Roadster on Top Gear

[TEG]

Really disappointing actually. I was all set to show my Top Gear watching friends Tesla's big debug on Top Gear, but now I am too embarrassed to even mention it...

Even if the negative aspect doesn't stick, it is still an opportunity missed.

On the other hand, remember the Stig Koenigsegg CCX problem?

They gave it a second chance and brought it back with an add-on wing:
Gametrailers.com - Top Gear: Koenigsegg Stig Lap by BoxCarBob


Maybe Tesla gets a second chance someday?
(Although you "never get a 2nd chance to make a first impression..." :frown: )

 

[Stewart W]

Probably the outcome would have been much better, because it would have avoided the "unreliable" verdict, which damages Tesla's reputation (I alreadys see in some comments on how this is supposedly a reflection on the unreliability of American cars), but it is a sports car, and for all the EVs they did take them to the track basically, even took the Prius to the track (which did raise some protests though).

On the tire issue, the Tesla's tires do seem to be the same as the standard Elise, Yokohama ADVAN Neova AD07. The tires of the Exige are A048, and apparently they wear a lot quicker and perform significantly better than the AD07 (basically they are like track tires). But mostly the slower lap can be attributed to a wet track, as even the A048 won't perform well on a wet track.

**********
+1
Tesla is NOT a track car ..period and end of that story!

 

[electricengine]

Always a 2nd Chance!

TEG i know what you mean. However, theres always second chances!

One of the biggest comments/impressions that people are making is the aggressive "engine braking" (regeneration) once you are off the throttle. I think this is definitely one of the place that Tesla Roadster can immediately/easily change and improve driving characteristics.

When you do the math - you dont recapture that much energy with Tesla's approach.

Besides, when you look at automotive dynamics, much of your breaking is better left for the front wheels.

** I think what turned off my friends is the "twitchy-ness" revealed in semi-aggressive corners - again, an artifact of the aggressive engine breaking.. (and of course the heavy battery - but i dont think the weight of the batteries is that big of a deal - My 1969 911 is ridiculously heavy in the back but drives really well)

 

[graham]

Sigh... and the negative re-reporting begins:

DVICE: Tesla Roadster put to the test with surprising results

Good thing we don't have an extra $109K lying around, or we would have already bought that pricey electric car, the Tesla Roadster. But Top Gear's Jeremy Clarkson dampens our spirits when he takes the electric rocket out for a spin, pitting it against the similar-bodied Lotus Elise.

AutoblogGreen is slightly more upbeat:
VIDEO: Top Gear finally tests the Tesla Roadster - AutoblogGreen

And then there is the issue of range. We all know about Tesla's claims of a 230+ mile range. That, of course, is based on the EPA driving cycle which comes nowhere near to taking advantage of the Roadster's full dynamic range. Our own estimate from our first drive last January is more like half the official number. Top Gear's range on the track? well let's just say it was considerably less than that.

 

[WarpedOne]

They gave it a second chance and brought it back with an add-on wing:

I wonder how many tenths would a rear spoiler and racing tires shave off those 1:27:2.

Now, what would be the proper way to make Jeremy Clarkson give it another try?
Not many cars have double appearance on TG, so it wouldn't be easy for sure.

I guess the best way would be that rumored Tesla Roadster 120 or whatever it would be called.
Racing tires and suspension, rear spoiler, upgraded motor and PEM cooling, maybe some additional IGBTs. It may run out of juice after only 30 miles but would that be hellishly or only godly quick?

 

[doug]

VIDEO: Top Gear finally tests the Tesla Roadster - AutoblogGreen

VIDEO: Jezza and the Stig take on the Tesla Roadster, for 55 miles! - Autoblog

Top Gear: Top Gear Reviews Tesla Roadster - Jalopnik

 

[dpeilow]

The only way they can get a second chance is:

1) Make a track car with better cooling.
2) A quadrupling of battery capacity.
3) Take the Model S300 down and make sure it works faultlessly.

None of that will happen for a few years.

 

[dpeilow]

Sigh... and the negative re-reporting begins:

DVICE: Tesla Roadster put to the test with surprising results

OK looks like Mittelhauser and myself are on the same wavelength there. I think we need to try and firefight this bigtime where ever such comments are popping up. If you click through to the Youtube page that site has used, you will see it is a mixed bag of comments, but two thirds are negative.


Edit: at least the Autoblog crowd seem quite balanced about it (not AutoblogGreen, but the normal one). Jalopnik slightly less so - but there are some level-headed people there.

Could it be that the public are slightly more sensible about this than quite a few sensationalist bloggers?


Also:

 

[graham]

The only way they can get a second chance is:

1) Make a track car with better cooling.
2) A quadrupling of battery capacity.
3) Take the Model S300 down and make sure it works faultlessly.

None of that will happen for a few years.

I think the battery capacity will increase over time. I also think as they ramp up volume with their drive train (Model S and others) they will make improvements that they will use on future versions of the Roadster. Give it some time and a revisit will be in order.

 

[graham]

That... is a lot of Tangos. I had no idea so many had been produced!

 

[JRP3]

The problems with the Tesla + May's cheer leading for the Clarity = disaster. Very disappointing all around and a real public relations setback for EV's in general.

 

[Tdave]

We all know the Tesla's range is drastically reduced when driven like they were driving it.

But the same is true of a "petrol car". My twin-turbo RX-7 I used to drive at the race track would go about 80 miles on a tank of gas (21 gallons). I could get close to 4 times that on the highway. That ratio of track range to max range is almost the same between the cars, which would make sense as we're talking energy use in both cases.

Has TG ever made fun of a Ferrari or other super car needing a fill up in the middle of their testing?

 

[JRP3]

Has TG ever made fun of a Ferrari or other super car needing a fill up in the middle of their testing?

Actually they did. Currently showing on BBC in the US, I think they are re-running it tonight at 9 :biggrin:

 

[stopcrazypp]

We all know the Tesla's range is drastically reduced when driven like they were driving it.

But the same is true of a "petrol car".

I have made that point in a lot of comments too (you can see heading to the articles and to the youtube videos of the Tesla). But of course the rebuttal is always that it takes so long to recharge, unlike a gas car (you can see this argument in autoblog comments), and they do have a point.

Overall I don't think that's as bad a blow since anyone who knows anything about cars will know if you drive a car like a maniac, the fuel economy goes down drastically, and really little to dispute on that.

The big blow to Tesla was the overheating and bad brakes. This is what is causing the majority of comments (on youtube mostly I have seen) on reliability of the car and questioning if the car is worth the $109k.

The major blow for EVs in general was all the negatives they focused on (long tailpipe, charging time), which they didn't focus on in the Clarity. This again is a HUGE blow to the public's enthusiasm for EVs and will make them think hydrogen is the ultimate solution. Really, for the average viewer who doesn't know much about hydrogen, that last piece will really make you feel warm, fuzzy, & triumphant inside, and thus convinced it's the best solution. A majority of commenters, it seems, on the Clarity piece felt convinced the Clarity was really the answer.

 

[AntronX]

How about if TM made a track version of the roadster? Make the battery pack using A123 LiFePO4 cells. Make it half the weight of original pack, obviously with less range, but the A123 pack will be more than twice as powerful than the original Li-Co pack. Original pack uses about 307 kg of Li-Co cells. So, half that weight, and you can have 2164 A123 cells. Each cell can do about 110 Watts continuosuly without excessive heating. 2146 cells * 110W = 236 KW or 316 hp (assuming 100% motor and PEM efficiency). Additionally, these cells do not burst into flames, so they can be aircooled. This eliminates the need for fluid cooling and air conditioning, which saves a lot of weight. Next, watercool the motor and increase the power rating of PEM. Also, maybe better grip tires with stiffer suspention and low or no regen will help.

 

[JRP3]

Faster track times were the least of the problems.

 

[GSP]

More powerful cells won't improve the roadster's performance, since power is limited by the inverter (PEM) and motor, not the battery. Also, lower energy (high power) cells would limit the 55 mi "road race" range even more.

I have to say that I'm very disappointed in TG's attitude, but not surprised. Realistically the roadster is a wonderful sports car, when used on public roads and drag strips. It is not a road racer, a pretty minor fault.

I even got sucked in about how great the FCX Clarity is, even though I very well know better. TG knows how to make their point well, even when it is total BS. It is a crime to misinform the public that way. If I was King of England, JC would be in London tower for that!

GSP

 

[AntronX]

More powerful cells won't improve the roadster's performance

So shaving off 400 - 460 Lbs of weight will not improve handling performance in the corners, as well as acceleration time?

 

[vfx]

Elon has said they do plan a performance version of the Roadster. It's on Von's plate but I think they are just a bit busy to build it now.

 

[GSP]

So shaving off 400 - 460 Lbs of weight will not improve handling performance in the corners, as well as acceleration time?

You're right, the lower mass will help acceleration (fore, aft, and lateral).

However even an equivalent mass of A123 cells will have drastically reduced range (about half). If you reduce the pack to half size, then you have only about 1/4 the range of a stock roadster, only about 14 miles of road racing!