RE: Tesla Roadster: 'Quickest car in the world'

[big_rob_sydney]

100,000 years of walking
2,000 years of horse and cart
100 years of ICE

EV?

Flying cars?

Forget the ICE. Its not only yesterdays tech, its a dinosaur that doesn't know its already dead.

[RobDickinson]

isaldiri said:

ChocolateFrog said:

The fast chargers must be insane to charge the lorries, something like a megawatt each. I wonder if the grid could cope with that sort of demand.

http://driving.ca/tesla/auto-news/news/motor-mouth...

yeah thats bullst.

Electricity will be generated by solar and stored locally in banks of batteries, price is guaranteed at 7c per kwh by tesla.

[anonymous-user]

RobDickinson said:

yeah thats bullst.

Electricity will be generated by solar and stored locally in banks of batteries, price is guaranteed at 7c per kwh by tesla.

[RobDickinson]

"The new Megachargers will be solar-powered, so charging with them won't take any juice away from the rest of the grid"

http://mashable.com/2017/11/17/tesla-semi-megachar...

And for charging a new connection...
https://cleantechnica.com/2017/11/17/tesla-semi-8-...


I'm sure you'll be able to build your own chargers for too or use other DC chargers if you just want to overnight it on say 50kw

[98elise]

The Spruce goose said:

F1 cars can do 0-60 in 1.6 seconds so maybe 1.5 seconds is the max. I think they will start talking about 0-100 times next. If it is correct it will piss all over the La ferrari's 2.6 seconds.

I was thinking road legal though. The roadster will be on road tyres, and I would assume relatively slim ones at that.

[RobDickinson]

Roadster tyres looked chunky, 10-12 inch.

~2 seconds on road tyres is getting close to the limit as calculated (ee on youtube) though that is a back of fag packet estimate obviously not perfect as the roadster does 1.9.

Probably doesnt take into account larger rear contact patches than front or time to load the brakes/tyres etc.

[anonymous-user]

bullittmcqueen said:

See my other post about the watch-argument. Problem is ICE cars require a huge infrastructure around them: petrol-stations, spare-parts, oil, the whole bang. This will largely thin out massively or go away altogether.

And a lot of stuff will not be produced anymore as it's not needed for EVs: transmissions, motor-parts, exhaust-systems, petrol-tanks,etc. So for the manufacturers it will not be changing some specs for parts they mass-produce anyway in a similar fashion and cranking out a few parts for the vintage guys to prevent idle-time. It will require machinery and production-systems that will then be largely obsolete and that must exclusively be kept running for the vintage guys.

If there are only a few left, supply of all that will dry up to high degree and keeping them running will become disproportionately more demanding, difficult and expensive. Which, of course, in turn will further reduce demand. Sure it will always be done if people pay up for it, but it will not be a mass phenomenon.

Chances are the 1960th TVR Griffith will actually be more likely to be still driving around in 30 years than the new one as its whole drivetrain is a lot less complicated than any modern engine as you could worst-case craft the parts yourself.

So i think if one wants to get a feel for what it will be like, one has to think more of maintaining a 1920s oldtimer than a 1990s car.

The more i think about it, and the Tesla got me thinking, i believe this is unstoppable and will have a major impact on entire industries that are not prepared for it.

I think you're right depending how far out you're looking. Older, simpler cars are not hard to maintain despite the lack of manufacturer support. If there's demand there will be plenty of infrastructure to support them as there is now. Keeping a 2017 supercar running could be a royal PITA compared to something from the 90's granted. Horses aren't easy to maintain or get spares for either but lots of people do, I think. EV 'revolution' is unstoppable I agree but I don't share your pessimism; there's already a vast eco system of independents running cars you can't get spares for, whilst there's demand from us it won't disappear. Looking further forward there will be 1000bhp retrofit EV drivetrains and batteries that weigh the same as a packet of crisps, kids will only be interested in the ''infotainment'' system and then 'our' generation will all be dead so who cares?

[Roscoe5]

Game changer!! Looks subtle, yet faster than a p1

[anonymous-user]

Roscoe5 said:

Game changer!! Looks subtle, yet faster than a p1

[Ares]

jason61c said:

This is pistonheads.

Not 'Brushless or battery heads'.

Tesla do a great job of generating money. Then under delivering.

I can't see how it will pan out as they're in so much debt, that once the tech actually works those companies that actually make money will be able to make a massive jump without all the development costs that go with being the first.

Does a car have to have pistons to be classed as worthy?

Discuss.

[Ares]

boxerTen said:

Ares said:

But one of the biggest whinges over EVs is about the lack of ability to drive an EV for 500miles non-stop.....? Because thats what most people do. Daily.

Its good it can do 600 miles non-stop, but can it be driven hard for any length of time? Let's say, 25 laps of Silverstone (about 1 hour and 90 miles) non-stop on a 'tank' with the throttle pinned to the floor at every opportunity?

Can any car with that level of performance do 90miles at 10/10ths on a single tank?

[otolith]

Ares said:

Does a car have to have pistons to be classed as worthy?

Discuss.

[Ares]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

We were talking track actually.

But yes, any car will plummet if it's used a lot. My car has, once, done 480 miles on a tank. But if I drive it using all 500 horses on a regular basis, I can also drain the tank in not much more than 100 miles. If I took it on track, it wouldn't even get to 100.

I'd say that was similar - only benefit is that when I brake using my car, the car doesn't refill the tank with a bit of extra petrol

[ntiz]

This does sound amazing and I'm sure it will be when it arrives.

But I would guess on usual Musk time this will turn up 2022 at the soonest. Bare in mind we are meant to be able to get in a Tesla put home in the sat nav and it drive you home with no input. Also meant to be able to summon from your parking spot to come pick you up. This was all promised to be available a 1+ year ago so far I wouldn't trust one to drive me down anything other than fairly empty motorway. But don't worry they will gladly take you money for these systems on the promise it's just round the corner.

I don't doubt Tesla's ability to get there eventually but they do seem to make a big song and dance about stuff quiet a long time before it happens.

[RumbleOfThunder]

jsf said:

Roscoe5 said:

Game changer!! Looks subtle, yet faster than a p1

?

[RemarkLima]

Salamura said:

This sounds like it will be a one-trick pony. To be able to go the claimed mileage and deliver the quoted performance it mush have a gazillion batteries and be really heavy, so I can't imagine it being particularly involving to drive. Btw, I suspect that if you do a few launches the battery will be all but depleted.

Sine Metu said:

Musk has already achieved his initial goal which was to demonstrate that electric cars were viable.

He has now just completely and utterly humiliated the engineers at Porsche (VW), Ferrari, Bugatti (VW), McLaren, Lamborghini (VW) whoever. Brands that existed purely for the purpose of seting new boundaries, of pushing the envelope, of breaking records, of acheiving headline speeds, of winning top trumps, all trumped in one move. A small start up just slapped them about the place. They all look a bit absurd today.

Do they though? Any of the above will be better built, more reliable, much, much more involving to drive, with a lot more character and soul, and just as quick in the real world.

I'm sorry, but isn't every fast car just too fast to be used in any way, too capable and devoid of any sense of engaging? Perhaps the Ferrari and Mclaren are the exception but everything now, with electric steering, poor damping, too much weight, and the dynamics of a mule seems to be the norm.

And given everyone loves SUVs which are even heavier, and even more devoid of any sense of feel, the fact it's a one trick pony isn't even going to be noticed... Right?

[ZesPak]

Salamura said:

This sounds like it will be a one-trick pony. To be able to go the claimed mileage and deliver the quoted performance it mush have a gazillion batteries and be really heavy, so I can't imagine it being particularly involving to drive. Btw, I suspect that if you do a few launches the battery will be all but depleted.

Sine Metu said:

Musk has already achieved his initial goal which was to demonstrate that electric cars were viable.

He has now just completely and utterly humiliated the engineers at Porsche (VW), Ferrari, Bugatti (VW), McLaren, Lamborghini (VW) whoever. Brands that existed purely for the purpose of seting new boundaries, of pushing the envelope, of breaking records, of acheiving headline speeds, of winning top trumps, all trumped in one move. A small start up just slapped them about the place. They all look a bit absurd today.

Do they though? Any of the above will be better built, more reliable, much, much more involving to drive, with a lot more character and soul, and just as quick in the real world.

That's a lot of assumptions.

More reliable? I think you need to look into exotic car ownership.

As for "just as quick in the real world", that's just an empty statement if I've ever seen one. Do you think someone buys a Koeningsegg, Pagani or Bugatti to beat a pleb in his 458 on a B-road?
These cars are all about top trumps, and Tesla is threatening to trump all of them.
A GTR is "just as quick in the real world", so McLaren or Ferrari just shouldn't bother?

[anonymous-user]

RumbleOfThunder said:

jsf said:

Roscoe5 said:

Game changer!! Looks subtle, yet faster than a p1

?

There is more to making a fast car than straight line speed. If that Tesla can match the technology applied into the performance of the P1 i'd love to see it. I know some of the guys that worked on the P1 and know what goes into product proving a car like that to bring it to market, it's laughable that a Tesla just launched as a PR stunt could come close in the real world as a car you could drive.

[RemarkLima]

Ocellia said:

Too fast? 99% of drivers will be incapable of handling that power, not to mention that UK roads are just too crowded.
Teenage boy stuff?

So the same is said of mclaren, porsche, Ferrari, lambogini, and basically every 'performance' car that can do 70mph in 2nd gear... Everything is too quick now, and with little feeling to really enjoy it.

[RumbleOfThunder]

jsf said:

RumbleOfThunder said:

jsf said:

Roscoe5 said:

Game changer!! Looks subtle, yet faster than a p1

?

There is more to making a fast car than straight line speed. If that Tesla can match the technology applied into the performance of the P1 i'd love to see it. I know some of the guys that worked on the P1 and know what goes into product proving a car like that to bring it to market, it's laughable that a Tesla just launched as a PR stunt could come close in the real world as a car you could drive.

Well so far we know it's faster in the typical acceleration tests and will have a higher top speed. The Roadster isn't a track biased Hypercar, so suspect it wont lap as fast as a P1, but time will tell on that. It's a GT more in the vein of a Chiron anyway. Point is there's nothing wrong with his statement is there?