Tesla Model S Performance Slays BMW M5 in Acceleration Test
October 10, 2012 12:12 PM
comment(s) - last by
Tesla Model S Performance (L) and BMW M5 (R)
(Source: Automobile Magazine)
Tesla's Model S is no joke
Some people have plenty of doubts about Tesla Motors and the Model S. The company is still struggling to
get production numbers up and is battling its way to profitability
. And the fact that federal money is being used to
fund a $7,500 tax credit
for the purchase of a $100,000 vehicle doesn't sit well with a lot of people.
However, there's no question that Tesla Motors has developed a remarkable car in the Model S. From its sexy exterior looks to its high-tech interior, the Model S aims to impress. And now, we're still learning that the five-door hatchback has some
serious performance credentials backing it up as well
pitted a fresh
Model S Performance
against BMW's new F10 M5. The BMW M5 ($106,695) is powered by a twin-turbo V8 engine developing a whopping 560hp and 500 lb-ft of torque (this is backed by a 7-speed dual-clutch transmission). The Model S Performance ($102,270) has a rear-mounted motor that generates 416hp and 443 lb-ft of torque.
When the two were set on the drag strip for a 0-100 mph race, the 4,640-pound Model S Performance simply walked away from the 4,347-pound M5 off the line. This stellar performance is no doubt attributed to the electric car's instant torque that is available from 0 to 5,800 RPM.
The M5 narrowed the lead towards the end of the run, but there's no question that the Model S bested BMW's high-echelon performance sedan in this particular test. However, this is just one test, and we'd like to see a complete head-to-head comparison between the two vehicles in the usual battery of acceleration, braking, and handling metrics.
To see the Model S go up against the M5, take a look at the video below:
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
RE: Still only practical as an extra vehicle
10/10/2012 2:03:36 PM
I only want that if it makes sense in the grand scheme of things. I'm presently happy with the 3.6l horizontally opposed engine that I have that produces > 300 hp and netted me over 25mpg on the trip I mentioned. Adding extra batteries and electric motors to the vehicle would make it more expensive (dear God, it already cost me enough), heavier (the enemy of vehicle performance is weight), while allowing it to be marginally more energy efficient. The engineer in me loves hybrids for the technology and squeezing out the efficiency, but the consumer in me doesn't particularly want to buy one.
The problem with hybrids is that they add a lot of complexity/expense without adding a lot of savings. If the government wasn't heavily subsidizing them in multiple ways (including both direct subsidies to buyers as well as bonus credit they provide in CAFE formulas), people wouldn't find them particularly attractive. That's why a practical EV has to be the end goal -- only one power train. Problem is, EV's aren't practical today.
You can argue (somewhat reasonably) that subsidization of hybrids will drive technologies required to develop good EV's, but that doesn't make me want to rush out and buy one.
RE: Still only practical as an extra vehicle
10/11/2012 7:28:09 AM
the enemy of vehicle performance is weight
That's not necessarily true. For traction, unless you have stiction from hot tires, their friction is proportional to the weight holding them to the road.
Weight is usually felt more in the handling/responsiveness, because a heavier gas car usually adds weight to the periphery, increasing it's moment of inertia faster than weight/friction. An EV, on the other hand, can keep its weight low and - most critically - closer to the center of mass. Compared to a gas car, it can be heavier with a
moment of inertia. That's why many reviewers said that the Fisker Karma is the best handling big car on the market (it is big despite the styling giving it a small cabin).
The future is really bright for performance PHEVs. Going from a 200kW motor to a 500kW motor adds a fraction of the weight/cost of going from a 270hp gas engine to a 670hp engine.
"Well, there may be a reason why they call them 'Mac' trucks! Windows machines will not be trucks." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer
Elon Musk: Tesla to be Cash Flow Positive Next Month, Model S Production Increased
October 5, 2012, 8:11 AM
Tesla Model S Hits 60 MPH in 3.9 Seconds, Misses EPA Range Estimates by 11%
August 29, 2012, 8:48 AM
Quick Note: Range-Topping Tesla Model S Signature Performance EV Already Sold Out
June 4, 2012, 1:47 PM
Tesla Model S Officially Priced from $49,990 after Tax Credit, Available Summer '12
December 20, 2011, 9:44 PM
Ford, Toyota, and Universal Pictures Celebrate "Back to the Future Day' in Style
October 21, 2015, 4:19 PM
Consumer Reports Flexes Muscle, Hits Slumping Tesla Motors Stock
October 20, 2015, 4:13 PM
Debunked: Beneath the Lies, Nigerian "Pee Generator" Is Still Pissing Into the Wind
October 19, 2015, 7:53 PM
Hot Air? President Obama, G7 Pledge to Eliminate Most Fossil Fuel Use by 2100
June 8, 2015, 5:40 PM
Study Predicts Self-Driving Vehicles Could Rake in Billions
March 6, 2015, 8:34 AM
Dual-Motor Tesla Model S P85D's "Insane Mode" Shocks Passengers
January 28, 2015, 11:18 PM
Latest Blog Posts
Sceptre Airs 27", 120 Hz. 1080p Monitor/HDTV w/ 5 ms Response Time for $220
Dec 3, 2014, 10:32 PM
Costco Gives Employees Thanksgiving Off; Wal-Mart Leads "Black Thursday" Charge
Oct 29, 2014, 9:57 PM
"Bear Selfies" Fad Could Turn Deadly, Warn Nevada Wildlife Officials
Oct 28, 2014, 12:00 PM
The Surface Mini That Was Never Released Gets "Hands On" Treatment
Sep 26, 2014, 8:22 AM
ISIS Imposes Ban on Teaching Evolution in Iraq
Sep 17, 2014, 5:22 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information