Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Faraday Future Unveils Super Fast Electric Car (bbc.com)

Posted by msmash on from the from-China dept.

Start-up Faraday Future has unveiled a self-driving electric car that it says can accelerate from zero to 60mph (97km/h) in 2.39 seconds. Faraday says the FF91 accelerates faster than Tesla's Model S or any other electric car in production. From a report on BBC: It was shown off at the CES tech show in Las Vegas. But Faraday Future has faced financial difficulties and one analyst said it had to challenge "scepticism" following last year's CES presentation. The FF91 was introduced via a live demo, in which it drove itself around a car park and backed into an empty space. Pre-recorded footage also showed the car accelerating from standstill to 60mph in 2.39 seconds. Tesla's fastest model did it in 2.5 seconds on the same track. Late in the presentation, however, there was an awkward moment when Chinese billionaire Jia Yueting tried to demonstrate the car's self-parking function on stage in front of the audience. This time, the vehicle remained stationary.

82 of 121 comments (clear)

  1. except of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The Tesla is actually in production.

    1. Re:except of course by Rei · · Score: 1

      The problem is that they're trying to get a chunk of a small market (luxury electric sports cars) from a company largely loved by that market, by getting some sort of marginal top-end acceleration improvement. It'd be like if a startup smartphone manufacturer had though that they could convert Apple fanboys during the Steve Jobs era by producing an iPhone copycat that was pretty much the same as the latest iPhone model but with a processor that was 5% faster.

      --
      For the love of Crom, am I the only one here who wants to keep the U.S. technologically competitive?
    2. Re:except of course by Altus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So you mean its the Samsung business model?

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    3. Re:except of course by leftover · · Score: 1

      Not to speak for Rei but you may have missed his main point. Samsung's market is people who do want a smartphone but not an Apple product. The straw business model Rei presented was for a company that would try to displace Apple in the population of Apple fanbois.

      Right at this moment, Tesla's market is everyone who wants a luxury electric vehicle since they are the sole producer.

      --
      Bent, folded, spindled, and mutilated.
    4. Re:except of course by green1 · · Score: 1

      And that is Rei's mistake.
      He is extrapolating that because people are currently buying Teslas, that they wouldn't rather buy from someone else. The fact is that there is a very large (and growing) portion of the Tesla customer base that is fed up with Tesla, and would gladly buy from anyone else if there was only a viable competitor. Unfortunately at this time, no suck competitor exists.
      To be successful in the market, a competitor to Tesla doesn't even have to produce a better vehicle, they just need to produce a vehicle that's almost as good, at a price that's about the same, but with a good service network, and not promise people things (and take money for those things) that they will never deliver.

      I have a Tesla, it's the best car currently on the market, from one of the worst companies in business today. I would gladly buy a slightly inferior product from another company if it meant avoiding dealing with Tesla. The problem is that there is no "slightly" inferior product on the market, there are simply vehicles that do not even begin to compare.

      Unfortunately, I personally do not believe that Faraday Future will be the company to change that. Everything I see indicates a lack of focus and drive that makes it unlikely they'll even make it to market, combined with the same attitude that Tesla has indicating a likelihood to also over-promise and under-deliver.

      I find more promise in Lucid Motors, though I am the first to admit that they still have a long way to go, and no guarantee of success.

    5. Re:except of course by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately at this time, no suck competitor exists.

      Freudian slip? I mean, I know the competitor's product might not auto-park correctly, but that's a little harsh. :-D

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    6. Re:except of course by green1 · · Score: 1

      lol, well, it was an honest typo, but if I'm going to be harsh on Faraday Future it won't be for the auto-park fail. A product failing to perform on stage 2 years before the final version is available to the public is embarrassing for the company, but not really a good indicator of how well the final product will work.

      If I'm going to criticize FF it will be for their lack of focus, lack of finances, and overly optimistic promises which I suspect will not come to fruition. I might also criticize the overly complex nature of their product.

      I honestly hope they succeed, however I'm not overly optimistic, they just aren't giving off any of the right signals.

    7. Re:except of course by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      The problem is that they're trying to get a chunk of a small market (luxury electric sports cars)...

      Actually, they're trying to get a position in a future, gigantic market where everybody, rich and poor, switches to electric. For the time being, they just need a beachhead, much like Tesla with the Roadster.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    8. Re:except of course by Obfuscant · · Score: 1
      If you want a position in a future market, you start making what that market will bear. For a future market where everyone buys electric, rich and poor, you make an inexpensive electric car with acceptable performance, not a high priced electric that is not really "Super Fast" at all. (60MPH is NOT super-fast.) None of the poor people are going to buy your cheap cars after you make a name for yourself as an expensive car manufacturer -- you're going to capitalize on your brand name and your prices will be higher than they should be.

      So no, they're looking for a position in the rich market by having "super fast" attached to their name.

    9. Re:except of course by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      If you want a position in a future market, you start making what that market will bear.

      Why do you do that? The market does not exist yet.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    10. Re:except of course by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Why do you do that? The market does not exist yet.

      Because that's how you get a position on that future market. If you wait until it exists you're already behind. "Behind" is not the position that any company wants to be in.

      But in truth, the market does exist. There are already EVs. The poor don't buy them because they can't afford to. The rich already buy them. You want to get into the market, you make a car the poor can afford, because there are so many of them compared to rich. You don't do that by building cars with the best acceleration numbers of any EV.

    11. Re:except of course by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Why do you do that? The market does not exist yet.

      Because that's how you get a position on that future market.

      No, that's how you die. Relevant words: "before its time". If you want to be in business, you better be satisfying demand that actually exists, or you better have deep pockets to cover your stupidity.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    12. Re:except of course by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      No, that's how you die. Relevant words: "before its time".

      I see nothing about "before its time" in anything you wrote. And as I said, the market is already breaking open, all it takes is a source that people can afford and more people will buy them.

      Henry Ford broke open the automobile market by using standardized production lines to make a car that people could afford. I don't think "Ford Motor Company" died because he did that. Do you? Did "Volkswagon" die when they produced "the people's car"? Or did both companies get a good position in the future market?

    13. Re:except of course by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Ok, you invest your money in a budget all-electric car company, let us know how that works out for you. Good luck with those lead-acid batteries.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    14. Re:except of course by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      That would require to do a different business
      What is wrong in preparing for and shaping a future market? Like Apple did with the iPod and iPhone? Or the new Space companies?

      Everyone can "attempt" to make a product on the current market and compete with everyone else who is in that market ... but why? If you only have a limited budget this is the most risky thing to do. Why do you think you are able to make a new product, market it, sell it and compete at the same time with dozens if not hundreds of more experienced and more established businesses?

      It is much easier to make a completely new product for a yet not existing market.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    15. Re:except of course by green1 · · Score: 1

      Tesla flat out lied to me to make a sale. They promised all sorts of features in AP1 that have not been delivered, and have quietly been removed from their website after they took my money.
      They have actively removed functionally from my car after I bought it through over the air software updates, without my permission, and refused to do warranty repair work without my agreeing to have functionality removed permanently from my car.
      They are openly hostile to any third party repair efforts, despite not having the capacity to do timely repairs at their own facilities.
      It's honestly hard to be much slimier of a company, but they are looking for ways each and every day.

    16. Re: except of course by green1 · · Score: 1

      As I said, best car, worst company. If someone else develops a car that's almost as good, I'll switch in an instant. It doesn't have to be better, it just has to be close.

    17. Re:except of course by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      What is wrong in preparing for and shaping a future market? Like Apple did with the iPod and iPhone?

      You can have "actual demand" as evidenced by customers buying products, or "suppressed demand" for a variety of reasons, including product not being available or current prices too high. Apple correctly judged that suppressed demand existed for the iphone, and that it was able to create a product to convert that suppressed demand into real demand. That was smart. But entering a market where suppressed demand exists, but can't be converted into real demand, for example, because the product cannot be produced profitably at the necessary price point is just stupidity. This particular form of stupidity may be indulged in successfully by a firm with deep enough pockets, but it is a practical certainty that better return on investment could have been achieved elsewhere, and thus still qualifies as stupidity even if successful.

      BTW, your other examples - ipod and space - are not good examples because actual demand already existed in both those markets.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    18. Re:except of course by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      but it is a practical certainty that better return on investment could have been achieved elsewhere
      Which requires that you have expertise elsewhere.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  2. Who cares? by nospam007 · · Score: 2

    Wake me up when they have a Super Cheap electric car.

    1. Re:Who cares? by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      Well, first, oil and gas subsidies have to stop, so I think it'll be a while before they're "cheap".

      Faraday Future is also getting subsidies. After all, we wouldn't want any of these billionaires to have to actually risk their own money, would we?

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    2. Re:Who cares? by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Wake me up when they have a Super Cheap electric car.

      Don't bother me until they have also made it recharge enough in a 15-30 min stop to make it another 300 miles of highway driving and there are charging stations at least every 100 miles on all the interstates I drive on.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    3. Re:Who cares? by Altus · · Score: 2

      They are claiming a 380 mile range or something like that. Thats pretty impressive and would certainly be more than enough for me to give up on a gas vehicle, Honestly a bit over 200 miles range would do it, 300 would be a no brainer.... but not if its going to cost me 100K.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    4. Re:Who cares? by codeButcher · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wake me up when they have a Super Cheap electric car.

      ... or just comparatively priced with a comparative range to today's ICEs. Now that would be groundbreaking.

      --
      Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
    5. Re:Who cares? by Rei · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Indeed. Which is the whole reason behind the gigafactory - get battery costs down, so you can put that much battery energy in a vehicle without having to pay out the nose.

      I had always thought of the Solar City acquisition as just a "Musk bailing himself out" thing, and the powerwall as just an also-ran product, but it increasingly occurs to me... it's all about the gigafactory. They want to be selling as many batteries as possible, to give them as good economies of scale as they can on the batteries for their cars. So the more home-scale backup systems they sell, the more "complete" home solar systems they sell with integrated battery backup, the more grid-scale backup systems they sell, etc, the more they accomplish that. So it makes sense that they'd try to make as many battery-related spinoffs as they can.

      Because Gigafactory 1 is only the start of their plans. They plan a whole network of gigafactories around the world. Each one targeting a lower production cost than the last.

      --
      For the love of Crom, am I the only one here who wants to keep the U.S. technologically competitive?
    6. Re:Who cares? by Altus · · Score: 1

      I do suspect it is their plan but I wonder how fast they can execute on it. As I understand it the chevy bolt batteries are supplied by LG, now its possible that this car will have some major electrical problems but assuming the roll out goes well those batteries can't be that expensive. It has a reasonable range (230 miles I believe) and it costs something like 36K before the tax incentive. Sure chevy gets some kickbacks from states on it but so does Tesla.

      Now mind you, I'm not ready to throw in on a GM car that is brand new and untested (nor would I recommend it to others) but it does show the possibility that Teslas competitors for battery production might be able to compete pretty aggressively on price. Not that it doesn't make sense for Tesla to invest in the Gigafactory because they need to be making their own batteries if they want to get anywhere but it may not result in them beating out the Asian battery manufacturers in the long haul. Those guys already have pretty hefty capacity and they wont be standing still.

      Long story short, I'm not holding my breath for an affordable electric with a decent range which is really all I want.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    7. Re:Who cares? by Smidge204 · · Score: 1

      All companies are allowed practically cost-free, perpetual leases on government owned wilderness lands? Wowee!

      =Smidge=

    8. Re:Who cares? by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      Then you should start looking, because there is a reason why every other major country (except the middle east/major oil suppliers) are paying 50% to 150% more than we do per gallon of gas.

      http://www.globalpetrolprices....

    9. Re:Who cares? by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      the "subsidies are bad!" guy! Can we call it a troll now?

    10. Re:Who cares? by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      I think Faraday is going to pull what Fisker did. Take all that sweet handout money knowing the product can't be done from an engineering standpoint. The big shots leave with all the money and get more high paying jobs somewhere else.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    11. Re:Who cares? by bobbied · · Score: 1

      NOT in the last 8 years...Well, no NEW leases in the last 8 years.

      So.. How is this a subsidy? The terms of the leases are similar to those on private lands as best I can tell.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    12. Re:Who cares? by bobbied · · Score: 1

      The difference here is mostly in the taxes, not the actual cost of the gasoline or diesel fuel. In some places, fuel is more expensive because it's more costly to ship and store, but the majority of the price difference is about taxes.

      So, how is the difference in taxes charged the end customer equate to a subsidy?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    13. Re:Who cares? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      The home battery will provide a nice aftermarket resale value for the batteries coming off the car. When the battery pack falls below spec for automotive application, it gets sold, unpacked, bad cells thrown out, repacked for home use. The cost of the battery to the car owner is somewhat mitigated.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  3. Wow! by nospam007 · · Score: 2

    I thought they manufactured just cages.

    1. Re:Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I thought they manufactured just cages.

      No, you're confusing them for Faraday Past.

    2. Re:Wow! by bobbied · · Score: 2

      I thought they manufactured just cages.

      Oh they have the capacity to do much more....

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  4. What is the Battery range? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    What is the Battery range?

    1. Re:What is the Battery range? by NatasRevol · · Score: 2

      Nobody knows. And even if they measure these one-offs, they're not in production, or for sale, in any time in the near future.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    2. Re:What is the Battery range? by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Depends.... But using maximum acceleration will get you 1/4 mile....

      Of course, after that, it will take you 12 hours to recharge the battery w/o overheating it....

      Sarc off

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    3. Re:What is the Battery range? by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      this is why the "Future" in the company name...

    4. Re:What is the Battery range? by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      What is the Battery range?

      At around 10 seconds in the video, it claims "over 700Km"(435mi) on a single charge.

    5. Re:What is the Battery range? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      But I can't drive 55 what is the real rage at city? Highway at 65-70+?

  5. Brand B? by MrLogic17 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I took a look at their web site, and man, does it feel like vapor-ware. All I wanted was information about the car, but 95% of the web site is on features of the seats, doors, and phone integration. Odd sales pitch for a car.

    What little I could see about the car part of the car left me saying that it's a just like a Tesla. Except you can actually buy & drive a Tesla.

    I predict a quick collapse of this company.

    1. Re:Brand B? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I took a look at their web site, and man, does it feel like vapor-ware. All I wanted was information about the car, but 95% of the web site is on features of the seats, doors, and phone integration. Odd sales pitch for a car.

      What little I could see about the car part of the car left me saying that it's a just like a Tesla. Except you can actually buy & drive a Tesla.

      I predict a quick collapse of this company.

      Faraday Future intrigued me, and I have a friend who works out there. I ended up interviewing and turning the job down. I do not regret that decision. The dysfunction started leaking before I even accepted the job.

    2. Re:Brand B? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      That's the new reality of "mobile oriented" websites. Pretty but useless.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re: Brand B? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No it's just a blatant ripoff of Tesla using the name of another long-dead electrical pioneer.

    4. Re:Brand B? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      There are some videos like this one where they demonstrate the car. They clearly have a working platform with apparently great handling and acceleration. The interior is just full of development kit though, only the space model car much in it and none of it seemed to be working.

      Also, it's a long long way from a prototype of this nature to a mass production car.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  6. Overheating by tinkerton · · Score: 1

    The acceleration numbers are spectacular but one cannot conclude at all this car is a sportscar. The first thing I'd want to know is, the batteries heat up under hard acceleration. Therefore the question is, can the car do hard acceleration repeatedly without overheating and cutting the power.
    I found conflicting information on the webs about the Tesla in that respect but in any case it would be a valid question for this car as well.

    1. Re:Overheating by tinkerton · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here ( http://www.motorauthority.com/... ) the Tesla can only do a third of the Nurburgring before temperature safeguards cut the power.

    2. Re:Overheating by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      If Electric cars ever become serious sports cars they're probably going to bring back grills, and find a way to maximize airflow over the batteries to try and cool them.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    3. Re:Overheating by green1 · · Score: 2

      Electric cars are serious sports cars, and they don't care about airflow over the batteries because it's too inefficient. They use liquid cooling just like you do for anything you're serious about cooling properly.
      Tesla took a shortcut in their motor cooling and then took a software shortcut to cut power based on time at high power rather than temperature, combined it makes the Tesla inappropriate for prolonged usage on a race track. That doesn't mean all electric cars are that way.
      Take a look at Formula-E racing for example.

  7. Re:most places have speed limits by buchner.johannes · · Score: 1

    But it can go to super fast super fast!

    --
    NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
  8. Wake me up when production starts... by kimgkimg · · Score: 1

    "the FF91 accelerates faster than Tesla's Model S or any other electric car in production" Yeah vaporware can definitely do that.

  9. Hard to take seriously by sjbe · · Score: 2

    I took a look at their web site, and man, does it feel like vapor-ware.

    Yeah I've gotten the same vibe from the company from day one. It doesn't really strike me as a serious company. Seems more like an effort to get some money from investors on a product that will probably never come to market. Maybe I'm wrong but there is just something about the whole deal that seems a bit off from what I'd expect out of a serious company.

  10. Re:Good grief by Barsteward · · Score: 1

    not really, its just a pissing up the wall exercise, they should spend their time making it use less energy for longer driving times between charges

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  11. Safety first? by Hylandr · · Score: 1

    Tell me again how self driving cars are supposed to bring safety to the roads by not having a human driver AND capable of drag racing at the same time?

    --
    ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    1. Re:Safety first? by codeButcher · · Score: 1

      Tell me again how self driving cars are supposed to bring safety to the roads by not having a human driver AND capable of drag racing at the same time?

      Maybe by outrunning all the accident-causing bad human drivers? (Sarcasm aside, I agree with you. Seems the acceleration is just sales pitch, it seems that is the lowest-hanging fruit in e-car features, given electric motor properties.)

      --
      Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
    2. Re:Safety first? by gurps_npc · · Score: 1

      Tell me again how lenses can both see things as small as bacteria and also see things as far away as other planets.

      Oh, wait, those are two similar but different instances of a class of technology, optimized for strikingly different purposes.

      Also, fire can both cook meat AND light your home, but not the same fire. And Nitroglycerin can both protect your heart and blow up things.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  12. Re:most places have speed limits by Zobeid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The top speed of my Tesla Roadster is only 125 MPH, but it's always zippy and responsive. We have speed limits as high as 85 MPH in some parts of Texas now. We also have a lot of rural two-lane highways where it's 75 MPH. When passing in these situations, I find it very helpful if I can zip up to 100 MPH momentarily to get on past and get back into my lane.

    Also, it has to be said. . . Acceleration is its own reward. The highway in front of my house is only 50 MPH, but 0-50 MPH in the Roadster always brings a smile.

  13. More Records by nsuccorso · · Score: 2

    Faraday Future unveils super-fast business model that accelerates from $10 Billion to bankruptcy in 2.39 months!

  14. ENOUGH of the dick-measuring already! by geekmux · · Score: 1

    0-60MPH performance means nothing to anyone else other than EV vendors caught up in this dick-measuring race.

    0-60MPH performance means nothing to anyone else other than EV vendors caught up in this dick-measuring race.

    How many fucking times must this be said, as if the primary metric (battery range) consumers magically don't give a shit about anymore?

    Don't worry though. This dick-measuring race will end once we have a 1-second 0-60MPH EV underneath some humans foot who sneezes at a stoplight, accidentally hitting the LUDICRIOUS-SPEED-GO pedal, killing half a dozen people in a crosswalk in the blink of an eye.

    Don't even know who to blame for this dick-measuring either, since more vendors are wanting to play this dangerous (and pointless) game.

    1. Re:ENOUGH of the dick-measuring already! by Octorian · · Score: 1

      That's why we need these companies to get to the point where they can diversify their product lines. So they can make normal cars with sane performance, while also having a dedicated sportscar line for bragging rights. It may not happen until Tesla's next-gen roadster, or projects like the Rimac Concept One turn into mass-production vehicles, but it'll hopefully happen someday.

    2. Re:ENOUGH of the dick-measuring already! by David_Hart · · Score: 1

      That's why we need these companies to get to the point where they can diversify their product lines. So they can make normal cars with sane performance, while also having a dedicated sportscar line for bragging rights. It may not happen until Tesla's next-gen roadster, or projects like the Rimac Concept One turn into mass-production vehicles, but it'll hopefully happen someday.

      The surest way to fail is for a new, unknown car company to build economy cars. Who is going to pay $25K or more to an unknown car company with an unknown track record?

      However, people are willing to pay a lot of money for custom cars, especially fast ones, even if it ends up being a collectors item. It's a way to recoup R&D costs while growing the business.

    3. Re:ENOUGH of the dick-measuring already! by geekmux · · Score: 1

      That's why we need these companies to get to the point where they can diversify their product lines. So they can make normal cars with sane performance, while also having a dedicated sportscar line for bragging rights. It may not happen until Tesla's next-gen roadster, or projects like the Rimac Concept One turn into mass-production vehicles, but it'll hopefully happen someday.

      The surest way to fail is for a new, unknown car company to build economy cars. Who is going to pay $25K or more to an unknown car company with an unknown track record?

      How do you do it? The same way previous vendors did it; by putting a good price tag on your product. When Hyundai broke into the US market in the 80's plenty of people took the gamble on a car that cost a fraction of a Toyota or Honda. Same for Saturn. And the businesses grew just fine without having to offer up a line of obscenely priced "custom" cars.

      I can buy a $20K car that gets damn near 40MPG today. The difference between $20K and the $80K "custom" EV is a SHITLOAD of gas money, which tends to vaporize the entire point of EV. On top of that, financial backers behind EV companies are putting up billions, which should be enough to get reasonable products to market without this whole methodology of creating sports cars first.

    4. Re:ENOUGH of the dick-measuring already! by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      accidentally hitting the LUDICRIOUS-SPEED-GO pedal, killing half a dozen people in a crosswalk in the blink of an eye.

      ... and killing THE DRIVER too

    5. Re:ENOUGH of the dick-measuring already! by geekmux · · Score: 1

      accidentally hitting the LUDICRIOUS-SPEED-GO pedal, killing half a dozen people in a crosswalk in the blink of an eye.

      ... and killing THE DRIVER too

      Ironically enough, we've made considerable advances in vehicle safety, so the human encased in 3,000 pounds of steel protected by seat belts, crumple zones, and 47 airbags will probably survive, while the rather squishy objects impaled on the front bumper won't fare so well...

    6. Re:ENOUGH of the dick-measuring already! by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      I have a feeling 0-60mph will be like the new "how thin is your smartphone". Something that once it hits a certain point consumers aren't going to care any more. I'd rather have a better battery in my car/phone than I would have a thinner phone/ faster acceleration.

      Yet, I know, just like Apple is going to keep shaving fractions of a mm off their phones rather than provide any meaningful improvement, electric car companies are probably going to keep targeting improving their 0-60 time.

      Does anyone really need to get up to 60mph in under 4 seconds? Yeah, it's cool, but in real life I'm not going to be accelerating that quickly very often as it isn't all that safe, and not comfortable for people in the car either.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    7. Re:ENOUGH of the dick-measuring already! by green1 · · Score: 1

      They do it because it's easy. What customers really care about is range and recharge time, but those are hard expensive problems to solve. Unlike in traditional vehicles though, more horsepower and more torque are practically free in an EV. A larger electric motor adds negligible more cost to building the vehicle, it adds only a tiny amount more weight, and apart from the tiny amount of weight, has no impact on range unless you floor it all the time, so there's no real downside there either.

      It makes easy headline numbers they can use to say they're better, even if nobody cares. It's not exactly like they're the only industry to do this either. Many industries focus on delivering lots of useless, but cheap and easy, features so they can claim to be the best while completely ignoring any of the stuff the customers actually care about.

      The PC industry was among the worst for years focusing exclusively on clock rates while ignoring all other metrics.

    8. Re:ENOUGH of the dick-measuring already! by green1 · · Score: 2

      Sort of, but the truth is that in the EV world, there's no reason to compromise on performance, it's not the same as with traditional vehicles, a large motor adds negligible cost to the vehicle, and it doesn't use much more electricity in normal use than the smaller motor does, so it doesn't compromise range much either. It's not like traditional cars where you have to chose between performance and efficiency, you can have both in an EV. (to certain limits, at the top end you do need to spend more, but not on the motor, on the battery, to get more power out at a time, you also need a bigger battery overall, but that also helps with range and recharge time)

      That said, you are also right that we need the companies to eventually diversify more so that they have multiple types of vehicle, but it does need the companies to become established first, a small company trying to produce a full lineup of 7 or 8 different types of vehicle at launch would have no hope of surviving. They also have trouble starting by going for a different niche that high end performance car, because their first vehicles will by necessity be expensive. It's easier to sell a $120,000 premium sports car, than a $100,000 stripped down commuter car. As they become established they can slowly work their way down market, as Tesla is just now starting to do with the Model 3.

  15. Re:Good grief by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    60s Porsches didn't have a particularly low 0-60

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  16. quickly receding into the distance by erapert · · Score: 1

    Faraway Future unveils super fast electric car.

    Summaries should have light-hearted and punny titles wherever possible.

  17. Missing the point. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    While everyone wants a car that can accelerate quickly, there is little point in having one if it cannot compare in a test of endurance. A lot of work went into making the Tesla motor run without overheating or needing an active cooling system so that it could go the maximum distance possible on the least amount of energy. I had serious doubts that this can compare with the same metric but if it can, great!

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  18. It's really needed? by fbobraga · · Score: 1

    All cars don't run in drag races, you know...

  19. Faraday Future going out of business by jlv · · Score: 3, Informative

    They are trying to leverage the Tesla approach to building a company: build a high-priced performance sports car first (Roadster), and then really usable cars after that. It worked for Tesla. (so far, but it looks like it will get them to the Model 3).

    I doubt it will work for FF.

    It's not like it was 9 years ago. There are lots of production EVs on the road, and more coming out all the time. A new superfast non-production 0-60 car.... who cars?

    Meanwhile, FF is missing payments to vendors. It looks doubtful they'll last long enough to get this past prototype.

    1. Re:Faraday Future going out of business by jlv · · Score: 1

      FWIW... I've put 24K miles on a Nissan LEAF. I've got a Model 3 reservation and a Model S on order.

      The deliveries of the Chevy Bolt to customers last month was a milestone event. *That* was great news for electric cars (notwithstanding that GM doesn't car if EVs succeed or not).

      FF is missing the point.

    2. Re:Faraday Future going out of business by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      They are trying to leverage the Tesla approach to building a company: build a high-priced performance sports car first (Roadster), and then really usable cars after that. It worked for Tesla. (so far, but it looks like it will get them to the Model 3).

      I doubt it will work for FF.

      It's not like it was 9 years ago. There are lots of production EVs on the road, and more coming out all the time. A new superfast non-production 0-60 car.... who cars?

      I agree.

      I don't have the megabucks for a Tesla Roadster. If I did, I'd buy a Tesla not a Faraday Future. I trust Tesla will still be around in 5 years, FF not so much. Tesla has proven themselves capable of building a quality car, FF has not.

      If I'm going to invest the money on a super expensive electric car, I'm getting a car from a company I trust. Faraday future I don't trust. Not yet. When Tesla came out there was not tried premium electric car brand so people were willing to take a risk on them. Now Tesla exists, FF will have a harder time getting early adopters willing to spend a large amount on an untried product.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    3. Re:Faraday Future going out of business by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      There are lots of production EVs on the road, and more coming out all the time. A new superfast non-production 0-60 car.... who cars?

      It looks nice and has good range. If the price is good, I would consider getting one.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re:Faraday Future going out of business by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      If someone could produce something competitive with the Model 3, that would be a story. An affordable EV with 200+ mile range and good performance.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  20. Re:Here's a supply of super cheap batteries by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

    They're using those on Ford's new Electric Pinto.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  21. What happened to electric delivery vans? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    Mail vans, many delivery vans, most school buses stay parked in one location for a long time. Their routes and timing are mostly predictable. There was some company created by executives who are Tesla alumi. It was pitching the use of battery garbage trucks and delivery vans. Wonder what happened to them?

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  22. Re:Good grief by by+(1706743) · · Score: 1

    But I doubt wonder if it could hold up doing that *all day*. Battery charging issues aside, I'm not convinced a Tesla or a Faraday could be driven to the limit for 24 hours straight, whereas the great race cars could still (mostly) outperform a Tesla or a Faraday, and do it (hopefully) for 24 hours.

    According to Wikipedia, the Porsche 917 could do 0-100km/h (62mph) in 2.3s, 0-200km/h (124mph) in 5.3s (!!!), and top out around 390km/h (240mph). (Admittedly it was not raced until 1970, and the quoted numbers may be from later in the 70s.)

    Pretty amazing car...they even used the tubular frame as oil piping, saving the need for dedicated oil lines.

  23. Solar City acquisition reason by mbkennel · · Score: 1

    I think the reason for the acquisition is consumer finance.

    The business model of companies like Solar City is making money off loans, with the hardware as the hook to get the loans. This will be important with the much more widely sold Telsa 3. Now, the model S is sold to very wealthy people who don't usually need financing or have significant credit risks. In the mass market, that won't be the case any more.

    Having experience with loan acquisition and risk pricing is very important to business success or failure. SC presumably has experience in this.