OT: Tesla Model 3
Given that the Big 3 operate in the backyard of Ann Arbor, I wanted to hear everyone's thoughts around Tesla. Do you currently have one? Did you place a reservation for the 3? How do you see the Electric Car market in the future?
Growing up in a GM family (in Michigan), there doesn't seem to be any thought from many of them around Tesla. Living in Chicago, there seems to be a lot of buzz. What say you engineering folks?
Yes, I am aware that username does not check out.
August 1st, 2017 at 11:27 AM ^
Did you know 2 new ones just opened in Marshall & Ludington. One is expected in Livonia soon.
I've seen a couple. There is actually a Tesla branded charging station not too far from where I live.
I like what Tesla is doing. I think electric vehicles are a good option for urban/shorter commutes or southern environments. I don't know how they would hold up in the winter, dirt roads, etc. Which is why I think electric power is still a long way from becoming a significant percentage of the driving fleet.
August 1st, 2017 at 12:10 PM ^
"I don't know how they would hold up in the winter, dirt roads, etc. Which is why I think electric power is still a long way from becoming a significant percentage..." Because you personally don't understand something, you believe the rest of the world will react? EVs do just fine in winter and on dirt roads.
I don't know how zone blocking works which is why I don't think football will be a popular sport.
"EVs do just fine in winter and on dirt roads"
Please provide some evidence for your statement. I'm not saying that the vehicle can't physically drive in those conditions. I'm sure they can, I'd like to know how this effects the long term reliability of the vehicles. How do maintenince costs compared to a similar sized gas vehicle say over 50,000, 75,000 or 100,000 miles?
They function fine in winter and on dirt roads. I'd recommend awd for winter because electric cars deliver 100% torque immediately. The superchargers are strategically located so you can drive to virtually any city in the US. I picked mine up in cleveland, stopped for charging in Maumee (outside Toledo near the border) and drove home for free. Just trying to dispel some of the range anxiety people have.
I think the car and technology is cool, but it's funny to see folks driving these thinking they're saving the environment. Buy it if you like the technology, performance, etc. Nothing wrong with that.
But if you want to drive it and be sanctimonious, kindly certify that your car's electricity is either hydro, solar, or nuclear sourced. (In most places in the U.S., that won't be true. It's just that the coal is burning somewhere away from your town, and being transmitted over lines that lose a huge percentage of the electricity along the way.) I've dealt with a number of wankers who think that environmental protection begins and ends with their purchase of a high-end electric car.
If you want to save the environment, ride share, drive reasonable speeds, don't drive too big or powerful of a car, cycle, take public transportation, keep your tires inflated, keep your car tuned, and keep your car for a long time instead of buying the latest car every year. It turns out that building cars uses resources and creates pollution.
Long-term, I think the potential for electric cars is great, and I encourage the technology. I think there are good sources for electricity (solar, wind, hydro), so this car is a step in the right direction. I'm just saying the car doesn't come with the halo that some folks think it does.
This is the mining for the rare earth minerals that are used to make batteries. How's that whole "lessened environmental impact" thing working now?
August 1st, 2017 at 10:20 AM ^
Coal mining doesn't have an adverse impact on the environment?
Besides, rare earths are used in every piece of modern technology we depend upon today. From your cell phone and tablet computer, to your flat screen TV or the navigation system in your car. Rare earth mining isn't going anywhere whether electric cars catch on or not.
That's not the point.
Energy has to be created and stored somehow. Just because the method of actually creating or capturing energy is "green," doesn't mean the devices used to do so are environmentally-enlightened.
And, to paraphrase Thornton Melon, I don't know if you're familiar with who runs some of the mines in places like Sierra Leone; but I can assure you, it's not the Boy Scouts.
August 1st, 2017 at 10:39 AM ^
They sure do.
August 1st, 2017 at 11:26 AM ^
Scale.
August 1st, 2017 at 10:19 AM ^
quite a mess too. mercury and other chemicals not so good for life. good idea, but keep working on it.
August 1st, 2017 at 10:38 AM ^
Are a work in progress. You raise one liability, currently there aren't enough economically-reachable rare earth minerals to meet projected global demand for electric vehicles. Moreover, the dirtiest road vehicles per unit are long haul trucks and at present the only way to power these electrically over considerable distances is by battery swaps, which would increase their environmental impact by virtue of the massive requirement for rare earth minerals per truck. And trains aren't a one for one replacement for trucks. Fuel cells on the other hand ...
They are just virtue signaling
Tesla does manufacture and sell the PowerWall and solar collectors already. In places like California, it's possible to live partially "off-the-grid."
But not so in the Midwest, and definitely not in Michigan. Many municipalities - and even subdivisions like mine - prohibit the construction and/or installation of solar arrays, windmills, and other "green" energy systems. I can't even put solar panels on my roof without paying a heavy fine to my HOA. So much for "environmental consciousness."
When I'm in cities that offer convenient public transportation, like Seattle, I use it in lieu of rental cars, ride sharing, and so on. That does a lot more to protect the environment than buying an EV.
What Elon Musk is doing, though, is bringing some great innovation to the industry. He has a mix of highly-experienced, automotive engineers, and engineers and technicians from outside the industry. That enables Tesla to take a fresh look at the problems faced by manufacturers, the industry, and their customers. He's followed a similar path with SpaceX and been quite successful.
Personally, I'm rooting for him. While I'm not yet ready to plunk down a king's ransom on a Tesla, the introduction of the Bolt means that we might be getting closer to a tipping point in greater adoption. That should lead, in turn, to even more innovation, and lower prices.
August 1st, 2017 at 10:05 AM ^
Hyperloop will be the next big thing once it's built
August 1st, 2017 at 11:15 AM ^
more suited to the cover of Popular Science than reality. The cross-jurisdictional barriers to constructing such a project are gigantic—who's going to give him the right of ways that he needs?—and that's aside from the enormous logistical costs of just engineering and building the thing.
He's pissing away $$ that are much better spent on his vehicle/battery and space initiatives.
August 1st, 2017 at 11:48 AM ^
Your mention of cross-jurisdictional barriers, while certainly an issue, is more an indictment of America's fossilized creativity and attitude than the hyperloop technology itself.
August 1st, 2017 at 10:52 AM ^
August 1st, 2017 at 11:39 AM ^
As you note, about two thirds of energy comes from natural gas (hi fracking!) and coal (hi stripped mountains, particulate matter, and CO2!). Ignoring over 66% of the source of electricity to make a point seems like weak sauce to me.
Furthermore, nuclear seems like a good choice, but only if you ignore the massive amounts of water it consumes. In states with water crises, nuclear can be a huge balance tipper. And there are counterarguments against wind (noise and migratory bird strikes) and hydro (watershed) sources too.
Striking a balance between energy sources is nuanced. But many folks want to promote their view of the world, and ignore that there are trade-offs with every green energy source. (FWIW, solar is pretty damned green, and makes a lot of sense if you live in a sunny state.)
Again, I encourage these developments, but it's amazing to me how folks will talk themselves into thinking that electric cars don't come at an environmental cost. Is it net-net a good environmental move to buy an all-electric car in 2017? I don't know - someone once said "torture the numbers, and they'll say anything you want them to".
My point is that these Tesla's are not the environmental panacea that many owners make them out to be. I've met a few owners who really think they are saving the planet, when simple car maintenance combined with reduced consumption would get them to the same or a better place than buying a newly-manufactured EV.
FWIW, I'm not anti-Tesla or anti-EV. I think these cars may well be a taste of widespread things to come.
August 1st, 2017 at 11:59 AM ^
August 1st, 2017 at 12:23 PM ^
We're pretty much out of things to argue about. Like you, I favor EV and hybrid technology. It's cool technology, with some current positive environmental (and performance) effects, and with great future potential.
As far as feral cats vs. wind turbines go, the solution is easy. Attach the cats to wind turbine blades, where they can catch the birds whilst they rotate (and go deaf from the rumble of the turbine). Two birds, one stone. Or one bird, one cat - you get the point.
August 1st, 2017 at 12:24 PM ^
"if you are going to buy a new car either way, I'd really need to see some stats that show that EVs and plug ins are not better"
http://www.nber.org/papers/w21291
In short, they conclude that the environment where you live and the source of power can have a huge impact. More rural areas can handle gas engine emissions better than dense cities and coal is obviously worse than clean energy plants. Combine those two factors and you get an interesting mix of places where you should or shouldn't drive EVs.
Yes, the cars shown on Friday do "start" at $49 K. But that's with over 300 miles per charge. I am still looking at the 220 mile version which, even with the premium interior upgrade, is a $40K car and that's before a $7500 tax incentive. Putting aside fuel savings, that means a car for $32,500 that likely outperforms or is similar to a BMW 330i. And has vastly better technology IMO. Not sure how you conclude it looks like hot garbage. People have different tastes of course but I think the Model 3 is a good looking car. Obviously you disagree. And when you compare it to the Bolt? It's not even a fair fight IMO. But the great thing is that everyone has different opinions and obviously there are many people that are interested in this vehicle and it has caused a sea of change in the vehicle industry.
Can you still get the tax incentive on the Tesla? I thought they were near or at their 300k limit with the reservations on the model 3.
August 1st, 2017 at 10:19 AM ^
Some that have reserved 3's will get it, but if you order now? Gone.
August 1st, 2017 at 10:31 AM ^
As stated below, it will phase out. Tesla just hit the 100,000 car mark and the phase out STARTS at 200,000 domestic vehicles but it phases out over something like 9 months or so depending on timing. It's currently expected that the phase out may START in 2Q or 3Q of 2018. Open question whether people reserving today would qualify or not. It's possible but maybe unlikely.
I haven't tried Tesla autopilot, but I have a new Q7 with ACC and active lane assist and while it's great, it's nothing close to "autopilot." Are you referring to new tech that's not implemented yet, or only in certain cars? I commute 45-60 min each way in Chicago and autopilot may be the thing that makes me switch away from the car I drive right now, which I love (A7).
August 1st, 2017 at 10:50 AM ^
Yeah, the total-robot-control autopilot. Waymo (the Google subsidiary) is way ahead, and Tesla is actually (according to publicly available California testing data) one of the worst at full autonomy. I don't know much about the current driver assist (but I think the new AP2.0 lags there as well), but definitely in full self-driving, Tesla is way behind.
Test driving a Tesla, especially the auto pilot, is hazerdous to your rainy day savings.
I love the idea of technology pushing the envelope in cars but in the end, I enjoy driving so a car needs to handle well and be fun to drive. I wanted a Model S but could not pull the trigger because of the price. So I reserved a Model 3 on day 1 (March 31, 2016). By my count, I still have about a 6-9 month wait but I intend to go forward with the purchase. While there are some drawbacks with the car, the techology is top notch and IMO the car competes favorably with the BMW 3 series/Audi A4. So I am all in at this point. Really the only thing that could change for me is if a used Model S becomes so attractive that I am willing to trade advanced tech for space and performance at a similar price point.
And about the "it's not cleaner or better for the environment" that is generally not true. First, modern coal plants are likely cleaner than individual cars at producing energy. Second, sometimes half of the electricity is produced from relatively clean sources. Are batteries 100% clean? No. Are they an improvement on the existing system? Yes.
Fair point but I would just say to compare the car to something more similar. I mean the technology and performance doesn't compare to the Corolla or Camry. And yes, those may be better values but I am not going to drive one. Maybe you could compare it to the new higher performance Civics and those appear to be good cars with reasonable performance. But again, the technology on the Model 3 blows away the Civic even if the car itself may not.
I currently drive a BMW 3 series as a holdover because it has good performance and handling with a reasonable level of appointments. Not luxury but not basic either. From what I have seen, the Model 3 meets at of these standards, plus gives me better technology and an electrice vehicle for about the same price. That's a great deal in my book.
August 1st, 2017 at 10:55 AM ^
Sorry, I don't see the 3 Series - Model 3 comparison at all.
August 1st, 2017 at 11:09 AM ^
Not sure why not. That is exactly the car that Tesla targeted and if you look at the dimensions and performance, those are the nearest comparables. The physical dimensions of the model 3/A4/330i are very similar. Obviously I have not experienced the interior of the Model 3 yet but early reviews (and views) are positive. I think it's likely that the Model 3 has a more luxurious interior than my 328i.
I am trying to understand how you don't see the comparison.
https://electrek.co/2017/07/31/tesla-model-3-vs-bmw-3-series/
I'm with you - plan on getting one Q1 '18. The range will enable trips back to Michigan, which is really the farthest I drive, any longer distance, I fly.
99% of the the time I am driving under 50 miles to a location so the range isn't an issue for me. At night you plug in and your at full charge in the morning.
I'm torn on getting the S or the 3 similar to you. The perfomance of the S is on another level and I'm continuing to wait to see what specs on the AWD 3 version will be. The RWD version will pull 0-60 in 5.1, which is quick, but would love to see a number in high 3s.
August 1st, 2017 at 11:59 AM ^
You routinely drive 100 mi/hr? Rad. Dropping the sarcasm the real contemporary numbers are more like 45 charging minutes for every four hours of driving and this surely will get better as infrastructure improves. Of course 95% of daily driving examples don't require any stopping at all (unlike gasmobiles); you simply plug in when you arrive at home. I have heard never needing to stop at the gas station is a major unexpected pleasure of owning EV's.
August 1st, 2017 at 12:34 PM ^
It's not really the infrastructure that needs to improve to charge the battery faster, it's the batteries themselves. Best analogy I ever read about charging a battery is that it's like filling a glass of water all the way to the top - you have to pour more slowly the closer you get so that you don't spill over (which would explode the battery.) That's a huge physics problem that infrastructure can't solve. Or I should say, not only the infrastructure.
The better solution is to have a battery that can go 500 miles on a charge, then charge it to 75%. That would give you comparable range to a gas car - although current charging speeds still mean spending 30-45 minutes instead of 5, on a long-distance trip.
What it's really going to take for electrics to take off is instant-charge capabilities. Supercapacitors and things like that will hopefully change the game. But as it stands, it's hard to reasonably by a vehicle that you can't drive on a trip up north without having to stop for over an hour to charge. Until that's brought down to reasonable levels, and charging stations are at most gas stations, then it's just not practical for anything but tooting around the city.
August 1st, 2017 at 10:24 AM ^
Batteries are getting much better at accepting high current power, but that C rate of the battery will be the limiting power. Also, the higher the current, the more heat you generate, so you have to have the correct amount of cooling during the charge to ensure the life of the battery. Fast charge options are getting much, better and i see us getting to a 5-10 minute charge posisble.
Tesla is a long way away from seriously threatening any of the major auto producers, foreign or domestic. The incumbents have the huge advantage in production capability and experience. Tesla's advantages are their battery production and charging network, which have absolutely nothing to do with building a quality, reliable automobile.
In other words, it will be much easier for the major producers to adapt to Tesla's innovations and negate them than it will be for Tesla to match the quality mass production that others are already capable of.
Telsa has 1/100th the production capabilty of Ford, and yet it has a higher market cap. Madness.
It's like Wall Street is figuring in future expectations or something.
Is Tesla the next Apple of Amazon?
August 1st, 2017 at 10:13 AM ^
Wall Street has been known for some spectacular failures.
Tesla has had problems ramping up production for every single model they have created, but are now magically going to be able to ramp up production of the Model 3? Especially when they promised Australia a 100 megawatt battery storage facility in 100 days or it's free at the same time?
Those hoping for 18 Q1 better be planning on 19. A colleague who has the Model S took delivery 6 months AFTER it was first promised. And this was only 12 months ago, not when it was first released.
August 1st, 2017 at 10:24 AM ^
I don't disagree with anything you have stated, however, do you think Tesla learned from the production of the S? The headaches they encountered with the X? He himself stated they went back to the basics because of what they had learned from their previous vehicles.