-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Sunlight
Member
I think we have the issue of a paradigm shift - EVs benefit far more from better aero than ICE cars as the extra weight of the batteries starts a knock-on effect whereas we have been used to just popping into the fuel station and adding 300+ miles quickly.
So ultimately EVs need to have better aero and revised architecture to get this and to benefit from having batteries and a small electric motor with reduced cooling requirements.
So the front of EVs can change to reflect the new requirements - ditto the overall architecture. This will alter the shape and style of 'ultimate EVs' but we will eventually adapt to the visual onslaught!
Clearly there is a fine line at the moment between exciting and alienating buyers - although I suspect that the public may be more ready for a 'strange change' that we give them credit for..... Especially the young brought up with a different techno viewpoint? 'Ugly' is very subjective..
Can Tesla afford to make a quantum leap and see how the public reacts? Trailblazer or 'conventional' revolutionary?
Maybe there is a case to made for variety of alternatives to be offered to slowly introduce the 'look' - wheel covers; shrouded wheels; alternative nose; revised rear end. The middle cab bit is less affected and rather driven by accommodation/practicality.
Then buyers chose between conventional looks (hopefully stylish and attractive by current standards) and more radical.
Soon we will all be radical. Don't say we won't change! Look at how early cars were made to look like horse-drawn carriages to avoid the 'shock of the new'....
That looks a bit daft now!
So ultimately EVs need to have better aero and revised architecture to get this and to benefit from having batteries and a small electric motor with reduced cooling requirements.
So the front of EVs can change to reflect the new requirements - ditto the overall architecture. This will alter the shape and style of 'ultimate EVs' but we will eventually adapt to the visual onslaught!
Clearly there is a fine line at the moment between exciting and alienating buyers - although I suspect that the public may be more ready for a 'strange change' that we give them credit for..... Especially the young brought up with a different techno viewpoint? 'Ugly' is very subjective..
Can Tesla afford to make a quantum leap and see how the public reacts? Trailblazer or 'conventional' revolutionary?
Maybe there is a case to made for variety of alternatives to be offered to slowly introduce the 'look' - wheel covers; shrouded wheels; alternative nose; revised rear end. The middle cab bit is less affected and rather driven by accommodation/practicality.
Then buyers chose between conventional looks (hopefully stylish and attractive by current standards) and more radical.
Soon we will all be radical. Don't say we won't change! Look at how early cars were made to look like horse-drawn carriages to avoid the 'shock of the new'....
That looks a bit daft now!
Why assume that efficient must equal ugly? This what everyone else does when they build an "eco" car, like the Prius, or the Murai, or the Leaf. They set the bar of expectations to "So ugly even it's mother couldn't like it" and go from there.
Take wheels for example, there's been about 0 effort into making aerodynamic wheels. The discontinued aero wheels were extremely ugly, but you could also tell they weren't designed with aero in mind. The highest speed part of the wheel was missing an aerodynamic treatment, and there were no aerodynamic shapes in at all, it only just covered the inner spokes.
BriansTesla
Old school meets new tech
I think we'll see the Kamm back on the Model 3, which has been mentioned here (thanks for the very informative discussion, btw!). Thereby, the Model 3 might have a similar shape to the Mercedes IAA concept (2015) [drag coefficient 0.19, when in aero-mode) :
driving:
Is that a weird mobile to you? To me not - I like it very much.
driving:
Is that a weird mobile to you? To me not - I like it very much.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mercedes makes amazing concept cars, but lack the vision and desire to build a decent long range EV production vehicle. Really quite pathetic...
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
roblab
Active Member
I've gotten used to just pulling the car out of the garage every morning and it's fully charged, FREE. Hmmmm. Never could do that with my old gas cars.
People seem to forget that some of those old "conveniences" weren't very convenient. Nearly 500 deaths per year from carbon monoxide, too. And we aren't even going to start on what happens when you go "popping" into a fuel station and it catches fire, or the nearly-every-ninety-second occurrence of cars catching fire on their own.
I can see some benefits to never going to those places to add 300+ miles quickly. Only time I want to add miles while driving is on a trip, and 30 minutes time out while I refresh is time well spent. The world needs to change focus, methinks.
McHoffa
CyberOwners
One thing I am used to right now is traveling from home in NC to just past Orlando FL and only stopping once to refuel between Savannah GA and Jacksonville FL (~400 miles). When we get our S we'll have to rethink how we travel. If we had superchargers at rest areas it might be a bit more convenient. We won't be able to get a 90D for maximum range, so stopping every 200 miles or less for 30-45 minutes to get a partial charge in our 70D will make our trips longer for sure. I think 400 miles per charge (and 30 minutes max to charge completely, a lunch break) would be the sweet spot for regular people to accept an EV and not even think about an ICE car having any advantage. I'm more than ready to switch to a Tesla, but that little difference will take some getting used to. The rest of the year though, I'll never even note that change.
For me, the sweet spot is around 500km (let's say 320 miles, even a bit less but that would leave enough spare). But in general, I agree with you that 400 miles per charge would be enough for the masses to fully adopt EVs. The charge time can be a bit more forgiving, in my opinion, say 45-50 minutes instead of 30. I have the feeling that most are really slow eaters and I always need to wait for other people to finish their meals ;-)
Tesla press conference: 6.2, Autonomous Driving, Musk QA, more - YouTube
Straight from the horse's mouth:
16 minutes in
Straight from the horse's mouth:
16 minutes in
The more I think about the plan for the Model 3 having a Cd less than 0.2, the more nervous I get.
I just don't believe that it's possible to combine a Cd of ~0.195 with a very good compact family car. If you look at the post by Newb, it's obvious that they've completely sacrifized rear head room. And there's hardly any luggage space.
To get a good Cd, a car pretty much has to be long and low, and when you reduce the length from 5 meters on the Model S, to maybe 4.5 meters, and also reduce the height, there's barely any volume left! The Model S is already one of the lowest cars out there.
I *really* hope the Model 3 can also come as a station wagon or crossover at launch, with a Cd more in the area of 0.25, so that the families that need to be able to occasionally carry 3-5 adults and lots of luggage also have an option. It would be fine to sell the less aerodynamic version with the largest battery only.
I just don't believe that it's possible to combine a Cd of ~0.195 with a very good compact family car. If you look at the post by Newb, it's obvious that they've completely sacrifized rear head room. And there's hardly any luggage space.
To get a good Cd, a car pretty much has to be long and low, and when you reduce the length from 5 meters on the Model S, to maybe 4.5 meters, and also reduce the height, there's barely any volume left! The Model S is already one of the lowest cars out there.
I *really* hope the Model 3 can also come as a station wagon or crossover at launch, with a Cd more in the area of 0.25, so that the families that need to be able to occasionally carry 3-5 adults and lots of luggage also have an option. It would be fine to sell the less aerodynamic version with the largest battery only.
Jumping to lots of conclusions there. I believe that the Model 3 will seat five adults and have more luggage space than a BMW 3 Series with both the trunk and the frunk. Models S and X have WAY more storage space than any of the competitors do. Have no fear Grasshopper Franz and Elon will come through.
RubenZoe
Member
Tesla has much work ahead, but as we can see in the video of Mercedes, with a free front of obstacles in the air flow, a fall from the ceiling and and aerodynamic wheels is enough to get that Cd less than 0.20
I just love that one! The UltraLight! Yes, it's a weird-mobile, but a weird-mobile I easily could see my self driving around in - if it only was an BEV. I was stunned when I first found out that it was fuelled by gasoline! It just beg to be electrified...
... I even watched "Demolition Man" just to see this car in action
I'm not sure a more sloped hood would be possible, given today's stricter pedestrian safety standards.
I don't think that's a big problem. You just install an airbag under the hood.
- - - Updated - - -
I really hope so. But aerodynamics are aerodynamics. I am worried a Cd less than 0.2 will lead to unacceptable compromises.
Last edited by a moderator:
