Tesla Roadster: Tesla unveils 'fastest production car ever'
Discussion
DonkeyApple said:
It's how showmen work. The purpose of this product is mainly to get everyone in the audience to look somewhere else. Tesla also completely understand the importance of halo products for imprinting the brand. Without that the investor appetite begins to wane and if the share price slips too far to the point that it changes sentiment then it's all over for the company in a matter of days before they've secured the real revenues from the sale of the 3. It's a very smart company who understand how the game is played and why to date investors have been willing to invest so heavily.
This. There's a suggestion it's based on the original Roadster, a 2020 production date punts it safely off into the distance. Sub 2 second 0-60 is going to make safe driving... interesting. He must have known the Model 3 excitement would be hard to maintain given the slow ramp up of production - even ignoring the delays they've had, so having this up his sleeve to bring out at an appropriate time makes sense.The trucks are probably more interesting, but the response from hauliers so far has been distinctly muted. Truckers are very specific in their expectations, so radical redesigns may prove challenging. Then again, if Tesla gets Amazon as a customer for coast-to-coast road trains, that's bread and butter for the company.
Tuna said:
The trucks are probably more interesting, but the response from hauliers so far has been distinctly muted. Truckers are very specific in their expectations, so radical redesigns may prove challenging. Then again, if Tesla gets Amazon as a customer for coast-to-coast road trains, that's bread and butter for the company.
The trucks will win a large market very quickly, in large towns and cities who are often left wing run and desperate to clean up the airlong distance they wont be much use but i suspect that was never the aim for generation one
Yipper - Still waiting on this price for the Hipercar.
Maintaining a gas turbine is going to be interesting. Not particularly known for their efficiency if you want to make them both affordable and low maintenance.
kambites said:
RumbleOfThunder said:
I like the sound of the Ariel, the gas turbine range extender makes a lot of sense to me.
If they can keep the weight down, make it reliable, and make it refined, make it meet emissions regs, etc. yes. But there's a lot of "ifs" in that. Tuna said:
DonkeyApple said:
It's how showmen work. The purpose of this product is mainly to get everyone in the audience to look somewhere else. Tesla also completely understand the importance of halo products for imprinting the brand. Without that the investor appetite begins to wane and if the share price slips too far to the point that it changes sentiment then it's all over for the company in a matter of days before they've secured the real revenues from the sale of the 3. It's a very smart company who understand how the game is played and why to date investors have been willing to invest so heavily.
This. There's a suggestion it's based on the original Roadster, a 2020 production date punts it safely off into the distance. Sub 2 second 0-60 is going to make safe driving... interesting. He must have known the Model 3 excitement would be hard to maintain given the slow ramp up of production - even ignoring the delays they've had, so having this up his sleeve to bring out at an appropriate time makes sense.The trucks are probably more interesting, but the response from hauliers so far has been distinctly muted. Truckers are very specific in their expectations, so radical redesigns may prove challenging. Then again, if Tesla gets Amazon as a customer for coast-to-coast road trains, that's bread and butter for the company.
The "interesting" bit about this new car is not the acceleration, but the fact it's the first EV that also claims a high top speed, which means it almost certainly now has a gearbox!
(with fixed gear EV's you have a trade off been accel and top speed, a typical SPM has a CPSR of around 3 to 1, so if the car can do 120mph, then peak power arrives at 40mph. But to do >200mph means there must be gearbox between the motor and the wheels! (maybe only 2 speeds)
(with fixed gear EV's you have a trade off been accel and top speed, a typical SPM has a CPSR of around 3 to 1, so if the car can do 120mph, then peak power arrives at 40mph. But to do >200mph means there must be gearbox between the motor and the wheels! (maybe only 2 speeds)
Dave Hedgehog said:
The trucks will win a large market very quickly, in large towns and cities who are often left wing run and desperate to clean up the air
long distance they wont be much use but i suspect that was never the aim for generation one
Yup. Any lorry destined for a city centre will need to be electric at a near point in the future. long distance they wont be much use but i suspect that was never the aim for generation one
It also makes sense for buses to also be electric.
Minicabs and taxis will all be pushed to electric and private ICE cars will be legislated out.
1) Every Tesla has been at least three years late,
2) There is a kind of Moores Law with battery tech that it doubles in performance every seven years.
So if he's saying 2020, it'll be 2024 before shipments, and 2025 before any quantity, by which time the weight of the batteries will have come down with all the virtuous circle stuff or less weight needing less power so more range and performance.
It will be interesting to see how many $50k deposits it gets.
Simon
2) There is a kind of Moores Law with battery tech that it doubles in performance every seven years.
So if he's saying 2020, it'll be 2024 before shipments, and 2025 before any quantity, by which time the weight of the batteries will have come down with all the virtuous circle stuff or less weight needing less power so more range and performance.
It will be interesting to see how many $50k deposits it gets.
Simon
Dave Hedgehog said:
The trucks will win a large market very quickly, in large towns and cities who are often left wing run and desperate to clean up the air
long distance they wont be much use but i suspect that was never the aim for generation one
The truck they've revealed is not a Transit - it's the biggest rig you can legally run on US roads. Tesla's specifically aiming it at long distance haulage, with road train 'autonomous follow' features, 500 mile range and talk of 'Mega Chargers' which will add 400 miles in 30 minutes (though it's been pointed out that the load needed to charge at that rate is astronomical).long distance they wont be much use but i suspect that was never the aim for generation one
It's odd - I don't know the economics of long haul stuff, but trying to disrupt a very well established (and somewhat traditional) market seems to me an order of magnitude harder than trying to sell EVs to hipsters. I can understand the running costs could be the deciding factor, but who would switch their fleet over to an untested rig without any pedigree to ensure it'll still be good in the million miles Tesla claims?
DonkeyApple said:
Yup. Any lorry destined for a city centre will need to be electric at a near point in the future.
It also makes sense for buses to also be electric.
Minicabs and taxis will all be pushed to electric and private ICE cars will be legislated out.
It's interesting that despite there being many obvious drivers for the change to occur, and no requirements for the machine to be anything other than utilitarian, that no-one has gone for this space yet. It suggests to me the practicalities and economics of a daily workhorse are not as simple as some would suggest.It also makes sense for buses to also be electric.
Minicabs and taxis will all be pushed to electric and private ICE cars will be legislated out.
WestyCarl said:
Fair play to Mr. Musk.
He made enough money with paypal to be able retire to a desert island. Instead he decided to make rockets that land on boats, the fastest accelerating 4 seater car, super tunnels, the largest battery factory in the world and now the fastest accelerating lorry the fastest accelerating sports car. Now doubt I have missed some of his other minor achievements along the way......
Indeed. He strikes me as the type that doesn't look at technology and think what can we do with it. He comes up with massively ambitious ideas and then sets to inventing the technology to make them happen.He made enough money with paypal to be able retire to a desert island. Instead he decided to make rockets that land on boats, the fastest accelerating 4 seater car, super tunnels, the largest battery factory in the world and now the fastest accelerating lorry the fastest accelerating sports car. Now doubt I have missed some of his other minor achievements along the way......
"Why don't we re-use rockets?"
"You can't really land a rocket Elon."
"I want mine to land. On drone ships"
The stuff SpaceX is doing now whilst ground breaking is just a means to an end. His goal is Mars.
I may be wrong but the truck thing sounds a bit unrealistic!
Estimates say the battery would need to be at least 10x a Model S - so 1MW
Range 500 miles, and charging in 40 minutes for 400 miles
So in 40 minutes it needs 800kw
Charging power = 1.2MW - 10x the current ( fastest ) speed of a supercharger - which is only possible when the battery has optimum temperature and state of charge.
A few trucks charging = 10MW = the same power as 10,000 homes.
Not to mention people estimate the battery to weight around 10,000KG
Estimates say the battery would need to be at least 10x a Model S - so 1MW
Range 500 miles, and charging in 40 minutes for 400 miles
So in 40 minutes it needs 800kw
Charging power = 1.2MW - 10x the current ( fastest ) speed of a supercharger - which is only possible when the battery has optimum temperature and state of charge.
A few trucks charging = 10MW = the same power as 10,000 homes.
Not to mention people estimate the battery to weight around 10,000KG
cay said:
Estimates say the battery would need to be at least 10x a Model S - so 1MW
I suspect that's where your maths falls down.Truck engines major on torque not bhp - electric motors already deliver that.
e.g. a typical modern Class-1 HGV engine puts out <3,000Nm of torque and maybe 500-600bhp, whereas the P100 is just shy of 1,000Nm.
So you'll only need 3x the torque, and arguably only 2x the bhp. So if you were to take 3x P85 powertrains and mate them together, you'd have enough motive force for a typical 40t HGV.
On that basis, it becomes a lot less of a stretch...
Max_Torque said:
The "interesting" bit about this new car is not the acceleration, but the fact it's the first EV that also claims a high top speed, which means it almost certainly now has a gearbox!
(with fixed gear EV's you have a trade off been accel and top speed, a typical SPM has a CPSR of around 3 to 1, so if the car can do 120mph, then peak power arrives at 40mph. But to do >200mph means there must be gearbox between the motor and the wheels! (maybe only 2 speeds)
Doesn't the dual motor Model S just utilise motors with different gearing? Possible we'll see this again?(with fixed gear EV's you have a trade off been accel and top speed, a typical SPM has a CPSR of around 3 to 1, so if the car can do 120mph, then peak power arrives at 40mph. But to do >200mph means there must be gearbox between the motor and the wheels! (maybe only 2 speeds)
cay said:
Not to mention people estimate the battery to weight around 10,000KG
If true that could be a bit of an issue, an equivalent Scania unit weights around 8.5T fuelled, all in the tesla must weigh 13T minimum.I imagine the Musk maths must cover the lost 5T of freight with significantly lower ton/mile cost.
Tbh, I would have thought commercial vehicles would have been the perfect first type of vehicle for Tesla. The haulage industry is pretty pragmatic, if it saves £1 they will buy it and if not the margins are so thin that they absolutely will not.
The Vambo said:
If true that could be a bit of an issue, an equivalent Scania unit weights around 8.5T fuelled, all in the tesla must weigh 13T minimum.
I imagine the Musk maths must cover the lost 5T of freight with significantly lower ton/mile cost.
Tbh, I would have thought commercial vehicles would have been the perfect first type of vehicle for Tesla. The haulage industry is pretty pragmatic, if it saves £1 they will buy it and if not the margins are so thin that they absolutely will not.
It's been said before that Tesla realise they will be aimed at low-density payloads. There's no shortage of toilet roll wagons going around.I imagine the Musk maths must cover the lost 5T of freight with significantly lower ton/mile cost.
Tbh, I would have thought commercial vehicles would have been the perfect first type of vehicle for Tesla. The haulage industry is pretty pragmatic, if it saves £1 they will buy it and if not the margins are so thin that they absolutely will not.
havoc said:
I suspect that's where your maths falls down.
Truck engines major on torque not bhp - electric motors already deliver that.
e.g. a typical modern Class-1 HGV engine puts out <3,000Nm of torque and maybe 500-600bhp, whereas the P100 is just shy of 1,000Nm.
So you'll only need 3x the torque, and arguably only 2x the bhp. So if you were to take 3x P85 powertrains and mate them together, you'd have enough motive force for a typical 40t HGV.
On that basis, it becomes a lot less of a stretch...
Torque / Power isn't the issue, you are having to move 40,000 KG instead of 2000 KG for a Model S.Truck engines major on torque not bhp - electric motors already deliver that.
e.g. a typical modern Class-1 HGV engine puts out <3,000Nm of torque and maybe 500-600bhp, whereas the P100 is just shy of 1,000Nm.
So you'll only need 3x the torque, and arguably only 2x the bhp. So if you were to take 3x P85 powertrains and mate them together, you'd have enough motive force for a typical 40t HGV.
On that basis, it becomes a lot less of a stretch...
I got those figures from a site which had some very in depth calculations.
Current trucks do around 5MPG - versus 50MPG for a diesel car, same comparison.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff