Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Tesla Roadster 2.0
Options
Comments
-
You're some comedian
Why?
The tech is developing so fast it's literally 10 years from a regular sedan being as fast as an M3, why exactly have I said that comedic?
Your the delusional comedian
People who buy performance cars now spend a fortune on them and usually can drive , taken then on track days etc . With tech like this you have average Joe driving out of the dealership in a car that will end his family's life in 10 seconds, I'm not talking now I mean in 10 years.
Do you ride superbikes? Because if not you can't even comprehend how fast these vehicles are going to end up and it will trickle down to mainstream sedans.0 -
Why would someone spend 60k on a car when they can't drive?
I wouldn't buy a superbike if I can't ride a bike?Why?
The tech is developing so fast it's literally 10 years from a regular sedan being as fast as an M3, why exactly have I said that comedic?
Your the delusional comedian
People who buy performance cars now spend a fortune on them and usually can drive , taken then on track days etc . With tech like this you have average Joe driving out of the dealership in a car that will end his family's life in 10 seconds, I'm not talking now I mean in 10 years.
Do you ride superbikes? Because if not you can't even comprehend how fast these vehicles are going to end up and it will trickle down to mainstream sedans.0 -
It's won't even touch them, the thing looks like crap with an interior to match no doubt and if your buying a supercar you want attention and nothing gets attention like the noise off a supercar, that the whole point. If it doesn't make noise then that's most of the thrill gone.
It's like saying a Chinese handbag is better than a french one, it may be but that's not going to change opinions
I would like to see how if drives other than a straight line seeing as it's going to be mega heavy.
No one on the road can drive any of them to their limit so the power figures while interesting/insane are pretty pointless in the real world.
I'm more interested in the tech trickling down, like they will have to start limiting these when family man who can't drive at all can go and pick up a 60k car from the dealer that could see him crashing a few mins leaving the dealership.
What are you talking about? There is so much dribble in that post, it was hard to choose what part of it I should clean up first.
Firstly, it looks great. But then some cars are fugly to the majority of us while being drop dead gorgeous to a small few.
While the noise of some "super cars" can be a thrill, it's not the main attraction. Personally, I would rather drive a quiet, good looking car than a noisy, ugly beast. It's also largely about performance and that's where the d1ck measuring comes in. Noise is way down the list unless you drive a fart can.
French bags ARE better than chinese bags. Most chinese made rubbish falls apart and/or are knock-offs. The exception is when there is a high level of quality control from international companies.
I would be confident that Tesla will make sure it drives pretty well....and they would want to with such power. The weight (and where they put it) will help with the low centre of gravity.
The vast majority of cars on the road are well capable of breaking the speed limits and most can go twice over, or more. So your last point is irrelevant.
Also, people drive cars they shouldn't be in every single day of the week. Twice this week I was nearly side swiped by soccer moms in big people carriers they couldn't drive.0 -
0
-
BBC piece I saw on this said investors were getting "Concerned" at the speed and amount of products Elon was thinking up.0
-
Advertisement
-
What are you talking about? There is so much dribble in that post, it was hard to choose what part of it I should clean up first.
Firstly, it looks great. But then some cars are fugly to the majority of us while being drop dead gorgeous to a small few.
While the noise of some "super cars" can be a thrill, it's not the main attraction. Personally, I would rather drive a quiet, good looking car than a noisy, ugly beast. It's also largely about performance and that's where the d1ck measuring comes in. Noise is way down the list unless you drive a fart can.
French bags ARE better than chinese bags. Most chinese made rubbish falls apart and/or are knock-offs. The exception is when there is a high level of quality control from international companies.
I would be confident that Tesla will make sure it drives pretty well....and they would want to with such power. The weight (and where they put it) will help with the low centre of gravity.
The vast majority of cars on the road are well capable of breaking the speed limits and most can go twice over, or more. So your last point is irrelevant.
Also, people drive cars they shouldn't be in every single day of the week. Twice this week I was nearly side swiped by soccer moms in big people carriers they couldn't drive.
Ok where to start.
Who buys a supercar that doesn't make noise? What's the point of having one if you can't be heard before your seen. There's no point, to be attention seeking. You want everyone looking at you. If your driving up a street you want everyone to turn their heads simple
Handling, the thing will handle like **** because it will weigh an absolutely enormous weight, that's not even up for discussion it's a given.
The car doesn't look great, it looks ok and it hideous compared to the other supercar offerings around, the interior is a joke.
When I say speed I should clarify acceleration, yes you are right every car can break the speed limit but not in a couple of seconds like it looks like ev's are going.
You think I'm anti ev, I'm not. Il probably buy one soon but I think Tesla are a sham.
Teslas cars from reading owners forums are a joke regarding build quality and musk promises the earth when he can't deliver 1/1000 of the vehicles he claims he will manufacture every quarter to investors. Half the world love them and half think they are a Ponzi scheme , I think the latter.
Look at the 3, where are they? The are making 3 a day when they are supposed to be making 90
No one in their right mind would buy a Tesla over a Ferrari no matter how fast it is, it would always be a second supercar purchase , so the argument it will kill other manufacturers is just absolute rubbish
I don't see how you don't find it interesting the way the tech is developing though. We've never seen anything like the performance these cars are making , it will trickle down and you will legitimately be able to buy a car in 5 years for average money with insane performance.
You say that will result in no difference in roads accidents and I argue it will, which it obviously will
Do you guys talk about hydrogen cars here or is that in the main forum? Seeing as that's where the major Jap manufacturers plus Hyundai are betting over ev that would be an interesting read0 -
Handling, the thing will handle like **** because it will weigh an absolutely enormous weight, that's not even up for discussion it's a given.
That is up for discussion. The only way I see the engineering working out for traction etc is with a lot less weight than a model S.
Cell energy density is increasing which means increases in battery capacity without increases in weight or volume.
The majority of the difference in capacity between the battery specs of the roadster from 2008 and the roadster 2020 are accounted for by these changes.
In addition the roadster 2020 is carbon fiber bodied vs the steel/aluminum roadster 2008.
There are a number of other inherent advantages EVs have over combustion that come into play with handling.
This is an i3 next to an ActiveE (electric 1-series):
Tall car right? how do you think it handles?
What if I told you the center of gravity of the i3 is lower than the 3-series (and pretty much at the same height as the GT86's) and it has weight distribution 48.5:51.5?
Batteries in a purpose built EV are mounted low in the chassis, comprise a lot of the weight of the vehicle and can be split and distributed to optimise weight distribution. And the low low CofG means they stick to the road like they're on rails.
The next big thing is Torque vectoring. Motors weigh and cost next to nothing in comparison to the battery or combustion engines.
You can have pretty much as many motors as you like, all coming with the advantages of precision control, torque from 0RPM, the ability to run freely without clutching and the ability to apply negative torque. All to individual wheels/axles.
I've driven the roadster and model S and both handle well and compare to the german competition. The only thing I dislike is the steering on the model S which is a bit vague.the interior is a joke.
*cough* prototype almost three years from volume production. Let's not judge just yet. For the record I'm not a fan of the prototype's interior either.Do you guys talk about hydrogen cars here or is that in the main forum? Seeing as that's where the major Jap manufacturers plus Hyundai are betting over ev that would be an interesting read
HEVs would technically belong in this forum. However they don't make any sense from an economic or technical standpoint.
I've direct experience in my day job of working with H2 fuel cells for certain remote and large scale applications.
They make sense for some purpose, but the last place they make sense is road transportation.
None of the car manufacturers have made anything close the the progress required on total roadblocks to practical HEVs. A not remotely exhaustive list:
The production cost of the stack (due to raw material costs not just production scale).
h2 production - 95% of which is currently from reformed natural gas.. this and my last point makes H2 expensive... around double the cost per km of petrol... and as much as 25 times higher than battery electric.
Safety issues due not least of which to high pressure requirement of storing usable quantities of H2 in acceptable volumes (want to see a Toyota engineer stop breathing? Ask them what happens if there's the tiniest flaw or damage to the COPV H2 tank). Not just confined to the vehicle itself, there are persistent safety issues throughout, largely down to H2 being a pain the arse to store and transfer (highly reactive gas, odourless, leaks through airtight seals, embrittles metals, reacts with many materials in common automotive use like rubber and certain plastics).
Refueling and infrastructure - 350kW rapid chargers being deployed right now are faster than H2 refueling. H2 refueling is not a simple process or even that quick, regardless of the sophistication of the H2 refueling station it's a lot more difficult, time-consuming and intolerant of errors/faults than pumping a liquid at atmospheric pressure. Other consequences of this include the inability to provide home refueling due to safety and cost issues which makes people reliant on a commercial infrastructure. And the commercial infrastructure? reliant on massive subsidies... how massive? Well you could buy 10-20 BEV rapid chargers for the cost of a single H2 pump. What commercial infrastructure has been built is unreliable in the extreme, many issues with the HEV lessees in california being unable to refuel their vehicles and having to leave them garaged for weeks or more due to all stations within range being out of operation.... meanwhile electricity is everywhere, the only issue is billing and allowing access.
Power output of automotive fuel cells is cack. Buffer batteries are required since the FCs operate fairly steady state. These buffer batteries are small to keep cost/volume/weight low... therefore discharge is low and they can't run powerful electric motors.
Degradation - not just of the fuel cell (parasitic reactions), issues with the entire h2 fuel system and how long it can be trusted without replacement or major overhaul/inspection. The Mirai for example has a "do not fuel after" date on the inside of the filler flap.
and the biggest issue of all... Efficiency... total system efficiency from electricity source (if using electrolysis... which you'd have to for it to be clean) to road surface not only 3-5 times lower than a battery EV, but also lower than some existing combustion vehicles (from the crude). There are substantial losses at every step in the chain all the way through H2 production and distribution <= many of these are inherent to the processes and materials involved and are unfixable (at least within the known laws of physics) and hands the cost of operation and TCO advantage to BEV
Apart from two projects well into the pipeline for ZEV credits, Hyundai has abandoned HEV development. Daimler's HEV team disbanded.
And the only reason Toyota & Honda have continued is the money being handed to them by the Japanese government (who have a madcap plan to mine ocean methane hydrates that will never (and should never) get off the ground) and the lack of another plan (though Akio Toyoda has set up a BEV development team headed by himself and has been poaching some of the best engineers from every project in sight).
I used think (and still see some use cases for) SOFC methane fuel cells would be good as range extender for long range electric HGVs.... Methane is much more energy dense and way easier to store and handle. but battery density and pricing has moved quicker than anticipated and for the limited remaining use cases it's not worth the development cost vs a diesel or petrol generator given that batteries would likely cover those edge cases too with the advent of any of the energy dense metal air chemistries.
HEVs are really just a combined delay tactic and PR exercise. Not something that has any future.0 -
That is up for discussion. The only way I see the engineering working out for traction etc is with a lot less weight than a model S.
Cell energy density is increasing which means increases in battery capacity without increases in weight or volume.
The majority of the difference in capacity between the battery specs of the roadster from 2008 and the roadster 2020 are accounted for by these changes.
In addition the roadster 2020 is carbon fiber bodied vs the steel/aluminum roadster 2008.
There are a number of other inherent advantages EVs have over combustion that come into play with handling.
This is an i3 next to an ActiveE (electric 1-series):
Tall car right? how do you think it handles?
What if I told you the center of gravity of the i3 is lower than the 3-series (and pretty much at the same height as the GT86's) and it has weight distribution 48.5:51.5?
Batteries in a purpose built EV are mounted low in the chassis, comprise a lot of the weight of the vehicle and can be split and distributed to optimise weight distribution. And the low low CofG means they stick to the road like they're on rails.
The next big thing is Torque vectoring. Motors weigh and cost next to nothing in comparison to the battery or combustion engines.
You can have pretty much as many motors as you like, all coming with the advantages of precision control, torque from 0RPM, the ability to run freely without clutching and the ability to apply negative torque. All to individual wheels/axles.
I've driven the roadster and model S and both handle well and compare to the german competition. The only thing I dislike is the steering on the model S which is a bit vague.
*cough* prototype almost three years from volume production. Let's not judge just yet. For the record I'm not a fan of the prototype's interior either.
HEVs would technically belong in this forum. However they don't make any sense from an economic or technical standpoint.
I've direct experience in my day job of working with H2 fuel cells for certain remote and large scale applications.
They make sense for some purpose, but the last place they make sense is road transportation.
None of the car manufacturers have made anything close the the progress required on total roadblocks to practical HEVs. A not remotely exhaustive list:
The production cost of the stack (due to raw material costs not just production scale).
h2 production - 95% of which is currently from reformed natural gas.. this and my last point makes H2 expensive... around double the cost per km of petrol... and as much as 25 times higher than battery electric.
Safety issues due not least of which to high pressure requirement of storing usable quantities of H2 in acceptable volumes (want to see a Toyota engineer stop breathing? Ask them what happens if there's the tiniest flaw or damage to the COPV H2 tank). Not just confined to the vehicle itself, there are persistent safety issues throughout, largely down to H2 being a pain the arse to store and transfer (highly reactive gas, odourless, leaks through airtight seals, embrittles metals, reacts with many materials in common automotive use like rubber and certain plastics).
Refueling and infrastructure - 350kW rapid chargers being deployed right now are faster than H2 refueling. H2 refueling is not a simple process or even that quick, regardless of the sophistication of the H2 refueling station it's a lot more difficult, time-consuming and intolerant of errors/faults than pumping a liquid at atmospheric pressure. Other consequences of this include the inability to provide home refueling due to safety and cost issues which makes people reliant on a commercial infrastructure. And the commercial infrastructure? reliant on massive subsidies... how massive? Well you could buy 10-20 BEV rapid chargers for the cost of a single H2 pump. What commercial infrastructure has been built is unreliable in the extreme, many issues with the HEV lessees in california being unable to refuel their vehicles and having to leave them garaged for weeks or more due to all stations within range being out of operation.... meanwhile electricity is everywhere, the only issue is billing and allowing access.
Power output of automotive fuel cells is cack. Buffer batteries are required since the FCs operate fairly steady state. These buffer batteries are small to keep cost/volume/weight low... therefore discharge is low and they can't run powerful electric motors.
Degradation - not just of the fuel cell (parasitic reactions), issues with the entire h2 fuel system and how long it can be trusted without replacement or major overhaul/inspection. The Mirai for example has a "do not fuel after" date on the inside of the filler flap.
and the biggest issue of all... Efficiency... total system efficiency from electricity source (if using electrolysis... which you'd have to for it to be clean) to road surface not only 3-5 times lower than a battery EV, but also lower than some existing combustion vehicles (from the crude). There are substantial losses at every step in the chain all the way through H2 production and distribution <= many of these are inherent to the processes and materials involved and are unfixable (at least within the known laws of physics) and hands the cost of operation and TCO advantage to BEV
Apart from two projects well into the pipeline for ZEV credits, Hyundai has abandoned HEV development. Daimler's HEV team disbanded.
And the only reason Toyota & Honda have continued is the money being handed to them by the Japanese government (who have a madcap plan to mine ocean methane hydrates that will never (and should never) get off the ground) and the lack of another plan (though Akio Toyoda has set up a BEV development team headed by himself and has been poaching some of the best engineers from every project in sight).
I used think (and still see some use cases for) SOFC methane fuel cells would be good as range extender for long range electric HGVs.... Methane is much more energy dense and way easier to store and handle. but battery density and pricing has moved quicker than anticipated and for the limited remaining use cases it's not worth the development cost vs a diesel or petrol generator given that batteries would likely cover those edge cases too with the advent of any of the energy dense metal air chemistries.
HEVs are really just a combined delay tactic and PR exercise. Not something that has any future.
I'm not even going to try to argue against you there , fair play and thank you that is one seriously informative post.
3 questions
do you not foresee a huge problem in Ireland because we don't have nuclear which we really need to make ev viable for everyone to drive. I should add I'm heavily pro nuclear
Second question, these battery's require a mineral that is not infinite and will become more expensive as more are produced and less mineral will be available.From what I have read, at the moment there is only one company in the world that can extract it from used batteries, they can extract very little and it costs a fortune and is not even viable . will this not pose a problem?
I read an article that addresses the safety issue of hydrogen and said it was an absolute non issue, hence why the manufacturers are going ahead with it? I.e greatly exaggerated danger
Only thing I have to take issue with is the handling, you've posted 2 regular cars that aren't for performance. The Tesla weight is alot higher than it's competition in the performance car world. There's no way it can handle as well, I'm not talking about regular road cars where it doesn't really matter tbh
Cheers0 -
Join Date:Posts: 33495
I'm not even going to try to argue against you there , fair play and thank you that is one seriously informative post.
3 questions
do you not foresee a huge problem in Ireland because we don't have nuclear which we really need to make ev viable for everyone to drive. I should add I'm heavily pro nuclear
Second question, these battery's require a mineral that is not infinite and will become more expensive as more are produced and less mineral will be available.From what I have read, at the moment there is only one company in the world that can extract it from used batteries, they can extract very little and it costs a fortune and is not even viable . will this not pose a problem?
I read an article that addresses the safety issue of hydrogen and said it was an absolute non issue, hence why the manufacturers are going ahead with it? I.e greatly exaggerated danger
Only thing I have to take issue with is the handling, you've posted 2 regular cars that aren't for performance. The Tesla weight is alot higher than it's competition in the performance car world. There's no way it can handle as well, I'm not talking about regular road cars where it doesn't really matter tbh
Cheers
Just going off figures from Wikipedia
Original Roadster - 1,305 kg
Aston Martin DBS - 1,850 kg
Bugatti Chiron - 1,996 kg
Bugatti Veyron - 1,828+ kg
La Ferrari - 1,255 kg (dry) 1,585 kg (I'll be honest, I have no idea what dry weight means here or which of those figures is more relevant).
Lamborghini Aventador - 1,575 kg
Porsche 918 Spyder - 1,634-1,704 kg
Koenigsegg Agera - 1,360-1,435 kg
Porsche 911 GT2 RS - 1,470 kg
Even if the new Roadster has a couple of hundred extra kilos added on it still compares pretty well there.0 -
AlmightyCushion wrote: »I'll be honest, I have no idea what dry weight means here or which of those figures is more relevant.
Dry weight is the weight of a vehicle without any consumables, passengers, or cargo.
It is one of the two common weight measurements included in road vehicle specifications, the other one being curb weight.
By definition, dry weight does not include any of the following:- Gasoline, diesel or any other fuel
- Engine oil
- Coolant
- Brake fluid
- Power steering fluid
- Transmission fluid
- Washer fluid
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_weightAlmightyCushion wrote: »Even if the new Roadster has a couple of hundred extra kilos added on it still compares pretty well there.
But da vroom?!0 -
Advertisement
-
One thing I dont get is how does this Roadster which am guessing has well over 1000bhp do 20kWh/100km in normal driving and a Leaf with 100bhp does 17kWh/100km, why so little difference in consumption?
Roadster has 3 high powered motors too and Leaf has a single weak motor
A bugatti Veyron or similar power 1000bhp ICE does maybe 8mpg and a little petrol with 100bhp does 50mpg.0 -
One thing I dont get is how does this Roadster which am guessing has well over 1000bhp do 20kWh/100km in normal driving and a Leaf with 100bhp does 17kWh/100km, why so little difference in consumption?
Roadster has 3 high powered motors too and Leaf has a single weak motor
A bugatti Veyron or similar power 1000bhp ICE does maybe 8mpg and a little petrol with 100bhp does 50mpg.
No matter how much power it is producing, the V12 needs to move all of those cylinders, compress the air et al. There is also optimal capacity per kW of produced power, when combustion is most efficient. More capacity leads to less economy when same power is produced.
Electric drive train has minimal parasitic loses and none of the above apply for with an electric drive-train. It is mainly rolling drag (correlated with weight) and aerodynamic drag (aerodynamic profile) that matter for an electric car. Even the weight itself isn't as important, as the electric car has very efficient kinetic energy recapture.0 -
do you not foresee a huge problem in Ireland because we don't have nuclear which we really need to make ev viable for everyone to drive. I should add I'm heavily pro nuclear
Short answer at least for the short/medium term is that we already have pretty much the generation capacity we need for over a decade of 100% of new cars being EV.
This is Eirgrid demand across the 32 county grid for the last week:
Those troughs are the drop in nighttime electricity demand and represent an amount of power roughly equivalent to 40-60% of the energy consumption of the private car fleet in Ireland over the same period if they were 15kWh/100km EVs. Most EVs charge at night anyway.
I'm an engineer, not a political activist. I have no issue with nuclear power, I've done a lot of reading on all the new reactor products like the VVER reactors and Toshiba's 4S. The big problem with nuclear is that in large part due to the political/ideological opposition the cost per kWh to build a reactor is off the scale and the time to getting the power station in service is way too long. In an ideal world there would have been a production line cracking out thousands of small modular reactors 20 years ago, but we don't live in that world.
In the world we live in at the moment you can (in most countries) go from greenfield site to 100MW solar PV plant inside of 6 months and, unsubsidised, produce power for a fraction of the cost per kWh of a new nuclear plant. It's just way way cheaper to overprovision solar PV and Wind than build a nuclear plant. And Solar PV and Wind costs are dropping (see Swanson's law) while nuclear's are going up.
Then there were the old arguments about base load. With smart grid management, a good mix of complimentary renewables, some demand response, some gas peakers and a little energy storage (pumped hydro and grid battery) for frequency support and short term needs we're seeing a lot of those worries evaporate.Second question, these battery's require a mineral that is not infinite and will become more expensive as more are produced and less mineral will be available.From what I have read, at the moment there is only one company in the world that can extract it from used batteries, they can extract very little and it costs a fortune and is not even viable . will this not pose a problem?
There are a wide variety of battery chemistries with various metals used. The biggest issue we have is with cobalt which is mostly a secondary output of mining for other metals and is therefore supply inelastic (though glencore and other mining groups are responding to high cobalt market prices and reopening some shut mines (whose primary metal had become uneconomic to mine but the cobalt price changes the equation) or exploring new opportunities, like the new mines in Spain). Not all chemistries use cobalt, for example BYD (the largest EV/PHEV manufacturer in the world... building more plugin vehicles per year than Tesla) uses cobalt-free Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries.
Next most problematic material is actually graphite, it this case it's not limited graphite supply, it's limited plant capacity to process raw graphite into high purity spherical graphite which is used as a battery anode material in a lot of chemistries.
Apart from those two materials the rest of the battery is common materials. Usually the largest component metal is aluminium then different chemistries have metals like nickel (nickel pricing may be a problem 'til supply can catch up), Iron, Copper, Magnesium etc. etc.
Lithium, despite the headlines, is very common. There's plenty of it in commercially viable quantities here in Ireland. In a pinch it can even be extracted from seawater (well, ideally from the brine from desalination plants and the market price for lithium would need to be quite high to make it viable) or even Iceland's geothermal wells (which would be more viable).
If you've drank water from a domestic tap or well in many areas of Ireland there's lithium in the water, it was even considered at one point that lithium might get added to water like fluoride in areas where it was not already present as lithium plays a role in normal fetal development and neurological development in children.I read an article that addresses the safety issue of hydrogen and said it was an absolute non issue, hence why the manufacturers are going ahead with it? I.e greatly exaggerated danger
It's definitely not a non-issue. Have they improved crash safety with recent designs, yes. But refueling safety and the lack of a margin for error in manufacturing remain problems. There's no way storing hydrogen at 700 times atmospheric pressure (like the Mirai does) in a moving vehicle will ever be described by any of the engineers as a non-issue. Toyota use a COPV (carbon overwrapped pressure vessel) to avoid having to add hundreds and hundreds of kilos of steel to the h2 tank to handle the pressure. But COPVs need to be manufactured with much more precision and are much more costly. We also don't fully understand the effect of stresses like temperature changes and repeated mechanical stress like road shocks on the long term structural integrity of COPV tanks. Even NASA is nervous about stress ruptures on COPV tanks and has long term research programs looking at them. A natural gas powered vehicle's tank pressure, for example, is usually at worst 250 times atmospheric pressure, which is much more manageable with common materials.Only thing I have to take issue with is the handling, you've posted 2 regular cars that aren't for performance. The Tesla weight is alot higher than it's competition in the performance car world. There's no way it can handle as well, I'm not talking about regular road cars where it doesn't really matter tbh
I'm not saying the weight has no effect. I'm just saying that the low CofG and weight distribution means that the increased kerb weight has less of a negative effect on handling than you'd expect. Put a Model S against say an M5 in the twisties and yes, the M5 has better steering and yes the M5 can corner a touch faster... but there's really not that much in it despite the 370kg weight difference.
The same is true of the original roadster. It handled it's 1300kg kerb weight well. I've only driven one once in California about 10 years ago but I didn't notice any handling issues.
With the carbon fiber chassis, and the improvements in chemistry already more than doubling the battery capacity with no weight penalty, I see the new roadster weighing at worst ~1500kg. Sure, that's not lightweight by any measure, but it's not way off it's competition. The McLaren P1 is 1,547kg.0 -
Great post thanks
I wouldn't buy one over a convenient supercar if I was lucky enough to be in the market for one but interesting none the less0 -
One thing I dont get is how does this Roadster which am guessing has well over 1000bhp do 20kWh/100km in normal driving and a Leaf with 100bhp does 17kWh/100km, why so little difference in consumption?
There's little to no efficiency penalty in adding more or more powerful electric motors (and often a little bit of a gain possible because you can more effectively manage the positive and negative torque to the wheels on a system level with multiple motors).
See the model S when dual motor AWD was added. Tesla leveraged the per-axle torque vectoring/regen and differing reduction gear ratios for both motors to actually increase range with the same battery even though the car got heavier and had more power and a higher top speed.
Steady state, moving an EV with the same aerodynamics and rolling resistance down the road should require the same power regardless of whether it's motor's peak power is 100kW or 1000kW.
Why that's not the case with combustion engines is a result of a number of factors. Many of these factors interplay and compound with other drive train losses. Those factors are things like the effects of part-throttle on compression ratio and are best left for a discussion on the main Motors forum or DIY Car Maintenance and Repair.0 -
Love reading your posts Cros
You know a hell of alot man0 -
Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 18,224 CMod ✭✭✭✭Join Date:Posts: 16970
It'll be on Jay Leno's Garage soon, though unclear how much we'll learn about it.Moderator: Television, Psychology and Dublin County North.
CMod: Entertainment
0 -
The Black Oil wrote: »It'll be on Jay Leno's Garage soon, though unclear how much we'll learn about it.
Its becoming clear it ain't going be winning any races
Will be a big heavy pig like a Veyron
Will be no Mclaren, thats for sure
Elon should really relax a bit with his claims
The Model 3 performance is the next disappointment, supposed to be 15% quicker than Ice rivals on the track ( his claims)
On a 90 second track it went into mild limp mode half way through, losing few seconds a lap over a short track
It has no chance on a track against an M3, RS5 etc, especially a long like the ring
Roadster will be the same, won't get near a rival like 720s etc on the ring
Porsche and others will produce the true proper sports car well before Tesla will imo0 -
-
Its becoming clear it ain't going be winning any races
Will be a big heavy pig like a Veyron
Will be no Mclaren, thats for sure
Elon should really relax a bit with his claims
The Model 3 performance is the next disappointment, supposed to be 15% quicker than Ice rivals on the track ( his claims)
On a 90 second track it went into mild limp mode half way through, losing few seconds a lap over a short track
It has no chance on a track against an M3, RS5 etc, especially a long like the ring
Roadster will be the same, won't get near a rival like 720s etc on the ring
Porsche and others will produce the true proper sports car well before Tesla will imo
Thats one of your most ridiculous BS claims ever and you have a lot of them.
Have you seen the stated 0-60 and 1/4 mile times? It's faster than the chiron, let alone the veyron!0 -
Advertisement
-
0
-
Easy now lads!
Thierry could very well have a point. The Veyron has insane acceleration and top speed, but on a track more mundane cars like an entry level Ferrari or a BMW M5 beat it. I for one will not take Elon's word for it that any Tesla will win on a race track.0 -
Easy now lads!
Thierry could very well have a point. The Veyron has insane acceleration and top speed, but on a track more mundane cars like an entry level Ferrari or a BMW M5 beat it. I for one will not take Elon's word for it that any Tesla will win on a race track.0 -
We'll have to see when it comes out but based on the only measurables available right now it's in adifferent league
In a straight line yeah it's a different league
How long of a straight, who knows
Even the multi million Rimac with 1000bhp gets eaten alive by a Veyron past 250kph
On a track the Tesla has big questions to answer
Tesla Model S P100D is an embarrassment on the track, can't even go 1/4 of a lap on the ring without limp mode, Model 3 performance is a bit better but won't complete a lap either, it has power loss too.
Model S cant even accelerate up and down the Autobahn without power loss and being overtaken by diesel Golf's in the process, think Bjorn has a vid on his Model X struggling with 200kph, my old diesel can do that all day
We all laugh at Nissan rapidgate and the lack of Evs by Germans/Japs etc, but Tesla are the biggest cowboys of them all
Lost count of broken promises
In fairness to the Germans they do it properly
Porsche Taycan will accelerate up and down the autobahn all day and complete a lap of the ring full blast with no issue
I will bump this thread in 2021 when the Roadster is beaten at the ring by a 10 year old V12 Aventador0 -
Old thread, but I might as well revive it
Unveiled today: the Tesla Roadster will do 0-60 in 1.1s
That's nuts! :eek:
All the hypercars can go home now, unless they come up with comparable fully EV cars0 -
But isn't that with the aid of actual rockets thanks to a SpaceX pack? And 2.1 seconds without the rocket thrusters. Which is rubbish in comparison0
-
More seriously, I do wonder about these rocket thrusters coming to market. Will they even be legal? What kind of fuel do they use, where do you get it, how much does the fuel cost and how long does it last? There’s various rocket fuels, which can be toxic or difficult to store depending on what you go for. And a rocket assisted version isn't really a fully electric car any longer, is it?0
-
In this video from Engineering Explained he talks about compressed air.
He also has another video where he explains why it is impossible right now to go below 2 sec without this helpers (thrusters) due to the limit of traction of the current tires.
0 -
You wouldn't want to have eaten anything within a half hour of flooring that baby
My stuff for sale on Adverts inc. outdoor furniture, roof box and EDDI
0 -
Advertisement
-
You wouldn't want to have eaten anything within a half hour of flooring that baby
I don't know. My own car does 0-60 in under 4s, a Tesla Model 3 P in about 3s, a current Model S P with cheetah launch in just over 2s. I did 0-60 in all of them several times. It gets a good bit quicker between 4s and 2s, but I'd say I'd have no problem doing it in 1s, that's about 3g? You'd need to brace yourself a bit, lean tight into the seat, particularly with your head. Most ordinary humans can take 4-6g without issue0
Advertisement