Green car

[drtruong]

Have any you considered to buy an electric car made by Telsa motors. 0-60mph in 3.9 sec.

www.telsamotors.com

 

[Osiris_x11]

e'...

Have any you considered to buy an electric car made by Telsa motors. 0-60mph in 3.9 sec.

www.telsamotors.com

Interesting topic, indeed! However, this sub-forum is meant for NSX-only discussion...

[B][SIZE="3"]New & Prospective Owners / Car History / Comparisons[/SIZE] 
NSX research & history, financing, comparisons, pricing, advice. 
New owner/member messages.[/B]

Such topics as the one in the original post of this thread belong in off-topic!

Also, on certain popular topics or queries, it's prudent to use the search as quite often there is some sort of dialogue already going on in regards to the topic in question...

http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94493

http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92451

http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91202

http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73590

http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73384

http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73434

http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71012


(I just replied to avert all the nasties & trite/laconic replies that would've come your way... you owe me one!)

 

[slamstrom]

Have any you considered to buy an electric car made by Telsa motors. 0-60mph in 3.9 sec.

www.telsamotors.com

You can fix it by adding "vs. NSX".:wink:

 

[skillz4587]

Very interesting concept. I definitely did have interest in the car and was really excited about seeing one in person. But I have read that it is difficult to get in and out kind of like the Lotus Elise. Also, the 0-60 speed is closer to 5.7, which is definitely no slouch especially for for an electric car. But I would be pretty disappointed if I gave a large deposit expecting a certain performance level and then getting something else. Supposedly, this will be fixed at a later time. I think the cause for the slower acceleration has something to do with the limitations of the transmission. With this being the companies first production car, it would be a good idea to wait a few years for all all the kinks to be worked out and the price to hopefully drop.

 

[Jett]

...the slower acceleration has something to do with the limitations of the transmission.

The limitation isn't the transmission, it is the batteries.

Supposedly, this will be fixed at a later time.

This says it all. Tesla is the new Tucker. Despite hearing about this car for literally years now, you still can't actually buy one, even if you are willing to pony up the $100k+. So far they have produced a few prototypes. It's not like they are having to reinvent the wheel. This technology has been around for what, 100 years? A few people have converted electric cars in their own garage. So what exactly are the engineering challenges? Standing around hoping for a better battery? Range has already been revised down, it will be revised down again, and eventually they may concede that a realistic range is, uh, maybe 60 miles on fresh batteries, less on older batteries. The other dirty little secret about the Tesla is that electric motors have been capable of delivering this kind of performance for decades. The problem is and always has been delivering this kind of performance without draining the battery in five miles.

Exactly how many people are going to buy one of these things? Millions of development costs for an tiny amount of buyers. I predict they will milk the trend for as long as possible, maybe suck in a few hundred million California taxpayer subsidy dollars eventually, then file bankruptcy and take everyone's deposit with them.

I think this pretty much sums up the business plan: Burn venture capital at a stunning rate, then try to suck in as much taxpayer subsidy as possible (because California wants to believe!) while hoping for someone to invent a longer-lasting battery. Of course, this could take a hundred years or a thousand. Advancements in engineering aren't correlated with how much money you throw at the problem.

I think electric cars are a great idea, but Tesla needs to put up or shut up. I think a car that some guy converted in his garage is waaaay cooler than a Tesla, because the guy in his garage "put up". Everyone else just likes to talk about how much they hate oil companies while doing nothing to change their consumption habits.

 

[MartinSD]

Greetings

I flew to Colorado a few weeks ago and sat next to an engineer from EPRI -- the Electric Power Research Institute. She told me that rechargeable car batteries would be made with lithium. I almost fell out of my seat suppressing a laugh -- there probably isn't enough lithium in the entire world to make car batteries for the state of California when combined with the other uses for Lithium -- yes, lithium is quite rare -- estimated reserves of about 100 million tons of ore. They apparently need a commodities trader on their staff. The power grid in the US is not capable of carrying the amount of electricity needed to charge cars, even if we had power plants capable of generating that much electricity. Tell me after you watch 10 trains with over 100 cars going by each hour that this is a greener way to drive.

Cheers,
Martin

 

[Joshs]

Very interesting concept. I definitely did have interest in the car and was really excited about seeing one in person. But I have read that it is difficult to get in and out kind of like the Lotus Elise. Also, the 0-60 speed is closer to 5.7, which is definitely no slouch especially for for an electric car. But I would be pretty disappointed if I gave a large deposit expecting a certain performance level and then getting something else. Supposedly, this will be fixed at a later time. I think the cause for the slower acceleration has something to do with the limitations of the transmission. With this being the companies first production car, it would be a good idea to wait a few years for all all the kinks to be worked out and the price to hopefully drop.

Don't worry, you couldn't get one with the weaker transmission even if you wanted to. The waiting list is pretty long, so by the time yours arrived in a couple years most of the kinks should be worked out.

Actually, the new transmission has only a single gear ratio - no shifting!

The reduced range wouldn't be such a big deal if it was possible to quickly recharge while out and about. Unfortunately it seems unlikely that an all-electric (non-fuel cell) car will ever have recharge times anywhere near what we're used to in a fueled vehicle.

-Josh

 

[Tom239]

The limitation isn't the transmission, it is the batteries.

Can you substantiate that?

 

[Jett]

Can you substantiate that?

I would think that this is self-evident. The amount of torque an electric motor can produce is (and always has been) tremendous, relative to horsepower. The challenge is to build a transmission that can withstand 0-60 in four seconds . So is there any technology available that can allow a transmission to withstand 0-60 in four seconds? Many modern automobile transmissions can handle this without a problem. The transmission doesn't know or care if it is being driven by a gasoline engine or an electric engine. Although the transmission for the electric car will be different from an automobile transmission, the electric engine delivers a more even powerband with which to pair a transmission, making the task easier than, say, having to develop a transmission as complex as the extremely complex automatic transmission used in the NSX. As evidence I will cite that the current transmission being offered in the Tesla is a two-speed transmission. They can use a two-speed (zero to 60 in 5.7 seconds) transmission because they have the even powerband of the electric engine to work with. A reliable engine-transmission combination could be built with off-the-shelf parts. Motor challenge? Solved decades ago. Transmission challenge? Solved decades ago. The only thing that the Tesla lacks is the one thing that can't be purchased. Forget fast charging for now - you first need a battery that lasts long enough. The problem is and always has been delivering high performance without draining the battery in five miles.

Frankly I don't think there is any shame in 0-60 in 5.7 seconds in an electric car. Give me 5.7 seconds and better range. But wishing for more range isn't going to make it a reality.

You may think I have a prejudice against electric cars. I don't. What I object to is a company preening for the public as if they had really accomplished something. So far they haven't done anything that wasn't done decades ago. All the technical challenges are deferred to some unspecified future date or will supposedly be ironed out down the road. They remind me so much of Tucker.

I think someone that obtains or converts an electric car is putting their money where their mouth is, and I admire that. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with electric cars. Ethanol? That is a whole 'nother set of problems.

The miracle of gasoline is the amount of energy stored in each gallon. We take this for granted, but think about it. A gallon of gasoline contains enough energy to propel a 1.5 to two ton automobile 15 to thirty miles, or more. That is pretty amazing.

 

[Tom239]

I would think that this is self-evident.

The question was, why are we seeing 5.7 sec 0-60 times instead of 3.9,
and Tesla's stated reason is that the transmission is locked into second gear.

Tesla says the first transmissions had a reliability problem with the
first gear. As you say, transmissions have been around for a while,
and there should be no reason why a decent one can't be built.
But it seems plausible to me that a fledgling car company has had
trouble getting a supplier to deliver a sturdy custom transmission
on the first attempt; it doesn't sound to me like a smokescreen to
hide the fact that their batteries can't dish out enough power.

Car and Driver, testing a prototype Tesla with a 2-speed transmission, said
"On a wet public road, with mediocre traction, we measured a 0-to-60-mph
time of 4.4 seconds (shifting at 62 mph) and a quarter-mile of 13.3 seconds
at 104 mph (shifting at 45 mph, which is what's represented in our spec panel)."

Motor Trend drove a prototype as well, and said "in the four seconds it's
taken to read this sentence, the Roadster has shrieked to 60 mph (Tesla's
claimed 3.9 seconds would seem entirely plausible in a controlled setting)."

Let me rephrase my question: do you doubt the magazines' reports?

Your argument is about energy storage capacity, not power. I can
understand skepticism about the claimed driving range, but I don't see
why you're skeptical about a transmission issue being responsible for the
reduced 0-60 performance.

 

[Jett]

I was taking a wider view. I have no doubt that the car can deliver that kind of performance. As stated, electric motors are capable of delivering a tremendous amount of torque, especially early in the powerband. What I am skeptical of is that they can achieve that kind of performance, come anywhere close to the stated range figure (even after having revised it down) and produce a charging system that has any longevity.

 

[MartinSD]

Greetings

i think you would want a CVT transmission with an electric motor. You can take advantage of the torque. The real problem is the same as with WW II submarines. The faster they went submerged, the shorter the battery life -- it was not a linear relationship.

Martin

 

[Jett]

Tesla IPO

This reminds me of the dot.com era. Suggestion for new Tesla motto: Burning venture capital, taxpayer, and investor cash since 2003! Still, I expect this stock to shoot the moon before it flames out. (Being partnered with Toyota gives them investor cred.) Gonna be like a NASA launch, come ride the roller coaster! Trade 2x leverage, triple your money on the way up then short it and triple that fortune again on the way down! Cover when the stock price falls below $2 as the roller-coaster pulls into the station. Woo-hoo!

At that point Toyota will step in and assume control of the company. I expect the trajectory to play out over five years or so.

Never too late to be a dot.com millionaire! Step right up and get your tickets!

 

[SilverStone05]

Is Elon Musk or whatever his name is...still affiliated with the company?

 

[omega2]

The only draw back to electric cars I can see is the charge time. For a gasoline powered car, it only takes several minutes at a gas station to fuel up. But electric cars can take hours. So you lose that spontaneous go for a drive at any time luxury with the electric cars. Electric cars have been around for about as long as the internal combustion engine and they still lost out.

I still think advancing hydrogen cell technology may be the more compatible fuel source for our way of life. Hopefully, the technology from the Honda FCX will be a precursor to more fuel cell cars that will eventually work into the sport car market.

 

[sahtt]

In the long run, a high mileage economy car is probably more 'green'. Most of our electricity is driven off coal and in the future, remarkable advances aside, that proportion will probably grow. I wish that wasn't the case. I wouldn't mind investigating an electric or hybrid as a daily driver.

 

[Daedalus]

Is Elon Musk or whatever his name is...still affiliated with the company?

Yes, he has been top guy since ousting Martin Eberhard. Elon is a genius plain and simple. And like a lot of really rich folks he is expert at leveraging every resource--including (especially) the government--to maximize his success and wealth. A few months ago he had none other than Prez Obama getting a grand tour of Elon's Falcon 9 rocket at the cape for his other venture, SpaceX. Tesla has been a bumpy road. A SpaceX IPO is imminent as well I think, based on their recent Falcon 9 success.

 

[Jett]

I think his expertise lies in attracting "opm" (other people's money) from taxpayers, investors, inc. He has milked taxpayer money from politicans who "want to believe", and he will cash in courtesy of investors who also want to believe in the forthcoming IPO, then at some point walk away rich one day and leave everyone else holding the bag.

A John DeLorean for the 21st century.

 

[Jett]

Well here we are about five years later (since the original post). See my post #13 above for context. Bought some puts, so my money is where my mouth is. I am riding the rollercoaster! Look out below!

 

[sahtt]

Time flies doesn't it. I'm looking for a valuation back in the mid single digit billions and will initiate a position if it gets that low. It's at 14 billion now and peaked at over 22 billion (bubble level).

 

[Jett]

An orderly sell-off of a magnitude of two/thirds from present valuation would make all my dreams come true. Well, not all of them, but it would make me very, very happy. Fair warning: Don't try and catch a falling knife on TSLA by going long, even if it drops to $40 - from there it could still cut you badly. My example would be GM stock - the old GM stock - now worthless.