Tesla Model S Named 'Car of the Year'

SternisheFan writes with news that Automobile Magazine has named the all-electric Tesla Model S its Car of the Year. Quoting: "We weren't expecting much from the Tesla other than some interesting dinner conversation as we considered 'real' candidates like the Subaru BRZ and the Porsche Boxster. In fact, the Tesla blew them, and us, away. Actually, the Model S can blow away almost anything. 'It's the performance that won us over,' admits editor-in-chief Jean Jennings. 'The crazy speed builds silently and then pulls back the edges of your face. It had all of us endangering our licenses.' Our Model S was of Signature Performance spec, which means its AC induction motor puts out 416 hp and that it blasts to 60 mph in 4.3 seconds. ... You'll note that we haven't even discussed Tesla's raison d'etre, which is, in Musk's words, 'To accelerate the advent of electric cars.' That's another credit to the Model S's overall execution and seductive powers. 'The electric motor does not define this car,' says Nelson. But it is, at the end of the day, what makes this very good sport sedan an absolute game changer. The Model S's range, rated by the EPA at 265 miles with the largest battery, finally fits the American conception of driving."

Comments

American concept of pricing?

[chill]

The Model S's range, rated by the EPA at 265 miles with the largest battery, finally fits the American conception of driving.

But at $78,500 before a $7,500 tax rebate that doesn't fit the American concept of pricing.

Make no mistake, I'd really love one of these. But $78,500 is pricy.

Oh, and there is that all important question of how they hold up in a hurricane. Fisker's Karmas seem to have issues with getting wet.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Model S's range, rated by the EPA at 265 miles with the largest battery, finally fits the American conception of driving.

But at $78,500 before a $7,500 tax rebate that doesn't fit the American concept of pricing.

Make no mistake, I'd really love one of these. But $78,500 is pricy.

Oh, and there is that all important question of how they hold up in a hurricane. Fisker's Karmas seem to have issues with getting wet.

Excuse me, but you're talking about yuppie Americans here. All this talk about sticker shock and total cost would imply that Americans give a shit about any number past the $399 energy-clean-bill-subsidized lease payment.

They don't.

And chances are that's exactly how it'll get pushed to the masses. Toss in a few more choice words like "tax refund" and they'll turn into a best seller.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[NeutronCowboy]

Well, it is pitched at the people who are looking at a BMW 5 series and think that it isn't advanced enough. As a result, 78K is expensive, but still within budget range.

As for the fate of the Fiskers.... they seem to be badly engineered. From what I saw in reviews, there are all kinds of engineering issues that range from how it drives to how the electrical system holds up even under normal driving. That said, I don't think I would want to submerge any of these fully electric cars. I did put down 5k to be in line for one of these babies, but I will also leave money aside to have a rock-solid gasoline-powered car that will handle the situations that the Tesla shouldn't. No need to pull all eggs in one basket.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Nadaka]

Yet it is a luxury sports sedan that has performance and amenities similar to other luxury sports sedans in its price range.

This isn't supposed to compete in price against a honda civic or aerostar minivan because it is for an entirely different market.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Turboglh]

I think this fits in fine with the American concept of pricing for vehicles in its class

Make no mistake, this is no chevy volt. It's a performance luxury sedan that happens to be electric

On the topic of the Karamas, they've had a series of fire issues. Including one recall that may or may not have solved all of the issues.

http://green.autoblog.com/2011/12/29/fisker-officially-recalls-karma-over-battery-safety-issue/
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/08/12/fisker-flambe-second-karma-spontaneously-combusts-w-video/
http://www.insideline.com/fisker/karma/uncertainty-surrounds-fisker-karma-fire-automaker-contends.html

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Ichijo]

There's also a model that's $49,900 after the federal rebate, and you can still drive it over 265 miles before it needs a gas station.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[lorenlal]

That said, I don't think I would want to submerge any of these fully electric cars. I did put down 5k to be in line for one of these babies, but I will also leave money aside to have a rock-solid gasoline-powered car that will handle the situations that the Tesla shouldn't. No need to pull all eggs in one basket.

Excuse me, but I don't like I would want to submerge *any* car of any type. Especially when you're talking about storm surge (brackish water).

Re:American concept of pricing?

[lorenlal]

s+r/like/think/g

hells bells with the quick trigger...

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Ol Biscuitbarrel]

The Karma will be the Pinto of the 21st century.

The Model S - You won't be incinerated while driving! Smooth ride!

Re:American concept of pricing?

[AaronW]

The Tesla battery design is much safer than the Fisker battery IMO. Each individual cell is protected against excessive current (shorts), under and overvoltage and that circuit is sealed inside each of the 9000 battery cells. In addition, the battery pack is designed such that if catastrophic failure occurs that the hot gases are directed away from the vehicle and occupants.

The Fisker looks really cool but it has a lot of technical issues that are still being resolved. My father owns one. The inside is really cramped despite it being such a huge car. The Tesla model S by comparison is quite roomy, though the headroom in the back seat is lacking.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Em Adespoton]

That said, I don't think I would want to submerge any of these fully electric cars. I did put down 5k to be in line for one of these babies, but I will also leave money aside to have a rock-solid gasoline-powered car that will handle the situations that the Tesla shouldn't. No need to pull all eggs in one basket.

Excuse me, but I don't like I would want to submerge *any* car of any type. Especially when you're talking about storm surge (brackish water).

You've obviously never driven the Lotus Esprit....

Re:American concept of pricing?

[tgd]

The Model S's range, rated by the EPA at 265 miles with the largest battery, finally fits the American conception of driving.

But at $78,500 before a $7,500 tax rebate that doesn't fit the American concept of pricing.

There are plenty of cars in that price range sold in the US every year -- thousands of them. And that's for the high end one. When you look in the $50k range, the number is huge in the US, especially with minivans cresting at $40k these days.

I really wanted one, but couldn't wait that long. :( Stupid waiting lists ...

Re:American concept of pricing?

[0123456]

There are plenty of cars in that price range sold in the US every year -- thousands of them.

But they don't have to stop every two or three hours to spend an hour or two recharging at one of the few charging stations available.

It's a niche toy, not a car to compete with any other $80k luxury vehicle.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anubis IV]

There's a 40 kWh model that starts at $49,900 before the rebate, but it only gets 160 miles, and there's a 60 kWh model that starts at $59,900 before the rebate, but it only gets 230 miles. I can't figure out which model you may be thinking of. Not to mention the fact that none of them actually need a gas station at all since they're electric. ;)

Re:American concept of pricing?

[robot256]

Wake me up when you're ready to compare apples to apples. There are plenty of luxury sedans and sports cars at that price range, and the Model S has more than enough features, style, and performance to match--or beat, as this award shows--every one of them. If you insist on comparing the Model S to a Toyota Camry, then I'm sorry but you're an idiot.

Musk has clearly articulated his strategy toward the electric vehicle market: Start at the high end, where the presently-high cost of batteries and the early-adopter tax can be easily absorbed. Make a car so sweet that it will fly off the lot at any price. Then once production is rolling, the technology is maturing, and costs are coming down, start removing trim features to bring the price down even further. But as long as the batteries and drive train remain expensive, it's better to sell a $60,000 luxury sedan than a $40,000 economy hatchback. Besides, he's essentially the only player in the luxury electric market. You don't expect 1-percenters to roll around in a lowly Nissan LEAF, do you?

But setting that aside, the Volt and the LEAF are not truly economy vehicles either. Both come with in-dash navigation, Bluetooth, and other advanced features as standard, and have great torque and handling, so can easily be compared to other cars in the $30-40k range. Electric cars are competitively priced if you are actually in their target market. Don't complain that you can't make your 150 mile commute on one charge, just don't buy one. The other 90% of Americans with commutes of less than 40 miles don't want you spoiling their fun.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[stephanruby]

Fisker's Karmas seem to have issues with getting wet.

If your definition of "getting wet" is getting fully immersed in salt water, then yes, most non-amphibian cars would have major "issues" with that.

Granted, the cars caught fire after the Hurricane ocean tide retracted, and after they had a chance to dry a little, and that was not good design, but you have to take into consideration that this line was a limited run of prototypes (and that this bad experience has most likely informed the entire industry).

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it more hilarious that its still a car you couldn't take a long road trip in because anything over the mileage and you would have to stop and recharge. Which is why even if it cost the same as my 30k car I would still get the gas powered car.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[ncc74656]

But at $78,500 before a $7,500 tax rebate that doesn't fit the American concept of pricing.

...not to mention that 265 miles per charge doesn't fit the American concept of usable range. I live in Las Vegas. Nothing is within 265 miles of here: not Los Angeles, not San Diego, not Phoenix, not Salt Lake City, not Reno. You might get to Kingman, Laughlin, or St. George (or even Nothing, for that matter :-) ) and back on a charge, but that's about it. I'd imagine the story's not much different anywhere else you might live.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[h4rr4r]

If you can afford an $80k vehicle you don't need to drive more than 3 hours. You can take a plane and sit in first class.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Bill_the_Engineer]

But they don't have to stop every two or three hours to spend an hour or two recharging at one of the few charging stations available.

You act like the typical driver spends more than two hours driving every day. For an overwhelming majority of people, the total time driving for an average day is well within the 2 to 3 hour mark.

Want to go on a long road trip? Well this may not be the car for you (just yet).

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I know, there's plenty of cars with that or more horsepower I could have for much less than that. Even some luxury cars like a Lexus ISF.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[amicusNYCL]

Oh, and there is that all important question of how they hold up in a hurricane.

That's not really all that important. What's more important is whether or not I have to ship the thing to California for maintenance or repairs.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Dahamma]

The Model S's range, rated by the EPA at 265 miles with the largest battery, finally fits the American conception of driving.

But at $78,500 before a $7,500 tax rebate that doesn't fit the American concept of pricing.

Make no mistake, I'd really love one of these. But $78,500 is pricy.

Actually, it's worse than that. The article was wrong, the Signature Performance model they tested (with the 4.4s 0-60 time) is $97,900 according to Tesla's site (and well over $100k with options like premium sound, extra row of seats, sunroof, etc). Even the non-signature performance model is $85k, and closer to $95k with options and charging cables. Those are right up there with a Panamera 4S.

Must be nice for those guys at Automobile magazine to get to drive cars without even having a clue how much they cost...

Re:American concept of pricing?

[skine]

It is up against cars in the same price category.

The $61k Porche Boxster isn't exactly something that your average American will buy either.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Ichijo]

Exactly. They can ALL go at least 265 miles before they need a gas station!

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Excuse me, but I don't like I would want to submerge *any* car of any type.

But when I submerge my gasoline powered Subaru in seawater, it may be totaled, but at least it doesn't burst into flames!

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Maybe for their next model Fisker will take a few design tips from this electric vehicle

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Anywhere on the East Coast the story is different.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[compro01]

Better comparison would be the Panamera rather than the Boxster. Both 4-doors and they're pretty close in price with the base model of the Porsche at $75,850 vs. $78,500 for the Model S.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[suutar]

Fits my range. I don't drive further than that unless I have to haul cargo, and for that I probably have a rented truck.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know anyone who regularly goes more than 265 miles in a non-stop trip, and all of those that do get on a plane.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Dahamma]

Though from what I have heard (from a coworker who's taking delivery of his next month) is the lower end models may not even be produced for a year or more. Tesla (understandably) is just building the higher-profit margin models as long as the demand for them is so high...

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Rob the Bold]

Oh, and there is that all important question of how they hold up in a hurricane. Fisker's Karmas seem to have issues with getting wet.

Like I mentioned in the Karma-fire discussion, you need this car to meet that requirement.

In the MIdwest, I'm more interested in how well they'd survive being thrown into a tree by a tornado.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a 40 kWh model that starts at $49,900 before the rebate, but it only gets 160 miles, and there's a 60 kWh model that starts at $59,900 before the rebate, but it only gets 230 miles.

The figures you quote are AFTER the tax rebate, not before.

http://www.teslamotors.com/models/options

See left side under 'Starting Price"

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Hatta]

Electric cars are competitively priced if you are actually in their target market.

Rich people?

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it more hilarious that its still a car you couldn't take a long road trip in because anything over the mileage and you would have to stop and recharge.

Isn't that true for every form of transport? Everything has to refuel when it runs out of fuel.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[robot256]

Electric cars are competitively priced if you are actually in their target market.

Rich people?

For this particular one, yes.

For the rest of us, look at these numbers: The Edmunds.com 5-year True Cost to Own(tm) comparing the base model Nissan Leaf to the base model Toyota Corolla, which is half the sticker price: $35,567 for the Leaf, versus $37,440 for the Corolla, in spite of the feature advantage the Leaf has.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[kf6auf]

To be fair, LA is 266 miles away from Las Vegas; drive 1mph slower and you'll make it. Alternatively, they plan to put in a fast-charge station in Barstow (152 miles away) as one of the first 6 fast-charge stations just to make sure people can make it from LA to Las Vegas.

Many families in the US have multiple cars and only take one on a road trip at a time. Most families don't need both cars to be able to go 450 miles on a tank that's fillable anywhere in 5 minutes.

Most people live on the coasts, and are a lot closer to places they'd regularly drive to. You could drive from New York City to Boston or Washington DC on a single 265 mile charge. In southern California, you could drive from LA to San Diego and back on a 265 mile charge. You could even drive around the entire San Francisco Bay Area on a single 190 mile charge (the $60,000 version).

A large number of (wealthy) people in San Francisco, New York, etc. don't even own cars. Surely if they don't need a car then a limited-range EV would satisfy their needs. Sure, EVs aren't for everyone; but a lot of US driving done with gas-powered cars could be easily done with EVs.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[BenJury]

When you do submerge your electric car, I'd imagine it won't be on fire for long...

Re:American concept of pricing?

[swillden]

Oh, and there is that all important question of how they hold up in a hurricane. Fisker's Karmas seem to have issues with getting wet.

Any reports of problems with submerged Nissan Leafs or Mitsubishi i-MiEVs?

Re:American concept of pricing?

[NeutronCowboy]

A Toyota Hilux, on the other hand, just needs to dry off a bit before driving off. God's indestructible vehicle for all purposes.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[cbhacking]

You live in the middle of the goddamn desert. The coasts are a lot more densely populated. 265 miles will almost get you from Seattle to Portland, OR - a trip I take once or twice a year - without stopping to charge. Yeah, my gasoline car gets 450 milues instead (which is high; many cars only get about 300-400) and there are more places currently where it can be recharged (fueled), but for well over 99% of the time I spend behind the wheel of my car, a total range of 100 mines would be sufficient, never mind the better part of 300.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[chill]

My angle was it was "Car of the Year". Not "Luxury Car of the Year" or "Best in Class", but "Car of the Year".

I just bought a new car last week, but my objectives were different. I drive 65 miles each way to/from work, so wanted something with top gas milage and could comfortably fit 4 people. I ended up with a 2013 VW Jetta TDI (manual transmission) and am very happy with it. I'm averaging just under 50 MPG on my commute and it cost me < $25K, including tax, tag & title.

I'd really love the Model S. Maybe in a couple years, assuming I can save my pennies.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[eddy the lip]

"Average" is a tough term, though. I don't think of the Boxster as an average vehicle. In many parts of North America range is going to be an issue, and for certain drivers, but I don't think this is being sold as a utility vehicle any more than other cars in the price range. This is aimed at people that have money for a luxury car, like performance, and aren't going to be taking it out for more than to work or a late night spin. At that, the Model S (apparently) is brilliant.

I'm not in the market for a Tesla (as far as cars they're currently putting out), but I'm damned interested in where it's going. I live in the country, make twice monthly trips into the city which is about an hour drive away. Slap this drive train and battery into something I can carry a month's worth of groceries in, and yeah, I'm interested. They can basically do that right now, it's just a matter of converting people from a pump to a charge. With less performance, an average interior and a big trunk, an electric vehicle would be ideal for me, and I'm an extremely average rural Alberta driver. I need something cheaper than the Model S, but I'm not buying any of the cars that were on the short list here, either.

Thing about vehicles is, one doesn't have to be perfect for the needs of every driver. I'm not in the market for a Dodge Ram. Doesn't mean that's not a successful truck. Sounds like the Model S is an excellent luxury car, electric or not. It hits the sweet spot for this market even though it has an entirely new way of carting all that energy around. That it's a step towards spewing less crap into the air is a nice bonus.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[drinkypoo]

My angle was it was "Car of the Year". Not "Luxury Car of the Year" or "Best in Class", but "Car of the Year".

That doesn't mean the car you should buy this year, unless you happen to be looking for a car in its class. It means the best example of what it is, the game changer, et cetera. And that award rightfully belongs to the Model S right now. If not the Model S, then the Leaf, but I have yet to hear anyone be passionate about their Leaf, only smug and/or satisfied. That's great but it's not car of the year.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[drinkypoo]

Nothing is within 265 miles of here: not Los Angeles, not San Diego, not Phoenix, not Salt Lake City, not Reno. You might get to Kingman, Laughlin, or St. George (or even Nothing, for that matter :-) ) and back on a charge, but that's about it. I'd imagine the story's not much different anywhere else you might live.

You live in one of the absolute worst-case examples, and you imagine that the story's not much different anywhere else? Obviously, you haven't been anywhere else, except maybe Texas, Montana, Kansas, or Alaska.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[drinkypoo]

If you had a telescoping snorkel, maybe. Hmm, I wonder if anyone has ever made one of those, it should be fairly trivial.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[swillden]

Electric cars are competitively priced if you are actually in their target market.

Rich people?

Not necessarily.

I'm not rich, and I just bought a Nissan Leaf after crunching the numbers very carefully. I'm far from poor, but I'm not rich. I did the math and with some reasonable (for me) assumptions over an 8-year time-horizon the Leaf was less expensive than *any* gasoline-powered car I could find. Well, any new gasoline-powered car, equipped comparably to the Leaf.

For example, the cheapest pure-gas car I looked at was a Kia Rio. $18.5K purchase price, plus sales tax less my guess at residual value after 8 years yields a net vehicle cost of $17.3K. Added to that, I calculate that I'd spend $13.2K on gas over 8 years, for a total of $30.5K. In per-mile cost, $0.32.

A better option was the Honda Insight. Price with tax of $22.5K, less tax credits estimated at $1.7K, for a net vehicle cost of just under $17.8K, but with an 8-year fuel cost of $10.5K for a total of $28.4K. $0.29 per mile.

In comparison, the Leaf costs $37.9K with tax, less $12.3K tax credits (federal and state) for a net vehicle cost of $22K. The 8-year energy cost, though, is $4.5K yielding a total of $26.6K. $0.28 per mile.

In addition, I think my Leaf will have significantly lower maintenance costs over the 8-year period, so it's a little better than the numbers above show.

However, there's also the downside that my calculations assume I need an additional gasoline-powered vehicle for trips which exceed the electric range. In my case that's the case, and will be (in fact, the Leaf's "energy" cost above is actually a mix of electricity for the Leaf and gasoline for my Saturn Ion).

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Model S's range, rated by the EPA at 265 miles with the largest battery, finally fits the American conception of driving.

But at $78,500 before a $7,500 tax rebate that doesn't fit the American concept of pricing.

For a sports sedan?? Uh YAH it does.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wake me up when you're ready to compare apples to apples. There are plenty of luxury sedans and sports cars at that price range, and the Model S has more than enough features, style, and performance to match--or beat, as this award shows--every one of them. If you insist on comparing the Model S to a Toyota Camry, then I'm sorry but you're an idiot.

Musk has clearly articulated his strategy toward the electric vehicle market: Start at the high end, where the presently-high cost of batteries and the early-adopter tax can be easily absorbed. Make a car so sweet that it will fly off the lot at any price. Then once production is rolling, the technology is maturing, and costs are coming down, start removing trim features to bring the price down even further. But as long as the batteries and drive train remain expensive, it's better to sell a $60,000 luxury sedan than a $40,000 economy hatchback. Besides, he's essentially the only player in the luxury electric market. You don't expect 1-percenters to roll around in a lowly Nissan LEAF, do you?

But setting that aside, the Volt and the LEAF are not truly economy vehicles either. Both come with in-dash navigation, Bluetooth, and other advanced features as standard, and have great torque and handling, so can easily be compared to other cars in the $30-40k range. Electric cars are competitively priced if you are actually in their target market. Don't complain that you can't make your 150 mile commute on one charge, just don't buy one. The other 90% of Americans with commutes of less than 40 miles don't want you spoiling their fun.

Just like Mac v. PC, I can already hear the whining "but I don't want bluetooth anyway, and my $20,000 Mustang is faster and cheaper so Volt sux."
The only classes these morons know are "what I can afford" and "over priced".

There is no sense in explaining the value, because if they're not in the target market - "they don't need it anyway"

Re:American concept of pricing?

[reboot246]

I can refuel in just a few minutes. How long does it take to recharge the Tesla Model S?

I have driven 300 miles to a job and then worked all day out of my vehicle. I don't think our customers would be happy if I had to sit and wait for my vehicle to recharge.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[skine]

Good point.

I only used the Boxster, since it was mentioned in TFA.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[evilviper]

I live in Las Vegas. Nothing is within 265 miles of here:

So go buy a Chevy Volt and be quiet while the adults are talking. I know, it's horrible that not all cars are made to fit YOU personally, but it happens.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anonymous Coward]

...not to mention that 265 miles per charge doesn't fit the American concept of usable range. I live in Las Vegas. Nothing is within 265 miles of here: not Los Angeles, not San Diego, not Phoenix, not Salt Lake City, not Reno. You might get to Kingman, Laughlin, or St. George (or even Nothing, for that matter :-) ) and back on a charge, but that's about it. I'd imagine the story's not much different anywhere else you might live.

Of course since there are free (for Model S owners) superchargers already deployed in California. You can actually drive from Las Vegas to LA, San Diego, San Francisco or even Tahoe today in a Model S with a 30 minute stop at a supercharger.
In the next few years Tesla will be adding hundreds more superchargers throughout the entire nation.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[TheLink]

Of course. Many 4WDs have them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmldDB7Tly0

See also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkTw7J-hGmg

But this is crazy since the car definitely isn't designed for it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FN6apdmKOLs

Re:American concept of pricing?

[AmiMoJo]

It would probably be cheaper to just rent a petrol car when you need one, rather than store and maintain one yourself.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[AmiMoJo]

But they don't have to stop every two or three hours to spend an hour or two recharging at one of the few charging stations available.

1. Fast charging to 80% capacity takes 30 minutes.

2. You should not drive for 3+ hours without taking a break anyway, it is dangerous no matter how good you think you are.

3. Just hire a petrol car for your road trip if it is really that much of a problem.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[iamhassi]

If these can be had at $399 a month then that needs to be emphasized in every review just like they mention the $7,000 tax incentive. They're not going to get anyone to look twice at this thing when they throw out numbers typical of Porsche price tags and look at how many of those you see daily. "Faster than BLANK" is nice, but it should be for $78,000, and your average american is concerned about monthly price more than 0-60. They need an everyman car if they expect to survive, something sexier than the Nissan Leaf but priced like a Camry or Taurus. And automobile always chooses silly concept-type cars as car of the year, last year it was the Chevy Volt.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[iamhassi]

It would probably be cheaper to just rent a petrol car when you need one, rather than store and maintain one yourself.

This. A few hundred dollars should allow you to rent most gasoline vehicles for at least a week, which is probably less then just one year of insurance, taxes and/or registration. But nothing beats the convenience of having a 2nd vehicle ready to go 24/7, so I can't blame someone for keeping a ten yr old Accord or 4runner around.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[dkf]

I live in Las Vegas.

Not exactly living in a population-weighted average location, I see...

Re:American concept of pricing?

[tinkerton]

My guess is someone who enjoys a boxster or a BRZ usually isn't interested in driving a 4600 pound car. It's fat. It can only drive straight. It's a dragster without the excitement of the sound. Maybe some people who own 911 to show off in might switch to a Tesla, but a BRZ is a budget car, and a boxster is a budget Porsche.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Smauler]

Most old diesels can run submerged fine, all you need is an air intake. Lots of old land rovers have things like these.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[drinkypoo]

Of course. Many 4WDs have them.

Reading comprehension failure: Telescoping snorkel. HTH, HAND.

As for vehicles not being designed for it, there's definitely a lot of work to do if you want to submerge a vehicle without causing problems. Fuel tank valves, axle vents, vents on electronics, etc etc. And the intake had better be sealed tight, e.g. with RTV. And I have a turbocharger, and it's best to assume that will die if you get it in the water, which it will if it's hot at the time. I'd want to replace every slip fitting with a thread fitting, etc etc.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Water submerging doesn't matter if it's gas or electric. If your car gets submerged up to the dashboard in water, it's considered totaled by most if not all insurance companies.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[elashish14]

Tesla is based in Palo Alto, and they're building charging stations in California. However that's still a lot better than Las Vegas.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[TheLink]

But there's no need for a telescoping snorkel for the car to submerge.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[drinkypoo]

But there's no need for a telescoping snorkel for the car to submerge.

Depends on how much water you're talking about. I've never seen a snorkel that was actually above the top of the vehicle, except for the removable one for the humvee.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anonymous Coward]

To corroborate your statement: while finishing college, I worked in insurance claims. The rule of thumb was: if water gets to the dashboard (salt or fresh), send it to the salvage yard; it's not worth repairing.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[amorsen]

If you are buying a $80k car, it probably isn't the only car in your household.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Shirley Marquez]

Having a Zipcar down the street can also solve the "ready to go 24/7" problem; if your need for an extra car is occasional it's much cheaper than owning another car. Especially since if you live in the kind of urban area where there is a Zipcar down the street, insurance is expensive even for a car that is rarely driven.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[HungWeiLo]

Seattle to Portland is only 174 miles one way.

Re:American concept of pricing?

[Anubis IV]

Ah, yep, I missed that little piece of text there when I was reading that page. Thanks for pointing that out.

I just have to wonder...

[ModernGeek]

is this the first car to make "Car of the Year" in a major publication that isn't even being mass produced?

Re:I just have to wonder...

[GodfatherofSoul]

I imagine the first fusion-powered car will make it as well.

Re:I just have to wonder...

[ModernGeek]

2010 called, it wants my knee-jerk reaction back. Looks like it is mass produced..

Re:I just have to wonder...

[mfh]

I imagine the first fusion-powered car will make it as well.

Fusion powered cars give me the weirdest boner. Like a car that could operate for a hundred years without any fuel... is just plain sexy!!! I could program my car to drive nonstop and I would never have to pay for rent as long as I stayed off toll-roads.

Re:I just have to wonder...

[Anonymous Coward]

It is hand crafted, inch by inch. Not mass produced.

Re:I just have to wonder...

[Anonymous Coward]

nope, the decay products will poison your fuel cycle. Sorry.

Re:I just have to wonder...

[Noughmad]

I imagine the first fusion-powered car will make it as well.

Fusion powered cars give me the weirdest boner. Like a car that could operate for a hundred years without any fuel... is just plain sexy!!! I could program my car to drive nonstop and I would never have to pay for rent as long as I stayed off toll-roads.

What, don't tell me the fusion-powered car won't be flying. It has to be, they promised it.

Re:I just have to wonder...

[Anonymous Coward]

It absolutely is not mass produced, by any automotive industry standards. These are one off low volume cars.

Re:I just have to wonder...

[Abreu]

It is hand crafted, inch by inch. Not mass produced.

Like a Rolls-Royce?

Re:I just have to wonder...

[Teancum]

I'd be curious what sort of fusion powering device you are thinking of here? There is no bloody way that a Tokamak style reactor could ever fit inside of anything smaller than the mobile launch platform that was used for the Space Shuttle, although the Polywell and Focus Fusion devices might be able to fit inside of a mid to large size ship (like a modern military submarine, aircraft carrier, or cruise ship). It is a matter of physics and being able to handle the plasma needed to cause fusion in the first place, where you also need to have enough equipment to be able to do something useful with that energy when it is produced in the reactor.

Robert Bussard suggested that a 5th or 6th generation Polywell (aka after it is already producing energy commercially in fixed location facilities like an electric generator plant and a few generations past that) might be refined to fit in the back of a semi-tractor truck and have room left over for cargo.

Perhaps in another 1000 years there might be some other breakthrough in physics that might permit something like Mr. Fusion from the Back to the Future movies, but don't go holding your breath.

P.S. don't get caught up in the scam called the E-Cat or other kinds of systems... almost all stuff of that nature is a scam or people under a strong delusion of seeing things that don't exist. "Cold fusion" might have some promise as a neutron source, but not for net gain in energy. A Farnsworth-Hirsch Fusor works better for stuff like that anyway.

Re:I just have to wonder...

[GodfatherofSoul]

Wow, what a Slashdot response lol. I was just making the point that a revolutionary technology is probably going to garner awards regardless of a limited market.

"Model S"

[mfh]

Did anyone else get the "Model T" reference? Like Tesla is taking a step back from the harmful environmentally dangerous combustion vehicles and redoing the whole thing. I have to admit this impresses me.

I bet we'll look back in few hundred years from within the confines of our brain jars and enjoy some very fine dream-inspired brandies and smoke about the wonders of the physical world and how foolish we were to think that was a good place to dwell for all eternity.

But until then let's enjoy these new environmentally friendly cars! To go from nowhere to nowhere for no reason other than your boss wants you to, and doing it all in style, without a bad environmental footprint apart from the scrap metal each of these will become one day.

Re:"Model S"

[Anonymous Coward]

42% of electricity is generated from coal. You've still got a bad environmental footprint. You're just not polluting your immediate area.

Re:"Model S"

[Attila Dimedici]

You know I overlooked that. That is very appropriate, since the Model T is what killed off the electric car about 100 years ago. I know they are trying to imply that they are at the same point in the development of the electric car that the Model T was in the development of the ICE car, but it just took 100 years longer.

Re:"Model S"

[mrjatsun]

You must work for an oil company :-) The important thing here is energy diversity. With an
all electric drive train, you can be powered from Nuclear, hydro, wind, solar, gas/diesel/biodesel,
coal, alcohol, etc. You also have the long term ability to provide your own power (e.g. solar)
instead of relying large multinational companies to do it for you with many layers of companies
taking a piece of the pie (including stock market shenanigans).

The idea car for me would be a car with an all electric drive-train, batteries for short
trips, and a multifuel small generator in the car. I'm not holding my breath. It would
disrupt too many very rich companies.

Re:"Model S"

[rhakka]

if you're in maine, half of your power is renewables and hydro and the other half is mostly natural gas. so... kind of depends where you live.

Re:"Model S"

[_UnderTow_]

From what I understand, most of the energy generated by an internal combustion engine is waste heat. Power plants (even ones that burn coal) are much more efficient. With an electric car, more of the energy released from burning fuel is used to actually move the car.

Re:"Model S"

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Putting the generator in the car is too heavy. Just add a class I trailer hitch and put the generator on a hitch rack for long trips.

Re:"Model S"

[Marxist Hacker 42]

More the same point in the development of batteries. The actual engine is 25 year old tech.

Re:"Model S"

[Teancum]

In terms of energy independence, coal is at least something you can get from parts of the world that aren't ready to blow up into open warfare. On top of that, you actually have a smaller environmental footprint generating the same amount of power from a large-scale coal plant than you would from a couple thousand automobiles.

On top of that, you aren't stuck with just one source of supplying that energy as almost anything which can turn a generator shaft is all you need to generate electricity. As an excuse for why you shouldn't buy an electric automobile, complaining about the "carbon footprint" of a coal power plant is about as lame as it gets. If you don't like coal plants, encourage policy makers (aka your state legislature or municipal power operators) to try alternative energy generation techniques.

Re:"Model S"

[TrekkieTechie]

a car with an all electric drive-train, batteries for short trips, and a multifuel small generator in the car.

So... a Chevy Volt, then.

Admittedly, it's not "multifuel", but that seems a minor quibble.

Re:"Model S"

[drinkypoo]

Probably nine out of ten drivers in the USA would fail horribly with a trailer.

Okay, eight of ten. But you can only have that one.

Fast charge or bust. But I appreciate the early adopters.

Re:"Model S"

[fnj]

It's also a piece of garbage with a laughably small range on electric and substandard fuel economy for its class on gasoline. Not too surprising that trying to build two cars in one ends up giving you one shitty car that is fantastically overpriced.

Re:"Model S"

[epp_b]

Uh-huh.

All that super-clean mining, transporting of minerals all around the world, processing and manufacturing that is required for the batteries. From where do you think the power to recharge that battery twice a day comes? Fairy dust and unicorn farts?

And don't forget, the battery is only going to last a few years. Compare that to a typical gas or diesel car, which can easily last for decades with proper maintenance.

At best, electric cars are just shuffling pollution around, if not making the problem worse. Just because you can't see and smell it coming out the back of your car doesn't mean it isn't somewhere.

There's no such thing as pollution-free energy, and the notion of powering cars by electricity is certainly no more ingenious than that of by gas or diesel. But it's a whole lot easier to sell to the eco-hipster market, as most people are too lazy to research anything beyond what is presented to them.

Just showing up is 90 per cent

[Anonymous Coward]

1) Tesla is leading the electric-car market mindshare for the simple reason that they've actually shipped a product, unlike perpetual bullshit machines BYD and Coda, who ship nothing but vaporware (wait, no - I think BYD eventually managed to get a few dozen out the door a few months ago, or something like that).

2) Think and Smart are/were doomed because they shipped crap that no-one was interested in. WTF is a "neighborhood electric vehicle"? I want a fucking ELECTRIC CAR, not a low-speed electric shitbox.

3) Series hybrids have a niche (garbage trucks and buses, mostly), and passenger cars are not that niche. This is why the Volt and Karma are failures.

4) Where are the lithium-air batteries?

5) The E 300 Bluetec HYBRID is cool.

Re:Just showing up is 90 per cent

[AaronW]

I was looking into Tesla's patents out of curiosity a few weeks ago and saw that they have a lot of patents regarding lithium-air batteries. It looks like they have looked long and hard at them and come up with ways to address their strengths and weaknesses, even though LABs are probably years away from production.

Re:Just showing up is 90 per cent

[Anonymous Coward]

3) Series hybrids have a niche (garbage trucks and buses, mostly), and passenger cars are not that niche. This is why the Volt and Karma are failures.

What? Can you expand on that? Why is the Volt's setup unsuitable for a passenger car, exactly?

Re:Just showing up is 90 per cent

[Anonymous Coward]

Electric vehicles have been around for 115 years. Tesla is just a hype machine sucking money from wealthy people. Take another company's car, slap in a load of laptop batteries, triple the price, and hope suckers come to your door.

If they were interested in energy efficient new vehicle design, they're scrap the battery, use the proven electric motor tech, and use a simple petrol engine to generate the power. My uni made one from a Ford Escort as a design project, nothing special. Only needed a 650cc engine to outperform and be more fuel efficient that the designers from Ford. It also massively reduced the complexity of the design by throwing away the standard drive train, hugely reducing servicing costs. Now if a bunch of spotty dweebs can do this, why can't the professionals in the industry? A: Money. It's not about making efficient transport, it's marketing and built-in failures to make yet more money.

Re:Just showing up is 90 per cent

[CohibaVancouver]

Think and Smart are/were doomed because they shipped crap that no-one was interested in.

Dunno what a "Think" is, but where I live (Vancouver, Canada) smart cars are everywhere, and this Spring, electric smarts will hit the road.

Re:Just showing up is 90 per cent

[rsborg]

3) Series hybrids have a niche (garbage trucks and buses, mostly), and passenger cars are not that niche. This is why the Volt and Karma are failures.

The Karma is a mess of problems, but the Volt is not a failure by any stretch of the imagination [1]. Sure it doesn't have the hype that the Prius did back in 2004, but it's a 40 mile ranged electric car that solves the range problem by including a gas-engine powerplant.

I do concede that the Model S is drool-worthy and I'd prefer one, but I've seen Volts around where I live and they're snappy, quiet, look nice and cost half as much as the Tesla... oh, and they have zero range problems as they reuse the existing petrol-distribution network. Definitely a geek status symbol (just not as big as the Tesla).

[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2012/09/24/august-chevrolet-volt-sales-redefine-failure/

I wonder...

[mschaffer]

I wonder if the Tesla cars have the same "hydrophobia" as the Fisker Karma ones that went up in flames in the flooding from Hurricane Sandy?

Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[fyngyrz]

I agree, except I'd go a little further to say that $78k is ridiculous.

Wake me up when an electric car is $20k new - it's a motor, controller and a chassis, for crying out loud. Built by non-union robots. Said pricing probably isn't going to happen unless we can roll back quite a few government mommy laws, but I can wait them out. If they never make a reasonably priced electric car, I just won't buy one.

Personally, I feel there are far better things to spend money on than expensive cars, considering there are inexpensive ones to be had that are truly serviceable, particularly in the used market.

Musk has said that his intention is to end up manufacturing a truly affordable electric car, and that this stage (the model S) isn't that; I'll take him at his word. Maybe next time! :)

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Guspaz]

Hybrid electric cars like the Prius C are $20k new, but that's not exactly what you're asking about, I realize.

The battery is a big factor in the Model S' cost. 85 kilowatts of lithium ion batteries ain't cheap.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[tgd]

Hybrid electric cars like the Prius C are $20k new, but that's not exactly what you're asking about, I realize.

The battery is a big factor in the Model S' cost. 85 kilowatts of lithium ion batteries ain't cheap.

The Prius isn't really electric in any sense. Its an Atkinson Cycle car, with a battery and electric motor to make it usable in the real world. There's a reason it can't go highway speeds on electric. That's true of all the hybrids. The Volt is the only non-pure-EV that is really still an EV.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[NeutronCowboy]

Maybe next time!

Not maybe, that's exactly the plan. Notice the trajectory here:
1) Tesla Roadster: Take a standard chassis, turn it into an electric car, sell as a high-performance roadster to people with ludicrous money lying around. The goal: to have a car prove the key technology: the battery and the engine.
2) Model S/X: Take the proven technology of the Roadster, put it into a sexy car that causes rich people to open their wallets, and sell it at a nice markup in the luxury segment. The goal: to work out the kinks in their manufacturing equipment and their supply chain.
3) Take their proven technology and manufacturing capability to create an electric for everybody.

In essence, Musk is doing a slow ramp-up that allows him to have customers subsidize the development of their final car. The 5k downpayment for a Model S is just as brilliant: it's free money for Tesla to build out their manufacturing capability. I love the Model S as a car, but it's the business model and the man at the top that makes think that Tesla is going to be the game changer for electric cars. The comparisons to Steve Jobs are not unwarranted.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[lurk and pounce]

You're an idiot. The high cost has almost nothing to do with cost of construction labor, government mommy laws, or union vs. non-union labor. Quite simply the cost is high because the R&D hasn't been amortized yet over several decades of production. Additionally, the Tesla would almost certainly not exists were it not for grants and subsidies from the same "government" you allude/whine about. Shut up and consider yourself lucky to pay taxes to a government that offers you an almost historically unprecedented quality of life. Government and private industry both largely employ the same type of people, except the private industry ones expect to get paid 50-1000% percent more. Talk about waste of money... Why is it when people talk about private industry as a "unit" to praise its efficiency, etc. they don't somehow include how most business fail, and the time and money wasted as a result. /rant

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[GrumpySteen]

Wake me up when an electric car is $20k new

http://i.mitsubishicars.com/

$21.625 after the tax credit. So... wake up.

it's a motor, controller and a chassis, for crying out loud.

And a very expensive battery. The Nissan Leaf's battery costs http://green.autoblog.com/2010/05/15/nissan-leaf-profitable-by-year-three-battery-cost-closer-to-18/">$18,000 to produce. This is why you don't see really good electric cars at that low of a price point. Fortunately, we have people making electric sports cars and they will help drive the advances in battery technology, eventually leading to cheaper, better batteries and cheaper electric cars.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[GrumpySteen]

Screwed that link, didn't I.

http://green.autoblog.com/2010/05/15/nissan-leaf-profitable-by-year-three-battery-cost-closer-to-18/

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a c. Accelerating fast is something it doesn't do. The 1st gen was faster.
It does pull in 70mpg+ at speeds under 60mph though.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Teancum]

While $20k for a new automobile may be your price point for purchasing one of these vehicles, why do you think this is a ridiculous price? Dismissing the cost here as if Tesla was somehow gouging the customers and that they have maybe $5k worth of parts and engineering in this vehicle is sort of absurd on your part.

There are some incredibly cheap electric automobiles including Zap Jonway, who sells an incredibly cheap electric vehicle. They don't have the performance of Tesla vehicles though. You could also get a golf cart if you don't want to worry about any sort of performance.

As for used vehicles, thanks for the "cash for clunker" program of Obama there are considerably fewer of those vehicles around to buy and their price is currently quite a bit higher... if you can even find them. Yes, there are "used" or "pre-owned" vehicles, but you can't find any $100 or $200 vehicles any more that you can take apart just for parts or spend a summer trying to rebuild.

The market that Telsa is going for right now are those who in America would normally be buying a BMW or Lexus, where $78k is typical.... perhaps a bit high but not too much. With the performance and the kind of interior work that you get with the Model S, I think it is priced about right and perhaps even a bargain for an electric automobile. If it doesn't fit your budget, don't be complaining.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Given that- and the time it has been since the Roadster came out- then for my 65th birthday I'll be able to afford a 2nd hand Tesla.

I turn 42 in two weeks.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Krojack]

Plus the Prius is uglier than my ass. And my ass is hairy and ugly.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you find Audi A8s to be ridiculously priced as well? How about the BMW M5? Or maybe the Maserati Quatroporte.

It's a luxury high-performance sedan that just happens to have an electric motor instead of an ICE. If you want something cheap then lease a Nissan Leaf for $219 per month.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[LateArthurDent]

Musk has said that his intention is to end up manufacturing a truly affordable electric car, and that this stage (the model S) isn't that; I'll take him at his word. Maybe next time! :)

To be fair, he's going about it the right way. He's bringing costs down by manufacturing an expensive vehicle for those that can afford it. The Model S is not only a much better car than the Roadster, it's also significantly cheaper. The Model X also looks fantastic. I imagine in another 5-7 years you'll get your $20k Tesla announced.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[suutar]

although with those crushed silicon anodes from that other slashdot story, they may get a lot cheaper in a couple of years. Just in time for my wife and I to pay off her car and be ready for a new one for me :)

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Guspaz]

The Prius C is a hybrid Yaris, and the Yaris (and other names in other countries) is one of the best-selling car lines in the world... I don't think the general consensus would agree with your opinion of the appearance of the Prius C.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Guspaz]

You're replying to the wrong person. I never said the Model S was overpriced. I think it's appropriately priced for the market it's in.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it is more for the "I've got so much money I can buy things like this and you can't" crowd.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[karnal]

"Best selling" doesn't mean "most popular appearance." It might mean "within the reach of most people's financial ability."

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[flyingsquid]

I agree, except I'd go a little further to say that $78k is ridiculous.

Wake me up when an electric car is $20k new - it's a motor, controller and a chassis, for crying out loud.

When new technologies are being introduced, they are inevitably going to be expensive. When PCs were first introduced, they were out of the reach of most consumers. The original Apple II cost $1300 dollars in 1977. Inflation adjusted, that is $5000 in 2012 dollars. And that's without a monitor. Now, manufacturing capabilities have improved and benefit from economies of scale, and you can get a far more capable computer for a few hundred dollars. TVs show the same pattern. The first color TV cost $1295 in 1954, over $10,000 in 2012 dollars.

Electric cars will follow the same trajectory as computers and color TVs- initially they will be luxury goods, and only a handful of people will be able to afford them. Eventually, the price will come down, and they will be within the reach of the average consumer. Tesla's goal is to make those cars, but since the technology is still so expensive, it makes more economic sense to develop and market a car aimed at the sports car market, rather than a conventional automobile. As the technology matures and manufacturing processes improve, the hope is ultimately to develop and sell affordable, mass-market electric cars.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[fyngyrz]

$21.625 after the tax credit. So... wake up.

I don't consider that an adequately sized car. When I say "car", I'm talking a traditional sedan.

No offense if you like very small cars. But I don't, and I wouldn't buy one.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Guspaz]

True, but "uglier than my ass" is not something I've heard typically used to describe the Yaris. It doesn't look anything like the original Prius.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[fyngyrz]

I think the price is ridiculous because I can buy a decent car for a lot less than that, that's all.

Buying at that price make no economic sense; and that's one of the metrics I use when selecting an automobile. Pretty much that simple.

If someone wants to pay that kind of money for a car, they're using metrics other than economic to make their selection. That's why I say this is luxury territory. It's a luxury car, plain and simple.

As for used vehicles, thanks for the "cash for clunker" program of Obama there are considerably fewer of those vehicles around to buy and their price is currently quite a bit higher... if you can even find them.

Well... not that hard. I recently (January/2012) bought a full-sized pickup for $1000. Runs perfectly, probably has many years of life left in it. So far, my only investment has been a $2.00 pushbutton to serve as the starter relay drive in lieu of the ignition switch, which went nipples north one morning.

If it doesn't fit your budget, don't be complaining.

Not complaining. Just not buying, and indicating where I sit, and what would entice me to buy. That's why my post was titled "Exactly. 78k is luxury territory" As you might imagine, a car I have zero interest in isn't exactly in the running for my own candidates for "car of the year", lol

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[fyngyrz]

Well, maybe. I could buy it easily, without resorting to a loan or a trade-in. I just wouldn't. From my POV, that's about 58k that I would be using very, very poorly, and that's not part of my approach to life. All I have to do is consider what great things can be done with 58k; things that would have far more lifespan and day to day use than a car, too. To me, that car simply makes no economic sense.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Anonymous Coward]

You're an idiot. The high cost has almost nothing to do with cost of construction labor, government mommy laws, or union vs. non-union labor. Quite simply the cost is high because the R&D hasn't been amortized yet over several decades of production. Additionally, the Tesla would almost certainly not exists were it not for grants and subsidies from the same "government" you allude/whine about.

As I read the first sentences of your post, I was all about modding you up - because I was waiting for a punchline. It never came. Apparently, you think that a non-cash expense has a major effect on product pricing. Sorry, you're the idiot.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[fyngyrz]

When new technologies are being introduced, they are inevitably going to be expensive.

Yes, ok. Well, let's see. Electric cars were introduced in... 1828.

...

Ok, kidding. Yes, and I'm waiting. I'd really like one of these in electric, with a range of, oh, say 20 miles or more.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[GrumpySteen]

You get what you ask for. If you say "burger" and mean "triple patty with extra cheese", you're going to be disappointed in the result.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[drinkypoo]

Given that- and the time it has been since the Roadster came out- then for my 65th birthday I'll be able to afford a 2nd hand Tesla.

I turn 42 in two weeks.

Well, either electrify something old yourself (like a triumph, MR2, lotus if you can afford one, VW bug if you can't) and live the dream. These days it's a matter of purchasing components and plugging them together. Well, you may have to make some cables.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[fyngyrz]

Ah. Now we're cooking. Car::food analogies!

I would contend a normal sedan is a burger. A triple patty with cheese is a corvette, a steak dinner is a Lamboghini, and an all-out crazed no-holds-barred feed-fest with champagne is a Rolls. A good convertible is a chicken sandwich without the top bun. That would make Tesla S... about a double patty, but with special cheese.

One of those bubbles with wheels is more like a half a McNugget, with no sweet and sour sauce, where every time you try to eat it, your fingers get stuck in the cardboard. And just when you think you've got it handled, the dog steps on it and ruins your meal.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Lord Dreamshaper]

My job requires a car. My priority is to buy as small a car as I can (still need to fit wife and kids and groceries after work) with an emphasis on fuel-efficiency. Then I drive the snot out of it for as many years as I can until it's not worth maintaining or reselling. Lather, rinse, repeat.

For what I spend on gas, over the typical lifetime of my vehicles, the huge purchase price is almost negated by the lack of gas bills. Only the annual trip to and from the inlaws would be cumbersome as I would apparently need 2 one-hour stops to recharge, one of which would be a meal break anyway.

tl; dr: If forced to, I could live with the pricing now for luxury I don't want; if they could afford to create a comparable middle-class version, it would be a no-brainer for me and I'd buy one *right now*.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Teancum]

I think the price is ridiculous because I can buy a decent car for a lot less than that, that's all.

Buying at that price make no economic sense; and that's one of the metrics I use when selecting an automobile. Pretty much that simple.

Again, this is likely a car you would never buy even if it was strictly an ordinary internal combustion engine vehicle with the same kind of engineering and styling. What you think is a decent car would likely not be a luxury sedan that would be purchased by a well-paid professional (aka full-partner lawyer or senior physician with an established practice). That is the market which Tesla is targeting.

This is even a pretty reasonable strategy where Tesla is trying to skim off the boutique market of well heeled customers that are less concerned about price but more concerned about creature comforts. The market for buyers of those kind of automobiles is rather small (just a few thousand cars at the high end... which is where they were selling the Roadster). The Model S is admittedly the next tier down from the very high end cars, but then again Tesla seems to have a factory which can ramp up production considerably as well as expand if necessary.

Trying to build this mass consumer automobile you are expecting them to make takes an insane amount of capital... which is one of the reasons why America has had only three auto manufactures for many decades. Frankly it is amazing that Tesla was able to not only design these vehicles but get through the whole U.S. Department of Transportation certification process to get these vehicles into serial production. Few other companies making electric automobiles have been able to get that accomplished, including the "big boys" like General Motors.

Hopefully this Model S will start to sell in the range of 20k-50k vehicles per year for a couple of years.... which will give Tesla the cash needed to expand and get those cheaper vehicles you are hoping for. This is an issue purely of economics, where the margins needed to build the lower price cars are much thinner and simply need a much larger volume of production in order to make a profit.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you find Audi A8s to be ridiculously priced as well? How about the BMW M5? Or maybe the Maserati Quatroporte.

Yes.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Provocateur]

You left out 4. Profit!!!

*sigh* must I remind you next time?

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[AmiMoJo]

The Prius can do 62MPH on its electric motor alone. I have been looking at getting one because I could probably drive to work on the battery alone. By most people's definition it is a true hybrid.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Twinbee]

I love the way we're talking about car power in kW rather than horsepower, at last.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[iamhassi]

After $7,500 tax credit, assuming purchaser is paying $7,500 a year in taxes, and it's been widely reported that half of America doesn't earn enough to pay federal taxes. You can't get back $7,500 if you didn't pay it to begin with.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[horza]

The engine kicks in almost straight away. No real chance you will drive to work on electric. The only real advantage is the engine is off when sitting in traffic. Fuel efficiency is ok, nothing amazing. Nowhere near what is advertised. The worst is that you cannot plug it in to recharge, you MUST charge via the motor. Any attempt to charge directly voids your warranty.

Phillip.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[MrTremere]

I love my Volt!

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[AmiMoJo]

The plug-in version has an electric range of 12 miles, but careful driving will get you more. I could get to work on electric alone.

http://www.toyota.co.uk/cgi-bin/toyota/bv/frame_start.jsp?id=CC2-Prius-Plug-landing

Protip: Google before making a prat of yourself.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Man On Pink Corner]

Why is it when people talk about private industry as a "unit" to praise its efficiency, etc. they don't somehow include how most business fail,

Why is it that people like yourself don't understand that failure is a beneficial feature of a market economy, and not a bug?

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[amorsen]

tl; dr: If forced to, I could live with the pricing now for luxury I don't want; if they could afford to create a comparable middle-class version, it would be a no-brainer for me and I'd buy one *right now*.

Cutting out the luxury has been done by every other electric car manufacturer. As it turns out, cutting the luxury only saves perhaps $10k. After that you start cutting necessities, like reasonable performance and heating and range.

I have recently compared the cost of batteries for saving solar power. Buying a Tesla Model S and taking the batteries, throwing the actual car bit away, is actually cost competitive to buying batteries off-the-shelf. I do not know how they achieve such amazing pricing, but they must have a fantastic deal with their battery supplier.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Man On Pink Corner]

Given that- and the time it has been since the Roadster came out- then for my 65th birthday I'll be able to afford a 2nd hand Tesla.

So how's that Marxism thing working out for you?

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Shirley Marquez]

It's not clear whether Tesla's path to the masses will ever involve ramping up production to that extent. It might instead involve licensing technology to companies that are already in the business of mass production of cars.

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Guspaz]

Well, I actually should have said "85 kilowatt hours" :P The engine itself is actually 310 kilowatts in the performance model, or 270 kilowatts in the regular model.

For comparison, the Leaf is 80 kW, the Volt is split into one 111 kW and one 55kW, and the Prius C is 45 kW (for the electric motor only).

Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Badly, which is why I've moved on to Chestertonian distributism. See my tag line- Tendence Reinhard, not Tendance Karl.

Pfff

[Anonymous Coward]

Greenwash.

Short out any large battery and watch the result

[Viol8]

And the fisker has a VERY large battery. You'd hope for some short protection but obviously they didn't design for it being submerged. I'd be interested to know what happens if a Prius is submerged.

Dip them in salt water...

[Anonymous Coward]

... and hopefully they will burn to the ground in a hilarious mess. That's totally worth car of the year!

Does it have the same battery as Fisker?

[Anonymous Coward]

I read yesterday that a hundred Fiskers were flooded W/salt water by Sandy and they all caught fire afterwards

Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[GoodNewsJimDotCom]

If price of the electric car > Price of cheap gas fueled car + 200,000 miles of gasoline then don't buy

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Anonymous Coward]

If price of the electric car > Price of cheap gas fueled car + 200,000 miles of gasoline then don't buy

You missed the point of this. They weren't comparing this electric car to a Geo or something. They compared it to a Porsche and a BMW, and it kicked their A$$...

The real point is that a gasoline powered sports car has trouble competing with this electric car. So let me know when Porsche comes up with something that can compete with this on performance...

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[tgd]

If price of the electric car > Price of cheap gas fueled car + 200,000 miles of gasoline then don't buy

If economics are how you judge a vehicle, spending anything more than a couple grand on a used car is a bad decision for you.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, based on THAT theory, then the price is getting close. My Lexus hybrid CT200h gets a consistent 39 miles/gallon. At the current $4.17/gall, that works out to $21,834 for gas, plus approx $35,000 for the car = $56,384. Not quite 78k, but that would mean a non-hybrid like the Audi A3 I had that got a very consistent 24 mpg comes to $34,750 for gas and $33,000 for the car = $67,750. Let's see - a Camry is not much cheaper in purchase price, and is similar to the Audi in consumption.

So, $78k is still on the high side, but getting very much closer to making sense... and that doesn't take into account maintenance (is it going to be cheaper to maintain without an internal combustion engine?), depreciation, etc.

Ben

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[h4rr4r]

It's a luxury car.

Cheap gas fueled car is not going to be an option anyone buying this considered. A BMW 5 is not cheap.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me know when Tesla comes up with something that can compete with a Geo.

(No really, an affordable all electric that I can fit into would be fantastic and I'd like you to tell me about it)

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Dahamma]

Problem is they compared a $100k car (not $78k at they claimed) to a Boxster. At that price they should be comparing it to a Panamera or Carrera S.

Not that I'm knocking the car, though, it's a great car and a great milestone for the industry. It's just at that price it's really not any more accessible to the average driver than the Tesla Roadster or a Fisker.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[GoodNewsJimDotCom]

I'm all for Tesla, I have a friend that works there. Selling these high class cars gets the technology better so things will be cheaper down the line. I'm hoping someday the electric car is also the economical choice. Once you can have a plug in car, you save a great deal on refueling, and it starts encouraging people to buy solar panels and the electric company to upgrade the grid.

I'm really happy for the technology to keep rolling forward, and maybe someday the electric car becomes an economical choice.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Beardo the Bearded]

That's approx $38k in Canada. (It's currently $1.19/L, I used $1/L) and fuel consumption of 10km/L. (approx 23 mpg) My car has about 80,000 in it and I've had it for 4 years, 20,000 km per year = $2380 in gas a year.

I pay about $1500 a year in electricity, including a 20kW forced-air electric furnace and an electric HW tank. Assuming that the car uses the same power as the furnace (I don't know for sure) it's about $960 a year for the power to run the car. That's a savings of $1420 a year.

A cheap car that would meet my requirements would run approx. $20k to start. The Tesla would be $80, so $60k difference. That would be a 42-year ROI. Li-Ion batteries will last approximately 5 years. Now, the problem with this car, and I hate to say this because it should be obvious, is that it isn't cool-looking. It looks like a plain old sedan. If I am going to spend that much on a car, I want, you know, a bit of a panty-melter.

That's weird though, I'm sure I didn't spend that much on gas, the fuel should only have been about $1500 a year. Was my ex doing a lot of extra driving? Oh...dammitsomuch.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[GoodNewsJimDotCom]

A plain ol' sedan is a step up from the early cars looked like. Remember the early electric cars were designed to stand out, and almost all of them looked silly?

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[fyngyrz]

That's a savings of $1420 a year.

...and what about after they add road taxes to the cost of that electricity? Because right now, if you drive with gas, you're paying for the road. If you drive with electric created anywhere but a gas-station fueled engine, you're not. Pretty sure they're gonna fix that.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Beardo the Bearded]

That's a common misconception. According to this study, tax rates for fuel-based vehicles are lower than required due to people who bike and pay property taxes.

www.vtpi.org/whoserd.pdf PDF link

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[swillden]

If price of the electric car > Price of cheap gas fueled car + 200,000 miles of gasoline then don't buy

If economics are how you judge a vehicle, spending anything more than a couple grand on a used car is a bad decision for you.

If economics are your *only* consideration, maybe. Personally, I just bought a Nissan Leaf, and the evaluation was made primarily on economics -- but with the starting point that I was going to buy new, because I prefer to buy new and drive for many years. Given the available new car options, and my driving patterns and related requirements, and the available tax credits, the Leaf and the i-MiEV were the cheapest options. Many small gasoline-powered cars were much cheaper up front, but when you factor in 8 years of fuel, the electrics win hands down (for me).

If anyone is interested in my analysis, I did it in a Google Docs spreadsheet, which I'm happy to share: http://links.willden.org/electric

Note that if you dig into the calculations in the spreadsheet some of the cells contain insanely-complex formulas which are not obviously meaningful. My calculation was done by assuming a normal distribution of trip lengths, applying the obvious cost function to lengths and computing the expected value of the resulting random variable. That calculation is fairly hairy and the resulting formulas are expressed primarily in terms of the Gaussian error function. I used Mathematica to compute the expected value expressions and then converted them to spreadsheet formulas. The result works very nicely, but the functions appear to be insane. For example, the image I included on this Google+ post shows the expression for the expected cost of operating a plug-in hybrid.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[swillden]

I think EVs are economical now. That's why I bought one! Because it was the cheapest option.

There are some caveats, though. In order for them to make sense, you first need to be in a position to buy a $35K car, and you need to have a long-enough time horizon for the lower electricity costs to pay for the premium over a comparable gas car. You also need to have driving patterns that stay within the electric range, with enough time between trips for recharging. Related to driving patterns, if you ever drive well beyond the range of the electric, you need a cost-effective alternative. In my case I already have two gasoline-powered cars and needed a third vehicle (there will soon be five drivers in my house!), so it's reasonable for me to fall back on the gas cars when necessary. Another alternative, if you don't need to make longer trips often, is to rent. Finally, you need to get tax credits. Without the available tax credits the EVs are middle-of-the-road options. Not terrible, but not great.

Of course, all of this will get better: range will improve, charging time will decrease, cost will come down. But there's a chance that an EV may be an economical choice for you now.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[fyngyrz]

What? "Lower than required" has nothing to do with it. The point is, a lot of the price of fuel is road tax. There is no road tax on electricity. My contention is, there will be, or else as we go to electric vehicles -- and we're going there, sure as can be -- they'll find some other way to incorporate it into the price of the car. Because the roads need to be maintained, and charging those who use them most is a reasonable way to do it.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[fnj]

If price of the electric car > Price of cheap gas fueled car + 200,000 miles of gasoline then don't buy

You conveniently left out the price of the electrical power used to charge it. The true equation is:

price of Tesla + 200,000 * (price of electrical power per mile + price of replacement batteries per mile + price of repairs per mile)
vs
price of BMW + 200,000 * (price of gasoline per mile + price of repairs per mile)

I would imagine the Tesla would absolutely clean up on repair expenditures, but battery expenditures would approximate fuel expenditures. It might be close.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Anonymous Coward]

Note that if you dig into the calculations in the spreadsheet some of the cells contain insanely-complex formulas which are not obviously meaningful. My calculation was done by assuming a normal distribution of trip lengths, applying the obvious cost function to lengths and computing the expected value of the resulting random variable. That calculation is fairly hairy and the resulting formulas are expressed primarily in terms of the Gaussian error function. I used Mathematica to compute the expected value expressions and then converted them to spreadsheet formulas.

(Shrug) I just went to the Porsche dealer and wrote a check, and then got on with my life.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[Anonymous Coward]

There are some caveats, though. In order for them to make sense, you first need to be in a position to buy a $35K car, and you need to have a long-enough time horizon for the lower electricity costs to pay for the premium over a comparable gas car. You also need to have driving patterns that stay within the electric range, with enough time between trips for recharging

And therein lies the problem with something like the Leaf. Why would I pay $35,000 for a car that goes a whole 60 miles and requires a good 10 hours to recharge if I can't find a quick-charge port? I could get something like a Sonata hybrid for $10k less that has more range, more room, more power, and takes all of 5 minutes at a gas station to refill.

The Model S is on the track to getting things where they need to be. Sure, it takes a similar amount of time to recharge as a Leaf, but instead of 48 miles (80% of 60), you get 100 in about a half an hour. If you have another 20-30 minutes to spare, you're back up to 230 miles. The Leaf won't take you more than 60 miles at a time no matter what you do.

The Leaf is meant for "city drivers" who can afford an expensive, short-range car alongside a moderate gasoline car for longer trips. The Tesla is aiming to be your expensive "only car", and they're working to make sure there's infrastructure for long trips.

Had I the money, I'd jump on a Tesla. However, I don't. So I'll choose the Hyundai that still looks nice and can actually carry things + people, but won't rape my wallet.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[iamhassi]

If price of the electric car > Price of cheap gas fueled car + 200,000 miles of gasoline then don't buy

You missed the point of this. They weren't comparing this electric car to a Geo or something. They compared it to a Porsche and a BMW, and it kicked their A$$...

The real point is that a gasoline powered sports car has trouble competing with this electric car. So let me know when Porsche comes up with something that can compete with this on performance...

I guarantee you I can buy a mustang or camaro from the dealer with enough manufacture offered go-fast options that'll kick a BMW or Porsche's A$$ for tens of thousands less but that doesn't mean I would want a Ford or Chevy over a BMW or Porsche because at the end of the day you're still just driving a Chevy or Ford. Tesla is an unknown name, it doesn't impress like BMW or Porsche.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[iamhassi]

Well, based on THAT theory, then the price is getting close. My Lexus hybrid CT200h gets a consistent 39 miles/gallon. At the current $4.17/gall, that works out to $21,834 for gas, plus approx $35,000 for the car = $56,384. Not quite 78k, but that would mean a non-hybrid like the Audi A3 I had that got a very consistent 24 mpg comes to $34,750 for gas and $33,000 for the car = $67,750. Let's see - a Camry is not much cheaper in purchase price, and is similar to the Audi in consumption.

So, $78k is still on the high side, but getting very much closer to making sense... and that doesn't take into account maintenance (is it going to be cheaper to maintain without an internal combustion engine?), depreciation, etc.

Ben

you forgot that electricity still costs money. Its cheaper than gas but not free. Assuming a relatively cheap 10 cent per kwh, a 24kwh EV (like the Leaf) would cost $2.40 to charge, which gets you about 60 miles. If gas is $3 gallon which it's been hovering around, that means its equivalent to roughly 70mpg. If u run the numbers it takes hundreds of thousands of miles to break even on a EV that costs only 10 grand more than a car that averages 30mpg.

The people that buy EVs are either poor at math or don't mind spending tens of thousands more to save the environment.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[swillden]

And therein lies the problem with something like the Leaf. Why would I pay $35,000 for a car that goes a whole 60 miles and requires a good 10 hours to recharge if I can't find a quick-charge port? I could get something like a Sonata hybrid for $10k less that has more range, more room, more power, and takes all of 5 minutes at a gas station to refill.

But gas is a lot more expensive than electricity. Total cost-wise, for many people the EV is cheaper. Oh, and the range is more like 80-90 miles if you drive efficiently.

The Leaf is meant for "city drivers" who can afford an expensive, short-range car alongside a moderate gasoline car for longer trips.

True, though the price differential between gasoline and electricity does, at least for some people, make the Leaf less expensive than a comparable gasoline car, assuming they need to have two cars anyway (I actually bought my Leaf because I needed a third car).

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[swillden]

(Shrug) I just went to the Porsche dealer and wrote a check, and then got on with my life.

Turn in your nerd card.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[RespekMyAthorati]

Toll roads are my guess.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[amorsen]

BMWs and Porsches are dead common. Tesla is different and rare, and the Roadster is known by practically everyone who cares enough about cars to think of buying a Porsche.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[amorsen]

Well, why aren't they charging for the pollution caused by petrol cars? Transportation related pollution is estimated to cost $80 billion a year in the US, yet road taxes bring less than a third of that.

Re:Exactly Re:Exactly. 78k is luxury territory

[badkarmadayaccount]

Cars need tires.

Canadians are out of luck!

[bogaboga]

Can anyone convince me that this car can do well in the Canadian winter?

I imagine a dude freezing inside when he employs the heater. The [luxury] car then becomes a frozen coffin!

Yikes!

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[0123456]

Can anyone convince me that this car can do well in the Canadian winter?

I'm sure it will run great at forty below. For about ten kilometers.

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[robot256]

Sorry, but you are outside the target market of electric vehicles at this time. Current battery technology does not perform well at extreme temperatures, either hot or cold. Maybe the huge battery pack would make up for that, but it will still be spending a significant amount of energy heating the battery itself, never mind the occupants. You'd only get about 50-75% of the advertised range depending on just how cold it got.

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[SandwhichMaster]

Yeah, I'm a Minnesotan, so I'm all too familiar with the cold weather problems. But I can still appreciate innovation, even if the solution doesn't work for everyone (yet?).

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[compro01]

Yeah, it would be such a burden to have to plug in the vehicle to keep the battery warm. It's not like we have to do that with current gasoline engine cars or anything.

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[robot256]

It is true that the electric car will heat itself up in the morning using mains power, without discharging the battery. However, unlike gas cars, the electric car must continue to expend power to keep the battery warm while it is driving. If you get stuck in gridlock or a snowstorm, that will eat into your range even when you are standing still. You would still probably be able to use the car on a daily basis, if you have a good garage to store it in and are satisfied with 50-70 mile range instead of 70-100 miles (for the smallest battery pack).

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[compro01]

Expend power? The battery will generate plenty of waste heat on its own in normal operation. Quite a bit of effort goes into keep the battery pack cooled.

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[robot256]

Actually, you're right about that. I just wasn't sure if it would be enough, especially at slow speeds. At least you would never have the problem that the Leafs have in Arizona--not enough passive cooling. But there is also the very serious problem of the batteries freezing when left at rest in cold temperatures. From a certain temperature, they can thaw out again after a while, but might be a lower bound below which they are permanently damaged. You would have to be very careful where you parked it overnight.

Hey, what the heck. Get one yourself and tell us how it goes!

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[MrLogic17]

I have mod points, but have to chime in.
In Michigan winters, when the temps drop to 0 F, the range is about half - based on a Volt owner I talked to.

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.treehugger.com/cars/winter-testing-teslas-model-s-electric-sedan.html

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[bentcd]

Can anyone convince me that this car can do well in the Canadian winter?

The car has a very efficient heat pump based cabin heating system. It will start delivering heat to the inside of the car much faster than a gas powered car will since it doesn't need to wait for the engine to get warm.

The battery pack is also heated (or cooled, as required) to keep it within optimal working temperatures. Outside temperatures therefore do not affect the performance of the car, other than possibly immediately after starting it up on a cold day while the heater is still warming it up. If it is anything like my Roadster than the manual will tell you to plug in the car if you're leaving it at colder than -20C for extended periods of time, in which case the battery will be heated using grid power.

The battery in the car is so big you're not actually going to notice much effect on range from it running its cabin and battery temperature control systems. Even if it had a 5kW cabin heater (which it definitely does not, that would be way over the top) the battery could run such a monster for 17 hours before running out. A more believable 1kW heat pump could be run for 85 hours. Temperature effects on vehicle range are therefore little more than sampling noise for this car.

(I had to snicker when I saw a video review of the Model S with the couple taking it from LA to Vegas, without the AC on because they thought it would save a relevant amount of battery capacity to keep it off. People's prejudices about electric cars are now due for a third millennium reality check.)

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[AmiMoJo]

The Leaf has a handy feature where it will turn on the heater at a preset time in the morning while it is still plugged in. That way you have a nice warm car to get into and don't drain the battery.

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[strikethree]

It is rear wheel drive. It is useless in the snow. front wheel drive would have been semi-doable in the snow and all wheel drive would be infinitely preferable... but no. The car is useless in the snow. :(

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[amorsen]

It is a performance car. Did you really expect it to be front wheel drive? Besides, get yourself some snow chains if snow is that bad where you live.

Re:Canadians are out of luck!

[strikethree]

Someone asked if it would be useful in the snow. I said no. I said no from experience. I have a Mercedes Benz E55 AMG and it is utterly useless in the snow. I also have a 92 Eagle Talon TSI (which means AWD). It is very useful in the snow. It is also more of a performance car than my E55 (more horsepower and equivalent torque, 4 cylinder vs 8 cylinder).

Being a performance car is no excuse for being utterly useless in low-traction conditions. I am honestly surprised that AWD cars are not standard except in low-cost models... which should be exclusively front wheel drive. Rear wheel drive is just completely pointless. I do love my E55 otherwise though. Quite a sweet car. ;)

Right out of the Movie "Trading Places"

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at that S-car go!

You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a Nissan Leaf. Range is under 100 miles but that meets my around town driving needs. We have my wife;s Prius for trips. Lease prices in October for 2012s were $200/month, $0 down, 24 months. Top speed is >90mph, seats 4 comfortably, 5 if a couple are kids. Decent trunk room. Good acceleration. Overnight charging in the garage with 120V (included) charger keeps me running, and my employer has 6 free charging stations on site, our town has 4, hospital has 2, etc.

Since there is no ICE, there is no oil to change, no transmission, no fluids to change, only 2 (windshield washer, inverter coolant) to top off. Only maintenance is changing wiper blades and rotating tires.

All in all a very drivable car, great end of year pricing, and very low cost to drive. EVs are here, available and practical. I love mine.

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[skine]

This argument comes up often, but how many people actually have boats, trailers, or other "toys" that they need to pull?

Personally, I ask a friend or family member with a van if they can help me move, or I rent a truck from U-Haul. Also, I've never had the need to pull anything, so perhaps a truck from Home Depot would be perfect.

Obviously if your job involves a lot of hauling, then you are going to get the right tool for the job. But why would I need to buy a pickup truck for the rare instances when I buy something bigger than the inside of my car? It's not like I'm going to buy a new couch, bed, or refrigerator every few months.

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[karnal]

Most people driving these types of inexpensive electric vehicles don't have these kind of "toys". And if they have the money for those kind of toys, they can afford to keep a truck around (or rent one like you said; probably not a home depot beater) for those toys.

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[rock_climbing_guy]

Since there is no ICE, there is no oil to change, no transmission, no fluids to change, only 2 (windshield washer, inverter coolant) to top off. Only maintenance is changing wiper blades and rotating tires.

So, your electric car doesn't have brakes and suspension? What about when the tires wear out and have to be replaced?

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[kenaaker]

No, he's got a Class 1 license and drops by Penske's to pick up a Volvo tractor to use for the trip.

Idiot.

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a 24-month lease. I don't know how quickly you tend to go through tires, breaks, and suspension components, but mine typically last for more than 2 years.

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[Yunzil]

All in all a very drivable car, great end of year pricing, and very low cost to drive. EVs are here, available and practical. I love mine.

The problem with the Leaf is that it looks like a fat squashed frog. I know this probably doesn't matter to you, but it does for much of the car-buying public. The nice thing about the Model S is that it's an electric car that actually looks pretty sharp.

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[swillden]

lol, what do you haul things with, or do you rent a truck from Home Depot every time you want to pull your boat, trailer, etc?

Toys...

I just got a 2012 Leaf (which I love -- awesome little car), and I also have a camp trailer (28'), a boat (20') and an ATV trailer, so I think I'm well-positioned to answer your question:

I pull the toys with my Dodge Durango. I commute and go to the grocery store and take the kids to school and etc., etc., in the Leaf.

Does that answer your question?

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[drinkypoo]

I usually need tires yearly if I'm commuting. We have rough roads where I live, though. The Leaf comes with LRR tires with a higher lifetime, though.

If you have a lease car, all that maintenance is done for you anyway, so you're not making a fair comparison anyway. You're talking about a lot of maintenance you don't have to do.

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[Anonymous Coward]

Tires yes. I have over 100K on my Prius and haven't you he'd the brakes, the regenerative braking provides most braking. Not sure on Leaf's suspension but haven't had to replace anything on the Prius. These are pretty light cars.

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[Anonymous Coward]

Regenerative braking (when the motor acts as generator) should save tons of wear and tear on the pads and disks, so they should last dramatically longer than in an ICE.
Suspension: hmm, never had to do any maintenance on that on my previous car in 220k miles..?
Tires, yeah, duh, as any vehicle. Actually you might need to change them more frequently -- that smooth silent railgun effect you get from flooring the thing from a stop is just too much fun. :-)

I have a Leaf too btw. I love it. My kids love it.

BTW, I paid 26k$ for it (a 2012 SL = with quick-charge port) after incentives, half the price of the cheapest Tesla. It already saved me over 1k$ in gas, and the hassle of a couple oil changes.

Did I mention I love this car?

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[Anonymous Coward]

Since there is no ICE, there is no oil to change, no transmission, no fluids to change, only 2 (windshield washer, inverter coolant) to top off. Only maintenance is changing wiper blades and rotating tires.

So, your electric car doesn't have brakes and suspension? What about when the tires wear out and have to be replaced?

Now be fair, you know he meant there is less preventative maintenance.

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[ThatsMyNick]

It has brakes, but uses it only below 10mph (at which point you would not expect any wear at all). Suspension & tires are still an issue though.

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[Teancum]

I have two vehicles myself, where one is a general small high-efficiency commuter car that I use if I need to make a long trips or for general running around town (it works fine for a trip to the grocery store), but another much larger vehicle that I use for those kind of trips like to Home Depot. And you can rent vehicles for a fair bit cheaper than you can from Home Depot from a much larger number of places if that is something you really want to do.

Besides, if you are the kind of person who has a large boat or the need to haul around a trailer, you will likely have a vehicle to live that kind of lifestyle. For myself, I think it is stupid that the government screws things up to force people into living a particular lifestyle, but at the same time you need to realize that not everybody needs a huge pickup truck. I usually borrow a vehicle belonging to a friend if my larger vehicle (a full-sized fan) doesn't do the job, and occasionally rent a U-Haul.

It isn't as bad as you are making it out to be here.

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[evilviper]

So, your electric car doesn't have brakes and suspension? What about when the tires wear out and have to be replaced?

In any EV or hybrid car the regular brakes will last an EXTREMELY long time thanks to "dynamic braking", as the motor handles almost all braking.

I don't think I've added any brake fluid to my car in the 20 years it's been around. Sure, it's there, but I wouldn't think to mention it in any car.

And he already mentioned "rotating tires" which is pretty close to mentioning (eventual) tire replacement.

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[mea_culpa]

A lease typically has an allowance on miles, 24k-36k depending on the car. Good tires can last that long, and I've gone over 50k on brakes.
You get nailed to the wall in fees if you go over so you will not be saving much if you plan on leasing an EV for gas savings on long daily commutes.

Re:You can buy an EV today at affordable price

[amorsen]

So, your electric car doesn't have brakes and suspension? What about when the tires wear out and have to be replaced?

Brakes on electric cars are rarely used -- depending on driving style of course, but you should let the regenerative braking do most of the work.

Charge time?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Model S's range, rated by the EPA at 265 miles with the largest battery, finally fits the American conception of driving

Aside from the "supercharging station" in New York taking an hour, there is no other mention how long it takes to charge up this battery from "non-supercharging stations."

This American's conception of driving is the "all-American Road Trip" which I've find myself doing a couple times a year and I've gone to either coast and across either border. I can blink and do 1000 miles (1600km) in 16 hours comfortably with a petrol-powered engine and my 5 minute fill-ups, and dining at the best roadside diners available.

With this, I'd barely be able to get across a number of states, then need to stop for around 15 hours whilst I look for an outlet and do some pencil rubbings of a cathedral floor.

Pass.

Re:Charge time?

[robot256]

The home charging stations Tesla sells are 70kW, 10 times faster than most public 240-volt charging stations. At that rate, you can charge the full 265 mile battery pack in about 2 hours. But you'd have to find fellow Tesla owners across the country to charge from, since there are very few public Tesla stations. A normal 7kW charging station will take >12 hours. Tesla is working on a solar-powered Supercharger network, though, that is intended to let Model S drivers go across the country and up and down both coasts with strategically-placed 20-minute charges. Presently the network is operational on the California seaboard only.

And here I thought it was going to be Lamborghini

[Anonymous Coward]

Good to know what my next vehicle purchase should be!

Fully-electric cars are toys of the rich. They don't make sense for anyone else.

(I'm not a fan of hybrids, either, but at least they're affordable. They're still toys.)

It's not the range...

[Iniamyen]

I could get by on 50 miles range, if the damn thing didn't take 6 hours to recharge.

Top Gear had figured this out years ago when they talked about the Hydrogen powered Honda FCX Clarity - It will work better because it fits our paradigm of driving and filling up and driving some more, not necessarily because it gets good mileage.

Re:It's not the range...

[mfwitten]

I could get by on 50 miles range, if the damn thing didn't take 6 hours to recharge.

This comment of yours is entirely irrational; if you could get by with a 50 mile range, then there is plenty of time for you to charge your vehicle whilst you are not driving it, namely when you are sleeping.

Furthermore, according to Tesla's FAQ:

How long does it take to recharge Model S?

Charging times are based on battery size and the combined voltage and amperage of the power source. A high-amperage 230 volt outlet can charge Model S from empty to full overnight. Model S is capable of recharging in 45 minutes using a fast charging station.

Re:It's not the range...

[robot256]

Let's compare hydrogen and electric vehicles:

Hydrogen: Available at a handful of gas stations around the country. Still not the same range as gas cars, still need to drive to a fueling station to fill up. Still has a battery in addition to the ridiculously expensive hydrogen fuel cells.

Electric: Available at thousands of public charging stations around the country, and millions of standard AC outlets, but you almost never need them because you plug in at home every night without ever having to detour to find fuel.

They both have electric motors and performance to match. They both have the potential to support renewable energy diversity. But both have problems with long range--even if you go 240 miles, is there a hydrogen station when you get there? Even if the hydrogen infrastructure gets built up, electric power is already there. I predict that fuel cell vehicles will find a niche of their own, and continue to improve, but they will never replace battery-electric vehicles.

Re:It's not the range...

[drinkypoo]

Hydrogen is a dream, and a dumb one. Well, that's what Daniel Tosh said about Ethanol fuel, but it's equally applicable to Hydrogen. There are a whole lot of reasons and we could rehash them all, but the most important is that there is no source of hydrogen to mine, or pump, or what have you. Making hydrogen electrolytically is not particularly efficient and the majority of our hydrogen is made by expensively cracking natural gas. They're already unable to fill projected natural gas demand (and yet, at the same time, everyone and their mom is trying to sell it as the fuel of the future) and where do you get more natural gas? Fracking, which is a bad idea, mmkay? So in addition to all the other problems with hydrogen, where is it supposed to come from and how will it get where it's going? As well, when they had on the guy from Honda, he explicitly said the stuff was still years away and not practical, I can't imagine why you chose to ignore that part except that it doesn't fit your view of the ideal solution to the problem.

Re:It's not the range...

[Iniamyen]

Perhaps you didn't understand my comment. If I want to take a 500 mile road trip in a single day, even in a regular car with a 50 mile range, I can do it by filling up 10 times. In a car with a 250 mile range that has to recharge overnight, I can only get halfway to my destination in one day. I hope you understand now.

Re:It's not the range...

[Iniamyen]

The battery in a hydrogen vehicle is not the same type of energy storage device as in a full battery electric vehicle - the bulk of the energy is stored in the fuel cell, and so the battery is very small, and very cheap, and very environmentally friendly in comparison. Without order of magnitude advances in battery technology, battery electrics are heavy, environmentally unfriendly (battery waste), and expensive when you have to replace the battery every 5 years.

Re:It's not the range...

[robot256]

You don't have to replace the battery every five years, or even every ten. The capacity degrades slowly, so if it's not enough then you just sell it at a depreciated value to someone who can use that size of pack. So far, batteries in actual use are matching the degradation predictions very well, and by the time it becomes an issue, you'll probably want a new car anyways. Every electric car battery will be recycled, and you always have to compare it to the alternative: Even if the production of an electric car has more environmental impact than the production of a gas car (and I'm not saying it does), can you imaging how much environmental damage operating a petroleum car for 20 years does? Compared to the virtually *zero* impact of the electric car, once it's built?

On the other hand, fuel cells have a serious chicken-and-egg problem. They still require a massive amount of R&D and investment before production units are reasonably priced. But no company is going to put in that kind of serious money unless the infrastructure is there to support wider sales. Looking at the Honda hydrogen car, it actually has less range than the Model S and for not that much less money--but with the added, probably deal-breaking hassle of having to find hydrogen fuel stations, instead of picking up emergency charging at any wall outlet. None of the fuel cell vehicles currently on the books are serious contenders--they are all "compliance cars" to fill out their fleet in California emissions standards. Until that changes, battery electrics are the only way to get off of oil.

Re:It's not the range...

[Iniamyen]

Capacity degeneration in a battery electric is equivalent to range degeneration. And in a type of car that needs to squeeze every ounce of range that it can (because of the aforementioned charging limitation), I would argue that this is skirting the issue -- the battery will eventually die enough to become useless, at which point it becomes waste and costs money to replace. Even Tesla's FAQ states a battery life of 5 years -- I'm not sure on what basis you are making your claims.

Once the electric car is built, it still has an environmental impact. Most of the electricity currently generated in the US comes from hydrocarbons (coal & natural gas.)

From the point of view of currently available technology, yes, the battery route is the one that requires less investment. But that doesn't mean it's better. If the goal of developing new technologies is protecting the environment, I think Hydrogen fuel cells have more potential. I think the problem is that battery electrics are being marketed as more environmentally friendly than they really are. People should understand the tradeoffs. I'm just arguing that in addition to developing battery technology, we should be investing money in figuring out how to produce and store Hydrogen.

The point at which battery electrics become "good enough" is the point at which battery technology gets good enough so that batteries last as long as the cars do, AND we start sourcing our electricity from non-hydrocarbon sources, AND people decide they don't need to drive more than the car's max range without a recharge break. I can see #1 and #2 happening down the road, but #3 seems like asking too much. Maybe supercapacitors that can be recharged quickly? :-)

20k electrics

[fyngyrz]

The battery is a big factor in the Model S' cost. 85 kilowatts of lithium ion batteries ain't cheap.

I think I'd be perfectly happy to pay $20k for a Model S with a 5kw battery. You think they'd go for it? :)

Re:20k electrics

[Guspaz]

Are you sure a 15 mile range would be all that useful?

The cost of the battery pack is probably at least $10k, but that's not enough to get the thing down to $20k.

The good news (for Tesla) is that it doesn't really matter for this particular car. It's competing in the luxury sports sedan market, where the $70k Model S is actually priced about the same as the gasoline-powered competition of that class. That's a big factor in why automag gave it the "car of the year", because it's a better car at the same price.

If you're choosing Mercedes E-550 for $75k or the Tesla Model S for $70k, and the Model S is considered to be a better car, the price isn't really a factor in that decision. Inconvenience of recharging might be, but the fact that the range on this thing is comparable to a gasoline car means it's fine except for long trips that don't have a supercharge station in the path you want to drive. That should be at least partially resolved in a year or two, once the Supercharge network covers most important routes in the US and Canada.

Re:20k electrics

[Raistlin77]

My daily commute is less than 2 miles - that would last me a week! Count me in!!!

Re:20k electrics

[fyngyrz]

Are you sure a 15 mile range would be all that useful?

Yes, I sure am. It's about 2 miles to work; major challenges here are deep cold starting / operating and various other weather factors. Rain, snow, high wind. Definitely need transport, and it definitely needs to be a closed cabin car, it definitely needs to be able to reach highway speeds, but range isn't much of an issue. Even the model S doesn't have enough range to make it to the nearest city in my state, which is 300 miles away. Not a common use case by any means, but it is mine.

As for the price w/5k pack, I was kidding. Hence the smiley.

Re:20k electrics

[Guspaz]

Well, with a supercharger between you and that city, you could do it with only an extra 20 minutes added to your trip to refuel (265 miles range, +100 miles for 20 minute supercharge). Considering we're talking about something like a 5 hour drive, that's not a significant delay. That's a stop-for-a-snack sort of time delay.

You do have to be fairly well off to afford the thing, though, much more so than I am ;)

Re:20k electrics

[fyngyrz]

Yeah, it'd be something if they started putting those on Montana highways... but I'm not holding my breath.

And I do have gas fueled vehicles that can make the trip, so for the rare times we go, we're covered. I'd just like to have an efficient, reliable, comfy EV for running around town with right here. Not a luxury car, but not a tiny bubble with wheels, either. I'd pay some extra for a jeep / 4wd form factor, they're very practical here. I run around in this thing, which is a super-cheap 4wd, and it has served us extremely well for almost all of our needs.

Re:20k electrics

[drinkypoo]

Are you sure a 15 mile range would be all that useful?

No, but I'm interested in the same deal, because in theory I can get cast-off cells from an electric motorcycle manufacturer. I'd be willing to limit the vehicle to the performance of an ordinary automobile so as to run on more primitive packs.

Re:20k electrics

[Anonymous Coward]

My daily commute is less than 2 miles - that would last me a week! Count me in!!!

My commute is like this too, but there is a valley in the middle. Anyone know how the Tesla does on steep hills? I'm sure there is some regen on the way down, but don't think it's all that efficient??

Re:20k electrics

[iamhassi]

Are you sure a 15 mile range would be all that useful?

The cost of the battery pack is probably at least $10k, but that's not enough to get the thing down to $20k.

The good news (for Tesla) is that it doesn't really matter for this particular car. It's competing in the luxury sports sedan market, where the $70k Model S is actually priced about the same as the gasoline-powered competition of that class. That's a big factor in why automag gave it the "car of the year", because it's a better car at the same price.

If you're choosing Mercedes E-550 for $75k or the Tesla Model S for $70k, and the Model S is considered to be a better car, the price isn't really a factor in that decision. Inconvenience of recharging might be, but the fact that the range on this thing is comparable to a gasoline car means it's fine except for long trips that don't have a supercharge station in the path you want to drive. That should be at least partially resolved in a year or two, once the Supercharge network covers most important routes in the US and Canada.

But you can't just say "I'm gonna make a luxury car and price it a little lower than well known luxury cars and make tons of $$$!" People buying $78,000 cars are buying the brand name as much as they are buying the luxury. You wouldn't pay $78,000 for a Kia no matter how much luxury it had, and Tesla is worse than Kia because Tesla has no reputation. A no-name startup appears and wants to price their cars like high end Benz, BMW and Porsche? Good luck with that. Even if it does sell, you're talking about a high end market that sells thousands of those types of cars a year, vs millions of Camrys and Tauruses sold yearly. And Americans still don't buy cars, we buy SUVs, even Porsche's highest selling vehicle is the Cayenne SUV. Tesla is doing everything wrong, it's almost like they're trying to fail.

Re:20k electrics

[iamhassi]

Are you sure a 15 mile range would be all that useful?

Yes, I sure am. It's about 2 miles to work; major challenges here are deep cold starting / operating and various other weather factors. Rain, snow, high wind. Definitely need transport, and it definitely needs to be a closed cabin car, it definitely needs to be able to reach highway speeds, but range isn't much of an issue. Even the model S doesn't have enough range to make it to the nearest city in my state, which is 300 miles away. Not a common use case by any means, but it is mine.

As for the price w/5k pack, I was kidding. Hence the smiley.

15 mile probably wouldn't sell, but 50 miles would, and they could always sell additional battery packs to increase the range, maybe lift a panel in the trunk and snap in a $500 pack and get another 5 miles? But 50 miles is about what the Volt gets before gas kicks in and it's still $40,000+ so even that's not low enough to reach that $20,000 sweet spot.

Re:20k electrics

[amorsen]

Tesla is doing everything wrong, it's almost like they're trying to fail.

Tesla actually makes money on each car sold, and they have 17000 on waiting list so far. Tesla does everything right: They make an electric car that actually works, damn the price. Everyone else cuts corners and end up with a lousy car with miserable performance that runs out of battery all the time, and after all that they are not actually cheap. Tesla is for rich people who either just want something cool or like being environmentally friendly -- and that is actually a real market. Not an extremely large market, but it exists. All other electric cars are for... Well who exactly?

There are 50 preorders for Tesla Model S for taxi use in Denmark. Again, perfect for the purpose, large enough to be useful, fits with the environmental profile many companies demand from their suppliers, luxurious like a Mercedes -- and the battery pack can handle a day of city driving. The only electric competitor for the taxi market is the Renault Fluence with its battery swap system, but the boot space is too small for luggage and it is not a luxury car.

Of course the Model S is way too nice-looking to have a chance in the US, but the Model X attempts to fix that.

Re:20k electrics

[amorsen]

Anyone know how the Tesla does on steep hills?

It will do absolutely brilliantly, it has 362 hp...

I'm sure there is some regen on the way down, but don't think it's all that efficient??

Compared to a petrol car which has zero regen? You probably won't get the listed 300 miles range in hilly terrain, but your commute is unlikely to be 300 miles.

Re:20k electrics

[Shirley Marquez]

A Nissan Leaf is closer to what you're asking for. Only 75-100 mile range and not nearly as sporty as the Tesla S, but also half the price (about $30,000 after the tax credit). In a few years it should be possible to sell a car like the Leaf for $20K (or whatever is the inflation-adjusted equivalent of $20K) as mass production drives down the price of the batteries. The electric drive train of the Leaf probably costs less to manufacture (leaving out the battery cost and the R&D) than the drive train in a $20K gas-powered car, so that kind of price point will be achievable someday.

Re:20k electrics

[Guspaz]

The same could have been said for Apple and the iPhone, they had no reputation in the market, but boy did they make a splash. Tesla has a lot of that going for them, there's a lot of "wow" factor in the Model S. The neat gimmicks like the autoretracting door handles, the sit-down-to-start, the touchscreen, you'd be surprised how much those sorts of things can win people over.

That said, your point about SUVs is well taken... Convenient, then, that Tesla's next model is an SUV, the model X ;)

Renault Le Car

[Anonymous Coward]

I stopped following the "car of the year" buzz when every major car magazine gave it to the AMC/Renault Alliance. This car was so bad that you could destroy it simply by slamming the door too hard. Set new standards for a rust bucket--it would develop rust spots while on a test ride.

Car of the year my ass....

[NinjaTekNeeks]

First and foremost, its ugly. Seriously Ugly, check it out here : http://www.teslamotors.com/models
Second off, it does not compare to Porsche in any real way, speed, agility, handling, comfort, all go to Porsche.
Next, its too expensive. 80 Grand for a car that looks like an ugly Buick? No thank you, I'll but a GTR or GT500 instead. Don't forget that you will need a 240W outlet (most homes have only one for your dryer), so you'll need that, or the high performance charging unit. Count on a nice addition to your electric bill every month.

Finally, average Joe won't get one. 5,000 units in 2012, that means you can't go to the dealer and snag one, not to mention you have to customize it 3 months beforehand to make sure you get what you want. Plunk down 5k, wait months and months and end up with a battery powered Buick Le Sabre. To hell with that. These auto mags really are useless dreck these days...

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[hendridm]

I don't think that it's ugly, but I would never buy one for the price. Ever.

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[Vicarius]

I also thought "Tesla" and imagined the old beautiful and sexy designs they used to have. All of the current lineup now just looks plain ugly. They should have fired their old designed several years ago and never hired any replacement, so that current models could have benefited from the old beautiful design.

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[jkflying]

You need your sense of taste checked. It doesn't look ugly at all. And a Le Sabre? Are you kidding? Have you even looked at the pictures? Are you blind?

If you want to compare to Porche, compare to their saloon, the Panamera. Or, perhaps, a BMW M5 or a Mercedes S500, which is what this provides similar features to. Except the acceleration, which is comparable to a Porche 911 Carrera, which happens to cost $80k. Odd that. http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/911/911-carrera/featuresandspecs/

What you pay in electricity you will save several times over in fuel.

And just because they are limited in quantity means they can't be car of the year? You're coming off as a grumpy old fart who just doesn't like these newfangled electric autermobeels and will find any reason you can to be offended that somebody else thinks they're great.

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[amicusNYCL]

First and foremost, its ugly. Seriously Ugly, check it out here : http://www.teslamotors.com/models

I have checked it out there, and I have concluded that it is not ugly. Seriously.

Second off, it does not compare to Porsche in any real way, speed, agility, handling, comfort, all go to Porsche.

How about in fuel efficiency, or emissions? Or, depending on the Porsche, price? That's a weird comparison to make though, comparing a luxury electric sedan with a Porsche. I don't recall Elon Musk saying he wanted the S to go head-to-head with Porsche.

Next, its too expensive.

Right, a 911 Turbo for $135,000+ is much more economical.

I'll but a GTR or GT500 instead.

Not exactly a great car for a family of 4 though.

Count on a nice addition to your electric bill every month.

Not if you have a free charging station. You also get a gasoline bill of exactly $0.

It's weird. It's almost like you're not Tesla's target market.

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[Yunzil]

First and foremost, its ugly. Seriously Ugly

Sorry about your terrible sense of aesthetics.

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[Teancum]

The one real ongoing expense with the Model S (and most electric vehicles) besides changing/rotating the tires is the replacement of the battery pack after about 5-7 years. While Tesla has done an amazing job with its battery pack and stretches the life out of those Li-ion batteries, they do need to be exchanged/replaced.

If you are lucky, you would likely junk the car (sell it to the used car market) and just buy a new car, but replacing that battery pack is a fairly expensive proposition and shouldn't be ignored. It depends on how many miles (aka gallons of gasoline) that are used on the vehicle. For people who have about an hour or so commute to and from work every day during the week and put on 50k miles per year, the cost in electricity would be trivial compared to the gasoline fuel costs.

On the other hand, if the car belongs to a shut-in senior citizen who puts on about 50 miles in a week if they are lucky and less than 2k miles for a whole year (I know more than a few people in that situation.... their cars are practically brand-new looking even after 10 years of ownership)... the fuel savings would be trivial. Sadly, the battery packs would still need to be replaced if it was an electric automobile. My point here is that your savings really depends on how you use the vehicle.

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[meta-monkey]

You can install a 240V outlet in your home for about $50 in parts. I did to plug in my RV. If you can afford an $80k car...you can afford a 240V outlet.

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[tinkerton]

It's weird. It's almost like you're not Tesla's target market.

That's of course the weird thing about being called car of the year. It needs the byline "for its target market".

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[horza]

I think it looks pretty, and the inside stunning. Certainly nicer than the Porsche. Probably handles better too. It looks like a toned down version of a Maserati. Not sure why I'm debating with anybody that likes something as ugly as the GT500.

I don't think a 240W outlet will even power a hairdryer, which is typically around 1kW. Maybe you mean 240V, like the entire of Europe? Just get a step-up convertor. The tiny amount of electricity used is dwarfed by your average petrol bill.

My friend waited over a year for his custom Lotus. Several months for a car transported back from the future will be a breeze. Your average Joe doesn't get a Porsche or a Mercedes, so that's hardly an argument.

Phillip.

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[amorsen]

That's of course the weird thing about being called car of the year. It needs the byline "for its target market".

It doesn't need that byline. "Car of the year" doesn't mean "everyone buy this particular car". This must be the first time you have heard of a car being called "car of the year"; otherwise you would no longer suffer from that misunderstanding.

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[amorsen]

Maybe you mean 240V, like the entire of Europe? Just get a step-up convertor.

Good luck with that at 70kW...

Besides, 240V sockets in the US are not the same as 240V sockets in Europe. 240V in the US consists of two wires, each 120V offset from neutral and in opposite phase.

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[tinkerton]

It would be a reminder, not necessarily new information. Just read the thread. A lot of people could use the reminder. And looking at your reaction, you could also use a few reminders - of things you probably know well enough. You're not new here either.

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[badkarmadayaccount]

No, that is split-phase, you have high-leg delta.

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[amorsen]

Which part are you disagreeing with?

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[amicusNYCL]

That's of course the weird thing about being called car of the year. It needs the byline "for its target market".

That applies to every other car, not just a Tesla. It should be implied that no car is for everyone. Look at their other cars of the year for past years. There's the Audi A7 for $60k, the Chevy Volt for $40k, the VW GTI for $24k, the Nissan GT-R, and the Audi R8 for $118k. Not a single one of those cars is marketed to every car buyer in the world. If everyone could be served by a single car then we wouldn't need more than one car model, would we?

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[tinkerton]

Of course. And now look at the article summary, it's comparing cars different categories as if they're one and the same.

We weren't expecting much from the Tesla other than some interesting dinner conversation as we considered 'real' candidates like the Subaru BRZ and the Porsche Boxster. In fact, the Tesla blew them, and us, away.

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[badkarmadayaccount]

Your definition of the US 240V standard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_leg_delta

Re:Car of the year my ass....

[amorsen]

240V in the US DOES consist of 2 wires, each 120V offset from neutral and in opposite phase. The US insists on only allowing 3-phase to be called anything with phase, but that is just wrong -- apparently phases that aren't in 3-phase are supposed to be called "legs". Anyway, with typical US 240V and assuming a purely resistant load: At any particular point in time, the voltage of one line is exactly the opposite of the voltage on the other when compared to neutral. That is the definition of being in opposite phase.

The wrong car won.

[MtViewGuy]

I think the car that SHOULD have won is the Ford C-Max Hybrid--especially with the Energi plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) coming out nationally in spring 2013. Unlike the Tesla Model S with its totally silly price tag, you can get a C-Max Hybrid for 1/3 the cost and still get over 40 mpg easily reasonable daily driving.

Re:The wrong car won.

[Sez Zero]

I think the car that SHOULD have won is the Ford C-Max Hybrid

This was automobile of the year, not econobox of the year. The Tesla was in the top three with the BRZ and Boxster, which are all of a much higher level of performance than the Ford Crap-Max box.

Car mag writes aren't going to pick a total performance dog for Car of the Year. The C-Max Hybrid only has electric top speed of 62mph!

Re:The wrong car won.

[jkflying]

If you're looking at the Ford C-Max, you should probably check out a VW Golf TDI. It gets over 50MPG. It has for the last 8 years. And you're complaining that the Tesla is expensive? Compare it to a BMW 5-series, which is what it provides similar performance to. It's not a bad deal at all then, and looks way cooler.

Re:The wrong car won.

[hendridm]

The C-Max Hybrid only has electric top speed of 62mph!

lol, really? What is that in kilometers? Because I couldn't imagine the average American buying one.

Re:The wrong car won.

[Anonymous Coward]

The C-Max hybrid has a top speed of 115 MPH with the gas engine and electric motor combining for 188 Hp. It's actually a pretty quick car (I've actually driven one). Ford claims it can operate up to 62 MPH in EV mode, which is only going to be when the load on the engine is light.

Re:The wrong car won.

[cbhacking]

62mi = 100km to within such a small margin of error that I'm sure the actual rated range is 100km (though that's odd for an American car)

Re:The wrong car won.

[Anonymous Coward]

And it's a stinky pollution box.
Yes, diesels STILL stink.

You can keep them.

Re:The wrong car won.

[drinkypoo]

You're way behind on the pollution thing. Diesels are now just as good as gassers. Maybe better, because we discovered a little while ago that gassers produce more soot than we thought because the testing methodology was flawed and biased in its favor. Diesels do still stink, but only at start. And they still get better mileage.

I will keep my diesels. They're grrrrreat.

Re:The wrong car won.

[MtViewGuy]

I would consider a VW with a TDI engine, but the higher price of diesel fuel here in the USA and the fact it requires a fairly expensive emissions control system to reduce NOx and diesel particulates to EPA Tier 2 Bin 5 levels makes it out of the question.

Performance concept of pricing?

[kwerle]

The Model S's range, rated by the EPA at 265 miles with the largest battery, finally fits the American conception of driving.

But at $78,500 before a $7,500 tax rebate that doesn't fit the American concept of pricing.

Make no mistake, I'd really love one of these. But $78,500 is pricy...

I'm not going to do the research.

How much do cars that go from 0 to 60 in 4.3 seconds generally cost? I dunno - that sounds very quick to me. This isn't just a sedan.

Re:Performance concept of pricing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not going to do the research.

How much do cars that go from 0 to 60 in 4.3 seconds generally cost? I dunno - that sounds very quick to me. This isn't just a sedan.

The 'entry level' two passenger Porsche Cayman S, which does 0-60 in about 4.8s, cost $72K when I was looking for one.

Nice car for some fraction of the market

[Geoffrey.landis]

The Model S's range, rated by the EPA at 265 miles with the largest battery, finally fits the American conception of driving.

But at $78,500 before a $7,500 tax rebate that doesn't fit the American concept of pricing.

It doesn't have to fit every American's price range. It just has to fit the price range of its target audience, which is people who would be buying Mercedes and BMW sedans.

(Also, that $78,500 price quoted was for a model near the top of the line-- the base model is $49,990. http://www.rsportscars.com/tesla/2013-tesla-model-s/ Still a big chunk of cash, but not significantly more than other cars of its class.)

they make sense as commuter cars

[Chirs]

If you're a single person driving tens of miles to work then tens of miles back, it totally makes sense to have a tiny electric car. Charge it at home, charge it at work, you're good to go.

Re:they make sense as commuter cars

[hendridm]

If you're a single person driving tens of miles to work then tens of miles back, it totally makes sense to have a tiny electric car. Charge it at home, charge it at work, you're good to go.

So their target market is young enough to not have a family or has too long of a neckbeard to post on Craigslist M4W (and, incidently, has enough money to afford one), and basically never goes anywhere.

Why don't I see more ads here on /.?!

ROT-13 [Re:Just showing up is 90 per cent]

[Geoffrey.landis]

This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.

My ROT-26 decryptor technology can defeat your use of dual ROT-13 encryption in under 100 milliseconds! (*way* under 100 milliseconds).

--and I'm upgrading to ROT-52!

Re:ROT-13 [Re:Just showing up is 90 per cent]

[certsoft]

I use ROT-256, much easier to read.

The sticker vs the savings

[lilfields]

The sticker price of the car would never pay for the gas money you'd save by switching to it. I actually like the Tesla cars, you can go into their stores in some cities and it's pretty neat to see...but it's also expensive as hell. If you want to save on gas just buy a motorcycle.

A couple quick links...

[SternisheFan]

http://www.teslamotors.com/models

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqRuPrT2azw

http://www.motorward.com/2012/10/drag-race-tesla-model-s-vs-bmw-m5-f10/

Re:And here I thought it was going to be Lamborghi

[robot256]

This is simply false. Anyone who drives less than 30 miles to work every day (which is the majority of Americans) is a potential EV owner. When you compare EVs to similarly-tricked-out gas cars, the prices are close, and when you include fuel and maintenance savings the EV wins outright. I don't know about you, but my personal driving habits don't include spontaneous trips of more than 100 miles without at least stopping to trade cars with a relative for the weekend. The marginally-reduced flexibility is totally worth the savings, moral satisfaction, and pedal-flooring fun of driving a clean electric vehicle.

American concept of driving

[istartedi]

I think it was put best by a former room-mate, back in my college days who said, more or less:

My first car was a gas-guzzling beater of a sedan that I bought from the neighbor's parents when they got a new car. I worked on it myself and it wasn't much to look at, but it was all I could afford with the few hundred dollars I made that Summer. I was young, and just knowing that I could hop in it and go anywhere in the country gave me an incredible sense of freedom and adventure.

$78,000 green-mobiles that force you to spend the night in a motel half-way across one state don't fit the bill.

Not *American* pricing, *early adopter* pricing.

[hey!]

Well, when the Ford Model T was introduced in 1908 at $850 ($ in current dollars), the next cheapest automobile you could buy cost over $3000, which is roughly $74K in 2012 dollars. Take the cheapest car you can buy today, say a Nissan Verso at $11,000 list. Cheap as it is, that car probably cost millions to develop, and if it were sold in the quantities that pre-Model T cars were sold it might well cost north of $50,000, just to amortize the engineering costs.

By 1908 standards, the Verso would be a marvel of engineering, yet it's $11K price tag when adjusted to 1908 dollars is only $446. That's far cheaper than the $850 price tag of the Model T. Two things make this amazingly low price: a century of experience in how to design and manufacture internal combustion engine vehicles, and huge sales volumes.

An early adopter for any technological innovation pays a steep premium. It's not range that has held back the electric car -- not in a society where four-car families is common. It's the early adopter premium you pay for new technology. That comes from having to figure out how to do so many new things (or get around limitations of current technology), and the small number of people who are willing to take the plunge with an immature technology.

It's not a case of the management at Tesla sitting down and saying to themselves, "What would be a good price for this car? How about $78,500?" $78,500 is no doubt the profit maximizing price. When the technology matures, they can *also* obtain economies of scale they can't get now. Economies of scale offered by lower prices would be overwhelmed by lack of technological know-how. This is why Tesla is focusing on the exotic car segment. Exotic cars are expected to be expensive and not entirely practical. They've produced a car which is expensive and lacks the full range of practicality of current ICE (i.e., no cross-country road trips). That's a canny way to bootstrap the development of a future model that will be the Model T of electric cars.

great products

[Anonymous Coward]

I am keeping my fingers crossed that my next car will be their Model X. Of course I'll wait for the second year, since I don't feel like being a beta tester for any car, no matter the energy source.

Re:great products

[hendridm]

Yes, I keep hoping that I'll win the lottery too. Of course, if I did, the X wouldn't be my primary car, but I'd probably want one in my massive garage that I'd have built.

Re:And here I thought it was going to be Lamborghi

[hendridm]

Anyone who drives less than 30 miles to work every day (which is the majority of Americans) is a potential EV owner.

Don't you drive anywhere else?

When you compare EVs to similarly-tricked-out gas cars, the prices are close

No, my VW Jetta TDI was considerably cheaper and is much less of a hassle.

and when you include fuel and maintenance savings the EV wins outright

No, how much gas and maintenance (are we including replacing the batteries here?) can you get for $50k?

I don't know about you, but my personal driving habits don't include spontaneous trips of more than 100 miles without at least stopping to trade cars with a relative for the weekend.

Really? Do you live in the future, or perhaps a parallel universe?

The marginally-reduced flexibility is totally worth the savings, moral satisfaction, and pedal-flooring fun of driving a clean electric vehicle.

I'm glad you like it. I can't afford it, though. Plus, I don't want one.

Car of the Year?

[eepok]

I know... it's their award, they can do what they want, but I would assume that the "car of the year" would be the best mix of:
*Affordability
*Driver/Passenger Safety
*Safety for Other Road Users
*Fuel Economy/GHG Emissions per Mile
*Sustainability of Production and Retirement
*Attractiveness to the General Public
*Real-World Availability

Operating cost are illusory

[fyngyrz]

At the current $4.17/gall, that works out to $21,834 for gas

Well... see, the thing is, gasoline isn't really $4.17 / gallon. The gas is much less, and the rest of that price is taxes that go for road maintenance.

The lurking problem here for pure electric uses is that no mechanism exists (yet) to add the road maintenance cost to the fueling (electric) costs of running an electric car, or a hybrid running on electricity from the wall (electricity from the gas engine is covered -- we pay for it when we fuel the gas engine.) Because of this, the actual running cost of electric-from-other-than-petro operation is being vastly underestimated, or perhaps "put off" is a better term.

I have no quibble with the higher efficiency of the powerplant...transmission...storage system as compared to direct, small-vehicle burning of petro fuels, but the running cost is clearly not being compared apples-to-apples at this point in the game. Just something to think about. Operating costs could (and I expect will) change significantly when the legislators decide to get around to it.

Re:Operating cost are illusory

[timeOday]

Well... see, the thing is, gasoline isn't really $4.17 / gallon. The gas is much less, and the rest of that price is taxes that go for road maintenance.

Well, the gas tax is about 10% of each gallon, which is hardly "vast."

I agree something would have to be done if electric cars get very popular though.

Re:Operating cost are illusory

[amorsen]

The lurking problem here for pure electric uses is that no mechanism exists (yet) to add the road maintenance cost to the fueling (electric) costs of running an electric car, or a hybrid running on electricity from the wall (electricity from the gas engine is covered -- we pay for it when we fuel the gas engine.) Because of this, the actual running cost of electric-from-other-than-petro operation is being vastly underestimated, or perhaps "put off" is a better term.

If you assume all the gas tax goes to road maintenance, there is nothing left to pay the pollution cost. You can equally well say that the actual running cost of petrol operation is being vastly underestimated.

Big Test Not Yet Reached: Mass Production

[Koreantoast]

As the article itself has pointed out, Tesla still hasn't passed the biggest test facing it: whether or not they can mass produce the vehicle. The numbers stated, only 250 out of 15,000 preorders delivered, says everything. Once Tesla gets over that hump, I think then they truly deserve the kudos.

Re:Big Test Not Yet Reached: Mass Production

[skine]

Why does Tesla need to do something that other cars that were considered don't have to do?

Porsche has been selling around 2000 Boxsters per year for the last few years in the US, while Tesla has shipped 1000 Model Ss since they started making deliveries in June.

Those numbers seem pretty comparable to me.

http://www.autoevolution.com/news/tesla-celebrates-building-of-1000th-model-s-frame-51201.html

Re:And here I thought it was going to be Lamborghi

[robot256]

Anyone who drives less than 30 miles to work every day (which is the majority of Americans) is a potential EV owner.

Don't you drive anywhere else?

Apparently not. In my almost perfect log of daily mileage starting in April, only once have I drive more than 100 miles in one day, and there was enough time in my schedule to charge enough to get home. I live 6 miles from work and 1 mile from school, so most days I drive less than 20 miles. My parents are 15 miles away, my friends are 30 miles away, and I usually carpool when going farther than that.

When you compare EVs to similarly-tricked-out gas cars, the prices are close

No, my VW Jetta TDI was considerably cheaper and is much less of a hassle.

and when you include fuel and maintenance savings the EV wins outright

No, how much gas and maintenance (are we including replacing the batteries here?) can you get for $50k?

I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to compare. If you are comparing buying a new electric car to keeping your old gas one, that is a totally different question from what I intended. I also cannot comment on the economics of buying a $50,000 car, ever, and limit my discussions of economy to the Nissan Leaf. My statement is based off the Edmunds.com 5-year True Cost to Own(tm) comparing the base model Nissan Leaf to the base model Toyota Corolla: $35,567 for the Leaf, versus $37,440 for the Corolla, in spite of the feature advantage the Leaf has.

The batteries are holding up remarkably well for the majority of Leaf owners, and are warranted to maintain 80% of their original range after 8 years or 100,000 miles. It is difficult to estimate how much reduced range will lower the value of the car, but expectations are that they will still hold their value better than gas cars because they will still run just fine on cheap, clean electricity.

I don't know about you, but my personal driving habits don't include spontaneous trips of more than 100 miles without at least stopping to trade cars with a relative for the weekend.

Really? Do you live in the future, or perhaps a parallel universe?

No, but I live in an urban area with two large cities within 50 miles, both with adequate transit systems, which is quite possibly the same thing from your perspective.

The marginally-reduced flexibility is totally worth the savings, moral satisfaction, and pedal-flooring fun of driving a clean electric vehicle.

I'm glad you like it. I can't afford it, though. Plus, I don't want one.

If your lifestyle doesn't fit the EVs currently on the market, then I don't blame you. I respect that you will make the right decision for your particular needs. But not everyone is exactly like you, there are plenty of people who can save money and enjoy owning an EV, so bashing them is arbitrary and rude. After all, the most popular vehicle model in America is the F-150 pickup with a measly 2% of market share, proving that a car can be successful without having to satisfy everyone and their uncle.

Great Car, wrong business model

[Anonymous Coward]

I've often thought that Elon Musk is following the wrong business model. Tesla has the best electric car technology hands down. Every other electric car out there has at best 100 mile range and looks ridiculous; the Tesla Roadster and Model S can actually replace a modern sedan in terms of driving distance. So ultimately the only real issue faced by a driver is recharge time, which with the range the Tesla has can be done at the home; most trips last under the 265 mile range when you're ocnsidering daily commutes so it can effectively replace most cars.

However manufacturing is quite expensive. There's a lot of capital required to build up a car factory, and it just takes a lot of time. In addition, while trying to make money as a successful entrepreneur, Musk has also stated that his goal is to make an effective electric car replacement for normal gasoline cars. His business model however puts him in competition with all the major car manufacturers, who all have 100 times the money he does and the facilities and factories in place to already.

Another company that faced this was Qualcomm. They had CDMA which at the time was the best cell phone technology, and they tried to manufacture their own cell phones but were competing with Nokia and Erickson and Motorola who were literally 100x Qualcomm's size. Qualcomm finally realized they couldn't compete on manufacturing and sold their manufacturing arm, and instead licensed their technology to all of the big cell phone manufacturers. Suddenly, in the early 2000s every cell phone was CDMA, and Qualcomm's massive competitors all suddenly became Qualcomm's parnters. Cell phone technology exploded into the market, and Qualcomm is now one of the biggest tech companies around. Tesla should follow this model. He's competing in one of the biggest markets in the world against osme of the biggest to-big-to-fail companies, if he stopped manufacturing and instead licensed his technology to everyone; Honda, GM, Ford, Toyota, etc. already have the factories in place to build them, and you'd see a massive proliferation of electric cars out there. With enough cars, the infrastructure would follow, making it easier and cheaper to make more cars and you'd see greater consumer adoption. I honestly believe you'd see a much faster electric car adoption if Tesla followed this model.

Re:And here I thought it was going to be Lamborghi

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you for the reply.

I believe:

1. Every family drives more than 30 miles occasionally.
2. Most families need to haul things occasionally (or often, depending on their lifestyle).
3. For the ~$50k difference, I bet that I can buy a lot more diesel than you can travel with your Tesla.
4. Batteries are expensive.

I wouldn't wipe my ass with Automobile.

[Anonymous Coward]

These people are the leavings from the empire of pompous bullshit created by
the now dead self-important douche bag David E. Davis Jr. who was a good example
of the overweight swine who make the US the shameful shithole it is.

Automobile Magazine's opinion is meaningless unless you are a tasteless
idiot who cannot discern a quality magazine from crap.

All the good car mags now are either British or German. There are NO decent
American cars magazines any more -- they are pure shit.

And the Tesla is a scam-mobile for poseurs who want to make a statement
not a real car for real people.

Fuck Elon Musk, I hope he gets terminal cancer soon, he doesn't add to this world
anything of true value and is a con artist.

who the fuck cares

[Anonymous Coward]

Who the fuck cares what the care of the year is this year, I want to know how good the car is going to be 5 years from now once its paid for.

Some of us don't buy a new care every 1-3 years because we don't like fucking care payments.

electric cars

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not a car, it's a cordless drill with seats.
When energy density of batteries increases by two or three
orders of magnitude, maybe then it will be a car.

and the winner is...

[Anonymous Coward]

Automobile Magazine has just overtaken The Nobel Prize Committee as the front runner in the I'm a Cocksucking Douchebag of the Year Award competition.

Analysis missed the Ford Focus Electric

[gr8_phk]

You may have done this prior to availability. But you missed the Ford Focus EV. It's substantially larger than the Leaf but I'd like to see the analysis include it.

Re:Analysis missed the Ford Focus Electric

[swillden]

You may have done this prior to availability. But you missed the Ford Focus EV. It's substantially larger than the Leaf but I'd like to see the analysis include it.

I didn't miss it; I excluded it because it's not available in my state.

Feel free to copy my spreadsheet and add it, though... or just click on the "Share" button (assuming you're logged into a Google account) and request that I give you edit permission, and then you can add it to my copy.

3 Tesla Model S links

[SternisheFan]

Tesla's main site/models: http://www.teslamotors.com/models

YouTube - Test drive ridealong: http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=oqRuPrT2azw

YouTube - Drag race, Tesla Model S vs. BMW M5: http://www.motorward.com/2012/10/drag-race-tesla-model-s-vs-bmw-m5-f10

Re:3 Tesla Model S links

[SternisheFan]

Sorry, I messed up with my copy/paste. This should be correct.

Tesla's main site/models: http://www.teslamotors.com/models

YouTube -Test drive ridealong: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqRuPrT2azw

Motorward has a link to YouTube -Drag race, Tesla Model S vs. BMW M5: http://www.motorward.com/2012/10/drag-race-tesla-model-s-vs-bmw-m5-f10

another company bankrupt

[Anonymous Coward]

why did they earn this? they took government money, built cars in another country and are now going bankrupt.
GG obama.
Nobama 2012

Still waiting for microturbine hybrid...

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, this is getting kinda lame here.

First serious try was done by by the guys behind the Capstone microturbines, to build a HEV, but they also tried to use flywheels when the carbon fiber variety still wasn't up to snuff, so they got close but gave up, and just sold the microturbines. Later on they did demo a kit car retrofitted with one of their microturbines, without the flywheel.

Jaguar recently had a concept car using twin Blaydon microturbines matched to special switched reluctance generators, but the production version of the car doesn't feature microturbines.

With the F-1 tech advancement of KERS flywheels, we're finally at the point where a diesel microturbine series HEV with flywheel energy recovery and in-wheel motors can be realized into a lightweight package.

Now it is true that conventional microturbines generally lose to small diesels in terms of absolute efficiency, but small diesels are not normally that lightweight. Though you might be able to cheat with single cylinder diesel engines with electric assist turbochargers.