Slashdot Mirror

In America, just in March, Tesla MS and MX are outselling all other hybdrids and EVs.
MS and MX combined account for more than 1/3 of all EVs and hybrids sold.

In fact, In North America, MS outsells all of its direct competitors COMBINED.
MX is now working up the scale and before the end of this will be the number 1 in its class. It will likely take more work to outsell all of them combined, but that is coming.

And Tesla is looking to put in an assembly line in Europe, since EUrope, like most other nations, will prefer to buy locally made.

Where does this leave Elon Musk/Panasonic's Megafactory?

In addition to what the other responder said, it's worth mentioning that the Gigafactory only occupies 18% of its eventual footprint right now. It may be that some part of it will be built to produce something other than Panasonic's batteries when it's finally completed.

And yes, it may be that it will be Tesla that commercializes this battery design. Elon Musk has repeatedly said in public, "Send me a sample." If a box of samples shows up on Tesla's doorstep, I'm quite sure someone will trundle them down the hall to the lab and test them out. (In a fireproof box.) If their own testing confirms these results, why wouldn't Tesla seriously consider doing the work to enable mass production? I'm quite certain that people at Tesla have been tasked to pay close attention to what Panasonic did to install its assembly line, so they already have some experience in house in doing precisely that.

I fully expect Tesla to commercialize some new battery tech, eventually. Shell hires chemists to figure out new things to do with petroleum, after all. It's maybe not directly comparable, but lithium mining companies aren't funding battery development, so it's going to have to happen further up the chain. Elon Musk has already exhibited a penchant for vertical integration (especially with SpaceX), so it's entirely reasonable to think that Tesla will invest in the most fundamental aspect of their business at a basic level.

While I don't have the new P90D or P100D I can attest that my Tesla P85 does accelerate quite nicely, even at highway speeds and it reacts nearly instantaneously. It's not the car's fault that the drunk driver lost control. When you have a performance car, you have to respect it. As far as performance cars go, my model S seems to be quite forgiving with it easy to maintain control even under hard acceleration. I can't comment on the newer all-wheel drive P models, but from what I've heard they're even better.

I've read about a number of very bad accidents with the model S where people walked away unharmed such as this accident where a 40 ton big-rig rear-ended a 5000-pound model S at 40MPH. Here's another one. The most interesting part is where he says, “I was pushed off road a good 100 ft. Initially, I was thinking I wouldn’t be able to get the car out But with some assistance from the tow truck driver & firemen I was able to drive it back on the road and eventually home.”

While I don't have the new P90D or P100D I can attest that my Tesla P85 does accelerate quite nicely, even at highway speeds and it reacts nearly instantaneously. It's not the car's fault that the drunk driver lost control. When you have a performance car, you have to respect it. As far as performance cars go, my model S seems to be quite forgiving with it easy to maintain control even under hard acceleration. I can't comment on the newer all-wheel drive P models, but from what I've heard they're even better.

I've read about a number of very bad accidents with the model S where people walked away unharmed such as this accident where a 40 ton big-rig rear-ended a 5000-pound model S at 40MPH. Here's another one. The most interesting part is where he says, “I was pushed off road a good 100 ft. Initially, I was thinking I wouldn’t be able to get the car out But with some assistance from the tow truck driver & firemen I was able to drive it back on the road and eventually home.”

"The hard, manual labor we put in to make Tesla successful is done at great risk to our bodies."

Tesla's plant is heavily automated so I find this unlikely. I also find it unlikely that OSHA has not inspected a 5,000 employee plant for safety and health hazardous issues given how OSHA operates, so this is a questionable statement.

Actually Tesla has failed inspections.

http://insideevs.com/tesla-mot...
Tesla Motors Fined $89,000 For 7 Safety Violations Linked To Fremont Factory Incident

        “Tesla employees Jesus Navarro, Kevin Carter and Jorge Terrazas were taken to Valley Medical Center in San Jose with second- and third-degree burns. Carter and Terrazas have returned to work. Navarro, who had burns on his hands, stomach, hip, lower back and ankles, was hospitalized for 20 days and continues to recuperate at home.”

        “Cal-OSHA’s investigation found that Tesla failed to ensure that the low-pressure die casting machine was maintained in a safe operating condition and allowed its employees to operate the machine while the safety interlock was broken. It also found that the employees had not been properly trained regarding the hazards of the machine, and were not wearing the required eye and face protection.”

http://www.dir.ca.gov/dosh/cit...

4/25/2014 Tesla Motors, Inc. Fremont Fremont District Office
Serious – 6
General – 1
Total
Violations - 7

  Citations were issued to Tesla Motors, Inc. for six Serious and one General violation. The employer did not conduct periodic inspections of use of a low pressure die casting machine, and allowed employees to continue using the machine after a safety interlock had been damaged, which resulted in injuries to three employees who were sprayed with molten metal. The employer failed to release the air pressure used to inject molten aluminum into molds before servicing, did not maintain the machine in safe operating condition and did not use a protective shield. The employer did not ensure that employees were trained in the hazards of using the machine, and did not ensure that employees used eye and face protection.

And it certainly isn't cheaper if you plan on keeping the car long enough that you have to change out the batteries.

Really? It certainly isn't cheaper? Let's take a look at that claim.

To replace the battery of a Nissan Leaf costs $5,500
Depending on who you ask, Lithium Ion batteries last between 3 and 5 years. That averages to between $152 and $91 per month.

Now I was burning $150 per month 5 years ago on a 20-mile one-way commute. So, no, it isn't certainly cheaper. It might be cheaper, but it isn't certainly cheaper.

Between $12,500 and $35,000 per car in ZEV credits - forced subsidies by other manufacturers. In 2012 ZEV credits were at least $119 million in the first half of the year. That's not insignificant income. And Tesla STILL loses money with that kind of credit.

As far as the Federal (and State, at least in CA) buyer's credit goes - why does Tesla advertise the subsidized price? Because it's easier to list as "starts at under $70,000" when you add in the credit on a $75,000 car.

3 years ago they predicted 100,000 in 2016

http://insideevs.com/tesla-pro...

In January of 2016 they were projecting over 3,200

http://www.fool.com/investing/...

The 100k prediction for 2016 was by a Forbes contributor, not Musk or Tesla.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ch...

3 years ago they predicted 100,000 in 2016

http://insideevs.com/tesla-pro...

In January of 2016 they were projecting over 3,200

http://www.fool.com/investing/...

Energy density is more important.

Then let's use the correct terms, shall we? If you mean energy density, don't say power density - they're not the same thing. :)

but I'd still prefer to see the battery pack be no bigger than a conventional gas tank

This is unfair. A battery pack may be a lot heavier than a gas tank, but an electric drivetrain is a lot lighter than a gas drivetrain. You need to compare total system mass, not just specific components.

In several frontal crashes, the pack caught fire

Sigh, this old canard? The rates of Teslas catching fire in accidents is much lower per mile than in gasoline cars. Gasoline car fires are far more common than most people realize, with 152k per year. Four people die in a a gasoline car fire per week. 90 gasoline cars catch fire per billion miles driven. Model S's hit a billion miles driven last year, and are probably double that by now. There's nowhere near the rate of fires per mile in the Model S as in gasoline cars. Not even close.

Gasoline fires also expand to engulf vehicles far faster than most people think. There's been little difference in the rate of fire spread in Model S crashes vs. gasoline crashes.

and in one incident 2 people were trapped & burned to death.

You must be talking about the Indiana crash. There's been no statement as to whether they were killed in the fire or the crash, which occurred at very high speeds into a tree and then flipped. The impact was so powerful that the car disintigrated, leaving what as described as "a debris field over 150 feet". As of last week the statement was that the coroner was still awaiting toxicology reports before giving a cause of death. The statements we've seen so far was that the girl "died in the crash", and the guy was extracted from the wreckage (took 20 minutes) and brought to the hospital alive, but died there.

Energy density is more important.

Then let's use the correct terms, shall we? If you mean energy density, don't say power density - they're not the same thing. :)

but I'd still prefer to see the battery pack be no bigger than a conventional gas tank

This is unfair. A battery pack may be a lot heavier than a gas tank, but an electric drivetrain is a lot lighter than a gas drivetrain. You need to compare total system mass, not just specific components.

In several frontal crashes, the pack caught fire

Sigh, this old canard? The rates of Teslas catching fire in accidents is much lower per mile than in gasoline cars. Gasoline car fires are far more common than most people realize, with 152k per year. Four people die in a a gasoline car fire per week. 90 gasoline cars catch fire per billion miles driven. Model S's hit a billion miles driven last year, and are probably double that by now. There's nowhere near the rate of fires per mile in the Model S as in gasoline cars. Not even close.

Gasoline fires also expand to engulf vehicles far faster than most people think. There's been little difference in the rate of fire spread in Model S crashes vs. gasoline crashes.

and in one incident 2 people were trapped & burned to death.

You must be talking about the Indiana crash. There's been no statement as to whether they were killed in the fire or the crash, which occurred at very high speeds into a tree and then flipped. The impact was so powerful that the car disintigrated, leaving what as described as "a debris field over 150 feet". As of last week the statement was that the coroner was still awaiting toxicology reports before giving a cause of death. The statements we've seen so far was that the girl "died in the crash", and the guy was extracted from the wreckage (took 20 minutes) and brought to the hospital alive, but died there.

$7500 does not impact a car that runs from 60-140K, so once the subsidy ends there, it is over. In addition, that same subsidy is available to Tesla competitors, but, they have not made the sales. Basically, Model S outsells its competitors and both have the same subsidies.

As such, I think that when M3 hits, and is a superior car to its competitors BMW 300 series, etc and at the same price point (35K), then it is obvious that Tesla will be selling as many as they can produce.

BTW, if the GOP kills the 7500, then you can bet on it that many others WILL be impacted on sales. The leaf, volt, bolt, i3, etc are $20-25K cars that sell for 35+K and the 7500 DOES make a HUGE impact on their sales. But even with that, they still can not compete against Tesla.

You can't currently charge a Nissan Leaf at a Tesla supercharger. The Nissan leaf uses the japanese CHAdeMO charging standard for DC fast charging. Teslas can also use CHAdeMO chargers with an adaptor. Teslas don't charge as fast on a CHAdeMO charger.

Elon Musk has spoken about opening up the Tesla charging stations to other models of EV in the future once a billing mechanism was in place. This was the motivation behind his release of Tesla patents so that other manufacturers can use them at no cost. He wants to other car makers to build Tesla charger compatibility into their cars. As yet there are no signs of any other manufacturer doing this. Japanese manufacturers have put a lot of investment in CHAdeMO over many years.

Musk could also convert his charging stations to support multiple charging standards. At the moment there seems to be an impasse when it comes to charging compatibiltiy.

Does http://insideevs.com/wp-conten... really look any better?

Anyway, you don't really look at the receiving end of the things. Who cares? You pick them up and plug them in, easy. The only problem at all with them is that there are three different standards.

J1772 plugs can be slow or fast. It depends on the electrical input you plug them into - you can plug them into a 110V wall socket and they need all night to charge up, or you can plug them up into higher-volt sources that are just as fast as superchargers.

If you don't know what you're talking about, why post?

Where do you think the CPSC gets its reports of problems from? People.

False/incorrect claims of issues are not uncommon and the agencies log them all.

"NHTSA Finds No Safety Issue In Tesla Model S Investigation, Says Most Claims Were Fake"
http://insideevs.com/nhtsa-clo...

It's true that Tesla has never had a recall affecting 4.3 million vehicles. It's also true that Tesla has not produced 4.3 million vehicles over its entire history. Here are some recalls that Tesla has had:

Tesla recalls 90,000 Model S sedans to check possible seatbelt defect: https://www.engadget.com/2015/...
Tesla Recalls 2,700 Model X SUVS to Fix Third-Row Seats: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...
Tesla Model S Gets Official Recall For Possibility of Fire Associated With Charging Adapter: http://insideevs.com/tesla-mod...

The last of those was a software problem that was fixed by an over the air update. So Tesla's record on software is not flawless.

"2. There's a reason they're talking about the 0-60 time and not the quarter mile time. Significantly cheaper and faster (in terms of top speed, quarter mile and lap times) cars have slower 0-60 times due to traction issues. 0-60 is Tesla's one and only performance party trick, neat as it is"

The refreshed Model S P90D Ludicrous is hitting 2.65s at 060 on stock 19" tires and 10.80 - 10.90 at the 1/4 mile. Those are darn good numbers for a sedan, into *recent* Nissan GTR territory. The "significantly cheaper" cars that are quicker to the 1/4 mile are typically 2-seaters and there are not many of those unmodified that can match a new top-end Tesla.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

The Tesla performance models have come a long way in a short time; the P85D had a 0-60 of ~3.2s, a 1/4 mile of 11.7s and needing about 28 secs for 0-150 mph - that last seems slow for a performance sedan but the latest models have cut that by over 20%.
It'll probably take better cooling & perhaps an additonal gear ratio to improve that much more.

http://insideevs.com/tesla-mod...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Nice job making up numbers, but they aren't at all accurate. Rolling and wind resistance isn't negligible, and your generator is going to tack on a lot of drag. Also, do you think that your generator will just drive the electric motor with enough current to allow for hard acceleration or hills (which would also require closely maintained feedback between the motor and generator)? How do you plan to handle that, exactly? The Volt, and other plug-in hybrids, allows it's range extender/generator to drive the transmission directly when it's more efficient to do so; but that won't be an option for your generator add-on.

Moreover, your 10-year battery estimate is way off when the operating battery temperature is actively maintained, and the depletion amount/load is limited, as is done with the Volt (and Teslas, and many other EVs). The Volt in particular is rated (and warrantied) to maintain it's charge capacity for 8-10 years, and, anecdotally, it seems that those claims are accurate. While there will be some degradation, to be sure, it's not at all in line with the numbers you pulled from your ass. As it turns out, battery degradation has been designed for, and the lithium-ion batteries in most EVs are not simply slapped into place or used like those in your phone or laptop.

Did it ever occur to you that, maybe, engineering teams have already considered the stuff that you're just spit-balling? You know, those design teams that actually rigorously researched -- and tested -- their design as opposed to simply saying, "I'll just make an add-on... that'll work!"

I'm sorry, but your idea is terrible.

Nice job making up numbers, but they aren't at all accurate. Rolling and wind resistance isn't negligible, and your generator is going to tack on a lot of drag. Also, do you think that your generator will just drive the electric motor with enough current to allow for hard acceleration or hills (which would also require closely maintained feedback between the motor and generator)? How do you plan to handle that, exactly? The Volt, and other plug-in hybrids, allows it's range extender/generator to drive the transmission directly when it's more efficient to do so; but that won't be an option for your generator add-on.

Moreover, your 10-year battery estimate is way off when the operating battery temperature is actively maintained, and the depletion amount/load is limited, as is done with the Volt (and Teslas, and many other EVs). The Volt in particular is rated (and warrantied) to maintain it's charge capacity for 8-10 years, and, anecdotally, it seems that those claims are accurate. While there will be some degradation, to be sure, it's not at all in line with the numbers you pulled from your ass. As it turns out, battery degradation has been designed for, and the lithium-ion batteries in most EVs are not simply slapped into place or used like those in your phone or laptop.

Did it ever occur to you that, maybe, engineering teams have already considered the stuff that you're just spit-balling? You know, those design teams that actually rigorously researched -- and tested -- their design as opposed to simply saying, "I'll just make an add-on... that'll work!"

I'm sorry, but your idea is terrible.

How about all the people that live in apartments with first come first serve parking? Or people that park in the street? Or way down the street? Overnight charging is not simple for everyone.

The article's headline is misleading in this regard. From TFA: "Roughly 90 percent of the personal vehicles on the road daily could be replaced by a low-cost electric vehicle available on the market today, even if the cars can only charge overnight".

So the headline should actually be something like "Electric Vehicles Can Replace 90 Percent of Vehicles Whose Owners Have Access to Overnight Charging". Home ownership in the first quarter of 2016 was just under 64% of households (close to its 48-year low). Making the oversimplified assumption that people who don't own homes don't have access to overnight charging, that puts the percentage of vehicles that could be replaced by electrics at about 58%.

Of course, a lot of people rent single-family homes and would be able to do overnight charging, and some apartment dwellers might be able to do it as well, so that number is probably low. But then there's this, that cites an even lower number because additional factors are taken into consideration.

It's not just access to overnight charging that limits the use of electric cars. Here are some other things to take into account:

1. Access to parking and an outlet specifically at home.
2. Drive a maximum of 60 or fewer miles on weekdays. Most of today’s BEVs have driving ranges between 60 and 90 miles. 69% of U.S. drivers have weekday range requirements safely within this range.
3. Own more than one vehicle or infrequently take long trips. A second vehicle enables longer driving ranges during vacations and trips. 65% of U.S. households have more than one vehicle.

Would a concrete wall (at around 100mph) followed by a tree count? With the fronts wheels completely sheared off? Driver walked away. There was a fire (after the driver exited), but the body blocked it from the passenger compartment.

Quote below from the link (photos at link):
http://insideevs.com/tesla-rev...

We believe these changes will also help prevent a fire resulting from an extremely high speed impact that tears the wheels off the car, like the other Model S impact fire, which occurred last year in Mexico. This happened after the vehicle impacted a roundabout at 110 mph, shearing off 15 feet of concrete curbwall and tearing off the left front wheel, then smashing through an eight foot tall buttressed concrete wall on the other side of the road and tearing off the right front wheel, before crashing into a tree. The driver stepped out and walked away with no permanent injuries and a fire, again limited to the front section of the vehicle, started several minutes later. The underbody shields will help prevent a fire even in such a scenario.

I realize it's a fan site link for EVs, but it has the coverage as I remember it.

And I'm not a fan boy, I respect Elon Musk and his RESULTS. He's pretty good in the results category, and in the dream categories.

The Tesla has a much better crumple zone in front because it doesn't have a huge heavy engine block in there. Just look at the pictures, the front end is essentially gone yet the passenger compartment is intact. I would say that's a pretty important advantage, and it may have been just the difference required to save their lives. If it had been a Mercedes, where would the engine have gone? Even if it didn't go into the cabin, it sure would have left much less room for crumpling to absorb the impact.

The passenger compartment is also extremely strong, they actually broke the testing equipment when they tried to crush the roof, for example. They overengineered the hell out of that car. Tesla is pretty new in the car business: when they designed the Model S they hadn't figured out yet that you have to compromise on safety if you want to compete in the market. They just made it as strong as they could. Fortunately the car is compelling enough that rich people don't mind spending the extra money. The Model 3 will probably be pretty safe, but I doubt it's going to break any testing equipment. For $35000 something will have to give.

Also, the car didn't catch fire. I know real cars don't automatically burst into flames while airborne like they do in the movies, but in this kind of crash some kind of fire would have been pretty likely. Here's one from not long ago, a crash between a Tesla and an ICE vehicle, the ICE caught fire while the Tesla didn't. Yes, I know, some Teslas have caught fire as well in other accidents but it was always after at least 10 minutes or so, giving people plenty of time to get out first. With an ICE, as soon as a fuel like breaks, you have to run away fast.

This guy did a pretty good job....

http://insideevs.com/additiona...

In the end physics wins.

Your predictions are absolute fantasy. You won't find any authority who predicts EV uptake at a fraction of your numbers.

EV sales have significantly underperformed predictions in the past:

http://insideevs.com/op-ed-201...

Here are a few.

Tesla seems to have it covered...
http://insideevs.com/tesla-det...
That's just Tesla. There are thousands of others (3000 Chademo in Europe).
http://www.chademo.com/

Let me guess... they will stop and recharge?
http://insideevs.com/tesla-det...

Actually, only the buyers get tax breaks. BUT, the dealers get some massively nice profits that are now cut out.
As to scaling, The Model X, which is considered the most complex car ever made, has in 3 months scaled up 10x, and is expected to scale up another 3-6x within the next 6 months. IOW, by next sept, they will be producing at a level of around 60-90K / year.

Can Tesla scale up to doing 100K on the M3 in its first year? Yeah, I have no doubt that in the first 12 months they will hit 100K or more. Why?
Because Tesla has already scaled up the majority of their factory. The paint line does .5-1 cars / year. They have a number of stampers, but the new one ALONE can do all of the stamping for .5-1M cars / year. And M3 is supposed to be the most robotic car line ever developed. Tesla expects that M3 will take the least amount of labor of any car for something similar.

Actually 150K is double what they are CURRENTLY selling JUST IN THE US.
However, the difference is that Tesla has or is in the process of, scaling up all areas to support over .5M cars / year. For example, their painting bay support over .5M. Stamper is now rated for over .5M.
So no, it should be pretty easy for them to scale up. The hard question is, can their suppliers scale up?

Tesla Model S was the best selling EV in the US last year (yes, it outsold the next best - the Leaf, in number of units, not just sales $) - source http://insideevs.com/monthly-p....

Typical home charger for a Tesla is the mobile connector which delivers 10KW charging from a dryer outlet. Owners have an option to install a 20KW Tesla plug-in charger in their garages, which many people do. Tesla plug-in "superchargers" charge up to 120KW, so 20KW wireless is not 3 times the rate of any of those plug-in chargers (it's actually only 1/6th of the most powerful one). It probably is 3x the rate of the original, discontinued a couple of years ago, RAV4 EV charger, but saying it's 3x the rate of plug-in chargers used today is incorrect. Lastly, there are public chargers limited to ~6.6KW, but their limit is not because of the fact that they are wired, it's mostly their power source (the J1772 connector used by most of those can handle up to 20KW).

There is progress on electric trucks. http://insideevs.com/tevva-mot...

> The Tesla Model S 85 kWh battery costs $44000.

Citation needed. Official cost estimates aren't known but Tesla probably pays around $20,000 for the battery on the P85D, and that's a big battery. http://insideevs.com/tesla-bat...

> My current car is 20 years old and requires very little in terms of operating expenses.

Cool anecdote bro. The actual data reveals that a 10 year old mid-price-range car typically requires $500/yr in maintenance costs; a 20 year old car requires $1000/yr on average.

Nonsense. Did you actually listen to the interview? It's in the context of hypermilers--setting the record for the longest possible drive on one charge--not real or rated range under normal conditions.

http://insideevs.com/tesla-mod...

The current record is 550 miles. That's 885km. And that as on a 85D, not the new 90D, which would put the expected result from the same test at 937km. Getting to 1000 in two years means going from 90 to 96 KWH in the battery, all else being equal. Considering that he's already stated that he expects a 5% improvement in the batteries every year, we would expect the 95D to be released next year, and the 100D the next, so that's right on schedule.

There were no cars capable of 250k charging and the standard itself is limited to 80kW, so it was a stunt only. I have no idea where you got the 2008 date, the official international ChADeMO standard was released in 2011 ( http://www.iec.ch/dyn/www/f?p=... ).

Standards are not made by some aliens, but by people interested in them. The fact that Chademo standard wasn't finalized to the last detail until some years later doesn't mean compatible chargers didn't existed before.
http://www.japanfs.org/en/news...
http://www.greencarcongress.co...
http://www.chademo.com/wp/wp-c...
As Tesla has chosen to fragment market in "DVD regions" style and do not participate, their needs for more power were not addressed. It doesn't mean it is not possible with the same or compatible plug. You can always extend software protocol for more power options and leave it backwards compatible. Changing plugs of existing widespread infrastructure is next to impossible. Chademo plug geometry allows up to 200 A, likely more if you use different alloy to handle higher temperature. It means 80kW at 400V or 160kW at 800V.

And anyway, it's being deprecated in favor of another shitty standard (from SAE this time).

Exactly. Some shitty "standard" was invented by German/US automakers to drag down Japanese EVs. Some FUD was spread that competitors are "deprecated" and it worked, you repeat it now. Tesla had option to use common open standard at that time and CCS may be not have happened. Like in Japan BMW i3 is sold with Chademo outlet instead of CCS:
http://insideevs.com/bmw-i3-ge...

And no, Tesla network do not use one standard. In Europe and China their plug is completely different and not compatible with American version.

They are not completely different. They just use different wiring arrangements and can be adapted by a simple wiring adapter.

I don't think they sell such adapter, and I wouldn't be sure they would start charging when VIN from other region would be sent to supercharger, and you already may be carrying a dozen different adapters in your trunk or frunk. What a hassle. Well, next year we will see GM Bolt, and most likely GM's own (CSS or whatever) fast charging infrastructure will follow, more wider as GM (plus others) is bigger player, and Tesla will be left on isolated island. Isn't that what they wanted?

Model S are prevented from use superchargers as they check VIN when you plug in. Do you really want to say all this is good business ethics?

Since Tesla actually foots the electricity bills and funds the network rollout - that's perfectly fine. Also, superchargers are more powerful than ANY of the deployed standards out there right now.

It is called abuse in my book but as the are trying "to save the world" they are entitled to do anything in they eyes of their fans. Most evil things in the human history were done by people fighting "for greater good". They receive lots of subsidized loans/credits/all kinds perks from all taxpayers and it isn't exactly correct that they foot all the bills or that it is impossible for them to charge others for use of their network to recoup all reasonable costs. Such practice may be even become illegal in Europe soon, there is bill proposed that publicly accessible charging stations should not be discriminating against other EVs. How about gas stations with different hoses and owned by GM, Toyota, BMW, each incompatible with each other? Do you imagine what absurd waste of resour

Take a look at the Tesla AWD. The front motor is is much smaller than the rear motor. While it may move it would be much slower. The front motor is there for traction control and acceleration boost.

I wonder if they'll get as generous a package as Government Motors did when they needed rescuing?

No they won't. Tesla revenue was $881.67M producing 36,000 vehicles and has 6,000 employees. GM makes revenue was $155.929 billion, producing 9,714,652 vehicles and has 216,000 employees. Based on revenue GM is 176 times as big as Tesla. On a vehicle production basis GM is 270 times as big. Let GM fail and at least 216,000 people are out of work. That does not include all the dealers, parts suppliers, transport companies, etc. Let Tesla fail the would be 6,000 people are out of work. See the difference?

Getting a free pass on $45 billion in future profits is a pretty sweet deal.

To scale it to the size by revenue that would be $255M in tax breaks to Tesla. To scale it to the size by vehicle production that would be $166M in tax breaks to Tesla.

It still has a lower coefficient of drag compared to a Prius or a Volt.

The Model S has a coefficient of drag of 0.24. The Prius is 0.26, the Volt is 0.28 and the Leaf is 0.32.

http://insideevs.com/car-drive...

Even though the Tesla Model S is quite a bit bigger, it is the same as a Prius at 6.2 feet CdA.

Trying to reduce the decision of whether or not to buy an EV down to cost alone ignores many of the things that factor into why a person chooses one car over another. Therefore, saying it doesn't make sense to buy an EV given their cost isn't a very convincing argument.

The sales numbers of EVs would seem to indicate that it is...

http://insideevs.com/monthly-p...

For 2014, 123,049 plug in EVs were sold in the US and this is a decent rise over the sales rate in 2013.

That sounds good, until you consider that ALL car sales in 2014 went up, it was a good year.

How good? Honda, all by itself, in the MONTH of December, sold 137,281 vehicles. EVs are a rounding error in vehicle sales.

How much so? 16.5 million new vehicles were sold in the US in 2014. EV sales were less than 1% of new vehicles sold.

How about this... Ford sold more F-150 Pickup trucks... In CANADA, in 2014, than all the plug in EVs sold in the US all year.

---

I get it, tech people and eco people love EVs, but it would seem that no one else does. The sales don't lie.

So you're not going to be satisfied until some arbitrary, indefensible requirement is met?

For comparison: The Nissan LEAF alone sold more in its first four years than the Toyota Prius in its first four years. EVs in total have sold roughly a third as many vehicles in four years as the *total* Prius sales in the past eighteen years. (536K[1] vs ~1.4M[2])

I don't think anyone could make a credible argument that the Prius was/is a failure, and EVs are on a trajectory to overcome them in market share despite naysayers, FUD and lack of availability.
=Smidge=

[1] http://insideevs.com/monthly-p...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...

Provide an actual source, or it didn't happen. For some reason, conservative talking heads decided (years ago.. maybe 3) that the Volt was a symbol of something they hated, and so was to trashed talked for about a year. Then Volt hating season was over and it dropped off the radar. During that time they made up all kinds of unsupportable accusations. One of which was that all of the money invested in GM (TARP funds) to keep the US Auto industry from cracking apart and failing - was all meant for the Volt. That was the only way their math came close.

Buuuuuuut to answer your question: http://insideevs.com/monthly-p... I'll let you add up the 5 numbers.

According to http://insideevs.com/monthly-p... that number is currently 20,040 (which - assuming the total amount for subsidies is correct - would amount to about 75k$/vehicle sold)

Enh, seems to be only off by a factor 10, though IANAEE (I am not an electrical engineer). Forgive me if I'm missing a factor 1.44 or something, below.

Obviously you don't charge an electric car battery at 12 V. What the individual cells do is irrelevant, since they charge in parallel; the bottle neck is the cable attached to the car (and cooling, but hey, we're assuming magic new wonder battery tech, so I'll conveniently ignore that issue).

The highest power available using standard CEE (IEC 60309) plugs and mainline voltage is 3 x 125A x 230V, or about 86 kW. This is not normal in a home, obviously, but you can easily get a couple of these in commercial installations.

Ignoring losses (I know, I know), 86 kW means one hour to fully charge a Tesla Model S with the big 85 kWh battery pack, but that's also a big battery pack.

Charging the 48 kWh battery of the upcoming Model E to 70 % will take: 70% x 48 kWh / 86 kW = 23 minutes.

Now, I would've thought 3 x 125 A x 230V was about the limit, simple due to the weight (those cables are very heavy!). But apparently, Tesla Superchargers go beyond this, to more than 120 kW (340 A x 360 V), with possible plans for 135 kW or even 150 kW. (I guess if the cable is short enough, and you increase voltage beyond mains voltage...) This gives you 70% x 48 kWh charging times in as little as 17 minutes (120 kW) or even 13 minutes (150 kW). Still a far cry from 2 minutes, but then the 17 minute figure is using current mass-market technology.

"Plus I bet" - a bet you've already lost - "that a couple of those 3.2 sec starts" - maybe a couple hundred - "make the range quite a bit shorter" - you'll have to redefine "quite"

It was for chaps like you we invented teh Googleh, but you'd rather spew your comment and be wrong than factcheck 1st and be silent.

Here's some info from over 1 yr ago - http://insideevs.com/drag-time...

Since you're as likely to read that link as you were ready to check your hypothesis first, I'll give you the short version. The P85 Model S burns about 1.1 kWh when doing a flat-out 1/4 MILE from a standing start BUT recaptures about 0.6 kWh through regen braking as it comes to a stop. This new P85D is about 5% heavier and would use a bit more energy but for just 0-60 mph, it's not going to be much for either car.

You're going to have a MUCH bigger impact on the tires than on range if you try to make every start into a 0-60 sprint.

Part of this is due to the rise of companies like Uber and Tesla Motors, blazing-hot start-ups that have been opposed at every turn by protectionist regulators and trade unions, in confrontations that are being used by small-government conservatives as case studies in government control run amok.

....except....

http://insideevs.com/uaw-looks...

CEO Elon Musk says Tesla is union neutral, so that’s the automaker’s stance.

Then there's the whole "government run amok" thing... where it should really say "state government run amok." The protectionist policies adopted haven't been federal, they've been state level. Texas, Arizona, Virginia, Maryland, and New Jersey have outright bans; Georgia and Colorado have severe restrictions on selling; and Ohio and New York have legislation pending. Musk has said, if the states keep fucking with him, he will use the federal courts to deal with the issue.... so again, the problem isn't the federal government, it's the states.

With Uber, again the problem isn't unions, and it's not the federal government.. it's city governments.

Perhaps this should be a case study on smaller governments causing more problems than they should, and those that promote "small government" lying and trying to blame "big government" and unions.

Musk has mentioned in the past a range of around 200 miles.

The UAW wants Tesla to join their union. And NADA wants Tesla to join their union. Tesla doesn't want to play ball. So the unions are flexing it's muscle to make Teslas join their unions. Really guys, it's that simple. It has nothing to do with the fact their car is electric. Seriously, just google for `tesla car union` and you'll find stories about the UAW. http://insideevs.com/uaw-looks... http://www.teslamotors.com/sv_...

Lets wait until a 3rd party company measures its efficiency in similar conditions as Tesla S instead of taking the number off of a BMW dealership sticker.
 
  Those numbers ARE from a third party
 
  the i3 comes with a internal combustion engine range extender, wonder what the efficiency drops to when that kicks in..
 
Care to show me the stats on the ICE range extender you speak of?
 
What the fuck are you Tesla fanboys so afraid of? That another company out there can do better? I thought that was the idea of the EVs to begin with! Jesus fuck, get over yourselves.

Population of Japan: 128 million
Population of Norway: 5 million

Nice troll, AC. "In 2013, 13,021 LEAFs were sold in Japan, which is a new record." With 4,604 sold sold in same period Norway is large.

Quick search found this: http://insideevs.com/tesla-mod...

nevermind there were more electric vehicles in widespread use before there were many gas stations 1898 is a pretty early example

http://insideevs.com/in-early-...

Think level playing fields. Ford can't advertise a rating of 5.4. GM can't. Tesla can because... why?

After that whole "My new supermegatube will do everything your high speed railway does, only cheaper - restrictions apply, supermegatube does not, actually, go to any of the locations served by high speed rail, and actually isn't going to be built anywhere near 50% of the stops" crap from Musk, I do feel the guy isn't always speaking with his honesty valve sealed properly.

I admire what he's doing, I hope he's successful at popularizing the electric car, and building the infrastructure needed to make it a transportation alternative, but the guy needs to knock it off with the exaggerated claims.

Hey, question: Which has sold more, the Chevy Volt, or the Tesla Model S?

That's right. The Volt. (50,000 vs less than 30,000 (forecast.)

Now, given that, the six million dollar question: how many Chevy Volts have caught fire so far?

Disclaimer: I'm a TSLA shareholder. I'm thinking this was a bad investment, but I'll see what happens over the next month.