Slashdot Mirror


Tesla Roadster Runs For 241 Miles In E-Rally

N!NJA writes with the mention of a recent alternative energies rally where the Tesla Roadster managed to cover 241 miles on a single charge, with another 38 miles of juice still left in the battery. "That would give the Roadster a theoretical maximum touring range of nearly 280 miles — 36 miles more than Tesla itself reckons the car will cover on a charge. If the numbers stand up to official scrutiny, Tesla will hold the world record for the longest distance traveled by a production electric car on a single charge. Of course, it should be pointed out that the Tesla was driven by a company staffer doubtless practiced in eking out every last mile from a charge, and that the speeds averaged on the run were hardly blistering — 90kph (56mph) on the motorways, 60kph (37mph) on trunk roads and 30kph (19) in the mountain roads. Tesla reckon the average speed for the entire journey was 45kph (28mph)."

12 of 294 comments (clear)

  1. Great by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Now make it affordable.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Great by aurispector · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Time for the miracle of mass production and economies of scale.

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
  2. Re:Very promising! by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > Imagine a gigantic cell phone or laptop battery blowing up. Yikes!

    Imagine twenty gallons of gasoline blowing up. Yikes!

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  3. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  4. Re:Very promising! by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As long as their they don't get batteries from Sony, I think we'll be fine.

  5. Re:Cool, it practically pays for itself by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If I accelerate to 97 km/h in 3.7 seconds, I most likely will hit the car in front of me and/or get a ticket for reckless driving.

    If I go at 201 km/h, I'll also get a ticket for speeding.

    Even though I'd like my next car to be an electric one, acceleration and top speed aren't the reasons for it.

  6. Re:The Contrarian Mystique by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Grow up, folks. They're trying to solve one of the biggest problems facing the world.

    Actually they are not, which is why they may succeed.

    They are trying to make a kick-ass car. People don't want to drive a large golf cart just to "save the planet", or at least not enough of those people exist to form a market.

    With the singular exception of battery life / recharge time electric vehicles are superior in every way to internal combustion engine vehicles. They have better torque characteristics, less moving parts and simpler maintenance. Once battery technology advances enough that the range is acceptable, electric cars will take over from combustion engine cars because they are simply better vehicles.

  7. Re:Oh bullshit by Rei · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When you look at the amount of energy stored in a gallon of gasoline compared to a ton of batteries you'll see why.

    That's just silly, though. EVs are exactly the opposite paradigm as gasoline cars. In gasoline cars, the fuel is light while the engine is heavy. In electric cars, the motor is light while the batteries are heavy. The Roadster gets its performance with a motor the size of a small watermelon that weighs something like 40 pounds. In short, battery packs aren't competing with the gas tank for weight and space; they're competing with the gasoline car's engine for weight and space. If you crunch the numbers, you'll find that the two powertrains will be approximately the same when batteries hit 350Wh/kg or so. Commercial cells currently top out at about 200Wh/kg, but there are about two dozen different techs in the lab that can 50%-800% increase the energy density of their respective electrode (anode or cathode). The odds of every last one of them failing to make it to commercialization are vanishingly small. Li-ion still has a very long run ahead of it.

    Don't you think if there was money to be made in this market someone would have tried when gas was over 4 bucks a gallon?

    When do you think it was that several dozen different marques announced EV programs? Nowadays, it's easier to count the companies that *don't* have EVs they're planning to mass produce. For example, among the biggest sellers in the US, there's only one: Honda. And they've already announced plans to make an electric motorcycle, so even they may not count.

    --
    I believe Bird-Person can arrange that.
  8. Re:28mph over 280 miles is not good... by defaria · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I drove 280 miles today (central NY to upstate) and it took me 3.5 hours, meaning I traveled an average speed of 80mph for the journey. Even at an average of 65mph (the proper speed limit) the journey would take 4.3 hours. 4 hours is a far cry from 10 hours traveling.

    What are you talking about? Your average person is not traveling 4.3 hours every day. Indeed even you didn't travel 4.3 hours every day. and I severally doubt you averaged 80mph. Hook up a meter to your car. Stopping for gas and/or eating, pissing or whatever tanks your average. You probably averaged less than 50mph. Trust me.

    While gas (and money) is a commodity that I would save by traveling with an automobile than ran on an alternative fuel source, there is a negative cost, an exchange of time. I save money, but I lose time. If you calculate how much I get paid an hour and convert the lost hours to dollars, it's more cost efficient for me to take a gas powered car over 4 hours than an electric car for 10 hours.

    The Tesla can easily keep up with your silly assed car. The only time wasters is if you have to recharge, which is generally done at night when you aren't billing any of those precious and expensive billable hours anyway!

    Even if the electric (or alternative fuel source) cars are cheaper to run and operate, time must also be factored in as a commodity, and weighed accordingly. But if these cars continue to run at considerably slower speeds than gas fueled cars I don't see many people shifting to them.

    Yes, with the key word here being "weighed". Comparing a long haul drive is not a fair comparison at all and it's not what you usually do. Most people drive 30 miles a day on average. You need to weigh for that heavily. Many people drive cars that are way underpowered compared to a Tesla. You sound like an idiot who doesn't know the first thing about what you are talking about!

  9. Affordability by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's already affordable to people who are in the market for cars that go 0-60 in 3.7 seconds. They can afford it so well that Tesla is back-ordered. That's proof of a market that you can take to the bank (literally).

    Once those people pay the early adopter tax, they fund the transition to higher-volume, lower-price cars like the Model S.

    The Tesla is a brilliant piece of product positioning.

  10. Re:What's the recharge time? by evilviper · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My Honda Civic refuels in about a minute and a half,

    Park your Civic in the garage tonight, and hit the button that tells it to drive itself to the gas station, fill-up, and return before you wake up in the morning...

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  11. Re:Very promising! by Plaid+Phantom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We love Tesla because they are doing something. The research and investment will lead to future electric cars that really are affordable. See the Model S for a big step in that direction.

    --
    All comments are properties and trademarks of the voices in my head. Not like I'm gonna claim them.