Tesla: Too little range at

[tomas]

Guys, the moderators are reviewing the situation. The thread topic is not about whether the OP is a troll or not, so please limit discussion to the merits of the original premise. Discussions about whether an individual is a troll or not is at the very least off-topic.

Thanks

OK, you are right, I apologize for being a jerk today! My response to original post from @porc is following:

* I agree with premise that effective transport is getting from point A to B... that's where the agreement ends.
* I'm not always concerned with time from A to B, and not always concerned with amount of resources consumed. Only concerned about getting to my destination when I want/need to be there, and enjoying the ride. I also do take some pleasure in driving a car that is powered by the sun... don't care about how many kW I might burn on the way, because they are replaced sustainably at end of day.
* And, I'm completely cool with any driver who DOES make time and/or resources their priority. The auto market is made up of people with many different preferences.
* I believe that THIS electric car HAS overtaken ICE cars. For me anyway. My fuel is free and sustainable, it's fast, comfortable, charged up every morning, full of useful technology, continuously improving, and also one hot looking ride!
* The recitation of all of the range and charging time numbers, assumptions, challenges is meaningless to me, and to most others who buy this car. We buy it because it suits our wants and needs.
* The MARKET will determine how many people are suited to the BEV, and the relative success of Tesla and any other BEV manufacturers. I'm bullish, but I've got no issue with people who are skeptical.

I think when people post concerns about range/charging time/whatever shortcomings causing electric cars to fail... they have some notion of success/failure that they need to explain. If porc means, for example, failure of BEV population to exceed ICE by 2020... I'd agree - that won't happen. But by 2050? I'd take that bet. And, whether or not Tesla Motors is still around, history will tell if they were the beginning or the end. I'll be collecting on the bet posthumously, of course.

 

[Doug_G]

OK, you are right, I apologize for being a jerk today!

Awesome, thanks!

Just so everyone knows, any additional posts about the OP's, uh, characteristics, are being sent to snippiness. If you don't see your post, it was "snipped".

 

[Canuck]

If your arguments were true, electric cars would already have taken off.

Point, set, match!

 

[FreeOfPge]

Setting all arguments (both for and against E.V. adoption) aside for moment. Porc, have you driven a Model S?

I'm NOT asking this as some fanboy, rah-rah rhetorical question. I'm asking because certain things in life just cannot be described. If you haven't experienced the Model S yourself, it will be difficult for you to fully understand what an electric car 'can be'. If you ask real nice, I bet you'll find a generous MS owner willing to take you for a drive. Many of your reservations, or preconceived ideas about electric vehicles could change with one drive in a Model S.

 

[djplong]

Cars have one core function: Effective Transport.
...
Teslas cars are at their weakest at exactly that core function: They have limited range, a high price tag and take a long time to recharge.
1) If you take 296 miles, you have to knock off 10% for battery degradation, and up to 30% if you want to drive at 80 mph, with less than ideal weather and an uphill road.
That leaves you with about 178 miles.

2) You will have to recharge for about 30 min for 50% or 1 hour or more for 100%.
3) Most cars are parked curbside, so for most people there is 0 infrastructure in cities.

The major thing you don't realize is that the market in the United States is way different from Germany in that we have way more homes with garages and other off-street private parking. When I eventually get my Tesla, I'll be leaving the house every morning with a "full tank of electrons". So, most cars are NOT "parked curbside". Even apartment buildings have dedicated parking (which can be upgraded with outlets). Never mind the fact that car ownership is way lower in urban places with public transportation (which, admittedly, isn't nearly as good as Europe with very few exceptions).

"The family road trip" is almost a thing of the past. if the trip is short enough for a day-drive (more common), you have destination charging coming on-line all over the country (hotels, restaurants, etc). If the trip takes more than a day, cheap airfares make it more economical to fly as opposed to paying $3-$4/gal of gas (which should be more plain to you since I was in Germany last year and saw the MUCH higher prices paid there for petrol).

You also probably haven't been told about a "range charge" which you can schedule in your garage overnight if you are planning a long trip the next day. This extends your range even further.

So you have the Model 3 coming out, starting around $35K (which is what I'm planning to buy) and we know the base model will have at least a 200 mile range.

And remember, NOT paying for gas is a HUGE cost - but there's far more that ISN'T talked about much. I have an app on my phone and have recorded EVERYTHING I've put in my car gas AND maintenance AND repairs AND paperwork (registration, inspection). Since I started recording (30 months ago), I've paid $5475 in gas at 29.1 mpg. HOWEVER - I've ALSO paid over $4300 for repairs (mostly 2 catalytic converters) and maintenance (oil changes, tires, brakes). Before I started using the app, I had another $1000 catalytic converter replacement (my car has 2 so I've replaced one twice in the 8 years I've had it). With the exception of tires, those are all costs I WON'T have with a Tesla. These are HUGE savings.

So when you calculate your #2, the TOTAL cost of ownership of the car, don't forget to factor in all the oil changes, water pumps, radiator flushes, transmission servicings you WON'T have in addition to fueling your car at about 1/4 what you pay for gas (or maybe 1/10 if you use European prices).

Now, for the 'urban owners', there's another way to serve that market. When it becomes more compelling, the simple solution is to put plugs at parking meters that are operated by swiping a card and then billing the owner for the electricity. Problem solved.

Politely, I would like to say that your last line has the biggest error. You say what you believe is needed "for the EV revolution to gain traction". Based on Tesla's backlog and the way other companies are scrambling, I'd say the revolution already HAS gained traction and is progressing.

 

[M67v]

If your arguments were true, electric cars would already have taken off. The reality is, that long ranged trips are important to consumers, even if they only make up 1-5% of the total miles driven . Nobody will pay 40000 dollars (which probably will be the cheapest version for the Model 3) for a car that lets you drive 100 something miles before you need to recharge for it up to an hour. Thats just not compelling enough and sounds like a step backwards for most, not like a revolution.

If you want a revolution, offer the range as well as the recharging times people demand.

You're wrong. People will definitely by a $70,000 Californian electric vehicle. Why? It has a perfectly reasonable range, charging is no concern for them, and they want an electric car.

 

[zro ltr]

My two cents on this: Electric cars are far from perfect. However, they are certainly the future. I was perfectly happy with my $35000 Camaro, but I sold it in order to buy a Tesla, which I won't have until December, because the sooner that future gets here, the better. Every BEV sold helps usher in a new era in personal transportation; inching the technology and infrastructure along. My buying a Tesla is a statement of confidence in Tesla and an investment in their future developments. For this, I'll happily take a bit longer when I drive across the country. Maybe I'm a sucker (There isn't even a Supercharger near me), but even if they're not the future, if no infrastructure will be advanced, and if there will be no tech progress, it's still a sweet car.

 

[FLDarren]

Good to know that you know what the people want. By the way don't forget to e-mail Elon and his team so they don't keep running head on in to the abyss.

LOL!

 

[Doug_G]

Another one gone to snippiness. This thread is on "low threshold moderation".

 

[Chickenlittle]

Cars have one core function: Effective Transport.

With effective I mean: Transport me from A to B in the least amount of time with the least amounts of resources consumed.

Teslas cars are at their weakest at exactly that core function: They have limited range, a high price tag and take a long time to recharge.

1) If you take 296 miles, you have to knock off 10% for battery degradation, and up to 30% if you want to drive at 80 mph, with less than ideal weather and an uphill road.

That leaves you with about 178 miles.

2) You will have to recharge for about 30 min for 50% or 1 hour or more for 100%.

3) Most cars are parked curbside, so for most people there is 0 infrastructure in cities.

Electric cars are a long way away from overtaking ICE cars.

For this to happen, in my humble opinion Elon Musk needs to achieve the following:

1) Increase range by 100%
2) Decreases total costs of ownership by 50% (35.000 dollar car)
3) Decrease charging times by at least 50%

A 200 EPA rated mile, 35.000 dollar car misses the mark, as many gasoline cars have greater functionality (range, refuel times, infrastructure) at the same or better total cost of ownership. It would have to be a 450 mile EPA Rated car and charging times would need to plummet by 50% for the EV revolution to gain traction.

i understand that the car does not work for you. for most of us we are happy. luckily there are many more cars out there that you may be satisfied with. i appreciate your input but just as i would not try to convince you otherwise, i wonder about the purpose of your trying to change our minds on a product that most of the posters are very satisfied with.

 

[jerry33]

1) Virtually everyone agrees that more range would be nice.
2) Everyone would like a lower price.
3) Tesla needs to be profitable.
4) To sell enough cars to achieve #3 the price can't be more than X.
5) The car needs to be compelling as a car.

Now it's obvious that these are conflicting goals. If you double the range, you increase the price to the point where sales decline. Driveability is also reduced (given current production parts). So the choice is to either wait until it's perfect or purchase when it's sufficient. "Sufficient" isn't the same for everyone.

 

[yesla]

I would remark that Tesla's target audience is not to the general public... yet.
the very fact that the "general public" is already making demands from Tesla... well... lets wait for the dinner bell and see how fast we can eat before speaking for everybody. I'll have my fill.

 

[brianman]

Cars have one core function: Effective Transport.

With effective I mean: Transport me from A to B in the least amount of time with the least amounts of resources consumed.

Teslas cars are at their weakest at exactly that core function: They have limited range, a high price tag and take a long time to recharge.

Please clarify what resources you are referring to. Time? Upfront cost? Tco? Per mile $ cost? Per mile natural resource cost? Per mile human population air quality impact? On every one of the metrics I listed, model s can be shown to come out ahead, so you must be specific on your criteria to make meaningful assertions or have worthwhile discourse.

 

[Red Sage]

Hey, look! It's a post begun by a Naysayer who has not a leg to stand on! w00+! This is so original!