I don't know... But I did pull down one of the YT videos of one of the test rides and loaded it into my video editor. The car took 5.2 seconds to go from a dead stop to 100mph. It got to 110mph at the 5.9 second mark, and then the driver lifted.Have they demonstrated the 1.99s run yet?
Has someone ever explained why do we need production electric cards to be ridiculously fast?
I get the perspective of a gasoline car having bragging rights about being fast: it wants to use whatever advantage it might have, perceived or otherwise, to obtain the most amount of money possible for the company and it's board of directors.
But the premise of electric cars should be "We need this tech to replace our dependence on fossil fuels" so how does killing yourself in under a second by losing control of your vehicle on urban environments not AT ALL designed to even handle such acceleration is going to save the planet or contribute to allleviate fossil fuel dependency?
It seems like Elon just wants the same bragging rights as gasoline cars. It fundamentally just wants to make a lot of money out of selling cars and is trying to reconcile conflicting interests here: the one that is about the ecological angle and the one that is about being a luxurios super car prestige while doing so. Seems like focusing on the later is directly counter-intuitive to just making the stupid electric cards widely available fast enough to shift away from fossil fuels.
They fail in one direction that matters - mileage, and they are desperately trying to make up for that in all other departments that we don't care much about.
FAIL.
They also contribute to wear and tear on the road but their drivers arent paying the tax that goes into repairing that wear and tear via not paying for gas. Electric is cool. But its being rushed.
At $130K it should come with RGB wheel well lights stock.(Welcome to full bore "tacky" in the computer age). But, knowing the way Musk prices options, they'll probably be an extra 10 grand.At $130 this is pretty attractive. But only if it has RGB.
15 minutes for ~200 miles worth of range is actually getting into gas car territory. But at $130,000 don't confuse this for anything more than a rich persons toy and at that point, everything else about it makes sense.They fail in one direction that matters - mileage, and they are desperately trying to make up for that in all other departments that we don't care much about.
FAIL.
Somehow, the mystique that a fast car means that a real man drives it had been embedded in the modern mindset, and we won't get away from that until modern men wake up and realize that they exhibit the behaviors of simple primates instead of modern humans, and, in fact, do not need such crap to be men. It's not only emblematic in hyperspeed EVs but in Harley's with their loud mufflers, and in the loud mufflers on the average "street dragster", IMO, and any other "performance" crap that the modern world has succeeded in convincing modern men that they need that crap to be a "real man" and without which, a modern man is just some whimpy lame excuse for a man. In the primate world, the fastest and the loudest is king. In the human world, IMO, it simply indicates testosterone poisoning, and a lack of self-esteem. To paraphrase Mr. T - pity the fools.Has someone ever explained why do we need production electric cards to be ridiculously fast?
I get the perspective of a gasoline car having bragging rights about being fast: it wants to use whatever advantage it might have, perceived or otherwise, to obtain the most amount of money possible for the company and it's board of directors.
But the premise of electric cars should be "We need this tech to replace our dependence on fossil fuels" so how does killing yourself in under a second by losing control of your vehicle on urban environments not AT ALL designed to even handle such acceleration is going to save the planet or contribute to allleviate fossil fuel dependency?
It seems like Elon just wants the same bragging rights as gasoline cars. It fundamentally just wants to make a lot of money out of selling cars and is trying to reconcile conflicting interests here: the one that is about the ecological angle and the one that is about being a luxurios super car prestige while doing so. Seems like focusing on the later is directly counter-intuitive to just making the stupid electric cards widely available fast enough to shift away from fossil fuels.
Except that this is only accomplished if you *also* convince those who value performance and not the environment to make the switch. If every EV is a Nissan LEAF, that ain't gonna happen. Whether he's accomplished it or not, Elon's goal has been to make a car that's just better, so that there are nearly zero excuses not to transition to EVs. Sure, fewer people will buy the more expensive Model S, but halo cars serve a purpose. GM sells a lot of cars *because* they have a Corvette. Porsche sells a lot of SUVs *because* they are known to make performance cars.
SIMPLE! Because going fast (and quick) is fun!
Not only can you race Lamborghini, Porsche, Bugatti and just about anything else to the quarter mile…
You can have a family of 4 witnesses watching
They fail in one direction that matters - mileage, and they are desperately trying to make up for that in all other departments that we don't care much about.
FAIL.
What did I just read?Has someone ever explained why do we need production electric cards to be ridiculously fast?
I get the perspective of a gasoline car having bragging rights about being fast: it wants to use whatever advantage it might have, perceived or otherwise, to obtain the most amount of money possible for the company and it's board of directors.
But the premise of electric cars should be "We need this tech to replace our dependence on fossil fuels" so how does killing yourself in under a second by losing control of your vehicle on urban environments not AT ALL designed to even handle such acceleration is going to save the planet or contribute to allleviate fossil fuel dependency?
It seems like Elon just wants the same bragging rights as gasoline cars. It fundamentally just wants to make a lot of money out of selling cars and is trying to reconcile conflicting interests here: the one that is about the ecological angle and the one that is about being a luxurios super car prestige while doing so. Seems like focusing on the later is directly counter-intuitive to just making the stupid electric cards widely available fast enough to shift away from fossil fuels.
Mate, I feel for ya. You people can barely deal with the outrageous price of guitar strings down under.$233,000 over here *sighs disconsolately in Australian*
Thanks. Oh well, probably un-insureable here anyway, or at least only for some enormous price. We have had a few cases where they won't insure if you've got full auto-driving installed. I'll just have to stick with my antique 5 yo model S.Mate, I feel for ya. You people can barely deal with the outrageous price of guitar strings down under.
A set of PB 12 string lights here in the "northern colonies", goes for about $8.00.
In Anzac land, that triples to $24.00
Here's the thing. From the technological point of perspective. An electric motor has a huge advantage over gasoline. All the electric's highest torque is produced at stall. Whereas, an IC engine has to rev up to hit its power peak.. So .that explains the outrageous. 0 to 60 performance..You are upset with EV's because the most technically advanced mass produced car is allowed to have insane acceleration? You said fastest, but didn't specify so I can only assume you confused speed with acceleration. They are not the same.
They demonstrated that electric cars are the absolute best in some of the most important metrics for *some* people. This is certainly good for electric car adoption.Has someone ever explained why do we need production electric cards to be ridiculously fast?
I get the perspective of a gasoline car having bragging rights about being fast: it wants to use whatever advantage it might have, perceived or otherwise, to obtain the most amount of money possible for the company and it's board of directors.
But the premise of electric cars should be "We need this tech to replace our dependence on fossil fuels" so how does killing yourself in under a second by losing control of your vehicle on urban environments not AT ALL designed to even handle such acceleration is going to save the planet or contribute to allleviate fossil fuel dependency?
It seems like Elon just wants the same bragging rights as gasoline cars. It fundamentally just wants to make a lot of money out of selling cars and is trying to reconcile conflicting interests here: the one that is about the ecological angle and the one that is about being a luxurios super car prestige while doing so. Seems like focusing on the later is directly counter-intuitive to just making the stupid electric cards widely available fast enough to shift away from fossil fuels.
Maybe *you* don't care about the others, but many people including myself do. And 405 miles is more than sufficient for most, maybe except those living in some fairly remote (few chargers) AND cold (low battery life) place.They fail in one direction that matters - mileage, and they are desperately trying to make up for that in all other departments that we don't care much about.
FAIL.
OK, "Dunning-Kruger Syndrome", is pretty much, an internet meme. Just some a**hole wanting to get his name in the books. Like "Asberger's syndrome", (which BTW has been removed from the DM-5), it is a fractional symptom of a much more serious overarching condition. In Musk's case, that would be a, "narcissistic sociopath".Not to mention, of course, Musky has his head up his A$$ as well as suffers from testosterone poising. He probably also suffers from Dunning-Kruger syndrome as well.
Yes. I like electric cars as a concept, but the implementation fails in a lot of areas. Recharge time is insanely slow. People claim it's only 15 minutes, but try waiting in a line of cars... Our Costco typically has at least 5 cars queued for each gas pump. At 15 minutes per car, you would wait over an hour. That's a FAIL. They lose up to 50% power capacity in cold weather. If you 'run out of gas' by the side of the road, you're hosed because you can't get a ride to the nearest gas station and get a couple of gallons of gas to tide you over. FAIL. They typically weigh at least 1000-1500 pounds more than a comparable IC car, which tears up the roads. They go through tires much faster.
People love the performance of Tesla Plaid, but honestly, for $113k you can buy a Nissan GT-R, or hop up your Subaru or Mustang, and you'll have a lot more fun. EVs
Yes for a HUGE amount of the driving market, the range is VERY suitable. It doesn't need to be perfect for everyone to be extremely valuable.They're not petrol? They accelerate way faster, they barely need any maintenance, they're cheap to run, they have tonnes of storage space, they're quiet, the infotainment is great, they don't cost any more than an equivalent petrol car to buy and they can even drive themselves (in certain situations). The range of 390 miles is way more than I'd sit in a car for but I'd be quite happy to wait 15 mins, have a coffee and add another 200 miles. It only costs about $15 to totally fill up (even cheaper at home). If you honestly have to drive over 300 miles a day then petrol might still be for you but, for the rest of us, I suspect electric makes way more sense.
But as someone who lives in Thailand, I've not forgiven Musk for the way he treated that ex-pat diver, so he can sell it to someone else.