TESLA S "Insane", vs McLaren Spyder

[westwall]

Guess who wins. Even though the S beats the McLaren in every category power wise (at least according to Tesla) the race isn't even close.....

Granted the McLaren costs twice as much, but there are plenty of inexpensive super car killers out there. The TESLA isn't one of them however....

 

[Wyatt earp]

Want to see it vs a bogati (Spl?), was watching a McLaren get blown away by one the other day.

 

[Wyatt earp]

And btw OP you know who would win if it was a cannon ball run...

Hell a clown car VW bug would win vs a telsa.

 

[Wyatt earp]

For the younger crowd who don't know what a cannon ball run is

Cannonball Run intro:

 

[Wyatt earp]

I want to see that telsa a go up against a 1000 hp Bugatti in the one mile.

Bugatti Veyron vs McLaren F1 - Top Gear - BBC:

 

[westwall]

I want to see that telsa a go up against a 1000 hp Bugatti in the one mile.

Bugatti Veyron vs McLaren F1 - Top Gear - BBC:

And, given a choice, I would take the F1 every time. What is amazing is there is a 30 year difference in technology and the F1 actually was very close.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I want to see a Tesla go up against Jon Huber's car. Hey, it's just an old 4-banger Mustang!

 

[eagle1462010]

One is a 4 sedan versus a 2 door sports car.............
Different purpose for the vehicles.............

both too pricey for me.....................

Until they get the price in half I wouldn't even consider a battery car.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I want to see that telsa a go up against a 1000 hp Bugatti in the one mile.

Bugatti Veyron vs McLaren F1 - Top Gear - BBC:

And, given a choice, I would take the F1 every time. What is amazing is there is a 30 year difference in technology and the F1 actually was very close.

I was thinking the same thing, by looks and all that bugatti is ugly, no style and no one is going over much the speed limit here.

 

[westwall]

I want to see a Tesla go up against Jon Huber's car. Hey, it's just an old 4-banger Mustang!

That harks back to the good old days of Formula One when they were running the four cylinder turbos. IIRC they were producing 800 horsepower out of them, but the "grenades" that they made especially for qualifying, put out 1350 horse, but they only lasted for 3 laps!

 

[westwall]

One is a 4 sedan versus a 2 door sports car.............
Different purpose for the vehicles.............

both too pricey for me.....................

Until they get the price in half I wouldn't even consider a battery car.

Absolutely true. However TESLA loves to market their sedan as a "sport" sedan. And, as I said, the TESLA owns the McLaren in power and torque, but where it matters, on the street, not the lab, the McLaren crushes the TESLA.

If one were to listen to olfraud and crick and the rest of the rah rah's, the McLaren shouldn't have stood a chance.

 

[Crick]

How is this thread on topic?

 

[westwall]

How is this thread on topic?

It's every bit as environmentally relevant as any other olfraud thread about EV's and how they compare to ICE vehicles. You don't seem to complain when he posts those. This is merely comparing and contrasting the difference between an EV (green, though not really) and a ICE vehicle which makes no claim to be "green" but, when one actually looks at the productions costs and pollution emitted during construction is actually "greener" than the TESLA.

And, that is why this thread is on topic.

 

[Crick]

None of the discussion so far has made the slightest mention of the environment or any effect these vehicles will have on it. It is off topic and should be relocated.

 

[westwall]

None of the discussion so far has made the slightest mention of the environment or any effect these vehicles will have on it. It is off topic and should be relocated.

Neither do olfrauds and you have never once reported on trying to get it moved. That being said why do you support EV's KNOWING that they are far more polluting to manufacture than this supercar?

 

[Old Rocks]

You make that claim without any credible source to back it up, Mr. Westwall. And your credibility is hardly something to be admired.

 

[Crick]

None of the discussion so far has made the slightest mention of the environment or any effect these vehicles will have on it. It is off topic and should be relocated.

Neither do olfrauds and you have never once reported on trying to get it moved.

What reports I have or have not made is completely irrelevant.

That being said why do you support EV's KNOWING that they are far more polluting to manufacture than this supercar?

Because during their lifetime they will produce a tiny fraction of the amount of harmful emissions that McLaren will produce.

 

[westwall]

None of the discussion so far has made the slightest mention of the environment or any effect these vehicles will have on it. It is off topic and should be relocated.

Neither do olfrauds and you have never once reported on trying to get it moved.

What reports I have or have not made is completely irrelevant.

That being said why do you support EV's KNOWING that they are far more polluting to manufacture than this supercar?

Because during their lifetime they will produce a tiny fraction of the amount of harmful emissions that McLaren will produce.

They will? So you completely ignore the point source pollution that is created to charge them? Electricity is not magical. To do a rapid charge the EV must be connected to the grid so no solar to recharge (unless you want to wait a few weeks between drives) and as we all know power plants produce FAR more pollutants than any car ever will. The McLaren produces 280ish gm/kg of CO2. Which, based on empirical evidence does nothing.

The TESLA though, gets most of its power from either coal or gas power plants and they produce all manner of pollutants. The McLaren doesn't.

 

[Crick]

The grid makes power far more efficiently than does that McLaren.s gas guzzling power mill, particularly as more and more of the grid is powered by low and no carbon sources.

 

[westwall]

The grid makes power far more efficiently than does that McLaren.s gas guzzling power mill, particularly as more and more of the grid is powered by low and no carbon sources.

What percent of the grid is actually powered by renewables? Not "projected" or "installed capacity", actual energy being delivered?