Whatever Happened to Electric Cars?

Your Subaru will do 0-60 in 3.2 seconds? Sorry, I gotta call bullshit on that. Plus, as you said "when the turbo kicks in", the Tesla does it instantly, without waiting for anything.

And no, the point of the Tesla is not to scare little old ladies. I thought the video was entertaining. I guess you didn't.





No, it will do it in 4.7 seconds. However IT'S a STATION WAGON! And it costs HALF of what a Tesla does. And no, nothing on this planet goes from zero to 60 "instantly". That's a physical impossibility, the top fuel dragsters are the fastest accelerating cars in the world and they do 0-60 in .48 seconds at 5.7 G acceleration. That computes to 0-100 mph in .8 seconds.

Annnd, checking a non biased source shows the base Model S 0-60 time as 5.6 seconds. The Tesla Performance drops that to 3.9 seconds, at an additional cost of 23,000 dollars! Almost the entire cost of my Outback!


Tesla 0-60 Times Quarter Mile Times - Zero to 60MPH Zero to 60MPH

I did not mean it would be going 60 mph instantly. But I did mean that an electric motor does not wait for anythingto spin up, kick in, or gulp air. In fact, that is one of the common themes of people who drove them is the instant response to the accelerator.

Whether it is a station wagon or whether it is free, the claim was made that the Subaru will do that (when the turbo kicks in).

Also, the base model Tesla is not what I was referring to, nor was it what was in the video. That is a Tesla Model S P85D, with the dual electric motors. Yes, it is an expensive car. But that does not change any of the performance facts.





The zero to 60 speeds for the Subaru beat the standard Tesla. You have to spend 23,000 more to be able to beat my station wagon......so I guess yes, you are correct, but I would expect a 95,000 dollar vehicle to beat a 30,000 dollar one. Wouldn't you?

If that was its sole attribute, sure. But your Subaru will beat a Mercedes S550. Does that make the Mercedes worthless?




Not at all. Did I claim the Tesla was worthless? I just claimed it wasn't that impressive.

Ok, so you are not impressed with a production luxury sedan that will do 0-60 in 3.2 seconds. No problem.
 
No, it will do it in 4.7 seconds. However IT'S a STATION WAGON! And it costs HALF of what a Tesla does. And no, nothing on this planet goes from zero to 60 "instantly". That's a physical impossibility, the top fuel dragsters are the fastest accelerating cars in the world and they do 0-60 in .48 seconds at 5.7 G acceleration. That computes to 0-100 mph in .8 seconds.

Annnd, checking a non biased source shows the base Model S 0-60 time as 5.6 seconds. The Tesla Performance drops that to 3.9 seconds, at an additional cost of 23,000 dollars! Almost the entire cost of my Outback!


Tesla 0-60 Times Quarter Mile Times - Zero to 60MPH Zero to 60MPH

I did not mean it would be going 60 mph instantly. But I did mean that an electric motor does not wait for anythingto spin up, kick in, or gulp air. In fact, that is one of the common themes of people who drove them is the instant response to the accelerator.

Whether it is a station wagon or whether it is free, the claim was made that the Subaru will do that (when the turbo kicks in).

Also, the base model Tesla is not what I was referring to, nor was it what was in the video. That is a Tesla Model S P85D, with the dual electric motors. Yes, it is an expensive car. But that does not change any of the performance facts.





The zero to 60 speeds for the Subaru beat the standard Tesla. You have to spend 23,000 more to be able to beat my station wagon......so I guess yes, you are correct, but I would expect a 95,000 dollar vehicle to beat a 30,000 dollar one. Wouldn't you?

If that was its sole attribute, sure. But your Subaru will beat a Mercedes S550. Does that make the Mercedes worthless?




Not at all. Did I claim the Tesla was worthless? I just claimed it wasn't that impressive.

Ok, so you are not impressed with a production luxury sedan that will do 0-60 in 3.2 seconds. No problem.





It's 3.9 seconds as tested by non biased testors, and no. I'm not. I would EXPECT a 93,000 dollar PERFORMANCE luxury sedan to do that. C'mon dude, it says PERFORMANCE in the NAME of the car! It is faster 0-60 than all the ICE cars in it's class, so that's a definite point in it's favor, however the range factor on a long drive is still an issue. But, like I have said many times before. I like the S, it is a world class sedan. There is no doubt about that!
 
Bullshit. The tailpipe emissions of a modern car are basically zero. (Some cars, the emissions ARE zero!)

I suggest you post what cars are zero emission. I can't seem to find any that arn't either wind or electric powered. I think there are few experimental solars that make zero. But name one combustion engined car that is zero emission. Even Hydrogen is not zero emission.

Now, step away from Pauxsnews and actually do some research yourself.

Almost all Subarus, the Ford Focus, the Prius, some Hondas, and I think the Fiesta are all PZEV. Even those that aren't are incredibly clean. When smogged, my Magnum (a 2007, a Tear II ULEV) blew zero across the board. No carbon monoxide, no unburned fuel, and no oxides of nitrogen.
 
Superchargers

A ways to go yet, but considering how quickly Tesla is putting these stations up, by 2020, you will never be more than 100 miles from one.

Two glaring problems. One, partially-charging a battery is one of the fastest ways to kill it! And two, it cannot last...it is not a sustainable business model.

That was true with nickel and nickel-cadium batteries. But partially discharging a lithium-ion battery is preferable to a complete discharge. So partially discharging the batteries and recharging them is better than completely discharging the li-ion batteries.

No, not partially-discharging, partially-CHARGING.
 
It's 3.9 seconds as tested by non biased testors, and no. I'm not. I would EXPECT a 93,000 dollar PERFORMANCE luxury sedan to do that. C'mon dude, it says PERFORMANCE in the NAME of the car! It is faster 0-60 than all the ICE cars in it's class, so that's a definite point in it's favor, however the range factor on a long drive is still an issue. But, like I have said many times before. I like the S, it is a world class sedan. There is no doubt about that!

It isn't faster to 60 because it's electric...it is faster to 60 simply because it is all-wheel drive! Forget 0-60, what is the 1/4 mile time and trap speed?
 
Bullshit. The tailpipe emissions of a modern car are basically zero. (Some cars, the emissions ARE zero!)

I suggest you post what cars are zero emission. I can't seem to find any that arn't either wind or electric powered. I think there are few experimental solars that make zero. But name one combustion engined car that is zero emission. Even Hydrogen is not zero emission.

Now, step away from Pauxsnews and actually do some research yourself.

Almost all Subarus, the Ford Focus, the Prius, some Hondas, and I think the Fiesta are all PZEV. Even those that aren't are incredibly clean. When smogged, my Magnum (a 2007, a Tear II ULEV) blew zero across the board. No carbon monoxide, no unburned fuel, and no oxides of nitrogen.




Mine too.
 
It's 3.9 seconds as tested by non biased testors, and no. I'm not. I would EXPECT a 93,000 dollar PERFORMANCE luxury sedan to do that. C'mon dude, it says PERFORMANCE in the NAME of the car! It is faster 0-60 than all the ICE cars in it's class, so that's a definite point in it's favor, however the range factor on a long drive is still an issue. But, like I have said many times before. I like the S, it is a world class sedan. There is no doubt about that!

It isn't faster to 60 because it's electric...it is faster to 60 simply because it is all-wheel drive! Forget 0-60, what is the 1/4 mile time and trap speed?





No, the electric motors in the front wheel help it along. Electric acceleration is very, very fast. Were it a ICE vehicle with all wheel drive it wouldn't be as fast.
 
It is quicker to 60 because it is AWD. Offhand, it CANNOT benefit from something a combustion engine car can: stored flywheel energy. To drag a Porsche 911 turbo, it's simple: put it in first gear, spin the engine to 6500+RPM, and drop the clutch. The energy stored in a spinning flywheel is tremendous! Drag cars with automatic transmissions accomplish the same thing by loading the engine against the torque converter and a transmission brake...watch the car (gray Mustang hatch) in the far lane for a graphic example of what that can do:

 
It is quicker to 60 because it is AWD. Offhand, it CANNOT benefit from something a combustion engine car can: stored flywheel energy. To drag a Porsche 911 turbo, it's simple: put it in first gear, spin the engine to 6500+RPM, and drop the clutch. The energy stored in a spinning flywheel is tremendous! Drag cars with automatic transmissions accomplish the same thing by loading the engine against the torque converter and a transmission brake...watch the car (gray Mustang hatch) in the far lane for a graphic example of what that can do:







My Outback is AWD, and yes the front wheels really help it get up and go. But, if it were an electric I would be at least a half second faster. That is simple reality. Off the line it is doggy till around 15 mph when the turbo spools up and kicks you in the ass.
 
Same thing the Subaru runs.

But the Subaru doesn't make 280HP/litre. (That is not a typo.)







Yeah, I know.....I just don't have the power. That's what I was referring too.
 
It's all in the software.

Electric motors like in Boston's old streetcars would accelerate until they wound themselves up so fast that they flew apart.

But today's software keeps that from happening.

All it takes is faith. Like the kind of faith that your Windows PC's software will never lead you into the Valley of The Blue Screen of Death.

That kind of immense faith.
 

Forum List

Back
Top