Forum

Bli med i fellesskapet
RegistrerLogg inn

Reaching for the Pie in the Sky...

I'll be posting some things I've written about Tesla Motors here for the perusal of fans and condemnation by naysayers. Enjoy!

--------

NOTICE: Red Sage's posts on the internet are prone to being wildly inaccurate, filled with supposition and innuendo, that presume pie in the sky impossible magic science hopeful idunno circumstances that may or may not actually occur in real life and stuff. They are also closed captioned for the humour impaired. As such, it would probably be a good idea if they were thoroughly ignored by anyone with a highly litigious nature. That is to say, I cannot actually predict the future, and that though I may occasionally get something right, it is purely accidentally coincidental, and I only warrant that when I get something wrong, it will be entirely and without fail 100% firmly incorrect.

RANGE AMNESIA...

I have seen a lot of reviews and test drives of the Tesla Model S on YouTube. I find it interesting that with all the talk about 'range anxiety' by naysayers, they seem to forget a few things.

As little as 25, 30, or 40 years ago, any street legal vehicle capable of a four second run to 60 mph (~100 kph) and/or a 12 second quarter mile typically got no more than 3-5 mpg in the city. They got 8-12 mpg on the highway -- if you were lucky. That's why they typically would have no less than a 25 gallon fuel tank. None of them were likely to have a leather and wood interior, air conditioning, a stereo sound system, anti-lock brakes, or room for five plus luggage. They'd likely be barren inside except for an instrument cluster, a rollcage, and a jumpsteat for a navigator.

With spirited driving, the deeper you put your foot into the accelerator, the less range you had to work with. So on the low end, a range of 75 miles between fill-ups might be expected. Best case would be 300 miles with that 25 gallon fuel supply. Assuming an expanded capacity 40 gallon fuel tank, you might manage 480 miles on a good day.

It's been a while. People forget that massive, high displacement, V8, V10, and V12 engines were not always paired with 5, 6, 7, and 8 speed transmissions. They forget just how often they used to stop for fuel in performance cars. They forget that there was a time when engine management computers, multiple/variable cams, electronically controlled intake/exhaust valves, and more technological features were not commonplace. They forget that for a very long time it was unheard of to expect even 25 mpg out of those vehicles.

In barely ten years since Tesla Motors began, they have matched and surpassed pretty much everything that had been accomplished with gasoline powered road cars during the first 100 of the past 120 years. Give them some time. If you haven't been impressed yet, you will be.

Are these postings on this blog, your own blog, or only YouTube?

I post pretty much anywhere people might listen... or read.

I decided to start my own thread of messages, because sometimes my posts are ridiculously long and sort of hijack other folks' posts...

Hauling Where the Heart Is...

One thing I would like to see Tesla Motors do is to further the clean, renewable energy initiative of the company. Before long, naysayers will begin to note, as Tesla's sales increase, that they still use fossil fuel vehicles to ship and deliver their cars in the United States of America. I propose heading off that criticism by doing the unthinkable.

Tesla should create a line of long-haul semi-trucks that are fully electric. A Tesla Road Truck. They would be used solely by their own company. They would not be offered for sale to anyone else. They would be driven by Tesla employees, who were experienced long-haul drivers.

It would have to be comfortable, aerodynamic, and efficient. I imagine something along the lines of the better looking trucks on the road:

Some might say it would be better to work with one of those manufacturers to jointly develop the Tesla Road Truck. I don't think so. It's better to be completely independent. This is about proving that it can be done, proving that it is feasible, proving they can do it alone. Proving the technology can be not only competitive, but superior.

The trucks would need their own separate charging infrastructure to accommodate their size and power needs. That could be arranged two ways. Tesla could forge an alliance with a company such as the TA Travel Centers of America to place truck specific charging stations at their truck stops. If that were not possible, Tesla could build out their own, private lots across the nation to act as Tesla Waypoints for charging their trucks in transit across the nation.

What I like about setting up at the truck stops is that they are ubiquitous, across the country. Tesla could just lease space on site to install their own Superchargers. TA would get the added advantage of having solar panels installed at their locations in sunny Southern states, such as Arizona, Texas and others, to offset their own reliance on the electrical grid.

Beyond that, truckers love to talk about their rigs, as a matter of tradition. Tesla owners do that just as much as anyone else. So Tesla's drivers would become ambassadors of the technology as well, direct to their peers. And Tesla Motors could use their input to gauge interest, occasionally having test drive events for the trucks as well, hosted by the TA Truck Stops. Even if Tesla decided not to ever sell the trucks or go into full production of them, it might be just enough to convince truckers to beg for the technology from their traditional truck manufacturers.

If they had to build Tesla Waypoints, that would not be so bad. Logistics could be handled rather easily by internal systems. They could be sure that security for the cargo was aptly monitored. There could be sleeping quarters on site, along with provisions for food, drink, and entertainment during a driver's down time. In fact, it might be a good idea to set up these Waypoints at strategic locations, even if they did have a good deal with TA.

It might not be necessary for 100% of Tesla's deliveries and transports to be made with these trucks. If perhaps 30 to 50 of their trucks were on the road, that might be enough to get the word out. If Tesla intends to release a pickup truck around 2020 or so, it would be a good idea to have these road trucks in public view around 2017. That would be just in time for the ramp up of production for the Model E, so it would get that much more publicity. And that publicity would increase anticipation for the pickup truck, call it the Model P.

To that end, the trucks would need to have superior range. I'd manage that by co-opting the traditional design aspects of semi-trucks:

  • The large ones typically have three axles. So you'd might as well have three motors, working in unison.
  • There are usually fuel tanks on either side of the cabin, running nearly the full distance between front and rear wheels. Those could house stacked battery packs, formed to fit that space.
  • Underneath the cabin and what is typically the engine bay on trucks, you'd have the usual 'skateboard' arrangement of battery packs, from front to rear.
  • In addition to all that, you'd make use of the space behind the truck cab, by storing battery packs vertically, behind the sleeper area.
  • Yes, the engine bay would instead be a ridiculously large frunk.
  • Naturally, the car carriers they would tow would be properly aerodynamic, enclosed, and covered with Tesla logos.

With those many places to store batteries, I think it would not be hard at all to achieve a cruising range, under load, of around 1200 miles on a full charge. That said, knowing that most trucking services govern their vehicles by limiting them to 55-65 MPH max, I took that into consideration as well. Assuming 12 hours on the road, at 65 MPH, that comes to 780 miles. So if someone were to hit the road at a 90% charge, which allows 1080 miles range, they could drive 780 miles and still have a 20% charge remaining -- a 300 mile range buffer. They would park at a TA Center, or Tesla Waypoint, to charge while they rest. If it were a rush shipment, a different Tesla driver would attach their rig to the load and continue, relay style.

Yes, I know... This would cost a lot of money. But it is mostly for the sake of marketing. It would still cost less than running multiple spots on Super Bowl broadcasts over the next six years. And the trucks would likely be on the road 20-25 years. That makes the expense more than worth it.

A trucker in Vancouver Canada wants his rig electrified. He sees the trailer as being electrified, not necessarily the cab. He knows, hes a trucker so i bow to his idea.

We Tesla fans are sure an impatient bunch.

We want the Model X YESTERDAY.
We want the Model E NOW!
We want a new Tesla Roadster TOMORROW!
We want a new Tesla pickup NEXT WEEK!
We want Tesla Boats!
We want Tesla Big Rigs!
We want Tesla to balance the electric grid!
We want Tesla to power the world!

Patience, grasshopper, patience. . .

These things take time, and Tesla is being aggressive, but careful at the same time.

I think Hydrogen will be the fuel that takes care of the industrial sized machines, ships, locomotives, cranes, maybe big rigs, buses, etc. It scales up quite nicely i understand. I say EVs for passenger cars and hydrogen/electric for the tractors etc.

holidayday implored, "We Tesla fans are sure an impatient bunch. ... Patience, grasshopper, patience. . . These things take time, and Tesla is being aggressive, but careful at the same time."

Indeed. I'm just literally spit-balling here. It will be nice to come back some time later to see just how off-base my predictions, hopes and dreams were. ;-)

*facepalm* You are not literally spit-balling. You are figuratively spit-balling by typing your ideas onto the internet.

Literarially spit-balling then...? Dude, I was tired after typing all that. It's not like I have a degree in American Standard Idiomatic English or anything. Certainly beats a literarial facepalm, yes? ;-)

literial is not a word, anyhow. Literally speaking.

vgarbutt;
Arrant nonsense, like all hydrogen dreams. Production + distribution + storage + cost + risk = stupid idea.

atiqurrahman113 posts are spam bot replies. Flag them.

Can I get mine à la mode? Is that extra? I like my pie warmed up too, if you don't mind. I would prefer soft serve... I don't care for rock hard ice cream. If that is all you have, then I'll pass on the ice cream. Perhaps I'll get lemon meringue instead.

Can you make it snappy? I'm in a bit of a rush. My trip charge is nearly complete.

Yes, à la mode is fine... And if you're from Chicago, I'll even include the slice of melted Cheddar cheese. ;-)

221 kWh or Bust...

My 1990 Honda Accord EX Coupe had a 17.5 gallon fuel capacity. It had a 28 MPG highway rating from the EPA. In practice, I got slightly over 33 MPG on the highway, using premium fuel, when I set my cruise control to 85 MPH. So, I didn't even have to start looking for a gas station until I had gone 450 miles. I would often stop to fill up between 500 and 530 miles. I rarely had to put in as much as 16 gallons. Basically, I knew I could easily use 90% of my fuel capacity anytime I wanted, without penalty.

Elon Musk has repeatedly stated his goals for Tesla Motors. He wants electric cars to be the best on the road. He wants them to be desirable vehicles, with no compromises in styling. He wants them to be useful for driving no matter the need or environment. He wants them to be fun to drive, stirring the emotions of those who own them. He wants them to be fully capable, with no unsavory limitations on range. Something tells me that Elon would like his cars to at least match the highway driving performance of the car I bought nearly 25 years ago.

I believe they can.

Tesla Model S owners often say that they really don't want to drive their cars like economy cars. They feel it is abhorrent to operate such a wonderful vehicle in that manner. It is often said that it is best to, "Drive it like you stole it!" I can't say I blame them. But as was the case with gasoline powered performance cars of lore, the deeper you put your foot in it, the more often you will have to fill up.

The dreaded 'range anxiety' so often associated with operating electric vehicles seems to set in once drivers drop below the 20% remaining charge mark on their batteries. On the other hand, owners are rather suspicious of charging their vehicles beyond 90% of a full charge with regularity, in order to preserve long term viability. This effectively means that the 'worry free' usable range of an electric car is only 70% of its absolute maximum range, because no one wants to be towed after embarrassingly 'running out of gas', so to speak.

In order to match the "Fuel? We don' need no steenkin' fuel!!!" attitude of driving my old Accord, that means 70% of the battery capacity must take an electric car driver 450 miles without issue, even at speed. That's a tall order. How to accomplish it? Huge batteries, by today's standards, would do the trick.

From the perspective of competitors in automotive manufacturing, the Tesla Model S already comes with huge batteries. 60 kWh and 85 kWh capacities are so far beyond everyone else as to be ridiculous. Even the few electric vehicles that might be rated at 100 miles per full charge, rarely get over 80 miles instead. Certain hybrid electric vehicles are so gimped they can barely manage 20 miles on electric power. So with one car rated at over 200 miles, and the other at over 250 miles per charge, Tesla is in a great position.

It's just not good enough though.

One gallon of gasoline is said to retain the rough equivalent of about 34 kWh of power. So the 60 & 85 kWh batteries from Tesla equate to 1.76 and 2.5 gallons of that fuel respectively. Though that works out to over 100 MPG equivalent, both of Tesla's car battery levels are rated a bit lower, around 90 MPGe instead, by the EPA. 34 kWh is about 37% of the 60 kWh battery, and 40% of the 85 kWh capacity. Yes, these cars make very efficient use of that power, but their range is still limited by the capacity.

One solution is to use incremental improvements in battery design, power management, and ionic solution to increase the amount of power that can be stored. The battery packs on the cars use thousands of cells in an array, whose combined storage equals the stated amount. If they can get improvements of only 8% per year, the total capacity of each battery pack will likely double by 2020. With a slight redesign of the cells, giving them a square cross section instead of circular, perhaps as much as 30% more solution could be included with the new form factor, while still fitting inside the same battery pack structure.

So the same quantity of batteries that yielded 85 kWh could potentially hold ~111 kWh with a redesign. With an improved ionic solution within them, the battery packs would get 221 kWh by 2020. The battery packs would be 30% heavier, but would hold 2.6 times the power reserve as the original 85 kWh version.

Used in today's Tesla Model S, that new 221 kWh battery pack would greatly increase maximum range, to about 650 miles. 70% of that yields a distance of 455 miles. Right on target. If it were used in a vehicle such as the upcoming Tesla Model E, the range would be even greater due to it having a nearly 1,000 lighter curb weight.

Keep in mind, these are all conservative estimates. If Tesla is somehow able to triple, or quadruple, the energy density of their battery packs they could lower the weight of the cars as well. The 85 kWh battery pack could potentially be 75% smaller. A 340 kWh battery pack could be the same size, shape, & weight as today's largest one. And should prices also fall along with weight, it will be easy to achieve their goals in the marketplace.

There's an intersection point of maximum charge, volume, weight, and charging connection hardware that TM has achieved so far. I think you're going outside the box on some of that.

Probably so. But won't it be cool when Tesla Motors is able to create a battery pack for even their least expensive, truly affordable cars... that holds the equivalent energy of 17.5 - 25 gallons of gasoline fuel? I really hope they can do it.

That works out to be 595 kWh to 850 kWh. Effectively ten times what Tesla currently offers. That would require a semi-truck to haul around today, I know. I'm just imagining the possibilities in lieu of improbability. In comparison to these lofty dreams, what I wrote above is very conservative. ;-)

"You may say... I'm a dreamer... But I'm not the only one." - John Lennon, 'Imagine'

The Electric Car Dreams of Red Sage...

I realized some years ago, that I don't actually possess patience at all. I have the ability to endure waiting, but I don't think that is the same thing. I can certainly tell when I have waited too long. I know people who are incredibly impatient, to the point of being unreasonable. I try my best not to be like them if it can be helped.

That said, I have been waiting for a proper electric car my entire life. To see that someone has finally made the complete effort to prove the possibilities of what I felt in my heart decades ago astounds me. Some might say that I'm obsessed, but they only just noticed. I've had this obsession since childhood, it was just pushed onto the back burner of my desires. So now, with the light shown upon the automotive industry by Tesla Motors, the fire of my desire for electric cars is stoked fully and the furnace will not burn low ever again.

I didn't realize until adulthood how much my perspectives on the auto industry were influenced by a cartoon I watched as a young child. 'Speed Racer' (Mach Go, Go, Go!) made me want to drive fast, study design, read schematics, conceptualize the future, and learn engineering, among other things. The idea of combining technology with improvements in racing cars struck me as perfectly natural. My level of expectation to see such improvements was piqued early on, long before I knew the realities of this world.

I had no idea that the biggest automotive manufacturers didn't share my perspective at all. To them, good enough was good enough. As long as the cars sold, they were perfectly OK with making minor cosmetic changes year after year and selling the same old hardware over and over again. They had become shills for the oil industry while building their own fortunes on sales of replacement parts for components that were designed for failure from the outset. That isn't excellence. That's robbery.

I had no idea of the various political and financial elements that existed internationally that placed such a high importance on the trade of petroleum products. I didn't realize that the specific gravity and positive inertia of the marketplace was such that too many people were making far too much money to move on to something, anything, else to power vehicles. I didn't know how protected those interests in petroleum were on all fronts, preventing the emergence of any technology or fuel source that proved 'better' in any way.

Even though Ethanol was used to power the fastest racing cars in the world, it was still called 'gas' and marketed at race tracks as if it were a petroleum based fuel. You couldn't get actual road-worthy vehicles with anything even remotely approaching such performance. And the fuel at race tracks was incredibly expensive, apparently now for the specific purpose of making sure no one would use it as a viable 'alternative fuel' for street cars.

When I was a kid, I just liked racing. I didn't care what kind. So I never developed the sort of snobbery I've encountered among some friends who are car enthusiasts, but only of certain types of cars, and only in certain racing series. I didn't know the difference. I just liked racing.

So I didn't recognize that 'Speed Racer' was based upon the idea of a 'run-what-ya-brung' analog of a prototype Formula One series until I was grown up. I look around today and... nothing of the sort exists. Not really. To some extent, the prototypes at Les Mans were that once... To some extent Formula One was that once as well... To a much lesser extent even IndyCar and NASCAR had that going for them... Each, right up to the point where someone unexpectedly created a car that though 'within the rules' was so far advanced beyond competitors that everyone else was racing for fourth place. So each racing series gradually legislated any form of performance excellence and technical innovation out of contention. I was appalled when I learned that some winning vehicles were handicapped by adding unnecessary weight, being forced into unwarranted black flag stops to allow other cars to catch up, or being sent unceremoniously to the back of the pack when they should have had the pole position.

That's why I am so passionate about what is happening with Tesla Motors today. They have an opportunity to advance the electric car without any of the compromises, excuses, or restrictions that have been imposed on everyone else who attempted to innovate. There is nothing at all 'illegal' about the Tesla Model S. Yet attempts are made seemingly every day to limit their success, to head off their innovation, to prevent their growth, all in favor of those who are 'also rans' in the race to bring electric cars to market. That sort of protectionist attitude kills the future in favor of the past. I cannot abide by it.

I have every belief that Tesla will not rest on their laurels. They won't sit back and say, "That's it! It's perfect!" No. Elon Musk has already said that he pays closer attention to his critics than those that praise him. He believes he can learn more from those who aren't happiest, if they have actionable issues that must be addressed, rather than just blowing smoke. So anything that isn't quite right, will be fixed. Anything that can be improved, will be. Any concerns about range, handling, comfort, charging, etc. will all be addressed. It will just take time. So yes, I'll just have to wait. That's OK.

Hydrogen is not a safe fuel, ever heard of hydrogen embrittlement ? This phenomenon makes the gas storage device a bomb, why do you think they test high pressure gas cylinders every 7 years, and these cylinder have very thick walls ( heavy weight )

hydrogen embrittlement is an issue with stainless steel but not all metals.

Brian H ......... Hmmmm. I do read all over the place lately that the large car companies want to use hydrogen fuel cell produced electricity for the car of the future, and 2014 is the year will supposedly see them. They think they can do a regular car, So im assuming they have a plan and since fuel cells scale up well they can be used for the locomotives and graders and other heavy machines. I agree with tesla that hydrogen powered EV passenger cars is not gonna happen.

vgar;
To KISS, hydrogen will not power anything. It requires more energy to isolate than can be recovered. It is a storage medium. It is difficult and expensive to store and distribute, requiring high compression and/or cryogenics. It leaks out of all containment. It is violently explosive, and burns readily, very hot.

The large car companies do NOT have a (rational) plan. Hydrogen is suitable, at best, for some kinds of space launches.

From a Conversation Elsewhere...

What follows is an excerpt from a conversation regarding the Tesla Generation III.


QKodiak wrote, "You totally misunderstand me. They need to be comparable to the vehicles in the price range because that's where customers are happy, and Tesla makes the most profit. The fact that they are EVs automatically makes them superior. You want them to produce a $60-80K M3 equivalent for $35,000 and that's not going to happen ever."

"Don't be so jaded and look at reality. For the money, there are better performing cars out there with more available features than the Model S. The 60 and 85kWh Model S which do 0-60 mph from 5.1-5.9 sec. are not as fast or handle as well as some of the cars in the same price bracket. The same can be said of the 3.9-4.6 sec. Performance version. For instance the Audi S8 can scream from 0-60 mph in just 3.5 sec. as can the latest Mercedes E63 AMG S. As stated before though, because the Model S is an EV, the driver experience is superior."


You are tying performance to dollars. I'm not. Neither will Tesla Motors.

The only way they will remove performance as a primary function of their vehicles is if they deign to go extreme low end, to release ridiculously limited 'city vehicles' and commuter cars for use in tight, congested areas such as China, India, and some European metropolitan areas.

Once again, that is NOT the $35,000 market they intend to target, if ever.

Jay Leno once said, "The last days of old technology are better than the first days of new technology."

That is, in order for anything new to take over a market, it really can't be 'just as good' as the old stuff, it must be BETTER. Otherwise, no one will bother.

The goal for Tesla Generation III is mass market adoption. Nothing less. To attain that goal at a $35,000 price point, Tesla must offer a vehicle that is in some way compelling enough to draw interest, capture the heart, and bring in the money with orders placed on the barrelhead. They cannot do that with an 'also ran' vehicle, with marginal performance, barely more than a Ford Focus Electric and less than a BMW 320i -- at $35,000.

Look back 25 years. Why was the introduction of a $36,000 Lexus LS400 so outstanding? Why was the same true of an Infiniti Q45? Simple. Both of them were luxuriously appointed, drove well, and blew the doors off cars that cost $15,000 more.

The Tesla GIII must do the same, by having their $35,000 offering topple the $50,000 version of the BMW 335i.

@Red Sage

The more pertinent point in all of this is to question just whom it is that is making these assessments/assertions regarding the particulars of Tesla's upcoming mass market model in order to attain an idea of just how relevant their opinion is to the actual development of the vehicle.

Granted, speculation is all well and good, though I've found that it all too often tends to inflate the readers' expectations well beyond the actual fitments/design/performance/etc., of the end result, leaving potential customers' expectations deflated and wanting for more from a manufacturer that never intended to give anything more than the minimalist finish product they've provided.

Not saying that this is the case with Tesla and the upcoming model, only presenting this as a cautionary tale of the potential negative effects of over speculation.

Lowered Expectations...

JAA: Did you read my disclaimer notice above? ;-) Yeah, I get it. Some people may latch on to what I write here and be overzealous in their hopes and stuff. Y'know -- like me.

Others are simply naysayers, and no matter how much evidence you accrue to support your position, they will say, "Itta neba 'abin!" Heck, even if I were to project the GIII to match the resounding transcendence that is the eyeball bursting, track shredding brilliance of the BMW 320i [this, for reference, is a joke], naysayers would claim it would lose to a 1990 Hyundai Excel.


Measuring Up to Competition...

I may be wrong, but it seems to me that Tesla Motors targeted the AUDI A8, BMW 7-Series, and Mercedes S Class when determining the performance capabilities of the Tesla Model S. As a reminder:

     Vehicle              Horsepower / Torque
     AUDI A8              420 HP / 444 LB-FT
     BMW 750Li            445 HP / 480 LB-FT
     Mercedes S550        415 HP / 516 LB-FT
     Tesla Model S P85+   416 HP / 443 LB-FT

I've mentioned before that Tesla Motors didn't have to go this route. They didn't have to make their first, bare bones, from the ground up vehicle, a serious contender to other cars at this price point. They could have chosen another route, one that would have allowed more range, more practicality, more usability. They could have detuned it to have merely decent performance 0-60 in 8 seconds, a 15 second 1/4 mile, an 85 mph top speed, a 400 mile range. All that would have garnered them multiple accolades. They had a choice to make, and they chose Performance.

That was a bold decision. It was also the right decision. By making a strong initial impression, the Tesla Model S was able to stand out from the crowd from the outset.

Since it has worked so well, I see no reason to second guess that course of action. Neither does Tesla. That is why their introduction of the Tesla Model X highlighted three parameters that must be met for that crossover vehicle:

  1. Functionality
  2. Style
  3. YTELSE

Thus, I am suggesting that when it comes to Generation III, Tesla will follow the path of Performance, first and foremost, as they have before. I also believe they will examine the best that their competitors have to offer, and do their best to match and surpass them in terms of Performance. Functionality and Style will not be overlooked at all in the bargain.

Elon Musk has already thrown the gauntlet, announced the new cars would target the BMW 3-Series vehicles directly. The very mention of those cars brings forth memories of their storied legacy of being the best handling, most sport oriented, highly sought after vehicles in the price range. They also happen to be the historically best selling Series in the BMW product range.

But new competitors have also targeted BMW 3-Series of late, and done so successfully. So those efforts must be weighed and measured as well. I trust that Tesla will apply their due diligence in that regard.

Vehicle        Horsepower / Torque
BMW 335i       300 HP / 300 LB-FT
Cadillac ATS   321 HP / 274 LB-FT
Mercedes C350  302 HP / 373 LB-FT
Tesla GIII     300 HP / 317 LB FT

Considering the target market, I really don't think Tesla can do any less with their base model than this, and hope to command attention.

I could be wrong. Really. I could. But I really don't think so, and I really don't think this is 'too much' to ask of Tesla.

The EV Kool-Aid Brigade...

I'm pretty sure we all know the hard route before Tesla Motors. There are plenty of people to remind us of that fact, especially on television, in print media, on the radio, and of course, here on the internet. It isn't that we are unaware of the challenges. It is instead that we are rather inspired by Tesla's willingness to take them on without reservation, with a well reasoned strategy that does have some inkling of possibility for success, no matter how improbable.

We know that what Tesla has done so far is 'not enough', even though their efforts have surpassed everyone else with their electric vehicles. The great thing is that Tesla feels the same, and fully expects to push the boundaries of what can be accomplished that much further, and beyond. Their vision of what an electric car can be, and will be, has become clearer as time as progressed for all but the most doubtful.

We are motivated by the knowledge that Tesla is not resting on their laurels. Everything they do is done 'the hard way' for the sake of getting things done right, the first time. That is because they know full well that failure has extremely high stakes for everyone involved. They have no wish to disappoint investors or consumers, and are their own harshest critics.

They don't much care how other auto makers view their way of doing business. Tesla does not care to follow their lead, because they can see where it terminates. Tesla want to excel, to exceed all previously conceived notions of limitations in automobile technology.

We are captivated by the knowledge that better things are to come. For all attempts by naysayers, who profess to be from The Show-Me State, to deny what has already been demonstrated as cold hard fact, we simply know better. We know, as do Tesla, that all of their concerns and complaints have been addressed -- not dismissed. That is because Tesla examined all the avenues ahead before they began the journey. They prepared themselves, planned a strategy, and designed a path by which to navigate the mire and muck long before setting out across the moors.

Some see this approach as too clinical. They see it in every aspect of Tesla's products. They claim it leaves them sterile, uninspired, without passion. Right up until the moment they start to drive... and grin.

RS;
Re the R8, even on a dollar scale: the base MSRP is $115K, >20% higher than a base P85+.

Red Sage,

For an EV kWh's are expensive. kW's come almost free with kWh's.

Put 3 Leaf batteries into one car. You have current for 3 times more powerful motor. Result is close to MS. Price will be high because of batteries, not because motor.

Non performance EV makes sense only, if you can afford only a small battery.

My guess is that battery capacity will double from current. More is possible only with metal air. Impurities in air could spoil metal air battery.

You wascal! You just swashed his dweams to wibbons!

@Red Sage

Honestly, I feel that it may well be 'too much to ask for from Tesla' to expect such comparable performance numbers, or even ergonomic fitments, that one finds in the Roadster or Model S to, likewise, come standard in the upcoming fourth (1. Roadster, 2. Model S, 3. Model X) iteration of the Tesla automotive lineup given that it is intended to be the economical and AFFORDABLE version for the mass market.

Afterall, one doesn't expect such luxurious appointments or road capability to be found in other automaker's lower end offerings, so why does one wish to hold Tesla to such high expectations from theirs?

Sheesh people, it's never enough is it?

The Tesla lineup is already a technological marvel, albeit one on par with the ISS, that has provided us all with a true, real world replacement for the conventional, long antiquated, air polluting ICE, and yet it's still not enough....

I'm sure that Tesla is destined to produce a high(er) end performance version, some day, but I don't see a car intended for the 99% (as I've seen someone reference before) of Humanity to be it.

Please be realistic.


X Deutschland Site Besuchen