Slashdot Mirror
Why Nissan Is Talking To Tesla Model S Owners
cartechboy writes "What do you do when you're the first to market with a mainstream item, and yet the competition seems to be a hotter commodity? Naturally you do your homework. That's exactly what Nissan is doing. With disappointing sales of its Leaf electric car, Nissan is doing the smart thing and talking to Tesla owners about their cars. One would assume this is in hopes of understanding how to better compete with the popular Silicon Valley upstart. The brand sent an email to Sacramento-area Model S owners with four elements ranging from general information and a web-based survey to asking owners to keep a driving diary and to come in for in-person interviews with Nissan staff. The question is: Is Nissan trying to get feedback on its marketplace and competition, or is the brand looking at either offering an electric car with longer range or planning to challenge Tesla with an upper end plug-in electric car?"
I don't see the Tesla as competing with the Leaf. The Leaf basically competes with the Volt. It's biggest problem is range. The Leaf suits only a narrow market who either has a very short commute or a relatively short commute with charging at their destination.
There's nothing wrong with that, but it does mean there's necessarily a small audience for it.
Tesla Model S vs. Nissan leaf
ones moderately cool and stylish ones a tiny little generic compact with some electrics in it..
when you can sell powerful electric sports cars to rich people and celebreties
???
Profit
Anyway Leaf is a silly name to sell an electric car.
How did Nissan get a list of Tesla owners and their email addresses?
My wife is a LEAF owner. In shopping for the LEAF, multiple Nissan dealers were dismissive about the vehicle as a passing fad, a toy, or just dumb. Several dealers didn't even stock one, let a lone a selection. One dealer's demo LEAF was parked behind other cars, under a tree, covered with bird crap.
The LEAF requires much less service (no gas, no oil changes) while presenting a steep technology learning curve, and making the issue worse, by treating the LEAF as an outcast, dealers sell fewer and have even less reason to be enthusiastic.
To understand why the Tesla is so hot while the LEAF is not, Nissan need look no further than their own dealer network. Tesla has not dealers, only showrooms, so none of the internal combustion versus electric hangups as the Nissan dealers.
BTW, we did finally find a Nissan dealer that had a good attitude about the LEAF and we are satisfied customers.
Nissan might have more luck selling their expensive electric if the darn thing weren't sprung like an overstuffed haywagon. The suspension is so soft there is not a trace of road feel, and the power steering is so squishy it's like driving a virtual reality vehicle in a bang-em-up game.
Not everybody who wants an electric wants it to feel like a Ford Explorer.
Don't take life too seriously; it isn't permanent.
The Tesla cars are marketed towards higher end customers. The kind of people with disposable income to afford the extra pain that might be associated with early adoption of new tech. Also the kind of people who tend to enjoy "early adopter" status.
Things like the garage charger (or even owning a home with a garage) or a secondary vehicle in case you want to drive somewhere out of range ... these are much easier to deal with if you can afford the 80k Tesla S
Beyond the financial, Tesla modeled themselves after small boutique shops. A lot more attention payed per customer, and a very narrow focus. There are always going to be problems with new tech, but Tesla has seemed much better positioned to get over those hurdles than a widely distributed brand. A Nissan dealership has to work with sedans, trucks, gas, electric, diesel, etc. Tesla is free to focus on working out their electrical issues and helping their customers
It also helps to have a eccentric billionaire at the helm. Other eccentric billionaires tend to flock together, giving the brand a lot of visibility.
This signature is false.
The other part of the story is that one is fuck ugly, the other is super high tech and elegant. Don't get me wrong, there's things I'd do differently on the Model S, but there's not much I could do worse on the Leaf.
To me, the Leaf looks like a butt-ugly frog. Maybe if the Nissan Leaf were as sleek a design as the Tesla, Nissan might sell a few more. I dont understand why car companies assume that electric or hybrid cars need to have "weird" designs.
Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.
Those who forget the past are doomed
The vast majority of Teslas have been sold in California. I know that because I happen to be doing some work in Silicon valley at the moment and I see a Tesla (or 5) every single day. I don't think I've seen one Tesla where I live.
The difference is that in California there are lots of charging stations set up so you can "plug in" when you need to. I'd be willing to bet there are not many charging stations in Montana.
The Leaf is a commuter car, the Tesla is a high end sports car that just happens to run on electric power instead of gas. The Tesla is an expensive car. The people driving them are the same people that a year or two ago would have bought a Porsche or a top end BMW or Audi. These are people that like fast cars and have a lot of disposable income.
Above all, the Tesla is a status symbol. It's a rich guy's way of saying I could drive a Porsche but I choose to drive a Tesla because it's environmentally friendly.
The Leaf, sadly, is DOA. Unless you start getting charging stations everywhere the only practical alternative is the hybrid. That's why the Prius, and to a lesser extent the Volt, have been so successful. It won't leave you stranded.
If you get stranded in the Tesla you just call Jeeves the butler to come pick you up in the Range Rover and all is well :-)
Range. Range. Range. Ability to recharge quickly at many locations. Range. Make it look cool. Range.
There. Paypal me a bunch of money, Nissan. Did they really not know this?
This might have worked better had I typed in the correct Manufacturer. Doh!
In the immortal words of Socrates, who said; 'I drank what?'
When you sell a new product, there are four cases:
A) Your product is better and more expensive.
B) Your product is better and cheaper.
C) Your product is worse and cheaper.
D) Your product is worse and more expensive.
There is only one case which will fail to materialize any significant sales, in case you didn't notice: it's D.
Tesla just about managed to get into the A category by having a roadster that is genuinely better than the competition in many, though not all, respects. It's a sports car, people are prepared to make compromises for performance. Most of all, they are prepared to make compromises in terms of the price. While the superiority of the Model S is limited to bragging rights, while range issues where addressed by brute force, that is in fact a unique selling point to a certain demographic that doesn't mind spending as much money on one car as other people would spend on five. Bragging rights aside, the Model S is still an inferior product compared to most other cars, including those of similar or much lower price.
Most other electric cars are firmly in the D category. They are both worse and more expensive. None of this is a game breaker by itself, but the combination is. The leaf is too limited by its battery to get even roughly in the territory of a normal car and it has no reserves to drive at higher speeds while still maintaining acceptable range. That's a non-issue for the Tesla, due to a huge battery pack and an equally huge price to go with it.
What nobody has done so far, is move into the C category. It doesn't matter if your product is worse, if you can sell it at a cheaper price than all the rest. We've seen this work with netbooks. Given full basic functionality, performance is much less of an issue than linear extrapolation would have you expect. You can sell a product at half price that has much less than a quarter of the performance in several metrics, so long as it still has full functionality. You could sell electric cars at half the price of the cheapest conventional cars - that is roughly 3-4000 euros - if they are still cars. An aerodynamic two-seat half-width car (passengers sitting behind each other, not next to each other), that can drive about 70km/h is enough for most needs in a city and limited over-land travel. Given the low price expectations are much lower. Given the smaller size and lower speed, much less energy is consumed. A 4 kWh battery could yield a range of about 100km, with some extra margin. Even a conventional wall outlet can charge this battery within an hour.
Most problems associated with high cost of electric cars are down to large size, high speeds, high weight and high range requirements, making large batteries an absolute necessity. Once you back away from large size and high speeds of conventional cars, the rest follows automatically. A small, relatively slow car needs 4kWh / 100km. A conventional car needs about four times as much, about 16kWh/ 100km. A battery that has only a quarter of the capacity can be charged in a quarter of the time. It is also just a quarter of the price, so it matters less if quick charging wears it down faster. The result is a much cheaper and much lighter car, that certainly doesn't need carbon fibre parts to save a few pounds. You could use something as pedestrian as a steel tube frame and still get a 300kg car.
Try making a car that doesn't suck. The leaf is a great car for people who don't like to drive. Make a car that handles well and performs respectably and people might want to buy it.
Maybe THAT is why Nissan is talking to Tesla owners: they're planning on competing with them with comparable models.
That would really be outside-the-box thinking for Nissan (or any Japanese car maker, really). Toyota, Nissan, and Honda (as well as their Korean counterparts Hyundai and Kia) have made many shit-tons of money in this country by selling really, really, excruciatingly boring cars. Talk to any person who has ever owned a Corolla - for example - and ask them to give you adjectives that explain their car and I guarantee you exciting will not be one. I know people who have sold their working Japanese cars after many years just because they couldn't stand to drive / look at them any more.
Now, granted, the American car makers have sadly largely copied that strategy and wondered why they can't get anywhere in the market.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
If it was $5000 cheaper, and didn't look like ass.
If you can't complete, purchase. Then you can either absorb or eliminate.
Except for the eco-proud, nobody wants a car that looks like a Leaf, or a Prius, or anything like an economy car. Yeah, we get it - little high pressure tires and aerodynamics matter, but you need to learn to hide that shit. Bland sedan or cute 2 seater (miata/mr2/Z3/Z4/TT) style for even lower drag - don't even let me know it's electric.
And give an option for a built in mini-generator (honda style - small, quiet, 2kW) that will give drivers the option of never getting stuck.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
>Bragging rights aside, the Model S is still an inferior product compared to most other cars, including those of similar or much lower price.
How's that? I can probably count on one hand the number of days in a year I need to drive >300 miles. Maybe on those days the Model S would be "inferior", but in every other way it's superior to any car I've ever had or seriously considered buying.
Erm... what do you consider to be worse about the Model S compared to other cars? It has superior performance to most luxury cars (it borders on being classified as a sports car itself, performance-wise), is surprisingly roomy, has lots of storage (due to the "front trunk"), is very comfortable to ride in (no engine vibration, no gear shifting, no idle noise... heck, it makes even sitting in traffic tolerable), has excellent handling with an extremely low center of gravity (the battery pack and it's armor plate make up the car's undercarriage), and it literally exceeds the maximum safety ratings that can be assigned (it broke some of the testing equipment rather than itself breaking, and the testers were *unable* to flip it with their usual test machine).
Its electronic, touch-driven center dashboard console might be a bit weird and off-putting to some people, but other people will absolutely love it. It's RWD, but since the motor is at the rear (and the whole car is pretty heavy anyhow) it actually has good traction under the drive wheels. Despite some news excitement, it's way less fire-prone than a gasoline car (and far safer in the event of a fire, too, with the car warning people in plenty of time to pull over and exit the car... following collisions with heavy metal objects on the road that would likely have totaled a conventional car). The range concern is a bit of a red herring; I drive more 250 miles in one day (giving some margin of error from their nominal max range) only a few days a year, and most people literally never do (for those who do, there's always the rental option for that occasional day... or just plan to eat lunch while the car sits at the supercharger station, unless you're planning to hit 500 miles in that one day).
I see it as far, far more than merely bragging rights. Most people seem to agree more with me than with you, too, considering all the "car of the year" and such awards it has received...
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
Cars have reached "Peak Car" levels.
Almost everyone 30 and under is over cars.
That said, all electrics compete best in areas where the electricity source is not from coal and where there is high speed rail between cities.
Exceptions: Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Vancouver BC.
Mostly as those areas have cheaper electricity which makes a full tank of electricity cost about 1/20th per mile as much as gasoline does.
However, it is more likely Nissan is more concerned by the 2015 and 2016 model year Teslas which are in the 45,000 and 30,000 dollar range.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Compared to my '04 Jaguar XJ (or, even the current one that I don't like), or the new Maserati sedan, the Tesla is a sad joke as a car. It is cramped, for one thing (I cannot even get into it); entry and exit is more difficult and less dignified (fun to watch your trophy girl, though, while you hold her door), and there's no good way to make a quick trip from the LA basin to Santa Barbara, Torrey Pines, or Palm Desert with any load of luggage, full A/C, party-level audio, and lights.
The Tesla model S and the Nissan Leaf are two very different cars. We have friends that own both, and have been doing the numbers on getting a Leaf.
The Tesla is a no-compromise luxury car, at a luxury car price. Has good range. Can be your main sedan.
The Leaf is an unapologetic economy car, priced to be a good value (at least in California after various rebates.) It's a commute car -- you don't go on road trips to the mountains with it.
The Leaf can be driven single-occupant in the the high-occupancy-vehicle (commute) lane. My wife figures that could take 45 minutes a day off her commute. So... what is getting 4 hours of your life back every week worth to you?
As I see it, Tesla has nailed down one end of the market, and the Leaf has nailed down the other with something that is *not* just a street-legal golf cart, but a real car. Anybody else that wants to make an electric car either has to wiggle in between, or try to move the goal posts. And IMHO, both the Tesla and the Leaf do a good job of defending their respective goal posts.
Tesla sell real cars that happen to be all-electric. And by "real" I mean "practical". The leaf has a range of maybe 80 miles. And (according to a NIssan dealer) that drops to "maybe 40" in the Minnesota winter. Even if Tesla cars lose half their advertised range here, it's still more than the Leaf's optimal conditions range.
I looked into the Leaf last time I was car shopping. I went to a Nissan dealer. They told me they don't actually HAVE a Leaf, but they'd be happy to show me a picture of one. They said they'd have three of them in stock in three months, because people had pre-ordered them, and maybe I could look at one then. Not test-drive one though. Just look.
But it's really the range that's the problem. There's no competition for Tesla on practicality. There's definitely competition on affordability.
Leaf is definitely a niche vehicle for people who never commute very far. Ever. I'd love to have an all-electric car, but a Leaf doesn't have the range, and a Tesla is way the hell too expensive. I kinda liked the Volt (over-engineered UI notwithstanding) but I just couldn't bring myself to pay that much for a car. Plus that guy's half-gas so it's a totally different ballpark than a Leaf is anyway.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
This philosophy has been applied to a car that exists and sells now, the Renault Twizy. Nissan belongs to Renault, incidentally (Renault also has a "full size" car, the ZOE, a fair bit shorter than the Leaf) .
It's not far from your parameters, although about 50% heavier and about twice the price, plus a monthly charge for battery leasing.
Probably bought a list from the CA State DMV. I can't speak for California specifically, but many states will sell any and all data they have on you to practically anyone.
Have gnu, will travel.
Nissan makes more expensive cars and owns Infinity etc. Tesla owners are NOT in the demographic of the Leaf. As with other typically poor /. articles it sparks a discussion by nerds who are annoyed with the article or the often horrible summary.
The Leaf sells really well and they don't much profit as they planned because it's a starter car; something the industry doesn't do much... like when they make their 1st truck for example. By profit, the car is a loser (compared to other models;) but it's purpose is investment in the future. The Leaf is the top car in it's bracket (not that there are many to compete with.) It's one approach before going to the higher end model of the car, Tesla is the other approach.
Given that new cars take years to make; this indicates they are aiming for a higher niche and probably going towards the same target as Tesla ... 3 years in the future, a 50k car; probably 4 wheel drive SUV car (cross over or whatever you want to call it. A wannabee SUV that breaks if you actually try to treat it half like a jeep.)
I've test driven the Leaf 3 times (just for fun.) Initially it was great, the other 2 times the dealership was not friendly about it. They know they won't make the $$$ from it and I found it extremely odd when I was defending the car against the salesman's critique. I suspect some policy or something was formed after the 1st few months at the dealership. I TOTALLY understand why Tesla sells the way they do; it's amazing any Leaf can sell under such resistance! Me? I can't charge it yet so I have to wait until I move or something. Large cities have many rental companies to fill in the rare gaps when you need a gas hog; and it's cheaper than owning one.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
What's the climate like?
Most other electric cars are firmly in the D category. They are both worse and more expensive. None of this is a game breaker by itself, but the combination is.
Nonsense. I bought a LEAF specifically because it's less expensive than a comparable gasoline-powered car. The range is limited, but I have to have another car anyway, so we just use that one for long trips. The LEAF is unbeatable as a commuter vehicle.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Guy I know commutes with a Leaf to work. Loves the electric benefits but says he can't keep the heat on in this bastard cold winter without the risk of running out of juice. He bundles up and braves it, but I gotta wonder, the battery must get hot anyway during operation; why can't they pump some of that into the cabin? I've also heard comments that some hybrids have that problem too -- to get decent heat, you have to run the engine.
I can't fathom why anyone who can afford a Tesla Model S would buy something else.
Because, if you can afford a Tesla Model S, you can afford the gas for anything short of a Sherman tank (roughly 1.2 gallons per mile). Gas is still king for availability and speed of "recharging" your energy storage.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
Toyota, Nissan, and Honda (as well as their Korean counterparts Hyundai and Kia) have made many shit-tons of money in this country by selling really, really, excruciatingly boring cars.
While that's true, all three of them have also made considerable money selling really, really exciting purpose-built sports cars. Nissan had the 240SX, Honda the S2000, and Toyota the Supra and now the GT86 (or Scion FRS or wtfever it's called here.)
Now, granted, the American car makers have sadly largely copied that strategy and wondered why they can't get anywhere in the market.
The Focus is a great car to drive, and that's everywhere in the market. But actually, that's not the problem with American car makers. The problem is manifold. They've managed to guide the crash standards towards selling us land yachts, and the emissions standards towards boning imports. And probably most importantly, they've got a large mass of idiots who will buy what they think is an American car on jingoism alone, when most of them are made from foreign parts (including engine block castings!) anyway. Also, they have to accomodate fat fucks. Having been one at times, I say this with all reasonable irony.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If Nissan is so interested in the vehicle and what it is that attracts owners, perhaps they should do like Consumer Reports and just buy one. Get a team of their engineers together and do a non-destructive "consumer level review" of the car. Emails from owners to a company fishing for information is one thing - but to have an actual car to analyze and see where the "bar has been set" is best.
If they want to beat the competition, they have to actually acquire the information the old fashioned way. Then just as importantly - make a conscious decision to NOT make something that falls short.
In other words - make a system that is naturally easier to use and user-centric - don't go all "Cadillac" and come up with some un-holy interface that just pisses off your customer base. Every time you see a device that hits the market that totally misses the mark of your customer, maybe you should fire the idiots designing your product and get people that f**king listen to the customers.
Never have a philosophy which supports a lack of courage
At least they're up-front about it. I refuse to EVER buy another Sony product since they decided to ship rootkits to their customers years ago. If I was King of the Universe I'd make every person who even REMOTELY knew what the Hell was going on at Sony commit seppuku in public, then give away all of proprietary Sony technology immediately into the public domain.
Never have a philosophy which supports a lack of courage
I bought a Tesla although I did look seriously at the Leaf. I also did some research on the upcoming BMW i3.
So far I've been amazed by the Tesla and in no way regret the decision to buy it. It's an incredible car.
The Leaf falls short on a number of fronts:
While the BMW i3 is not on the market yet, what i've read makes me believe that it will use very similar technology to the Leaf with the only real difference being the additional of an optional small gasoline engine. Yet more complexity, more weight, and more maintenance. Exactly what I do not want to see in an EV.
If Nissan wants to compete with Tesla they're going to have to change both their mindset as well as the mindset of their dealers. I would argue that an electric car is not just a gasoline car with the gasoline engine and gas tank replaced with an electric motor + batteries. It really is a different type of vehicle that requires rethinking what a car should be from the ground up. Until Nissan, Ford, GM, etc., as well as the car dealers, figure this out, they'll be unable to compete on equal terms with Tesla in the EV market.
I agree with most of what you said. I have had my Model S for almost a year now and sold my Prius. The number of times I need a gasoline powered car is quite small. I have also found it to be a very practical car. I regularly haul my dog in the back. I've hauled bicycles up to the mountains and even a new dishwasher. I currently have a 50lbs bag of dog food in the frunk. The amount of interior space is amazing.
It handles beautifully and has plenty of range for most trips. The Superchargers are also not that big of a deal. When I went to Lake Tahoe I stopped along the way to charge and got lunch, using the money I would have spent on gas. By the time I was done, the car was about ready. I monitored the state of charge with my phone and started up the AC before heading back and unplugging it since it was around 106F outside that day.
While the touch screen isn't for everyone, they did a good job with it. It's very responsive with large buttons making it very easy to use while driving. There's also voice support for the radio which also integrates Slacker and navigation.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
Its an electric car, not a sports car.
The fact that it's an econobox has more to do with that than it being an electric. As we see with the Model S and the roadster before it, performance is very possible for electric vehicles.
I don't read AC A human right
Is Nissan totally OBLIVIOUS to what makes a quality automobile? The beautiful Telsa is like a futuristic BMW 5 Series, the Leaf is a butt ugly piece of junk. It's like entertaining the delusion that a Porsche and a Buick are about the same in terms of performance, driving pleasure, and prestige. Or that Bloc de Foie Gras d'Oie and Spam are about the same in terms of flavor and texture. Is it just because the Leaf and Telsa are "electric" that some believe it magically puts them in the same category in terms of quality and performance?
In 3 years, the model E will be out with a costs of 35K, and a range of 200 MPC+. My guess is that if any company is going to compete against Tesla, they will have to deal with 3 items:
1) range.
2) fast charge everywhere.
3) car for the money. $ for $, tesla is the best value going. None better.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The leaf is too limited by its battery to get even roughly in the territory of a normal car and it has no reserves to drive at higher speeds while still maintaining acceptable range.
Remember that Nissan is a Japanese company and that is the Leaf's primary market that it was designed for. As it happens it does okay in Europe as well, but it wasn't build to deal with the average American's range anxiety or tastes.
Most of its features are about comfort, and some of the best are only available in Japan (e.g. whole house UPS). Japan has lots of cars that never make it to the rest of the world, despite them being extremely practical and useful simply because the Japanese evaluate cars differently. Look up "kei cars", for example.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Seriously, people want a CAR. Because it's electric doesn't mean you need to hop your designers up on LSD before work in order to have it stand out. I kind of liked the specs of the Leaf, but it has looks that turn off almost all potential buyers.
It also helps that the Tesla S was designed from scratch as an electric car. The Leaf is using basically the same platform as the Cube, so it's just a gas car with an electric chucked in. The Tesla Roadster was just an electric Elise, but it was really a limited-run testbed, and it could sell as a high-performance car at least (given it could out-accelerate a conventional Elise)
An aerodynamic two-seat half-width car (passengers sitting behind each other, not next to each other), that can drive about 70km/h is enough for most needs in a city and limited over-land travel.
For us USAsians, that's a hair over 43MPH. You would never sell such a "car" in the US. City streets here often have speed limits higher than that. The only people who buy EV's with top speeds that slow are golf courses.
That would really be outside-the-box thinking for Nissan (or any Japanese car maker, really). Toyota, Nissan, and Honda (as well as their Korean counterparts Hyundai and Kia) have made many shit-tons of money in this country by selling really, really, excruciatingly boring cars.
I own a Honda Integra type R (which revs to 9000rpm, 15mph to 150mph in one gear), my sister owns a Toyota MR2 (mid engined, RWD). I constantly play with the lift off oversteer with mine around roundabouts. Also, have you not hears of the old Nissan Skyline or new GT-R? Not all their cars are dull... in fact, I'd say for reasonably priced cars, the Japanese manufacturers have some of the best.
In a word, it's ugly. Compete other electrics? Not likely, given that most others range in looks from so-so to very attractive. No, this thing might be an option for a Camry hybrid buyer considering pure electric instead.
That would really be outside-the-box thinking for Nissan (or any Japanese car maker, really). Toyota, Nissan, and Honda (as well as their Korean counterparts Hyundai and Kia) have made many shit-tons of money in this country by selling really, really, excruciatingly boring cars.
I own a Honda Integra type R (which revs to 9000rpm, 15mph to 150mph in one gear)
I can tell you a few things about the Honda / Acura Integra from my own experience:
my sister owns a Toyota MR2 (mid engined, RWD)
That car was discontinued some time ago and did not sell in particularly large numbers in comparison to the other Toyota cars. It also shared almost no parts with any other Toyota, and hence they (as a company) learned almost nothing from it.
Also, have you not hears of the old Nissan Skyline
Also discontinued, and never sold in North America.
or new GT-R
A technically impressive car, but made in such small numbers as to be of no real importance. It also does not share any relevant parts with any other cars of the same badge. Being as hardly anyone wants to spend $80k on a Nissan anyways, its existence is of at best marginal significance.
Not all their cars are dull... in fact, I'd say for reasonably priced cars, the Japanese manufacturers have some of the best.
You didn't name a single reasonably priced car that is in current production. Furthermore of the cars that you named that are not in production, they were outsold several hundred fold by sedans from the same vendors that could be marketed as cures for insomnia. You could just as well be trying to excuse the Dodge Neon by telling us about the performance specs of the Viper.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
They just need to win nearly all of the awards, and continue winning them.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Why do you think your sparsely inhabited backwater on this planet is representative for the global car market? And for that matter, why do Tesla owners here in this thread and elsewhere think *they* are in any way representative for any population on this planet whatsoever, with the exception of the upper 0.5%?
Is your smug superiority superior enough to buy everyone else an electric car who can't afford to pay a cool $60,000 or $85,000 for theirs?
Oh, I agree that most of the time a heat pump system would be more efficient, and having one shouldn't add much weight at all as you're only extending the capabilities of the AC system a bit. Yes, cooling/heating the car while it's still plugged in should help as well. I suggested a hydrocarbon heat source for a number of reasons:
1. Functionality - you still get heat even at -40
2. Range - In extreme cold the heat source can not only heat the cabin, but the battery as well, enabling you to pull more of the energy from it, plus you're not using electricity to provide the heat.
3. Safety - If something happens, you're still capable of heat with an exhausted battery.
I don't read AC A human right
He said the Model S was in cat A (better, more expensive).
It's the **Leaf** that he said was in Cat D (worse, more expensive).
Sure, you can rev it to 9k, but the fuel economy is so poor at that point that you might as well be driving a car with a larger engine
It's not designed to be fuel efficient. At 70mph, it's already over 4000rpm in top gear. It is not a cruiser. It's a performance 1.8 litre 4 pot.
That car is pretty much physically undrivable (and equally so, unridable) for anyone much over 6' tall - I tried to sit in the driver's seat of an Integra coupe once (I'm 6'3") and even with the seat all the way back I could not physically work the pedals because my knees were firmly embedded into the dash.
Erm... I'm 6'6". Was the car you drove a type R? - they have different seats, I assume set lower. Driving position is absolutely fine for me, headroom is better than just about any car (there's about 3 or 4 inches leeway above my head in the Integra - no other car I've driven has near that).
A technically impressive car, but made in such small numbers as to be of no real importance. It also does not share any relevant parts with any other cars of the same badge. Being as hardly anyone wants to spend $80k on a Nissan anyways, its existence is of at best marginal significance.
Well... people who want an astoundingly quick car will pay that much, and with good reason. It trounces just about everything on the planet. Sure, it hasn't got the badge, but if you want a (relatively) cheap usable supercar, that's the best one.
You didn't name a single reasonably priced car that is in current production. Furthermore of the cars that you named that are not in production, they were outsold several hundred fold by sedans from the same vendors that could be marketed as cures for insomnia. You could just as well be trying to excuse the Dodge Neon by telling us about the performance specs of the Viper.
I'm not defending the dross most Japanese cars are... I was pointing out there are some good ones. The GTR is about the same price as a Tesla S, and yes, it is a hell of a lot faster. Current good less expensive Japanese cars include the Subaru BRZ, Mitsubishi Evo X (though Evo VI's were the best), Toyota GT86, and the new Subaru WRX will come next year (though recent previous ones have been a little underwhelming, like Mitsubishi's).
Performance cars, even reasonable cheap ones, will _always_ be outsold by dull sedans. That's the nature of the market. I'm not trying to defend the dross that is the Toyota Corolla.