Anti-Tesla Gibberish

[dflye]

We should add to the FAQ

Just make sure it references this photo from his bio:

[ChrisgG]

Everyone was great, lots of interest in EVs ... but the Coda salesperson seemed to have his sales pitch honed around 'Tesla is built for the elite, Coda has built for the masses'. He didn't let up. He didn't care that the Model S was effectively half the price, that Gen III would be even less yet. He was a broken record.

Well he tells the truth, Tesla products for now, are for the wealthy or the ones who cut deep into their accounts because they (we) are fanboys. I'm a Fan of Tesla since I first read about Martin Eberhard wanting to build his Electric Sports car. Honestly, the main thing wich could keep me from buying it is the price Tag. I know it's competative to other cars in that league, but well it IS the league of the rich guys. And the Roadster was even more so. I absolutely believe that through the Roadster and the Model S Tesla planted the seed that people want an Electric car. A good one, a nice looking one and a fast one. They defenitely also proved that Electric Cars are real cars.

But then, the masses still have to drive with things like the Renault Twizy. Teslas Answer to that, the Gen3 is far far off. First there will be the Model X then probably 1-2 other models. They probably will come on with their own roadster... so I'd be surprised if they come before 2017. Also the Model S kinda cheats with it's 57k entry price. With that it will be a very good 2nd car as the range is quiet short, better then the others.. but still short. So for me I'd at least need the 2nd pack. Then we war at 67k, then I'm in Europe so it will be more likely 80k... gulp.

[Norbert]

First there will be the Model X then probably 1-2 other models. They probably will come on with their own roadster... so I'd be surprised if they come before 2017.

There were plans to have other models and/or the "own" Roadster, first, but my understanding is that has changed since battery development allows going towards the GenIII directly. The current plan is the GenIII will come directly after Model X (not sure if there might be other developments in parallel). The date given is still, as it "always" was, 2015/2016.

Also the Model S kinda cheats with it's 57k entry price. With that it will be a very good 2nd car as the range is quiet short, better then the others.. but still short. So for me I'd at least need the 2nd pack. Then we war at 67k, then I'm in Europe so it will be more likely 80k... gulp.

I don't see how that would be "cheating" just because perhaps it is less than *you* (or I) want. It is still more than most (if not all) other EVs offer as a max range (except Tesla's Roadster and the Rimac), and some claim an EV doesn't need to have more range than that ( a good number of people would probably only by it as a second car in the first place). I say that while being in favor of increasingly large ranges, I do think it is a major win that the Model S offers a 300 mile range.

[bonnie1194]

Well he tells the truth, Tesla products for now, are for the wealthy or the ones who cut deep into their accounts because they (we) are fanboys. I'm a Fan of Tesla since I first read about Martin Eberhard wanting to build his Electric Sports car. Honestly, the main thing wich could keep me from buying it is the price Tag. I know it's competative to other cars in that league, but well it IS the league of the rich guys. And the Roadster was even more so. I absolutely believe that through the Roadster and the Model S Tesla planted the seed that people want an Electric car. A good one, a nice looking one and a fast one. They defenitely also proved that Electric Cars are real cars.

But then, the masses still have to drive with things like the Renault Twizy. Teslas Answer to that, the Gen3 is far far off. First there will be the Model X then probably 1-2 other models. They probably will come on with their own roadster... so I'd be surprised if they come before 2017. Also the Model S kinda cheats with it's 57k entry price. With that it will be a very good 2nd car as the range is quiet short, better then the others.. but still short. So for me I'd at least need the 2nd pack. Then we war at 67k, then I'm in Europe so it will be more likely 80k... gulp.

My issue was not about whether he was wrong or right ... it was about the appropriateness of the conversation at an Earth Day event where EVs were on display for the purpose of raising public awareness (not to sell vehicles by bashing the competition).

In fairness, my interaction with other Coda reps since then has been stellar.

[favo]

I say that while being in favor of increasingly large ranges, I do think it is a major win that the Model S offers a 300 mile range.

Having a maximum range (reasonably) comparable to ICE vehicles means that some people will give Tesla models a closer look, even when they have ruled out other EV's with <100 mile range as too impractical or "toy" cars. In the end, they may re-evaluate their actual need to go that far on a daily basis and conclude that a smaller battery will indeed work for them. Getting past the initial impression that EV's are not "real" cars is very important if Tesla wants to grow the market. I think this is a valid reason to offer a 500-mile (or more) battery pack, when prices come down a bit more. Even though many don't often "need" that range, the psychological barrier it breaks down is huge.

[jerry33]

Having a maximum range (reasonably) comparable to ICE vehicles means that some people will give Tesla models a closer look, even when they have ruled out other EV's with <100 mile range as too impractical or "toy" cars. In the end, they may re-evaluate their actual need to go that far on a daily basis and conclude that a smaller battery will indeed work for them. Getting past the initial impression that EV's are not "real" cars is very important if Tesla wants to grow the market. I think this is a valid reason to offer a 500-mile (or more) battery pack, when prices come down a bit more. Even though many don't often "need" that range, the psychological barrier it breaks down is huge.

It's more real than psychological in my opinion. I would much rather have a 500-700 mile range because the 300 mile range just barely competes with old fashioned cars.

Real life example:

This week I drove from Texas to Nebraska twice. The distance is just over 600 miles one way. That means the Model S would need twenty hours of charging using a 50 amp RV plug. The first ten hours are done at home so they don't really count. Then there would be two five hour charge stops along the way plus ten or eleven hours of driving making the total trip time twenty three hours. (Hopefully Denise won't bring so much luggage that I can't lay down in the back and sleep during part of the two stops.) That's the worst case. The best case would be two one hour supercharge stops making the travel time thirteen hours. However, I don't expect there to be any superchargers at the two places they would make sense for this trip (Stillwater, OK and Junction City, KS) for many years to come (if ever). Of course, I would be tickled pink if there were. A 500 mile range would only add one four hour charge stop at an RV park with no superchargers required. A 700 mile range would mean no lengthy charge stops at all.

[favo]

It's more real than psychological in my opinion. I would much rather have a 500-700 mile range because the 300 mile range just barely competes with old fashioned cars.

Yeah, personally I agree. I like to take road trips, and if I bought a really cool, expensive car like Model S, I'd want to use it and not rent a crappy ICE car or fly. 700 miles would be great, since I don't think I'll ever drive that far in a day again, but half that would be OK, since I'd certainly stop on such a long trip. (And that needs to be actual mileage with AC/heat and real highway speeds of 70 mph or so.) It will be interesting to see whether battery capacity + price or charging speed + charger prevalence will win out. A significant advance on one front could render the other mostly irrelevant. I'm kind of hoping for battery capacity/price/weight, since I like the idea of never having to stop unless you want to and this would give EV's a significant advantage over ICE cars. I suppose if battery capacity is too high, you might not be able to draw enough power fast enough from the grid to charge it fully. I'm waiting to see how it shakes out over the next couple of years and hope Gen III hits the sweet spot for me.

[JRP3]

Even though many don't often "need" that range, the psychological barrier it breaks down is huge.

I was talking to my father about the new RAV4EV and he was claiming it couldn't work for him because of its limited range. I then pointed out to him that he hates to travel long distances, the few times he does a long trip he takes my mother's car, not his RAV, and he's probably not taken his RAV more than 100 miles in a day in many many years. In reality he's a perfect candidate for an EV with around 100 miles of range. Even after hearing me rant about EV's for years he still has a mindset that is disconnected from reality.

[vfx]

I was talking to my father about the new RAV4EV ... he still has a mindset that is disconnected from reality.

Would he be emotionally moved by a test drive?

[ggr]

It's more real than psychological in my opinion. I would much rather have a 500-700 mile range because the 300 mile range just barely competes with old fashioned cars.

Real life example:

This week I drove from Texas to Nebraska twice. The distance is just over 600 miles one way. That means the Model S would need twenty hours of charging using a 50 amp RV plug. The first ten hours are done at home so they don't really count. Then there would be two five hour charge stops along the way plus ten or eleven hours of driving making the total trip time twenty three hours. (Hopefully Denise won't bring so much luggage that I can't lay down in the back and sleep during part of the two stops.) That's the worst case. The best case would be two one hour supercharge stops making the travel time thirteen hours. However, I don't expect there to be any superchargers at the two places they would make sense for this trip (Stillwater, OK and Junction City, KS) for many years to come (if ever). Of course, I would be tickled pink if there were. A 500 mile range would only add one four hour charge stop at an RV park with no superchargers required. A 700 mile range would mean no lengthy charge stops at all.

I don't think your calculation is quite correct. Just because the battery has a bigger range, doesn't mean it will charge faster from the same chargers. You get a certain number of miles per hour of charging (at a constant rate of charging). So except for your initial charge, that happened at home and doesn't count as part of the trip, and discounting the time to find a charge place and plug in, you'll take the same total time to charge for the same distance. Have I misunderstood?