Electric cars not exciting? Take a look at this one.
 

Electric cars are starting to get exciting

The Electrifying Tesla Roadster
http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/5...ef9da36db7.jpg
http://en.autos.sympatico.msn.ca/gui...mentid=5156898

It would be nice, however, to see some of this technology filter down to cars at more affordable levels.

The batteries in those cars are expensive. Same goes with the motors.

well all new technology is expensive initially, look at computers, they cost a fortune when they were initially released, and for what 256k? Or even calculators for that matter, those things that banks and car repair shops give away by the dozen now used to cost a lot.
I like this car, and I like the concept. Because it is economical, sensible and does not have a loud motor or pollute the environment it is very unlikely to take off in America.

If they they ever make electric cars affordable and fast, count me in.

It just goes to show you that we do not need to spend $100 /barrel of oil for too much longer.

Compare it to a Ferrari with similar performance capabilities. It's a lot cheaper.

As for more affordable levels, Tesla is planning on releasing several other models of cars, including a sedan which will be a lot cheaper (under $60,000).

Wow. . . do you guys really not know about the EV1? GM released a car through their Saturn dealerships (though only leased in California) in 1996, yes, 11 YEARS ago, that was fully electric and had the same performance characteristics of gas power vehicles, but were limited to about 160 miles in range.

If you'd like to be pissed off at people over the electric car go check out the documentary "Who Killed the Electric Car"

I'd love to stick it to the oil companies, I just haven't come up with a realistic way how yet.

And if you watch the movie you know they're no longer for sale. Anywhere. You have to either make your own EV1 or settle on the only street legal electric car in the world: Tesla. I'd guess a lot of people on TFP have seen the movie, I own it. That hardly means we can all go out and get plug and play cars for ourselves.

Nickel battaries are terrible for the environment.

According to some studies, a Toyota Prius will release three times as much emissions as a Hummer H2 will in its entire lifetime. And the Hummer H2 has a much longer expected life span.

Only if you don't recycle them.

I must apologize, I was attempting to address the tone of some of the posters that the electric car was a new idea.

But wouldn't it be nice if you could still just go buy one? :)

The Tesla Roadster sounds alot like big on promises, short on deliveries. Anybody who's plunked their money down (the full amount, btw) is a sucker in my opinion. This vehicle hasn't been crash tested. A 250 mile range (their website says 200) sounds very optimistic. Three-hour charge times are impractical by any stretch. It doesn't help that no journalist has been allowed to even drive the car, or that delivery of these cars has been pushed back to the summer of 2008 (the first owners should've been taking delivery of them by now).

This car could be worth it's weight in gold if it could even demonstrate that it can go 250 miles on a single charge. But then again, if the technology for this to happen did exist, we would've seen it on hybrids by now. After all, every car company is on the hunt for this holy grail of battery technology.

I see no future in electric cars beyond becoming expensive toys.

Ah, tone is hard to decipher online. Apologies. Honestly, I'm just really mad that they took the wonderful machines off the road.
I'd be driving one for sure. I'm even considering getting the second or third generation Tesla sedan, assuming I can afford it and it's performance is acceptable. I'm currently saving up for a Merc that runs on biodiesel (an ML320) but if an electric alternative surfaces, I'll be on that like a hobo on a ham sandwich. Combine solar shingles with an electric car and you're driving completely independently. Even biodiesel burns oil.

Wow. Considering that it's not been released yet, how can anyone suggest that it's not delivering?
It's being tested currently. No information, good or bad, has been released about it's cash abilities.
We're fortunate that we live in a world that requires evidence instead of just basing decisions on what sounds optimistic. As tested, the car has about a 250 mile range. As tested. That means it's happened.
Because you only sleep 2 hours at night?
The average American hybrid gets 32 mpg. The average 94 Geo Metro got closer to 50. They don't cant a car that gets good mileage.

I accuse them of failing to deliver because the company has full price deposits from over 350 customers. They expected to be driving off in their new roadsters this year, and now they have to wait another year. I also find it troubling that they're still taking deposits on a vehicle that is already a year behind on production.

Crash testing is important because when the innards of a Lithium Ion battery are exposed to oxygen, they explode. Until NHTSA runs a few roadsters into a wall at 30 mph and verifies that you won't die a firery death, it's not safe.

As far as I know, no outside source has verified the company's claim of 200 miles per charge (250 was too optimistic, so they sent a letter to those who paid for the cars to expect a range closer to 200). This is important because any car that can only run 100 miles (my realistic estimation) and require 3-6 hours (3 on a 90-amp charger, 6 on a 60-amp charger) pretty much handcuffs you to how far you can go while worrying about where you're going to find a 110-volt outlet to plug into if you go a bit too far.

Keep in mind, it requires 746 watts of energy to generate 1 horsepower. Multiply that by 248 hp, and you have a car that requires over 180 kW of juice to spin that motor. The EV1 required only 102kW, and was only 300 lbs heavier than the estimated weight of the roadster, but only managed 120 miles on a good day. Does 200 miles still seem like a stretch?

If it works out, then great, but until I see a vehicle on the street and a satisfied customer, I'm not buying into the notion that this is the wave of the future.

Even if the manufacturing process.

Go to Sudbury and look at the nickel mines (Toyota buys about 1000 tons each year) and the 1,250-foot-tall smokestack that spews huge puffs of sulphur dioxide at the Sudbury mine and smelter operation has left a large swath of the surrounding area looking like a surrealistic scene from the depths of hell. The surrounding area is full of skeletons of trees and bushes that will remind you of ghostly sentinels guarding a sprawling wasteland.

Then all 1000 tons are shipped to China where its made into nickel foam, and then to Japan where they get assembled. The entire journey is over 100, 000 miles. Each and every mile is done on ships with dirty, inefficient engines or on diesel locomotives, not some hybrid car.

Even nicke batteries of the size used in cars are hard to replace, since there isn't a system that has been set up to recycle them. And, rechargeable batteries also lose charge slowly as well.

Crash testing is important because when the innards of a gas tank are exposed to even the smallest spark, they explode. People have driven the car and, as I said, the car is CURRENTLY being tested. Right now. Today.
Where did 100 miles come from? Even the older electric vehicles got more than that 10 years ago. Even if it was your hypothetical 100 miles, how many Americans drive over 100 miles a day? If it is the 200 miles per day, then you're talking about over 90% of the population. Also, where can you NOT find an outlet? Drive 99 miles to work, plug it in, then drive home and plug it in over night.
Of course not. The EVI came out 11 years ago. To assume there have been technological advances in the past 11 years seems intellectually dishonest.
Your call, but it was the wave of the future 11 years ago before it was killed.

Filters already exist to reclaim cadmium from the byproduct of production, before it's released into the air. It takes energy and an investment to implement the filters, so few have done it. It's in the works that Nickel-Cad processing plants will be moving back into Europe once they can demonstrate that they have the necessary filters.

The point is, driving a hybrid car is worse than driving say a Hummer H2. And the filters area in place in Sudbury. If they were, there wouldn't be acid rain over there. And in places like communist China, filters will never be implemented since China has no regard for the environment.

I suppose the real question would be, what's worse: the estimated 3,000,000 people who've died in the Middle East because of oil...or localized acid rain that may be fixed soon because of filters?

They're both bad.

And the acid rain isn't "localized". Canada is facing big problems with environmental destruction.

Hybrids aren't the solution to our gas addiction.

One of the reason why car companies, governments, and oil companies are not complaining about gas-electric hybrid cars, is because they all will profit from hybrid cars, especially oil companies, and heres how:

There are two ways a company can make money; either by selling 100 products and making $100, or by selling 1 product and making $100. Historically speaking, old companies have made money using the latter, but they are shifting towards the latter. Hybrids are helping them do so.

On a side note, auto manufacturers love sending hybrids to North America, because it makes them more politically correct. They were also developed to make a the oil companies, the uneducated environmentalists and public alike happy, and to comply with mandates like CAFE. Since hybrids return very good mileage, they help auto manufacturers comply with CAFE.

And, as I mentioned earlier, the batteries are transported all over the world to the plants to get manufactured in ships and locomotives that just LOVE drinking that oil.

What? No regard for the environment?

As a percentage, China derives more of its energy from renewable resources than does the United States--I think by more than double.

I think it may look like no regard for the environment because of some bad cases. But remember, China has a much larger population than the United States, if that is your benchmark.

China has also started building cities like Dongtan.

See also Pop-Up Cities: China Builds a Bright Green Metropolis

I think it's only a matter of time before places like China begin to develop these technologies and export them to the rest of the world. Look forward to driving Chinese low- to zero-emission automobiles. China will do this out of necessity, especially if their population has an increased demand for automobiles and other transit.

Oh, and in regards to the OP... this car does look exciting. I always enjoy hearing about new designs like these.

China's taking an initiative for a "green community", but they definitely aren't in the manufacturing sector, which is what we're talking about here.

Point taken, but I'll still take my chances with a gas tank which isn't likely to explode on impact like a Li-Ion battery can. Don't believe the hype about exploding Pintos.
I have a better question, how did they calculate this 200 mile range? Was this averaged out of a EPA-standard city/highway driving cycle? Or was this determined by mathemagics based on the kilowatt-hours the batteries are rated at? Was this determined from a steady cruise? Did they even regard the extra energy used during hard acceleration (as a sports car driver will be tempted to do), keeping in mind that regenerative braking does not recover as much energy as manufacturers want you to believe?

According to what empirical data?
Judging by the EPA's fumbling of the Prius's mileage, I'd trust something that came from Tesla's marketing department over an EPA number. The other stuff is meaningless.

I rember seeing a couple of different documentaries on this vehicle, and I am not 100% on this, but I do believe that Who Killed the Electric Car? was among one of the filmographies that delved into the capabilities of this efficient-yet-powerful roadster.

I'll see if I can find a a link to the film --Who Killed the Electric Car?

I remember watching it on Google Video....

I'm sorry. I thought China made stuff. My mistake.

Seriously, though, China is beginning to make headway into the automotive manufacturing sector. Not much to panic about yet, but China is certainly vying to be a top global economy to watch. And given their own population and current global trends, the market for hybrid cars will be of great interest to the Chinese companies hoping to compete globally.

oh how i love a good debate *rubs hands together*

i'm not sure if you are refering to, or have ever read, the CNW marketing research report claiming that a prius is worse for the environment than an H2 based on the overall energy costs. while the purpose of the study was a good idea, they have several flaws in their system. first, if we are talking about overall COST of this vehicle, what about the money we are pumping into middle eastern countries each time we fill up an H2 (a lot more money than a prius sends) and some would say we're fighting a whole damn war over this oil. this is not factored into their study at all, or even addressed. there is also huge speculation over the credibility of their data showing the estimated life-span of a prius (109k) vs an H2 (197k). there is also plain falsities in the study as well. for instance the study states that the lithium-ion batteries of the prius are not recycled, despite toyota having an extensive recycling program in place. then there are just oddities such as the fact that the xA and xB are both built on the same assembly lines, only sold in the US, both shipped at the same time, to the same dealers, have the same engines and transmissions, are within 50 lbs of each other and 2 mpg, yet somehow the xB only costs 60% per mile vs the xB ($.78 vs $.48 respectively).

i'm not saying a prius is a saint, but i'm just going to say it... anyone who still thinks driving a hummer is better than driving a hybrid is still not getting it. if you want to argue with me that a VW Lupo or Toyota Echo is more environmentally friendly, go for it, but don't be so foolish to argue that a Hummer is good for "mother nature."

It's actually through it's first round of crash testing.

they have, however, riden in the passenger seat many a time, it's not like no one outside the company has experienced this thing perform. besides, do you trust a journalist in your car that hasn't even fully passed it's crash tests? ;)

seriously... who is the last person to try to start an automotive company from scratch in the US? Delorean? Tucker? yeah they faired well... cut the Tesla guys some slack, building a car is an expensive and time consuming venture.

and to the OP and those talking about affordability, Tesla feels the same way. with the success of the Roadster they have plans for a sub-$60k sedan in '09 and a ~$30k mass-market vehicle in '10. will they reach that goal? i doubt it, but maybe '12? at least they are aiming in the right direction.

I'm not denying the fact that the Hummer H2 will cost more on gas, all I'm saying is that a Prius is meaner to the environment than a Hummer H2. The amount of acid that has been caused by all the nickel mining and smelting in Ontario is incredible. You wouldn't know that, since all you see is the 50 MPG EPA figure slapped on the window of a Prius.

And, we really aren't buying gas from the Middle East since most of our oil comes from Alberta. And dependence on foreign oil and environmentalism are two topics that should not intermingle.

For life expectancy, you really can't say if the Prius will last longer. It hasn't even been on the market for a decade, whereas Hummers (and other conventional cars) have for many decades.

Even if Toyota recycles batteries, there is still a lot of environmental damage being done when they are made.

An xB also costs more, so that obviously have something to do with the figures. They are also taking into account resale value, etc.

Nether of the two cars is good for mother nature. Riding a bike or walking is good for mother nature. But out of the two, the Hummer is better since it uses less energy, from its production till its "death" when compared with the Prius.

If you really want to reduce your carbon emissions footprint and still drive a car, you should just buy a late model Golf TDI and get it to use biodiesel. That would actually make a difference.

San Jose has buses that run on Hydrogen, which are even better than biodiesel vehicles.

...except where you discuss the environmental cost of transportation.

I understand that you are pissed about the trouble from Ontario nickel mining, but I don't believe that the damage being done there, even if it's totally for Priuses (which i doubt) outweighs the overall damage done globally by large SUVs. And when it REALLY comes down to it, i serious doubt EITHER of us are qualified enough to say which is the more damaging factor, speculation is speculation. You say all i see is 50 MPG well i can just as easily say all you see is mining and smelting and need to open your perspective as well.

http://lugar.senate.gov/graphics/ene...il_Imports.gif
http://www.saudi-us-relations.org/im...mption-600.jpg

Yeah, these are just two graphics, the first from Senator Lugar's (R-IA) Energy Initiative and the other from the Saudi-US Relations Information Service, but we by no means get MOST of our oil from Alberta, or Canada, or North America even.

yeah, and you can't really say it will last shorter either, really. oh, and the Hummer has only been commercially available since 1992, and the Prius since 1997 in Japan, not too far behind.

According to their data the xA is $13.1k and the xB is $14.9k, but give no reason why this is important in energy usage. They don't take resale value into account at all (have you read the report?), simply overall lifespan in years vs. number of miles estimated to be driven each year. They do, however, take into account what % of the overall lifespan is with the first owner vs subsequent owners, which is 5.6 for the xB and 5.9 for the xA (even though they haven't been on the market for 5 years, these numbers are based on the perceived buying demographic) They state that the "the movement of a vehicle through the marketplace adds to the overall energy costs." So i assume they are saying that having a car sit on a used auto lot means it is partly responsible for the energy usage of that lot? and that the usage of that lot while it sits there (and maybe moved 30 yards across the lot) is greater than the energy used when belonging to a person and being driven around? A bold, un-supported claim.

(emphasis mine)

Yeah, I didn't think of that at first. A vast majority of nickel is used in steel and nickel alloys.

Sadly the tech for good electric cars is out and theres no reason why it couldnt be affordable. but... the car companys do not want to produce it. Ford had a car called the evo i think it was years ago that was full electric. they leased out a few hundred of them then when leases ran out they took them back and crushed them all and refused to let anyone renew the lease. even though everyone that had them loved them. Car companys make the most money selling us cars that burn gas and have complex and expensive moving parts in them. a simple electric car wouldnt have all that much to go wrong or wear out so they would lose a fortune by not selling us all those repair parts. It will take a miracle or a disaster for us to change to full electric.

Personaly i want to see a full size 4x4 truck thats electric with a small diesel engine thats used just to recharge the batteries on long trips. Toss on a few solar panals on it to keep the batteries topped off during short trips and it would be perfect.

Where would one get a decent AC electric engine that puts out 186 kW (about 250 hp)? I've been looking everywhere, but all I can find is the Tesla motor, and it's not for sale. Everything else stops around 100 hp. It's frustrating.

There is a test drive review of the Tesla roadster in the new issue of Automobile Magazine.

Tried to find a link for it, but its not on the magazines web site just yet.

No need to go after the mining industry now, I work for CVRD INCO, we follow the environmental rules as they are laid out, I'm not in Ontario though, guess mining where I am is alright. As for the smoke stack, just be thankful they put up the super stack, imagine how bad it was with the old smaller one and no filters.

Oh yeah and that roadster is fuckin cool, I'd drive one.

I will withhold my opinion on the environmental aspect of the discussion and my opinions on the car itself have been adequately represented already. I'd just like to point out that if you're going to name your car the Tesla roadster it should be able to shoot lightning bolts.

Just sayin'.

Or resurrect the mix-match body parts you've assembled into a superhuman ogre but accidentally given an "Abby Normal" brain.

...

Romance Mobile: Hmm, I bet you could pick up some chicks in that shiny sportscar and use the short range as an excuse to go back to your place after a date.

me think Tesla pretty

IIRC this car accelerates unbelievably well, with no pesky gearchanges to worry about - just smoothly-delivered power and torque.