They'll want a real one.
Posted on 01/25/2010 4:28:22 PM PST by NormsRevenge
Yes, thats a fact. No viable battery. The government saves a company thats all hat and no cattle. Using our money to keep it going when u=it should go under, because why? Its a company that is politically correct on energy.
Wet dreamers! They don;t have a battery! What will they do, hook the cars up to hprses? Buahahahahahaha!
Sheer Idiocy.Criminal use of tax money.
Don't kid yourself; that ridiculous pile of hazardous waste on wheels is the darling of the EnviroNAZI.
The Tesla being all electric is not a benefit.
What if you need to acclerate quickly in emergency manueurs or you are driving up a hill when traffic stalls? And your range is drastically reduced?
300 miles is IF they meet their battery targets becuase the batter does not exist yet.
This theoretical battery on a perfect day with perfect temperature and humidity with a feather left foot will reach 300 mile range.
We all know how often perfection with multiple variables happens.
What if your destination is 150-200 miles away?
What if your destination is only 100 miles away but you get stuck on the freeway for hours or get detoured?
It looks like a standard 5 passenger sedan but it says it is 7 passenger?
The Volt is a political statement for rich Greenies and Anti-Oil Hawks.
The Tesla is a toy for the super rich.
Nobody is his right mind that can afford one $50-60K car will get a Tesla.
After the Leonardo DiCaprio’s and Jay Leno’s of they world get their Volt, there will be many upper-middle class people that will buy a Volt as their only or primary car.
Oddly enough, all of those things are in fact available in the vicinity of Palo Alto. There's plenty of light industrial square-footage available for a song, the NUMMI plant in Fremont (just across the short Dumbarton Bridge) is closing and there are plenty of workers and suppliers looking for something to do, etc. Not to mention East Palo Alto.
I assume our Democratic Gods and Goddesses have something to do with this, because after all, this is their play area. Or maybe some of the executives responsible live in posh SF Peninsula neighborhoods and don't want to commute too much.
There’s an empty plant in Fremont that they can probably get real cheap, and there are 7000 or so laid off employees of NUMI available...
Tesla won’t be paying anyone back; everything they’ve done has been on OPM and they’re running out of suckers.
I doubt they will stoop to take a “used” plant and the unions will probably make a case that California wages need to be double what they are in Michigan.
Precisely!
Sure, but the power still comes from the EVIL oil or coal industry. Unless these things come with magical unicorn power!
The 45 minute charge is on a dedicated 300 amp circuit.
It will be interesting when they start negotiating with the union in CA to staff the plant. It won’t come cheap.
ELECTRIC CARS DON'T WORK
They'll want a real one.
Here’s a link to some of the battery issues...
Electric motors have more torque than gas engines.
300 miles is IF they meet their battery targets becuase the batter does not exist yet.
This is Tesla we're talking about here. They've got a pretty good track record so far.
This theoretical battery on a perfect day with perfect temperature and humidity with a feather left foot will reach 300 mile range.
We all know how often perfection with multiple variables happens.
Yeah, there are going to be variables. I'm sure they know that ... just like the EPA knows that a car they say is going to get 25 city miles is likely not to get exactly that.
What if your destination is 150-200 miles away?
What if your destination is only 100 miles away but you get stuck on the freeway for hours or get detoured?
I may be wrong here, but if you're not moving, the vehicle's not using up the battery power, is it?
It looks like a standard 5 passenger sedan but it says it is 7 passenger?
7 ... 5 adults, 2 children. Must be some sort of jump seats in there.
The Volt is a political statement for rich Greenies and Anti-Oil Hawks.
Yeah, but it didn't start out that way. Too bad it ended up like that and with a more boring style than the concept had.
The Tesla is a toy for the super rich.
The roadster, perhaps. But at 49k, the Model S is not out of the question.
Nobody is his right mind that can afford one $50-60K car will get a Tesla.
Definitely not the first one off the assembly line. But maybe as it progresses and looks like the real deal, maybe it will catch on.
I am part owner of another car company...WOOPIE!
No shi! They still use up more energy going uphill and reduce electricity for range. Therefore range is reduced.
This is Tesla we're talking about here. They've got a pretty good track record so far.
No they don't. They almost have no track record. The introduction of their $100K roadster was delayed,delayed,delayed. When introduced it was $119k, a one speed transmission instead of the two speed transmission they promised when they took deposits from customers. It is not as efficicient as they promised because the roadster needs to be plugged in almost around the clock when not used. Plug in to cool batteries after use. Plug in to warm up batteries before use. Owners reported range of 50-70% of what was promised. Top management fired again and again. Former president started a blog poo-pooing Tesla. Big layoffs last year.
Yeah, there are going to be variables. I'm sure they know that ... just like the EPA knows that a car they say is going to get 25 city miles is likely not to get exactly that. Your mileage may very on a 25 mpg car of 20-25% is maybe $10-15 a week. On a Tesla it may mean it is useable on a commute or it is not. It is the difference between getting stuck in the middle of nowheresville and not.
I may be wrong here, but if you're not moving, the vehicle's not using up the battery power, is it? Radio,AC,Lights,Cooling System for battery pack run on electricity generated by a Unicorn riding a Unicycle.
Yeah, but it didn't start out that way. Too bad it ended up like that and with a more boring style than the concept had. Even if GM would never admit it was always the plan.That is the nature of the relationship between brand new technology and first adopters. Concept car had concept car syle. It can't meet federal safety requirements. Roof is too low to meet crush standards and ordinary folks would hate having to bend so low to get in. Production Volt is real world perameters for real people. By the 3rd or 4th year of production upper middle class people will be driving this car. By the 2nd or 3rd Generation everyday people smack in the middle class will be driving this car.
The roadster, perhaps. But at 49k, the Model S is not out of the question.
A car that starts out at $49k is not out of the question. A toy that starts out at $49K is out of the question. That is what the Model S is with it's limited range. Plus the roadster was supposed to be $100k but ended up at $119. If the Model S follows suit it will be $59K.
Definitely not the first one off the assembly line. But maybe as it progresses and looks like the real deal, maybe it will catch on. No it will not. Not with current specs. Not even close. The Volt(EREV) is 5-10 years away from mass adoption. The Model S(BEV) is 15-20 years from mass adoption. And that is an optimistic view of battery technology advancement. Then again there could be some 19 year old genius at MIT or Cal Tech that developes a battery technology that completely changes the electric car paradigm.
Not exactly. A 19% increase would be an additional $7600, not $19000.
All of this conversation said, would you rather companies not even try to produce an alternative to the gas powered car? This is at least heading in the right direction and will lead to better solutions.
At least somebody is trying to make one that has hope of succeeding and not some ugly egg shell on wheels.
Your electrical dream will work well (in your opinion) under ideal climate conditions, but take it into the Northern States, Canada or Alaska and it will be quite worthless.
Then there is also the “Out of thin air” issue over where the power these vehicles use will come from. It will require massive increases of power to charge them and the ratio of power needed to feed them, in relation to the amount of energy that will be yielded, does not even come close to what gas/oil powered vehicles produce.
There is only an illusion that these are “green” and “non impact”. In fact, on the contrary. They will increase massive power plant output and emissions in the process, which of course is not even considered by the ignorant environMENTAL crowd.
Then, one also must consider what destructive increases in electricity prices this will cause all of us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.