I can read a story with the best of them, this reporter perhaps NEEDED a story that was going to cause a stir, as a reporter, his methods certainly are suspect, if as he states he was doing a test of the supercharger network then the MS was his main tool in that test, that means it should be fully charged for each leg of the test, he nullified the test when he used the level two charger. There are too many conflicts in these statements not to see the desired out come he was trying to reach. i suspect if he uses these methods for reporting then all his work is looked at as shoddy.I don't think you can justify his actions as he doesn't understand EV's or EV charging, then what was he doing trying to conduct a test of same, just sensationalism at it's worst. Trying to sell a column and papers, once again just shameful.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
NYT article: Stalled on the EV Highway
- Thread starter Jeeps17
- Start date
- Status
Norbert
TSLA will win
Well Chelsea's article is blaming Tesla as well... from just a slightly different angle.
As far as I can tell, it's mostly her old anti-fast-charging rant: Pushing fast-charging/road-trips causes unfavorable comparisons to ICEs.
That train left long ago... Tesla is building a Supercharger network, and will continue to market this popular feature, which invariably includes media tests and inherently comparisons to ICEs. Nevertheless it will be an increasingly popular feature helping to sell Model S, helping its owners take it to places it otherwise wouldn't go. Given the magnitude of the undertaking, there'll be a few difficulties along the way, but the direction will remain 'forward'.
Tesla has thousands of employees have do not drive EVs. Nearly all have been given the keys to a Tesla but a few minutes of track time or a weekend is not hypermiling experience. If he talked to someone who is not an engineer or EV veteran at Tesla who advised him wrongly it would not surprise me.
AprilDelivery??
Member
The NYT reporter could have easily planned out a better route. If he was stopping off in NYC , he could have easily recharged at the Tesla Paramus Store Parking Lot and is just 136 miles from Wilimington , Delaware to Paramus which is just by the GW Bridge , 6 miles from NYC. Then another 100 miles to Milford ,Ct Tesla Supercharger. But NY Times has such a bad reputation of deceiving the facts to the public especially when comes to Israel!!!
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Gard...+Plaza+Paramus+NJ+07652&radius=15000&t=m&z=13
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Gard...+Plaza+Paramus+NJ+07652&radius=15000&t=m&z=13
Originally Posted by dsm363
He made it seem, as pointed out elsewhere, that he was testing the limits of the vehicle and it ran out through no fault of his own even though he never did a range charge and left the last charger with 32 miles of range in order to drive 65 miles.
Or maybe he was seduced by Tesla's comments? "Tesla’s experts said that pumping in a little energy would help restore the power lost overnight as a result of the cold weather, and after an hour they cleared me to resume the trip to Milford."
That was my earlier point. Half ignorance, half willful ignorance but either way the Reporter in him knows that if he does run out he will have a story... and can blame it on Tesla.
The Real Problem With Tesla's Test-Drive Debacle (TSLA)
This article seems to indicate that the detour into Manhattan was after the car was put onto a flat bed truck. I have not read the last 47 pages of this thread but can anyone verify this?
.
This article seems to indicate that the detour into Manhattan was after the car was put onto a flat bed truck. I have not read the last 47 pages of this thread but can anyone verify this?
.
hsmohler
Member
My Nissan Leaf losses are around 50 % when running the heater full time. In clod weather it is best to run the seat heaters. The steering wheel in the Leaf is heated which is nice.
We hope to have our S 85 by 5 March 2013.
We hope to have our S 85 by 5 March 2013.
It seems to me like the experiences of Broder comes down to two things:
- His own inability or unwillingness to RTFM and obtain information about the product he was testing from other sources. (Poor journalism.)
- Tesla's inability to convey the relevant information in a sufficiently persuasive manner. (I really doubt they called him multiple times and gave him instructions which he then disregarded. If so, they should have recorded those calls. I do believe him when he says he received unclear and contradictory instructions.)
Nothing about his experiences has really anything to do with the car. Regardless of blame, the car was used improperly, and he ended up in a bad situation.
One more thing - I think Musk missed the mark in his use of the word "fake". Broders' article is clearly a NYT article, not written by a chinese hacker or something. A more accurate term would be something like "hack job". This was on twitter though, so I'll excuse Musk for being inaccurately brief.
- - - Updated - - -
Also, when it comes to the overnight losses, which seems like the most serious issue, two things occur to me:
- Broder should have known that he needed to plug in for the night, by reading the manual, asking questions and reading articles and/or forums.
- Tesla should have told Broder that he needed to plug in for the night, until the issue is resolved in future firmware updates. (Tesla may or may not have told him. We don't know.)
Who is most to blame seems like a fairly trivial point to me.
- His own inability or unwillingness to RTFM and obtain information about the product he was testing from other sources. (Poor journalism.)
- Tesla's inability to convey the relevant information in a sufficiently persuasive manner. (I really doubt they called him multiple times and gave him instructions which he then disregarded. If so, they should have recorded those calls. I do believe him when he says he received unclear and contradictory instructions.)
Nothing about his experiences has really anything to do with the car. Regardless of blame, the car was used improperly, and he ended up in a bad situation.
One more thing - I think Musk missed the mark in his use of the word "fake". Broders' article is clearly a NYT article, not written by a chinese hacker or something. A more accurate term would be something like "hack job". This was on twitter though, so I'll excuse Musk for being inaccurately brief.
- - - Updated - - -
Also, when it comes to the overnight losses, which seems like the most serious issue, two things occur to me:
- Broder should have known that he needed to plug in for the night, by reading the manual, asking questions and reading articles and/or forums.
- Tesla should have told Broder that he needed to plug in for the night, until the issue is resolved in future firmware updates. (Tesla may or may not have told him. We don't know.)
Who is most to blame seems like a fairly trivial point to me.
1st post, Volt/Boston guy, here.
The author spoke of turning the heat off early on, near NYC, but later mentioned he turned it off a second time near Milford. What gives? As an (ER)EV owner, I know that range play can be like a trip on Apollo 13. It takes commitment when you're up north, but the Volt is good about understating range as you implement range-increasing maneuvers. It also maths the range out based upon empirics from previous trips. I'm surprised Tesla does not, and thought the problem was its not adapting its own empirics after having been transported from someplace warm. I smell a patch.
Musk needs a spokesman. His 'Fake' comment, and general combativeness will otherwise bastardize, or greatly slow down, EV adoption, not that Tesla will necessarily be around if he keeps up. He's unquestioned as an innovator, but EV ambassador?
He also jumped on Boeing, for using larger per-cell structures like Nissan and GM do. GM already got 3 more miles of range after a disproportionately smaller increase in battery size (.5kwh) in its 2013 Volt. At least it looks like chemistry is developing in these larger cells. A123 was working on its "nano-phosphate", which was another example of progress in reducing range degradation over all temperatures (cold and hot). Now, the 2013 Volt can be set not to turn on until below 15 degrees, versus previous models 25 or higher. Does Panasonic even have a "laptop batteries for cars" department? Tesla? A "cold weather package" takes on new meaning with EV's. Tesla doesn't have an engine, and shouldn't be caught looking like they are taking this even less seriously. I still want one, after my brutal 2hr, 30 mile commute this morning.
The author spoke of turning the heat off early on, near NYC, but later mentioned he turned it off a second time near Milford. What gives? As an (ER)EV owner, I know that range play can be like a trip on Apollo 13. It takes commitment when you're up north, but the Volt is good about understating range as you implement range-increasing maneuvers. It also maths the range out based upon empirics from previous trips. I'm surprised Tesla does not, and thought the problem was its not adapting its own empirics after having been transported from someplace warm. I smell a patch.
Musk needs a spokesman. His 'Fake' comment, and general combativeness will otherwise bastardize, or greatly slow down, EV adoption, not that Tesla will necessarily be around if he keeps up. He's unquestioned as an innovator, but EV ambassador?
He also jumped on Boeing, for using larger per-cell structures like Nissan and GM do. GM already got 3 more miles of range after a disproportionately smaller increase in battery size (.5kwh) in its 2013 Volt. At least it looks like chemistry is developing in these larger cells. A123 was working on its "nano-phosphate", which was another example of progress in reducing range degradation over all temperatures (cold and hot). Now, the 2013 Volt can be set not to turn on until below 15 degrees, versus previous models 25 or higher. Does Panasonic even have a "laptop batteries for cars" department? Tesla? A "cold weather package" takes on new meaning with EV's. Tesla doesn't have an engine, and shouldn't be caught looking like they are taking this even less seriously. I still want one, after my brutal 2hr, 30 mile commute this morning.
current Volt owner too
I agree cell chemistry will progress. Tesla should also allow power draw from plug after full charge so battery will be topped off in the morning; and some have suggested to have the navigation system warn inattentive drivers to activate "range charge" when their route is not covered by their mode of charge.
The author of the article corrects himself in the comments and says he was in error when saying that the car was on the flatbed when going through Manhattan.
I also found his other conclusions to be lacking.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Musk can be abrasive, but overall I like his straightforward unfiltered comments. I think he just gets frustrated when the rest of the world can't see his vision. I don't think his comments will slow down EV adoption even one second. It moves forward with the technology, no matter what people might say.
Um, in an ICE you are rarely too far from a gas station. So you don't have to worry much about range. That's why they try to drive as carelessly as they do in an ICE.
Although, last month I headed off to the airport at 5am and realized I was almost out of gas... and that the gas stations on my route were all closed!!
Krugerrand
Meow
If you think his reaction was 'combative', you need to get out more. Someone just took an undeserved swipe at his company and the incredible product it makes. His response, frankly, was rather tame. His phone interviews were calm, clear, concise.
He was also quite technically clear why Boeing is currently having issues with their batteries and showed a willingness to work with Boeing to fix the problem and you call that 'being jumped on?'. Did you miss the part where those batteries are in airplanes and catching fire? Are you prepared to get on one of those planes and 'hope' the next set of batteries doesn't catch on fire, while your 30,000 feet in the air?
I don't think Mr. Musk has ever shared the wish to be an EV Ambassador, so what makes you think he's trying to be one? He's protecting his company and has ever right to do so, and I'd think a whole lot less of him as a CEO if he didn't. Indeed, I rather enjoy his honest outspokenness that comes from passion and belief that there's a way to ensure the future of mankind.
Norbert
TSLA will win
There is now the question of "theory" and "reality". If it wasn't for all the discussions and comments by EV enthusiasts, around the article, and you read just the article itself, would you get the impression that:
Theory: 'As an owner of a Model S, you would not be able to reliably make the same trip as the author attempted. You may run into severe difficulties.'
I think the article, as eventually published with all the knowledge of what happened, is written to create this impression, and it is false. Provided that an owner gains a bit of experience driving in similar temperatures (and overnighting, yes there is that, Tesla's original intention appears to have been to drive directly to Boston) before taking the range to the limit, we appear to claim the reality is
Reality: 'Owners of a Model S are able to make this trip reliably, and they are confident they will be able to prove it in a few days.'
According to Elon, they discussed the planned trip with the author, and intended to substitute owner experience of similar situations with 3 "common sense" instructions: 1) Reasonable speed, since range is speed dependent, 2) No detour, 3) Maximum (Max Range) charge. With all the slack some people seem to be willing to give the author of the article, how about giving Tesla the benefit of the doubt that they really believed that they gave him these 3 simple guidelines, and that the driver would able to accept and implement them.
Theory: 'As an owner of a Model S, you would not be able to reliably make the same trip as the author attempted. You may run into severe difficulties.'
I think the article, as eventually published with all the knowledge of what happened, is written to create this impression, and it is false. Provided that an owner gains a bit of experience driving in similar temperatures (and overnighting, yes there is that, Tesla's original intention appears to have been to drive directly to Boston) before taking the range to the limit, we appear to claim the reality is
Reality: 'Owners of a Model S are able to make this trip reliably, and they are confident they will be able to prove it in a few days.'
According to Elon, they discussed the planned trip with the author, and intended to substitute owner experience of similar situations with 3 "common sense" instructions: 1) Reasonable speed, since range is speed dependent, 2) No detour, 3) Maximum (Max Range) charge. With all the slack some people seem to be willing to give the author of the article, how about giving Tesla the benefit of the doubt that they really believed that they gave him these 3 simple guidelines, and that the driver would able to accept and implement them.
Last edited:
roblab
Active Member
Hi, All,
This whole scenario reminds me of the joke about the girl in the office calling tech support to find out why her computer wasn't working, only to report at last that the power had been out so she couldn't see if the monitor was plugged in or not. The tech told her, or wanted to tell her, to pack the computer back up and take it back to the store and tell them that the reason for the return was that she was "too stupid to own a computer".
That was back in the day. Today we have a new tech problem. And there are still people who will not RTFM: "read the fine manual", and will forget what it was that the fellow told them when they picked up the car. It is gonna happen. These people know about putting gas in the tank, and how to look at a gas gauge to tell if they will make it to the next off ramp, but they never saw a car that can tell them that if they keep driving that way, you have exactly 32 miles left of charge. What does that mean??? What is Range Mode??? What is full charge???
We drove to Canada and back. During that time I got an email from Tesla saying that my battery was below 10% and I needed to plug in. It was better than that. We had been on far eastern Oregon, and drove over 290 miles in freezing weather at several altitude changes. We stopped to do some top up charging, and even added a few additional miles, and it wasn't enough.
But we knew. The car told us that if we drove like we had been, we would end up short. So we slowed down. And we slowed down some more. We limped into our destination with ONE mile left, but we did NOT have to be towed, because we believed what the car was telling us.
The problem is getting the average driver to figure it out. Not every one can make the switch from old dinosaur technology to the new age, but there will be more and more who "get it", and will be able to drive into the new world with a great big Tesla Grin on their faces.
This whole scenario reminds me of the joke about the girl in the office calling tech support to find out why her computer wasn't working, only to report at last that the power had been out so she couldn't see if the monitor was plugged in or not. The tech told her, or wanted to tell her, to pack the computer back up and take it back to the store and tell them that the reason for the return was that she was "too stupid to own a computer".
That was back in the day. Today we have a new tech problem. And there are still people who will not RTFM: "read the fine manual", and will forget what it was that the fellow told them when they picked up the car. It is gonna happen. These people know about putting gas in the tank, and how to look at a gas gauge to tell if they will make it to the next off ramp, but they never saw a car that can tell them that if they keep driving that way, you have exactly 32 miles left of charge. What does that mean??? What is Range Mode??? What is full charge???
We drove to Canada and back. During that time I got an email from Tesla saying that my battery was below 10% and I needed to plug in. It was better than that. We had been on far eastern Oregon, and drove over 290 miles in freezing weather at several altitude changes. We stopped to do some top up charging, and even added a few additional miles, and it wasn't enough.
But we knew. The car told us that if we drove like we had been, we would end up short. So we slowed down. And we slowed down some more. We limped into our destination with ONE mile left, but we did NOT have to be towed, because we believed what the car was telling us.
The problem is getting the average driver to figure it out. Not every one can make the switch from old dinosaur technology to the new age, but there will be more and more who "get it", and will be able to drive into the new world with a great big Tesla Grin on their faces.
I just did a full mileage check between points etc. If he had a full charge Washington, DC to Newark, De. 99 miles do a full charge you can go to Milford, Ct. which is 200 miles do a full charge. The distance to Groton Ct. is 58 miles and back to Milford, Ct. would be a round trip of 116 miles say he did loose 75 miles charge that would come out to 191 miles. A full charge is 265 miles EPA, 300 miles per Tesla. Even if he did not charge in Range he would have had the charge to do the trip. If he wanted he could have done Boston which is 147 miles from Milford. He used the NJ Turnpike I have a feeling he was cruising way beyond the speed limit. I believe the limit is 65 in the Southern sections but is 55 in the Northern area if my memory serves me correct. This proves that he did not charge fully at either charge station or speed took a toll on range. He probably kept up with a lot of the 80+ MPH group out there. I have been passed like I was in reverse many times on the Turnpike by vehicles well in excess of 65 MPH.
Beavis
Model S Signature 991
But this guy is an automotive journalist. Take your pick: is he stupid or disingenuous? Personally, I believe he is not your average nimrod.
- Status
