Join The Community

Do you go to bed with your iPhone at 30% charge and NOT plug it in? NYT article = bad piece of journalism.

In my opinion, this article was a hatchet job and failed to take into account the authors own mistakes. It was 10 degrees F overnight (-12 C). He knows already that the cold has taken range away. He says in the article "no charger available". No 110v outlet anywhere? Why didn't he charge up completely in NY? Untrue and blatantly deceptive. Many people have to plug their ICE cars overnight to keep the block warm in extreme temperatures.

Does anyone go to bed with their iPhone, iPad, whatever, at 30% charge and expect it to last the whole next day?

I think the NYT should add a caveat to the article and point out these points.

EPA managed what on their 2 cycle test?

300 miles range. The number fell to 265 on their tougher 5-cycle test.

Still, 265 is ridiculous in real life use. 175 is he correct number or trip planning. For all of you TM fanboys out there hating on the NYT reporter, he did what he was told and had direct support from TM throughout the trip, with more avice and support than any of us will receive. You BLAME him for not plugging in even though the car leaflet indicated a big cushion for his Hirt drive the next day. Do YOU fill your ICE car's tank at 30% formpty? If you do, you've got more free time on your hands than most.

For those who said he should have plugged in during the overnight, check your facts. First look at Plugshare for Groton. As he said in the article, there was nowhere to plug in. Second, those of you who say he should have plugged into 110 either don't have a Model S or don't live where it is cold. In 10 degree weather, the charge from a 110 outlet is not close to enough to keep up with he vampire loss from maintaining the battery's heat. In any case the car would have LOST range while plugged into a 110 outlet in those conditions. But of course that is not explained in the manual and no one at TM seemed to understand this fact when advising the reporter. Make excuses and blame the messenger if you wish, but this is NOT about educating the user, or his stupidity. This is about a car that was demonstrated to not be able to do what it and its seller's marketing arm claimed.

These cars are sold as ICE replacements, except better in every way. Until the car can figure out its own status and mileage projections more realistically, it is still Beta technology. I own one, am in a similar over-sold situation where the car cannot reasonably make my 220 mile single-leg requirement. Otherwise I love the car, just can't drive it much.

Lots of typos in prior post. Sorry, iPad fumble fingers.

Pungo - Elon said he was given explicit instructions and deviated from them. I don't blame him, I blame him for half and Tesla for half. Unfortunately the half where he humbled himself and took responsibility for his (lack of ) actions must have been edited out of the article. No we hear he's sort of a half-truth teller - maybe didn't tell a lie, but didn't tell the whole truth. Hmmm.

BTW, I drove 202 miles one way twice last week at 72MPH, with 42 and 22 miles remaining. So 175 for trip planning is conservative for many trips.

Tesla employee told me what Broder reported is not what the GPS file recorded. This issue is probably not finished.

Cattledog - I'm with you, both on the reporter's behavior as well as doable range. Have made the bay area to Sacramento trip numerous times (200-210 range) without a concern. And that includes some sections out on the 205/I5 that are high 70's/low 80's. 200 easy, 220 still enjoying the ride and having fun. Not so sure about 240 without 'trying' and accounting for the Sunol and Altamont passes. As I've indicated on another thread - when 240-260+ is needed, am handing the fob to my wife...

I really want to see the car logs published. For me, however, it doesn't really matter. The bias is very clear in the article. The adjectives, the word choice. No charge in NYC, no charge overnight, the pathetic sounding cafe where he spent a little time.

It was an article generated to create controversy and it has successfully. The author is not a fair and unbiased journalist and he makes no attempt to appear as such. Fine.

Just wish there would be a fine print on the article saying, "I don't believe in electric cars and wanted to behave as moronically as possible while driving one."

That Broder. Oh, brother!

The link for the New York Times does not work. Was it removed?

This is what Broder has to say for himself (defensively) on the NYT blog: "Virtually everyone says that I should have plugged in the car overnight in Connecticut, particularly given the cold temperature. But the test that Tesla offered was of the Supercharger, not of the Model S, which we already know is a much-praised car. This evaluation was intended to demonstrate its practicality as a “normal use,” no-compromise car, as Tesla markets it. Now that Tesla is striving to be a mass-market automaker, it cannot realistically expect all 20,000 buyers a year (the Model S sales goal) to be electric-car acolytes who will plug in at every Walmart stop."

Alcolytes? Every stop? What? How about AT NIGHT dodo!! Like you do your phone. Is that a compromise? Is that being an alcolyte? (Well, in some ways I guess.)

Test of the supercharger? You didn't even wait till it fully charged at the last stop.

Well that clears it up. Broder is an idiot.

Wondering if anyone picked up on Elon's tweet that broder "blatantly" ignored tesla reps advice? Could be interesting if broder made up what tesla reps told him to do. Maybe I'm interpreting this tweet wrong. Wish they would post the log blog already so we can get past this crap already....

Tesla has to move fast on publishing the log otherwise they will lose credibility.
Tweets are not the media to rectify incorrect reporting.

X Deutschland Site Besuchen