 3.157 miles/kWh
So obviously for the roadster, 100,000 miles of motoring will consume a grand total of about 31,675 kWh at a cost of £1,580. (1.58 pence per mile) if you charge it quicky at night.
(If I had used the better 4.17 figure above, this would be £1,200 for 100,000 miles)
If you have no choice but to charge your Roadster at the fastest rate, always using the very worst UK Tier 1 daytime electricity tariff of 36p/kWh then 100,000 miles of motoring would cost you, at most, £11,455 in energy consumed. (In fact Tier 1 only applies for the first 125kWh consumed each quater by your household during the day)
The Elise S: At 34 mpg, 100,000 miles will consume about 2,940 (Imperial) gallons
1 (Imperial) gallon is 4.544 litres, so 2,940 gallons is about 13,360 litres.
So for the Elise S, 100,000 miles of motoring will cost you £15,360 (15.4 pence per mile)
Finally, if I make the simplistic assumption that:
Total Cost of 100,000 miles of motoring = Purchase Price + “Fuel” cost over 100,000 miles; then we have:
Roadster: £ 71,900* + £ 1,600 = £ 73,500
Elise S: £ 24,000** + £ 15,360 = £ 39,360
So over 100,000 miles the Roadster currently costs you about £34,000 more than an Elise S.
*This assumes that EU Roadsters will continue to be sold at the fully-loaded Signature 250 price.
** You could buy a second-hand Elise to get a slightly better spec or to push the purchase price even lower.
Obviously any comparison with another sports car can be labelled fair or unfair depending on your point of view. Even Lotus’s more aggressively styled and spartan Exige can’t match the Roadster’s 0-60 time unless you supercharge it (which pushes up the purchase price and drops the average mpg to around 23).
The Tesla Roadster is pretty much unique. Unique is always going to be pricey and as far as low-volume, all-electric sports cars go, the Venturi Fetish is considerably more expensive. Are electric sports cars worth it? Depends what value you place on their uniqueness.
The Roadster’s body is carbon fibre as standard; the Elise uses cheaper materials (carbon body kits can be purchased) as well as an engine manufactured in high volumes for a number of auto-makers by Toyota - so naturally being able to call upon economies of scale allows the Elise to be cheaper. Then again, I have completely ignored environmental issues, which for some people have a higher “worth”. For others, the prospect of an electric sports car with fewer expensive mechanical components to replace (e.g no clutch) may be very attractive. (But if you’re burning out clutches regularly on your ICE, you’re not driving modestly
). At present, annual insurance and road tax figures favour EVs. For some people, a sports car will never be environmentally sound, no matter what it is made from or what technology drives it.
However, everyone knows that petrol is unlikely to stay at £1.15 per litre. Likewise, everyone should be aware that at some point after 100,000 miles you will need to buy a new Li-ion battery pack for the Roadster (i.e a new “fuel tank”). Or maybe have your old one reconditioned with new cells? (No prices have been set for a complete new pack - but the figure of U.S. $25,000 has been bandied about in these blogs.) This will be true for all vehicles with Li-ion battery systems - although the smaller batteries used in hybrids will be proportionally cheaper to replace.
If the ESS costs £13,000 to replace (and 100,000 miles uses £2000 of electricity) then that still works out cheaper than 100,000 miles-worth of petrol at a fixed £1.15 per litre for any car getting less that 35mpg. If petrol prices continue to rise, running and replacing the ESS becomes cost-effective against total 100,000 mile fuel bills for a greater proportion of higher mileage ICEs.
To ask why the Roadster is more expensive in the EU (fully-loaded Signature 250 price; 90,000 Euros) than the US (base price $109,000), is much like asking why there is a differential in the price of gasoline between these two territories. Companies can charge what they consider the market will sustain in order to cover costs and make a profit. Unfair? Feel free to walk away, if you can.
Malcolm,
You are not taking into account maintenance. Oil changes, filters, fluids, worn parts etc. And you are adding money for a new battery but you are not adding the cost of a new engine in the Elise. I would be interested to find out how that closes the gap. Also, for some reason you assume the worst case charging for the Roadster but the best case for the Elise. Perhaps we ought to look at a more level playing field
I also find it interesting that the operating cost as you state is 10 times greater for the Elise than the Roadster. And that is BEFORE you count the maintenance costs so it is likely to be 15 - 20 times greater. Simply adding 34 oil changes is going to sky rocket the price of the Elise not to mention all of the other parts that will wear out. I have always been interested to see what the cost of a car would be if all of the manufacturer’s recommendations were followed including tune up and everything. 100,000 miles of tune ups on my car will probably hit $20,000 USD and that is not very exccessive.
Why are you using the Elise S when even you state that the Exige is the closer comparison in performance and still not up to the Raodsters standards. You should be using the closest car possible not the most economic one possible. I will be very interested to see the more realistic numbers that you can come up with.
AND why do you assume that you can get the Elise at a lower price and you do not allow TM to sell a vehicle that is not fully loaded. That price will go down after the signature 250 series and it is not fully loaded. Lets see a supercharged Exige compared to the Roadster base price as that is as close as you can get without moving away from the similarity that you are making with the body style but not the performance. Let put super car to super car and that would be even better.
Something I have been thinking about for a while… For the sake of increased mileage why not incorporate a self charging generator for the batteries. Not one connected to the motor though. Two theories: 1. A small windmill or propellor of some kind under the carriage linked to a generator. or 2. Use the heat generated by brakes and tires to produce a charge… like a peltier device. The windmill idea may have some drag issues or changes in the cars handling, but I think either of these would boost the available mileage substantially before having to dock for a full charge. Am I off base?
Hi kevin.
If we just consider running costs rather than purchase price - which is always going to be bad for the Roadster - it’s a low volume, carbon fibre sports car packed with proprietory technology - then the surprising thing is that the worst case for energy costs for the Roadster is already far better than the best case for the Elise. And to be honest, the choice of car is somewhat irrelevant since the key point I wanted to make is about energy efficiency rather than performance. If Tesla can sell a new ESS for £13000 then ANYTHING which gets worse than 35 mp(i)g today is going to cost more in the long run.
I’m not sure if the figures are as favourable in the States yet, with the smaller gallon and cheaper gas.
And as you state, once you throw in regular maintenance the argument goes more in the Roadster’s favour, but it is harder to put solid numbers on these.
I chose the Elise rather than the Exige since it is one of the more economical sports cars and people tend to have the knee-jerk reaction of calling the Roadster “the electric Elise” even though the car only contains 7% of the Elise’s components. The other issue is the level of creature comforts. Only the US Elise and US Exige have AC as standard. (Seem to be around $46,300 and $61,000 respectively - according to lotuscars.com). Calling the UK Exige “spartan” or “a driver’s car” is being polite
I freely admit that all such comparisons fall short because EVs are not really comparable to ICE vehicles. Yet inevitably such comparisons will be made. It’s fun to show that even heavy bias in favour of ICEs cannot help them.
If Tesla can stay off gas completely with a cheaper Whitestar (come on guys - I know you want to be the next great US automaker but your cars make far more sense in the European markets) then they will be swamped with the demand.
Malcolm,
I was not disputing the fact that you need running cost AND purchase price. I believe that is true. What I was saying was that you left out a ton of running costs. I thought you were making the point that the Elise was cheaper in the long run form the following satatement that you made :
Total Cost of 100,000 miles of motoring = Purchase Price + “Fuel” cost over 100,000 miles; then we have:
Roadster: £ 71,900* + £ 1,600 = £ 73,500
Elise S: £ 24,000** + £ 15,360 = £ 39,360
I was not against your arguement it was just that I was interested in more information to help complete it. Bringing the costs for the ICE more in line with the BEV. I think once maintenance is considered that they will be much closer if in fact the Roadster does not do better than the Elise or the Exige. I was just more curious that is all
Malcolm,
I did a bit of research here in the US and this is what I found. I had to use 2008 info because the prices are not out for the 2009 Lotus’ yet.
Roadster was $99,000 USD base price + $1199 to charge it for the 100,000 miles = $100, 199
Elise was $46,270 USD base price + $18,181 for gas and about $1020 for oil (@$30/oil change) = $55,471
Exige Super Charged was $64,890 and believe it or not mileage was only 1 MPG less so I used the same figures = $84,091
And that still does not count the rest of the maintenance so I am guessing that they would end up VERY close. Maintenance cost for a Porshe over 100,000 miles is estimated at about $10,000 which puts it close to $94,000 only $6,000 less than the Roadster over 100,000 miles.
Using the Porshe 911 Carrera as comparison comes out to $102,000 slightly more expensive than the Roadster using average operating costs from the web.
Joe Palazola: I’m afraid you’ve overestimated the power produced by such a small wind turbine, and underestimated the drag it produces - it would actually reduce the driving range!
I’ve had some experience with peltier devices, and power is proportional to the temperature difference - a steep thermal gradient is needed to produce useful amounts of power. Attached to friction brakes on conventional cars, it would produce a modest amount of power, enough to light a LED or maybe run a tiny fan, but only for a few moments while braking. Moreover, the Tesla Roadster uses the motor for regenerative braking, which is far more efficient and captures far more energy. The hydraulic friction brakes are used so little and so seldom that a peltier device wouldn’t be able to produce any useful energy at all!
I’ve a Diesel car….I want offer you, this car to find a solution for convert my and every car in a electric car.IH iihih ihih ….I image a vison : my TELSA concessionary and ufficial assistance.. in Sicily…
Joe Palazola wrote on June 11th, 2008 at 12:32 pm//
=======
{Sigh} Once more with the free energy.
Joe, stay away from stock investments and Ponzi (pyramid scheme) promoters. You are obviously highly susceptible to something-for-nothing illusions. People like you are meat and drink for the scam artists of the world. You’ve been warned.
Dr G;
Even more arrogant and irrelevant and screwy than last time. Amazing!
Any update on progress with these production milestones? As of today I believe we have seen just two deliveries in the Founder / Funder / Close-Personal-Friend Series.
You don’t want to keep Arnie waiting….
www.teslamotorsclub.com/2358-post1.html
Brian H wrote on June 12th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
{Sigh} Once more with the free energy.
Joe, stay away from stock investments and Ponzi (pyramid scheme) promoters. You are obviously highly susceptible to something-for-nothing illusions. People like you are meat and drink for the scam artists of the world. You’ve been warned.
Cute Brian… very cute. I am only casting out seeds of thought. Not looking for free energy. There are answers and possibilities, but small minds like yours will stop most people from discussing them for fear of being ridiculed. I am not most people and don’t think much of you or your type. You fancy yourself as one of the best and/or the brightest, but rather than illuminating you would turn down the rheostat on discussion and make weak attempts at sarcasm. Thanks for that. The simple law of physics that states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction precludes the notion that there is any such thing as free energy. I am just wondering if we can find a way to make modest gains in some way with WASTED energy. To that end I was more specifically interested in the potential of a Peltier device to generate SOME possibility for recharging. There must be some heat source even on these vehicles that could be useful (even heat from the tires or the electric motor). As human beings we are not perfect nor can we create the perfect mechanical device. There is some wasted energy left in every piece of machinery. I am not an engineer, I just have this nagging thought that a great deal of development sometimes creates tunnel vision and small ideas can slip through the cracks. Especially if small minded people are involved. The older I get the less time I feel like expending with people who feel the need to show their intelligence through what they perceive to be wit. (Wit is educated insolence – Aristotle)
You could also have this company introduced in London as you know London and Ireland needs it more than anything, with what all those scientists saying about global warming and ice breaks. But yes this is a good way to have the car introduced. its fast what everyone would want. Its electric, cheap no gas. what more can anyone want. Electric car is going to be the best more people will also buy since its cheaper.
ntrspd: from last Think blog www.teslamotors.com/blog2/
” We plan to establish service facilities in key European cities, starting with London, Paris, Munich, Northern Germany, Milan, Oslo, Copenhagen (this list is being finalized).”
Tesla has a nice concept, but impractical at best.
I have found what appears to be the most economical transportation imaginable. A 1980’s Toyota Camry or Honda Accord with all options. For a mere $1,000 you can purchase one of these beauties, pocket any amount of $$ you’d spend on a new/used EV, HEV or PEV and drive this pure petrol unit until your life on this planet ends. Do the math- even at $4-5-6 per gallon of petrol it will be the most economical choice.
Nothing on my car costs more than $2k to replace. Haven’t yet in 256k miles….
Do the math before you write anything - PLEASE!
Hey, is it safe to drive this car in rain or water logged streets? I mean when it rains heavily there can be huge water logging in India so would it be safe to take a spin around without a shock???
I love your car and engineering. If I was a bit younger I would love to work for you (embedded software engineer).
My question is why a single moter and gear box vs individual wheel moters aka, PML Flight folks?
Good luck and godspeed,
davidW
Please produce a model that the average consumer can afford. The Middle East moguls are strangling the rest of the world and your product is the answer to everyone’s prayer!
Produce a model in the $15,000 - $25,000 price range so the average consumer may take advantage of the technology and this nation can rid itself of the carbon-based, pollution producing, environment damaging mode of transportation.
You have an opportunity to make history similar in scope to man’s first flight, discovery of penicillin, man’s first step on the moon. Don’t let it pass you by.
Hi Jason B
So are you saying that there will never be a second or third-hand market for EVs which will be as cost-effective as the one which currently exists for ~25 year-old Japanese ICE cars? I accept that this will take quite a few decades to establish and economical pure gas cars are not going to disappear for a while. However all car makers continue to look very seriously at improving hybrids, pure EVs - even diesels.
Not that this is a concern. You can just keep buying cars which are about 25-30 years old, no matter what technology they contain. It’s a good system - clearly it works.
David Whitelaw
Unfortunately, in-wheel motors increase the mass of the wheels - so called “unsprung weight” - the proportion of the car’s weight not supported by the springs. This has an adverse affect on handling.
www.teslamotors.com/blog3/?p=56
In addition there are more motors to control/maintain and each is exposed to far higher shock loads, vibrations, water, salt etc etc. Not good for durability.
David W,
Well that is actually a VERY simple answer. Two motors are twice the weight !!! And secondly, motors at the outer edges of the car will create non desireable handling characteristics.
Jim,
It will be 4-5 years but the affordable one you are talking about is coming. Due out in 2012 I believe. This is the first step to getting there.
Jim: www.teslamotors.com/blog2/?p=8#more-8
harry ellert wrote on June 1st, 2008 at 6:34 pm
when can ausrtalia expect this fantastic car.can we buy one left hand drive now from usa.perth has many millionaires per capita perhaps the highest on earth.if you are interested i certainly am in bringing tesla to austrailia
********************************************************************************************************
I am on the East Coast (Queensland) of Australia and our country is in the middle of a resources boom. We have many potential customers here.
If Tesla builds a RHD version for the London market, they could export the same product to suit the Australian market at the same time. Residents on the Gold Coast (South East Queensland) love their fast flashy toys, and a green one would be a welcome edition to many garages.
To give you an idea of disposable income on the Gold Coast, to purchase a median priced home on the coast requires an annual income of over $300,000 ($AUD)
Have you approached Lotus to sell Tesla vehicles via their global network of new car dealers?
It would also give Tesla vehicles an immediate sales boost as each of the dealerships would require a car to sell from, how many lotus dealers are their worldwide?
Very similar market, existing sales network, and you have an existing relationship with the company.
Any thoughts?
Have to say job well done, almost. Burnham Engineering has developed a thermoelectric system that is 97% efficient, we used our system on a kit car, total electric and drove it over 4000 miles never plugging in or charging other than the te generator on board, we put our unit on a hybrid and made over 4700 miles never plugging in or running the gas engine, we have powered everything from watches to automobiles and scooters, and have designs for units that would power a locomotive, we had contacted you several times and no answer, we are at this point ready to market our systems and had hopes of a new and unique company such as Tesla, but it looks like the old brands will be where we focus our market. Good luck.
Dr. Burnham,
The claims you made regarding your thermoelectric system (efficiency, range per charge) seem too good to be true. How about some data to back them up, or a link to a website or article with a bit more detail for those of us not familiar with your technology. Otherwise they’ll remain just outrageous claims for us.
In keeping with the title of this blog, here’s the state of the 2011 plans of “THINK” The Ox. Note the white stripe down the roofline on both sides: that’s bare metal!
Dr. Steve;
Alright, I’ll bite: 97% efficient at using WHAT heat source? Neither you nor BE’s bare-bones website says. Just “no fuel”. Uh-huh.
Jason B., it’s great that a used Toyota or Honda works for you, but it won’t work for everybody or even most people, there are just not enough used cars. Somebody has to buy new cars and drive them for several years, that’s how used cars are made. Not everyone wants to drive a used Japanese economy car, some want luxury or a big land yacht or sporty performance or flashy good looks and are willing to pay extra for it. And of course, some people want to drive a super cool highly manuverable ultra fast ultimate high tech dream car, and are willing to pay lots of money for the priviledge. That’s where Tesla Motors comes in.
Dr. Steven Burnham: Tesla Motors has seen lots of wildly optimistic proposals to increase driving range, sadly, most turn out to be delusional crackpots or smooth talking scam artist. Maybe your correspondence sounded too much like a crackpot scammer, and they roundfiled it. Making extravagant claims (97% efficient thermoelectric? What about Carnot laws?) without evidence to back it up can do that.
The few proposers that aren’t nutters or crooks have a prototype, or just a good idea, and are not actually manufacturing yet. Probem is, to manufacture thousands of cars requires parts that are readily available and on the market now, they cannot wait for something, no matter how good, that won’t be available in large volumes for years, if ever.
Contact them when you have a product on the market that they can test to see if it works as claimed and meets their requirements. It would also help if you had the manufacturing capability to meet their supply needs. Then they would consider it for a future model.
Hey Steven, what is your field of science?
I am sensing the need for an Update to the Program Update blog !!!
It is June 19th. We should be rapidly approaching several mile stones 
According to your stated schedule above we should be hearing that all of the Founder’s Series cars are completed and are being shipped to the States. I am hoping that the whole series is completed and you will be shipping them all at one time. That would be a GREAT press event. ALL 24 Cars delivered at the same time. 
Also, as this month comes to a close we have been told that we will hear news on the Whitestar by the end of the 2nd Q and low and behold here we are end of the 2nd Q and no news yet. BUT you have 11 more day to keep your word !!! Please do so
Hopefully we will get BOTH big announcements this week !!!!
Also, We should hear that production has now ramped up to just over 1 car per day which would be enough to meet the schedule for the Signature 100 series cars.
Hope to see lots of good news here soon
Kevin;
If you write “low and behold” instead of “lo and behold” again, I’m coming over there and giving you a good, heavy one upside the head! );(
But, yes, it’d be deeelightful to hear that the skedyool is being followed!
Brian,
I don’t think one typo happening one time is deserving of a threat of bodily harm
But be careful what you threaten I may actually like that 
Many times my brain goes faster than my fingers and in a blog I don’t really care to take the time to correct it. I see you got the point anyway.
From your Program Update:
All high-energy lithium ion cells experience a gradual loss in maximum capacity based on usage levels, time, and other factors. Your owner’s documentation will include information on expected behavior of the battery over time and the factors that affect the rate of wear.
Doesn’t loss of battery capacity translate to loss of range?
Also, from your Program Update:
The battery pack is expected to last longer than the warranty period, although repairs beyond the warranty period will be charged at regular part and labor rates.
How much loss in battery capacity constitutes a failure that will be covered by your warrantee?
Will this be a prorated type of warrantee?
I am very interested in the electric car ,but I am blue collar America. When can we expect a affordable electric car to go back and forth to work. I am a paramedic in New York City [FDNY], and I live 50 miles from my station.
I can see where you get the number 256 from the EPA Federal Register reference. However the number is not MPG or MPGe for that matter. The correct unit is PEF. So it might be correct to say Tesla gets 256 PEF.
I should add that PEF is not a matter of physics or engineering. Rather it is obtained by including a “goodness factor” which is an artifact of law and nothing else. This is a multiplier of (1/.15) which was determined to be a favoritism to be given to alternative fuel vehicles. It is quite absurd to use this in any technical discussion.
Like Kevin and many others, I am very curious about the progress of the Whitestar. I know Tesla has an entry in the Automotive XPrize competition, and it would be most logical if it is the Whitestar, because the rules state that at least 10,000 yearly production must be planned for. I did read some discouraging information that would disqualify almost all EVs, except the Aptera; That is the formula for calculating pollution is heavily weighted by polution of coal-fired electricity plants. This is because the US electrical system is so dependent on coal. I hope the blog addresses these issues, as well as target production date etc.
Sen. McCain offers $300 million prize for new auto battery
apnews.myway.com/article/20080623/D91FQ6L81.html
Telsa Motors….step up and claim your prize!!!
Malcolm,
Interesting comparison with the Lotus and I wouldn’t argue with most of it. But….I think you should compare the vehicles taking into account depreciation during ownership of the car rather than using the total cost price of the car. If you compare using total cost price that’s like assuming that each car is worth zero when you have finished with it….very far from the truth. Of course you would have to guess at the depreciated value of a Tesla after say five years as we have nothing to base the figures on. For the Lotus you could use current used car values. Using my method the Tesla would look like a much better deal than it does when you compare total cost price and I think it’s a fairer comparison as it’s closer to the true cost of ownership..
Kevin;
Unfortunately, lots of people think “low” is correct. I also cringe at “wallah!” and a few other malaprops trying to substitute for the real things. In contemplating “low and behold” once, I flashed on a picture of cows mooing as they gazed at something beyond their ken heaving into view.
Curtis;
I think he’s covered by the “existing technology” phrasing; Tesla’s ESS is “existing”. I think it will have to be something like the nanowire version of the LiIon to qualify.
Hey guys, could you give us an update or at least some information about when you can give us an update on the White Star?
Per your own blog (The Song Remains the Same, Dec 2007) you satated “Tesla is also hard at work on model 2, the mid-size luxury sports sedan, which will be unveiled in the first half of next year.”
Are you planning to unveil it in the next week?
I have been holding my breath for 6 months now and am having a tough time keeping it up;)
1. It needs a rollbar or a rollcage (true for all convertables).
2. different front & rear wheel rims & tires are not practical if you get a flat. Two spares are required.
3. angled wheel spokes present a peculiar version of motion—leftside vs rightside. Symmetrical radial spokes look better.
4. vehicle is pricey.
5. perhaps a few years downstream you could make a “peoples-tesla”..lightweight, fast, no frills 3-door hatchback coupe at the
cost (and with the reliability of) an Acura Integra…when you do, sign me up.
6. However, beyond the nit-picks, this is a beautiful, innovative and well designed attack on the problem…congratulations!
I think Tesla missed its window of opportunity. Maybe it will produce the Roadsters it promised, but the rest of the project is doomed. The only issue now for electric vehicles is the lithium-ion battery, and from what I’ve been hearing you can already get them if you look around. I’ve got a friend with a Prius who found lithium-ion batteries and gets 50 miles in a plug charge, and 100 mpg in hybrid mode. The average person drives less than 40 miles a day, so my friend’s Prius is the electric car of the future.
It’s a shame that Tesla never kept its first promises, but the venture capitalists have money to burn so it’s no biggie. What’s the situation with the deposits, though? How much do people who ordered the Roadsters (which they may or may not ever get) have at risk?
I heard rumor that Tesla was planning on coming out with a more affordable sedan for the masses. Is that just rumor? Some of us would love to have a Tesla roadster, but can’t afford $100K for a vehicle and would still like to be independent of gasoline. Any news?
When it comes to range in an EV, a roadster/convertible will always lose to the same car with a hardtop, so the Tesla’s pack in a sedan or coupe will go even farther, especially if drivers aren’t treating it like a Lotus. The high level of performance is one way to justify the high price — even if an ICE version would be cheaper, a large portion the market for this class of car doesn’t quibble at doubling the price-tag going from a “common” gas sports car to its rare electric equivalent…the bragging rights alone are worth that much.
I forgot to add that the Tesla is designed for looks, not aerodynamics - even with the hardtop in place, is has numerous items that could be implemented to minimize drag, but many of those would effect handling or ruin the curves of the body (we can only hope Toyota starts working over the Prius to get the tiniest bit of the Tesla’s panache).
Umm… I don’t have $120K but I sure as hell would love a car (roadster, sedan, ute or whatever) that will run 225 miles on a charge. Any consideration for building a petrol-less for the rest-of-us?
Tesla must come out, fast, with a “T Model” for the masses, before the big gorillas do it.