|
While I agree that points #2-#4 are detrimental to the "best car. Period" statement, I don't think #1 is a misstep. I don't want to repeat the points in the appropriate thread. If there is a chance of a bad customer experience from supercharging the 40kWh base model, it will happen. Then we'll have a lot of anti-EV gibberish.Originally Posted by brianman
Last edited by VolkerP; 07-17-2012 at 01:00 AM. Reason: make it look more on topic
Point of clarification: IMO, the (debatable) mis-step #1 was regarding communication and expectation setting.
Truly Electric Spaceship-Like Adventure ~ Signature Model Spaceship
PLEASE NOTE: these musings are the copyrighted intellectual property of the author, and are intended as part of a conversation among the Tesla Motors Clubs membership. My words may not be quoted by any third party outside the Tesla Motors Clubs forums, without my expressed consent. Especially the NYT, which is clearly ethically challenged.
Point acknowledged. A supercharging option for the 40kWh base model would set expectations that you can do road trips with that, even when Tesla makes you sign a document that you supercharge once a day at most.
Or, more simply, just share the fact early that there are technical reasons (or financial reasons -- too many chargers needed or whatever other reason) rather than "leading on" some of the "base" model buyers with an unquashed expectation that SCs will work for them. I'm referring to the "October surprise" of "Supercharging: Not Available" at Model S Options and Pricing | Tesla Motors.
Editor's Note: The phrasing "leading on" is a bit more charged than intended. I was trying to represent the posts I remember reading.
Truly Electric Spaceship-Like Adventure ~ Signature Model Spaceship
PLEASE NOTE: these musings are the copyrighted intellectual property of the author, and are intended as part of a conversation among the Tesla Motors Clubs membership. My words may not be quoted by any third party outside the Tesla Motors Clubs forums, without my expressed consent. Especially the NYT, which is clearly ethically challenged.
Looks like JP has moved "TheStreet" investment website for Tesla bashing and more or less rehashing is Axion pumping from SA
This is just too good. So one of Mr Petersen's favorite rants is that EV's are toys for the rich and any tax refund is obscene. I wonder how he feels about the potential tax refund available for the $45,000 Residential Energy Storage Hub that people can buy as a whole house backup and power conditioner system, which happens to be built around the Axion PbC battery?
I also wonder how he'd feel about Tesla owners buying one, in conjunction with a solar system, to allow true nighttime charging from stored solar energy, emissions free, which completely kills his "coal powered" EV that's dirtier than a Prius?
http://www.cepro.com/article/rosewat...ps_on_steroids
For a battery that is smaller than a LEAF pack and costs 10k more than a LEAF, I'd rather just buy a LEAF with the V2Home attachment, then I have a battery backup that can drive.
Good find JRP3, his system gets 15,000 in rebates and is an extravagance, most blue collar people do not have solar, and even fewer would even put out 45,000 to get off the grid.
And the economics of such as system, if a grid connection is available, NEVER pan out. They are much worse than an EV, as the battery has no other function.
I'm thinking it's more targeted to power critical operations where power surges and outages could end up costing large amounts of money, as well as the few people with enough cash that the expense doesn't mean much. I also expect other companies to come out with more affordable versions, probably lithium based. It doesn't make the PbC look all that cost effective, as Petersen constantly claims.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote