backtop


Print 81 comment(s) - last by phxfreddy.. on Mar 21 at 5:11 PM


  (Source: Tesla Motors)

  (Source: Tesla Motors)
Tesla Motors laughs at naysayers and begins production of its first all-electric vehicle.

Naysayers have lampooned the all-electric Tesla Roadster ever since DailyTech first covered the sleek two-seater in late 2006. Some balked at the $100,000 price tag, others complained about the vehicle being vaporware, and many laughed at the idea of "temporary transmissions" while production units were still being developed.

Despite the whispers from an increasingly rowdy audience, Tesla persisted. In late January, the company announced that it passed all Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. The company also noted at the time that regular production for the vehicle would commence on March 17.

Today, Tesla announced that production began for its Roadster. The company is slowly churning out Roadsters and hopes to build as many as 100 units per month by early 2009.

According to Tesla Motors President and CEO Ze'ev Drori, the company's main focus now is to expand the "sales and service arena marked by the opening of our Los Angeles store and Menlo Park store in the near future."

To the naysayers, Drori adds, "With this milestone, the Tesla Roadster is the only zero emission electric vehicle in production today -- this is in stark contrast to the others who only talk about their future plans. Tesla’s remarkable achievement validates the vision, ingenuity, hard work and commitment of Tesla’s employees."

It is truly a great achievement for Tesla Motors and the automotive industry in general. Hopefully for Tesla, the public's eagerness to learn more about the all-electric Roadster will translate into sales for more mainstream future models including a rumored sedan and crossover utility vehicle.

For those that haven't been following the Tesla Roadster's development, the vehicle features a 3-phase, 4-pole electric motor which develops 248 HP. It can accelerate to 60 MPH in under 4 seconds with its two-speed transmission -- early production models are equipped with a temporary one-speed transmission which limits 0-60 times to 5.7 seconds. Top speed for the Tesla Roadster is 125 MPH and its can travel 220 miles on a single charge. It takes roughly 3.5 hours to charge the lithium-ion battery pack.

The 2008 Roadster production is already sold out as Tesla Motors took reservations for over 900 units. The company is now accepting orders for 2009 models which will hopefully come with the production two-speed transmission already installed.





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

...
By UppityMatt on 3/17/2008 8:18:39 PM , Rating: 1
"Top speed for the Tesla Roadster is 125 HP"

I think you wanted MPH.




RE: ...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 3/17/2008 8:23:07 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I wanted at least 150 MPH to keep up with the rest of the small roadster crowd ;)


RE: ...
By Samus on 3/17/2008 8:31:21 PM , Rating: 2
Still faster than an MX-5 1.8 ;)

But honestly, when do you go 125MPH, even on a track? And considering this car can get to its top speed faster than any gas roadster out there because of its torque, the top speed is really just a number.


RE: ...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 3/17/08, Rating: 0
RE: ...
By therealnickdanger on 3/17/08, Rating: 0
RE: ...
By Parhel on 3/17/2008 10:29:17 PM , Rating: 2
I just looked at the G8 Sport Truck from your link. I'm at a loss for words. If you become sick easily, I wouldn't recommend clicking that link.


RE: ...
By ebakke on 3/18/2008 12:57:31 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. What the hell is GM doing?? It's no wonder why they can't sell vehicles.


RE: ...
By whirabomber on 3/18/2008 6:27:57 AM , Rating: 1
The G8 sports truck is a move in a good direction. Why buy a large 4x4 pickup to commute in when all the consumer wants is a vehicle that can haul a lawn mower once every 6 months? The G8 sports truck and it's chevy counterpart prevents a vehicle that not only looks halfway decent, but uses much less gas than the estimated on average 16mpg a consumer would get from a pickup.

The G8 sports truck looks like a refreshing change from the standard fair of mini-trucks, glorified station wagons (read SUV), and 5-doors. As every vehicle in any give class look almost just like every other vehicle in the class the G8 is break from the monotony of the stock car mentality of today's designers.

I will agree that the G8 sports truck is in a niche market currently owned by the subaru baja. However, I'd sign up for a vehicle with a low center of gravity that can haul a couple of sheets plywood and 2x4's plus get 20+ mpg any day.


RE: ...
By theapparition on 3/18/2008 10:01:39 AM , Rating: 2
The G8 sports truck in no way competes with the Subaru Baja. If anything, it is a revival of the old "El Camino", which was a high powered bastardized car/truck hybrid. The G8 sports truck will be faster than most mustangs and just as fast as SRT-8 branded Dodges. If anything, it is closer related to the Dodge Magnum (truck vs. wagon).

As for why GM is doing this, the real question is why not? The car is already designed and selling in Austrailia as the Holden Ute. If you already have something made, and from the ground up made to pass US safety standards, what extra does it take to bring it here and market it? GM has already done their homework. There is a small niche market for this. Just as there is for the Challenger or the Ford Thunderbird, Scion xB, or Chrysler Prowler.

They call this polarizing marketing. 90% of the people who see it will hate it, but out of the 10% that like it, a very high percentage will "Have to have it". It's a way to differentiate yourself in the field of "me-to" sedans. Gone are the days when you see a new nameplate live on for 30+ years.


RE: ...
By whirabomber on 3/18/2008 10:32:19 AM , Rating: 2
Ok, the Baja has 4 doors and a 4 banger, but the same concept.


RE: ...
By 67STANG on 3/18/2008 11:30:29 AM , Rating: 2
361 HP and no weight over the rear tires does not mean this will be faster than most Mustangs, it just means it will put on a better smoke show....

Also, this thing looks like vomit on wheels. Looks like Pontiac designers hit another home run, following up on vehicles like the Aztec and Vibe. (Barf!).

Back to the Tesla though, while I love this car (and could never afford one), I think it at least gets "the ball rolling" for others to create electric cars we can afford. Besides, I'm tired of paying $500/mo. for gas.


RE: ...
By theapparition on 3/18/2008 11:57:24 AM , Rating: 4
I suggest you re-read my original post. This is not a concept......it is a re-badged Holden Ute. Just like the G8 is a re-badged Holden Commodore, and how the GTO was a modified re-badged Holden Monaro.

quote:
361 HP and no weight over the rear tires does not mean this will be faster than most Mustangs, it just means it will put on a better smoke show....

Performance results already exist (Holden Ute), so no need on my part (or anyone else's) to speculate.

quote:
Also, this thing looks like vomit on wheels. Looks like Pontiac designers hit another home run, following up on vehicles like the Aztec and Vibe. (Barf!).

Pontiac didn't design this. Again, it is made by Holden (GM's Austrailian subsidiary) and imported. Now, if you wanted to say that Pontiac management was crazy for bringing it over, then that would be a valid point, but don't denigrate Pontiac designers for something they didn't do.

Personally, I don't like the car, but as I said in my original comment, they are looking for the 10% that like it. Obviously, you and I are part of that 90% catagory.


RE: ...
By 67STANG on 3/18/2008 4:12:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Performance results already exist (Holden Ute), so no need on my part (or anyone else's) to speculate.


There happens to be a reason why you don't see too many (almost none) drag racing trucks. Getting a truck to hook is very difficult-- you just can't get the tires planted like you can on a car.

Also, the 361hp option is just that, it's the top option for the vehicle... If you want to go apples to apples, you should compare the mustang's top option (Shelby GT500KR). But then again, it couldn't even compete against a standard GT500.

I stand corrected on the Holden design, but shouldn't I be allowed to put them down for the Vibe and the Aztek? Or were those also imported?


RE: ...
By theapparition on 3/18/2008 9:55:41 PM , Rating: 2
Ahhh, I see now that the only reason you are debating anything was because I said it could beat most mustangs. And that is true, considering that most mustangs sold are also the V6 models. So not sure why you even brought up the engine choices, since the mustang has them too.

quote:
If you want to go apples to apples, you should compare the mustang's top option (Shelby GT500KR). But then again, it couldn't even compete against a standard GT500.

Apples to apples is always subjective. Fords top offering compared to the Ute's, or would price be better where it is more comparable to the GT. In any event, I don't think they're comparable, since I doubt the market for the G8 truck will steal any marketshare from the Mustang. I mean, why not compare this to a Ferrari, or a McLauren. Those comparisons would be about at equally useless. However, when dealing with strait facts, the Ute puts in low 5sec 0-60 times and low 13sec 1/4 mile times. Take that as you will, but it will beat most stock unmodified mustangs.

Funny, since every time this is brought up on the mustang boards, you ford guys all scream how the GT500KR shouldn't be compared to the Z06 or Viper because they cost more. But then again, the GT500KR can't even compete against a standard C6 and gets thourouly slammed in every single test catagory (even with the 100hp advantage). So what would be an Apples to Apples comparison then?

quote:
There happens to be a reason why you don't see too many (almost none) drag racing trucks. Getting a truck to hook is very difficult-- you just can't get the tires planted like you can on a car.

There have been many high powered trucks that are able to break into a 13 sec 1/4 mile from the factory, something a standard Mustang GT can barely do (high 13sec car). Let see. Fords own Lightning, GM Scyclone, Dodge has one too. Now, if your talking true drag racing in the 9s or even 8s, I'd agree, but we're not. We're talking stock cars off the showroom floor, so not too difficult to do in a truck. I own and run one of the fastest IRS cars in the world, pulling consistant low 9's so I know how difficult it is to launch.


RE: ...
By Canizorro on 3/18/2008 10:46:00 AM , Rating: 2
I prefer the look of the Saturn Sky. Do you know if they are also going to come out with a coupe version of the Sky?


RE: ...
By Spuke on 3/18/2008 1:38:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Do you know if they are also going to come out with a coupe version of the Sky?
No coupe version of the Sky.


RE: ...
By manoj252 on 3/18/2008 1:01:45 PM , Rating: 2
I agree that it is a beautiful car to look at and drool over. However, I rented a Pontiac Solstice recently and I was not that impressed with how it handled. The current convertible version has no trunk space whatsoever though the Targa should show an improvement on both counts.


RE: ...
By Spuke on 3/18/2008 1:37:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I rented a Pontiac Solstice recently and I was not that impressed with how it handled.
A LOT of owners feel the same and corrected it with different tires. Now people are having the dealer install different tires before delivery. Hopefully, GM will address that in the future.


RE: ...
By tomosius on 3/17/2008 8:44:56 PM , Rating: 2
125 seems low at first sight, but it would be enough in most of the situations.
Plus, most of the pleasure of driving a powerful car comes from acceleration, not going really fast. I start getting scared when I go over 140 in my friends car, but the accelerating is fun ;]


RE: ...
By ThisSpaceForRent on 3/17/2008 11:13:20 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know passing people going 60 when you're doing 130 can be interesting too. However, I have to agree with you. Reading about the top speed you do feel like you'd be slighted buying the car, but you don't need to go that fast. What's more important in daily driving is acceleration, that can get you out of trouble.


RE: ...
By Spuke on 3/18/2008 12:54:19 AM , Rating: 2
I don't live in the city so my "acceleration from a stop" opportunities are very limited. I'm more interested in high speed acceleration, and to some extent, top speed. 125 is too low for me. 155 would be better although my present car does 140 and that's fine by me.


RE: ...
By ebakke on 3/18/2008 12:59:25 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
125 is too low for me. 155 would be better although my present car does 140 and that's fine by me

Such different lives we lead.


RE: ...
By Spuke on 3/18/2008 10:28:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Such different lives we lead.
Fascinating, isn't it?


RE: ...
By TSS on 3/18/2008 9:44:52 AM , Rating: 2
i'm from europe so using km/h, and 125mph is 200 km/h. the top speed here, on highways, is 120 km/h. the highest i know of in europe is austria which is working on a 160 km/h test plan or something. excluded, of course, the german autobahn, but there has been talk about limiting that too.

now, i'm not sure but i believe the american speed limit was 60mph right? so, if 125mph doesn't do it for you, i'd kindly request to turn yourself in at your local police office at any given time.


RE: ...
By theapparition on 3/18/2008 10:10:36 AM , Rating: 2
The american speed limit is not 60mph. Speed limits are governed by the states (within federal guidelines) based on the road in question.

For most highways, 55mph was the defacto-standard. For many interstates, speed limits have increased to 65mph, with some stretches going to 70mph.

Some highways in sparsely populated areas have limits set on "Reasonable and Prudent" (basically no speed limit based on weather conditions).

Then there's some car events I go to where the police shut down highways for public access and allow us to blast down at over 200mph. :)

So, to answer your question, there is no set "American speed limit".


RE: ...
By SilthDraeth on 3/18/2008 10:33:33 AM , Rating: 2
Arizona has 75 and I believe a few places with 80.


RE: ...
By Spuke on 3/18/2008 10:41:15 AM , Rating: 2
Out here in the west, most speed limits are 75 mph. Some parts of Texas are 80 mph. California is 70 mph. Oregon is 65 mph. But the traffic (the legal drivers anyways), goes between 75-90 mph depending on the freeway. In the 75 mph states, people drive a bit quicker and on my Arizona drives I've seen over 100 by a good portion of the traffic. People drive a little slower on the Vegas runs because of the heavier traffic but there's still a ton of cars doing 90 mph.


RE: ...
By 67STANG on 3/18/2008 11:32:15 AM , Rating: 2
Has anyone been to Montana? Drive as fast as you want while the sun is up. (Watch out for deer though).


RE: ...
By JoshuaBuss on 3/18/2008 4:14:05 PM , Rating: 2
I was just gonna say.. I've heard montana doesn't have any set limits during the day.


RE: ...
By Spuke on 3/18/2008 7:14:29 PM , Rating: 2
Montana has had a 75 mph speed limit since June 1999.


RE: ...
By TITAN1080 on 3/18/08, Rating: -1
RE: ...
By cgadragon on 3/18/2008 2:14:20 AM , Rating: 2
I've got a 1.8L MX-5...had it up to 135MPH on level ground (drag limited...maybe I had a tail wind? I didn't look at the wx forecast.)


RE: ...
By Calin on 3/18/2008 7:29:14 AM , Rating: 2
This time to top speed is based on the average power the engine/motor can supply during the acceleration. As long as you keep your motor in a maximum power envelope, you should get the best acceleration.
In this regard, the one speed transmission uses the high torque at low rpm to give quite a bit of power to the wheels. Meanwhile, a gasoline engine will use its many gears to give power to the ground - a low gear at low speed (high engine rpm, high engine power) and a high gear at high speed (high engine rpm, high engine power).


RE: ...
By FITCamaro on 3/18/2008 9:14:28 AM , Rating: 1
Uh electric motors have less and less torque the higher the "rpms" go. It's not going to pull like it does from 0-60 all the way to 120.

And I've done 140 on public highways. I don't stay at that speed, but its fun to take a jaunt up to it for a few seconds for the adrenaline rush and slow back down. I'm just careful and do it with no one around me on a road I know is flat.


"only zero emission electric vehicle"
By Flunk on 3/17/2008 11:36:06 PM , Rating: 1
"only zero emission electric vehicle"?

What about golf carts, low speed electric vehicles, electric trains, trolleys, subways, etc. I think maybe you mean only 2 seater zero emission sports car.

Oh wait, what about the emissions from the generation of the power? If your power comes from coal you could conceivably be worse off than a gasoline-powered car.




RE: "only zero emission electric vehicle"
By Squilliam on 3/18/2008 12:51:53 AM , Rating: 4
Power plants are vastly more efficient than the internal combustion engine, circa 20-25% to over 50%. The power distribution network is more efficient than getting gas from a gas station. The emission controls can be much greater at a power plant too, due to centralisation. I would put the roadster at, at least twice as energy efficient as a Prius.


RE: "only zero emission electric vehicle"
By Spuke on 3/18/2008 12:56:07 AM , Rating: 2
ICE's can range from below 20% to over 40% efficiency. It depends on the engine. Some are just better built and better engineered than others.


RE: "only zero emission electric vehicle"
By djc208 on 3/18/2008 7:27:05 AM , Rating: 3
40% outside of a diesel is pushing it, and even with an oil burner that's high. But that's also asuming optimum conditions, the problem with a standard gas engine is that it has to operate all over it's RPM range with various loads. That peak efficiency is going to be at a certain engine speed and load which ideally the transmission fights to keep as much as possible but then we usually ruin it by slowing down or speeding up even just cruising on the highway.

Then there is idleing and coasting losses which is just wasted energy.


RE: "only zero emission electric vehicle"
By Calin on 3/18/2008 7:47:56 AM , Rating: 2
And waiting in traffic with the air conditioning working, and so on


By Spuke on 3/18/2008 7:16:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And waiting in traffic with the air conditioning working, and so on
How much of a decrease in thermal efficiency happens in this situation?


By theapparition on 3/18/2008 12:03:06 PM , Rating: 2
There is some debate on what actually requires more energy, including the cost of mining for raw materials and manufacturing of hazardous by-products (batteries). In the end, though, I think that electric cars will be the future.

And I like another point you brought up, that centralizing power generation means tighter controls on emmissions. However, for electric cars to become mainstream, we need massive changes in our power infrastructure to support the load.


RE: "only zero emission electric vehicle"
By MAIA on 3/18/2008 10:35:39 AM , Rating: 2
What about the batteries ?

How many "emissions" were needed to build those ?


By jRaskell on 3/18/2008 12:21:13 PM , Rating: 2
If the battery is good for 1,000 charges (and I believe it's actually more than that, but let's be conservative), at 220miles per charge, that's 220,000 miles before you need to replace the battery.

220,000 miles is going to be about 44 oil changes, assuming 5000 miles between oil changes. At 5 quarts per oil change, that's 220 quarts of oil you'd consume in an ICE for every battery consumed in an electric car.

From an emmissions/production standpoint, it doesn't really look like either vehicle design is exactly leagues ahead of the other.


I've driven this car!
By timmiser on 3/17/2008 8:34:16 PM , Rating: 5
That's right. I've driven this bad boy. Took it up to 125 MPH easy. The crazy thing that you must get used to is the silence of the electric motor. You hear the wind and road noise and any tire squeak but that's it! The acceleration is very good also. The only little issue is that I had was when I was racing 4 other (gas powered) cars and I crashed it into a light pole at over 100 MPH but to my surprise, there wasn't a single scratch on it. I lost the race but in a rematch 5 minutes later, I was finally able to pull off the victory over those other cars.

-PGR4




RE: I've driven this car!
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 3/17/2008 8:35:36 PM , Rating: 3
Damnit, you had me up until "I was racing 4 other"

:(


RE: I've driven this car!
By jhinoz on 3/17/2008 9:07:11 PM , Rating: 2
So you're the STIG?


RE: I've driven this car!
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 3/17/2008 9:12:13 PM , Rating: 2
The Stig would be listening to power ballads or self-help tapes while driving instead of the "eery silence".


RE: I've driven this car!
By jhinoz on 3/17/2008 9:17:20 PM , Rating: 2
If the stig was driving all he'd hear would be the screetch of burning rubber.

Maybe they'll do a "star in an electric car" instead of the "star in a cheap car" bit?


RE: I've driven this car!
By ThisSpaceForRent on 3/18/2008 9:14:00 AM , Rating: 2
God I love Top Gear. I like to sit in my living room naked, covered in used motor oil and watch the show. Well, not really, but still an awesome show. Best car show ever imo.


Must be great for city diving.
By Warren21 on 3/17/2008 11:27:21 PM , Rating: 2
Although acceleration is limited by it's current first-gen transmission, the amount of torque theoretically available from electric engines is amazing. Imagine getting smoked off the red-light by this thing: a 'glorified golf-cart' (generalized redneck opinion... completely untrue, however).

Also, the way gas pricing is headed the plug-n-play capability is great. Were it not for the high-price, I'd definitely buy one. I'll have to settle on wanting one, instead...

Here's to hoping the electric car has reversed it's 20th-century death sentence.




RE: Must be great for city diving.
By Spuke on 3/18/2008 12:57:54 AM , Rating: 2
Once the larger manufacturers get in on this, the prices will fall and adoption will be much higher. Right now, it's just a niche car.


RE: Must be great for city diving.
By djc208 on 3/18/2008 8:04:37 AM , Rating: 2
I think the all electric cars will be a niche for quite a while due to range and recharge time limitations.

I think the progression is/will be: the parallel hybrids you we have now (prius, Camry, etc.) are the first step.

The series hybrids (Chevy Volt) are the next step. The engine can be purpose built which improves effeciency and emissions with the benefits of the electric drive train.

This may/will change over to the fuel cell eventually since all that has to happen it to remove the engine/generator and replace it with a fuel cell stack.

Eventually some combination of all electric and hybrid electric vehicles will become the norm, the wild card here being battery technology. If something big comes along to reduce recharge times and improve range then we could see a very short time spent in these other phases.


RE: Must be great for city diving.
By molgenit on 3/18/2008 8:11:13 AM , Rating: 3
The 220 mile range and 3.5 hour re-charge tome look pretty good to me. This model (in cheaper varaitions of course)may accelerate the time line.


RE: Must be great for city diving.
By molgenit on 3/18/2008 8:12:53 AM , Rating: 2
time not tome, got to really preview the preview ;)


RE: Must be great for city diving.
By jRaskell on 3/18/2008 12:36:33 PM , Rating: 2
IMO, battery powered electric cars will be a niche. Electric cars won't come into their own until they're able to switch over to capacitor based storage solutions. this will provide them a number of benefits over batteries:

1. With an adequate recharge station, a large scale capacitor could be recharged in a matter of minutes.

2. Caps can be recharged literally millions of times, compared to batteries thousands of time.

3. Caps can take full advantage of regenerative technologies. Batteries slow recharge abilities limits how much power can be recaptured from such technologies.

I personally don't see fuel cells as being the technology to move to for commuter vehicles, or even just vehicles in general. Establishing the infrastructure for supplying the fuel would be far more expensive than just setting up electric charging stations. Hydrogen could certainly still be used as a source of energy, but in Power Plants, converted to electricity, and distributed for use in electrically powered devices (vehicles included).

All that being said, what should be done is rarely what actually gets done. The sad truth is, the Political arena is far more influential on this stuff than simple logic and reason.


By FITCamaro on 3/18/2008 9:21:34 AM , Rating: 1
I'd rather buy a $35,000 car and be able to buy gas for the next 10 years. Then buy another $35,000 car and buy whatever fuel it uses for 10 more years. Then I might be even with the cost of this car.


By theapparition on 3/18/2008 10:29:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Imagine getting smoked off the red-light by this thing:

Not going to happen to me, ;)
Even for about the same amount of money.

I'll say this. I love the gas engine, I do. I love the sound. Nothing compares to the roar of a big-block engine with headers flowing through a quality exhaust. The sound is soul-ful. Just so.....American.

Then you look at the complexity, the problems, the smell, the emmissions, etc. and the gas engine (or diesel) doesn't look so good anymore. Kind of like the wild nymph you had fun with for a few months but now you realize you have to live with her. With that in mind, electric cars will be the future, but you'll always want that little fun on the side. There's not much fun with electric cars.


lame
By headbox on 3/18/2008 2:25:13 AM , Rating: 2
If all that matters is speed, any modern sportbike can smoke any modern sportscar- at a fraction of the cost. My Honda CBR 600 was under $3k. I get 50 mpg, insurance is $10/mo, and no production car can catch it.




RE: lame
By 306maxi on 3/18/2008 4:43:24 AM , Rating: 4
Yes but the unfortunate problem with bikes is that an accident that would be a fender bender if 2 cars were involved can be a fatal accident with a bike involved. One of my friends didn't see a car indicating and went to overtake the car and while he only just caught the bumper of the car he was thrown off his bike, then thrown up by a kerb, hit a stationary car parked on the verge and died about 5 hours later. All about 300m from home too.

That's enough to make me never want to jump on a bike on a public road. Enjoy your bike and the performance that comes with it but do take care now because the human body is a fragile thing.


RE: lame
By molgenit on 3/18/2008 8:14:54 AM , Rating: 2
In several countries ER doctors refer to motorcycles as donorcycles.


RE: lame
By FITCamaro on 3/18/2008 9:33:13 AM , Rating: 2
There's several production cars that can catch it.

And when someone hits me, I have a steel cage with airbags protecting me. You have a bucket that keeps your brains off the pavement.


RE: lame
By 306maxi on 3/18/2008 5:35:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And when someone hits me, I have a steel cage with airbags protecting me. You have a bucket that keeps your brains off the pavement.


Thanks for pointing that out. I'll now remember coming across my friend 2 minutes after his accident when he was in the process of dying and think well at least his helmet kept his brain contained......

What an insensitive and crass thing to say.


RE: lame
By theapparition on 3/18/2008 10:57:18 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If all that matters is speed, any modern sportbike can smoke any modern sportscar

A CBR 600 can go a mid 3sec 0-60 and mid 11sec 1/4 mile (according to Honda). There are several production cars that can beat that, although none are anywhere near $3k.

Motorcycles are crazy fast, but are much more difficult to live with than a car. I'd hazzard a guess that almost all bike owners also own cars, or have easy access to a car.


RE: lame
By phxfreddy on 3/21/2008 5:11:44 PM , Rating: 2
Compare a motor bike to a car. I did not know they let guys off the short bus use computers.


Hey Jay Leno, take one for a drive.
By mvrx on 3/17/2008 10:42:26 PM , Rating: 2
Jay Leno is a car nut. I'd like to see him driving electric cars and giving his thumbs up or thumbs down.




RE: Hey Jay Leno, take one for a drive.
By Spuke on 3/17/2008 11:09:17 PM , Rating: 2
I think Leno's already got some electric cars. Part of his vast collection. Have you ever seen his steam powered car?


RE: Hey Jay Leno, take one for a drive.
By Schrag4 on 3/18/2008 9:42:08 AM , Rating: 2
Doesn't Jay have a jet engine powered motorcycle? (I'm sure I butchered some terms there)


By MAIA on 3/18/2008 10:52:23 AM , Rating: 2
Yes he has. It's a Y2K or something...
Here:
http://br.video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=642338


RE: Hey Jay Leno, take one for a drive.
By MAIA on 3/18/2008 10:42:24 AM , Rating: 2
Isn't that called a "train" or something ? ...


By Spuke on 3/18/2008 1:56:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Isn't that called a "train" or something ? ...
Not sure what he calls it.


By Brandon Hill (blog) on 3/18/2008 11:48:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Jay Leno is a car nut. I'd like to see him driving electric cars and giving his thumbs up or thumbs down.


Ask and ye shall receive :)

http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/video_player.s...


Litiium-Ion?
By prenox on 3/17/2008 9:11:54 PM , Rating: 4
I just hope the Lithium-Ion batteries don't come from Sony.




RE: Litiium-Ion?
By daftrok on 3/17/08, Rating: -1
RE: Litiium-Ion?
By snowbro on 3/17/2008 11:07:02 PM , Rating: 4
I think the Sony joke was funnier than your never-ending lame-o monologue...

Just my opinion...


RE: Litiium-Ion?
By exanimas on 3/18/2008 1:31:31 AM , Rating: 3
It was a Family Guy reference.


RE: Litiium-Ion?
By molgenit on 3/18/2008 8:07:09 AM , Rating: 3
Got Sony stock?


batteries
By goku on 3/17/2008 10:26:18 PM , Rating: 5
I wonder what the warranty will be on the electric batteries.




RE: batteries
By Spuke on 3/18/2008 1:58:17 PM , Rating: 2
What's the warranty on hybrid car batteries? I'd imagine both would be the same. I have no idea what Tesla's warranty is though.


100k and Everyone's Happy!
By hubajube on 3/18/2008 2:22:20 PM , Rating: 2
You people act like this is the second coming of Christ. This car is for that rich wanker that wants to show off his "greenness" to his friends. It will be bought and sold within a year after he/she tires of driving (or parked, more likely) the same car. This car doesn't mean jack. It will take a GM or a Toyota to bring this car to us. It will take GM or Toyota's vast resources to make this car cheaper for us to be and in the form we want to buy it in (4 door sedan, truck, or SUV) And more than likely they will have to reinvent the wheel because sharing tech would put Tesla out of business (not that they won't be out of business soon anyways). The Volt offers WAY more promise than niche sports cars from some already dying small car company.




LONDON CONGESTION CHARGE
By Combatcolin on 3/18/2008 2:41:27 PM , Rating: 2
Feel the delicious irony of being able to drive a sports car in central London and not have to pay the charge every day!!

Clarkson would be over the moon!




Doesn't matter how you drive it?
By 7Enigma on 3/19/2008 9:22:37 AM , Rating: 2
So I'm pondering a question that I can't come to an easy conclusion to. Maybe you folks can help me out.

Since this is electric and there is no fuel efficiency to worry about, does the range of this car remain unchanged regardless of how quickly you accelerate?

I understand obviously higher speed would reduce the range due to drag and requiring more load on the batteries, but say I have this car on the same 10 stop trip (ie 10 lights). With my 2000 Trans Am there would be a large difference in fuel economy if I rip off the line and accelerate as quickly as possible to say 65mph rather than a slow jaunt rowing through the gears.

But this car has a single (for now) gear, and will eventually have only 2. With the single gear while it doesn't seem logical at first glance at every given speed you will be at X draw on the batteries. Doesn't it then make sense that regardless of how quickly/slowly I get to 65mph it took the same amount of energy to get there?

I also don't know about battery dynamics, but is it possible you could have LONGER range by accelerating quickly due to some inefficiency during speed up?

Comon people help me out!




"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki