Consumer Reports Says Tesla Model S Is Best Overall Vehicle

cartechboy writes "When one thinks of Consumer Reports, refrigerator ratings and car seat reviews usually come to mind, but the organization actually reviews cars too. In fact, it just released a new round of top vehicle picks and it said the Tesla Model S is is the Best Overall Car you can buy. It's unusual, to say the least, for an outlet that typically names a Toyota or Lexus to choose an electric car that costs nearly $100,000 in most popular configurations from a Silicon Valley upstart. Interestingly, the Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car. Isn't the Model S green? But I digress. A company that many thought would be bankrupt and closed by now has produced a brand-new electric car from scratch that Consumer Reports feels is the best car it's actually tested since 2007."

Comments

Film at 11!

[Anonymous Coward]

$100K car is better than a bunch of $20-30K cars.

Re:Film at 11!

[TechyImmigrant]

To be fair, you could spend $100k on a Merc or a BMW and get something that looks like a $40k Merc or BMW but is less reliable.

Re:Film at 11!

[icebike]

Or you could spend three times that on a Bentley and have a reupholstered Volkswagen Phaeton that delivers all the mileage of a 1980s pickup truck (and is also less reliable).

Over priced as the Model S is, that price is going no where but down, and range is going to go up.

Re:Film at 11!

[Moheeheeko]

then why isnt the Bugatti Veyron #1 on the list at ~2 million dollars?

Re:Film at 11!

[Anonymous Coward]

Reliability is not tied to initial price. BMW's and AMG's are in the shop just as much as any other car and their average bill on exiting the shop is about 2x-3x higher. Even for things like bulb changes, brakes, belt changes, plugs, wires, alignments, shocks, struts, batteries, fluids etc. All of those are routine wear items that every car has to have done regardless of who made it and how much it initially cost.

Re:Film at 11!

[macpacheco]

Because more expensive doesn't mean better.
The Tesla Model S isn't better because it costs more, it's better because it's better.
An electric car with a powerful motor gets awesome acceleration, yet a quiet ride.
But its the car's electronics are better than any other car out there.
Plus a hundred grand is a lot of money, but its a number that doesn't require to be a 1% to be able to afford it, it's like a 10% or 15% richest person car.
The cheapest one at less than 60 grand after credits are affordable to maybe the top quarter of the US population.
Musk was right, EVs will be the best cars from now on.

Re:Film at 11!

[Moheeheeko]

That was my point. the AC implied more expensive = better.

Re:Film at 11!

[Firethorn]

Implied, maybe. But there are typically serious gains to be made quality wise when you go from the bottom end to the mid end, but going above that quickly gets you into 'bling' being more important than functionality.

A car built for quality isn't going to be as cheap as one built for that purpose, but it should fulfill various other functions better.

Where does the law of reducing returns kick in? Hard to say.

Re:Film at 11!

[MobSwatter]

Matches are cheaper.

Re:Film at 11!

[igny]

Or you could spend three times that on a Bentley and have a reupholstered Volkswagen Phaeton that delivers all the mileage of a 1980s pickup truck (and is also less reliable).

Over priced as the Model S is, that price is going no where but down, and range is going to go up.

So what does it mean for Tesla's resale value? Did Consumer Reports take car's resale value into account?

Re:Film at 11!

[tibit]

Generally speaking, cars are not investments, unless you're a collector. Just like the fine house one lives in is not meant to be an investment.

Re:Film at 11!

[bhiestand]

Generally speaking, cars are not investments, unless you're a collector. Just like the fine house one lives in is not meant to be an investment.

So what? It's an asset worth 6 figures that will likely be re-sold during its useful lifetime. Depreciation matters. You expect a house to at least hold its value over time.

I know people who spend a few hundred per year to have the latest MacBooks, buying the new model with every release and selling the old one. Laptops aren't investments, either, but resale value matters.

Required South Park Reference

[Virtucon]

"f you wanna live, you'd better step on the gas! Oh wait, is this a Tesla? Shit! Well press on the prissy pedal!" - Cartman

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Anonymous Coward]

*pussy pedal.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Ralph Wiggam]

That "prissy pedal" makes the Model S go from 0 to 60 in 4 seconds and do a quarter mile in 12.5s. That's faster than a Porsche 911.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Algae_94]

There's more to racing cars than how fast they go in a straight line.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Virtucon]

For $89 K there are a lot of other cars that go faster from 0 to 60 and cost less or are in the ballpark. Fortunately these car's also won't just arbitrarily catch fire
when parked in their garage and unlike the Tesla, you can buy one in most states.

Chevrolet Camaro Convertible ZL1 (Manual) 0-60 mph 4.0
2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray Z51 0-60 mph 3.8 Quarter Mile 12.0

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps, but a Corvette can't do that with more than 2 people in it.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Ralph Wiggam]

I know. And since the Model S is as heavy as a Sherman Tank, it makes a terrible race car. But calling a car that can dust a 911 in a drag race "prissy" is just stupid.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Ralph Wiggam]

Wow. You can name two sports cars with slightly better 0-60 times than a 4,600 pound four door luxury sedan. That's very impressive.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[amn108]

Weight figures:
Porsche 911: ~1300kg
Tesla Model S: ~2000kg
M4 Sherman: ~30000kg

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Firethorn]

Oh certainly. Thing is, with stuff like them having to undertake 'special measures' to flip one, it sounds like it's a very stable platform for driving in as well.

The extra sprung mass of the battery might be part of what's keeping 'road noise' perception well below what most people are used to.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Monoman]

Has there been an update to the second garage fire? If you know more then you should post up the information. The last I heard was "In this particular case, we don't yet know the precise cause, but have definitively determined that it did not originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or the electrical receptacle, as these components were untouched by the fire."

If that is true then that that leaves. 1) the car batteries 2) something that was brought into the vehicle 3) something external to the vehicle 4) ?????

Slashdotters love good coverup stories, etc but you gotta back them up with more than headlines.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.chevyhardcore.com/news/gm-launches-investigation-into-random-5th-gen-camaro-fire/

http://www.atmoreadvance.com/2014/01/24/car-catches-on-fire-at-bank/

Not all cars are immune to spontaneous combustion. Looks like the Camaro isn't either.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[dave420]

Take a look at how many gasonline-powered cars catch fire in people's garages, and then realise how ignorant you are.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty much any short run high performance vehicle will have problems like this, fires, spectacular mechanical faults (e.g. the steering wheel comes off!) and ridiculous maintenance problems ("So, yeah, every 10 000 miles we have to tighten this bolt, but it's inside a compartment you can only reach by removing the entire exhaust system...")

The reason is a cross product of two factors. On the one hand you've doing less prototyping and component tests than a mass market product like a BMW 5 series, because prototyping is so ludicrously expensive and you just aren't going to sell enough units to justify it and then on the other hand you're pushing the materials and components as hard as you can to get the best possible performance. So e.g. maybe BMW puts a 1mm aluminium case on something, they find it gets hotter than they'd like in the prototype, they switch to a 2mm case and that tests fine, the weight increase is tolerable, they sell it. No problems. Now you're making a limited run sports car, you need a case for this part, you guess 1mm will be fine and that'll keep the weight down. It does get pretty hot on the test track, but nothing bad seem to happen. OK, ship it. One day an owner runs the car up the unrestricted coast road in mid-summer. They stop for drinks, and - after a little while - that aluminium case, no longer air-cooled has reached a temperature where it can ignite nearby plastic trim. The car is ruined, photographs in the local papers. Whoops.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Anonymous Coward]

Cool - I had always assumed that part of the reason it was so fast is that it was _light_ (yes, I could have looked into it if I cared enough). Neat to see it manages to outaccelerate a 911 while being much heavier.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Virtucon]

Considering I have vehicles that are over 60 years old that are driven regularly, you don't know how ignorant you are. Most of the gasoline vehicle fires start because of poor maintenance or because of a broken line due to impact or damage from road debris. They don't catch fire from being plugged in or getting wet.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[tibit]

FTFY If that is true then that that leaves. 1) something that was brought into the vehicle 2) something external to the vehicle 3) ?????

I hate to point the obvious, but there's nothing inherently Tesla-related in that list. Unless, say, a musical Elon Musk bobble head caught a battery fire :)

Re:Required South Park Reference

[tibit]

This stuff can be thermally modeled in tools that cost a few $10K at most. There's no need for prototypes just to figure that one out.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Virtucon]

There are more, but you can't drive the Tesla vigorously and get the range... Even with the 85 kw batteries a lot of owners are reporting 200-250 miles typically without being hard on it with no A/C or heat, which is good but I live in the South and A/C is a necessary evil and I have yet to see any conclusive "real world" testing in either extreme heat or cold situations, both of which reduce range.

Likewise their 20 minute "super chargers" only give you about 141 miles of range, so if you're doing city driving where you plugin at work or at home then it'll be fine but on long road trips you'll be spending quite a bit of time waiting... So a car with a plug is still a car that's tethered.

I'm not saying the car is a bad car, I think it has a few issues to work out and I wouldn't buy one until they figure out their fire issues. Oh and by the way, I also have a Nissan Leaf so I'm not exactly anti-EV.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[killhour]

You're missing the point. If you want to get down to money, you have to talk about TCO (Total Cost of Ownership). My electric company charges $0.11/kWh. Now, that's on the low side, so let's guess $0.13 is a good national average (if a bit high). If an 85kWh battery can get me 265 miles, and we assume 85% charger efficiency, that means I need to spend $13 on electricity to get me 265 miles. The Chevy Camaro ZL1 has an EPA rating of 12/18 MPG. Lets assume all highway driving to make it even more stacked against me. The current average gas price for Premium (as of 02/24/14) is $3.78/gal, as per http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pe... . To go 265 miles in that Camaro, I need to spend $55.65 in gas. If I travel 1060 miles per month (to make the math easy), that means the Camaro costs me $170.60/month more than the Tesla does in gas. That's a $2047.20 difference per year. The Camaro costs $60,555 for the base model. The Model S costs $72,400 for the normal 85kWh or $85,900 for the high performance option. The standard 85kWh would just about pay for the difference over the 5 year period of the loan, meaning the difference is basically a wash if you're financing with a low interests rate (which, let's face it, you probably are). The high performance version would still have a $12k delta or so, but the Tesla is a LOT more practical for daily commuting, and that balances it out for me.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Virtucon]

Uh, I have a Nissan Leaf and for the past 23 months of ownership I can say that a) It's economical b) the range is nowhere near what was advertised c) the range is diminishing over time with battery age (I'm now down 30 miles on a full recharge) d) When I go to replace the batteries it I'm looking at an $8K bill (with labor). e) In the summer my range is roughly 2/3rds what it is during moderate temps 80F. f) While I have the 220/240V charger @ home, finding one around town isn't easy so the infrastructure isn't there yet. While I haven't graphed it out I figured after 6 years I'll be replacing the batteries and even at $3.20/gal (around here) that's a hell of a lot of gasoline. I figure I'll keep it for another two years and trade it in to avoid having to pay for the batteries and looking back at it considering the limited range etc. It may have made more sense to lease it. Overall it's a nice local runabout great for distances out to 20 miles or less. So while it may make sense for you, I'm thinking it's about a wash right now in terms of fuel costs/electric costs/charging inconvenience and battery life. If the US would allow us to import say the VW UP! or 1L Ford Fiesta that are 60MPG cars then you'd probably see a bit more pressure on electrics vs. overall cost of ownership.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Anonymous Coward]

That "prissy pedal" makes the Model S go from 0 to 60 in 4 seconds and do a quarter mile in 12.5s. That's faster than a Porsche 911.

Which is exactly why this is such an obvious bought advertorial that it damages both Consumer Reports' as well as Tesla's name.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Ralph Wiggam]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simile

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Ralph Wiggam]

the range is diminishing over time with battery age (I'm now down 30 miles on a full recharge)

Holy shit. How old is your car? Since at least the 2013 model year, the battery warranty has covered loss of charge below 9 bars for 60k miles.

Re: Required South Park Reference

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm impressed man, you're killing it with these +1 scores. I am probably wrong but the same opposition that Tesla gets from the auto industry seems identical to what you're probably feeling right now from the rest of the forum.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[RogL]

This stuff can be thermally modeled in tools that cost a few $10K at most. There's no need for prototypes just to figure that one out.

That's probably what the Camaro engineers thought...

Re:Required South Park Reference

[dave420]

Oh, well the fact you have old vehicles means all those cases of ICE cars bursting into flames are all lies, put out by the auto manufacturers themselves, who issued recalls for the hell of it, damaging their stock price to make me look bad? Eh? Your "logic" is pathetic. The fact of the matter is recalls happen frequently for cars which spontaneously combust. You clinging to your fantasy isn't changing reality, merely making you look absolutely stupid. You're right, though - those ICE cars don't catch fire because they get plugged in (as they don't get plugged in) or getting wet, but plenty do catch fire due to poor, factory-fresh wiring, or bad design. This is established fact, but I guess you know better than reality.

Re:Required South Park Reference

[Virtucon]

Oh I see, can't spell much so let's use an acronym, ICE. How about STFU?.. I swear you know nothing about how cars work and yet you can't even bring yourself to acknowledge that these $90K Teslas have a design flaw. 5 bursting into flames in the past five months vs. Zero for the Nissan Leaf over it's entire production run is a bit of a problem. Tesla will eventually have to come clean with a design change, not just a software push. Cars do not spontaneously combust, gasoline powered vehicles can catch fire due to damage, improper maintenance but still I don't see them blowing up just sitting by themselves unless they're leaking gas all over. That also requires an ignition source. Combustion 101 fact for you.. Fuel + Air + Spark = go. Have Fuel leaking onto a hot exhaust or having fumes come in contact with a spark, you'll get a fire but again fuel systems have progressed sufficiently to make that a non event unless again, there's damage or improper maintenance. This isn't the movies and they don't somehow mysteriously burst into flames. If there are safety issues, the manufacturers know what will happen if they ignore it. Recalls are expensive but not unprecedented to handle these kinds of problems and that's what's been missing in this because "oh lookie it's an electric car and their safe." Bullshit, I wouldn't buy a Tesla until this is fixed once and for all but then again there are retards with more brains than money so I'll let them bake the design in.

The fact that Musk and his cronies say "there are no problems" doesn't mean that there's not something wrong with these cars and eventually there will be an expensive recall and that's the last thing Tesla wants because of their "no dealer network" way of doing business. Couple that and now the analysts are pushing Tesla down in price ($65 is what is considered "fair" value/share) and you'll see them panic a bit here shortly. Despite that I'm not on the negative side of Tesla, I want them to succeed but this will literally blow up on them if they don't address it soon.

Also, grow up and learn a thing or two about the folks who have classic vehicles, we tend to take better care of them and are well aware of what can go wrong with them more than anybody else. I have a Leaf as well and you know what, it doesn't blow up or catch fire either but it's a PITA for long trips so it's relegated to around town driving or where we know a charging station is. I have faith in it because lots of well trained scientists worked with the engineers to come up with a power system that was reliable and as safe as they can make it. To be honest, the wife drives it and loves it and I know she's safe in it. Me I'll stick to my burping, old fuming and volatile internal combustion engines for my first preference in driving.

Now if you'll excuse me I'm going for a drive in one of my burping, farting, dangerous cars powered by some high grade fuel. If I pass a Tesla I'll be sure to wave the driver down and ask him if he's increased his Fire Hazard Insurance on his house.

last rite to remain silent collapsing

[Anonymous Coward]

keep it to ourselves? people will talk, always happens

Re:last rite to remain silent collapsing

[Anonymous Coward]

See, this is another one of those posts that makes me wonder what all this forum is used for.

This is old news

[pudding7]

This was a big deal when it was announced, almost a year ago.

Re:This is old news

[DogDude]

It's a big deal because a year later, lots of people STILL think it's the best car on the market.

Re:This is old news

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, and most of them have never even driven one! That's what's most amazing.

Re:This is old news

[VIPERsssss]

Sounds exactly like the buzz about Obama back in about 2007...

Yep, and years later, lots of people STILL think he's the best president in over a decade.

Re:This is old news

[Anonymous Coward]

To be fair, that's not much of an accomplishment, since there's only been one other President to compare him to in the past 12 years.
He's on the right side of some issues (gay rights), and the wrong side of others (gun rights).

Um, so CR is biased?

[gwstuff]

And the submitter isn't

"choose an electric car that costs nearly $100,000"

$89,500 is nearly $100,000.

Re: Um, so CR is biased?

[Anonymous Coward]

You lost me at Um.

Re:Um, so CR is biased?

[garyebickford]

Home version:
"It was on sale for 50% off, so I was able to buy it with the money I saved!"

Silicon Valley version:
"We lose $40 on each one but we make it up in volume!"
(see Osborne Computer)

Re:Um, so CR is biased?

[macpacheco]

The cheapest Tesla can be had after credits for about 60 grand. It's just that most people don't want the small 40kWh (software limited 60kWh) battery.

Re:Um, so CR is biased?

[aviators99]

The cheapest Tesla can be had after credits for about 60 grand. It's just that most people don't want the small 40kWh (software limited 60kWh) battery.

It *could* be had for that amount. The 40kWh model was only really "available" for a few days. A few hundred people were grandfathered in.

Re: Um, so CR is biased?

[gwstuff]

If you post a story in which you strongly insinuate that a reviewer is biased, then it's a good idea to either not be biased yourself, or to try to conceal that bias. There are several indications of bias in the post, I only mentioned one, which was to round off the price tag advertised in the review ($89,500) all the way to $100,000, instead of say, to $90,000. The exaggeration obviously helps advance the case further, since $100,000 seems significantly more than $89,500 than $90,000.

Another Tesla story?

[Experiment 626]

Wow, we haven't had one of those since yesterday. It's great that Slashdot has car stories, but when most of them are slashvertising the same car over and over, and the rest ignore anything that isn't EV / Hybrid / Autonomous it gets pretty boring and repetitive.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[BasilBrush]

Where are the other cars with interesting technology? Having stories for run of the mill ICE cars would be a mistake. But geeks do tend to be interested in EVs and AVs.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[meustrus]

Are you saying that boring cars that aren't EV / Hybrid / Autonomous are really that interested to the "news for nerds" crowd? For that matter, what about Ford F-150 story? That's definitely not EV / Hybrid / Autonomous, unless you count the little spies built into the vehicle. But go ahead. You were busy trying to downplay the newsworthiness of a vehicle which manages to impress everybody despite a sizable contingent devoted to grinding all EVs into dust.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Experiment 626]

I have to disagree with you there. The Hennessey Venom GT's 270.49 mph run on the space shuttle landing strip was a far more interesting technological accomplishment than this, and completely ignored by the Slashdot editors. Why should a car somehow count as "interesting technology" because electricity makes it go? So what, golf carts can do that.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[BasilBrush]

The Hennessey Venom GT's 270.49 mph run on the space shuttle landing strip was a far more interesting technological accomplishment than this, and completely ignored by the Slashdot editors.

It might be interesting for gear-heads. It's not interesting for geeks. Perhaps you're on the wrong site.

Why should a car somehow count as "interesting technology" because electricity makes it go? So what, golf carts can do that.

And if golf carts were new, they'd be interesting too.

Re: Another Tesla story?

[Anonymous Coward]

'Car with huge enginegoes faster' is interesting? 'Production car (sort of) (almost) sets new speed record' is interesting? No, thanks.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[div_2n]

We haven't had any major technological investments in propulsion of any type for a long time now, so going by your criteria we haven't had anything interesting happen in about 40 or 50 years now related to vehicular transportation.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[MightyYar]

I'd argue that the new electronic (no mechanical link) steering and ability of the car to drive itself under certain conditions make the Infinity Q50 worthy of a mention. It's at least as geeky cool as coupling a battery to an electric motor.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Experiment 626]

I get the Slashdot love for autonomous cars. Running off of computer, pushing the limits of AI, society having to come to terms with legal and liability issues raised by new technology. Good stuff.

But why should running off of electricity somehow make a car interesting? Because it's "new"? No, people have experimented with electric cars since the 19th century, the main difference now is we have batteries that make it semi-practical. Because storing power in a battery gives it something in common with geeky devices like laptops and tablets? Because some geeks also happen to be into environmental causes? Seriously, what is so exciting about this car that it gets so many Slashdot stories?

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Anonymous Coward]

Where are the other cars with interesting technology?

Well let's see. From this current season of Top Gear, they've already reviewed the McLaren P1, and are due to put it against the Porsche 918 Spyder (and Porsche already have the 997 GT3 R Hybrid).

In terms of "interesting technology" the McLaren contains technology developed directly from the Formula 1 KERS systems, which is pretty damn interesting in itself.

Of course neither McLaren or Porsche are called "Tesla" so Slashdot never report them. Because "muh tesla", or whatever.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[steelfood]

Because in terms of geeky, nerdy topics of discourse, Tesla Model S pretty much is the perfect trifecta: environmentally clean, advanced (computer) technology, and cars. The only thing that's anywhere near as close is Google's autonomous car, but that only hits two of the three, and doesn't have nearly as much going on around it as the Model S currently does.

Oh yeah, Tesla is also something of an underdog, taking on Big Auto and Big Oil at the same time.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Em Adespoton]

I get the Slashdot love for autonomous cars. Running off of computer, pushing the limits of AI, society having to come to terms with legal and liability issues raised by new technology. Good stuff.

But why should running off of electricity somehow make a car interesting? Because it's "new"? No, people have experimented with electric cars since the 19th century, the main difference now is we have batteries that make it semi-practical. Because storing power in a battery gives it something in common with geeky devices like laptops and tablets? Because some geeks also happen to be into environmental causes? Seriously, what is so exciting about this car that it gets so many Slashdot stories?

It isn't that it runs off of electricity -- it's that it does it in a way that is comparable with an ICE vehicle, combined with the development strategy that Musk uses at the company, plus the fact that this is an OTA reprogrammable software-controlled drive-by-wire vehicle.

Basically, there's a lot of nerdy stuff going on here, and nerds are interested in how it turns out. If this were done in an ICE vehicle, there'd probably also be a significant amount of interest -- but all the traditional manufacturers tend to stick to traditional design, manufacturing, and development methods (we even had a slashdot article on this exact issue not too long ago). Batteries? They're really not what all the hoopla is about. Nerds are fascinated by design and implementation, not by batteries.

As for your last question... Nissan is apparently asking the same question :) I hope they find the answer, as it would be great to have competition in the "let's do things in a new way" department.

Think of it as Indy music vs the RIAA, but swap Tesla in for the Indy producer and the MV conglomerate for the RIAA. Same story, different industry. So far though, the MV industry seems to be getting it, even if they're moving slowly. Probably due to the fact that our lives are on the line in their industry.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[gutnor]

Because of Musk. Geeks have also a thing for famous people voyeurism, just not regular star or singer.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Em Adespoton]

I'm not sure how many people are interested in the electric motor in the Tesla; I'm not. I'm more interested in their development methodology and their software/hardware interface.

That said, the Q50 is indeed worthy of a mention -- why not submit a few articles about it? After all, that's what gets Tesla mentioned -- people find it interesting enough to submit articles until a few of them stick to the front page.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Anonymous Coward]

It isn't that it runs off of electricity -- it's that it does it in a way that is comparable with an ICE vehicle

Except they're not. Any given Tesla car is shit compared to even the most basic ICE vehicle. Range is shit, price is shit, refuel time is shit. A Tesla is at least three times as shit as a cheap ICE car. Even their "green" credentials are on very thin ice, what with all those batteries full of Lithium and rare earths that travel all around the world after having been mined and extracted with horrifically polutting methods.

Although hey if your man crush on Musk is strong enough, I expect anything by Tesla looks good.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Nethemas the Great]

First and foremost it is considered a disruptive and transformative technology; it's one of Elon's pets; and it's an aspirational product for geeks. All of which, but especially the first point mean that any Tesla article will attract a sizable crowd.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Sarten-X]

I get the Slashdot love for Tesla. Running at usable power, pushing the limits of electrochemical storage, society having to come to terms with legal and liability issues raised by an unusual business model. Good stuff.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[drinkypoo]

Sadly, it's said to have vague and inconsistent steering feel and the hybrid doesn't get particularly exciting mileage. The Q50 is a yawn of a car.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Ralph Wiggam]

People have known for a long time that putting enormous turbochargers into a small light car can make it go very fast. I like the Venom GT and read about it on /r/cars this week- but this isn't the right crowd.

Have you ever seen a golf cart do a quarter mile in 12.5 seconds? I haven't.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[MightyYar]

Well, I drive a yawn of a car (two, actually) - but it can't drive itself!

Re:Another Tesla story?

[cheesybagel]

Lithium isn't that hard to extract. ICE cars have usually lousy acceleration starting out of the gate. Electricity can be generated from a lot of different sources.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[AK Marc]

Are the ones discussing the fires "slasvertising"? If that were happening, wouldn't the stories be more favorable?

Re:Another Tesla story?

[TrekkieGod]

But why should running off of electricity somehow make a car interesting? Because it's "new"? No, people have experimented with electric cars since the 19th century, the main difference now is we have batteries that make it semi-practical.

So you're saying there's something new now that wasn't possible before?

Seriously, what is so exciting about this car that it gets so many Slashdot stories?

Well, compare it to the other electric cars, and I don't mean golf carts or the ones that were being built in the 19th century. Compare the Model S to its contemporaries, who can and do use the same battery technology that makes electric cars feasible now. The Model S has a much larger range. The Model S accelerates faster. The Model S doesn't make the annoying high pitched sound the Prius does, and is relatively silent. The Model S looks better. The Model S isn't trying to get its range by being smaller and lighter, and is a nice spacious car. Tesla is making it such that you can drive everywhere it not by compromising and making it a hybrid, but by building an infrastructure of chargers and battery swapping stations.

What's exciting about the Model S isn't that it's an electric car. You're right, there's nothing interesting about that. What's exciting about the Model S is that it's a no compromise electric car. It's not just a great electric car, it's just a great car, period. You can't say that about any other electric car. If they weren't electric, you'd steer clear from them because a short-range, small and heavy vehicle is a horrible idea. But if the Model S was an internal combustion vehicle, people would still want to buy it, at that same price point. It wouldn't be making press, but it would still be a great car.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[AK Marc]

Not a world record, didn't do it twice, not a "production vehicle". Tesla is more interesting because you can actually buy one. The Hennessey is a limited run that looks to be all sold out. You can only get one used, not go out and buy an available new model. When Hennessey makes 500+ of them, give us a call.

Elecrtic vehicles are 100+ years old. Though the second coming of them is much more interesting. The Tesla would replace the primary car in most US households without them hitting limitations on a regular basis. When I was younger and owned an unreliable vehicle, I rented a car for a cross-counrty trip. Why does everyone assume that's a dumb idea? So many places have unlimited miles, rent something better suited to a once-a-year or less event. If we accept that, then the Tesla is a very interesting vehicle. One of the few commercially successful electric cars. Not like the EV1, that was expected to be a failure, so it was never "sold", or so many hybrids they try to hint at the electricness of.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[AK Marc]

Yes, and if you note, lots of Google car submissions are accepted.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[drinkypoo]

Well, I drive a yawn of a car (two, actually) - but it can't drive itself!

Anything less than fullly automated driving is just jerking off, and really a danger as it can lull a driver into a false sense of security. You can compare it to ABS, which certainly has its uses (for example, maintaining control of a vehicle while attempting to brake on snow or ice) but which also doesn't improve accident rates because people count on it to save their bacon in too many situations.

I look eagerly forward to completely self-driving automobiles, although I still think the proper technology for that has been around for many decades and is called rail.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Algae_94]

You can't deny that the engineering it takes to push a car to 270mph is impressive. The make up of the Tesla S is also impressive.

It is not necessary to read about the same model S every day. How about take one of those days to post a story about the Hennessey?

Re:Another Tesla story?

[AK Marc]

In the 1960s, the top speed for a wheel driven vehicle (not a jet powered one, but '60s tech driving wheels) was over 400 mph. 50 years later, production cars (which this limited run doesn't even qualify for), are nearing 70% of what was achieved in the '60s. Managing to hit 70% of what was done 50 years ago isn't going to awe me. Top speed is one of the least interesting performance measures of a car. Why would top speed matter in a road car when it's never legal or safe for a car to do it on the road?

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Anonymous Coward]

What's exciting about the Model S is that it's a no compromise electric car.

As long as you consider "no compromise" to mean paying a hundred grand and getting less than 250 miles of range and having to wait extended periods of time to recharge, with the distinct possibility of not having a Supercharger station available before the power runs out. It's a nice car, but it's still not terribly practical for most people.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Twinbee]

Off the top of my head:

* Much faster chargers than anything else (superchargers)
* Free power at said chargers
* Battery Giga-factory being built soon - equal to the production of all the LIon battery production in the world.
* Safest car ever
* Tons of space in car
* An aesthetically pleasing design compared to other EVs
* Best acceleration for a car in its class (luxury big sedan)
* No dealers to take 15% of cash or each car sold
* Battery at floor of car makes handling amazing
* Range for a single charge (200-300 miles) off the scale compared to other EVs
* Fair pricing (in China, Teslas are not double or triple of the cost of elsewhere in the world)
* Amazing giant screen (e.g: for maps or rear camera)
* Updates over the air
* No noise, exhaust/smell/CO2 and little maintenance compared to even hybrid cars
* Visionary CEO who wants to change the world and get us all off ICE cars ASAP.

Did you know all of those?

Re:Another Tesla story?

[MightyYar]

True, and counter to my own point, there was a story about an autonomous Nissan in Japan a while back. (Nissan is the parent company of Infinity.)

Re:Another Tesla story?

[MightyYar]

and really a danger as it can lull a driver into a false sense of security.

While your rationale seems logical, I have to assume that Nissan has done their homework. If I'm wrong, we'll see cars like the Q50 go the way of the dodo as insurance carriers jack up rates.

I like rail, too, but you have to couple rail with sensible development - and that cat is already out of the bag. Also, the government seems incapable of running these systems cost-effectively. I live in an old suburb with decent rail service every half hour. A 20-minute ride downtown costs about $5, and the same on the way back. Even off-peak, it is almost $4. Take the kids downtown on the weekend (if I plan ahead and get the lower rate from the ticket office) and I'm out $24 for what would be a 6 mile drive. And that's heavily subsidized!

To be fair, the system is geared towards commuters who can buy a pass for around $100/month. That works out to roughly $5/working day, which is 1/2 price. Still only barely competitive with a carpool, which is a shame - though again, to be fair roads are also subsidized somewhat.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Anonymous Coward]

But geeks do tend to be interested in EVs and AVs.

Speak for yourself, they'll have to pry 93 octane from my cold dead hands.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[rjstanford]

Even their "green" credentials are on very thin ice, what with all those batteries full of Lithium and rare earths that travel all around the world after having been mined and extracted with horrifically polutting methods.

As opposed to oil, which is often extracted with polluting methods then shipped by boat around the world to be refined before being shipped again to its destination? And that happens for every tank, not just for manufacture.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[rjstanford]

As long as you consider "no compromise" to mean paying a hundred grand and getting less than 250 miles of range and having to wait extended periods of time to recharge, with the distinct possibility of not having a Supercharger station available before the power runs out. It's a nice car, but it's still not terribly practical for most people.

Most people - especially those in the $80K car market - fly somewhere when they need to go over 300 miles in a single trip without ending up back where they started.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[rjstanford]

Still only barely competitive with a carpool, which is a shame - though again, to be fair roads are also subsidized somewhat.

Urban roads cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $15 million per lane mile (and up from there). Also remember that most roads have at least two lanes. Even adding a lane to an existing road can cost ~$5 million per mile. Commuter rail is usually dirt cheap in comparison to road expansion, but since maintenance and construction costs are so much less they have far fewer voices during bond elections than the concrete guys do.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[MightyYar]

There must be more to it than that. Rail gets taxpayer money - even a piece of the gas tax! I'd be pissed if I lived out in the boonies on some potholed road while my gas tax was going towards rail... I get that point of view. Also, I think your cost numbers are off. I think light rail averages around $35/mile in the US. Wikipedia seems to think that rail and road are comparable when it comes to capital cost/mile.

Maintenance is probably just as important, but I can never find numbers on that. Much of the true labor cost is obscured by pension obligations and the like, which don't always get factored in. Slowly we'll automate the trains like Singapore does, which ought to help quite a bit.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[tibit]

"getting less than 250 miles of range" That's pretty much like a city driven Ford F150 truck that quite many people use as a commuter car. So, I'd say it's nothing to scoff at. I get only 400 miles on a 20 gallon tank in a Volvo S80.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[drinkypoo]

Wikipedia seems to think that rail and road are comparable when it comes to capital cost/mile.

They are about the same in the worst case, and rail is ten times better in the best case. But the rail would be even cheaper if we were using PRT; you don't have the same requirements for moving people as you do for moving massive cargo. So-called "light rail" is a foolish boondoggle because it doesn't use light rail at all. PRT would also preserve the car companies for a time, permitting them to be phased out gracefully.

Re: Another Tesla story?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can probably gear (adjust CVT? ) the Tesla to hit 400 also. So the question is can you hit 400 in comfort?

Re:Another Tesla story?

[MightyYar]

I do like the idea of PRT, but I'm somewhat skeptical due to it not having been implemented anywhere in the world in any meaningful way. Once there are self-driving cars, it will only be a matter of time before we get self-driving cabs - those would be very similar to PRT in practice, and might be a reasonable alternative to car ownership.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[AK Marc]

Nerds are often interested in cars. Cars have tech. But pure HP wars aren't nerdy enough for Slashdot. The editors know that anything about any EV/hybrid will generate lots of posts about coal and politics and such, so they encourage/reward them. If the commentators could remain on topic, the number would drop drastically. But we are off topic discussing the related or unrelated stories.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[BasilBrush]

I've never heard of it, and the things you mention don't even make it into the wiki entry, nor the review I found on Google.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...

Not convinced it has any geek cred so far.

It may be that people that are both gear heads and geeks can't separate the two interests.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[BasilBrush]

Even their "green" credentials are on very thin ice, what with all those batteries full of Lithium and rare earths that travel all around the world after having been mined and extracted with horrifically polutting methods.

Lithium is a finite mined resource, just as fossil fuels are. The difference is that the Lithium in batteries is recycled into new batteries. Fossil fuels on the other hand are used once, then contribute to global warming.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[drinkypoo]

Well, I hope the self-driving cabs (which I agree are likely) are the gateway to accepting PRT. I enjoy my car blah blah blah but cars suck and they will always suck unless we get some really magical energy storage technology. And even then, there's tire dust.

Here's hoping, though.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[Algae_94]

Let's not forget that the subject of this thread is what is interesting technology to talk about on /.

The article we are commenting on is about the Tesla being Consumer Reports best car. Not anything about the tech in the Tesla S, but that it was voted best car by a magazine. Even if it's been bested by a lot, going 270 mph is more interesting than being voted best car by Consumer Reports.

Re: Another Tesla story?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't just gear a car to go super fast. It needs to have enough power. I seriously doubt you can get a Tesla to go 400 mph.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[MightyYar]

I apologize if you have already hit your NY Times limit for the month, but here's a pretty decent article describing the features in non-geek terms.

In case you did hit your paywall limit, here's the relevant text:

It begins with technology that is de rigueur on most luxury cars: Radar adaptive cruise control lets the Infiniti regulate its speed, even in stop-and-go traffic, with no need to touch the gas or brake pedals. But the radar tracks not just the car ahead, but the one ahead of that, providing more time to warn drivers and make smart decisions during chain-reaction stops.

  More autonomy groundwork is laid with the optional Direct Adaptive Steering: The world’s first steer-by-wire system in a production car eliminates any physical link between the steering wheel and the turning wheels. It’s all done electronically, with three separate controllers for fail-safe redundancy. If all else fails, a clutch re-connects the mechanical steering column to restore physical control.

You can see where this is headed. Another option, Active Lane Control, links lane-keeping cameras with electronic steering that subtly turns the steering wheel (drivers can adjust the level of assistance) to center the car in its lane and adjust for crosswinds and pavement.

With the Q50 managing its own speed and adjusting course, I could sit back and simply watch, even on mildly curving highways, for three or more miles at a stretch.

Drivers can also toggle up standard or customized settings for power assist and steering ratio, the latter making sharper turns for a given amount of steering input.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[MightyYar]

Don't forget massive amounts of road salt! :)

Re:Another Tesla story?

[AK Marc]

Yes, but given the number of stories about the Tesla, any news about the CEO, stock price, or awards would likely be gauged to be newsworthy, regardless of comparitive interest of any single story. Once a single subject is being covvered in absurd detail, all details will be covered, without regard to whether any individual detail is newsworthy.

Re:Another Tesla story?

[BasilBrush]

You've convinced me. That is interesting for geeks. So what it needs is someone like you to submit stuff like this as a story.

"Green"

[jxander]

Interestingly, the Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car. Isn't the Model S green? But I digress

Because the Prius is completely ordinary (or even sub par) in every aspect EXCEPT for it's "green" profile.

The Tesla S is a genuinely great car. From power to handling to in vehicle infotainment systems, everything in the Model S is top notch.

That might be related to the price tag of a Model S being about triple that of the Prius, but hey, you get what you pay for.

Re:"Green"

[icebike]

Wow, just about every professional reviewer disagrees with you.
But hey, haters going to hate.

Re:"Green"

[BasilBrush]

A poster who's made almost no posts except anti-Tesla posts. Someone has an axe to grind. Probably an employee of another car company.

Re: "Green"

[Anonymous Coward]

I wanted to read and appreciate everything you had to say - but when you start a sentence with "Ummm" it just makes you seem kinda dopey. Like someone standing out in front of the building smoking a cigarette, even though it's going to kill you. Sorry.

Re:"Green"

[Narcocide]

"slack/vague" or "inert/flat"

pick one.

Re:"Green"

[Anonymous Coward]

It is slack , vague and inert and gives no actual feel. It is very deceptive. It is also too low, prone to scrapes and bottom slappers. It is also too flat. It's comfortable but again, deceptive and gives of surreal feeling of insecurity.

Spoken like a true audiophile. I couldn't tell if you were talking about a $30,000 preamp or $75,000 speakers

Re:"Green"

[amicusNYCL]

Talk about surreal feelings of insecurity. Does Tesla threaten your livelihood, or something? Do you own a dealership? Not a single negative thing you said about the car is objective. In other words, your criticism was slack, vague, inert, and deceptive.

Re:"Green"

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, it's very surprising that the latest in technology is popular on /. I mean it's like a bunch of nerds hang out here talking about new for them and stuff they thing matters!

Re:"Green"

[Anonymous Coward]

If he were a true audiophile, that would have been a reference to a cable not "tuned" for digital signals or a codec operating at 240 kbps instead of 320.

Re:"Green"

[jxander]

Not sure which is worse, replying to a troll or replying to yourself... eh.

I highly recommend anyone take a test drive instead of just believing some yahoo on the Interwebs (myself included). See if there is a Tesla dealership in your area, and sign up for a test drive.

I was lucky enough to take a test drive on a random whim. Passed the showroom, and decided to take a peek. It was a slow day so I chatted with a sales rep for a bit and next thing you know, we're on the road.

It was an absolute blast, and if I ever have 80,000 - 100,000 to drop on a vehicle, my decision is already made.

Re:"Green"

[jxander]

Obligatory?

Re:"Green"

[kf6auf]

Other people have addressed several of your issues, so I'm just going to look at the claim that driving uphill empties those batteries in very little time.

As far as I can tell, the steepest drive in the United States (from the beach to the top of Mauna Kea, HI -- not entirely paved) is approximately 13800ft / 4200 m above sea level. Since the mass of a Tesla Model S is 2100 kg, this would consume 25 kWh of energy (30 kWh if you loaded it with 300 kg of people and stuff and factor in a 93% motor efficiency). The energy stored in a full Tesla battery is either 60 or 85 kWh, depending on the model. The drive from Hilo is 43 mi / 71 km (or Kona is 64 mi / 103 km), which over flat terrain would consume 15 (or 20) kWh, for a total of no more than 50 kWh. Thus, you could easily do the drive in a charged 60 kWh Model S. And, the drive back would be entirely free because you just brake all the way down -- just don't charge it at the top unless you want to burn out your brakes.

In theory, the potential energy of a Model S (+300 kg) on top of Mount Everest is 59 kWh, so I don't recommend that with the 60 kWh battery, but then I suspect you'd have issues trying to drive any car to the top of Mount Everest.

Re:"Green"

[ksheff]

Not to mention that Tesla is "green" by making money selling zero emission vehicle credits to other manufacturers. http://beta.fool.com/dcawrey/2...

Re:"Green"

[sribe]

That might be related to the price tag of a Model S being about triple that of the Prius, but hey, you get what you pay for.

Just a note to add some color: lightly-used Model S cars sell for about 30% more than new ones, because the waiting list for new ones is so long...

Re:"Green"

[ameen.ross]

Not to mention flat.

Re:"Green"

[AmiMoJo]

I don't get all the Prius hate. It does look a bit odd but not ugly. In Japan last year 9 of the top 10 best selling vehicles were hybrids, the top two being Toyota's smaller model (forget the name, Aygo?) and the Prius. Clearly it's an attractive car for a lot of people.

Re:"Green"

[tibit]

Reads like an audiophile review. I've read better reviews of dance performances than this pile of who-knows-what.

Re:"Green"

[tibit]

Yay, someone else gets it!

Re:"Green"

[gzuckier]

how can it be a great car if it's not 4wd, weigh 6,000 lbs, and be equipped with more home entertainment devices than my actual home?

Re:"Green"

[mschaffer]

In the US, where over 60% of the electricity comes from fossil fuels, the Tesla is not a green car. Also, it is nowhere near zero emission.

Re:"Green"

[jxander]

No, but it offloads the carbon emissions to a single location... or at least, several orders of magnitude less locations than every single car on the road. A couple dozen coal fired plants are much easier to regulate than keep up on smog checks for every single ICE.

And if/when some new breakthrough is made (thorium reactors, fusion plants, or some yet to be discovered power source.) bringing that tech online instantly switches every EV on the road to clean power source.

Re:"Green"

[mschaffer]

The number of locations is irrelevant.
At least in the USA, most cars are already very well regulated. The bigger problem lies with trucks.
Also, until fossil fuels are replaced in electricity generation, it's just moonbeam dreams and unicorn wishes. Also, battery production for EVs, hybrids, etc. is not necessarily great for the environment.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[meustrus]

Correction: Hybrid cars can be greener than electric ones. I'm sure you didn't mean to lump the hybrid SUVs in when you blanket claimed all hybrids were greener than all electrics. Especially since technically a golf cart should also count as an electric car (or at least could be retrofitted into one) and that would definitely be greener, if a bit less refined than a Tesla.

Re:They gave Obama the Peace Prize

[cbhacking]

Consumer Reports controls the Nobel prize committee, or at least did in 2008? Whoa, when did that happen?

The Tesla is not a Green Car

[Anonymous Coward]

Tesla vehicles are not green. The fact that it costs close to $100k should indicate that it is a very resource intensive product. Some things that cost a lot are not necessarily resource intensive (e.g., legal services or software), but for a manufactured good, price is generally a good indication of how many physical resources went into making it. The Prius is cheaper, and that reflects a lower relative resource cost to manufacture.

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car

[icebike]

You know, its priced at 89K, but that does not indicate its cost, so your analysis is at best flawed, and that's being generous.

Some things are priced simply to get what the market will bear.
Other things are priced to hold down demand, because they have only managed to build 30,000 of them, and they believe quality is more important than quantity.
Some things are priced to pay back the investment, so that they can expand and add new production capacity and build battery plants.
Somethings are priced high so that the labor can be paid a good wage.

But very few things (other than commodities) are priced based on the cost of raw materials that went into them.

Next time you go shopping, wander into a jewelry story and look at a Rolex (any Rolex) and compare it to a similar sized watch.
Then come back and tell us how price is a good indication of resources consumed.

Re: The Tesla is not a Green Car

[Anonymous Coward]

....believe quality is more important than quantity.

Yeah? What an interesting way to forward the "green" project as the way to save the world. Build few expensive products that only a few rich document bags can afford.

Fuck you

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car

[macpacheco]

Tesla's are expensive due to:
  1-Extensive Aluminum construction, Aluminum is called bottled electricity due to costing far more in electricity than anything else to make it. But Aluminum can be recycled. And electricity could come from solar, wind or nuclear. Steel pretty much needs to be made with coal (metalurgical coal), melting aluminium doesn't require putting all that electricity in again
  2-Battery components are expensive, but much like Aluminum, can also be recycled
And yeah, Tesla is expensive because it's a startup company that is growing with cash flow instead of borrowed money. They already have a 25% gross margin on the car. And unless they drop the price, in 3 or 4 years that margin should get above 30% with the battery cell cost reduction from the giga factory and other economies of scale.
Sure, Steel can be recycled, but it's not as expensive to make to begin with.
Musk said raw materials alone on a li-ion battery pack costs US$ 80 / kWh, or US$ 6800 on the big 85 kWh alone. I bet the aluminium costs another US$ 25k.
But there's one factor you are ignoring. A Tesla durability should easily exceed a regular car except for the battery pack and motor, Aluminium doesn't corrode like steel (over decades).
Tesla already states that except for the battery, the model S should last 15 years, essentially requiring replacing the motor by then.
If you keep your model S for 15 years and drive about 20k miles / year, just the hard cash savings on gas and maintenance will fully pay the car compared to a non hybrid car. For a heavy commuter or a cab, it might pay itself (as in the whole cost of the car) in 10 years.

If you want to be green, keep your car for 10 years or more.

Re: The Tesla is not a Green Car

[AK Marc]

The rich document bags use disproportionately more resources. Targeting them gets the greatest effect per person. And they are some of the few that can afford green. The middle class can't. The poor are green because they can't afford anything.

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car

[ksheff]

Does the 25% gross margin include the zero emission vehicle credits that they sell to other manufacturers or is that just gravy?

Re: The Tesla is not a Green Car

[Anonymous Coward]

Epic autocorrect fail.

Re: The Tesla is not a Green Car

[AK Marc]

I expected as much, but kept the wording because it was funny.

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car

[Anonymous Coward]

SpaceX Falcons are expensive due to:

    1-Extensive Aluminum construction, Aluminum is called bottled electricity due to costing far more in electricity than anything else to make it. But Aluminum can be recycled. And electricity could come from solar, wind or nuclear. Steel pretty much needs to be made with coal (metalurgical coal), melting aluminium doesn't require putting all that electricity in again

But Teancum, sorry I mean macpacheco, Elon Musk claim the Falcon is amongst the cheapest of launch vehicles? (I just wish we the taxpayer are not paying $133 million to SpaceX to put a puny 1000 lb into orbit, while the Russians are beating our ass with 5000 lb for the same price).

  2-Battery components are expensive....

Really Teancum? Sorry I mean macpacheco.
What are Chevy, Nissan, Mitsubishi, BMW ...using if not "battery components"?

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car

[Ungrounded Lightning]

Tesla vehicles are not green. The fact that it costs close to $100k should indicate that it is a very resource intensive product.

Actually it indicates that the early adopters are paying for building a car company and designing the car, not just the car itself, This is a proven model for new tech.

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car

[Gavagai80]

A Tesla durability should easily exceed a regular car except for the battery pack and motor, Aluminium doesn't corrode like steel (over decades). Tesla already states that except for the battery, the model S should last 15 years, essentially requiring replacing the motor by then.

That sounds quite awful. My car is 15 years old and hasn't required any major work. Is the 15 year life limit assuming 20K miles per year (so 300K miles, which sounds a lot better), or does it apply regardless of mileage?

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car

[macpacheco]

Should be 15 years with higher than average usage.
Elon Musk is known to be very conservative on this kind of statement, so I expect the cars to last even more than advertised.

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car

[macpacheco]

I believe that doesn't include any types of credits.
It means the average cost of making the car versus the average revenues from selling them.
Of course it indirectly includes consumer credits, since they are a rebate on the sticker price, the consumers get that credit, not Tesla.

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car

[im_thatoneguy]

Also the subsidies for an ICE (oil and refinery subsidies) vehicle are built into the subsidized fuel price. So the $7,500 electric vehicle subsidy should be included as part of the price as well for an Apples to Apples vehicle cost comparison.

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car

[kyrsjo]

Why does the motor need to be replaced?

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car

[icebike]

Also the subsidies for an ICE (oil and refinery subsidies) vehicle are built into the subsidized fuel price. So the $7,500 electric vehicle subsidy should be included as part of the price as well for an Apples to Apples vehicle cost comparison.

Exactly.

Most of those so called "subsidies" are provided in the form of facilities. Roads.

Take what ever you prefer to think of as a subsidy, and compare it to the cost of roads. The cost to build roads exceeds all other supposed "subsidies" you can marshal.

So since Electric Cars pay no gas tax, you can make the case that tax break they get is exactly backward, and it should perhaps be a $1430 tax bill instead.

The US fleet average for cars 35.6 MPG. (Note: that seems unrealistically optimistic).
The average US gas tax is 49.72 cents per gallon.

Its easy to get 100,000 miles out of current production cars.
So the average car will consume an optimistic 2,857 gallons of fuel over 100k miles, and pay gas taxes of around $1430 to the road maintenance fund.

A more realistic estimate of MPG is probably closer to 20, which would show the ICE vehicle contributing $2,270 to road maintenance over the same 100k miles.

Since there is no reason to expect an EV to damage the roads LESS than an ICE vehicle, they might not be paying their fair share of road maintenance tax. States are already becoming aware of this because gas tax revenues are falling short simply due to better MPG in recent years, and having a whole new class of electric only vehicles is going to impact that shortfall even more.

I think you can expect to see that $7500 tax break disappear over the next few years.

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car

[macpacheco]

Wear and tear I think. But it's likely they will last much longer if you don't drive much.
The thing about electric motors is they don't have parts that needs periodic replacing, oiling, greasing, but when they fail, it's something critical that shorts, or something serious. If they last 15 years, they are probably designed to be recycled instead of repaired.
But the electric motor is probably cheaper than the battery pack, and the pack is expected to last half as much anyhow.

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car

[im_thatoneguy]

As my Civil engineering friend would always point out though, gas taxes barely cover a small fraction of a road's expenses. Most DOT construction budgets come out of the general funds.

eulogy for btc on network news

[Anonymous Coward]

now our media is 100% bi-polar with fear of change features

Best car overall??

[David_Hart]

So, the best car overall is a $100,000 luxury vehicle that can drive, at most, 4 hours and then needs to recharge for 5 hours??? Obviously Consumer Reports has a different set of standards than 99% of people who live in North America. Most of us are lucky if we afford one car worth $30K, let alone two (Tesla for city driving and another one for long distance).

I thought that the Consumer Reports mission was to test and report on consumer items not luxury goods...

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

It only needs to recharge for 20 minutes. AND, in teh long run, the Total cost of ownership is way less than that "$30K" car. Difference is the cost basis is loaded up front. Look at what your monthly overall bills are for the life of your vehicle, including fuel and repairs, and you'll see that a Tesla is cheaper in the long run.

Re:Best car overall??

[DogDude]

I don't know about most people, but if I'm driving more than an hour or two, I'm renting a car so as not to put the miles on my own cars. I would never drive my commuter long distances

Re:Best car overall??

[David_Hart]

So you don't pay for repairs to the Tesla or any battery replacements?

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

Total cost of ownership is way less than that "$30K" car.

You're on a Linux website, buddy. We don't allow talk about TCO in this part of town.

Re:Best car overall??

[BasilBrush]

What makes you think expensive products for individuals aren't consumer products?

CR is not called "Thrifty Reports".

Re:Best car overall??

[David_Hart]

I don't know about most people, but if I'm driving more than an hour or two, I'm renting a car so as not to put the miles on my own cars. I would never drive my commuter long distances

I do that for work trips but it doesn't work for me for vacation trips. When I drive home for Christmas (6.5 hr drive) in the Northeast we usually have snow, ice, etc. and I wouldn't trust the tires on a rental car as far as I could throw them. During the summer I need to tow stuff and, unfortunately, you cannot rent a tow vehicle...

Re:Best car overall??

[BasilBrush]

Prius batteries are still going 15 years later. Too early to get anything more than an estimate for Model S batteries, but don't assume they need replacing/reconditioning any more often than an ICE car needs it's engine replaced/reconditioned.

As to repairs, there's far less to go wrong on EVs.

Re: Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

Then why do you have a car? To not drive it?

Re:Best car overall??

[OhPlz]

$70k is going to buy a heck of lot of gas and routine service, especially if the comparison vehicle is a relatively efficient hybrid.

Figure $3.50 for gas.. that's 20k gallons. 40mpg, that's 800k miles. Subtract a bit for periodic 6mo maintenance, I bet a lot of us would be trading in for something newer before we ever hit the point where the Tesla ends up cheaper. The Tesla owners almost certainly would be trading in sooner, shiny object complex. Repair costs remain to be seen.

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

You're not most people. The cost of the rental car is significant enough that it would triple the cost of running your own vehicle (assuming only oil and gas expenses).

I am absolutely certain the average person does not spend triple the cost of the gas and oil they put into their cars on repairs and maintenance.

Re:Best car overall??

[IndigoDarkwolf]

When I drive more than an hour or two, I'm making a journey that crosses state lines. If I felt I had that kind of money to waste driving a rental across state lines, I wouldn't be worried about putting miles on the car I have.

Re:Best car overall??

[ranton]

It only needs to recharge for 20 minutes. AND, in teh long run, the Total cost of ownership is way less than that "$30K" car. Difference is the cost basis is loaded up front. Look at what your monthly overall bills are for the life of your vehicle, including fuel and repairs, and you'll see that a Tesla is cheaper in the long run.

Well, considering repairs are usually more expensive for more expensive cars, I doubt that the Tesla saves you on anything but gas. And if driving 15k miles per year at 20 mpg while paying $4 per gallon, it would take 20 years to break even on your Tesla purchase. Considering you probably won't keep your Tesla for 20 years, I doubt it is cheaper in the long run.

Re:Best car overall??

[David_Hart]

What makes you think expensive products for individuals aren't consumer products?

CR is not called "Thrifty Reports".

My definition of a consumer item is one that most people can afford, even if it is a tiny bit of a stretch. You have to admit that a $100,000 car is well outside of the price range of most consumers. I'm not saying that it has to be the cheapest POS that everyone can afford. Just that it should be, in my opinion, somewhat affordable...

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

Tesla Repairs are factored into the calculation. The only real comparison is the cost of wearable components - like tires and brake pads. (Batteries last a looong time.)

Re:Best car overall??

[icebike]

vehicle that can drive, at most, 4 hours and then needs to recharge for 5 hours??

Quote:

Despite all these challenges, a full seventy-six hours after leaving Los Angeles, the team rolled into New York City. The total trip was 3,427 miles and the team only spent 15 hours and 57 minutes tied to a charger.

So lets do the math: 76(Total time) - 16(charge time) = 60 hours drive time.
60h drive time is 4.75 greater than 16h charge time.

So somewhere your math went off the rails.

Of course most people sleep.
So they can charge at home or on the road at a slower rate without inconveniencing themselves.

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

It takes 20 minutes to charge to 50%, if you drive out of your way to a special charging station. That's only 100 miles on the largest battery.

You didn't know it was only to 50% because Tesla are past masters at PR and misleading people like you.

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

Consumer Reports gave the Model S a score of 99 out of 100 because it takes almost 6 HOURS to recharge.

The Tesla website claims 29 miles of range per hour of charging when plugged into a 240V / 40A socket. With the Tesla high poer charger installed in your home, you can get up to 58 miles of range per hour of charge.

The Supercharge stations are rated at up to 170 miles for a 30 minute charge.

Re:Best car overall??

[drinkypoo]

You're not most people. Most people have a car in part so that they can make trips like those. A two or three-hour trip in a car turns into an epic on public transportation.

Re:Best car overall??

[PRMan]

Seriously? I'm in Southern California and I've driven to Yosemite (multiple times) Oregon, Yellowstone, Carlsbad Caverns, Arizona, Las Vegas, etc. What's the point of owning a car if you don't get to enjoy it on a long drive?

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

The Prius isn't an EV. It's a hybrid. Big difference. And the cost of a battery pack for one costs as much as a rebuild on my Subaru 2.5.
 
The oldest Prius batteries I've found cited was only 10 years old. Not 15.
 
  As to repairs, there's far less to go wrong on EVs.
 
I definitely want a cite on that. Especially on your highly praised Prius (which still isn't a real EV regardless of how you want to bend the figures).

Re:Best car overall??

[icebike]

So $89,000 car Minus 70,000 for your gas bill, leaves you enough money to buy and drive a $19,000 dollar for 800K miles?

I'm afraid I'll have to bow out. I'm not spending that much time in a $19,000 car. No thank you.

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to mention the electricity for the Tesla (tada!) isn't free.
 
  24 cents per mile.

Re:Best car overall??

[Nethemas the Great]

The maintenance on EVs are negligible, a fact that for instance prompts many Nissan dealers to marginalize, even avoid stocking the Leaf altogether. Wiper blades, alignments, and tires. Check the maintenance schedule on them. There really isn't much to do, it's most just a bunch of inspections. The usable life on Tesla battery packs will easily outlast the average life of an ICE retaining 85% capacity at 100,000 miles.

Re:Best car overall??

[jxander]

It's not just gas.

Ever had to replace a water pump in your car? Serpentine belt? Timing belt? Radiator leaks? Head Gasket? There are a LOT of things that can go wrong with internal combustion engines

Not that electric engines are indestructible by any stretch, but there are significantly less bits to fall off.

Re:Best car overall??

[AK Marc]

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ve...

Your standards are low. Americans own over 1.2 cars per driver. So a 2-driver house has 2.4 cars, or about half of all 2-driver households have 3 cars.

With the statistics as they are, it seems you are the one that's out of touch.

Re:Best car overall??

[Waffle Iron]

So, the best car overall is a $100,000 luxury vehicle that can drive, at most, 4 hours and then needs to recharge for 5 hours??? Obviously Consumer Reports has a different set of standards than 99% of people who live in North America. .

CR uses a predetermined formula to rate their cars. Their formula puts heavy emphasis on fuel economy, safety, handling, comfort and practicality, and some emphasis on performance, and little or none on things like off-road capability. (As demonstrated by the Jeep Wrangler often coming in dead last in the past.) Other magazines for different audiences obviously use different weights for evaluating cars.

I don't think that they factor price into the formula at all. The formula says how objectively "good" the car is according to their weighting, and they report the price separately for you to judge on your own whether you want to pay for that goodness. They sometimes do reports on high-end luxury cars such as the Audi A8 that command a price in the same ballpark as a Tesla, and I've seen them state that one reason is because high-end cars often highlight future trends for more common cars.

As it happens, the Tesla is an almost perfect fit for CR's formula. I doubt that the formula factors in recharge time, probably because that concept is new and refill time for all gas cars was negligible. I'll bet that if plug-in cars of all types become more popular, they'll have to factor recharge time into their scores, and then the CR Tesla score will drop relative to gas cars.

Re:Best car overall??

[AaronW]

Try recharging for 20-30 minutes at a Supercharger or in a few months spend 90 seconds to swap batteries. Every morning my battery is at 60% because I spent 5 seconds plugging in at night and 5 seconds unplugging in the morning. I could just as easily have charged to 100% but the battery will last longer if I keep it between 40-60%. When I drove up to Lake Tahoe I stopped in Folsom to charge for free. I spent the money I would have spent on gas getting lunch. By the time I was done with lunch at a nearby burger place (Burgerocity, awesome burgers) my car was ready to go. I had no problem whatsoever reaching my destination above Lake Tahoe near the summit of Kingsbury Grade at around 7200 feet. As more and more Superchargers are built, road trips become easier. I can already drive from San Diego to Vancouver or across the country and along much of the East coast. By the end of the year 80% of the country will be covered. With Tesla's cross country trip charging consumed around 20% of the time and they were driving through some pretty nasty weather. I don't really mind a half hour break after a few hours of driving. I'll be less tired and sore when I get to my destination. For most of my driving I spend far less time waiting for charging than I did filling up my hybrid at the gas station.

Re:Best car overall??

[AaronW]

Owners are reporting losing about 1 mile of range after 30,000 miles of driving. The Tesla batteries are warrantied for 8 years or 100,000 miles but will likely last a lot longer. Everything is covered by the warranty except the tires and wheels. It covers brake pads, wiper blades, everything. For when I did need to pay for repairs due to self inflicted damage, the repair cost was far less than if it had been say a Prius, let alone another luxury car. Tesla has stated that their goal is to not make a profit on service.

The extended warranty for 8 years, 100K miles was not that expensive.

And I could have bought a pre-paid battery replacement after 8 years for $12K. As an alternative I bought 8K worth of Tesla stock at $35. It's hovering around $250 right now. Tesla's battery replacement gives back $1K per year you wait past 8 years. I figure that by then the cost of the battery will have dropped significantly especially if they get their Gigafactory online.

Re:Best car overall??

[AaronW]

At least here on the west coast in the next few months battery swapping will be an option. It will take only 90 seconds if you want to pay for it (about the cost of filling up a tank of gas) whereas the Superchargers are free for life.

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know about most people, but if I'm driving more than an hour or two, I'm renting a car so as not to put the miles on my own cars. I would never drive my commuter long distances

Yes, because logic dictates that wear and tear locked in cruising at highway speeds is triple that of stop-and-go commuter traffic, right? Oh, the horrors you would impose on your poor, poor daily commuter should you actually fill it up with premium gas and let it breathe on the freeway for once.

And to clarify, no, most people who own a car don't feel the need to pay someone else to rent another one.That's the entire reason you own one outright.

I'm guessing you probably lease too (likely the real reason you waste money renting another car, again), and therefore cannot accurately comment on turning a wrench on your own vehicle that you've pushed past 200,000 miles. If you did, you would likely know how much sense your logic lacks avoiding distance driving in your daily commuter. Pay a car off for once and stop giving a shit about it after that. Laugh every month you don't have a car payment, take care of it, and drive it wherever you want. A car is nothing more than a tool we humans use. Don't let it turn you into one by treating it as anything else.

Re:Best car overall??

[swillden]

I don't know about most people, but if I'm driving more than an hour or two, I'm renting a car so as not to put the miles on my own cars. I would never drive my commuter long distances

I often rent for long drives, too, but I do it because my commuter car can't drive far (Nissan LEAF), and my family car / toy hauler is a gas guzzler (Dodge Durango). So if I don't need to haul a bunch of people or tow the boat or something, renting a Prius costs less.

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

CR uses a predetermined formula to rate their cars. Their formula puts heavy emphasis on fuel economy, safety, handling, comfort and practicality, and some emphasis on performance, and little or none on things like off-road capability.

B.S.

If that were true vehicles like the Chevy Cruze diesel would have a semi-good review. Which it doesn't!

Consumer reports lacks credibility. It's just a bunch of fools rating things on personal preference.

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

http://jamesordinaryguyreviews.blogspot.com/2011/09/why-consumer-reports-sucks.html

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

What makes you think expensive products for individuals aren't consumer products?

CR is not called "Thrifty Reports".

The overall point here stands. The average Consumer(as in Reports) cannot afford a car that costs half what the Tesla does, so it IS rather pointless to rate certain cars when those who can afford them are not relying upon the expertise or opinion of said magazine to sway their decision. At all.

No more people today are lining up to buy a $100,000 car than there were yesterday just because they say it's an awesome car. The fucking price tag tells me that.

Re:Best car overall??

[David_Hart]

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ve...

Your standards are low. Americans own over 1.2 cars per driver. So a 2-driver house has 2.4 cars, or about half of all 2-driver households have 3 cars.

With the statistics as they are, it seems you are the one that's out of touch.

No... You are misunderstanding what they mean by vehicles per licensed driver. Taking a look at Wiki (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_United_States) licensed passenger vehicles includes Vans, Trucks, cars, etc. a good percentage of which are used for business. In other words, the average family does not have 3 vehicles as you are arguing, but actually 2 or less. The difference is made up by vehicles owned by small businesses, farms, etc. for specific business use. If you dig deep, you'll find that the statistics do not mean what you think they mean.

Secondly, this says nothing about how much the average family pays for cars. Most families that I know have an older car that is used for the daily commute and a bigger hauling vehicle to ferry their kids around. The cars that they do own are valued less than one Tesla. They couldn't afford, either financially or or opportunistically, swapping two cars for one Tesla.

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not just gas.

Ever had to replace a water pump in your car? Serpentine belt? Timing belt? Radiator leaks? Head Gasket? There are a LOT of things that can go wrong with internal combustion engines

Not that electric engines are indestructible by any stretch, but there are significantly less bits to fall off.

Yes, most of those $500 - $1500 repairs(or cheaper, if you DIY) fall in line with car ownership likely around the time that a Model S owner is shelling out a few thousand for a fresh set of batteries. Might even do that again in the lifetime of the car.

Those who are selling EVs as a more affordable maintenance alternative are full of more shit than vaporware pimps in the dot-com era. Sorry, not buying it yet. Car maintenance is far too profitable for any design to impede that greed. Ask any car stealership where their true profit center is. That won't change just because you swapped out gas and oil for brushes and batteries.

Re:Best car overall??

[AK Marc]

The number of passenger cars per household (not trucks) is about 2 per household.

Average new car is over $30k. Yes, I know that's new. But even your $300 clunker was new at some point. If people aren't buying new cars in enough numbers, there'd be no used cars.

Re:Best car overall??

[SeaFox]

I don't know about most people, but if I'm driving more than an hour or two, I'm renting a car so as not to put the miles on my own cars. I would never drive my commuter long distances

Isn't a "commuter" a person who drives long distances on a regular basis every day to work?
Also, you should know that highway driving is actually much better for your car than stop-and-go city driving. I would say you're doing a vehicle a disservice to only drive it to and from work in what I imagine to be rush hour traffic, and not on a longer trip on the highway were it can wind up and burn accumulated sludge and other internal dirt off from inside.

Re:Best car overall??

[Paintballparrot]

in teh long run, the Total cost of ownership is way less than that "$30K" car.

No it doesn't
Lets take my gas guzzling Crown Victoria Police Interceptor as an example, now I bought it used but I believe they cost around $32,000 new, lets call that $35,000 to be safe and we will assume the life of a car is 100,000 miles
I get about 15 MPG because of hilly terrain, little highway driving and a lead foot. gas is about 3.70 here and has stayed about there for 4 years now but we'll call it 4.25 to offset any unexpected future price increases.
Add in 20 engine oil changes at $40 each for the good stuff
5 air filters at $15 each
3 fuel filters at $10 each
3 sets of 8 brake pads at $80 each because I'm guessing the Tesla's regenerative braking extends the lives of discs and pads so I'll just add all my brake jobs in.
1 set of 4 brake rotors at $350
6 years of Pennsylvania state emissions inspections means that I will be paying $30 more for having to do the actual inspection instead of just getting the exemption sticker.
I get $65,008.33 for the total cost over the life of the car assuming gas hits $5 a gallon in the next few years and you do maintenance more than most people.
Now I like the Tesla but considering the average midsize now gets twice the mileage of my car it is not cheaper in the long run. I will however consider Tesla in the future when they can start bringing their prices down. Until then I'll probably be looking at a Charger R/T or Taurus SHO in 6 years or so when I decide to get a new car.

Re:Best car overall??

[dunkelfalke]

You are probably forgetting brake fluid. Unless it is mineral oil based, like it used to be on some Citroens, it will have to be replaced every two years at best.

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? Because that cracked regenerative flywheel on my girlfriend's Prius cost a pretty goddamned penny.

Re:Best car overall??

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know about most people, but if I'm driving more than an hour or two, I'm renting a car so as not to put the miles on my own cars. I would never drive my commuter long distances

You are certainly not most people, and foolish. It's typically more expensive to rent a car than to just put the miles on your own damn car.

Re:Best car overall??

[abigsmurf]

Lets say you spend $5000 on services and repairs for the $30K car's life, that's $65K for fuel. How many miles is that?

A $30K performance high performance car is probably 30mpg. At $3.50 per gallon, That's 8.5miles per $. $65K would get you around 550K miles of driving.

Of course pretty much any car in existence would fall to bits long before hitting 550K but that's enough to show that you saving money is most definitely not a good reason for buying a Tesla..

Re:Best car overall??

[rjstanford]

Assuming that you see nothing wrong with comparing a Civic to a BMW 7-series purely on cost either, then your comparison is valid. Otherwise people might think that it was a wee bit skewed.

Re:Best car overall??

[Waffle Iron]

If that were true vehicles like the Chevy Cruze diesel would have a semi-good review. Which it doesn't!

Look on their website. The Cruze diesel does have a semi-good review.

They give the Cruze a 70, whereas the range of all compact cars is 61-82, so it's near the middle of the pack. They fault all versions of the Cruze for a cramped back seat and much worse than average reliability.

They mention that the diesel is new and hard to find. They also say that handling suffers from the added weight, and that the diesel is loud and unsmooth. They said it's the best choice for those doing a lot of highway driving due to its stellar highway mileage, but not so great for city driving due to its roughness.

Maybe you own one and it actually drives as smooth as silk? Otherwise, I'd say CR's rating looks like a fair assessment.

Re:Best car overall??

[ranton]

Assuming that you see nothing wrong with comparing a Civic to a BMW 7-series purely on cost either, then your comparison is valid. Otherwise people might think that it was a wee bit skewed.

He said it was cheaper than a $30k car in the long run, not a BMW 7-series. I am sure the financial figures are more in Tesla's favor when compared to other luxury cars, but that wasn't what the post I was replying to was saying.

Re:Best car overall??

[BasilBrush]

My definition of a consumer item is one that most people can afford, even if it is a tiny bit of a stretch.

Then your definition is wrong. A consumer simply means one who consumes, as opposed to produces. In use it applies to individuals as opposed to businesses. But there's no exclusion as to personal wealth.

You have to admit that a $100,000 car is well outside of the price range of most consumers.

An $89,000 car is above the range of most consumers, yes. All consumers, no.

Re:Best car overall??

[Whorhay]

History would seem to be proving your wrong. When GM had the EV1's out on the road one of the perks was happy mechanics. They were much simpler and cleaner to work on than conventional cars. The battery packs will eventually need to be replaced but they should be getting cheaper and cheaper per watt stored as time goes by and technology improves. While pretty much the opposite seems to be true for ICE vehicles and their parts. The sheer number of moving parts in the average ICE power train compared to that in an electric car is a god indicator of how long it should last.

Re:Best car overall??

[OhPlz]

Those aren't typically going to fail until the vehicle is significantly older. I had my last vehicle (a hybrid) for nearly 8 years, only thing I had to replace was the small 12v battery at the usual interval for car batteries. Do cars even have timing belts anymore?

Re:Best car overall??

[samwichse]

Now do that for a car that actually competes with the Model S.

The Audi A7 (base $64,500), the BMW 6 series (base $75,400), and the Mercedes-Benz CLS (base $72,100). Note base prices are pulled from Google's first result.

I would compare a Nissan Leaf to say... a Honda Fit or a Fiesta hatch likewise (or a Nissan Versa!).

Don't know why the GP decided comparing to a 30k car made any sense at all... he started a discussion that makes 0 sense.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[cbhacking]

I wanted to read TFA (no, I'm not new here) to see if they said anything about that... but apparently CR can't take a slashdotting? Lame.

Re:Bronco Bama the man of the people!

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't have mod points so I'm just posting the warning to everyone else:

Do not feed the off-topic trolls.

Stock Bump too

[icebike]

The Consumer Reports article plus solid financial news and analyst forecasts for Tesla today and widely circulating speculation about their planned Gigafactory to be announced in a couple weeks with an aim of cutting battery costs by at least 50%, all lead to a surge in the stock today (2/25).

Even the confirmation that the Model X would indeed not surface until 2015 seemed to have no effect.

The stock was up as high as 17%, and closed up just under 14% (+$30 on the day to $248). With Morgan Stanley estimating a $320 price there is probably significant growth left, It seems they will have no problem funding that 5 to 7 Billion dollar battery plant. The "giga" refers to Tesla's need to build the equivalent of all of the world’s current production of lithium ion batteries under one factory roof. May be time to invest in on Lithium stocks as well.

Of course, the next drunk that crashes his car and lives to watch it burn will provide a stock dip, but that just sounds like importunity knocking.

Still, I predict Haters going to Hate. They should be arriving in about 3 seconds.....

Re:Stock Bump too

[Lucidus]

I don't know whether 'importunity knocking' is original to you, but that phrase made my day.

Re:Stock Bump too

[icebike]

I save my best proof reading for those who pay me. But you're welcome.

Re:Stock Bump too

[AmiMoJo]

If you are looking to invest check out Panasonic too. Tesla is building the gigafactory with Panasonic, who already supply all their batteries.

Re:Stock Bump too

[rjstanford]

The stock was up as high as 17%, and closed up just under 14% (+$30 on the day to $248). With Morgan Stanley estimating a $320 price there is probably significant growth left, It seems they will have no problem funding that 5 to 7 Billion dollar battery plant.

You realize that unless they do another offering, are are buying another company with stock, the rise of fall of the price in the secondary market has absolutely no affect whatsoever on Tesla's ability to build a plant?

Tesla hate?

[meustrus]

A company that many thought would be bankrupt and closed by now has produced a brand-new electric car from scratch that Consumer Reports feels is the best car it's actually tested since 2007.

I have yet to meet anybody who thought Tesla "would be bankrupt and closed by now" who wasn't actively scheming toward that end. And yes, FUD counts as actively scheming.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[Anonymous Coward]

Your typical power station is much more efficient in converting fossil fuels into electricity than a typical ICE is at converting fossil fuels into kinetic energy.

Coal Power: 40-45% efficient
Natural Gas Power: 50-60% efficient

ICE: 25-30% efficient

Even with transmission loss, you are still ahead of the efficiency game compared to an ICE.

Re:"Vehicle"

[meustrus]

Alright Mr. Pedantic, let me fix that headline for you:

"Consumer Reports Says Tesla Model S Is Best Overall Land-based Self-moving Street-legal Consumer Vehicle"

Re:Bronco Bama the man of the people!

[Anonymous Coward]

Off topic? How is this off topic?

Obama, man of the people, saved the world from gas guzzling internal combusion engines by singlehandedly inventing the battery. In fact he invented lead and the silicon chip, the wheel.

And he's going to make sure that if you like your Tesla model S you can keep your Tesla model S, and what's more it will save you $2500 per year!

Just wait until the website is working.

Is Tesla great because they have to be?

[swb]

Is Tesla and their cars great because they have to be -- selling a new kind of car at a high price to a customer base that demands to be catered to, in small enough quantities to care?

Or are they great because they're doing it better and even if some magic happens to the basic technology and they can sell a mid-sized sedan with model S specs in the mid-$40s will they still be great, or will they just devolve into yet another car company with all the car company shenanigans?

Or, to put it another way is the Tesla S a really great car with a great ownership experience and can owning any future Tesla aimed at the larger marketplace remain this way?

Re:Is Tesla great because they have to be?

[PRMan]

They have to be. If not, they go the way of Fisker Karma.

I was thoroughly impressed with the interior

[BLToday]

I haven't driven one but played around with the interior at the mall. The human/car interface is by far the best one I've used. The multitouch screen is responsive and intuitive. The material quality is top of the line. I totally would buy one if I had the money.

Re:I was thoroughly impressed with the interior

[cbhacking]

I think that's part of their genius in using in-mall showrooms. Not only does it let them use a nice small space to show off their cars, they can put them where everybody will see the car and can come ask questions about it. Very few people will go to a dealership just to look at new models unless they already plan to buy one (partially, of course, because car dealers are often quite annoying people). Almost everybody goes to the mall, though, and if they can see first-hand how awesome a car Tesla makes, it could influence their decisions on when they next want to buy a car.

Re:I was thoroughly impressed with the interior

[Anonymous Coward]

Almost everybody goes to the mall, though...

Is it still 1987 where you live?

Re:I was thoroughly impressed with the interior

[BLToday]

Probably like me, a married dude that goes shopping with the wife. While she and women like her try on clothes, men like me play on our smartphones and occasionally wander into guy stores like Tesla, Brookstone, Microsoft or See's Candy.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[AK Marc]

CR is paywalled. Have to subscribe to read the full report.

Don't trust tests you haven't faked yourself...

[ffkom]

... and that even includes surveys from pretending-to-be-non-profit-organisations, as recently exposed about the ADAC "Car of the Year" survey.

Or I could buy three Ford Fusion Hybrids

[Anonymous Coward]

A fully loaded Fusion Hybrid Energi Titanium is about $35K.

And from 50 feet away it's nearly indistinguishable from a Tesla.

It also has a gasoline engine that'll get me home when the batteries are depleted.

I've seen 'em, sat in them. I think it'd be a tough sell convincing me it's $55K better.

Re:Or I could buy three Ford Fusion Hybrids

[zwede]

A fully loaded Fusion Hybrid Energi Titanium is about $35K.

And from 50 feet away it's nearly indistinguishable from a Tesla.

It also has a gasoline engine that'll get me home when the batteries are depleted.

I've seen 'em, sat in them. I think it'd be a tough sell convincing me it's $55K better.

It's easily $55K better. Sorry.

Re:Or I could buy three Ford Fusion Hybrids

[Anonymous Coward]

A fully loaded Fusion Hybrid Energi Titanium is about $35K.

And from 50 feet away it's nearly indistinguishable from a Tesla.

It also has a gasoline engine that'll get me home when the batteries are depleted.

I've seen 'em, sat in them. I think it'd be a tough sell convincing me it's $55K better.

It's easily $55K better. Sorry.

Oh, well, silly me. Now that you've explained it it's perfectly clear that the Tesla's better.

Not!

You wouldn't be biased, would you? Did you buy an S and your ego requires you to defend your overpriced gadget? Yeah, I thought so.

Green depends on where you live/work

[WillAffleckUW]

The reason they gave the Prius "most green" is that is green in many areas - city, country, and for long commutes.

In the True West (BC, WA, OR, CA) the Tesla S would be greener, in that we have cheaper electricity that is anywhere from 2/3 to 99.8 percent green (hydro, wind, solar) and we have the highway infrastructure of Tesla charging stations to allow long drives (say from Vancouver BC to San Diego CA) on all electric without more stops than a gas powered car would use.

Different measures. If you lived in a place where your electricity for most of your trips came from coal or natural gas, you'd want to buy a Prius.

Note: a 60 mpg car (they do exist in Canada) that you own for 10 years is greener than a full electric car that you power with coal-based electricity.

Re:Green depends on where you live/work

[Overzeetop]

Actually, every dollar spent on acquiring your vehicle is a dollar which has been burned as energy somewhere in the chain. Until renewable sources of energy come on line in a significant fraction, and are self perpetuating (i.e. the sources themselves produce most of the energy to produce), the truth is that every dollar spent has been (or will be) respent on energy. Coal is free, oil is free, gold is free, steel is free. What costs money is the extraction and processing, roylaties (profit for the resource "owner") plus overhead and profit...the last two of which get respent on "stuff" which is really just raw materials converted into goods via energy.

For a vehicle with a 200,000mi life expectancy, $90,000 purchase price means you have to save more than $60,000 in fuel costs, or 30c/mile, over a $30,000 vehicle just to break even. And that's not going to happen. While you could argue that *your* electric is nuclear/solar/hydroelectric, the fact is that *on average* electricity is still based largely on a non-renewable fuel.

I didn't rtfa (since it's probably paywalled as all of CR are), but I stand by my theory - the less expensive it is over it's full life cycle, the more green it really is.

Re:Green depends on where you live/work

[WillAffleckUW]

I agree. We need to look at total supply chain from cradle to grave. Which is why you can buy a "green" car and wreck it at 3 years and it causes more climate change than a non-green car that someone drove for 10 years.

The comparisons become more difficult when we look at what the $90,000 could have gone to - if invested in converting your house to high insulation passive solar it would have been more green than if spent on a Tesla. But if you already have such a house, replacing an older car with a Tesla in the True West is usually a good choice.

Re:Green depends on where you live/work

[drinkypoo]

every dollar spent on acquiring your vehicle is a dollar which has been burned as energy somewhere in the chain.

That is not true at all. Some cars actually cost more to make than they do to sell, e.g. Lexus LFA. But those cars don't actually cost that much in energy; they have enormous numbers of man-hours. You have to account for the profit. Lexus might take a loss, but everyone they're buying components from is profiting and the profit isn't accounted for in energy expenditure.

Re:"Vehicle"

[BasilBrush]

Best vehicle does not imply it can do everything every other vehicle can. If that was a necessary qualification, then no vehicle could ever be awarded a "best" award.

Their mission is to report on ALL good.

[Anonymous Coward]

And it starts at $50,000 (take-home price for most people.) Still well in to "luxury" territory for most people, but it's disingenuous to always refer to it as a $100K vehicle.

Also, the "recharge for 5 hours" is *ALSO* disingenuous. There are plenty of quick chargers now.

Almost nobody buys two new cars at once for two separate purposes. Almost nobody goes from zero cars to two cars. Anyone buying a Tesla is almost guaranteed to already have another vehicle that would be their "road trip" vehicle. When we bought our last new car, we kept BOTH of our prior vehicles - I used the new sedan for commute, my wife used the old compact car for commute, we kept the SUV for "fun" (camping, trips to the mountain for skiing, etc.) A couple years later, we inherited a Subaru Forester from my wife's mom, so we were able to replace both older cars with it. Yeah, my wife's commute got a little more expensive, but it's not like we went "Oh, we don't want to keep both the compact and the SUV - let's buy both a sedan AND a new SUV..."

Lastly, according to multiple studies, 98% of trips taken by car are under 50 miles in length. That means that even the lowest-capacity Tesla can handle 98% of trips. Yes, there are people who need more range in their primary vehicle - this vehicle isn't for them any more than the Tesla Roadster was for general contractors. Or a Ford F-450 is appropriate for an urban pizza delivery person. I have a mid-length commute: 11 miles each way. The LOWER capacity Model S would last me nearly two weeks between charges. I wouldn't buy a Hummer to replace my sedan for daily commuting, just as I wouldn't buy a Miata for camping!

Re:Their mission is to report on ALL good.

[David_Hart]

And it starts at $50,000 (take-home price for most people.) Still well in to "luxury" territory for most people, but it's disingenuous to always refer to it as a $100K vehicle.

I can only go by what was printed in the article. If the true take home cost is $50,000 after rebates, tax deductions, etc. then that makes it more affordable. But I can't find anything that backs this figure up.

Re:Their mission is to report on ALL good.

[Nethemas the Great]

Tax credits vary depending on where you live. Regardless, for US customers there's a federal tax credit of $7,500 for personal use EVs. State incentives can bump that up to $15,000. Base cost is $69,000.

Re:Their mission is to report on ALL good.

[AaronW]

I actually sold my other car. In 8 months I had only driven my other car once. I have no regrets. It just wasn't worth the hassle of having my other car constantly in my driveway and paying the registration on it. Since I sold it to a relative I can always borrow it if I need to.

Re:Their mission is to report on ALL good.

[Anonymous Coward]

Be careful on that federal tax credit ... if you have the money to afford a Tesla, you might make too much income to get the credit (as a doctor friend found out on another hybrid vehicle).

Getting it on a lease, and then buying out the lease might be a work-around.

Re:"Vehicle"

[beltsbear]

Ok. The Tesla S is the best vehicle that does not require either a ground support team, a special license or a two man crew.

Re:Scam

[amicusNYCL]

You're talking about a scam in a Tesla article and mention Le Car and the Nobel Peace Prize? Do you know what the definition of a scam is?

No disrespect to Tesla but

[Anonymous Coward]

My Porsche with PASM, PDCC, PSM, PTM and PTV Plus all working together, so I don't drive right into a tree, seems more technologically advanced. Oh, and it's riding on PCCBs.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but then how green are the batteries in your all electric vehicle? Ah.

2013 Motor Trend Car of the Year

[Buck Feta]

And now CR Best Overall? Tesla's on fire!

*ducks*

Re:2013 Motor Trend Car of the Year

[PRMan]

Renault Alliance was Motor Trend's Car of the Year. My dad bought one and it sucked. I quit listening to anything they had to say after that.

Re:2013 Motor Trend Car of the Year

[Tablizer]

Yip, I'm just burning to own one!

Re:2013 Motor Trend Car of the Year

[future assassin]

Tesla's on fire!

Is it the shoes? Boooom shakalaka!

Re:2013 Motor Trend Car of the Year

[zwede]

Renault Alliance was Motor Trend's Car of the Year. My dad bought one and it sucked. I quit listening to anything they had to say after that.

In their defense: What other new cars were there in the early 80's? The Chrysler K-car? Maybe the Renault really was the best (least sucky) at the time.

Re:2013 Motor Trend Car of the Year

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, I owned a Renault Alliance... I bought it from a little old lady for $450 and it was fantastic! Rust free, a genuine 40mph, extremely comfortable and I'd say it totally deserved the priced. I wish there were more of them around, I'd buy another one in a heartbeat!

"Overall" vehicle?

[Anonymous Coward]

I would have figured some kind of pickup truck to be the best overall vehicle, that or some kind of tractor.

Re:"Vehicle"

[icebike]

expanding that to best vehicle is beyond absurd.

Not half as absurd as your examples.

One thing that gets overlooked

[NotSoHeavyD3]

Besides how much the car costs how much does it cost to get your electrical installation in your house upgraded to support charging the car? (My house was built in the 50s and it can barely handle the load of a modern house. I'm thinking I'd need to upgrade it if I want to have a tesla. I know I have to upgrade it if I wanted to add central air.)

Re:One thing that gets overlooked

[drinkypoo]

First, you have to be able to upgrade. If you have 100 amp service, and you live in a dense residential neighborhood, you may not be able to upgrade to 200 amp service. You might just be SoL.

If you can upgrade, you have to pay a contractor to bless your new service connection, and you need to pay for the connection. You may well need a new panel, and you'll need a new circuit.

Re:One thing that gets overlooked

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey! This is about Tesla. Everything is magically cheaper when you drive a Tesla, going anyplace beyond 13 miles in a ICE car is suddenly impractical and electricity is free because you drive a Tesla.
 
Of course, your gas guzzler will break down every 3 days and catch your house on fire too!

Re:One thing that gets overlooked

[zwede]

It cost me $55. My house was built in 1999 and already had 200A service. I went to Lowes and got a NEMA 14-50 receptacle, a 50A breaker and some 6 gauge wiring. I installed it according to code, of course. Don't want to take any short cuts with a 50A circuit.

Re:One thing that gets overlooked

[icebike]

Any modern house wired for the possibility of an electric clothes dryer and/or electric range/oven is going to have 200amp service.
Even if you have a gas water heater. 200amp service (minimum) has been pretty much standard for well over 30 years in most areas of North America.

(Houses build in the boom just after WWII, maybe not so much)

And yes, you would want to pay a contractor, specifically a licensed electrician, because if something goes wrong your insurance won't pay.
I've installed many a circuit as just a home owner, but something this big is not the place for Joe Handyman.

Re:One thing that gets overlooked

[LDAPMAN]

Unfortunately, it is already wired for 200 amp service for a reason. Many American homes with dryer, range, electric AC/heat, and electric hot water cannot take another 50 amp load without the real possibility of exceeding 200 amps. Having a 200 amp service is no guarantee your ready to add Tesla charging.

Re:One thing that gets overlooked

[drinkypoo]

Any modern house wired for the possibility of an electric clothes dryer and/or electric range/oven is going to have 200amp service.
Even if you have a gas water heater. 200amp service (minimum) has been pretty much standard for well over 30 years in most areas of North America.

We're specifically talking about a house built in the fifties. About half the places I've lived have only had 100 amp service. They had gas appliances, thankfully. I far prefer them. I always seem to burn everything on electrics, though I've never had an induction range.

And yes, you would want to pay a contractor, specifically a licensed electrician, because if something goes wrong your insurance won't pay.
I've installed many a circuit as just a home owner, but something this big is not the place for Joe Handyman.

Meh. Not a big deal. But any time you're dealing with the service connection you need the blessing of a licensed electrical contractor.

Re:One thing that gets overlooked

[rjstanford]

Unfortunately, it is already wired for 200 amp service for a reason. Many American homes with dryer, range, electric AC/heat, and electric hot water cannot take another 50 amp load without the real possibility of exceeding 200 amps. Having a 200 amp service is no guarantee your ready to add Tesla charging.

So set your charger to run between midnight and 6am - easy. Or some other time when you're unlikely to be running the dryer, cooking, cooling your house, and heating lots of water all at the same time.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[icebike]

My typical powerstation is horrible at converting fossil fuels to electricity.
Now rain water, that it converts very well.

Really?

[Daetrin]

"When one thinks of Consumer Reports, refrigerator ratings and car seat reviews usually come to mind"

Actually i bought my subscription to Consumer Reports specifically because of the car reviews, and if i were to name the top two things that come to my mind when i think of them it would probably be cars and TVs.

...wait, they review car seats too?

Re:Really?

[rts008]

I haven't looked at a CR since the 1980's, but by then the aftermarket for high performance items were dying off somewhat.
But during the 1970's, there was a strong market for that stuff.
I can recall several reviews back then in different issues of several of the more popular 'racing seats' makers.
Recaro were one of the more popular 'racing seat' makers.(they were VERY nice!)

I actually used the CR article on a Recaro seat as a partial tie breaker when I bought mine in 1975 for my '69 Chevelle I raced Super Stock class with on the weekends, and drove to school and work through the week. (insanity of youth is my only defense-it was a HUGE PITN for normal driving! *but was nice on the ass*)

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[Ralph Wiggam]

the fact that electric cars are no greener than what the energy company uses to generate and transport electricity.

An electric vehicle powered entirely by coal generated electricity creates less pollution and CO2 than a Prius. Coal plants are rapidly being replaced by natural gas, which is far cleaner. West of the Mississippi, a much larger percentage of our power comes from nuclear and hydroelectric.

The current process of creating lithium ion batteries isn't as clean as we'd like. That's not a problem with electric vehicles. That's a problem with how we currently make those batteries.

Just goes to show that Consumers Reports is BS

[Anonymous Coward]

They always have been biased, and their metrics for determining the "best" have always been "because we say so". Then they always fall for politically correct bullshit because this organization has always been a mouthpiece for left wing political causes. So this month's propaganda is that the Tesla S is the best overall car even though it cost a minimum of 60,000 dollars and at the best possible scenario it can only go 300 miles @ 55 mph without multiple hours of downtime for charging. Sure if your a rich liberal you can afford this and buy the second internal combustion engine powered car car you need if you want to travel very far, but political correctness demands that we don't consider those two facts to be limitations. For the bulk of the population those two facts will kill the deal hence why electric cars are sales flops. But Consumers Reports has to be name the Tesla S the best overall vehicle because political correctness demands it, not on any technical or practical merits.

Re:Just goes to show that Consumers Reports is BS

[AaronW]

First of all, it doesn't take multiple hours of downtime for charging. Generally stops at the Superchargers are only around 30-40 minutes. In the next few months it will only take 90 seconds when battery swapping is added. The Superchargers are also free and guaranteed to be free forever. Battery swapping will cost about the same as filling up a similar luxury car. Besides, usually it doesn't matter how long charging takes. I always wake up each morning to a full tank (or in my case usually 60% charge to help extend the battery life), so to speak. It takes me 5 seconds to plug in at night and 5 seconds to unplug in the morning. In a typical week I spend far less time waiting for my car to charge than I do waiting to fill up my gas car, which I've sold since I drive it so rarely now. In the cross country trip Tesla spent 80% of their time driving and 20% charging while driving through some fairly nasty weather. If you stop for the night, as most drivers do, then you wake up in the morning with a full tank. Tesla's sales have been anything but a flop. They can't make them fast enough. They're outselling the gasoline cars in their class by a fair amount and they're making a decent profit from each one sold (over 25% margins).

Add to that that there's not much that can keep up with it, gasoline or electric. Most electric cars aren't selling all that well because they have poor range, poor battery life, or are just plain ugly. They're econoboxes that can't go 100 miles. For example the battery in the Leaf is only warrantied for 5 years and people are seeing significant degradation after only two years in hot climates.

The model S does not have any of these compromises. The car handles beautifully and is very responsive with quality materials and it looks great, not like a frog, even though it has one of the lowest coefficients of drag of any car out there. It has tons of room since the battery is a flat skateboard under the car with an electric motor the size of a watermelon that delivers 445 ft/lbs of torque, 416HP with minimal transmission losses. The climate control works well as does the user interface which is extremely responsive (it's based on Qt and runs on Linux on a Tegra 3). Driving it is a blast, especially with 0-60 in 4.2 seconds (3.9 according to Car & Driver). While the range is typically around 240 miles of real-world driving that's not that different than many ICE cars I've driven. The response is instantaneous. There is no lag. There's very little maintenance required other than rotating the tires and replacing the cabin air filter and wiper blades. The brakes should last nearly forever due to regenerative braking. The one-pedal driving of the car is quite addictive. It lets you configure how it behaves as well, like if you want strong regeneration or not if you let off of the gas or if you want it to creep forward when you let off the brake.

The Superchargers are usually at locations where there's places to eat and stretch ones legs. On my last trip to Lake Tahoe I stopped in Folsom to charge. By the time I was done with my burger my car was charged and ready to go and there was plenty of range left when I got to my destination at 7200 feet near the summit of Kingsbury Grade.

In the next three months Tesla will have battery swapping between the Bay Area and LA. By the end of the year 80% of the country will be covered by charging. Already the West coast is pretty well covered as is much of the East coast. I can drive from San Diego to Vancouver without spending a dime on fuel and spend at least 75% of my time driving.

The car has a ton of space in it, far more than my Prius ever did. I have far more luggage space, not even counting the frunk, which I find quite useful.

Tesla's goal was to create the best car, not the best electric car. In many ways they succeeded. They've also done away with a lot of things that suck about buying a car like the dealerships and dealing with dealership service. Their warranty covers everything except the wheels and tires and I do me

Re:Just goes to show that Consumers Reports is BS

[David_Hart]

The Superchargers are usually at locations where there's places to eat and stretch ones legs. On my last trip to Lake Tahoe I stopped in Folsom to charge. By the time I was done with my burger my car was charged and ready to go and there was plenty of range left when I got to my destination at 7200 feet near the summit of Kingsbury Grade.

Just make sure you don't get stuck anywhere without a charge. I highly doubt that there are roving tow trucks that carry battery packs with them. All you need with an ICE car is a siphon hose to borrow enough gas to get to the next gas station.

Re:Just goes to show that Consumers Reports is BS

[AaronW]

The thing is that there are more charging spots than gas stations. The car is quite good at telling you how much range is left. What happened to the NY Times reporter was due to his own stupidity. He charged the car for fewer miles than his destination. The car went 20 miles further than it said it could and he blamed the car for the fact that the car said it didn't have enough miles when he started.

In a pinch the Tesla can be charged any place there's an outlet, including all of the RV hookups which are typically NEMA 14-50 outlets or TT-30 outlets. I have adapters for virtually all 110 and 220 outlets including a 20A 110 adapter.

I have never once run out of gas in my 26 years of driving and none of the gas cars I've had told me the number of miles to empty. Only one time have I had to stop somewhere unexpectedly to charge. I knew well ahead of time I would have to do so and ended up having to stop in Monterey for an hour to charge for an hour.

Some trucks are starting to carry generators to charge electric cars in my area.

Re:Just goes to show that Consumers Reports is BS

[dave420]

?? You're really desperate to make Teslas sound terrible. Keeping an eye on an electronic fuel gauge which can tell you exactly how far you can go (as opposed to simply guessing, as in the majority of ICEs) isn't exactly difficult. Plus the tow truck you mentioned can tow a car. Plus ICE cars break down frequently (due to the greater number of moving parts) etc. You really need to try harder. In a few years people will look back at folks like you and scratch their heads that you ever graced the world with your short-sighted, Luddite presence. It's the 21st century. You're boring.

wear is cumulative

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, that if you commute 20 minutes 5 times a week, that you have in fact driven your commuter car for an hour and 40 minutes.

CR - Credibility?

[sk999]

Consumer Reports has been reviewing cars forever, and I relied on them for my first two car purchases. Then I zeroed in on a Jeep (needed to get into the back country) and CR went out of its way to expressly say "DO NOT BUY THIS VEHICLE". I bought it anyway, and it was the best I've ever owned. Repair record was not perfect but still better than all those previously highly recommended vehicles, and the ergonomics were superior to anything I've have before or since. If that same model were still made today I'd buy another.

If you are looking to buy a new vehicle, ignore CR.

Re:CR - Credibility?

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the reasons I dropped CR is they have obvious biases for many types of products that have nothing to do with reliability or performance. The other reason I dropped them is they lobby for nanny state legislation (I dropped AAA for similar reasons since they are always pushing for more mandatory driver aids in automobiles).

Re:CR - Credibility?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah back in the early '70s, they reviewed the 340 'Cuda, and the main thing they gigged it for was that the trunk was not suitable for taking home your groceries. Because anyone who bought one would be VERY concerned about that.

Re:CR - Credibility?

[Twinbee]

Occasionally, you'll find products on Amazon where 90% people give them one or two star, and the other 10% give it 5 star. Who's to say you're not that case here?

Re:CR - Credibility?

[AmiMoJo]

All you have done is show how worthless anecdotes are. I'm sure some people were perfectly happy with their Zunes, and a few Sinclair digital watches probably never broke down.

I'd take Consumer Report's advice over yours I'm afraid. They have more experience with a large number of vehicles over many decades, and most importantly if there are consistent problems with a model they will probably hear about it where as you only have one data point.

Re:CR - Credibility?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, that makes perfect sense. Let's not listen to comphrehensive industry statistics when we have one guy with anecdotal evidence!

Re:CR - Credibility?

[tlhIngan]

Consumer Reports has been reviewing cars forever, and I relied on them for my first two car purchases. Then I zeroed in on a Jeep (needed to get into the back country) and CR went out of its way to expressly say "DO NOT BUY THIS VEHICLE". I bought it anyway, and it was the best I've ever owned. Repair record was not perfect but still better than all those previously highly recommended vehicles, and the ergonomics were superior to anything I've have before or since. If that same model were still made today I'd buy another.

If you are looking to buy a new vehicle, ignore CR.

Except you pretty much invalidated the reason why CR does what it does - you needed it for the back country. CR covers "normal" use - what the average user uses their vehicle for. Like most SUVs and 4x4s never touch anything more "off road" than the odd dirt road caused by road repaving. Who otherwise spend their entire driving lives running on paved roads.

For these kinds of people, any vehicle meets their needs. CR just uses a set of objective tests to pick "best" of the lot. For specialized needs, the objective weightings will be off.

For example, if you're moving cross country, a Tesla Model S makes a poor moving vehicle - you'd probably want a cube van or a semi, depending on how much stuff and all that. But you're also not likely to see CR recommend a Peterbilt 390 because most people don't have a need for it.

Same goes for everything else. If you need a computer, CR will recommend a bunch of computers. But if you're a techie, your needs and what most people need probably won't align at all (e.g., CR puts emphasis on tech support, which most techies won't need over say, Google). Ditto anything else. Want a washing machine? Well, CR probably will pick generally good overall machines, but if your job is to do the linen at a hotel, you probably won't go for it. Or home theatre systems - if you're an audiophile or a cinema junkie who has their own theatre room, well, CR doesn't cater to you. They'll cater to people who just want better sound while watching movies on their 42" HDTV in the living room.

The only thing you need to know is when your needs are "average" or when you have special requirements.

I do believe CR makes their raw data available to members so if you do have special requirements, you can simply emphasize those differently from the default CR weightings. Like perhaps your jeep is just awful when you run it on standard paved roads, use it as a commuter car In stop-and-go traffic and in gas consumption.

Re:CR - Credibility?

[im_thatoneguy]

Why would I have been at all unhappy with my Zune. All of the reviews for the Zune were glowing. The Zune software was awesome compared to iTunes which is still horrifically terrible on Windows.

Zune was a complete sales disaster but it wasn't because it was a poor product. And I had no need for it to sell well to get a great experience.

bias, bias, bias

[Anonymous Coward]

"names a Toyota or Lexus"

Could it be cause Toyota is the likely buyer of Telsa if they do sell out? And we all know how Toyota and CR go hand in hand much like Toyota and JD power did back in the day (and considering Hyundai has enough cash for JD).

Good news bad news.

[Anonymous Coward]

The good news is that Tesla S ranked in the top of it's class. The bad news it was in the article reviewing charcoal briquettes, not cars. Consumers reports should come up with recommendations for a top rated fire extinguisher just in case someone decides to buy a Tesla.

Powered by

[Anonymous Coward]

Clean burning coal.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[skids]

Actually when you compare a non-hybrid SUV to a hybrid mileage-wise, they are more green because they save more gas. However, that's leaving unchallenged the customer's perceived need to buy an SUV in the first place (not that ther aren't some that do need one.)

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[bledri]

... that electric cars are no greener than what the energy company uses to generate and transport electricity.

What's funny is it would take someone only a few seconds to look up the relevant facts, but they never do. If someone is opposed to "green technology," they just let their confirmation bias decide that statements that align with their beliefs are obviously true. ICE engines are incredibly inefficient. All that noise that requires a muffler is wasted energy. All that heat that requires a radiator is wasted energy.Power plants are fairly efficient, as are electric motors. Don't believe me? Run the numbers:

Using the magical power of the internet, we can find out that a power plant burning petroleum produces 12.7 kWh per gallon. Tesla recently drove two Model S cars across the country (3,464.5 miles). The total energy consumed by both cars was 1197.8 kWh. It would take a power plant 94.3 gallons of gasoline (1197.8 kWh / 12.7 kWh / gallon) to generate the electricity used by both cars, so each car drove 3,464.5 miles on the equivalent of less than 48 gallons of gasoline. That's 72 MPG. What 5 seater, high performance, luxury hybrid gets 72 MPG?. It doesn't matter if the power plant is burring coal, power plants and electric motors are so freakin' efficient they blow everything else out of the water. Furthermore, it's much easier to scrub the exhaust of a power plant, than of a car.

And guess what, the US produces energy using all sorts of fuels: coal, natural gas, hydro, nuclear, wind and solar. Hybrids only burn gas, no alternative. Electric cars are green, get over it and stop spreading FUD to people too lazy to google reliable sources and perform simple math.

Re:"Vehicle"

[AK Marc]

I understand you didn't RTFA, but perhaps you can try next time to RTFS(ummary) "the Tesla Model S is is the Best Overall Car you can buy"

CR didn't say it was the best vehicle on the planet, but the best overall car (assumption: within their test criteria).

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[Anonymous Coward]

About as green as the mining the coal (not green) for the first battery.

Of course, unlike coal, batteries are 100% recyclable and no longer require large amount of energy to mine and refine the materials. So, for battery 2 and on, extremely green.

Way to Cherrypick

[icebike]

Not to mention the electricity for the Tesla (tada!) isn't free.
  24 cents per mile.

Nice try. They measured a drag race up to 111 miles per hour.

Actual representative cost per mile is available here and note that the cost per mile column is in CENTS, not dollars. (That chart largely agrees with Tesla's calculator on their official site.

Its a lot closer to 2.14 cents per mile in my state.
Even in California, where your cherry was picked from the real cost is 3.82 cents per mile.

Re:Way to Cherrypick

[Firethorn]

Nice try. They measured a drag race up to 111 miles per hour.

Average of 111.3 mph. Top speed of 114 mph, which to me indicates that the car hit 'top speed' rather quickly, per the article.

I also know that if you drag race normal gasoline vehicles and calculate the fuel efficiency from it you'll generally get a figure in the 'gallons per mile' range.

The site said their measurements indicate that Tesla Motors Inc (NASDAQ:TSLA)’s Model S went from zero to 60 miles per hour in just 3.9 seconds and ran the quarter-mile at 12.4 seconds with an average of 111.3 miles per hour.

the service station answer is simple

[deviated_prevert]

Jake Fisher, CR's head of auto testing, put even that drawback in context when he enthused: "If it could recharge in any gas station in three minutes, this car would score about 110."

In a nutshell make the batteries themselves removable and generic, but what do I know. Like everything that requires a standard it ain't gonna happen any time soon until some level of extreme public input makes it happen. The oil companies would crap if all of a sudden there was a simple way to store huge amounts of solar power in local automobile service stations. UNTIL WE GET TOGETHER and stop sucking on the teat of big oil and the industry of wars we will not mature as a civilization deserving of this planet. This is ET is calling and if you don't hear the call you will be left in the dust.

Re:the service station answer is simple

[Firethorn]

In a nutshell make the batteries themselves removable and generic, but what do I know.

They are removable. The battery pack is roughly like an armored skateboard bolted to the bottom of the car. A mechanical swap takes 90 seconds.

As for generic, Tesla uses more or less standard 18650 cells from panasonic, basically the AA of LiIon rechargable batteries. The pack itself is propriatory at the moment, but what can you do? From what I understand the 'same' pack with generational improvements are going to be used with the Model X.

Re:the service station answer is simple

[deviated_prevert]

In a nutshell make the batteries themselves removable and generic, but what do I know.

They are removable. The battery pack is roughly like an armored skateboard bolted to the bottom of the car. A mechanical swap takes 90 seconds.

As for generic, Tesla uses more or less standard 18650 cells from panasonic, basically the AA of LiIon rechargable batteries. The pack itself is propriatory at the moment, but what can you do? From what I understand the 'same' pack with generational improvements are going to be used with the Model X.

Thank you and it is good to see some people actually using their brains for a change. A method to save solar power and transport it is the key to the energy problems of this planet. Oil is only a very dirty and slow way of doing the job. No difference except that the sun shines mostly on deserts and methods of transmission must be addressed adequately. By covering a small part of the deserts some reversals of the CO2 caused changes in Ocean PH and the current thaw in your polar regions can also be addressed before the actions of corporate greed and wars cause another mass extinction.

Re:the service station answer is simple

[dave420]

They're rolling out battery swap sometime in the not-too-distant future. It takes 90 seconds to swap a battery, at the cost of about a normal tank of gas.

Veyron

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, someone submit a high end car story. Make one up. Veyron versus Vespa. McLaren vs Mustang. Ferrari vs Firefly.

That's much of why Tesla beats the competition.

[Ungrounded Lightning]

That "prissy pedal" makes the Model S go from 0 to 60 in 4 seconds and do a quarter mile in 12.5s. That's faster than a Porsche 911.

And that's much of why Tesla beats the competition.

Electrtic cars inherently COULD accelerate as much as possible given the coefficient of friction of tires on pavement. Electric motors generally have max torque at stall. All you need is a big enough motor and power supply. (What matters is being able to apply the necesary power during accelleration, which is a whole separate issue from cruising mileage.)

Unfortunately, other electric car manufacturers have been thinking "eco freeks in their underpowered compact and mini cars" and building underpowered electric powertrains. Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning, along with the engineering team they assembled, did not make that mistake. Instead they designed a vehicle with the horsepower to have high performance.

Re:That's much of why Tesla beats the competition.

[Ralph Wiggam]

Unfortunately, other electric car manufacturers have been thinking "eco freeks in their underpowered compact and mini cars" and building underpowered electric powertrains.

Like who? My Nissan Leaf has excellent pick up.

Re:That's much of why Tesla beats the competition.

[tibit]

Except it's hard to pick up girls in it :)

Re:That's much of why Tesla beats the competition.

[kilfarsnar]

Unfortunately, other electric car manufacturers have been thinking "eco freeks in their underpowered compact and mini cars" and building underpowered electric powertrains.

Like who? My Nissan Leaf has excellent pick up.

Compared to what? From what I can see, the Leaf does 0-60 in about 9 seconds, with a power output of 107 HP. That's adequate, but not all that fast compared to a lot of cars out there.

Re:That's much of why Tesla beats the competition.

[Ralph Wiggam]

The torque curve is completely different in electric cars. It will push you back in your seat and easily allow you to merge into any traffic.

Horsepower only affects top speed. The Leaf's top speed of 93 is plenty for normal people.

Re:That's much of why Tesla beats the competition.

[uncqual]

The Leaf's top speed of 93 is plenty for normal people.

That's only true for city driving and short trips - which of course is about all you are likely to use the Leaf for due to its range. There are roads where I have regularly driving a little above 93 MPH for most of an hour - sure, I'm passing cars, but every so often I have to slow down to merge right to let someone by (since I'm a courteous driver) whose headlights are gaining on me from a 1/2 mile back (I'm actually happy to let them by - it reduced my chance of getting a speeding ticket as if there's an cop around, they will usually get pulled over, not I). On these roads, I don't think going above 93MPH, at least on occasion, is "abnormal".

Hmm!

[Anonymous Coward]

Toyota or Lexus to choose an electric car that costs nearly $100,000 in most popular configurations from a Silicon Valley upstart. Interestingly, the Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

No how much CO2 and other contaminants are emitted from a power plant? Does the Tesla recharge itself? Of course it also depends on what fuel the plant uses.

Compare that to the pollutants the Toyota Prius puts off!!

Even the author of the story doesn't seem to get that, and yes there has been a continuing argument over how much pollutants are emitted while charging an electric car over gas efficient vehicles.

I didn't see anything from jxander that bad mouths the Tesla, and it seems you have a high opinion of the Tesla and when anyone comments about it not being a 'perfect ego friendly car' as expected Tesla nerds fly off the handle, instead of realizing the car despite its outstanding crash and safety rating is still flawed.

Re:Hmm!

[BasilBrush]

No how much CO2 and other contaminants are emitted from a power plant? Does the Tesla recharge itself? Of course it also depends on what fuel the plant uses.

Depends where you live. A number of countries such as Norway and Iceland are 100% renewable for electricity. A few more are in the 90%+ range. Others have committed themselves to 100% by various target dates.

My country, the UK, is doing badly with about 4% renewables. The USA better than the UK, but still fairly poor with about 13%.

Still all of those are better than the Prius, that uses 0% renewables.

Also bear in mind that there are people who charge their EVs at home using their own power from solar or wind. And that some public charging points are similarly 100% renewable.

Note also that the percentage of electricity coming from renewables increases year on year. So will get better over the life of the car.

Since when is $69k "almost $100k"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, you can soup it up and pay more, but the Model S starts at 30% lower than this article blurb indicates.

That's roughly in the same ballpark as an Escalade. Both are 2-3x what I could afford to pay for a car, but it's not like they're asking for the moon, especially when you consider the long-term cost of fueling.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[Powercntrl]

If someone is opposed to "green technology," they just let their confirmation bias decide that statements that align with their beliefs are obviously true.

The problem is that Tesla promotes the car as a "0 emissions" vehicle, as if it runs on unicorn farts and pixie dust. While it certainly produces less CO2 than a gasoline vehicle, most of the coal plants in the US are notoriously filthy beasts and you can feel free to Google what other not-so-nice stuff comes out the business end of a coal plant.

It's good to be the king

[Powercntrl]

So, the best car overall is a $100,000 luxury vehicle that can drive, at most, 4 hours and then needs to recharge for 5 hours??? Obviously Consumer Reports has a different set of standards than 99% of people who live in North America. Most of us are lucky if we afford one car worth $30K, let alone two (Tesla for city driving and another one for long distance).

If you have 70k to drop on a Model S, you'll get a tax rebate back because it's electric and it will save you money over the long run in "fuel" costs. Though, if you have that kind of disposable income, the cost of gas probably isn't stopping you from taking that vacation to Disney World. If you're like me and you cringe every time you stick your credit card into the pump, you probably view the Tesla as just another way that being rich helps the rich stay rich (okay, a game of Monopoly teaches that, too).

In the grand scheme of things, if you care absolutely nothing about being "green" and just want to drop a few grand on something that'll give you a return on your investment, a few computers stuffed with high end ATI video cards mining the crypto currency du jour (probably Dogecoin for the moment) will probably line your pockets way better than the fuel savings of a Tesla Model S. Which leads me to believe people are buying these cars not because of the fuel savings, but because it's a smug status symbol and a decent enough car for its price.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[Twinbee]

Batteries are energy agnostic. They can get their energy from solar, nuclear or some tech of the future (fusion etc.). In 10,000 years, we'll still be building cars with batteries as the energy provider since they're just so flexible and efficient.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do you assume the problem is the energy required? Mining and refining that stuff is horrifically dirty. Oh and then it has to travel twice around the world before it actually becomes a battery in a Tesla. Carbon footprint indeed...

Re: Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[Anonymous Coward]

Your calculation misses some crucial points:
Transformation losses (typically 0.95)
Transmission losses (depends on where you live, 0.9 to 0.7 is common)
Charger effiency (about 0.85)
Also energy needed to manufacture the batteries, etc. pp.
The Tesla is probably still 'better' than comparable luxury cars, but my guess would be that an efficient Diesel will still be ahead.
It's not the big revolution people make it out to be.

Right on

[Anonymous Coward]

As far as altitude and internal combustion engines, that require a steady stream of air for cooling, goes air "density" goes down as altitude rises, hence the engine performance is sub-par one example is when the weather is hot (low density) a car which is turbo-charged losses the extra power.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[rjstanford]

It takes very few emissions to send something twice around the world these days. Don't make the mistake of looking at the absolute carbon cost of a modern vessel vs. a single piece of its cargo. A modern container ship can transport somewhere around 18 million cubic feet of cargo from China to the US using ~4,800 tons of fuel (1.3 million gallons). So a gallon of fuel can move approximately 14 cubic feet of stuff from the US to China (or back).

Re: Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[rjstanford]

Your calculation misses some crucial points.
Refinery energy losses (typically .85)
Transmission costs (varies by location since most oil is delivered by boat and gasoline is delivered by truck)
Also energy needed to manufacture the engine, refine the steel, etc, pp. ...

Its telling that the full lifecycle energy cost of a Tesla's power is still better than only one component of an ICE vehicle, don't you think?

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[Kjella]

Using the magical power of the internet, we can find out that a power plant burning petroleum produces 12.7 kWh per gallon. Tesla recently drove two Model S cars across the country (3,464.5 miles). The total energy consumed by both cars was 1197.8 kWh. It would take a power plant 94.3 gallons of gasoline (1197.8 kWh / 12.7 kWh / gallon) to generate the electricity used by both cars, so each car drove 3,464.5 miles on the equivalent of less than 48 gallons of gasoline. That's 72 MPG. (...) Electric cars are green, get over it and stop spreading FUD to people too lazy to google reliable sources and perform simple math.

Pot, meet kettle. If we for simplicity's sake assume the oil tanker drove as far to deliver it to the power plant as the gas station, then an apples to apples comparison needs to take into account the 93% average transmission and distribution efficiency of the US power grid and the approximately 80% charging efficiency of the Tesla. So to consume 1197.8 kWh in the car you must provide 1197.8 / 0.8 / 0.93 / 12.7 kWh = 126.8 gallons of fuel at the power station which puts it at a more modest 55 MPG. Yes, power plants are somewhat more efficient but when you include the overhead of producing it one place, sending it by wire, charging a battery wtih it then discharging it instead of just using it directly much of the advantage is lost.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[kyrsjo]

Extracting and refining oil isn't exactly "green" either - especially now that we're used a lot of the conventional sources, and tar sand etc. is getting profitable.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure it qualifies as high performance, but a high-luxury car that does nearly that MPG is the Lexus IS 300h. Too bad Lexus won't sell it in the US

Sigh...

[Anonymous Coward]

What rock have some of you been living under? CR has been doing vehicle reviews for decades and has included higher-end ones like BMWs on their Recommended list, even as it also recommends ones as Best Buys for their overall value. Too many people confuse price and value, equating cheapest price as best value.

oh what a feeling!

[Anonymous Coward]

From the power to the handling to the vehicle infotainment systems to the warm loved feeling as tesla rams its cock straight up your financial ass over and over and over.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[gzuckier]

Here in CT we're still getting our electricity from the Filthy Five power plants http://www.nytimes.com/1998/07... which were exempt from the Clean Air Act in 1977 because they would be shut down for obsolescence "soon". There isn't a car on the road whose exhaust is worse than these babies.
On the other hand, some western location that gets power from Grand Coulee Dam...

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car.

[Anonymous Coward]

'Mr. Pot' made an apples-to-apples comparison, of the energy used to move the cars from point A to point B.

When it didn't turn out according to your preconceived notions, you added transmission, and storage losses to *one* side of the comparison, thus turning it into an apples-to-oranges comparison.

Strangely, enough, you're not including the fuel/energy used turning the crude oil into gasoline, and *driving* that gasoline to the gas station where you filled up your tank. If you did, that would make it an oranges-to-oranges comparison.

Oddly enough, though, the Tesla *still* wins on efficiency when you make your apples-to-oranges comparison.

Hello, Mr. Soot.

Consumer Reports

[Anonymous Coward]

It is silly to take a consumer report seriously. Every initial report that they have made on cars for the last 45 years in my observed experience have been dead wrong. I would run away from their best rating and look at there worst with some interest.