Test drive of a petrol car

http://teslaclubsweden.se/test-drive-of-a-petrol-car

by caiobegotti • 11 years ago

401 263 11 years ago

teslaclubsweden.se

hnnewguy4• 11 years ago

Is this what passes for clever? It's hardly a "tech" article, that's for sure.

The engine was also extremely hot, we burned ourselves when we touched it.

Electric motors run cold, I guess?

We started calculating price versus consumption and came to the shocking conclusion that a petrol car costs unimaginable €12 per 100km! Sure, electric cars could also theoretically come up to these amounts if they quick charged at one of the most expensive charging stations in the country – but for petrol cars there are no cheaper alternatives!

You can buy a $12,000 gas car, but for electric cars there are no cheaper alternatives. Work that into the cost vs a $100,000 Tesla. The 99% of the world are not complete idiots; electric cars aren't mainstream yet.

nemo• 11 years ago

"Is this what passes for clever?"

Swedish humor is no laughing matter.

reitanqild• 11 years ago

remember -around here(Norway, next to Sweden) taxes on gas and gas cars make Tesla prices look very reasonable.

A brand new Tesla is about half the price of a similar (>400hp) car I guess.

toomuchtodo11• 11 years ago

That's what happens when externalities are properly priced into vehicles using taxes. Nicely done Norway/Sweden.

amalag3• 11 years ago

You can buy a 2013 used Nissan Leafs with under 10k miles for under $12k. That is comparable to a gas car. The low range on the Leaf really affects their value.

jaxbot7• 11 years ago

I drive a Leaf. It's actually a really great city car. I use it for all my driving (commute, shopping, exploring the city) except for one trip a month I make in my old gas car. The car basically pays for itself compared to what I paid in gas in my old car. It's also almost zero maintenance, which is a huge plus coming from my old under 12k gas car which needed oil, random part replacements, cooling system issues, etc. Worth considering if you drive less than 60 miles a day, imo.

drzaiusapelord11• 11 years ago

Wait, you're comparing a NEW ICE car with 200+ range, warranty, etc to a tiny ~40 mile range USED EV with a battery pack on its last legs (battery pack capacity drops begin at around 10 to 15k and continue from there). Real world range in traffic, climate control on, etc is not the advertised number. Its not even close. Search the Leaf forums if you don't believe me.

Not to mention, after Fed and State rebates, there's $10,000 off the cost, which is affecting its resale value. Give me $10,000 for an ICE car and I'll show you a near free car with 4x the range, a warranty, etc.

Come on.

umanwizard• 11 years ago

He was talking about new, so that's apples and oranges.

You can buy a used beater petrol car (but still working) for under $1,000.

hahainternet3• 11 years ago

Is this what passes for clever? It's hardly a "tech" article, that's for sure.

I read it with a smirk, I thought it was a nicely done parody. In a few decades when your average 25 year old has never known a petrol driven car (yes yes this might not happen) it is a believable experience.

mikeash20• 11 years ago

Is it even a parody? It's written from the perspective of somebody who doesn't yet exist: a person who has only known electric cars for their whole life. But aside from that, it does a pretty good job of imagining what that person would think the first time they're exposed to a "normal" car.

ebbv• 11 years ago

for electric cars there are no cheaper alternatives

Not true at all. I traded in a Subaru WRX and pay less for my Leaf every month than I did for the Subaru. Not to mention the savings on the costs of driving it around.

The 99% of the world are not complete idiots; electric cars aren't mainstream yet.

These two phrases don't necessarily have anything to do with each other.

It's true, there are good reasons why EVs aren't mainstream. One is that if you're in an apartment or condominium EV ownership is pretty much out the window unless you can get your property managers to install charging stations.

Another is that you can't get one with 200 mile range for under $60k right now, and that's a big hurdle for most people to get over mentally. Even though most people don't drive more than 80 miles in a day, and a Leaf WOULD do just fine for them, they can't bring themselves to act rationally about it. Being that close to their limit is a mental block. That's why it's important that Tesla delivers on the promise to offer a $30k 200 mile range car in 2017.

Now, all of that has nothing to do with the original article. The point of which is really that EVs are way, way nicer than petrol cars, for a variety of reasons. Which is something that most people just don't get yet.

toomuchtodo11• 11 years ago

It's true, there are good reasons why EVs aren't mainstream. One is that if you're in an apartment or condominium EV ownership is pretty much out the window unless you can get your property managers to install charging stations.

State laws are coming online that require property managers to install charging stations if they're above a certain size. California's law is already in effect with regard to this.

SteveGerencser• 11 years ago

Range is why we don't have an electric car yet. They are great for urban dwellers but for people that live out 'in the country' range is a serious issue. We only go in to town once a week or so and that is a 50 mile round trip if we make no extra stops. To go to the 'city' which happens once a month or so a round trip easily crosses the 100 mile range and can top 150 miles with dinner added in. A trip to a real metro area would easily cross the 250 mile mark.

If Tesla can deliver a 'real' 200 mile car for a reasonable price it would be worth considering. But for a significant percentage of the rural population EVs are simply not an option at this point.

thedrbrian• 11 years ago

I guarantee the leaf isn't a tenth as fun as the WRX. If Nissan would import the micra into America then you could pay even less for a small Nissan.

mikeash20• 11 years ago

"Which is something that most people just don't get yet."

Yes, yes, and more yes.

People still don't really understand electric cars yet. They see an EV as a sacrifice. They think that you buy an EV either to save money on gas or out of some vague sense of environmental responsibility. They don't understand that they are just plain better.

Right now, gas cars offer three advantages over EVs: there's more variety in the market, they're cheaper, and they go farther. These are not insignificant advantages, of course, but people don't realize that EVs are equal or better in all other respects.

It's coming around now that EVs are getting more exposure, and especially since Tesla keeps getting so much attention for producing a car that's good on its own merits, and not merely good "for an EV."

The other side of this is that people are blind to the problems of gas cars, because they've grown up with them. One of the biggest problems people see with EVs is charging. But if you hadn't grown up with gas vehicles, the idea of seeking out a specialized filling station once every week or two and then dispensing dangerous, toxic liquid fuel from an apparatus that doesn't even seal it off from the outside would seem completely mad. You have to do a complete change of the engine lubricant how often? The windshield wiper fluid cap is in the same compartment as components that get hot enough to cause serious burns? Every time you slow down you just throw away all your kinetic energy, and grind down your brake pads while you're doing it? This is clearly not a viable technology.

hn_3• 11 years ago

I don't believe you are painting a clear picture of the average person's "mental block." Most people I know would love to own a EV but they "aren't there yet" for most people I know.

I drive very little on a day to day basis. Very very little. That's great for someone who only needs to drive to work and run errands in town. (Me). I pretty much never leave town day-to-day. The big issue is I make a lot of road trips around the East Coast on the weekends - so I need my car to have a very long range once in a while and I make enough road trips were it isn't economically feasible to rent a long range car once a month (or so) for that. It also isn't economically feasible to buy a second vehicle and pay all the ownership costs of that. My spouse and I carpool, we both work in town and it makes sense economically and ecologically to only own one car. The minor inconvenience of it is more than worth it. If I were to get an EV I'd have to also buy a second car.

Seriously, I would love to own an EV - absolutely love to.

Plus many people live in apartments and park on public streets.

mikeash20• 11 years ago

Electric motors don't need much service (and when they do, it's highly complicated) so there's no need to provide access to it. People occasionally ask to see the motor in my Model S, and the best I can do is point to the rear seats and say "it's under there." There's nothing on the car that you can burn yourself on that you can get to without tools.

And did you really say that there are no cheaper alternatives for an electric car than a $100,000 Tesla? You might want to have a look at what's actually available, if that's what you actually meant to say.

hnnewguy4• 11 years ago

And did you really say that there are no cheaper alternatives for an electric car than a $100,000 Tesla? You might want to have a look at what's actually available, if that's what you actually meant to say.

If you want an electric car with 200+ mile range, what are the alternatives?

atjoslin• 11 years ago

Web cached version: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:lVzsGlt...

axx3• 11 years ago

As much as i like this article, Tesla would never had the success they now have, without the "petrol car"-Industry.

The automotive industry brought a lot of innovations and lowered prices for tooling etc. by a lot. I think this article is very funny (and sad), but you have to give those "old" companies a lot of credit for their work.

That's still no excuse for other companies, not to hop on the electric train.

hahainternet3• 11 years ago

but you have to give those "old" companies a lot of credit for their work.

I can't think of any industries where that wouldn't be the case.

jaxbot7• 11 years ago

To be fair, though, we theoretically don't need the car industry at all. Tesla is building an electric industry to solve the emissions problem created by a transportation industry that does not need to exist.

Take NYC for example. MTA enables transportation to just about anywhere in the city, all through an electric, mass-transit trolley system.

If we look at the history of municipal transportation, it looks pretty clear that trolleys were winning over the majority of the car industry up until GM took over trolleys[1] and shut them down to essentially require people to own cars to do any transportation outside of biking and walking.

I think what Tesla is doing is wonderful, but I feel like the problem they are having to solve didn't need to exist in the first place, and the petrol car industry got us in a bad situation.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspi...

axx3• 11 years ago

You do realise that not everyone is living in big vivid cities with perfect transportation?

For people in rural/urban areas cars are essential.

And don't get me wrong, i agree with everything you say, but that problem won't be solved so easily.

joshuapants• 11 years ago

Take NYC for example. MTA enables transportation to just about anywhere in the city, all through an electric, mass-transit trolley system.

From my time living in a suburb with a car and living in NYC with no car, the MTA is really really inconvenient and filthy. I wouldn't want to have a car in NYC, but I also wouldn't want to be there in the first place.

ekianjo5• 11 years ago

we theoretically don't need the car industry at all

Oh, so we reached the new milestone of 100% people living in urban centers and nobody has let me know ? :)

Obviously a ton of people need cars every single day to actually move from their home to their work place, because, you know, there's not just public transportation everywhere (and even when there is, it can be crappy and inefficient as hell, too).

ptaipale• 11 years ago

In my opinion perhaps the most astonishing thing is the development of material technology. How the industry can make engine components that endure mechanical wear for hundreds of thousands of kilometers and tens of millions of engine rotations, with huge pressures and extreme heat inside the engine, applying tremendous forces of torque, and operating in either hot or extremely cold climates.

PinguTS• 11 years ago

Still there would be no Tesla without the car industry.

Tesla has lots of same parts from Ford.

Anything from adaptive cruise control to autopilot and as such is brought in because of the partner ship with Daimler.

The original sports car was based on the Lotus Elise.

The whole manufacturing plant is build by car industry experts.

lucb1e3• 11 years ago

The charging confuses me. Of course you pay to get gas at the pump, don't you pay to get electricity?

I've always wondered that, seeing cars charge on the street or in parking lots, how does the system know whom to charge... or is it government-sponsored to promote electric cars?

Edit: Relevant section

The seller looked very puzzled at us and explained that it is not possible to refuel gasoline cars at home, and there are no free gas stations. We tried to explain our questions, in case he had misunderstood, but he insisted that you can not. Apparently you have to several times a month drive to the gas station to recharge your petrol car at extortionate prices – there are no alternatives!

Edit 2: I should clarify, I'm from the Netherlands (Europe).

raverbashing4• 11 years ago

You don't pay at Tesla stations

lucb1e3• 11 years ago

I guess those must have a Tesla logo? I've never seen any of those (I live in the Netherlands).

Edit: Those? http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger I guess we don't have these, I would surely have recognized them.

drzaiusapelord11• 11 years ago

You don't pay at Tesla stations

Tesla is a money losing company and its cars and its own funding are subsidized by the US taxpayer. $108m in losses last quarter.

Yeah, its neat they can pull this trick, but its meaningless as its clearly non-sustainable. Show me profitability, especially when they're off corporate welfare from my tax dollars. Why are the working poor and middle class families being taxed to make luxury $100,000 cars cheaper for the top 10%?

I'm getting a little sick of paying for a rich person's tax break on a $100,000 car. The reality, regardless of hysterical fanboy HN downvotes, is that EV's make no economic sense for the average car buyer. The market is choosing against them for a reason, and not because everyone else in the world, but you the EV enthusiast, is ignorant.

Personally, I think Lithium-Ion just isn't there from a cost/capacity perspective and will never get there. ICE alternatives are still forming and we'll probably look back at the crazy Tesla days the same way we look back at other oddball cars like the Delorean. Middle-aged millenials will be fixing them up in 20+ years and enjoying their kitschy value.

Heck, even if we get cost down to ICE levels (and we wont) we still have major wear issues to worry about:

The results of an Idaho National Laboratory study released in March found that the test LEAFs lost 22-26% of their initial capacity after just 40,000 miles.

http://www.torquenews.com/2250/how-long-will-electric-vehicl...

So on a hot day with the AC on, what am I getting in range from a $30,000+ EV with 40,000 miles? 30-40 miles maybe? There's a reason no one is buying these things.

tldr; ICE will die someday, but it wont be lithium-ion that kills it.

cpwright• 11 years ago

You don't pay at Tesla stations, because you've prepaid for the supercharging option. They may have recently eliminated it as a separate ~$2,000 option with the introduction of the 70D, but that just means it is rolled into the price of the car.

axx3• 11 years ago

I can't answer your question, but i can tell you that engery prices will rise, if more people need more electricity to charge their cars. Electricity cost is so "low" because most cars don't need this type of Engery.

To solve this issue people need to charge their cars at home with solar power.

exelius• 11 years ago

Well, if energy prices rise a bit, solar becomes much more attractive economically. So it's a feedback loop that solves itself.

toomuchtodo11• 11 years ago

I don't have a link offhand (my apologies), but there is a DOE report floating around out there from 1-2 years ago stating that almost 80% of the current light vehicle (cars) fleet in the US could be converted over to using the electric grid solely with existing generating capacity.

Combined with the relentless expansion of solar and wind in the US, I disagree with your assertion that energy prices will rise long-term. You'll probably see peaks and troughs as demand increases and supply comes online, but there is a lot of land left for renewables to be deployed to.

lucb1e3• 11 years ago

Why would the prices rise? We will consume more, and then we pay more, but why would the price per kWh change? In general things become cheaper to produce at scale (though I guess the current energy consumption is already at a big scale).

mikeash20• 11 years ago

Electricity costs are low because electricity is inherently cheaper to generate and distribute than gasoline. Big, centralized power plants enjoy economies of scale that allow them to be much more efficient and operate more cheaply. They can also use fuels that are impractical for mobile use (basically all of them). Cars don't use gasoline because it's cheap, cars use gasoline because it's dense. If you don't need density then you can use much cheaper stuff, like coal, natural gas, uranium, sunlight, water trapped in a big lake, etc.

If everybody switched to electric cars tomorrow, electricity use would go up about 30%. This is far from trivial, but it's not the sort of thing that would cause prices to spike.

Answering the grandparent, payment varies. At home, you obviously just pay it in your electric bill. When charging away from home, some chargers are free. Businesses often put them in to attract customers, and Tesla operates a vast network of chargers whose operating costs are covered by car sales. (These chargers only work on Teslas, and electricity costs are low enough that they can afford to provide lifetime charging for their customers.) Some chargers are paid, and that's typically done with an RFID card (either a regular credit card with RFID, or a card specifically for the charging network) or a smartphone app.

Navarr2• 11 years ago

There are a number of places currently where the government will subsidize electricity used for cars.

In Bowling Green, Ohio for example city parking lots have a couple electric car chargers that are free. Park your car & pay the meter (the parking isn't free!), plug it in, and walk downtown for some eatery.

http://bgsujournalism.com/j4200/bowling-green-grows-fond-of-...

http://www.bgsu.edu/campus-sustainability/transportation/ele...

drzaiusapelord11• 11 years ago

There are a number of places currently where the government will subsidize electricity used for cars.

So both the car and electricity are subsidized by hard working tax payers? Well, that can't last forever, so what's the REAL cost here? I think when we remove the welfare the cutsey "OMG GAS COSTS MONEY" argument will be dismissed as hyperbolic nonsense it truly is.

I think the "electric is cheaper" argument is complete bunk without government welfare. The real cost of that giant Lithium-Ion battery and energy is non-trivial. Lets remember we're talking about a $100,000 Tesla here. That's not affordable by most.

Not to mention, the money vs time cost. When I take a roadtrip or a long drive I can drive 300+miles, no issue, and refill in a couple minutes. With an electric I need to stop often and spend god knows how long getting a full charge, then go again. Imagine the costs here associated with long range trucking, delivery vehicles, etc. Or just time cut from my precious vacation time. Unless there's a massive breakthrough in battery cost, you're actually paying a lot more than an ICE car for day to day driving.

Gasoline is so energy dense, so plentiful, and so easy to work with, its going to be VERY difficult getting off it. I pity the electric guys. They know its a uphill battle and lodging themselves into the luxury high end for economic survival is very telling. The "low" end is still a $35k+ car with quarter the range of the Tesla, which is terrible from pretty much any rational metric.

ekianjo5• 11 years ago

There are a number of places currently where the government will subsidize electricity used for cars.

You can hardly call subsidies "free". Everyone pays them in the end.

jaxbot7• 11 years ago

I think the biggest difference, speaking from my experience as a Leaf owner, is that electricity is much cheaper than petrol, more predictable in price/not as volatile as petrol prices, and the car itself is much more efficient than a gas car would be thanks to aerodynamics, regenerative braking and otherwise high efficiency in electric motors when compared to internal combustion engines.

raverbashing4• 11 years ago

I'm not really sure about absolute price/J of energy comparison between electricity and gasoline

However an electrical car is more efficient than a gasoline one (gas engines are inefficient, diesel not so much)

smackfu3• 11 years ago

Our electricity costs are certainly more predictable: always going up.

hn_3• 11 years ago

Cost to operate the vehicle (gas) isn't the whole story. How much do these vehicles cost to insure and is it comparable with a gas car at a similar price point? (Not being snarky, just curious)

commandar2• 11 years ago

While your other points are perfectly valid, improved aero isn't an advantage unique to electric cars.

lgbr• 11 years ago

In relative terms, charging an electric car from home is cheap. It is even negligible enough to where the companies that sell you electric cars will do so by comparing the purchase price of an electric car to the cost of a normal gasoline car plus the gasoline over the next several years.

The charging stations on the street usually belong to a consortium with a membership card that unlocks the charging port or it may also belong to your local energy company. Subsidies may also apply to the energy supplied by them.

danielweber5• 11 years ago

Yes. When comparing electric cars to gasoline cars, just assume the electricity is free.

The real money for the electric car is the depreciation of the battery pack. A penny or two per mile is a rounding error compared to that.

dghughes• 11 years ago

You could have a home distillery and use kitchen waste as the mash for the starter. Using kitchen waste to make fuel is so green not like those coal-fired electricty plants.

engates• 11 years ago

Tesla pays for charging at any of their Tesla SuperCharger stations. So free to the Tesla owner.

bradleyland• 11 years ago

Don't you pay to get electricity?

That depends. For example, Tesla operates Supercharger (that's what they actually call them) stations where you can charge your car for free. There are other free options as well.

However, most people will charge the car at home, so let's look at what it costs you to charge an electric car at home. I don't have this data for Europe, but I'm sure you can find it with some digging. In the US, the price of electricity is typically charged in kilowatt-hours (kWh), and varies based on your location. This table tells us the average cost per kWh by state:

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm...

I live in Florida, and in a market where the cost per kWh is particularly low. For off-peak times, I pay $0.09/kWh. While that's exciting for me, let's round-off the Florida average to $0.12/kWh and do some math with that.

Some searching around on the internet tells me that a typical Tesla driver will get anywhere from 2.5 miles to 3.5 miles per kWh. Let's go with the median at a flat 3 miles/kWh.

From here, most people jump straight to equating cost per kWh to miles per kWh, but charging is not 100% efficient. I found a reasonably well researched source [1] that puts efficiency at around 80%, which we'll factor in to the cost.

Making some more assumptions, let's look at the cost to drive this theoretical electric car 12,000 miles per year:

Calculate annual kWh:

12,000/3 (total miles/miles per kWh) => 4,000 kWh

Factor in charging efficiency:

4,000/0.80 (annual kWh/charging efficiency): 5,000 kWh

Calculate the cost of electricity at local rates:

$0.12 x 5,000 kWh => $600 annually

Monthly?

$600/12 months => $50

Weekly?

$600/52 weeks => $11.54

How does this compare to petrol powered cars?

Calculate annual gallons of fuel:

12,000/30 (total miles/miles per gallon) => 400 gallons

Calculate cost of petrol at local rates:

$2.85 x 400 gallons => $1,140

Monthly?

$1,140/12 => $95.00

Weekly?

$1,140/52 => $21.92

So, do you pay? In most cases, yes. However, the monthly cost is lower by almost half. The value equation for electric cars is strongly dependent on the input factors. If you drive a lot more miles, or if you pay a lot more for petrol, your value equation changes significantly.

I published this comparison as a Google Spreadsheet as well [2].

1: http://www.teslarati.com/charging-tesla-model-s-cost-higher/

2: Published version:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15PbqSFB7ubis59AecCkV...

Source (can be copied):

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15PbqSFB7ubis59AecCkV...

yc1010• 11 years ago

Uhm I would love a Tesla (if they ever start selling right hand drive versions in my little backward western european country) but at an equivalent of €100K price tag (that means I have to earn ~€210K before tax, to be left with that amount around these parts) its a bit steep...

Neither am I sure that the inept electricity supply board would know how to install a charger for one, and well electricity is expensive here in Ireland, paid €1200 last year for just above 4000KW/hours for my home/office

Yes my petrol 4x4 is 10 years old, yes it does a terrible mileage in a country where petrol is €1.40/liter now, yes it breaks alot and has to be serviced (just this week) and pass yearly road-worthiness testing and costs me a fortune in tax and insurance (€700 + 330 last year)

Maybe if we werent taxed as much I could afford after a few years of saving a luxury of an electric car, until then me good old jeep will continue to drive me over the potholed narrow roads we have (which apparently all that road tax AND now local council tax was meant to improve)

sigh...

tl.dr: The article is funny but not all of us enjoy Nordic standards of living or wages (After tax), or have governments that are not out to fleece the taxpayers and hand their blood money over to failed banks and their developer buddies who helped them get elected.

kaolinite2• 11 years ago

They are planning to eventually release a more affordable Tesla, just as soon as they can scale up enough that it's viable. The first car they made (the Roadster) was a very expensive supercar, which they sold in low numbers. Then they made the Model S, an expensive, luxury sedan, which they're selling a lot more of. I'm not sure if pricing has been released yet for the Model X but I suspect it'll be cheaper than the Model S and will sell in even greater numbers.

Elon doesn't really seem to be in this for the money or the luxury status - he seems to just care about building great cars that are good for the environment. As soon as he can make really good, affordable electric cars - I'm sure he will.

stcredzero2• 11 years ago

The Model X is a luxury SUV. ("Estate," in the british isles.) The next model is supposed to be the "Model 3." They can't use Model E, because Ford still has that trademarked or something along those lines. Otherwise, they could have models S, E, and X.

notdang• 11 years ago

Tesla is not the only electrical car. There are other electrical cars much cheaper than a Tesla.

grecy2• 11 years ago

The sell RHD in a few markets now (Australia for one), so chances are they'll eventually sell them in more and more markets.

paganel• 11 years ago

The car’s gasoline engine coughed to life and started to operate. One could hear the engine’s sound and the car’s whole body vibrated as if something was broken, but the seller assured us that everything was as it should

I've only learned to drive and have owned my car for a year now (I'm in my mid-30s), but I just love the engine of my petrol car starting. Often times I choose to drive with my radio turned-off just to hear the engine's sound. Mind you, is a regular 1.4l hatcchbak, nothing sporty or the like.

Later edit: I also love to change gears, honestly. Not sure exactly what it is, but I don't see myself driving an automatic.

You need a lot of training to learn to select the right gear at the right time

And about this, there's no "a lot of training" needed, you just get used to it pretty fast. Actually, IMHO, is part of the whole process of you becoming one with your car.

markbnine• 11 years ago

Obviously this post is not interested in car-geeking, but I agree, the sound of combustion engines can be wonderful (VW Beetles).

to3m• 11 years ago

I pretty much always drive with the radio off. My car is a 3L diesel. Purists might scoff, but I've always liked the noise it makes. I was sold pretty much instantly on the test drive and four years later I still love it. Once you're on the move, it's very relaxing, like an ambient music track, with a cheeky whirring noise in the background that becomes more evident when it gets going.

When you're sat stationary with the engine idling, the gear knob and foot pedals shudder, and there's a slight juddering through the steering wheel. Some might think of this as unrefined, and possibly even agricultural, but I find it actually quite comforting. At such low revs the engine also sounds rather clattery... but I don't mind. At least you know it's still there.

(I had a courtesy car a couple of years ago with an engine that was undetectable while idling - and I ended up not liking it! It was so nice to have my car back, with its reassurring vibrations and its clattery engine sound. People are weird.

(But maybe if I'd have been given a Tesla, with its panoply of toys and its space shuttle-style acceleration, I'd have got over it.)

nsxwolf3• 11 years ago

I also love manual transmissions. It will be the hardest thing for me to give up when I eventually make the switch to electric.

I suppose it is similar to the satisfaction the owner of a mechanical watch gets -- but it's more visceral. You're really becoming part of the machine, and you feel it. Coordinating gear shifting with clutch pedal actuation, instinctively doing it all at the right moment based on what you hear and feel from the engine. Your body and mind are involved, consciously and subconsciously. Now all that is just ... gone.

tgbrter4• 11 years ago

You can always occupy yourself, now free of unnecessary tasks, with audiobooks.

rconti2• 11 years ago

Yup. Being in tune with the vehicle is the most fantastic part of driving. The skill and coordination required, the tactile pleasure of the controls and the gearchange. The automatic kills much of the enjoyment of it. And yes, I've been driving for about 20 years, and yes, I've commuted in some of the worst traffic in America.

Also, changing gears myself does not preclude me from listening to audiobooks, as some commenter mentioned. I'm already sitting there operating the controls on the car. Having one more lever and one more pedal does not exactly tax me mentally, or preclude my other senses, not constitute any real effort aside from perhaps an extra calorie or three burned.

tgbrter4• 11 years ago

You have a valid point, but... anyone here misses typewriters? I didn't think so.

rconti2• 11 years ago

First of all, there was an article about Hanx Writer just the other day. Yes, there ARE people who miss typewriters.

Secondly, the word processor does countless things the typewriter cannot do, and does so with an order of magnitude more speed.

The automatic transmission does nothing a manual transmission cannot do (from the end user perspective), other than being ever so slightly less effort, and perhaps a few milliseconds faster in gearchange, which does not matter unless perhaps you are being paid for how fast you can get to the grocery store.

Freed of the tyranny of having to use your left foot for a clutch, what is it that you accomplish while driving an automatic that you could not before?

qu4z-2• 11 years ago

I don't miss typewriters, never having used them regularly, but they certainly have their advantages as well. If I were to take up something involving more writing I'd probably get one. I spend a lot of my writing time with paper and pen these days.

dabeeeenster• 11 years ago

I wrote this a couple of years ago

http://www.solidstategroup.com/page/6277/a-review-of-the-new...

I guess that's what you would call 'creative license'...

bjwbell• 11 years ago

I like yours more. I couldn't read more than a couple paragraphs of the new one without cringing from their 'creative license' with facts.

1123581321• 11 years ago

I like yours a good bit more. It's a better comparison and funnier. Thanks for sharing.

CamperBob2• 11 years ago

I guess that's what you would call 'creative license'...

Don't Panameras have the same auto start-stop feature that the 981/991 cars have?

And who in the world replaces their exhaust system every 20,000 miles?

ekianjo5• 11 years ago

You need a lot of training to learn to select the right gear at the right time – though there are also models with automatic transmissions that can do this themselves. In the manual transmission car, we needed to constantly guard the engine from damaging it. Very stressful.

Mmm. That's probably supposed to be funny, except that it is not, since automatic cars are so boring to drive in the first place. Manual cars are the real deal if you want to feel your car and the road when you drive instead of relying on a computer to make your choices. There's certainly a use for automatic transmission (on motorways or on heavy traffic roads for example) but in most other situations I'd rather have manual over it.

The seller looked very puzzled at us and explained that it is not possible to refuel gasoline cars at home,

Because you don't need to, when you have an autonomy of hundred of kilometers with a single tank. An electric car is like a smartphone, it may be nice to operate (if you like them) but you need to charge them everyday. And you can forget about long distance driving without having to stop for a long while to recharge your car. Oh, and you can store petrol in your car (in your trunk) if you want to go very, very far, but good luck doing that with an electric car if you go in remote places without plugs anywhere to be seen. Electric cars are obviously only for urban zones (or places not too far in between them).

especially given that all gasoline must be imported from abroad.

Is that article from like 20 years ago ? Because where Tesla is the most popular (i.e. in the US), now a large part of the petrol is actually extracted locally.

Do not confuse petrol cars’ exhaust pipes with fuel cell cars’ – while hydrogen powered fuel cell vehicles emit only water vapor gasoline cars spew out noxious gasses, and even fossil carbon dioxide that contribute to Earth’s future-catastrophic warming!

Yeah, and your electricity that powers your car is still made mostly from fossil fuels in most parts of the world, or nuclear energy which is not too hot with the general public nowadays. It's nice to be blind.

watty• 11 years ago

The goal of driving (for most) is to get from A to B, not entertainment. I agree, I loved my manual car but the masses prefer the convenience of automatic which is why manual cars continue to disappear.

Electric cars will eventually replace petrol cars, it's a fact.

ekianjo5• 11 years ago

Electric cars will eventually replace petrol cars, it's a fact.

No, it's one of the potential future scenarii, but certainly not the only one. It will be a fact when it has actually happened.

It's just like people predicting the death of the PC and its total replacement by tablets - but hey, after several years of tremendous tablet growth, looks like 2014 was not so hot.

Let's not be too hasty in making predictions.

ekianjo5• 11 years ago

The goal of driving (for most) is to get from A to B, not entertainment

Sure, I agree. but having an automatic car is a barely better experience than a petrol car in that regard. Sign me up when the self driving cars are out, but until then driving in heavy traffic will suck no matter what.

codeulike• 11 years ago

There's certainly a use for automatic transmission (on motorways or on heavy traffic roads for example) but in most other situations I'd rather have manual over it.

Tesla cars do not have 'manual' or 'automatic' transmission as commonly understood. There is no 'gearbox' at all because it is not necessary. The electric engine drives the wheels directly. For slower speeds, it just uses less power.

scott_karana2• 11 years ago

Both the Roadster and the Model S use a single gear to change their final drive ratio, so they do have gearboxes, technically. :-)

The Roadster was actually planned to be a two-speed, but had issues with it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Roadster#Transmission

maaaats• 11 years ago

Is that article from like 20 years ago ? Because where Tesla is the most popular (i.e. in the US), now a large part of the petrol is actually extracted locally.

The article is from Sweden, which has little oil resources. I'd also argue that Norway is the country which Tesla is more popular, in % of cars sold.

Yeah, and your electricity that powers your car is still made mostly from fossil fuels in most parts of the world, or nuclear energy which is not too hot with the general public nowadays. It's nice to be blind.

Still, it might be more efficient doing it this way instead of transporting the petrol around to be used in inefficient engines. Also better for the local air and noise pollution. Still, most energy in Norway, for instance, is from water.

joshstrange• 11 years ago

Yeah, and your electricity that powers your car is still made mostly from fossil fuels in most parts of the world, or nuclear energy which is not too hot with the general public nowadays. It's nice to be blind.

Right now, yes, most electricity probably comes from fossil fuels but assuming that burning fossil fuels in cars direct vs burning them in power plants are the same is extremely naive. I'll allow Bill Nye the Science guy to explain: http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi1169817881

TL;DR: It's a lot easier to burn FF's cleaner at 1 location than fix it for every car on the market (which will be outdated in terms of it's "clean tech" as soon as it comes off the line while a factory can be continuously upgraded with the best available).

Shivetya• 11 years ago

Contrived to the point of stupid so the point is lost.

Really, this could have just as well been written in the early 1900s with a moron buying a car when a perfectly good horse was available.

Two problems still exist with electric only cars they haven't shown are solvable. Truly fast charging and handling of that "damnit, the son forgot to plug the car in when he got home and I need to go to work/doctor/etc NOW" and lack of available charging for large number of potential drivers. Want to be silly like the article, don't get snowed in without power for days on end that still happens in North America.

As for repair shops at dealers, well being able to have your car repaired and serviced anywhere is a good thing. Just happens that Tesla does its best to hide the service issues by keeping it mostly internal.

So yeah electrics are cool, leaning towards a ER EV myself simply because I have to travel on my schedule and not my cars

nailer• 11 years ago

damnit, the son forgot to plug the car in when he got home

I don't see that as a significant problem: 'complain when at home but not charging' is a fairly easily implemented fix.

jmilloy• 11 years ago

I could be wrong about this, but I think it is referring to a specific review of a Tesla test-drive from a few years back. It doesn't seem quite so contrived with that in mind, and the point is also more clear.

krschultz• 11 years ago

It's not contrived. All the points you mentioned about the downsides of EV are true. That's why they're a single digit percentage of the market right now at best.

The point of this article is to point out the compromises that we are currently making. They're invisible to us because they are the compromises we have been making for generations. I can imagine a 538 article that illustrates how much land we allocate to gas stations using several graphs. For some people that article will be interesting. Other people's eyes will glaze over. This kind of article uses humor to make the same point.

I don't own an electric vehicle. I'm very aware of the advantages of electric vehicles for society at large, but reading about how funny it is to not be able to store things in the front of the car made me realize how much of a feature that really would be. Reading about his concern that an gasoline powered car is less safe because you have a giant engine in front of you made sense to me in a way I previously hadn't thought about.

He didn't even make a bunch of other points that I often think about - like the level of soot in cities. Our children will probably look back at us the way we look back at London in 1850 shrouded in coal dust.

aidenn02• 11 years ago

You just barely missed the point of the article. They are parodying the EV reviews that "could have just as well been written in the early 1900s with a moron buying a car when a perfectly good horse was available."

serve_yay• 11 years ago

I noticed that a car I drove by yesterday was a Tesla. But I didn't notice immediately, because it looked like a Buick or something.

I don't understand why, if they're trying to do something radically different, their cars look pretty much like everyone else's. Perhaps they are trying not to scare off potential buyers, but it seems like people are already interested in trying something different when they buy a Tesla. I personally would never drop whatever crazy prices their cars cost for something so mundane looking, though.

BorgHunter• 11 years ago

There's more volume in conventional-looking cars. Look at the responses to the Nissan Leaf and BMW i3, two electric cars that are legitimately funky-looking; something that looks weird will turn more people off than will be turned on.

flyinghamster2• 11 years ago

On the contrary, I'm glad that Teslas are both handsome and fairly normal-looking. An electric car doesn't need to look ridiculous.

NickM3• 11 years ago

I think the key point here is that Tesla is not trying to make the world's best electric car, they're trying to make the best car, period. If they try to make something radical and different looking, then they're going to gain some extra traction with people who want to stand out and be different, but they already have those people in the bag anyway.

On the flip side, making their cars deliberately strange looking is likely to turn a lot of people off. People who might otherwise be interested in buying a Tesla simply because it's a high-quality, practical car that competes well with other cars in its price segment, gasoline or not.

S_A_P3• 11 years ago

I get the point of this article and its tongue in cheek. Twenty years ago people laughed at electric cars with their maybe 30-40 miles of range and 8-12hour charging times. Tesla has done a lot to iron out most of these engineering problems and I applaud them for that. However, articles like this also smack of elitism, especially considering the 6 figure prices most Tesla vehicles sell for. I would love to own a Tesla, just as I would love to own a 2000 acre ranch estate with a huge mansion on it. When electric cars can compete in the range of commodity cars, then we can have this conversation about the merits of electric cars.

I just watched a video comparing the Dodge Charger Hellcat to a Tesla P-85d. Both have similar power, and while you can debate the level of quality of FCA vs Tesla you can still drive a Hellcat(which is an insane gas guzzler) for less money for 5-7 years depending on your yearly mileage. At that point, most people will likely purchase a new vehicle, and that is also assuming you only use free superchargers. A Tesla is definitely a luxury item, I get that, and there are other options. The problem is most current other options are more like the electric cars 20 years ago than a tesla.

Progress is being made and I am excited about that. I would love to have an electric commuter car as long as it could meet the following criteria.

1) seat 5 people comfortably 2) have 150+ miles of range(I drive about 120 miles per day) 3) cost between 30-50k 4) have reasonable performance(say comparable to a german sedan in that price range) 5) recharge quickly and easily, possibly have battery swap capability for the high use days 6) emphasize being a good car and not a "green" car. Im all for taking care of the environment, but will never buy a car with a 60" x 12" GREEN ECO ELECTRIC POWER emblazoned across the side.(In the same way I would never get a car that says "UBER HEMI BIG WANG POWER" either) 7) be reliable and comfortable to drive, with low cost of ownership at least comparable to a reliable petrol car.

I dont think any of that list is unreasonable, and I am glad that Tesla exists, they have done a great service to the electric car.

ksk• 11 years ago

Your points are very reasonable. However, I think that unless some government funds electric car tech research, the only way is to approach it top down, in a capitalist model. Make an electric car that's expensive, with a very high profit margin. Sell it to the rich. Use the profits to drive the tech advancement. If you approach it by making affordable cars, it will be quite a while before you accumulate enough capital to invest in the technology.

matznerd• 11 years ago

Also, the first cohort of Model S' are coming off lease to certified pre-owned and the price is right around $60k with some dipping below it.

Edit: here is a link to the fan made sortable spreadsheet of available cars http://logmysc.com/cpo-reports.php

LewisJEllis• 11 years ago

"the 6 figure price most Tesla vehicles sell for" - really? You're right that they're a luxury item, but let's be accurate here. Only the top-of-the-line performance model is $105k, and that's before tax credits which bring it back down to five figures. The entry model is $75k, and the midrange is $85k.

brandonmenc2• 11 years ago

Only the top-of-the-line performance model is $105k, and that's before tax credits which bring it back down to five figures.

Which loan financing and sales tax brings back up to six figures.

S_A_P3• 11 years ago

I looked for a breakdown of Tesla sales, but could not find anything. I am pretty sure that it is accurate to say the majority of Tesla Model S's on the road are 6 figure vehicles. I know this is anecdotal, but here in the Houston area, I would say the breakdown of Model S vehicles on the road are about 5% P65, 65% P85, and the rest P85D/S/+. Now, Im sure there are people who bought the stripped down P65 with no options. However, Most of these P85s are loaded, and a quick glance at the Tesla motors site shows that a 70 will cost you 76,750 base and 91,250 loaded (+ 1200 dest&regulation fee.) A 85/D will cost you 81,750 base and loaded is over 101,250. Cars like the ones most magazines test are fully loaded top of the line models. The sticker on the P85D in the video vs the charger hellcat was 129k. Sure you can get one in the 75-90k range, but most on the road are not going to be equipped that way.

This is just the nature of the car business(even a disrupted one). People want options, and base price is rarely what gets delivered, there is just too much profit to be had from options.

I am not saying this to deride Tesla, but lets call the model S what it really is, a 100k electric car with great performance.

pkulak• 11 years ago

I agree. If this were written by a Nissan Leaf blog it would come off far more proletariat and I'm not sure any of it would have to be changed (except the bit about the frunk).

ctb_mg• 11 years ago

Tesla is trying to reach into lower market segments. The media is throwing around the $35k price point for a few months. [1][2]

[1] http://www.engadget.com/2014/07/15/tesla-model-iii/ [2] https://duckduckgo.com/?q=tesla+35k

yellowapple• 11 years ago

They're not really there yet, though; right now it seems like Tesla's still raising capital via the Model S and (eventually) the Model X. A significantly-cheaper Tesla (which probably ain't the Model X) will probably arrive alongside the new battery-churning Gigafactory they're building here in Reno (since that'll allow for better economies of scale with the batteries at least), which is slated for completion by around 2017 IIRC.

ruswick2• 11 years ago

This is exactly what I thought when I read this. It's incredibly pretentious and doesn't come off well.

That said, electric cars are more accessible than ever. The leaf starts at only $21000, which is in the range of most new-car buyers.

The real problem is the lack of diversity. There are very expensive electric sedans like the Teslas and the i8, and then there is the leaf and plug-in prius. But, there are not downmarket electric compact sedans, minivans and true SUVs. If you want an electric vehicle, you either have to shell out $800 a month or get stuck with an odd-looking hatchback. I really hope manufacturers begin rolling out new form factors for their EVs sooner rather than later.

KirinDave• 11 years ago

Well the other problem is that many electric cars assume you have the facilities to charge them on your own. Home ownership should not be a precondition for car ownership.

Certainly I could _afford_ a Leaf or a Tesla if I wanted to make room for the payments. I'm more concerned how to charge it if I don't own a garage, and I'm sort of grossed out by how nearly all literature on the subject just totally glosses this over.

ajtaylor3• 11 years ago

Take a look at the VW e-Golf. It retails for $34k, seats 5, is still VERY fun to drive with great performance. However, it will fail on your range and charging time requirements. For a shorter commute I think it might work pretty well for you.

jaggederest• 11 years ago

The calculations in Sweden (where the author/s are) are entirely different. The Tesla isn't a luxury item there, and you can't drive a small cheap car for equivalent price, since the taxes and gasoline costs are so high.

orjan• 11 years ago

The Tesla is definitely a luxury item here in Sweden. I drive a Renault diesel and I could buy three of those for the price of a Tesla (yeah, I know, apples/oranges...) TCO for a Tesla will (sadly) be a lot higher than for a fossil fuel car, simply because of the high purchase price.

justinpaulson• 11 years ago

The pre-owned prices don't look too bad, considering the standard Tesla package that is usually reserved for luxury cars: http://www.teslamotors.com/models/preowned

Also, the Model III should be more affordable as well, and get close to matching your criteria...seating 5 people "comfortably" is arguable with most sedans and crossovers though. However, I haven't heard much about it since the initial announcements: http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a12983/35000-tesla-mode...

Aloha• 11 years ago

My list is almost identical to yours, but I need range more in the 300-400 mile range, in short an electric mid size or large sedan - I drive a crown victoria now, and would be looking for something similar.

csomar• 11 years ago

A bit off-topic, but I wonder if in the future we should focus on reducing the car price or increasing personal wealth.

Tesla should be considered more renewable (since it doesn't consume gas) and thus a benefit for society and the nature.

Maybe we should think how to raise the GDP enough so that everyone can afford the clean (and luxurious) car.

Too2• 11 years ago

If you can accept plug in hybrid as electric there are tons of good options matching almost all your criteria, Audi, Mercedes, BWM, Lexus, Volvo, VW, Toyota(more than just prius) etc etc, all have plug in hybrid variants of their normal cars. All without any big stickers, that's probably why you haven't even realized that they exist out on the roads :) Hybrids also have the benefit of always fulfilling criteria 2 and 5, which pure electric simply don't.

tripzilch2• 11 years ago

I just watched a video comparing the Dodge Charger Hellcat to a Tesla P-85d. Both have similar power, and while you can debate the level of quality of FCA vs Tesla you can still drive a Hellcat(which is an insane gas guzzler) for less money for 5-7 years depending on your yearly mileage.

Was that for US prices of fossil fuels? While I don't know about Sweden (where this article appears to have been written), but compared to prices in the Netherlands, in the US gasoline is about 2-3x as cheap (at least, last time I checked, I don't own a car so I don't keep quite as close an eye on these prices).

Or compare for yourself (today's average Dutch price is 1.735 euro per liter):

https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=1.735%20euro%20p...

Equals 7.326 dollars per gallon. How much do you pay in the US?

microcolonel• 11 years ago

Inaccurate, internal combustion engines combust fuel, they don't explode it. Explosions are something you don't want in a motor.

chillingeffect• 11 years ago

I don't know who would downvote you for this fact, but you're absolutely right.

grecy2• 11 years ago

Isn't "combustion" just a type of "explosion".

i.e. A (somewhat) controlled explosion?

Combustion: Rapid chemical combination of a substance with oxygen, involving the production of heat and light

Explosion: A violent expansion in which energy is transmitted outward as a shock wave.

dragonwriter• 11 years ago

Combustion and explosion are orthogonal concepts. You can have combustion without explosion, combustion with explosion, and explosion without combustion (e.g., the failure of a pressurized container without any chemical reaction.)

korethr2• 11 years ago

Yes, Electric cars are great and have many advantages and improvements over cars with internal combustion engines. I won't deny this.

But until such time an electric cars is available as a compact hatchback that has >800 mile range on a single charge, and go from from depleted batteries to full charge in < 5 minutes, I'll be keeping my VW Golf TDI. The latter fits my use and needs from a personal vehicle better.

MrRadar2• 11 years ago

Why do you need an 800 mile range? Do you drive from New York to Chicago on a daily basis?

korethr2• 11 years ago

If a 15 year old internal combustion engine design can do an 800 mile range, I don't think its unreasonable for electric cars to get there, especially with as fast as Tesla is coming up with improvements to electric cars.

But let us consider advantages to an 800 mile range. Even within the urban core, where a 100 mile range is enough for a few days of commuting along with an emergency reserve, an 800 mile range is going to mean far less-frequent charges, just as it means far less frequent fill-ups for a combustion-powered car. That's less strain on the owner's wallet, and less strain on the electrical grid. These advantages are felt even more acutely by those who don't live and commute in the urban core, be it in the suburbs, outer edge of a metro area, or rural area proper. Not everyone can or wants to live in a densely-packed urban area, and for those who don't, a vehicle with a long range is very practical.

An extended driving range also makes longer road trips less expensive and more practical. A full day's drive with fuel/charge to spare? Yes, please. And even if you think that such is a silly thing which no person should rightly desire from their personal transport when air travel (and airprort security theater) is available, consider another application: Trucks.

Large, long-haul cargo trucks (semis) are one of the main means of transporting goods quickly across the US, and are one of the main consumers of petroleum-based fuels. They get that range by having large fuel tanks -- 100 US gallons or more. Now, imagine if electric car tech can make a compact hatchback go 800 miles/charge, what that could do when scaled up to large trucks. If you want do something about the consumption of petroleum fuels and consequent emissions in the US, getting trucks with the same or superior range on electric power is a good place to focus.

wayanon• 11 years ago

Bravo!

btbuildem• 11 years ago

Now, let's take this a big step further, and try to see how ridiculously outmoded, destructive and dangerous the entire setup of using cars for routine personal transportation really is..

bbarn2• 11 years ago

This was a fun read, but unfortunately, the electric car isn't practical yet in the environment it should excel the most at - the city. It's only a feasible option if you're a home owner with a garage. I could totally afford a tesla, and I love them, but I don't want to own anything beyond a condo in the city, and that means street parking. Even in the best neighborhoods where I wouldn't worry about the car getting stolen/vandalized, there's still no where to charge it! Residential city areas are never going to be lined with charger plugs for people to parallel park outside their apartments and use.

So, the only people it's practical for, are suburban (or very well off urban) people who don't drive often. I just don't see the infrastructure needed happening in a city the size of Chicago within my lifetime, and since populations are still centered there, I don't see gas cars going away in my lifetime, as much as I'd love them to.

mdorazio• 11 years ago

Just FYI my friends live in a condo in the city and drive a Tesla anyway. They use the supercharger stations just like normal gas stations -- fill up once a week (or less if you don't drive much) _for free_ and you're good to go. So it's definitely possible, just slightly less convenient than an ICE car due to the small number of high-speed charging stations currently available.

bbarn2• 11 years ago

http://www.teslamotors.com/findus#/bounds/42.023131,-87.5240...

Not in this city. The nearest one is an hourish away, depending on time of day and traffic. This is by the way, the third largest city in the country.

New York has only one in JFK, which as I understand it is an awful place to have to drive to.

Possible, yes, practical, no. "Slight less convenient" is a gross understatement in at least these two cities. LA, well.. the culture of "you just have to take an hour to get anywhere" seems to permeate anyway so maybe it works.

Zirro• 11 years ago

In my apartment complex (built recently in Sweden) there is a shared garage located below the building. It is a great way to get cars off the streets and certainly a feasible location for chargers. In fact, I believe there are some there already.

outworlder• 11 years ago

This is such a US-centric view.

In some countries, you can't even own a vehicle if you don't provide proof that you have some place to park it at (eg. Japan, lookup Shakoshomeishou). In others, you would be crazy to leave a car parked outside overnight, luxury or not - there is insurance, but the premium will easily double (eg many areas in Brazil, particularly the North and Northest states).

rentnorove• 11 years ago

It's applicable to many european cities.

ryanlol2• 11 years ago

And in some countries you can just park pretty much anywhere and you'll only worry will be potential parking tickets.

ryanlol2• 11 years ago

Over here in Finland most apartment building parking lots come with lines of electric outlets (used to keep the cars warm in the winter) that have already been there for tens of years.

Here's a picture: http://www.vastavalo.fi/albums/userpics/13723/normal_2010110...

Currently these don't have high enough amperage for fast charging of Teslas but the electric companies are already upgrading their infrastructure to enable that.

minwcnt5• 11 years ago

My rental apartment in the Bay Area has special parking spots with chargers for EVs. And it's not a particularly high end complex (though it is large). Within a year I would expect this to be standard here, maybe within two years for the rest of the country. It seems pretty standard these days for large public parking lots in places like shopping malls to have them as well.

mindslight2• 11 years ago

Monthly cost for a petrol car can -just for the gasoline alone- easily exceed one hundred Euros

Although I appreciate comparisons from inverse perspectives, a few specific points fell flat. Assuming a rough 10 year lifespan, depreciation on a $20k Civic is $166/mo, while depreciation on a $70k Tesla is $583/mo. Also, if you're worried about carcinogenic effects from a few whiffs of gasoline, then you most likely don't need a car since you've already confined yourself to a hermetic bubble.

danielweber5• 11 years ago

Yes. It's foolish to compare the cost of consumable gas vs consumable electricity.

Much better is consumable gasoline versus battery depreciation. Electricity costs nearly disappear.

This was an old adage among the homebrew EV crowd: buying a battery pack is pre-paying for your fuel for the next N years.

The Powerwall[1] is about 35 cents per KWh, assuming it can handle 1000 full cycles. ($3500 for 10KWh capacity.) A decent EV can get 5 miles out of that, so the battery depreciation is 7 cents a mile. That's a multiple of the electricity cost, which is about 2 cents a mile if you don't try for any time-of-day billing.

[1] This is just my best comparison of the actual cost of a Tesla battery.

33W2• 11 years ago

30mpg at $2.25/gal is 7.5c per mile. Versus 9c for an EV (7c battery, 2c elec), this is a $1500 over 100k miles. If we consider the other maintenance costs, I think they are nearly equivalent.

lamby• 11 years ago

It may sound like a bad omen to buy the car from a car repair shop that you want to visit as seldom as possible.

That's....quite a good point.

ghaff8• 11 years ago

Cute line. Though the reality is that the service needs of modern autos during the first 5 years or so are likely to be pretty modest. Maybe a tire issue (which an EV could have also). Probably brake work which an EV may not require at that point. Various fluids--though oil changes are about 10K miles with synthetics.

One of my vehicles is about 17 years old with 170K miles. I wouldn't expect to get that out of an EV. Don't get me wrong. I'd be interested in an EV someday. But maintenance isn't a big deal within the window where I'd expect to have to replace an EV's battery pack at this point.

rhinoceraptor• 11 years ago

It reminds me of this Windows review, from the point of view of a Linux-first user:

https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/miduh/tomt_an_articl...

wj• 11 years ago

"I could never drive an electric car because <insert my unique situation and criteria>."

Wait 20 years and then get back to us. In the meantime those for who an electric car makes sense will drive them. For those it doesn't won't.

This isn't politics or sports but a lot of the reasoning on here reminds me of those types of discussions.

humanrebar• 11 years ago

It's pretty sad that you equate politics and sports and I can't really disagree. Or maybe politics has always been about identity and people who like ideas and ideals are outliers.

ajtaylor3• 11 years ago

I just leased a 2015 VW e-Golf last week so this is particularly relevant to me. It will be a commuter car and from the few days of driving it so far, this will be perfect for me. The amazing thing is getting into the car and having it be perfectly silent. The next thing that astonished me was just how fast it could be from a standstill. Plus it's a Golf and my love of Golfs can be found by looking through my comment history here.

I'll admit that I'm still dealing with a bit of range anxiety, but I haven't come close to being truly scared of running out of juice. I generally run it in Eco mode w/ the regenerative braking in mode 1 or 2 so I often make back 10-20 miles of range during hilly drives.

MattHeard• 11 years ago

The petrol tank apparently often leaks after an accident so the flammable liquid pours out and becomes ignited!

I read recently in the New Yorker that accidents causing a fire are rare: approximately 1 in 100. [1]

[1] http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/05/04/the-engineers-l...

vacri3• 11 years ago

Releasing the accelerator pedal resulted in no significant braking, we had to use the brake pedal very much to slow down the car.

Why should releasing something called an 'accelerator' cause braking? A vehicle should coast in that situation, not try to stop.

EliRivers• 11 years ago

In many vehicles, releasing the "go forwards please" control does cause braking. In this day and age, it's pure convention.

vacri3• 11 years ago

If it was called that, I would have less of a problem. Braking is, however, merely acceleration in a different direction. :)

Test drive of a petrol car

Related Stories