Wow, for me the model s is the easy winner when it comes to looks in that pic
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Next gen Roadster
- Thread starter dsm363
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Future Tesla
Wow, for me the model s is the easy winner when it comes to looks in that pic
Mycroft
Life happens
...Me three... (Having owned a Miata, Z4, and Boxster in the past...). The Boxster was already feeling like too big of a car; I'd hate to see space wasted on an unusable back seat. I'd like some more storage space, but it needs to be covered storage, especially in a convertible.
What I want to see in Roadster 2.0 are improvements over Roadster 1.0
#1 Lower CG - as low as they can get it, battery in the floor instead of in a big tall box will be a huge improvement.
#2 Better motor cooling ( water cooling ) so that it doesnt overheat after a couple of minutes of full throttle.
#3 More tire. Room for bigger & wider rubber front and rear.
#4 Dual rear motors, one for each wheel - no differential.
#5 Better aerodynamics. 0.35 Cd is actually awful. I'd love to see in the 0.25 range or better. Just doing that to the current Roadster would dramatically improve range and top speed.
#6 More power. The Roadster is awesome from 0-60, okay from 60-80 but lacking from 80 up.
I want it to pull hard to 120mph, I want to beat Skyline GT-Rs in the 1/4 mile - I want it to be a 10 second car. that means 10.99 seconds.
I honestly believe that is totally doable.
While we are dreaming:
Roadster 3.0 SuperSport:
#7 AWD with 4 independant motors.
#8 Even better aerodynamics - like 0.20 or better.
#9 100kWh of battery with 750kW peak output: 1000hp
#10 270mph top speed - taking the title away from the Bugatti Veyron
#1 Lower CG - as low as they can get it, battery in the floor instead of in a big tall box will be a huge improvement.
#2 Better motor cooling ( water cooling ) so that it doesnt overheat after a couple of minutes of full throttle.
#3 More tire. Room for bigger & wider rubber front and rear.
#4 Dual rear motors, one for each wheel - no differential.
#5 Better aerodynamics. 0.35 Cd is actually awful. I'd love to see in the 0.25 range or better. Just doing that to the current Roadster would dramatically improve range and top speed.
#6 More power. The Roadster is awesome from 0-60, okay from 60-80 but lacking from 80 up.
I want it to pull hard to 120mph, I want to beat Skyline GT-Rs in the 1/4 mile - I want it to be a 10 second car. that means 10.99 seconds.
I honestly believe that is totally doable.
While we are dreaming:
Roadster 3.0 SuperSport:
#7 AWD with 4 independant motors.
#8 Even better aerodynamics - like 0.20 or better.
#9 100kWh of battery with 750kW peak output: 1000hp
#10 270mph top speed - taking the title away from the Bugatti Veyron
I think you may get all your wishes with perhaps these exception of these:
#4 Dual rear motors, one for each wheel - no differential.
#7 AWD with 4 independant motors.
#10 270mph top speed - taking the title away from the Bugatti Veyron
I sort of doubt those will happen, but the others seem realistically possible.
What I'd like to see for Roadster 3.0:
- No back seat! It's a Roadster, after all.
- Optional AWD that is Ferrari FF-style (the front wheels only get power if the rears are slipping).
- 300-350 mile range.
- Model S-like platform with the batteries in the floor for an extremely low CoG.
- Keep the carbon fiber, even if it's done in a very low-volume variant.
- No back seat! It's a Roadster, after all.
- Optional AWD that is Ferrari FF-style (the front wheels only get power if the rears are slipping).
- 300-350 mile range.
- Model S-like platform with the batteries in the floor for an extremely low CoG.
- Keep the carbon fiber, even if it's done in a very low-volume variant.
This is what I want too. Basically the current Roadster with better aerodynamics, movable steering column, seats that adjust up and down and less blind-spots. A larger trunk would be nice too and should be possible if the battery is in the floor.
tonybelding
Active Member
What would I like to see?
Keep it convertible, keep it a two seater. Rear wheel drive is fine, though I wouldn't object to AWD as long as it doesn't add too much weight, cost and complexity. Keep the car small, though it doesn't necessarily have to be as small as the first series.
Make it less "supercar", less exotic, more livable -- less like a Lotus Elise, more like a Mazda Miata. (Or more like a Corvette, for that matter.) Easier to get in and out. More ground clearance. Better visibility all around. Quicker and easier to put the top up and down.
I assume it will be designed with the batteries in the floor pan, which is all good. I assume battery technology will be further refined by then, so I'm not concerned about range -- I'm sure it'll be more than adequate. I'm not wedded to carbon fiber, and I would like to see it be a lot more affordable.
Styling? My biggest advice would be to throw out the rule book and pay no attention whatsoever to today's ridiculous trends. This is not an era of beautiful cars, so why copy the competition's mistakes? If it were up to me, I'd start with the shape of a 1970s Corvette Stingray, then melt away all the sharp edges (but keep the curves!) and give it the Luigi Colani style biological aerodynamic treatment. But that's just me, and is surely not the only possible approach.
Keep it convertible, keep it a two seater. Rear wheel drive is fine, though I wouldn't object to AWD as long as it doesn't add too much weight, cost and complexity. Keep the car small, though it doesn't necessarily have to be as small as the first series.
Make it less "supercar", less exotic, more livable -- less like a Lotus Elise, more like a Mazda Miata. (Or more like a Corvette, for that matter.) Easier to get in and out. More ground clearance. Better visibility all around. Quicker and easier to put the top up and down.
I assume it will be designed with the batteries in the floor pan, which is all good. I assume battery technology will be further refined by then, so I'm not concerned about range -- I'm sure it'll be more than adequate. I'm not wedded to carbon fiber, and I would like to see it be a lot more affordable.
Styling? My biggest advice would be to throw out the rule book and pay no attention whatsoever to today's ridiculous trends. This is not an era of beautiful cars, so why copy the competition's mistakes? If it were up to me, I'd start with the shape of a 1970s Corvette Stingray, then melt away all the sharp edges (but keep the curves!) and give it the Luigi Colani style biological aerodynamic treatment. But that's just me, and is surely not the only possible approach.
I'd honestly hope not. If they are going to be luxury, they'll have to be stylish. They've already been one-uped by the Karma (on the styling front anyways), they can't afford to go mundane. Mazda Miatas aren't progressive or eye-catching these days. Nor are corvettes really. For such a progressive company, I think not appealing to a newer, trendier crowd would be a mistake.
My hopes? I'd love to see something like the R8, but I don't think that's Franz's style. What about that aggressive Model S mockup from ages back?
*edit* found it!! Reminds me of a Nissan GT-R, but not a *horrible* base to work from. Much too angular for Franz though
And this from leftlanenews could make a decent bluestar:
Last edited:
Ground clearance: I'm pretty sure it has a little more ground clearance than the Miata, Z4, and Boxster that I've previously owned. It's a very short car and you sit very low to the ground, but the ground clearance definitely isn't low for a sports car.
Visibility: Doesn't seem much worse than the Miata, Z4, and Boxster. Obviously with their tops down those others have better visibility. Before I first test drove a Roadster, I had, incorrectly, expected the visibility to be very bad due to the small rear window and the body sloping from the back of the top to the rear (of course I expect I would have had a different reaction if I'd never owned an other types of roadsters).
Easier to get in and out: You've got me with you there. That was my biggest concern before my first test drive: that entry/exit would be unreasonable for a big guy. It was definitely very tough the first few times, but I tried entry/exit several times at the 2 test drive events that I went to and finally decided that it wasn't unreasonable for a daily driver. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be able to get in an Elise with the top on.
tonybelding
Active Member
Mundane? Mundane?? I don't see how you can possibly think that I was asking for "mundane" styling! That's exactly what I'm saying they should stay away from.
OK, now I see why you were confused. I never said that the new Roadster should look anything like a Miata or a (modern) Corvette. I was using those as examples of how it should drive and function -- less as a high-strung "exotic" and more as a popular sports car that's easy to drive and live with. Styling is a completely different topic.
I don't believe in dumbing down a product to try and reach the lowest denominator. That's a sure path to mediocrity.
Nope, not dumbing it down, but let's be frank, the miatas and vettes typically appeal to the previous generations of car buffs. When I thought you meant you wanted styling like those cars, I said that wasn't progressive enough :smile:
Very unlikely if they stick to the small size Li-Ion cells. They have great energy density but their power density is not suited for a supercar.
Similar threads
