You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
... Autobahn speeds are really inefficient...
Hmmm... I'm not sure. As always, correlation does not necessarily mean causation. In general, German drivers are better trained than American drivers. Perhaps the repeal of the 55mph cap reduced the average speed disparity on US roads.I... don't know. The fatality rate PPM is a bunch lower on the Autobahn because you really have to pay attention. What is the right speed given that? Or given that the PPM fatalities went down when the US federal 55mph cap was removed way back when?
I... don't know. The fatality rate PPM is a bunch lower on the Autobahn because you really have to pay attention. What is the right speed given that? Or given that the PPM fatalities went down when the US federal 55mph cap was removed way back when? What's the value of human life vs. the extra energy expended? Or lost productivity due to the lost time for going slower? What if the cars could "train" up to minimize the extra lossage? Would that change the balance?
Here's a quote from Car and Driver:100mph on German Autobahn is "normal". I have driven many times from Hamburg to Berlin, and even in a VW Golf, given the smooth surface, and the strict rules (no passing except on the left and clear that lane "right-quick"), was very comfortable at 100mph. Yes, you may call it inefficient, and I might even agree from a technical point of view; but the reality is -- it is reality over there. From a US-centric POV -- given the strict speed limits here (of course I have also driven through Nevada and Utah and Wyoming along with traffic at 80mph for hours) -- we can criticize all we want. But dpeilow said it well "even old grannies ...".
So ... TM needs to address the thermal issues for the Autobahn-centric customer.
Since you bring up weight, perhaps one of the reasons why Darryl wanted a half-size battery pack in the racing version of the Tesla is to offset some of the added weight of the liquid cooling.Until there is a significant improvement in electrical energy storage I'm not sure it's worth Tesla's while increasing the weight of the vehicle for motor cooling. Prolonged high speed driving will remain the province of traditional ICEs and hybrids for some time to come. I'm not sure that the Volt could cope with Autobahns.
The ESS is built with 2C discharge rated battery cells. At 56 kWh this corresponds to fastest sustained discharge in half an hour at 112 kW ( not at 185 kW ). So top sustained ESS power corresponds to 130 mph speed.
...
As I understand higher electric power of 185 kW available corresponds to short few seconds power bursts from ESS. ESS could not deliver it for much longer than few seconds I guess. I suppose at 185 kW electric motor would overheat so it also would be able to sustain it for not too long time of seconds or may be few minutes. But few seconds is enough for acceleration into equilibrium speed at least below reasonable street speeds (say below 90 mph).
...the PEM can limit how long it can get full power.
If it were water cooled they could have considered running it longer...
There have been, however, multiple teething problems in the Tesla's development. Several weeks ago, a columnist for Automotive News attended a press drive of the Tesla in Germany. The good news: "The car offered the heart-pounding ride of a street racer," he wrote.
The bad news: "Of the three test cars offered at the Tesla presentation, one did not start. Another began emitting smoke from the lithium-ion battery compartment in the rear."