Tesla (Renamed)(Tesla semi/Roadster)

[perica91]

I think Model Y is just rumor
http://carsoid.com/tesla-model-y/

Quote

There is not much known about the Model Y. It could have Falcon Wing doors, like the Model X. When Musk tweeted about the Model Y in October, for instance, he said that either the Model 3 or the Model Y would have Falcon doors.

 

[Spaceception]

I know, I know, but this thread is mine anyway, so who cares

And

It looks awesome

Edited July 9, 2017 by Spaceception

[Bill Phil]

I feel like range boosted electric vehicles, which are basically hybrids, would be the way to go for the near future. Large batteries aren't exactly environmentally friendly, and considering that batteries lose capacity over time, they'd need to be replaced. 

It doesn't take much energy to maintain highway speeds. Get a small battery, a small generator to charge it, and beefy electric motors, and you could get decent range and acceleration.

[StupidAndy]

you forgot an option in the poll:

"I would like one but I'm too young"

[WinkAllKerb'']

On 05/03/2016 at 4:46 PM, Spaceception said:

 

nice design ^^

[tater]

He has the same issue with naming schemes as SpaceX. Model S, Model X, Model 3, Model Y. After Z, then they skip to 4, or add 1 & 2? Maybe use "Block" numbers?

[Spaceception]

1 hour ago, tater said:

He has the same issue with naming schemes as SpaceX. Model S, Model X, Model 3, Model Y. After Z, then they skip to 4, or add 1 & 2? Maybe use "Block" numbers?

S3XY (It was supposed to be an E, but Ford wouldn't let them have it)

Don't know what Z will be for though.

Edited July 11, 2017 by Spaceception

[Spaceception]

Here are some of the specs from the Tesla site: https://www.tesla.com/model3

5.1 - 5.6 seconds from 0 to 60 mph

220 - 310 miles of range

Pay per use supercharging

Seating for 5 adults

15 cu ft of cargo space

1 digital display, 15 inches.

35,000 - ~44,000 (W/o incentives) USD

There's obviously way more tweet on their twitter

It's finally here!!! And I want one.

Edited July 29, 2017 by Spaceception

[StupidAndy]

5 hours ago, Spaceception said:

It's finally here!!! And I want one.

only one?

[Spaceception]

7 minutes ago, StupidAndy said:

only one?

No, 30, they're revealed near the end

[StupidAndy]

Just now, Spaceception said:

No, 30, they're revealed near the end

but you only want one?

[Spaceception]

Just now, StupidAndy said:

but you only want one?

Oh, I didn't read that right I want just one, what do I look like? A pile of money?

I'm going to need to save up for awhile, but there's over 400k reserves to hand out, so I've got a few years at least.

[Bill Phil]

23 minutes ago, StupidAndy said:

only one?

Considering how harmful the batteries are to the environment, even one is a bit of a stretch. Not to mention that just building the car represents a good chunk of the environmental damage that a car will cause.

[Spaceception]

13 minutes ago, Bill Phil said:

Considering how harmful the batteries are to the environment, even one is a bit of a stretch. Not to mention that just building the car represents a good chunk of the environmental damage that a car will cause.

Damn it, the forum ate my reply.

That's actually not true, the lithium batteries Tesla uses has very little of it, and the amount they do use, is able to be almost completely recycled.

There's a lot more in this article, I tried quoting some things, but, internet/forum trouble. https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/06/how-tesla-will-change-your-life.html

[Bill Phil]

11 hours ago, Spaceception said:

Damn it, the forum ate my reply.

That's actually not true, the lithium batteries Tesla uses has very little of it, and the amount they do use, is able to be almost completely recycled.

There's a lot more in this article, I tried quoting some things, but, internet/forum trouble. https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/06/how-tesla-will-change-your-life.html

Actually there are many factors. Building a new car takes energy. This is true. But building an electric car could take more energy than some cars. Not to mention that if you live in an area where coal provides most of the electrical power, you'd be hard pressed to make it any greener than some of the worst cars out there. 

Electric vehicles will only really make sense once we've got better batteries, better motors, and a cleaner electrical grid. We have none of those things.

And I wouldn't use a blog as a source....

[Regor]

3 hours ago, Bill Phil said:

Actually there are many factors. Building a new car takes energy. This is true. But building an electric car could take more energy than some cars. Not to mention that if you live in an area where coal provides most of the electrical power, you'd be hard pressed to make it any greener than some of the worst cars out there. 

Electric vehicles will only really make sense once we've got better batteries, better motors, and a cleaner electrical grid. We have none of those things.

And I wouldn't use a blog as a source....

Petrolhead...

[Bill Phil]

28 minutes ago, mabdi36 said:

Petrolhead...

Huh? I'd love it if we could all use electric cars, but they aren't a miraculous solution to all of the world's problems. We need to get rid of fossil fuels in general, not just the gasoline in cars. Nuclear, solar, and the whole nine yards. A cleaner electrical grid makes electric cars greener, too. At the same time we can move onto hybrids and work on improving the batteries and motors. Once our tech reaches a certain point, all electric will be practical, and the percentage of people using gas only cars will decrease, while hybrids and electrics increase, and eventually hybrids decrease as electrics take over. 

Tesla is trying to jump the gun, so to speak.

[Spaceception]

4 hours ago, Bill Phil said:

Huh? I'd love it if we could all use electric cars, but they aren't a miraculous solution to all of the world's problems. We need to get rid of fossil fuels in general, not just the gasoline in cars. Nuclear, solar, and the whole nine yards. A cleaner electrical grid makes electric cars greener, too. At the same time we can move onto hybrids and work on improving the batteries and motors. Once our tech reaches a certain point, all electric will be practical, and the percentage of people using gas only cars will decrease, while hybrids and electrics increase, and eventually hybrids decrease as electrics take over. 

Tesla is trying to jump the gun, so to speak.

We have to start somewhere. Sure, the grid isn't completely green (Isn't like at a quarter in the US though? Or around a third?), but we're not going to do anything if we sit around waiting for the perfect moment. And it's not like we aren't building new plants that have solar and wind instead of fossil fuels.

But what about the pollution by mining, refining, transporting, etc, etc all the fossil fuels we use? How bad is that?

 

And from your previous quote, I would trust Wait but why. His articles are well researched, and go in depth on a bunch of topics.

Yes, making electric cars are almost, if not about as bad as making fossil fuel ones, but a lot of components that they will have (At least Teslas) will be in the Gigafactory, and that's 100% powered by renewables. Transportation costs still involve fossil fuels, but they're working on an electric truck.

The point is, we need to start working on it now, it might not be the best of circumstances at the moment, but as we move away from fossil fuels and move closer to renewables, the electric car will continue to get greener, while the gasoline car remains in the past. And sometime in the future, advancements in electric cars will lead to a new and better battery that's greener than a lithium ion, and not expensive.

[Bill Phil]

6 minutes ago, Spaceception said:

We have to start somewhere. Sure, the grid isn't completely green (Isn't like at a quarter in the US though? Or around a third?), but we're not going to do anything if we sit around waiting for the perfect moment. And it's not like we aren't building new plants that have solar and wind instead of fossil fuels.

But what about the pollution by mining, refining, transporting, etc, etc all the fossil fuels we use? How bad is that?

 

And from your previous quote, I would trust Wait but why. His articles are well researched, and go in depth on a bunch of topics.

Yes, making electric cars are almost, if not about as bad as making fossil fuel ones, but a lot of components that they will have (At least Teslas) will be in the Gigafactory, and that's 100% powered by renewables. Transportation costs still involve fossil fuels, but they're working on an electric truck.

The point is, we need to start working on it now, it might not be the best of circumstances at the moment, but as we move away from fossil fuels and move closer to renewables, the electric car will continue to get greener, while the gasoline car remains in the past. And sometime in the future, advancements in electric cars will lead to a new and better battery that's greener than a lithium ion, and not expensive.

Yes, we do have to start somewhere. It's called the hybrid car. 

Electric cars aren't new. We had them over a century ago. They just couldn't compete. But now we have hybrids, which improve the environmental aspects of gas cars without falling into the traps that electrics suffer. That's why we should transition to those first. Those hybrids could use electric motors to accelerate, a small buffer battery and a small gas motor, and you'd have a greener than average car and plenty of the normal benefits of modern cars. Then it's just a matter of improving the batteries until you get to a point where the gas motor is no longer necessary. 

Things have to be phased in. Sudden changes tend to not happen. It's gradual. And a big part of that journey to everyone having all electric cars is the hybrid. We shouldn't skip over it just because all electric sounds cooler.

Car engines are maybe a few hundred kilowatts, and they rarely ever rev that high. A well sized power plant is easily a thousand or more times that, and it's on for much longer periods of time. Power generation is by far the bigger hit to the environment than cars. But refining and transporting fuel are bad for the environment as well, but not nearly so much as power generation.

Renewables are low capacity. Super low. As in, some types don't even break 10% of capacity. Not to mention the nasty stuff you need to make them. Renewables aren't perfect, either. Fission is actually our best bet for the near term, and the long term of fusion doesn't pan out. Then we could use space based solar as well.

We already have electric car technology. It's ancient. Old. Dinosaur technology. And while it may be the future, it's just not practical at the moment. Lack of infrastructure, not being much greener, and so on. The bottom line is that Teslas should be cars from thirty or fourty years in the future, whereas hybrids should be the near future, as we shift to greener electric power plants and build the infrastructure for hybrids, which can then be adapted to electrics. Not to mention developing greener methods of manufacturing cars.

[PakledHostage]

On 7/9/2017 at 5:32 AM, Bill Phil said:

I feel like range boosted electric vehicles, which are basically hybrids, would be the way to go for the near future. Large batteries aren't exactly environmentally friendly, and considering that batteries lose capacity over time, they'd need to be replaced. 

It doesn't take much energy to maintain highway speeds. Get a small battery, a small generator to charge it, and beefy electric motors, and you could get decent range and acceleration.

I couldn't agree more. As much as I like the idea of electric cars for around town, I think they are still impractical for a lot of potential purchasers.

Two of my friends have electric cars - one a Tesla Model S and one a Kia Soul. Both owners suffer range anxiety. And as much as I enjoy riding in those vehicles as a passenger, I wouldn't buy one. From my friends' experience, their range suffers in cold weather and road trips take a lot longer. Given that I use my car mostly in cold weather and for road trips, it pretty much rules out an EV.

I also don't think much of the current crop of hybrids. While they reduce emissions from vehicles stuck in slow moving traffic, stopped at traffic lights and waiting in the drive through lineup, they aren't really any different than a conventional ICE powered car on the highway. Their maintenance  cost/hassle is higher than other vehicles too. The additional parts count and complex transmission required  to route power to the wheels from both an electric  motor and gasoline engine bears a maintenance cost.

The option that Bill Phill mentions, on the other hand, sounds very practical to me. You'd get all the benefits of an electric car, while maintaining your range on the highway and in cold weather. The generator wouldn't require a transmission, could be run at its peak efficiency and wouldn't have to be very big. I have rolled my hatchback Mazda 3 down a hill in neutral (kids, don't try this at home - it is illegal in a lot of jurisdictions) to get a sense of how much power it takes, and it worked out to about 25 HP to maintain 120 km/h on flat ground. A small generator would keep you  going on the highway pretty much indefinitely while the battery pack would have more than enough in reserve for climbing hills, passing other vehicles and short trips around town.

Edited August 1, 2017 by PakledHostage

[tater]

I'm in the hybrids first camp as well. 

Gasoline has an energy density about 2 orders of magnitude higher than Li batteries. 

That doesn't mean you can't have a mostly electric car, but you could drop electrical storage to something on the order of a commute (50-100 miles?), then have a motor optimized for charging. During daily use, you might charge it at night (excess power on the grid anyway), and never burn gas. On weekends, you dip into gas sometimes. Best of both worlds.

[tater]

All electric does is move the tailpipe to another neighborhood, which is another issue that needs attention. People can signal their virtue with respect to pollution, while they dump their pollutants out over the horizon. Even if a company like Tesla was to build solar farms (or worse, wind) to cover 100% of car use, they'd probably put it where I have to look at it so people in LA don't have to.

I'd be less annoyed if they were pro nuke, probably, as that's the only real solution.

The arguments about total impact are also completely legitimate, and not easy to calculate. 

https://www.wired.com/2016/03/teslas-electric-cars-might-not-green-think/

They can be better than my gas guzzling rover, for sure, but that doesn't mean they are even emission free, much less impact free.

[LordFerret]

Here are the US auto sales for September.
GM  279K
Ford  221K
Toyota  174K
Honda  142K
Nissan  140K
Hyundi  57K
Kia  52K
Volks  51K
M-Benz  32K
BMW  30K
Tesla  3,350

How do "investors" pay $350 per share for Tesla and $14 a share for Ford? Tesla sold  3,000 out of 1,180,000.  On top of that, Ford pays a dividend.  ALL these companies also manufacture electric, hybrid, and plug-in hybrid vehicles.  Tesla makes electric only.  Does Tesla have better engineers than those other companies? I don't think so. The only thing Tesla had going for it was its battery, and even that at this point is falling behind ... not to mention the wake-up call people got when they discovered that Tesla could remotely turn on additional battery life (unlock additional battery capacity), a feature in their car which they'd have to pay extra for up from the base model. Not familiar with that one?... check out that story and the exodus from Florida prior to the hurricane.

[Dartguy]

23 hours ago, LordFerret said:

Here are the US auto sales for September.
GM  279K
Ford  221K
Toyota  174K
Honda  142K
Nissan  140K
Hyundi  57K
Kia  52K
Volks  51K
M-Benz  32K
BMW  30K
Tesla  3,350

How do "investors" pay $350 per share for Tesla and $14 a share for Ford? Tesla sold  3,000 out of 1,180,000.  On top of that, Ford pays a dividend.  ALL these companies also manufacture electric, hybrid, and plug-in hybrid vehicles.  Tesla makes electric only.  Does Tesla have better engineers than those other companies? I don't think so. The only thing Tesla had going for it was its battery, and even that at this point is falling behind ... not to mention the wake-up call people got when they discovered that Tesla could remotely turn on additional battery life (unlock additional battery capacity), a feature in their car which they'd have to pay extra for up from the base model. Not familiar with that one?... check out that story and the exodus from Florida prior to the hurricane.

Have you ridden in a Tesla?  There isn't a Ford made that comes close to the comfort, performance, and attention to detail in the Tesla.  They are unbelievable inside and even more under acceleration.  Just mind-blowing.

 

As for being green, I am a huge petrolhead and always will be, but if I had the money, I would absolutely own a Tesla.

[TheSaint]

Sure, I'll buy a Tesla. When it can do this: