doug

That quote is from the Governor's press release which I linked above (post #15). Oddly the info doesn't appear anywhere on Tesla's website.

Cobos

What might solve the range issue and at the same time let Tesla keep their initial announcement would be 2 different modes like the Karma has. In sport mode the Whitestar does the 0-60 in 6 secs and is very aggressive, but the range suffers. In long-range mode you do get the 225miles range but acceleration is limited and possibly top speed. That way you can offer both and satisfy both the hypermilers and racers. I at least would love a feature like that. It's same kind of thinking a laptop maker uses to get the best battery performance they can get.

Cobos

doug

I think the Roadster already has driving modes like you describe. The Karma's two modes are very different, one uses the ICE, the other doesn't.
The range number, however, is dictated by the EPA driving cycle and doesn't have much to do with the "mode".

Kardax

EV motor power output has basically zero impact on efficiency.

The difference has to be in the battery side of the equation. It's gonna be bigger than the Roadster, so it'll need a bigger (at least in terms of capacity) battery than the Roadster has.

This suggests that a future Roadster model will have either longer range or less weight as the higher-capacity battery tech moves there.

-Ryan

stopcrazypp

But I remember quite clearly that the Roadster can go into a "half torque" mode that significantly increases the remaining range, so there is still probably some relation between power output and efficiency, though in general the efficiency of an EV shouldn't vary too much based on power.

__________________
Because there are tons of crazy people in this world...

Cobos

Yes the Roadster has a 10% left of battery power limp-mode which might be similar to the Valet mode.

So as stopcrazypp says I assume there are some connection between how much power you can draw from the batteries and the range. Compared to the Roadster I'm sure they are using more powerfull individual cells than the Roadster does, they should be about 20% better for the same price... This might be all it takes if they can make the sedan pretty light, and with a low air resistance.

Cobos

doug

It's a bit of semantics, but there is a difference between the power a motor is capable of delivering and the amount of power it is actually delivering at a given moment. I believe what Kardax meant was that putting a less powerful motor in the sedan won't necessarily improve the range. But certainly driving less aggressively (i.e. requesting less power) will. A limp mode simply limits how quickly you can accelerate and top speed. This is something you could also do with your right foot.
My point was that the range number is obtained by using a specific driving pattern, dictated by the EPA. This is independent of the kind of driving modes you are talking about, though there probably is an optimum regen profile.
This sort of technical discussion is probably more appropriately continued in this thread: http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/futur...whitestar.html


.

doug

I had this to say over at ABG:
"1. SFGate says it will be called "Model S". Many Tesla fans had figured it might be called the "Tesla Sedan". I guess neither are a real name, but Model S follows the no-risk alphabet soup common in recent years."
I have to say I don't really like Whitestar for anything more than a codename.

Yes, that thread already exists here: http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/futur...ame-ideas.html
As they say on larger forum sites, and will become more important as this site grows, "Search is your friend."

doug

Manntis

You expect reporters to know things like Pacific Standard Time becomes Pacific Daylight Time in the summer? It's like you expect them to know facts and such! ;)

__________________
If you keep your head in the sand on global warming, you'll get water up your nose