Model S First Drive Reviews

[CanuckS#69]

The C&D review is on the newsstands in Canada. I dropped by to pick up the Motor Trend one and went home with a few extra articles as well.

 

[brianman]

This one?
Magazine Rack

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

Well, that sucks. They should be providing their Model S content free online like everyone else does, instead of making me go out and buy their magazine.. :cursing:

 

[alset]

The Car and Driver review from the January 2013 magazine is now online with 58 photos:
2013 Tesla Model S Test - Review - Car and Driver

 

[Todd Burch]

The Car and Driver review from the January 2013 magazine is now online with 58 photos:
2013 Tesla Model S Test - Review - Car and Driver

Interesting that they didn't mention the Superchargers.

 

[vfx]

You guys should comment on all the upgrades you have already recieved.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

You guys should comment on all the upgrades you have already recieved.

Read their review, and posted my concern about the methodology they are using to measure 0-60 times for the Model S. I wrote about this elsewhere when they first listed the 4.6 number during their video review a couple of months ago, but it very much looks like they are not doing the adjustments they typically do for ICE vehicles, including rollout, which makes no sense whatsoever.

Plus the link to their test data is broken. Which upsets me for an entirely different set of reasons

 

[artsci]

It's a very mediocre review, not from the standpoint of praise or criticism of the S, but as a piece of auto journalism. It's not particularly well written and based on information we all know is outdated. I'm afraid it's just a sloppy effort -- C&D just wasn't conscientious enough. Given that this review comes months after ones with much greater accuracy, this is especially unforgivable. I cancelled my C&D subscription years ago -- a very good decision it appears.

 

[dsm363]

It's a very mediocre review, not from the standpoint of praise or criticism of the S, but as a piece of auto journalism. It's not particularly well written and based on information we all know is outdated. I'm afraid it's just a sloppy effort -- C&D just wasn't conscientious enough. Given that this review comes months after ones with much greater accuracy, this is especially unforgivable. I cancelled my C&D subscription years ago -- a very good decision it appears.

Definitely. Take this from the article for example

Our measured range was 211 miles—not quite the EPA-predicted 265—but impressive, given our 75-to-80-mph highway speeds.

Don't they know how the EPA range is calculated? Do they say the same when they drive any gas powered car?

Also

Our car had the optional 20-kW, 80-amp *charger, which cuts the plug-in time to about seven hours.

They could simply go to Tesla's website. It's a little over 4 hours at 80A.

And

Moreover, Tesla recommends using the standard-range mode, which reduces available energy and range by about 15 percent while extending battery life.

Shouldn't this be 10 percent?

And

This performance is particularly impressive because the Model S weighs 4785 pounds.

According to Tesla, it's 4647.3lbs

Also, don't think this is accurate. Tesla was losing money at the very beginning on each Roadster sold but thought they were making a profit on the Roadster at the end but still losing money as a company since they were expanding to build the Model S

The Model S is a clean-sheet design that required far more investment than its first car, the Roadster, which was based on the Lotus Elise and cost well over $100,000 but still lost money. Not that we own any Tesla stock, but a car company that doesn’t make money won’t be in business for long—and its eight-year battery warranty won’t be worth anything if the company goes under.

 

[Brian H]

Yeah, some journalism inspires an urgent urge to do some slappin' upside the head while clarifying certain misconstrued ambiguities ...

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

Definitely. Take this from the article for example


Don't they know how the EPA range is calculated? Do they say the same when they drive any gas powered car?

Also


They could simply go to Tesla's website. It's a little over 4 hours at 80A.

And


Shouldn't this be 10 percent?

And


According to Tesla, it's 4647.3lbs

Also, don't think this is accurate. Tesla was losing money at the very beginning on each Roadster sold but thought they were making a profit on the Roadster at the end but still losing money as a company since they were expanding to build the Model S

+1 to all of your points except the weight of the car. Weight depends on options, and part of the Car and Driver testing methodology is the weigh the car themselves. I've seen several other independent tests where fully optioned cars weighed in the range that C&D found. Of course many of those reviewers might have been weighing Elon's car too

 

[dsm363]

+1 to all of your points except the weight of the car. Weight depends on options, and part of the Car and Driver testing methodology is the weigh the car themselves. I've seen several other independent tests where fully optioned cars weighed in the range that C&D found. Of course many of those reviewers might have been weighing Elon's car too

Ah, thanks. That makes sense and didn't know that. I give them credit for mentioning they were driving a pre-production car but that begs the question why they even wrote this 'review' on a pre-production car. I'm sure they could have paid some owner to review their production car.

 

[gg_got_a_tesla]

Not sure if this was posted:

2012 Tesla Model S Review - Watch CNET's Video Review

Edit: the video review by Brian Cooley is old but, the text is new.

 

[Brian H]

Ah, thanks. That makes sense and didn't know that. I give them credit for mentioning they were driving a pre-production car but that begs the question why they even wrote this 'review' on a pre-production car. I'm sure they could have paid some owner to review their production car.

Pre-production at this late date? Has this been sitting around mouldering?

 

[ModelS8794]

Ah, thanks. That makes sense and didn't know that. I give them credit for mentioning they were driving a pre-production car but that begs the question why they even wrote this 'review' on a pre-production car. I'm sure they could have paid some owner to review their production car.

Perhaps auto journalists just aren't used to working with product that develops at Internet speed. What other car could they have reviewed a model year and find the features they complain are missing (voice command, seat memory, etc) are actually present on all vehicles just a few weeks later, including the one they tested.

 

[alset]

Pre-production at this late date? Has this been sitting around mouldering?

The review was in September and just published in the January edition.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

Tesla Model S: review | carsguide.com.au

 

[dhrivnak]

While I did not drive it I thank "sparrow" for letting me see his Model S Signature. WOW the car was very nice. I was especially impressed with the fit an finish. "Sparrow" is a true EV advocate as he also had a Roadster, Leaf and the interesting 3 wheeled Sparrow in the garage. That with the windmill and solar panels in the back yard showed I have a long way yet to go.

 

[Arnold Panz]

In the Wall Street Journal's year in review, Dan Neil reviewed his biggest misses of the year, one of which was the Karma because he was too kind to it in his initial review.

He also talked about ones he got right, including Model S. Here is the blurb:

 

[Jeeps17]

New review on Cars.com

Quite an exhaustive and overall positive write-up.

They used a vehicle with old firmware (pre-creep), but mention it's upgrade a few days after they returned their loaner.

And, of course, the butt-sensor gets it again!