-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Audi R8 e-tron
- Thread starter SwedishAdvocate
- Start date
The 2012 was touted as such in Sept. 2009, apparently.
First Look: 2012 Audi e-tron Battery Supercar | TheDetroitBureau.com
Audi e-tron - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So, I guess, we should be charitable and say the author was "incomplete" rather than "deceptive" in failing to point out that he's talking about "Audi's tech progress" not "Audi's vehicle offerings to real customers that are actually driven on public roads, like, you know, a car".
[Sorry, I'm getting a bit grumpy about the not-really-a-car-for-you-to-maybe-have song-and-dance prototypes just like Elon is grumpy about the constant "research just made something amazing, but you can't have 1 cell to actually test" issue.]
Last edited:
- estimated price on this particular car of $1.3 million
- only achieve a little more than 130 miles of range
- 375 hp (604-lb lb of torque), 0-62 mph in 4.2 second
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
As quick, twice the range, a twelfth of the price, so roughly 24 times better?I think I'll keep my Sig P85 [~$110k, 265mi, 4.4-and-revised-down-since-then].
- estimated price on this particular car of $1.3 million
- only achieve a little more than 130 miles of range
- 375 hp (604-lb lb of torque), 0-62 mph in 4.2 second
Motor Authority has a few different numbers than cited elsewhere:
So, Audi's best effort, costing 10x more than the P85D, falls short in every dimension, other than 10% extra range. To be fair, we don't have skidpad tests for the two cars, and I expect the R8 will do much better there than the P85D.
We should be glad that Audi is actually willing to produce this car at all; perhaps they'll eventually sell a real competitor to a Tesla vehicle. Audi's inability to get a superior car on the road underscores just how amazing Tesla's achievement with the Model S remains.
So, by the numbers:
| Tesla P85D | Audi R8 e-tron | |
| HP | 691 | 456 |
| Torque | 687 (flat) | 678 (peak) |
| 0-60/62 | 3.2 (to 60) | 3.9 (to 62) |
| Top speed | 155 | 130 or 155 |
| Cd | 0.24 | 0.28 |
| Range | 253 | 280 |
| DC charging time | ~50 min. | ~110 min. |
| Seating | 5+2 | 2 |
| Cargo space | 31.6 cu ft | ~0 |
| Price | $134,170 | $1.3 million |
We should be glad that Audi is actually willing to produce this car at all; perhaps they'll eventually sell a real competitor to a Tesla vehicle. Audi's inability to get a superior car on the road underscores just how amazing Tesla's achievement with the Model S remains.
That comparison is hilarious. The R8 e-tron will have no meaningful impact on the EV market. AUDI should stop wasting resources on that car and produce an affordable EV that they will sell more than a few dozen of.
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
That's what's the real shame about it. Stop creating these halo unrealistic supercars (which then you aren't going to really produce, anyway). Instead make a realistic car that has a place in the market.
Much as I don't really care for the i3 because of the styling and the silly range extender - that's a much more useful entry into the EV space than the R8 e-tron
jkliu47
Member
One other important number to compare: Sales volume
Skeptical Audi returns to electric sports cars - Yahoo Finance
"Sales of the R8 e-tron probably won't exceed 100 a year through 2022, research firm IHS Automotive forecast. By comparison, IHS expects deliveries of Tesla's Model S to grow 14 percent to 41,396 cars by 2022 from 36,364 this year."
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
It's one of the most expensive fig leaves in history... and it looks like that's all it is. Dear Audi. The emperor has no clothes.
You’re right. Embarrassingly I didn't think about that. (I guess not having more than high school level tech ed. will do that to you… :redface
So then this R8 e-tron should probably be able to at least use a faster max charging rate at a Tesla Supercharger than whatever is the fastest charging alternative that Audi is providing as an option now at the launch.
Then why doesn’t Audi buy into Tesla’s Superchargers system?
That seems rather super stupid!
Because spreading the advent of sustainable transport is the sole purpose of why Elon got into Tesla. It’s all in the mission statement blog post that I’m too lazy to link to. Just Google it. And there are of course also other decent search engines ...as they would say if this was Swedish Public Service :wink:
(Is there another search engine?)
- - - Updated - - -
Those wheels are however some rather good looking Aero wheels!
Right now I can’t think of any Aero wheels that are better looking. And I think they would look even better if the ‘contrast color’ was black or really dark grey instead of that white (?)
Kind of feels really embarrassing that Tesla couldn’t do better design wise with their Aero wheels… :crying:
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Why should Tesla let them?
While tesla motors master plan - Bing tells me that the end-game for Tesla is "help expedite the move from a mine-and-burn hydrocarbon economy towards a solar electric economy" you have to understand that when Elon took Tesla public his main responsibilty is now to the company's owners - its shareholders - and there is no reason what-so-ever to give away one of their prime business advangates cheaply, or at all.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Elon has stated more than once he is not chasing every last penny on the table.
The broader goal is more important. But chasing the broader goal instead of short term profits will lead to very large long term profits. Even if profits could be higher if focused only on chasing the highest ROI.
Elon has said if shareholders don't like it they can fire him or sell their TSLA stock.
Apple's Tim Cook has said the same. He did not give a damn about ROI when making Apple products accessible to the blind. Clean energy projects etc.
The broader goal is more important. But chasing the broader goal instead of short term profits will lead to very large long term profits. Even if profits could be higher if focused only on chasing the highest ROI.
Elon has said if shareholders don't like it they can fire him or sell their TSLA stock.
Apple's Tim Cook has said the same. He did not give a damn about ROI when making Apple products accessible to the blind. Clean energy projects etc.
Well...
I do understand that. Audi would of course have to sink as many $$$ as Tesla into every single second spent, and every single kWh drawn from a Tesla Supercharger, as Tesla themselves do.
If Elon's main responsibility is to Tesla's shareholders, then why did he give away all the Tesla patents?
And if Elon's main responsibility was (monetarily) caring for a bunch of shareholders (as opposed to caring about the acidity of theirs and everybody else's blood stream...), then why did he go into the business of electric cars (and rocket science(!)) in the first place?
And that's not the blog post I was thinking of. This is:
- - - Updated - - -
Rob beat me to it...
Last edited:
I would argue that Tesla is not competing with other EV manufacturers, they are competing with ICE ones.
And that anything Tesla can do to grow the overall EV market, benefits them greatly. I think once you have convinced someone to consider an EV, and they cross-shop EVs, Tesla is the winner.
Having the old ICE makers finally come to the EV game only helps Tesla sell more cars.
So, I think it is to Tesla's benefit to let others participate in Superchargers.
There doesn't have to be anything altruistic about it, it is pure win for Tesla.
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
I agree that Musk has a legal responsibility to his shareholders; but the regulations don't say over what time period. These days, stock trading is so easy many people are looking for very, very short returns; the reporting periods are 3 months apart so that is what many CEOs focus on.
Some CEOs focus on the longer run (which is more the way things used to be when it was very hard to research, invest in, and sell shares of a company). I think many of these tradeoffs of releasing patents and allowing others in to the Supercharging network are more focused on the long run. as Rob noted. The "rising tide" thing Rich mentioned is a big part of it.
In any event, in the case of Superchargers, I am sure Tesla would charge another automaker enough that it would be worthwhile, especially given what the ability to expand coverage would do for Tesla's customers. Given what Tesla would likely charge, and how hard Tesla is to work with, and how reluctant auto manufacturers are to do anything the might benefit a competitor (perhaps a reasonable strategy in a mature, high-capital, low-margin market, but very different in a disruptive market) I have strong doubts that we will see anybody buying in to Tesla's Supercharger system. If another manufacturer really thinks such a system is important (hey, if you want to drive long distances, they have lots of gas cars to sell you!), they will likely create a parallel system.
And yes, I also agree I want those aero wheels!
Some CEOs focus on the longer run (which is more the way things used to be when it was very hard to research, invest in, and sell shares of a company). I think many of these tradeoffs of releasing patents and allowing others in to the Supercharging network are more focused on the long run. as Rob noted. The "rising tide" thing Rich mentioned is a big part of it.
In any event, in the case of Superchargers, I am sure Tesla would charge another automaker enough that it would be worthwhile, especially given what the ability to expand coverage would do for Tesla's customers. Given what Tesla would likely charge, and how hard Tesla is to work with, and how reluctant auto manufacturers are to do anything the might benefit a competitor (perhaps a reasonable strategy in a mature, high-capital, low-margin market, but very different in a disruptive market) I have strong doubts that we will see anybody buying in to Tesla's Supercharger system. If another manufacturer really thinks such a system is important (hey, if you want to drive long distances, they have lots of gas cars to sell you!), they will likely create a parallel system.
And yes, I also agree I want those aero wheels!
Last edited:
Audi's claim of 280 mile range is likely not EPA rating and reflects an internal "best case" scenario.
- - - Updated - - -
That may have been why he got involved with Tesla, but today he owes results to his investors and stock holders.
- - - Updated - - -
Nobody is irreplaceable, not even Elon Musk. Look at what happened to Steve Jobs. The Board could very easily fire Musk if the company turns out poor performance, does not meet stated objectives, etc. In fact, Musk said that he should be fired if Model 3 does not launch on time. I agree.
Yes, I remember this. I admire Cook for saying that. However, accessibility and clean energy projects reflect a drop in the bucket in terms of Apple's costs. Cook can say that because those projects have very little impact on Apple's bottom line. However, Elon can't tell his investors to pound dirt because he needs them.
Fine. But that still leaves richkae's argument in post #97, as well as the sinking pH level in your bloodstream...
Last edited:
Similar threads
