When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
2015 S550 Palladium/Deep Sea Blue, 2016 Tesla Model S 70D, 2015 Volvo XC70
Originally Posted by S63AMG888
Driven a 100D, raced a 90D model S. Performance is outstanding, but no performance note from the engine or exhaust. Wasn't my cup of tea.
There still might be a Porsche Mission E in your future. Porsche's director of the 911 model line was quoted here saying that "I drove the prototype of our coming electric sports car, the Mission E, and it was a very compelling experience". And they are encouraged enough that they may increase their production plans beyond 20k annual units (compared to 32k for the 911, worldwide, in 2017). I wonder if they'll use the sound system to give you the drivetrain note you want, or a choice of them? That's something Tesla and other EVs should do, imo.
@syswei: Except the grid isn't anywhere near 40% efficient when your power plants are only running ~30-35% efficiency *at the plant itself*. Then you've got at least 10% grid/distribution losses. Even .35*.9*=31.5%. The Tesla charger is widely reported to be 80% efficient, so 31.5*.8=25%...and we've not even turned the car on yet. I'm willing to bet good money that the car itself has more than 5% losses from battery to the pavement. So, as far as efficiency / environmentally-friendly things go, it's no better than what we already have, possibly worse. Many of these Tesla owners really need to take the "Zero Emissions" plates & bumper stickers off their cars and put "100% coal powered" on them.
Next, I often hear Tesla fanatics claiming what a safe car it is. But the facts are something a bit different. Even a ****ty Kia/Hyundai beat it. Remember, you can buy almost Elantras for the price of a P100d. Pay particular attention to the roof strength ratings, as Tesla made a big hoopla about this when the testing rig broke. Again, the ****ty Hyundai beat it out. BTW, an E-Class will hold 6x+ it's weight on its roof: http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/veh...017?print-view http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/veh...018?print-view
Even the Chevy Bolt (arguably a closer match to the Tesla) does a better job: http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/veh...018?print-view
The marketing **** for Tesla continues. From the Model S webpage: "0.23 Cd, The most aerodynamic car in its class with the lowest drag coefficient on earth".
Ahem... the lowly Mercedes E-Class has a 0.23Cd as well, no magic door handles needed. Even the luxo-barge S550 has a 0.24Cd.
I know P.T. Barnum Elon Musk is the idol of the decade, but when you pull back the curtain the reality doesn't match the hype.
I've driven multiple Model S cars, both the older and newer styles, and I really didn't care for them. Too much money for too little car. Acceleration was impressive, but that was about it. Surprisingly, my biggest gripe about the Model S was motor noise. I drive up to 40,000 miles/year and that motor whine got annoying very quickly to me. I loved the silence and smoothness at stops, but once the motors came on, forget it. Also, charging was a no-go for me and the driving I do. I'm getting ~500-660 miles per tank with my E-Class, which I can refill in 5 or so minutes. The powertrain I wanted in this car (but not available in the USA -- thanks for saving us from great fuel efficiency EPA!) would have gotten 1,300-1500 miles per tank. It also doesn't help that I'm based out of Florida, which has a power grid that makes Puerto Rico's look enviable.
2015 S550 Palladium/Deep Sea Blue, 2016 Tesla Model S 70D, 2015 Volvo XC70
Originally Posted by BeachBunny
@syswei: Except the grid isn't anywhere near 40% efficient when your power plants are only running ~30-35% efficiency *at the plant itself*. Then you've got at least 10% grid/distribution losses. Even .35*.9*=31.5%. The Tesla charger is widely reported to be 80% efficient, so 31.5*.8=25%...and we've not even turned the car on yet. I'm willing to bet good money that the car itself has more than 5% losses from battery to the pavement. So, as far as efficiency / environmentally-friendly things go, it's no better than what we already have, possibly worse. Many of these Tesla owners really need to take the "Zero Emissions" plates & bumper stickers off their cars and put "100% coal powered" on them.
Again, I'll point you to actual power plant net installations in recent years in the bar chart a few posts ago...you don't see coal. The mix has been 30-50% natural gas, and the rest renewables. So it is simply wrong to think that future large-scale adoption of EVs is somehow going to be fueled by coal.
As far as your claim that "your power plants are only running ~30-35% efficiency *at the plant itself*" ...well, the facts say otherwise for the relevant plants, namely natural gas:
Calculating efficiency by dividing the equivalent Btu content of a kWh of electricity (3,412 Btu) by the heat rate (source methodology) and taking the 2016 natural gas heat rate of 7870 from this table yields a 43% efficiency. But that is for the natural gas plant the installed base. From the trend in the table (8471 or 40.3% efficiency in 2006 to 7870 or 43.3% efficiency in 2016), it is pretty obvious that NEW natural gas plants that are installed to meet future EV demands are more efficient than old nat gas plants.
If future utility capacity additions are 50% natural gas and 50% renewables (and from the chart it looks like the renewables mix could be higher), then since burning nat gas produces 25% less CO2 than burning gasoline, an incremental EV could reasonably be expected to produce 62% less CO2 than an ICE.
Originally Posted by BeachBunny
Next, I often hear Tesla fanatics claiming what a safe car it is. But the facts are something a bit different. Even a ****ty Kia/Hyundai beat it. Remember, you can buy almost Elantras for the price of a P100d. Pay particular attention to the roof strength ratings, as Tesla made a big hoopla about this when the testing rig broke. Again, the ****ty Hyundai beat it out. BTW, an E-Class will hold 6x+ it's weight on its roof: http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/veh...017?print-view http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/veh...018?print-view
Even the Chevy Bolt (arguably a closer match to the Tesla) does a better job: http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/veh...018?print-view
The marketing **** for Tesla continues. From the Model S webpage: "0.23 Cd, The most aerodynamic car in its class with the lowest drag coefficient on earth".
Ahem... the lowly Mercedes E-Class has a 0.23Cd as well, no magic door handles needed. Even the luxo-barge S550 has a 0.24Cd.
I know P.T. Barnum Elon Musk is the idol of the decade, but when you pull back the curtain the reality doesn't match the hype.
I've driven multiple Model S cars, both the older and newer styles, and I really didn't care for them. Too much money for too little car. Acceleration was impressive, but that was about it. Surprisingly, my biggest gripe about the Model S was motor noise. I drive up to 40,000 miles/year and that motor whine got annoying very quickly to me. I loved the silence and smoothness at stops, but once the motors came on, forget it. Also, charging was a no-go for me and the driving I do. I'm getting ~500-660 miles per tank with my E-Class, which I can refill in 5 or so minutes. The powertrain I wanted in this car (but not available in the USA -- thanks for saving us from great fuel efficiency EPA!) would have gotten 1,300-1500 miles per tank. It also doesn't help that I'm based out of Florida, which has a power grid that makes Puerto Rico's look enviable.
I have no problem with your Musk bashing. As I mentioned we would most likely replace our Tesla with an EV from MB or Audi. My reasons are that I don't trust Tesla as much as I had on safety, and I'm pretty sure that even 2 years from now, Tesla will not have caught up to European luxury brands on interior refinement. BTW I am indirectly short some Tesla, which is ok with me.
EVs only shift the emissions from the tailpipe to the power plant. I never see anyone who promotes EVs talking about the emissions of the power plants *AND* losses incurred from the power plant to where rubber meets road. Fossil fuel power plants are only ~30-35% efficient, very rarely 40%. The rest of that energy is dumped into the environment as heat. At present, this heat accounts for more BTUs dumped into the environment than ALL OF the gasoline burned in the USA in cars. THEN you have transmission & distribution losses, each dumping more heat into the environment. Looking for global warming sources? Here's a big one that no one's willing to talk about.
/QUOTE]
A Telsa S results in less than 1/2 the C02 emissions than your E300 200 vs 427 g / mile
2015 S550 Palladium/Deep Sea Blue, 2016 Tesla Model S 70D, 2015 Volvo XC70
[QUOTE=MBNUT1;7412414]
Originally Posted by BeachBunny
I'
EVs only shift the emissions from the tailpipe to the power plant. I never see anyone who promotes EVs talking about the emissions of the power plants *AND* losses incurred from the power plant to where rubber meets road. Fossil fuel power plants are only ~30-35% efficient, very rarely 40%. The rest of that energy is dumped into the environment as heat. At present, this heat accounts for more BTUs dumped into the environment than ALL OF the gasoline burned in the USA in cars. THEN you have transmission & distribution losses, each dumping more heat into the environment. Looking for global warming sources? Here's a big one that no one's willing to talk about.
/QUOTE]
A Telsa S results in less than 1/2 the C02 emissions than your E300 200 vs 427 g / mile
The links don't work, but thanks for posting, Mbnut1, I hadn't realized that site offered the capability. I think you meant to show these pages or something like them:
The links don't work, but thanks for posting, Mbnut1, I hadn't realized that site offered the capability. I think you meant to show these pages or something like them:
It shows annual Petroleum Consumption of 0.2 barrel for the Tesla. 0.2 barrel = 8.4 gallons. Which is equal to 1,160,000 BTU/hr = 339 KW. Teslas have like 70KW batteries don't they? 339/70 = 4.84. You only charge 4.84 times in a year?
I am trying to find where my mistake in my calculation is.
2015 S550 Palladium/Deep Sea Blue, 2016 Tesla Model S 70D, 2015 Volvo XC70
Originally Posted by llcd
It shows annual Petroleum Consumption of 0.2 barrel for the Tesla. 0.2 barrel = 8.4 gallons. Which is equal to 1,160,000 BTU/hr = 339 KW. Teslas have like 70KW batteries don't they? 339/70 = 4.84. You only charge 4.84 times in a year?
I am trying to find where my mistake in my calculation is.
Very reasonable question but after thinking on it some and seeing the definition elsewhere on the site that "The Energy Impact Score shows the number of barrels of petroleum the vehicle will likely consume each year from domestic sources (red and blue barrels) and imports (black barrels)" I think they are literally only considering petroleum...not natural gas, coal, etc. So basically it is a nonsensical number when considering EVs, since oil-fired utility-scale power plants are a miniscule portion of the power plant installed base. The first pic should only be used to look at the ICE MB, and only the second pic used for the Tesla EV (it clearly includes the entire power grid, and apparently transmission losses).
It shows annual Petroleum Consumption of 0.2 barrel for the Tesla. 0.2 barrel = 8.4 gallons. Which is equal to 1,160,000 BTU/hr = 339 KW. Teslas have like 70KW batteries don't they? 339/70 = 4.84. You only charge 4.84 times in a year?
I am trying to find where my mistake in my calculation is.
I don't know where the gas consumption comes from. It gets its power from the plug. The point of the post is that even considering the upstream emissions producing the electricity the Tesla "emits" half the CO2's as the E300
2020 S560 Sedan, 2019 SL450, 2019 E450 Luxury Trim Wagon
I have a friend in West Los Angeles who put down a deposit on a Tesla Model 3. Here is a copy of an email I just sent him:
Hey Buddy,
Ask yourself this question: If you are driving on a two lane road with no center divider and you are hit head on by another car, driven by some pot-head, who crosses the double yellow line, as he is texting his LEGAL marijuana shop, would you rather be in a car made by a company with a long history of superior engineering and safety technology (preferably a German brand) or in a car made by a Silicon Valley tech start-up?
They can’t even get up to speed on the Model 3 and you are going to put your life in the hands of these guys who are probably all getting high while on the job? When did it become fact that someone could start a car company from scratch and almost overnight be accepted as a competitor to the likes of BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche and even Honda?
I have a friend in West Los Angeles who put down a deposit on a Tesla Model 3. Here is a copy of an email I just sent him:
Hey Buddy,
Ask yourself this question: If you are driving on a two lane road with no center divider and you are hit head on by another car, driven by some pot-head, who crosses the double yellow line, as he is texting his LEGAL marijuana shop, would you rather be in a car made by a company with a long history of superior engineering and safety technology (preferably a German brand) or in a car made by a Silicon Valley tech start-up?
They can’t even get up to speed on the Model 3 and you are going to put your life in the hands of these guys who are probably all getting high while on the job? When did it become fact that someone could start a car company from scratch and almost overnight be accepted as a competitor to the likes of BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche and even Honda?
I have a friend in West Los Angeles who put down a deposit on a Tesla Model 3. Here is a copy of an email I just sent him:
Hey Buddy,
Ask yourself this question: If you are driving on a two lane road with no center divider and you are hit head on by another car, driven by some pot-head, who crosses the double yellow line, as he is texting his LEGAL marijuana shop, would you rather be in a car made by a company with a long history of superior engineering and safety technology (preferably a German brand) or in a car made by a Silicon Valley tech start-up?
They can’t even get up to speed on the Model 3 and you are going to put your life in the hands of these guys who are probably all getting high while on the job? When did it become fact that someone could start a car company from scratch and almost overnight be accepted as a competitor to the likes of BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche and even Honda?
I've read a lot of your posts, and you seem like a good guy, but I just don't get it. And i mean no disrespect to you at all. But innovation is what has driven most if not all of there great inventions in this country. I think its pretty cool that it is an American company. I had a many MB's for close to 20 years before owning 2 Tesla model S'. I thoroughly enjoyed them. A lot of fun and great technology in them. I also don't get the constant comparing to an S class.The most common thing about them is price point. Having owned both and speaking from years of experience they couldn't be more different.
2020 S560 Sedan, 2019 SL450, 2019 E450 Luxury Trim Wagon
Originally Posted by lungs414
I've read a lot of your posts, and you seem like a good guy, but I just don't get it. And i mean no disrespect to you at all. But innovation is what has driven most if not all of there great inventions in this country. I think its pretty cool that it is an American company. I had a many MB's for close to 20 years before owning 2 Tesla model S'. I thoroughly enjoyed them. A lot of fun and great technology in them. I also don't get the constant comparing to an S class.The most common thing about them is price point. Having owned both and speaking from years of experience they couldn't be more different.
I'm all for innovation and would just LOVE to buy an American car, but for me, there is nothing that can touch my new S560. If Cadillac would stop their foolish drive towards being a "performance" brand and get back to their roots of building the best luxury cars in the world, I'd be right there, check book in hand. But that really is another discussion. My point to my friend is that I feel that Tesla and other more recently introduced brands have little car building experience under their belt, compared to the engineering juggernauts like MB, BMW, Porsche and other long time, proven brands. I live in Orange County, CA and my friend lives in L.A. I can't speak for other areas, but here in So. CA, the driving has REALLY gotten crazy. The traffic is horrible, people get running late and they seem to just lose it and begin driving like idiots--five minutes after they hit the road. Add to this cell phones, texting and the wonderful decision to legalize pot in California and driving is way more dangerous here than it was a decade or two ago. The Tesla may look great and go like hell, but when the worst happens and there is a bad accident, I'll take my chances is a big, solid, piece of German engineering, produced by a company that has probably test crashed more cars than Tesla made last year, over something from a fledgling car maker, no matter where they are made. Lastly, it is the scuttlebut today on the business channels that Tesla may actually go bankrupt this year. I would hate to see that happen, but who wants to have their money in a car produced by a company that isn't around anymore? Personally, I have nothing against Tesla and I wish them great success, I just don't want one.
2015 S550 Palladium/Deep Sea Blue, 2016 Tesla Model S 70D, 2015 Volvo XC70
Originally Posted by Streamliner
Lastly, it is the scuttlebut today on the business channels that Tesla may actually go bankrupt this year. I would hate to see that happen, but who wants to have their money in a car produced by a company that isn't around anymore?
If Tesla gets into serious financial straits, then imo Apple would come in and buy them at fire-sale prices. Tesla stockholders might lose out, but Tesla car owners would be protected.
Below is a link to a Washington Post article questioning the financial viability, or at least a threat to it, for Tesla and Elon Musk. Historically this was the undoing of many automobile manufacturing enterprises. Perhaps Musk has too many irons in the fire and has spread his resources too thin? https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...evening&wpmm=1
I'm all for innovation and would just LOVE to buy an American car, but for me, there is nothing that can touch my new S560. If Cadillac would stop their foolish drive towards being a "performance" brand and get back to their roots of building the best luxury cars in the world, I'd be right there, check book in hand. But that really is another discussion. My point to my friend is that I feel that Tesla and other more recently introduced brands have little car building experience under their belt, compared to the engineering juggernauts like MB, BMW, Porsche and other long time, proven brands. I live in Orange County, CA and my friend lives in L.A. I can't speak for other areas, but here in So. CA, the driving has REALLY gotten crazy. The traffic is horrible, people get running late and they seem to just lose it and begin driving like idiots--five minutes after they hit the road. Add to this cell phones, texting and the wonderful decision to legalize pot in California and driving is way more dangerous here than it was a decade or two ago. The Tesla may look great and go like hell, but when the worst happens and there is a bad accident, I'll take my chances is a big, solid, piece of German engineering, produced by a company that has probably test crashed more cars than Tesla made last year, over something from a fledgling car maker, no matter where they are made. Lastly, it is the scuttlebut today on the business channels that Tesla may actually go bankrupt this year. I would hate to see that happen, but who wants to have their money in a car produced by a company that isn't around anymore? Personally, I have nothing against Tesla and I wish them great success, I just don't want one.
Interestingly enough, the "engineering juggernauts" that you mention and others still have problems manufacturing consistently high reliability vehicles, especially as they pass warranty. Can Tesla? Or has Musk just created a nice to look at, high performance appliance?
What will happen to Tesla as they lose their $7,500 tax deduction per vehicle, probably this year? Historically, as cars lost their incentives, sales went down. GM can afford that. Can Musk or will he just go on to something else?
2020 S560 Sedan, 2019 SL450, 2019 E450 Luxury Trim Wagon
Originally Posted by El Cid
Below is a link to a Washington Post article questioning the financial viability, or at least a threat to it, for Tesla and Elon Musk. Historically this was the undoing of many automobile manufacturing enterprises. Perhaps Musk has too many irons in the fire and has spread his resources too thin? https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...evening&wpmm=1
AND, let’s not forget the millions—or is it BILLIONS of dollars of tax subsidies his company has received. It would be interesting to see where Tesla would now be if they had not received this tax payer provided charity.
AND, let’s not forget the millions—or is it BILLIONS of dollars of tax subsidies his company has received. It would be interesting to see where Tesla would now be if they had not received this tax payer provided charity.
That's an interesting question. What if car companies in general didn't get subsidies? Well, Tesla probably wouldn't have to compete with GM or Chrysler, at least not as healthy companies now. Ford took their subsidy, even though they didn't need it, just to keep the playing field "level".
Big companies with hiring power get favors. Doesn't matter if they are dying industries like coal and steel or high tech companies like Amazon and Tesla.
2015 S550 Palladium/Deep Sea Blue, 2016 Tesla Model S 70D, 2015 Volvo XC70
Originally Posted by grossmsj
That's an interesting question. What if car companies in general didn't get subsidies? Well, Tesla probably wouldn't have to compete with GM or Chrysler, at least not as healthy companies now. Ford took their subsidy, even though they didn't need it, just to keep the playing field "level".
Big companies with hiring power get favors. Doesn't matter if they are dying industries like coal and steel or high tech companies like Amazon and Tesla.
Watch yourself, you might confuse Streamliner with actual facts!
03-20-2018, 03:49 PM
