Tesla (Renamed)(Tesla semi/Roadster)

[Bill Phil]

2 hours ago, Dartguy said:

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.

Well what do you expect from a luxury vehicle?

[Spaceception]

Tesla revealed their long awaited Semi last night, and as a bonus, revealed a new Roadster that's not just ludicrous, but goes all the way to Plaid!

 

[Green Baron]

Too expensive for me, even if they could deliver.

Tesla reminds me of the hype at the end of the 90s when the "burn rate", the rate at which a company burns their money, was a quality criterion for buying their stocks. The market went down 70% shortly thereafter.

Toyota, Renault, VW and others of course actually can build cars for the mass market. Tesla built a week's production of Toyota or VW in the whole year (?) i read. If they don't spool up quickly they'll loose the market of electric cars right when it starts.

Announcements are one thing, action another.

[tater]

Yeah, they need to actually manufacture cars. 

Seems like the semi trailer should have solar panels on top, does it?

[NSEP]

That things looks cool! Bye bye old rusty sketchy looking and polluting white vans!

100km/h in 1.9 seconds? Does it also brake that fast, do we also say bye bye to car accidents now?

[Shpaget]

5 hours ago, tater said:

Seems like the semi trailer should have solar panels on top, does it?

Without going into too much legalese and localization, with maximum truck length of roughly 18 meters and width of 2,6 m, we get to the roof area of about 45 square meters.

With maximum power production of solar panels of around 200 W/m^2, we can expect no more than 9 kW in perfect conditions. Compared to engines of several hundred kW we usually find in semi trucks, we can safely conclude that this would be rather pointless.

[tater]

10 minutes ago, Shpaget said:

Without going into too much legalese and localization, with maximum truck length of roughly 18 meters and width of 2,6 m, we get to the roof area of about 45 square meters.

With maximum power production of solar panels of around 200 W/m^2, we can expect no more than 9 kW in perfect conditions. Compared to engines of several hundred kW we usually find in semi trucks, we can safely conclude that this would be rather pointless.

Not to run the truck on the road. As an emergency trickle charger, or to offset some of the AC when the truck is parked. Course I'd be inclined to put a generator in the back, lol.

I've see too many cases where they close the highway (snow, usually) out here n the west, and trucks are stuck out there for sometimes days. Bright and sunny out, but the road closed miles ahead.

 

[Shpaget]

Emergency as in case you get stuck in the wilderness? It would be cheaper to call for help and get towed than to wait for a few weeks to get enough energy drive for a few hours.

There is is huge battery under the bonnet. Other than the main power train, there is no energy consumer worth mentioning. All the lights, heating and AC don't even compare to the energy requirements of driving.

If you're stuck on a closed road due to snow and run your heater to stay warm, you are spending some 500 W or perhaps 1000 W (that would make the cabin quite toasty quickly, I'd say). But compare that to driving that takes about 300 000 W on average. You can run your heater for 25 days and consume as much energy as one hour worth of driving.

Now, compare that to the expense of hauling an extra half a ton of solar panels every day (and having your maximum cargo mass being lower by that amount).

[YNM]

I wonder - how heavy is their truck ? You guys over in the US have some pretty restrictive axle loading isn't it ?

[NSEP]

 

[Green Baron]

8 hours ago, YNM said:

I wonder - how heavy is their truck ? You guys over in the US have some pretty restrictive axle loading isn't it ?

If i recall right its 12t for a powered and 10t for a trailing axle in Europe. Metric if somebody should question her-/himself. Special transport vehicles may have different numbers but then must carefully plan the route in order not to overstress bridges, tear down power lines, raze curves, destabilize slopes .... in short: make it into the local news.

I doubt it is much different on the other side of the pond. They use the same materials for roads, bridges and trucks ;-)

 

As to the actual weight ... trucks rarely run empty, it is not their destiny . Is the difference between empty weight and gross total known ? Presentations alone don't weigh much ...

 

I expect European and Japanese manufacturers to flood the market with electric cars soon. Quotes will be introduced or are already introduced (China in front, Scandinavia and France discussing). Tesla must hurry up if they don't want to get caught between the wheels ...

Edited November 18, 2017 by Green Baron

[LordFerret]

12 hours ago, YNM said:

I wonder - how heavy is their truck ? You guys over in the US have some pretty restrictive axle loading isn't it ?

I think what you're looking for is this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bridge_Gross_Weight_Formula

Trucks on the interstate here, running back and forth between Ohio and NYC for example, carry full loads in both directions (as @Green Baronpoints out "trucks rarely run empty"), are usually right at (more likely over lol) 80,000 pounds GVW. They can however carry far more weight than that. For that kind of data you'd need to check with the axle manufacturer to see what the stress test load limits are. I'd be more inclined to think tire and rim and lug nut fails would occur before any axle snapping though.

[YNM]

@Green Baron @LordFerret

80,000 lbs is only ~37 tonnes. In Sweden (and the nordics I think) they have 60 tonnes (132,000 lbs) GVW, 25.25 m length. Some EU directive (undirectly, at least for what I linked) mentions that structures have to at least able to carry 40 tonnes (88,000 lbs) GVW, which was why the Tamar Bridge in Plymouth, England had to be upgraded. According to the wiki for US weight limit, apparently 17,000 lbs (7.7 tonnes) per axle is/was the limit, which is below Europe's 10-12 tonnes (20,000 - 26,000 lbs) per axle.

All things above makes me saying that apparently US weight limit are quite more restrictive. I presume a lightweight truck would really make for all the difference and such, yet the requirement for low axle weight makes the case for bonnets, for instance you guys over in the US don't favor COE which truncate chassis length (and ultimately weight) and so on but clearly increases axle weight.

Which, again, considering how far heavier an electric car can be compared to petrol cars, would it imply a huge weight penalty for electric trucks ?

Edited November 18, 2017 by YNM

[Green Baron]

50 minutes ago, YNM said:

Which, again, considering how far heavier an electric car can be compared to petrol cars, would it imply a huge weight penalty for electric trucks ?

I doubt it is much heavier. The Renault Kangoo ZE (Model 2011-), a light electric commercial auto, weighs around 1400kg. That doesn't sound much heavier than a diesel, which would be the alternative for commercial use, and maybe 300kg more than a small petrol car. The electric Golf is about 500kg heavier than the petrol version (not the diesel), but i don't by a VW any more, one has his principles :-).

All in all i'd say, heavier than a petrol, not much heavier than a diesel. The heavy diesel engine, gears and transmission train of a truck might indeed be close to a huge battery bank, maybe more ? If you integrate the electric motors directly in the rims you save a lot of material compared to a classic drive train or even the upcoming electric "box" designs.

Since everyone is investing heftily in battery development i expect the odds to become even better. At least until we one can actually buy a Tesla Semi ... .

Edited November 18, 2017 by Green Baron

[LordFerret]

There's another thing to consider here, and that is at present the view is that Tesla might not make it. I've been saying this for a while now; Musk is in trouble. There are major production issues as far as his cars go, not to mention two other makers out there are stomping him in sales. You've all read the news. The only thing (or so it seems to me) that's saving his butt is his battery ... but even that is in question. He's got a very rough road ahead if he's going to succeed. He might have spread himself too thin.

As for his (off topic) hyper-loop, the folks over at Virgin (Hyperloop One) are stepping things up and moving out front. For one, they've got a design which permits modules to exit off at stops mid-run and not just point to point. Out on the west coast (USA), word has it the tunnels are nearly complete. At the moment, I can't find the link to back that statement up, but if I find it for sure I'll post it.

For the second thing; Hyperloop One has just about locked in a deal in India.
 

Quote

Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka have signed deals with Virgin Hyperloop One (VHO) to assess the possibility of developing hyperloops in these states.
- https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/transportation/airlines-/-aviation/forget-flying-india-is-planning-to-travel-faster-on-ground-at-1000-km-an-hour/articleshow/61701312.cms

 

[PakledHostage]

1 hour ago, LordFerret said:

There's another thing to consider here, and that is at present the view is that Tesla might not make it. I've been saying this for a while now; Musk is in trouble. There are major production issues as far as his cars go, not to mention two other makers out there are stomping him in sales. You've all read the news. The only thing (or so it seems to me) that's saving his butt is his battery ... but even that is in question. He's got a very rough road ahead if he's going to succeed. He might have spread himself too thin.

But Tesla's technology is worth something, so I don't think it is going to die any time soon. You see that in the stock price. Its market cap isn't all about hype. (Although Musk does engender more than his share of hype and fanboyism.) They may have some wrinkles to iron out but the company has lots of earning potential in the years ahead if/when they get that sorted out. Investors will inevitably keep throwing them money because electric vehicles are an up and coming thing. (And I say that even as someone who probably won't be buying an electric car for at least a decade or more because I am too cheap to buy new vehicles and I think the technology needs to mature a bit before it will be practical for my type of driving.)

 

22 hours ago, Shpaget said:

But compare that to driving that takes about 300 000 W on average. You can run your heater for 25 days and consume as much energy as one hour worth of driving.

While your point is valid in principle, I think 300 kW is too high for an average power consumption. It might use that much going up a hill, but not on the flat highway. I'd expect it to be closer to half that or less on level roads.

 

1 hour ago, LordFerret said:

Out on the west coast (USA), word has it the tunnels are nearly complete. At the moment, I can't find the link to back that statement up, but if I find it for sure I'll post it.

I'd be very surprised to learn that they were that far along. You'd think it would be bigger news if that were the case. Tunnels long enough to be useful for a Hyperloop would be among the longest tunnels in the world.

[YNM]

7 hours ago, Green Baron said:

All in all i'd say, heavier than a petrol, not much heavier than a diesel. The heavy diesel engine, gears and transmission train of a truck might indeed be close to a huge battery bank, maybe more ? If you integrate the electric motors directly in the rims you save a lot of material compared to a classic drive train or even the upcoming electric "box" designs.

Well, yeah... Except that you either will need a few electric motor (one for each powered axle or wheel) or one electric motor and a gearbox etc. still, and I wonder would the chassis-with-battery (that's how they often do it) etc. would cope with crash tests and such. And how far they can go as well - 500 miles (800 km) is honestly really paltry apparently compared to how far I can go (in a simulation, admittably) on standard fuel tank Scania COE 4x2 - 2000 km. And how bloody long it takes to "fill" one up !

6 hours ago, LordFerret said:

There's another thing to consider here, and that is at present the view is that Tesla might not make it.

According to BBC apparently that was the big question when Musk presented his latest ideas.

4 hours ago, PakledHostage said:

While your point is valid in principle, I think 300 kW is too high for an average power consumption

Spintires XD

4 hours ago, PakledHostage said:

But Tesla's technology is worth something

Electric transmission have been around since the first petrol cars were around (electric cars were meant for the ladies, you know). They haven't found metal-air battery or such in turn, unless they found one.

6 hours ago, LordFerret said:

Out on the west coast (USA), word has it the tunnels are nearly complete.

Well, the San Andreas fault hasn't seen problems... probably it hasn't.

Edited November 19, 2017 by YNM

[PakledHostage]

14 hours ago, YNM said:

Electric transmission have been around since the first petrol cars were around (electric cars were meant for the ladies, you know). They haven't found metal-air battery or such in turn, unless they found one.

I was thinking of their self driving technology when I wrote my earlier post, but I also think it is unfair to equate a modern Tesla with an electric car from 100 years ago. Battery technology, motor control systems, manufacturing techniques and materials, and on and on have all advanced sufficiently in the intervening years to make the comparison ridiculous. They are no more alike than a modern Mercedes is like the Benz-Patent Motorwagen.

Edited November 19, 2017 by PakledHostage
Fixed a spelling mistake

[StupidAndy]

am I crazy or are there 2 different types of semis? the one on the left seems smaller...

see! the one on the left is shorter!

is it a cheaper version? a more efficient version? a faster version? who knows! I hope you do

[Green Baron]

7 hours ago, YNM said:

Well, yeah... Except that you either will need a few electric motor (one for each powered axle or wheel) or one electric motor and a gearbox etc. still, and I wonder would the chassis-with-battery (that's how they often do it) etc. would cope with crash tests and such. And how far they can go as well - 500 miles (800 km) is honestly really paltry apparently compared to how far I can go (in a simulation, admittably) on standard fuel tank Scania COE 4x2 - 2000 km. And how bloody long it takes to "fill" one up !

*snip*

Yeah, it might be too early for an electric long range truck for full commercial use. It'll probably need more legal "stimuli" fpr them to be used widely, if at all in the near future.

3 hours ago, StupidAndy said:

am I crazy or are there 2 different types of semis? the one on the left seems smaller...

One of the huts has a sleeper under roof and a coffee machine for those who spend several days in them. The other is just planned for shorter trips without that. Technically they are probably the same.

Edited November 19, 2017 by Green Baron

[LordFerret]

My error, it wasn't SoCal I'd heard about, it was Colorado. The partner involved was from SoCal (Los Angeles, "Arrivo").
http://www.denverpost.com/2017/11/14/arrivo-hyperloop-inspired-test-track-colorado/

 

Musk is like a Popular Science magazine... lots of ideas he's trying to make come true, other people's ideas.

[YNM]

12 hours ago, StupidAndy said:

am I crazy or are there 2 different types of semis? the one on the left seems smaller...

see! the one on the left is shorter!

is it a cheaper version? a more efficient version? a faster version? who knows! I hope you do

I guess it's a sleeper and a day cab.

Are those low-profile tires ? In a bloody truck ???

 

All looks like it's ripped off some futuristic films. I hope that's not final in any way.

 

12 hours ago, PakledHostage said:

I was thinking of their self driving technology when I wrote my earlier post, but I also think it is unfair to equate a modern Tesla with an electric car from 100 years ago. Battery technology, motor control systems, manufacturing techniques and materials, and on and on have all advanced sufficiently in the intervening years to make the comparison ridiculous. They are no more alike than a modern Mercedes is like the Benz-Patent Motorwagen.

Well, mention everyone in the last century then. It's not only theirs.

8 hours ago, Green Baron said:

Yeah, it might be too early for an electric long range truck for full commercial use. It'll probably need more legal "stimuli" fpr them to be used widely, if at all in the near future.

Yep. AFAIK in America they still don't have the likes of Euro ratings up to the really ridiculous limits (like Euro VI) or so ?

Also, how does a full electric compare to a diesel-electric hybrid ? I mean, trucks can go idle a long time... Keeping the engine running just enough to keep it going at a slight hill directly while storing enough in batteries to get from a standing start up the tallest incline in the US would be enough ?

[PakledHostage]

38 minutes ago, YNM said:

Well, mention everyone in the last century then. It's not only theirs.

But again, that's a ridiculous argument. Traditional auto manufacturing corporations like Mercedes, GM, VW etc have value that results from how their in-house technology allows them to make money. Sure some of the ideas that they are using were invented by others but as a corporate entity, each of these companies have heir own unique capability to generate profits. Tesla is no different. They've hung their hat on their self driving technology, their battery technology and their supply chain management. Some of it may need further refinement, but it still has enough value that people are willing to give them money to iron out those wrinkles in very reasonable anticipation of a future pay off.

[LordFerret]

59 minutes ago, YNM said:

I mean, trucks can go idle a long time... Keeping the engine running just enough to ...

No mention has been made yet of reefers (as in a refrigerated truck, not the stuff you smoke). How is an electric long-haul truck going to handle that? I don't have any statistic available, but I'd be willing to bet (here in the USA) most trucks haul foodstuffs requiring refrigeration.

[YNM]

1 hour ago, PakledHostage said:

But again, that's a ridiculous argument. Traditional auto manufacturing corporations like Mercedes, GM, VW etc have value that results from how their in-house technology allows them to make money. Sure some of the ideas that they are using were invented by others but as a corporate entity, each of these companies have heir own unique capability to generate profits. Tesla is no different. They've hung their hat on their self driving technology, their battery technology and their supply chain management. Some of it may need further refinement, but it still has enough value that people are willing to give them money to iron out those wrinkles in very reasonable anticipation of a future pay off.

By "everyone" I mean battery manufacturers, other electrical system research.

"Traditional" manufacturers also strive for what Tesla is now doing, esp. in Europe (or european makers), and let's not forget the Japanese. AFAIK what Tesla is striving to do is lessen the costs of these things by being entirely dedicated to electric vehicle and hoping to rake a huge momentum to ensure the production's moving.

For self-driving, I'll be honest, they might be just working in the US. I can't see them works out the Magic Roundabout for instance...