Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Tesla Model S Floats Well Enough To Act As a Boat, According To Elon Musk

Posted by msmash on from the it's-a-boat,-it's-a-car,-it's-boatcar dept.

It appears a Tesla Model S car can float and effectively drive on water. Tesla CEO Elon Musk tweeted a video of a Model S car which was able to float well through a flooded tunnel in Kazakhstan. Musk also noted that the company "definitely" doesn't recommend trying this -- but still vouched for the availability of this feature. The Guardian reports: The car appears to power through the water using the thrust of the wheels turning in the water, as the bow wave laps over the car's bonnet. Most internal combustion engine cars are sunk in water when the exhaust becomes flooded, which is why serious off-roaders have big exhaust scoops leading to the roof. Electric cars don't suffer from that particular issue, but how the rest of the car will react is unknown.

45 of 238 comments (clear)

  1. Not quite. by Type44Q · · Score: 5, Insightful

    have big exhaust scoops

    Don't you mean "intake snorkel?"

    1. Re:Not quite. by fabioalcor · · Score: 3, Funny

      have big exhaust scoops

      Don't you mean "intake snorkel?"

      Whatever floats your Tesla.

  2. Makes sense by NotDrWho · · Score: 5, Funny

    Teslas have been floating on government subsidies for years.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    1. Re:Makes sense by bravecanadian · · Score: 3, Funny

      Teslas have been floating on government subsidies for years.

      Impossible. Elon is a visionary business genius. Everyone in the media tells me so.

    2. Re:Makes sense by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apparently, the tax credits given to Tesla's customers for buying electric cars now count as subsidies for Tesla.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    3. Re:Makes sense by Tom · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Unlike GM, which got a massive bailout, or VW which is partially owned by the (german) government, or virtually any other big car company who all get this or that benefit package.

      You are right. Those are not subsidies. At least not by name.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    4. Re:Makes sense by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps they're similar to the ones that float the deep water oil rigs.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    5. Re:Makes sense by Paleolibertarian · · Score: 2

      And your point would be? A tax credit IS a subsidy in that the taxpayer doesn't have to pay it to the government and in some cases may even get a refund!

    6. Re:Makes sense by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 2

      Yup. My first Japanese car (a Subaru) lasted fourteen years. That's longer than both american cars I'd owned previously, put together, twice over, and then some.

      So, 14 years.....divided by two cars = 7 years per car.....twice over = 3.5 years per car....."and then some."
      So you only got 3 years each out of two American cars? What'd you do? Run them into an overpass abutment when you were driving home piss drunk at 3 in the morning?
      I've never had an American car last less than 14 years. And this is in Canada, where they're exposed to all sorts of cold weather related crap: salt, sand, freezing cold starts for 4 months of the year, etc.
      You do realize you need to actually change the engine oil on schedule, right?

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    7. Re:Makes sense by N3wsByt3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But it's not specially for Tesla, nor is it Tesla's fault the government subsidizes it. It's the governments' fault. And in a democracy where the government is chosen, it is, thus, the citizens' fault. Basically: it's your fault. ;-)

      Well, ok, I'm sure you voted for the good guys who never give out subsidies, but still...

      Point being, the parent poster was specifically calling out Tesla, and thus implied they were getting some sort of unfair and unethical advantage. But it's not limited to Tesla, and it's debatable whether it's unethical. If the government gave you a taxbreak so you'd only have to pay half your taxes, would you refuse because you thought it unfair? I very much doubt it. I know I wouldn't.

      So... is it necessary and a good thing the government masively subsidises stuff like electric cars, solar panels, windmills, etc. Hell no. It costs loads of money and often just keeps non-profitable companies afloat with taxpayers' money. Not saying it's always the case, and maybe Tesla would survive without the subsidies, but that's what it boils down to most of the time.

      However, the ones to blame is the government allowing, nay, stimulating such squander. NOT the companies who just make use of the money that is thrown at them.

      In my country they're starting subsidising electric cars too, now. It's foolishness. Getting 3000 euro or not for a 50000 euro Tesla for instance, will not deter or stimulate a person rich enough to buy one. I mean, if you're rich enough to buy one in the first place, and they want one, they will buy one, regardless of whether they get a 3000 euro reduction. This is just an added bonus to the rich, which don't really need them. so the theory that it's need to 'stimulate' innovative technologies so they break through on the market, is basically bull. It doesn't really help, and it costs the populace dearly anyway.

      When an electric car will go down to 15-20000 euro, and becomes viable for ordinary citizens, THEN it would matter in deciding to buy one or not. But at that time, they'll undoubtedly stop giving subsidies, as they always do. Because it's beginning to cost too much, and the rich elite (many of whom are the same politicians that voted for the subsidies in the first place) has already got one anyway. Of course, the official explanation by then is that 'the goal has been achieved' and thus no more subsidies are necessary.

      It's all crap. If a new technology is better than old technology, it will manage to break through with or without taxing your citizens, including the poorest, to pay for a sweet bonus for the rich. There are very few technologies that have inherent advantages, and yet that need heavy subsidies to stay afloat, certainly for longer than a few years. After that, it just becomes a monetary black hole where you pour in taxpayers' money endlessly, so a company which isn't competitive stays afloat while we're paying for it - often doubly so.

      It's a distortion of the free market, and I believe the disadvantages of such a system are far bigger than the occasional advantage of having a new technology that might or might not have broken through without it, for the simple reason that most WOULD have broken through eventually anyway, if they're really that good and better than old technology.

      --
      --- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
    8. Re:Makes sense by Enigma2175 · · Score: 2

      Yup. My first Japanese car (a Subaru) lasted fourteen years. That's longer than both american cars I'd owned previously, put together, twice over, and then some. And it never broke down. The only maintenance I did were the scheduled services recommended in the manual, and replacement of consumables like tires and brake pads. The same can definitely not be said of the Ford or Chrysler. For that matter, I could have gotten a few more years out of the Subaru. But it was due for a new set of brakes plus a timing belt & water pump. The cost of that was more than the value of the car. And I'm more of a city than outdoors person these days, so the mileage penalty of all-wheel drive doesn't make sense anymore.

      My rule now is that to even be worth consideration, the VIN must start with the letter "J". Anything else is a non-starter.

      Yeah, it would be impossible for a Subaru to have a problem, like "Subaru is recalling 48,500 Legacy and Outback models for total steering failure" . So maybe your anecdotal experience is not the same as data! Funny that you would claim your Subaru is more reliable that Ford, as the data from this dependability study says that Ford beats Subaru in dependability. Neither are stellar, but the data certainly doesn't back up your experience.

      --

      Enigma

  3. Wow the car knowledge here is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Most internal combustion engine cars are sunk in water when the exhaust becomes flooded, which is why serious off-roaders have big exhaust scoops leading to the roof"

    No. Most internal combustion engines are destroyed via hydrolock when (significant) water enters the intake of the engine. Because it can't be compressed, the engine basically explodes internally (pistons, valves, etc, etc). If water enters the exhaust and the engine is running, this is usually not a big deal because the air pressure from the engine will push it back out. Also, the exhaust valves don't suck in air so it will take some serious water pressure to get past those.

    Typically, to combat this, the intake will have a snorkel attached to it and that will be as high as possible, thus preventing water entry into the intake. The exhaust may be raised as well (but that is not absolutely necessary) and this is a serious consideration if the engine is to be turned off while submerged (as then water will enter the combustion chamber through the exhaust valves, hydrolocking when you try to start it again).

    1. Re:Wow the car knowledge here is bad by wbr1 · · Score: 2

      Would gas pressure suit you better? You may know have knowledge of exhaust gas pressure since your o-ring is blown out AC.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    2. Re:Wow the car knowledge here is bad by msauve · · Score: 4, Informative

      "once a Tesla starts taking on water I'd imagine it'd sink like a lithum rock."

      Which is to say, it would still float? Lithium has a density similar to wood (pine).

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    3. Re:Wow the car knowledge here is bad by Isao · · Score: 2

      In fact, many motorboats exhaust below the water line just fine.

  4. Actually... by b0bby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think this is incorrect:

    Most internal combustion engine cars are sunk in water when the exhaust becomes flooded, which is why serious off-roaders have big exhaust scoops leading to the roof.

    I think the snorkels are intakes, not exhaust - you don't want to suck water into your intake manifold.

    1. Re:Actually... by I4ko · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It wasn't deep in the video at all. The white juke was no more than its doorsills deep (and was moving albeit slowly as not to cause a wave), which is like 18 cm at most. The air intake on the juke is also quite a bit higher - around 70 cm from the ground if not more (around the same height as the lowest point of the steering wheel). The Testa didn't float at all, it was just driving on the bottom.

  5. Re:Floats unlike Tesla by Rei · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What are you talking about? If you're talking about the suspension issue, the NHTSA investigated and found no problem with Tesla suspensions (and furthermore that 93% of the complaints were fraudulent).

    --
    Monkeywrench Ex Machina.
  6. Today Teddy Kennedy would drive a Tesla by david.emery · · Score: 2

    One of the great parody ads: http://www.funnyfakeads.com/pi...
    And the background for it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  7. Jay Leno's take by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Jay Leno had some interesting things to say about Tesla.

    I've noticed the same thing (as Jay): people are falling over themselves to try to bring Tesla down, and I haven't the first idea why.

    GM stock price slumped a whopping 1.3% on news of its ignition recall that was actually killing people.

    Apple hires some engineers with car experience, everyone guesses that they'll be making electric cars, and "OMG, this could be the end of Tesla!" (The stock drops 10% in a day).

    Analyst price targets for Tesla are all over the map, going from $150 to $385.

    Jay mentions that "we like noble failures more than we reward success". I think that's true, but it's also baffling.

    1. Re:Jay Leno's take by geekmux · · Score: 2

      GM stock price slumped a whopping 1.3% on news of its ignition recall that was actually killing people.

      Apple hires some engineers with car experience, everyone guesses that they'll be making electric cars, and "OMG, this could be the end of Tesla!" (The stock drops 10% in a day).

      Analyst price targets for Tesla are all over the map, going from $150 to $385.

      Removing the opinions of talk show hosts/car collectors for a moment, perhaps what these statements truly highlight is an utter inability to predict a damn thing when it comes to the incredibly unstable stock market.

      People equate it to gambling for valid reasons.

    2. Re:Jay Leno's take by PPH · · Score: 2

      and I haven't the first idea why.

      I do.

      Back when electric cars were DC traction motors jerry-rigged into compact cars with a trunk full of lead acid batteries, I got into several conversations with some greenies about what it would take to get the public into them. With some level of extraordinary prescience, I would say, "When electric cars have the comfort, performance and price of IC engine cars, we will buy them. Nobody wants to drive around in a glorified golf cart with open sides and 30 miles range."

      The inevitable response was that electric cars were meant to be inconvenient, uncomfortable and uneconomic as the first step to getting people out of private vehicles and into mass transit. Which could eventually control where and when people travel. Pretty much like the Soviet Union at the time issued travel permits.

      The modern electric car in general and Tesla in particular have dashed the hopes of the social control freaks to use the inevitable downfall of IC powered private vehicles to direct the population to suit their whims.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:Jay Leno's take by hey! · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I don't know what it is with the Tesla hating. But that said, *this* particular bit of hype does deserve to be condemned.

      (1) The driver in the video is a moron. You never drive your car into a situation you aren't sure you can drive it out of -- particularly one involving water. People get stranded that way (and often killed, if water is involved).

      (2) Because you saw some guy do it doesn't mean your car will do it. If it's not part of the design specifications of the car, the car can't be relied upon to do it. If people routinely drive through deep water with near-perfect success, then sure. But because it happened once doesn't mean you should be the second person to try it.

      (3) Tesla owners should not be encouraged by the company to think their cars can act as boats unless the company plans to stand behind that.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  8. Like a duck? by fishwallop · · Score: 2

    So the Tesla floats like a duck?
    It must be made of wood.
    Like a witch.
    And what do we do with witches?

  9. Synopsis wrong by MouseR · · Score: 3, Informative

    Musk didn't say (less even vouch) for the availability of this "feature". It's not a feature. It's a capability inherent to any car with closed cabin. All cars will float for a brief period of time (which is what Musk said: it will float for a brief period of time).

    The batteries and electrical system is isolated enough to sustain sub-bar pressures and will hapilly drive along as the engine is not dependant on any air intake system not being flooded.

    Technically, all EVs should be able to do this for a period. DONT drive across the lake.

    Ranged-extended vehicles (Gen 1 & 2 Volt, BMW i3, Fisker Karma) dont have this luxury. While the electrics will continue working, any flooding of the ICE will require major repairs.

    Disclaimer: I own a Gen2 Volt.

  10. Re:the only thing left by Rei · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It actually has enough power to, versus its weight, if one were to retrofit the drivetrain to turn a prop and affix some reasonably efficient wings and flight surfaces. A typical Cessna weighs a bit over a tonne and has an engine in the ballpark of 120kW or so. Even the cheapest Model S is about 2 tonnes and puts out about 250kW. The high performance versions are about 200kg heavier and pump out vastly more power.

    Heck, you could probably fly one with just a big parasail for lift - the L/D ratio of 4-5 is probably good enough, at least for the mid-range versions and possibly the low-end as well. You just need to find a good way to get that motor power going to one or more props.

    --
    Monkeywrench Ex Machina.
  11. Re:Floats unlike Tesla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    He's also talking about that one incident where a Tesla ran over a chunk of metal on the highway, resulting in a horrible fire that was isolated to the engine compartment, and required that the driver pull over and shut the car down. (Rather than the much safer standard vehicle alternative of exploding, crashing, and suddenly ceasing to have a working engine while driving at high speeds on a crowded highway). Tesla's total dismissal of the incident is just typical of their head-in-the-sand tactics to ignoring real problems.

    Wake up sheeple!

  12. Re:Floats unlike Tesla by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hey, whatever floats his car. ;)

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  13. Re:the only thing left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh good lord, don't give them ideas. Now my model 3 is going to be delayed while they work out the kinks in the flight systems and autopilot.

    I blame you.

  14. Float? Not quite. by kamakazi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am sorry, but that car wasn't floating. The wheels and tires on a Tesla are going to have no forward thrust, because the entire wheel will be submerged, meaning the top of the wheel is thrusting backwards just as well as the bottom is thrusting forward.

    The low profile tires on the Tesla are going to have minimal thrust anyway, because the tread is not even vaguely paddle like. For reference look at this video of the bigfoot monster truck floating across a lake. Even that truck with duallies on it (total of 8 monster truck wheels), which did float high enough for the big mudders to act like paddles, didn't make as quick forward progress as an old man in a canoe, and was extremely slow to respond to steering input.

    The tesla in the video not only has enough power to push a big bow wave, it has enough steering traction to slalom through the other cars on the road. The weight of that car was obviously enough to keep the tires on the pavement at that water depth. I am not denying that the Tesla could float, nor am I denying that it may be water tight enough to float well, but it will be pretty much powerless and uncontrolled while floating.

    Mr. Musk is very proud of his car, but on this video I call BS. That is not floating.

    --
    "Proximity to wonder has blunted our perception and appreciation of it" --Tim Hartnell in 'Exploring ARTIFICIAL INTELLI
    1. Re:Float? Not quite. by msauve · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "the entire wheel will be submerged, meaning the top of the wheel is thrusting backwards just as well as the bottom is thrusting forward."

      Except they're not open wheel cars, they have fenders and wheel well liners.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    2. Re:Float? Not quite. by kamakazi · · Score: 4, Informative

      hmm, that is a point. If the wheel stays up in the fender it may act as a very inefficient impeller, taking in water at the rear of the fender opening, the fender liner acting as the casing of a very poorly coupled pump.

      It would work better if it was a fully skirted fender, which they aren't, so most of the water being pumped is going to just blast out sideways, mostly out, because the inside of the wheel well is lower that the outside.

      Just guessing, without modeling, I think the thrust would be mostly down, with some backwards.

      I don't know my Tesla models that well, but if it is AWD any thruster effect from the front wheels would be less, because of the larger wheel well clearances for turning, and would disappear almost entirely when the wheels were turned left or right at all.

      Teslas probably have an advantage in this regard, because they have a pretty taught suspension, and probably won't droop as much as the cars us mere mortals drive, which at full droop can be almost entirely out of the wheel well, below the body of the car.

      You are correct, I had not considered the ducting action of the fenders. However I stand by my final judgement that the car in the video is not floating.

      --
      "Proximity to wonder has blunted our perception and appreciation of it" --Tim Hartnell in 'Exploring ARTIFICIAL INTELLI
  15. Re:Batteries by necro81 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Electronics in automotive environments tend to be very well sealed, because they are exposed to all kinds of crap. Rain is the least of it: snow, salt, sand, mud, marine air, gasoline, motor oil, washer fluid - all of these would utterly destroy electronics if they were not well protected against it. The electronics enclosures, cabling, and connectors used in automobilies are typically rated to IP55 at least, and typically are IP67. Once you have sealed it well enough to keep out all the crap you'd encounter on the road, you get protection against temporary submersion more or less for free.

  16. Re:Batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yes, you can. The stuff is called "Lith-X", and we were trained in its use. Lith-X was applied by the bucket load. For very small fires, like foils, something that resembled a salt shaker was used.
    Of only minor interest here: we were working with Lithium-6...

  17. Re:Nothing new by bobbied · · Score: 2

    LOL.. When new and the door seals actually worked and the heater channels where not rusted out, yea they could float... My old 65' beetle would have sunk like a scuttled German U-Boat on the high seas when I owned it. A cross wind was more than just an adventure in uncommanded lane changes, it also blew stuff around inside the car because the "door seals" didn't seal anything... Imagine driving this across Indiana in -10 weather.... Can you say COLD, with roasted ankles?

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  18. Re:Floats unlike Tesla by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 3, Funny

    In other news, Mr. Musk announced a new line of sneakers that allows wearer to walk on water...

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  19. Re:Floats unlike Tesla by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Thank you for your opinion Anonymous Coward. But I'll go with what the NHTSA, and NCAP say about it instead. Not that I don't value your opinion, just that it's utterly wrong and worthless.

  20. Re:Batteries by NatasRevol · · Score: 2

    Well, clearly not the first, but whatever.

    --
    There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  21. Re:Floats unlike Tesla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    WHoooooosh.

  22. Re:Like to see a Tesla powertrain on an actual boa by Junta · · Score: 2

    Well 240 hp on a 21 foot boat makes for pretty fun sport boating already...

    In general, engines on boats short of yacht class are relatively ancient by automotive standards (e.g. carburetor was the norm until very recently, and engine diagnostics are much less sophisticated for boats)

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  23. If someone steals a Tesla... by Khyber · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...do we then call it an Edison?

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  24. Re:I'm not the biggest tesla fan by tekrat · · Score: 2

    You're assuming that Tesla's *only* business model is to sell cars. Well, Elon Musk is a smarter businessman than you are.

    Tesla's profits come from their sale of carbon credits and other "green" state and federal regs to other car companies who continue to pump out gas-guzzling SUVs.

    http://www.marketplace.org/201...

    Also for a while, Tesla was licensing their patents to other manufacturers, but I think that's over now as they opened up the patents.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  25. Re:Batteries by legRoom · · Score: 2

    What utter nonsense. Lithium is not burning via some Li + Li --> Li_2 reaction in the absence of other elements.

    That is true, but in the case of Lithium batteries the required oxidizer is an essential component of the battery itself. No outside chemical input is required for the battery to burn or explode; the military has investigated the use of lithium batteries as improvised grenades.

    The problem with water ingress would not necessarily be that it serves as a concentrated oxidizer, but rather that it may short out the batteries, causing sufficient local heating to trigger a self-sustaining chain reaction within the batteries themselves.

  26. HIgh intake not exhaust by Jeff1946 · · Score: 2

    Off roaders use high intakes mainly to reduce the amount of dust sucked in which will eventually clog the air filter. Obviously it would help going through water. Usually water is flowing and as soon as the car reaches a depth where is will float you are going to go "down the creek without a paddle."

  27. Re:Floats unlike Tesla by rpstrong · · Score: 3, Funny

    Or: "I'd like to agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong."