Slashdot Mirror

Is that why there are thousands of them, sitting lots, getting recharged with diesel generators, because they cannot sell them fast enough? Oh, that's right - you said make them fast enough. Unfortunately, that's not what matters - sales is what matters, not necessarily production rate.

Wow!! You found one Tesla dealer who is recharging their cars with a diesel generator. Therefore all Tesla owners must be recharging their cars with Diesel Generators, what a bunch of hypocrites!!! You just won the fossil fuel vs electric cars debate single-handily with one link to an article in the automotive press equivalent of the Daily Mail. We are all in awe of your debating and reasoning skills.

Is that why there are thousands of them, sitting lots, getting recharged with diesel generators, because they cannot sell them fast enough? Oh, that's right - you said make them fast enough. Unfortunately, that's not what matters - sales is what matters, not necessarily production rate.

Well he's got to do something with the massive number of Model 3s sitting around being charged with diesel generators. Might as well put them in a tunnel!

Nope. Like the GM EV1, the 1st Gen RAV4 EV was lease only.

Nope. It was lease only at the beginning, but "at the lessees' request, many units were sold after the vehicle was discontinued." and also "A total of 328 RAV4 EVs were sold directly to consumers throughout 2002 and into 2003."

Yes, the NHTSA rates car safety, giving each car either four or five stars. Last year 97% of vehicles received one of the the top ratings.

One way to get a five star rating is to have the front wheels and most of the engine compartment end up in the front seats after a collision:
https://www.thetruthaboutcars....

IIHS, on the other hand, provides ratings which allow you to tell which cars are the safest and which aren't so safe. Not every car gets a trophy from IIHS because failing to distinguish safe cars from less-safe ones, giving them all high ratings like NHTSA does, would reduce the profits of the companies sponsoring the testing. The companies need to know which ones are actually safer.

> It was founded in 1894 by William Merrill

That's right. Merril, an insurance underwriter, lead the project, which was funded by insurance companies.

Here's the thing - car accidents and the other dangers we are talking about kill tens of thousands of people every year. Real people, whose children actually lose their parents. This isn't a game and it's not theoretical. Livew are on the line, yours and mine. So let's do what works, okay? Let's figure out what has ACTUALLY improved safety effectively and do more of that, alright? We can choose something else to try to score points for some political theory.

What's he blubbing about this time? Consumer reports rating his people killing software as less good than GM's? TSLA down to 282

https://www.thetruthaboutcars....

The deadline was moved twice. So now that they've finally met it for a single week... huzzah I guess. From here:

As it continues working through supply and assembly line issues, Tesla has pushed back its goal for 5,000-vehicle-a-week Model 3 production for the second time.

Last year, Tesla assured us it could reach the goal by the end of the calendar year. As problems mounted on the production line, that target moved to the end of the first quarter of 2018.

In yesterday’s quarterly production report, the automaker stated this:

“As we continue to focus on quality and efficiency rather than simply pushing for the highest possible volume in the shortest period of time, we expect to have a slightly more gradual ramp through Q1, likely ending the quarter at a weekly rate of about 2,500 Model 3 vehicles. We intend to achieve the 5,000 per week milestone by the end of Q2.”

An engineering firm...

No doubt... and no doubt it went down something like this...

How many GM, Ford, Chrysler, Audi, BMW, VW or other cars get delivered to the customer with a cracked a pillar?

Fixed that for you.

The cracks are showing.

Maybe I'm missing it, but has Tesla perfected it's auto business? Should it be branching out already?

No their cars are still piece of shit lemons.

Exactly! How the hell do you tease out what part of the profit was derived from the shape of the phone case and the arrangement of icons?!? Especially since the phone may not have sold, or sold as well, without those properties? Samsung's analogy about an 18-wheeler with an infringing cupholder is just absurd -- without A/B testing, there's no way to know whether buyers chose the 18-wheeler based on the cupholder or some other factor. But if the cupholder was the deciding factor (as, in actuality, it often is), then *all* of the profits were derived from that infringement.

Now I think design patents are problematic, especially when things are merely similar rather than indistinguishable, but I agree that this verdict was the worst possible outcome.

In Trumpamerica, hybrids and electric cars will be replaced by God-fearing American coal burning cars!

You mean like this?

Or did you mean this?

What about this one?

With automated interstate driving, you could send a truck from NYC to LA in about 1 day.

I have no idea how you think a truck can go across the country in 1 day. Sure, some guys recently did the Cannonball Run in just over a day, but that was at high speed and with plenty of tricks to not be stopped by police.

Google maps shows the time as 41 hours, and that assumes no traffic and traveling the posted speed limit. From my recent perspective of having driven large amounts of miles while on vacation (4,100 this month and 3,600 in May), I can guarantee you need to add a few hours to whatever Google says, especially since these trucks will still be limited to the posted speed limit.

(Here's Scott Adams talking about trying to purchase a vehicle. It's quite an interesting story, and shows a first-person view of one of the techniques of sales.)

And here is something Scott Adams should have considered before he tried to buy a Ford Raptor at a Chevy dealership:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.c...

Summary: He wanted product X, went to someone who does not sell product X, found out that product X will not be available for a year and "realized" he never wanted product X to begin with. Maybe he hypnotized himself.

As for his analysis on trump, a good test of that will be in November if trump "wins in a landslide".

Though I did see in an old magazine (Mother earth news?) where someone rigged up a stove in their car to generate CO to burn in the engine. Don't know how true the article it was, or how well the car ran...

Oh yes, "wood gas" engines are a real thing.

The process of using oxygen starved combustion to turn organic material into a combustible gas has been known for 175 years. Gustav Bischof built the first wood gasifier in 1839. By the turn of the 20th century, before the use of natural gas started proliferating in the 1930s, in many municipalities syngas produced from coal was centrally produced and distributed via pipelines to homes and businesses to use for heating and cooking. In 1901, Thomas Parker made the first vehicle powered by wood gas.

Source: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.c...

That the cars will still emit 200% of legally mandated NOx levels.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.c...

Only the newest vehicles with the urea injection (2015 and newer) will make it to the legal levels.

So if you bought a "clean Diesel" based upon VW's bogus claims, remember what they did to you next time you're out buying.

You are a fucking idiot. From a previous article. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/apr/23/diesel-cars-pollution-limits-nox-emissions

All of them fucked up but your dipshittery only focuses on one brand. They all need to burn less fumes. You are a fucking moron.

That the cars will still emit 200% of legally mandated NOx levels.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.c...

Only the newest vehicles with the urea injection (2015 and newer) will make it to the legal levels.

So if you bought a "clean Diesel" based upon VW's bogus claims, remember what they did to you next time you're out buying.

Jalopnik and Gizmodo

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/ blows Jalopnik away. And all Gizmodo ever did was rehash condensed summaries of other people's content.

It might help if the Obama Administration hadn't allowed most of the competing rental car companies to merge, creating an oligopoly that keeps prices high.

Hertz is already doing pretty bad. Uber and Lyft are a huge problem for the rental car companies. And Hertz in particular has accounting irregularities. They're going to have to redo the last 5 years of their financials.

Their only saving grace is that car rental has become an oligopoly. The Obama Administration allowed Avis to merge with Budget and Hertz to merge with Dollar/Thrifty. Avis also bought Zipcar. The other company in the 3-way oligopoly is Enterprise/National. Car rental pricing has been artificially high with less competition.

Uber and Lyft, and the entrance of some smaller competitors (because the car rental business has low barriers to entry -- really, how hard is it to rent cars?) are starting to bring rates down again.

Rather than simply boycotting Hertz, I suggest using a service like Hotwire. Wait until the day before you need to rent a car and then go to Hotwire. Rental companies can either rent you one of their cars for cheap or leave it sitting on their lot earning them nothing. If there are no good deals (because of high demand or because the local city has a high tax on car rentals) just use Uber or Lyft.

If your company has an exclusive deal with Avis or Hertz for business travelers, your company is overpaying, probably by a very large amount. Do some price comparisons with Hotwire and email them to the decision makers. That would be the worst thing for Hertz.

Actually, automakers are well aware of the importance of cupholders.

http://wardsauto.com/news-amp-...
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.c...

A study shows that fast charging infrastructure is more effective than price rebates on EV. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.c...

Heh, I lol'd .

But anyway, to go off on a tangent, where was the /. coverage of the Car2Go outage from Friday? The one caused by the meltdown of their "German-based" mobile carrier due to some network roaming bug? I assume they're trying to deflect the blame to T-mobile without directly impacting their stock price...
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.c...

I'm not really sure why you think Blue Laws are designed to protect incumbents. Why outlaw sales on certain days when it's much easier to keep existing dealers in power by establishing franchise laws instead?

Others have already answered this more succinctly ("politics"), but sure, I'll bite.

I get a little tired of the Musk worship.

Why does his company need a huge pile of tax breaks to succeed? If I open a company tomorrow, how can I get away with not paying taxes?

Rich people can affect public policy to help them make more money. But in this case, think of it less as giving tax breaks, and more of giving tax incentives for finally succeeding at doing something we've been trying to do for a long time anyway. I'm sure Musk made plenty of threats to build this factory somewhere in Asia if he didn't get favorable treatment here in the US. At least, he would have been a dumbass not to.

Why are Tesla's debt bonds in Junk status but he continues to get freebies from states?

S&P 's reasoning was that Tesla had all of their investment in one kind of product: electric cars and batteries. Not enough diversity to avoid risk. So if China preemptively opened their own Gigafactory and undercut Tesla's battery prices, all of Tesla's assets would be kind of worthless and they'd go kaput. It already happened with Solyndra, it could well happen again. Hell, we might as well give up and let China build batteries and electric cars for the world now.

Why are Tesla's cars so rudely expensive? Is there a plan for a 4 door sedan that a real family can afford in the 20K - 30K range like the Prius?

OK, I'm not a Musk worshipper, but I've followed enough tech news that the "Model E".. oops, sorry Ford, "Model 3" will be priced at 35K after they finish fleecing the early adopters for funding all of the preliminary engineering R&D costs with the Model S and the Model X. And they would have come out with the Model 3 sooner, but one of the blockers is... the lack of a Gigafactory. Tesla already consumes the majority the world's supply of Li-ion batteries serving the Model S production as it is.

Why is it that a guy with a big mouth and political friends on all sides gets so much tax subsidy, loans, breaks and deals?

I dunno, ask your friends at Exxon and Monsanto? I would think Musk seems to be some kind of small fry in comparison. Oh, now you've got me looking up his bio... http://www.biography.com/peopl...

Why are guys who run factories employing tons of US citizens in US based factories (like Toyota) who produce super reliable product with great mileage get slapped by the media when a bogus story about a gas pedal getting stuck?

Heh, do you also remember the story about the faulty seatbelts back in the 90s, and Toyota blamed messy American fast food culture for spilling food in the clasp mechanisms and jamming up the works? Silly media. Anyway, I bet those companies also get some nice tax breaks. Maybe some of those tax breaks are expiring, because Ford/Mazda has been moving some of their assembly plants from Michigan to Mexico. BTW, if you're interested in that kind of news, http://www.thetruthaboutcars.c... tends to have pretty good coverage and typically includes a healthy helping of humor, wit, and sarcasm.

Not sure why people need a super-hero.

Er, are you suggesting that Musk should have gotten into boring venture capital financial firms after making his fortune? It seems to take a special kind of nerd to throw your finances at the relatively high-risk and low-margin pursuits of electric cars and space launch vehicles. Most other nerds I know do that kind of thing as a hobby.

3.8 million priuses have been sold and cab drivers will tell you they easily go into the 300K range and even if the battery runs out the car is still useable.

I like the Prius (at least the Gen2 Prius)... it's a very diff

Government made them difficult and expensive to buy compared to SUV's, which were classified as trucks (hence a lower gas mileage standard).

"Stigma" had nothing to do with it.

Maybe so, but there is still a stigma attached to minivans. They say, "I now live a boring suburban lifestyle". A friend of mine said as much when he bought his Honda Odyssey. He loves the Odyssey, but he knew he was no longer cool. And, to be fair, once he and his wife had kids they became just as staid and boring as their minivan suggested.

It's cool; they're happy with their lives and love their kids and home life. But it reminded me of why I'm still single and childless. That life is unattractive to me.

Government made them difficult and expensive to buy compared to SUV's, which were classified as trucks (hence a lower gas mileage standard).

"Stigma" had nothing to do with it.

That may be true purely in terms of number of accidents on straight roads with long lines of sight. However, the amount of damage caused in a crash DOES go up exponentially with speed. You stand a fairly good chance of surviving even a head-on collision at 55 MPH. You'll have a lot of bruises, some broken bones, possibly some back damage, etc. but you'll probably live. On the other hand, hit that same bridge pillar or concrete barricade at 90 MPH, will leave the first responders wondering how much of you they can shovel into the bag and how much they just have to hose off the road after they drag what's left of your car off it. This is what happens in a 120MPH crash. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.c... It's a bit faster than your 'safer' 90 but your 90 will still put the engine block squarely in the passenger cabin and burst your aorta as soon as the car starts decelerating. This is 120KM/H or 75 MPH. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... , well below your 90 but still almost universally fatal in a head-on.

Sure....

German auto club Allgemeiner Deutscher Automobil-Club e.V., or ADAC, may no longer bestow their annual Yellow Angel Award after the club admitted to vote rigging.

Land rovers are notorious for breaking down. If you look at any reliability data for cars, land rovers consistently rank at or near the bottom. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/02/land-rover-and-jd-power/

all they could do with the brakes is turn off and on any "skid control" systems, the brake system on cars is STILL a mechanical/hydrochloric system , link from steering wheel to steering rack is not fly by wire in the EU, and cars still have "butterfly" valves for air intake, that is linked to pedal postion .. via mechanical cable

Wow, the EU must be a pretty backward place. From a performance stand point, I know when they unveiled the new 2005 Mustangs in America a lot of people griped that the throttle is electronically controlled, there is no direct linkage. Not to mention, luxury brands like Lexus, Range Rover, etc all use electronic throttle control. Hell, do you remember all of the "unexplained" acceleration problems that Toyota had? It was because of electronic throttle control. PS, they lost the lawsuit that dealt with a 2005 Camry.

This article covers the problem better than I can explain it in a short post:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/10/how-cafe-killed-compact-trucks-and-station-wagons/

Not to mention the tax loss carry-forwards that GM was able to keep in bankruptcy - something no other companies are allowed to do. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/11/gm-carry-forwards-worth-45b-off-future-tax-bills// That's another $45B that the taxpayers lost out on.

I know a guy who got burned for this 20 years ago. Crime all comes down to intent, not just simple actions. That's why George Zimmerman was not-guilty. Even though by his own admission he shot and killed Trayvon Martin it was not his "intent" to do so but rather an unfortunate side effect of firing a bullet into him during a struggle.

It is 100% legal to install hidden compartments, and in fact many major vehicle manufacturers do this today with their in-dash-pullout cup holders and fold-in-to-the-floor seating. However it is 100% illegal to install those exact same compartments specifically for the intent of smuggling contraband.

It would be interesting to see if a car salesman could be convicted for selling a 2013 Ford Flex to an agent that explicitly stated they would use the compartments for drug running.

Oh, forgot the link: Lexus is irksomely self-satisfied about theirs, describing it in hyperbolic tones that would make you think nobody had ever woven a circular structure before; but it is a pretty neat looking example...

It's a funny topic to try to google for pictures/video of: you've got your home knitting enthusiasts, with lovingly refurbed Legare 400s that appear to have been stolen from around 1880, ( a modern version is available, from New Zealand for some reason), your inscrutable Chinese industrial machinery suppliers, with even more inscrutable comments from would-be buyers in textile-producing parts of the world, and finally your "supercar" puff pieces, with industrial designers talking about aerospace technology in order to boost the perceived value of cars produced (with a very few, largely promotional, exceptions) by entirely different methods.

However that would also mean that the car can be recharged from 0% to 100% in 40 minutes - and that is not what happens in reality. Initial charging is faster, and as you say the last 5% may be not even desirable.

Like I said earlier, for longevity purposes Tesla actually has their system report it's full and stop charging at about 80% of the maximum charge it's battery pack could actually take. That avoids the 'last 5%' slow charge problem pretty much completely, as a LiIon battery pack will still be charging at a good rate until it's over 90%. Figures are approximate due to variability in chemistry, battery size, what's considered a 'fast charge', etc...

Wiki and other sources are quoting 'about an hour' for a full charge, with 50% being 20-30 minutes, but then Tesla's website mentions that they're upgrading(have upgraded?) their supercharger stations to make charging even faster, so the 30 minute references might be for the older stations. All figures are for the longer range 85kwh battery.

However EVs cannot pull a trailer.

They can't? I mean, google has all sorts of hits...

Once the manufacturer installs the hitch, they cannot control what kind of a boat, or a horse carrier, or a heavy trailer will be connected there. They'd need to come up with some nonstandard interface, that is guaranteed to only support the charging trailer.

Actually, they can. My light truck, for example, has a class II receiver(3.5k pounds), which is 2". On the open market I can only get class 1(2k pounds) or 2 ball mounts that fit my receiver. If I had had the tow package, I could have put a class III on(5k pounds). With a regular EV, you'd get one with a 1 1/4" opening, which you can only fit the smaller ball on, thus only the smaller trailers with that type of hitch.

If somebody goes through the effort to custom make a 1 1/4" bar with the larger ball in order to hook up a large boat to their EV, the damage is going to be warranty voiding obvious. Most of those things are designed to hook into a special hitch installed into the bed of a pickup or on an actual semi.

Meanwhile, there's all sorts of instructions in my truck on how much I can tow. There's stickers on trailers as well, all I have to do is play 'equal to or less than'. Places like U-Haul are well used to educating users, and have a selection of light tow trailers that even smaller cars can haul. I figure they'd be the ones renting out the generator trailers anyways.

There is yet another issue. Most people do not know how to drive with a trailer - not just in reverse, but even forward. I guess they could learn, but the clientele that buys EVs is fairly demanding.

I learned in the course of a day. I wouldn't rate myself as expert, but some of these models are designed to help prevent jackknifing when backing, and you shouldn't be doing much of that given that you're only going to be using it(theoretically) on the highways. I learned with a 3k pound loaded trailer without fancy steering.

I priced that rental online, and it was more than $500 for a week.

The price I found was $320 for a SUV from Enterprise, like I said. Your dates might have been bad, or the area expensive, etc... *shrug*, rental prices vary a lot. As for snow chains, well, I own a set, they aren't cheap, but well, I live in Alaska, paranoia is professional for winter up here.

$20k would get you a pretty good older used SUV as long as you're careful. But transaction, registration, inspection, and insurance costs would eat up any savings from buying if your use is irregular enough. I'll note that you didn't bu

Yugo

I don't think you were completely trying to make the point that "EV still has to be plugged in to a fossil-fuel plant, so they're no better than gas", but I've heard it made so many times that I get stabby when I see something like it.

My issue is people act like electric cars cost nothing to run, and that's not true. I pay almost 11 cents a kwh. Nissan Leaf has a 24 kwh battery. So it'll cost me $2.64 in electricity for a full battery. The range varies from 47 miles to 138 miles, but 70 seems about average, so let's assume $2.64 for 70 miles.

Judging from my experiences with the 2012 Ford Focus it should easily average 35mpg. Gas at $3.50/gal, that's $7 per 70 miles.

So the Leaf is much cheaper to operate, 70,000 miles in a Leaf would cost $2,640 compare to $7,000 from a Focus. But the Nissan Leaf is a $36,000 car compared to the $15,000 Ford Focus. $20,000 would buy A LOT of gasoline. Also figure the Leaf will need a special $2,200 home charger unless you want to wait 12 hours for the car to charge on 120v.

And let's not forget the hassle. Every time you park you have to plug in the Leaf. Every. Single. Time. You know how annoying it is to have a cellphone battery only last until noon? Multiply that by 100x. And god forbid there not be a garage to park in and have to run around in the rain plugging in the car. Not fun.

Electric just doesn't make economical sense yet. Maybe if gas was $7 a gallon.... no, still not, $2,640 vs $14,000 for 70,000 miles, you'd have to drive almost 150,000 miles to break even considering the $20,000 price difference between a Focus and Leaf, and you'd still have to deal with the hassle of charging the Leaf all the time for 150,000 miles.

But if gas prices triple in 15 years like they have in the past 15 years I could see electric being the solution, especially if the vehicles get a better range and become more efficient, but that's assuming cars will still be 35mpg and electricity prices remain 11 cents per kwh.

Not quite, in the case of Chrysler, it would seem. At least it doesn't pass the sniff test. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/04/the-chrysler-coincidence-bailout-loan-shuffle-to-help-fund-fiat-takeover/

This story contradicts the story posted over at TTAC where they claim the shutdown has been extended from two weeks to three weeks.

Jalopnik should be liberated as well. The journalistic value has gone downhill from the early days but at least it's entertaining.

That's already happened; many of Jalopnik's best authors have migrated to The Truth About Cars.

(Not only is the writing better, but TTAC also liberated auto enthusiasts from Denton's Javashit-and-attention-whoring-dependent commenting system. The harder he tightens his grip, the more talent slips through his fingers...)

I doubt anyone in China who wants a car would buy the Aptera. This is what they buy:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/01/chinas-best-selling-cars-of-2010/
http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1909818,00.html

As for elsewhere, who (other than car collectors like Jay Leno) would buy an Aptera? And why? If I had USD20K to spend on a vehicle I'd certainly buy something else. More range, more seating capacity.

If I was rich and was going to buy an electric vehicle just for "cool factor", I'd buy something like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5xf1zWSuWc :)

How about these references...

Speed Cameras Cause Bad Driving, Increase Crashes

or...let's try Arizona, if you don't trust the UK report...

AZ Police Report Shows Speed Camera Caused Accident

Do you need more..? I'm sure there are quite a few studies showing this trend.

Also, how does the post-it [note] defeat red-light cameras?

Answering your last bit first, certain people in Arizona (angered over a speed camera company) have resorted to using Post-It Notes to disable cameras. They're not doing any permanent damage and I don't believe anyone has been up on vandalism charges since they're not actually damaging the cameras - just disabling it in a fashion. (Europe has had way more cameras in places like the U.K., and solutions have ranged from putting a bag over the camera or silly string to slightly less friendly versions such as setting the cameras on fire or shooting them out with an air rifle.)

I used to think that was the case too, until I found out the way they caught Eliot Spitzer is by noticing he was making unusually large cash withdrawals. Basically, the only reason you have privacy is because no one cares about you. If someone wants to follow you around and figure out what you are doing, they can

Yes, that's if you store all of your money in the bank. I usually would have my entire paycheck direct-deposited and then withdraw what's needed for the week minus what I would leave in for savings, slush fund, or online purchases I intended to make. I always have a little bit of the proverbial "cash under the mattress" and generally try to avoid using debit/credit when and where I can.

The point is that you have to be aware of how a paper trail could be used to track you, and use that to your advantage. If you don't want to be tracked in any fashion, it's surprisingly easy to make it very difficult for companies (or the government) to get any real, meaningful data about you and your purchasing or movement habits. It just takes a little thinking and situational awareness.

technology coming down the pike. the new diesels look especially intriguing. And it appears the rotary isn't dead, it's just restin'.

It's pining for the Fords.

technology coming down the pike. the new diesels look especially intriguing. And it appears the rotary isn't dead, it's just restin'.

It gets worse.

On at least one occasion, OnStar allowed police to secretly listen in to a car's cabin in order to gather evidence for a drug conviction. Start here.

Earlier this year, Toyota opened their first new factory in Japan in 18 years. There are very few robots in the factory; they even have humans doing the welding work. Toyota claims that all of the savings gained by robots is lost due to building the factory to accommodate automation and buying and maintaining the robots. In fact, Toyota has been moving away from heavy automation for the last 10 years.

Better Place says they've had their battery swap system do changes in under 40 seconds. The video on their site shows it happening in just over 1 minute. Not bad for the first gen (wow, that robot moves slow), but they're stuck in that place where they have the idea, and have invested in the technology, but need to get all the players on board or they'll get nowhere. Unless car manufacturers get on board, it won't matter how many swap stations they build. Unless they have swap stations, no car manufacturers want to join. Right now, they've opened one in Israel, but only some demo vehicles can use it so far, since the Renault Fluence Z.E that is supposed to be the flagship battery swap electric vehicle isn't on sale yet (or wasn't in March when that was written). It will be interesting to see what happens. I like the idea of charging my car's battery at home most of the time, but having the option to swap it at a road-side station if I want to go on a long trip. We're a lot of infrastructure away from that day, though.