Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In all fairness, the primary purpose of this vehicle is for normal daily commutes and not road trips. It more than meets that need and would meet the needs of many people if it was offered at a competitive price point. This is early adopter pricing and reflects high upfront R&D costs as well as costs of the unique infrastructure necessary to support it (ie. charging stations). This is no different than any other new technology product when it is first introduced.
Things will improve over time and the Tesla (or a competing product) will change based on feedback to meet the customer's needs and wants.
All-electrics are primarily a commuter vehicles, though a 250 mile range does qualify it as a "over the road" car. Recharging infrastructure is a chicken and egg situation. The vast majority of driving is within 50 miles of home so home and/or office recharging facilitates a very large market. Costs will drop as production expands.
So one must be some sort of engineer or technical person to waste $122,000.00 purchasing this vehicle so they can drive at some insanely slow driving speeds while dressed in thermal underwear?
As I've said repeatedly concerning these electric toys, when one has to radically modify their driving habits to make up for the deficiencies of the technology it's guaranteed to be a failure.....
Well, thank you for the Luddite interpretation of what I said.
But yes, for the 1st or 2nd generation of electric-only automobiles, you will need to be a wealthy automotive enthusiast in order to use them well. By the 3rd or 4th generation they'll be acceptable for use by the general public.
Of course, there is the possibility that the economic picture will shift, and Electric Cars will go the way of General Aviation; only being used by a few wealthy enthusiasts. However, that's pretty unlikely considering that we are merely talking about a different way to power an existing widely-adopted technology. Maybe if rail, or some other mode of transporation, supplants automobiles. But I don't see that happening.
Looks like a cool vehicle. There are a number of firms, many outside the US, working on alternatives to gas/diesel-powered vehicles. It's odd how many people seem to celebrate and mock the failures of these pioneers while perpetuating a structure that favors old technology and puts up high barriers for new technologies.
Even with available technology it makes no sense that we cannot have a clean-diesel vehicle available here similar to those available in other countries in Europe and Canada. According to what I have read, the new standards for low-sulfur diesel are the same in the US, Canada, and Europe and diesel engines of US manufacturers produced in Europe no longer require modifications to be sold in the US. So why so few choices? Why can't we have the 65 mpg equivalents currently available in Europe here now?
I have been waiting for a 30 mpg small diesel pickup for years as have many others. Makes no sense.
As for Tesla vs NYT, Tesla has not contradicted the Broder's statement that he followed Tesla Support instructions, nor have they reconciled the fact that the tow truck driver says the car was bricked (even though they say the car never ran out of power).
CNBC proved Tesla's claims of an ability to drive from DC to Boston in a Tesla to be correct. The NYT proved one of their reporters is unable to drive from DC to Boston. People in NYC don't really know how to drive. It's not their fault.
The CNBC reporter was able to make it with surplus miles to spare between chargings. The long distance driving is not the intended purpose of this vehicle. With a range of 200 miles+ it is more than sufficient for most people's everyday commutes and uses and could be easily recharged at home.
This is early adopter technology. This will improve rapidly if people see that a vehicle with this type of range would work for them. Other technologies such as the air car/hybrid I posted on another thread can be combined to achieve lower total costs.
The solution to reducing fossil fuel and reducing carbon emissions involves a variety of technologies. Electric has a lot of potential especially as solar/wind and other technologies are improved to reduce consumption/pollution from source generation of electricity.
I did wonder about the 74 degree cabin temperature, but I see that was probably the heater setting and not the actual temperature inside the car, since it was such a cold day.
This part seems fishy to me. The heater runs off the same batteries that power the car. I'm looking into building my own electric car right now, and this is a very common issue that people cope with. Some just forgo the heater totally because it's such a drain on power.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
