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)."
Now make it affordable.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Does anyone know how likely the batteries are to catch fire or explode? Imagine a gigantic cell phone or laptop battery blowing up. Yikes!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You can give just about *any* car dramatic improvements in fuel economy if you know how to drive them correctly. See HyperMilingA.
Just to see if it worked, I tried it with an ageing GMC Van (big, full sized, full of people) and measured an increase in fuel economy from about 20 MPG to over 30! Of course, there's something about driving on a freeway at 45 MPH and coasting to a stop from a half mile away that annoys the bajeezus out of other drivers.... I must have been flipped off half a dozen times!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Have you been offworld the past year or so? The Tesla is probably a *lot* faster than what you drive now.
Caveat Utilitor
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.
Maybe you were attempting a joke, but this is a pure electric car. There's no fuel to be efficient with. Besides, no car has its "sweet spot" at 28 MPH, and if you read the summary you'd see that they drove at several different speeds over the course of the journey, which just happened to *average* 28MPH. They never actually drove any length of time at that speed.
You are aware that this is a car that could easily blow away almost all other cars on the road in terms of performance, right? It took this long because it was going *through narrow mountain roads in the Alps*. Are you going to drive 80mph on roads like this?
I believe Bird-Person can arrange that.
They're essentially not, essentially, yes, no. The phosphates and spinels most other auto makers are using, even moreso.
I'm not sure what you think is in li-ion batteries that you're picturing is so toxic. These aren't lead-acid or nickel-cadmium here. Want to know what goes into a lithium phosphate battery? Lithium salts (like you find in mineral water -- in fact, they're actually produced from salt flats where mineral waters evaporated), iron powder, phosphoric acid, sugar (for a carbon binding), porous polyethylene (separator), graphite or amorphous carbon (anode), any one of a variety corrosive but generally nontoxic electrolytes, casing, wiring, and so forth. You'll find worse stuff in a lot of bulk steels than you will in LFP cells.
I believe Bird-Person can arrange that.
Acceleration is a damn good reason to go electric. Electric motors produce consistent torque independent of RPM, and the torque is applied instantaneously. The result is instant acceleration regardless of current speed, and is also why the newer Tesla only need one gear. Such acceleration is useful in many day-to-day driving situations.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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!
My Honda Civic refuels in about a minute and a half, and I can get well over 400 miles on a tank on the highway. Just sayin'.
Lithium-oon polymer will take over soon enough. Compared to the good old Lithium-ion (not polymer), it packs more energy per weight and volume, does not enforce specific cell proximity and shape (semi-fluid?) and has lower risk of exploding. The price is already about the same.
Things are always improving :-)
Electricity is everywhere. Once electric cars start reaching significant numbers, you'll start seeing charging stations in parking lots, on streets, everywhere. They'll work like modern parking meters. Slide your credit card or drop in a few bucks and charge away.
If you need to charge quickly (less than 30 minutes), there are battery chemistries which can do that, too.
For people who are able to park their cars and charge them over night - essentially eliminating the need to stop and "fill up your tank" periodically, is a huge gain in convenience.
Hydrogen is a decent energy carrier which many people like because switching to it wouldn't require a significant change in behaviour. It also has the drawback of either requiring a significant amount of electricity (if using electrolysis) or natural gas to produce. Not to mention that all hydrogen fuel tanks leak a significant amount of their fuel within weeks. It's more efficient to use that electricity to charge batteries for electric cars, or if using natural gas, simply use the natural gas in a regular combustion engine.
I assume you know that Top Gear *admitted* to faking the ep -- not that this is something new for them. They're an entertainment show. They never ran out of electricity and were never without a working car. The only thing that actually did go wrong was with the brakes -- but it was merely a blown fuse from the abusive track duty they put it through, and the replacement was a nothing task. Their charge time statements were horribly misleading, too.
Clarkson stated that even if the Roadster had performed flawlessly, he still would have been hard on it because he believes that hydrogen is the future.
I believe Bird-Person can arrange that.
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.
Electric outlets might be in a lot of places, but wiring for high power is not as ubiquitous as you'd like to think. The US power grid is already stretched pretty thin and widespread adoption of plugin vehicles would necessitate major infrastructure upgrades. The average home or even parking lot is certainly not going to be wired to refill a vehicle in 30-minutes.
Lets throw in a little basic energy math to show exactly how bad the situation is, eh? A gallon of gas is about 125 MJ or about 35 kilowatts*hours of power. Charging at a rate of "1-gallon-gas/hour" equates to 35 kilowatts (about 30 hairdryers all running at once for the blonds out there). Thus to put in "2-gallons" worth of electricity in 30 minutes requires delivering 140 kilowatts, or 583 amps on a 240 volt circuit. For comparison, pumping 4 gallons/minute at the gas station is just over 8-megawatts.
Plug-in at home vehicles are pointless if there isn't enough power available at the homes and/or enough hours in the day to get a significant charge into the vehicle.
No; Tesla babies the heck out of them. In addition to careful load balancing and charge controlling, they have a smaller depth of discharge and are highly climate controlled (some might say too much; some owners have complained that when they're not driving the car often, it can spend as much on refrigerating the pack as on driving!). Also, each cell effectively functions individually, unlike the cells in your laptop, where if one goes bad, the whole pack goes bad. Lastly, the inverter is less voltage sensitive than your laptop. It's sort of like how rechargeable NiMH batteries last for so much longer than normal alkaline AAs in a digital camera but not in a flashlight. It's not that they hold vastly more power; it's that the voltage stays higher longer. If you use normal alkaline AAs in many digital cameras, the voltage will quickly drop below what the camera can tolerate.
That battery replacement will not be neither cheap nor trivial I would assume?
Tesla offers a future replacement Roadster pack for $12,000 upfront. That's based on projected future pricing of cells, of course. For the Model S, that number is to be "well under $5,000".
I believe Bird-Person can arrange that.
Tesla decided to dump the multi-speed transmission, as the manufacturer of the tranny couldn't meet the torque and RPM specifications in the production vehicles. All sorts of finger pointing went with the issue, and it nearly took the whole company (Tesla) down with the lack of a quality transmission.
Oh, a two-speed transmission was built, but it only got a couple thousand miles on it before it had to be replaced. This blog entry goes into details on how the problem was finally "fixed", with what was a single-speed transmission.
I don't have that problem with my bike so I have an advantage when accelerating from zero.
Actually, that's only because they didn't know you were racing. Yeah, you're That Guy. Congrats.