In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1359
The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web
The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts
"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion
"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion
This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion
The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets
For fantasy football and other fantasy sports discussion
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Another way to think about the price of the Model S:
How much do similarly performing IC luxury sedans cost, or how well do similarly priced IC luxury sedans perform?
For $60,000 you're looking at an M37, 535i, GS F sport, A6. They're all nice cars but the Model S is faster and arguably as nice.
$80,000-$100,000 will get you into some seriously fast lux sedans like an M5, E63AMG, S6/S7, etc.
Is the Model S on par with those cars? Maybe. I love the idea of the Model S, but if I'm torn between that and an M5... I mean, have you ever driven an M5?
On the other hand, having an electric car in this conversation should be seen as a victory for Tesla. I think you're right that the price will come down and cars like the Model S are going to do very well against similarly priced IC cars. It may be a while before an electric is seen as a on-par with top performing halo cars like an M5 though.
The $60,000 is not just battery but also has less power. It is also the base price (just like everything else, the Tesla has expensive options). Looking at comparable base price numbers you are looking at a BMW 550i (base $60k), Mercedes E550 4matic, A6 3.0 (which is actually a base of $50k), Cadillac CTS-V (although a little smaller), Lexus GS 350 F Sport (starting at $53k) or GS 450h (hybrid which is a little faster), Infiniti M56, etc.
The Tesla claims 0-60 for the $60k model at 5.9 seconds and 1/4 mile at 14.2 seconds. Every single one of those vehicles are faster by a fair margin. In fact, most of the lower end versions are faster.
The $72,400 Tesla performs much closer to those vehicles, yet even then is only 5.6 and 13.7. The 550i, E550, CTS-V, and M56 (the true $60k vehicles) are a fair amount faster, and actually very similar to the $87,400 Tesla. Of course with that money you can start looking at M, AMD, and S versions which will perform better.
Those are straight line numbers and there is more to performance than that, yet the Tesla is not faster than similarly priced models in the same class.
Another note is the Tesla prices include a $7500 tax credit. Top end speed for the Tesla is also considerably lower than the competition. Of course how many people do more than 110-125 mph on a regular basis? So I won't really harp on top end speed.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by scott91575 14 months ago
re: "perfectly usable for 80% of us"
The problem with this premise is that even with the best range and optimal charging options, you will need a spouse with a real car to go on vacation, or you'll have to bum a ride with a buddy (or greyhound) to drive any serious distance. If you're truly on your own, then the electric car is like a tether to your home base. I think that alone eliminates the 80% theory. Now if you are okay with a car that is okay for 80% of your driving needs, then go for it. I guess you'll rely on a second car or a buddy to get you through the other 20% of your driving.
For my family, gas or hybrids are still mandatory, and hybrids still mostly cost too much to justify.
Oh, and back to the subject of the thread: The writer has zero integrity and should be ceremoniously dumped by NYT.
This post was edited by has been 14 months ago
It was just a mistake;
I didn't mean to let them take away my soul.
Am I too old?
Is it too late?
Clearly shoddy journalism, but I want my damn hydrogen car!
To achieve great things, two things are needed; a plan, and not quite enough time. -- Leonard Bernstein
I wouldn't ever need another car to go on vacation. I haven't gone on a road trip longer than 250-300 miles in over 10 years.
Anything beyond a 4-5 hour drive and I'm getting on an airplane. Even if I was to drive cross-country, I'd be fine limiting myself to 250-300 miles a day or figuring out some kind of a gameplan to recharge an electric car with stops along the way.
No idea if I'm in the 20% on this or not. But the point that electric cars are not well suited for long distance road trips has been beaten to death. No one is really arguing otherwise.
Ok well then how many American's are married and/or have 2 or more cars? More than 60%.
And with increases in high speed rail availability and speed in the next 20 years, I wouldn't even want to take a car on a road trip if I didn't have to.
But these points like you said are all moot anyways for most of us. Sure it is possible and reasonable for 80% of us to have 1 car that is electric. But its still too expensive for most people anyways.
And yes, that writer even looks like a douche
Of course, if you are comparing prices and performance then you probably need to knock off about $10,000 from the price of the Tesla since you will probably save that much in the first 4-5 years of ownership on gas (or add the cost of gas to the comparables). So in real-world terms, that $60,000 is like buying a $50,000 car. Just something to keep in mind when comparing price vs. performance.
I'm siding with the Times.
"It was also Tesla that told me that an hour of charging (at a lower power level) at a public utility in Norwich, Conn., would give me adequate range to reach the Supercharger 61 miles away, even though the car’s range estimator read 32 miles"
No one would drive off on a 61 mile drive when the display said 32 miles remaining. I don't give a crap how long someone on the phone told me to charge the car.
It's clear to me that Brodor is/was being intentionally obtuse on this situation. Him unplugging the charger at 28% (with 32 miles indicated) then lamenting the fact that the car ran out of juice 51 miles later one of the dumbest things I've ever read.
CNN just did the same drive without any problems.
It's Broder's fault he followed the advice of a Tesla technician?
I am not.
That's not what I said, is it.
What I said is that no one would drive off on a 61 mile drive when the display said 32 miles remaining.
It doesn't matter much to me what a Tesla rep told him over the phone.
I thought part of the controversy is Broder did not properly follow instructions.
That was not the statement that was made. The whole cost/benefit analysis would be very, very long and I don't really feel like going into all of it. I am not stating the Tesla is a poor vehicle either in performance or even value. Yet Phil stated it was faster similarly priced cars at $60,000 and that is simply false.
In the end let's assume the money equals out over 5 years with similar performance vehicles. Yet at the end of the day you still have a vehicle that you have to wait a long time to charge, has limited range, and is a startup company with little history and facilities in comparison to it's competition. There are lots of variables that simply cannot be ignored or broken down into simply cost per mile of fuel.
This post was edited by scott91575 14 months ago
Nope. The controversy is that Broder surmises in his original article that under typical conditions the Tesla Model S cannot make the 200 mile trip between supercharging stations in Newark, Del., and Milford, Conn, which is false.
The truth is that Broder did manage to drive from Newark to Milford on a single charge. He only ran out of juice when he decided to leave Milford on a partial charge for another 150+ miles of driving to a restaurant and hotel. Even after stopping for more juice the next morning, he AGAIN decided to leave without enough range to get back to the supercharger.
The bottom line is that Broder is either dumb, or was intentionally trying to get the car to run out of range. Either way, his original article is extremely skewed. Did a Tesla rep tell him that "an hour" of charging would be sufficient for the 61 mile drive? Maybe, and if so Tesla might need to improve their customer service. Does that mean that Tesla's Supercharging network or the Model S doesn't work as advertised, when Broder is the one who decided to set out on a 61 mile drive with 35 miles of indicated range? Absolutely not.
Yup, my bad. You are correct that the "slow" Model S is not as fast as some IC vehicles that are similarly priced.
I'm not sure you can actually buy a 550i for $60k (most "as tested" 550i's are closer to $75k) but your point is still valid.
The price/performance argument is very close though in comparison to traditional cars. An $87k Tesla Model S Performance is arguably on the same level as many other cars with similar price tags and at this level there is very little premium being paid for the electric drivetrain.
I do too. I will never buy a Tesla product.
Seems like a perfectly fine technology to troll around the suburbs running errands and whatnot. As it stands now, it would be annoying to have to recharge during a trip between Detroit and Chicago
I am sure the technology will advance though. Expanding the range and reducing the charge time is obviously critical.
holy mother of god, the stone cutters....quick check for the stone cutter birthmark.
Your average UofM fan and I have something in common, neither of us went to UofM. Though we do share One major difference, I got Accepted.
shocking, the New York times supports...the New York times. To bad every other publication is panning them.
Not too mention having to plan a trip within a controlled environment. What happens if between Detroit and Chicago weather arises and you decide to check into a motel to ride it out? Generally those types of things are unlikely but having to plan around a charging station you never know what may happen.
Is the writer not supposed write about his actual experience with the car? Always on the phone with a tesla technician, cold outside and having to think about the heat. At least Musk's talking points of a trip into manhattan and intentionally doing laps in a parking lot have been put to rest.
The writer was supposed to give an unbiased review of the supercharging station system. He wasn't reviewing the car itself, someone at NYT already did that (and gave the car a very favorable review).
He didn't do that. Instead, he created an impossible scenario that intentionally avoided using common sense that a typical motorist would use, to prove a point... that if you don't charge up an electric car, it's battery will run out of juice.
His chief complaint is that the car only went 51 miles on an hours charge using a non-Supercharger station, when the car in fact told him it would only go 35 miles.
I don't understand why there is so much focus on electric cars as opposed to Natural Gas cars. It's such an easier transition, and we have enough fuel in America to last hundreds of years. With electric cars we're dependent on the countries that provide the battery materials, Bolivia?
Natural Gas cars are safe and fill ups would be the same as today. All that is required would be for more stations to provide pumps. This seems likely as the major oil companies are also the major nat gas companies. Plus nat gas is cleaner than coal which is what powers most electric cars.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports