If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(TreeHugger)   NYT Reporter: "The new Tesla sedan doesn't come close to stated range in cold conditions. It had to be towed home." Tesla CEO: "Guess what? Our car logged your GPS & battery data, and it says you're full of shiat." Watt now?   (treehugger.com) divider line 272
    More: Plug, NYT, Model S, Elon Musk, Motor Trend  
•       •       •

22681 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Feb 2013 at 11:45 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



272 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-11 08:49:21 PM  
It will be interesting to see the fallout from this.
People mocking electrical cars
GPS data being released
Accusations of lying
The journalist ranks closing on Tesla motors so they don't get any more reviews as they "undermined' one of the their own
 
2013-02-11 09:19:53 PM  
What! You don't say.  A media member has once again took a bias view and tweeked the test to get the desired results.  Good thing the car didn't have a gas tank.  They would've added a sparking device to blow the tank (chevy truck).  Or like the Ford Explorer, when a tv crew ran a test to prove how safe the vehicle was by only blowing a rear tire while driving a straight line.

/somebody paid this journalist
 
2013-02-11 09:23:45 PM  

Nezorf: It will be interesting to see the fallout from this.
People mocking electrical cars
GPS data being released
Accusations of lying
The journalist ranks closing on Tesla motors so they don't get any more reviews as they "undermined' one of the their own


I want to see the Tesla blog details to find out if this is idiot error of if the journalist out and out made shiat up.  If he charged the battery to 90% and ran out of juice, MAYBE that's an excuse.  If he started driving with a 50% chard and took a roundabout way home, that's inexcusable.
 
2013-02-11 09:26:11 PM  
Looking over his article titles he seems to shill for big oil.
 
2013-02-11 09:27:44 PM  
I'm betting that the NY Times version of events is closest to the truth.

The article didn't make it all that bad for them-- just part of the learning curve with a new technology.

Elon seems determined to turn it into tons of free negative advertising.  He cannot win.
 
2013-02-11 09:28:57 PM  

Because People in power are Stupid: Looking over his article titles he seems to shill for big oil.


I read his article and it seems it should be pretty easy to cross check his multiple phone calls to Tesla, verify the story with the tow truck driver, and check (from Tesla) that the car went where he said it did.
 
2013-02-11 10:07:36 PM  
But I was told all reporters, save those from Fox and the like, were left wing commies,
 
2013-02-11 10:07:44 PM  
I'm waiting to hear some more facts come out before pronouncing one or the other party guilty here.  It's a very strange thing, this.
 
2013-02-11 10:23:11 PM  
ecx.images-amazon.com

Oil companies influencing the media? Say it isn't so.
/Great read
 
2013-02-11 10:57:31 PM  
Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.
 
2013-02-11 11:03:08 PM  
You know how the EPA determines highway fuel economy?  They run the car on a dynamometer using a program that lasts for 12.5 minutes at an average speed of 48mph.
 
2013-02-11 11:09:43 PM  

ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.


That's why I think this may backfire on Tesla.  They might get a "Wait, what, everything I do in my car can be logged?" reaction they don't want.

I mean, yeah, every car built now has a black box, but you don't like hearing a car company admitting "We can see everything in that black box at any time."
 
2013-02-11 11:16:14 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: You know how the EPA determines highway fuel economy?  They run the car on a dynamometer using a program that lasts for 12.5 minutes at an average speed of 48mph.


The whole boring detail can be found here.

I do have to say, I have a 2006 Infiniti G35 sedan and the EPA estimates were a little low.  It was listed at 17/22 and I get about 23 on the highway.  They've only dropped about .2 mpg over the years, but the car has 140,000 miles on it, so that's expected.  When the AWD kicks in it can really hurt the mileage so it's good it doesn't snow much around here.
 
2013-02-11 11:18:54 PM  

jake_lex: I mean, yeah, every car built now has a black box,


Tesla is probably logging far more data than your usual black box records, for good reason.
 
2013-02-11 11:19:00 PM  

Lsherm: I do have to say, I have a 2006 Infiniti G35 sedan and the EPA estimates were a little low.  It was listed at 17/22 and I get about 23 on the highway.  They've only dropped about .2 mpg over the years, but the car has 140,000 miles on it, so that's expected.  When the AWD kicks in it can really hurt the mileage so it's good it doesn't snow much around here.


What's strange is that it seems that every car I've had with a huge motor and low mileage estimates does better while fuel efficient vehicles do worse than the EPA numbers.
 
2013-02-11 11:39:14 PM  

ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.


If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear, citizen.
 
2013-02-11 11:47:15 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: Lsherm: I do have to say, I have a 2006 Infiniti G35 sedan and the EPA estimates were a little low.  It was listed at 17/22 and I get about 23 on the highway.  They've only dropped about .2 mpg over the years, but the car has 140,000 miles on it, so that's expected.  When the AWD kicks in it can really hurt the mileage so it's good it doesn't snow much around here.

What's strange is that it seems that every car I've had with a huge motor and low mileage estimates does better while fuel efficient vehicles do worse than the EPA numbers.


Maybe because the bigger engine hits the overdrive gear faster and can stay there because of the extra torque?  Just guessing.

Mine's a 3.5L V6, which is now on the bigger end of things, but it's not a huge engine.  However, during normal driving it hits 5th at 40mph and stays there.  A tree fell on it last year and I rented a Honda Civic for a week, and the Civic shifted gears all the time.  The Honda still got better mileage because it had a tiny engine, but it was definitely working harder.  If I was going 70 on the highway and had to accelerate, it would drop a gear.  I suppose that adds up over time.
 
2013-02-11 11:49:21 PM  
Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?
 
2013-02-11 11:49:27 PM  
Bloggers are going to get a charge out of this
 
2013-02-11 11:53:03 PM  
God, RTFA. Tesla puts a data logger on THE CARS THEY LEND TO JOURNALISTS.
 
2013-02-11 11:55:06 PM  

Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?


"Payoffs from oil companies with a definite interest in the status quo" aren't a reason to lie?
 
2013-02-11 11:55:21 PM  

lack of warmth: What! You don't say.  A media member has once again took a bias view and tweeked the test to get the desired results.


Probably trying out for a gig on Top Gear.  I heard they pulled a similar stunt.
 
2013-02-11 11:55:42 PM  
Automotive journalists are only second to video game journalists in rankings of full of shiat shills.
 
2013-02-11 11:56:35 PM  

Suckmaster Burstingfoam: God, RTFA. Tesla puts a data logger on THE CARS THEY LEND TO JOURNALISTS.


No one reads the articles anymore. It's easier to just pop straight into the thread and froth right away.
 
2013-02-11 11:57:21 PM  
www.hongkiat.com
To be continued...
 
2013-02-11 11:57:37 PM  

Suckmaster Burstingfoam: God, RTFA. Tesla puts a data logger on THE CARS THEY LEND TO JOURNALISTS.


No, according to tweets, they only turn it on when they lend it to journalists.
 
2013-02-11 11:57:53 PM  

jake_lex: ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.

That's why I think this may backfire on Tesla.  They might get a "Wait, what, everything I do in my car can be logged?" reaction they don't want.

I mean, yeah, every car built now has a black box, but you don't like hearing a car company admitting "We can see everything in that black box at any time."


You don't hear them ADMITTING it...but that doesn't mean they can't.
 
2013-02-11 11:58:16 PM  
Oldiron_79

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say they both have reasons to lie, but they're just different. And it's a well known fact that the NYT has been an administration mouthpiece for quite some time. Like since at least the Vietnam war. SIgned,

LIB!!!!!

/I think you're going to believe derp.
 
2013-02-11 11:58:40 PM  

notmtwain: I'm betting that the NY Times version of events is closest to the truth.

The article didn't make it all that bad for them-- just part of the learning curve with a new technology.

Elon seems determined to turn it into tons of free negative advertising.  He cannot win.


Being "close" doesn't count.  Even if NY Times was mostly right - they will still come out looking bad and biased.  Elon cannot lose here.
 
2013-02-11 11:59:04 PM  
Jeremy Clarkson is amused

i.dailymail.co.uk
 
2013-02-11 11:59:58 PM  

Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?


Unlike conservatives and libturdarians we're going to find out the facts, not jump to conclusions based on who said it.
 
2013-02-12 12:00:26 AM  

Popcorn Johnny: Lsherm: I do have to say, I have a 2006 Infiniti G35 sedan and the EPA estimates were a little low.  It was listed at 17/22 and I get about 23 on the highway.  They've only dropped about .2 mpg over the years, but the car has 140,000 miles on it, so that's expected.  When the AWD kicks in it can really hurt the mileage so it's good it doesn't snow much around here.

What's strange is that it seems that every car I've had with a huge motor and low mileage estimates does better while fuel efficient vehicles do worse than the EPA numbers.


My father has a 99 Corvette. At 75 mph, it gets about 33 mpg. In 6th gear it's almost idling along.
 
2013-02-12 12:01:00 AM  

Gyrfalcon: jake_lex: ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.

That's why I think this may backfire on Tesla.  They might get a "Wait, what, everything I do in my car can be logged?" reaction they don't want.

I mean, yeah, every car built now has a black box, but you don't like hearing a car company admitting "We can see everything in that black box at any time."

You don't hear them ADMITTING it...but that doesn't mean they can't.


Outside of Tesla and GM's OnStar program, most black boxes lack the means to phone home.  They can be read after a crash, but they don't continually report back.

I believe GM's fine print tells you that data gets uploaded in the event of a crash or other event that requires emergency help.
 
2013-02-12 12:01:29 AM  
I'll reserve my outrage until I see the data.
 
2013-02-12 12:02:20 AM  

Popcorn Johnny: Lsherm: I do have to say, I have a 2006 Infiniti G35 sedan and the EPA estimates were a little low.  It was listed at 17/22 and I get about 23 on the highway.  They've only dropped about .2 mpg over the years, but the car has 140,000 miles on it, so that's expected.  When the AWD kicks in it can really hurt the mileage so it's good it doesn't snow much around here.

What's strange is that it seems that every car I've had with a huge motor and low mileage estimates does better while fuel efficient vehicles do worse than the EPA numbers.


The EPA doesnt actually test vehicles these days they just apply a math formula based on weight and hp. Anyways the formula consistantly over estimates mileage for small vehicles andunderestimates mileage for large vehicles because it doesnt account for the fact that volume increases by the cube area increases by the square, so it does not take aerodynamics in to account at all.
 
2013-02-12 12:02:58 AM  

chapman: lack of warmth: What! You don't say.  A media member has once again took a bias view and tweeked the test to get the desired results.

Probably trying out for a gig on Top Gear.  I heard they pulled a similar stunt.


Wait, so you're saying that the moustachioed gentleman who tried and failed to drive the G-Wiz up the 33% incline was really James May wearing a strip of electrical tape under his nose!?
 
2013-02-12 12:03:43 AM  
I read the NYT article. What I don't get is why the author didn't just stop at a conventional electric car charging station. Those are all over the place (well, compared to Tesla's own ever few hundred miles). I assume the Tesla also has an adapter for the standard electric car chargers.
 
2013-02-12 12:06:16 AM  
I bet Edison's sedan can electrify its potential customers...and elephants.
 
2013-02-12 12:06:31 AM  
Some writer that barely got out of J School trying to cut corners got burned by his stupidity and tried to blame the car. Only problem is, cars today know more than the people driving them. OBD III for the win.
 
2013-02-12 12:07:53 AM  

ameeriklane: I read the NYT article. What I don't get is why the author didn't just stop at a conventional electric car charging station. Those are all over the place (well, compared to Tesla's own ever few hundred miles). I assume the Tesla also has an adapter for the standard electric car chargers.


Maybe they don't?  He said the tow truck had to attach a special Tesla adapter to charge the car on the side of the road.
 
2013-02-12 12:08:51 AM  

Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?


http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/may/12/pressandpublishing.usnew s  They already lied before, and thats because they were just lazy
 
2013-02-12 12:09:03 AM  

Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?


NYT has practiced poor journalism for about 2 decades now. This view was only reinforced when my father-in-law shared the same opinion, but what does he know? He only graduated Summa cum laude from the NYU School of Journalism.
 
2013-02-12 12:11:11 AM  

Popcorn Johnny: Lsherm: I do have to say, I have a 2006 Infiniti G35 sedan and the EPA estimates were a little low.  It was listed at 17/22 and I get about 23 on the highway.  They've only dropped about .2 mpg over the years, but the car has 140,000 miles on it, so that's expected.  When the AWD kicks in it can really hurt the mileage so it's good it doesn't snow much around here.

What's strange is that it seems that every car I've had with a huge motor and low mileage estimates does better while fuel efficient vehicles do worse than the EPA numbers.


Depends. I've seen two or three different sets of EPA fuel ratings for my car, but the latest numbers from fueleconomy.gov are way lower than I usually get.* (Hell, they're barely higher than my my brother used to get out of his 1990 F-150.)

*I usually see high 20s around town and commuting to work. (Rush hour sucks.) If I drive over to WI and put high-octane, no-ethanol gas in the tank (all the gas here is E10), I can get 35+ over long distances.

My favorite story about mileage is a Saturn I had in college. I'd get low 30s around town, 40+ on the freeway. (Personal best was 42, on a trip where I also... shall we say... drove very fast, through much of Pennsylvania.)

But the first few months I had it, I just drove to and from school. (I shouldn't have - I should have been walking, biking, or taking a bus, but I was geeked about having a car.) It was about two miles each way, which gave the engine just enough time to remember it was an engine, and maybe consider warming up, before I shut it off.

My second tank of gas lasted me the entire month of February. Average mileage? About 18mpg.
 
2013-02-12 12:11:35 AM  
Assuming an EVs heat is operating at full blast (max temp / max fan speed) what does that do to the theoretical 400 mile range? Five percent less? Fifty percent?
 
2013-02-12 12:12:52 AM  
It is fun to watch people take sides before data release. (give me a car that can run further on less ENERGY and you have my attention. Until then, electricity or gas is irrelevant to me)
 
2013-02-12 12:14:57 AM  

Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?


There are big oil shills on all sides of the political spectrum.
 
2013-02-12 12:19:13 AM  

Nezorf: It will be interesting to see the fallout from this.
People mocking electrical cars
GPS data being released
Accusations of lying
The journalist ranks closing on Tesla motors so they don't get any more reviews as they "undermined' one of the their own



Actually the opposite would happen.  A reviewer lying undermines all other reviewers more than it undermines the company.  Reviewers will flock to Tesla even knowing their results are monitored it is win win for the reviewers.  Either you get a bunch of them showing that the Times reviewer (and Top Gear) were full of shiat and you maintain the integrity of the reviewing system.  Or you get a bunch of them showing that hey there may be something to these reports and you maintain the integrity of the reviewing system.

When looking at reviews integrity means a lot to the majority of people.  To people that love Tesla or hate Tesla they are going to listen to whatever biased review they want.

The same goes with the rest of the world, although the media seems to be fairly successful at selling opinion over fact now.
 
2013-02-12 12:19:38 AM  

Happy Hours: Jeremy Clarkson is amused

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x315]


Or "Why Tesla datalogs the cars they lend to the press now."

One pack of vicious lies is all it takes.
 
2013-02-12 12:19:46 AM  

Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?


Throw in the fact that there is an actual log of actual data, and motives dont matter. The data will indicate who is lying. No need to motive speculation.

Given that many others have run the same test which has given the same results that Tesla claims, AND they claim that the logs vindicate them. If the reporter's story was accurate/truthful, Tesla would simply say "99 out of 100 times it works, as shown by all these other testers, this was an outlier"

I think there is a 99.99999% chance that this reporter will be out of a job in less than a month.
 
2013-02-12 12:21:27 AM  
Grammar... how does it work?
I should proofread. anyway, You get the idea.

The only way Tesla could lose here is if they made a mistake and got data sets confused.
 
2013-02-12 12:22:59 AM  

ISO15693: Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?

Throw in the fact that there is an actual log of actual data, and motives dont matter. The data will indicate who is lying. No need to motive speculation.

Given that many others have run the same test which has given the same results that Tesla claims, AND they claim that the logs vindicate them. If the reporter's story was accurate/truthful, Tesla would simply say "99 out of 100 times it works, as shown by all these other testers, this was an outlier"

I think there is a 99.99999% chance that this reporter will be out of a job in less than a month.


Screw you, buddy. If the facts don't fit my preconceived views, I will regard them as lies, and further proof of the evil (LEFT/RIGHT)* conspiracy!


* circle applicable political spectrum
 
2013-02-12 12:23:32 AM  

ilikeracecars: Suckmaster Burstingfoam: God, RTFA. Tesla puts a data logger on THE CARS THEY LEND TO JOURNALISTS.

No, according to tweets, they only turn it on when they lend it to journalists.


So, having telemetry gear sounds pretty good when you'd prefer someone in the factory figuring out what the problem is and not Clem, the shadetree mechanic.
 
2013-02-12 12:23:51 AM  
images4.wikia.nocookie.net
Drats! Foiled again!.
 
2013-02-12 12:24:04 AM  

ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.


My 2001 Neon is sitting in my driveway, and I admit that I'm dragging my heels on taking it to the junkyard. They were good solid little cars with more heft and less frou than my current car (an Accent). However I do love having a USB port. Just not sure it's worth everything I gave up...
 
2013-02-12 12:24:47 AM  

doctor_sbaits0: Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?

There are big oil shills on all sides of the political spectrum.


Corrupt politicians, corrupt journalists, corrupt business....it's just too much. Thank goodness I get the real deal on Fark.
 
2013-02-12 12:25:46 AM  
The one thing I noticed from that article was the journalist didn't fully charge the battery. He charged it to the point that it indicated he should> have enough juice to get to his destination. Of course the indicator was inaccurate and he ran out. The thing is he had already used the car in the cold and knew full well it would lose charge under these conditions. Instead of compensating for this however he just let the car fail the test and wrote his scathing review. It almost seemed like he was setting the car up to fail. Either that or the guy is not particularly intelligent.

Personally I don't think electric vehicles are well suited for road trips at present due to long charging times and manufacturers are making a mistake by positioning them as such. They are ideal for cheap commuter vehicles and runabouts however and if they played up that usage and lowered the prices I think they'd find a lot more customers.
 
2013-02-12 12:25:59 AM  

Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?

www.pbs.org


I dunno whether you're late to the NYT having ethics problem party, or late to the apres party of libs being pissed about it, but either way, you're late.
 
2013-02-12 12:28:48 AM  

Suckmaster Burstingfoam: God, RTFA. Tesla puts a data logger on THE CARS THEY LEND TO JOURNALISTS.


Or so a journalist claims.
 
2013-02-12 12:29:17 AM  

TomD9938: Assuming an EVs heat is operating at full blast (max temp / max fan speed) what does that do to the theoretical 400 mile range? Five percent less? Fifty percent?


It's not just the heater running.  Cold zaps batteries, and since batteries have always been the Achilles heel of the electric car, that's kinda info that might be good to know.

Nissan Leaf has the same problem - not enough range for a long commute, quick charge often and drastically reduce the life of the batteries.

Charging time is what killed the Baker electric which was actually quite popular with women in NYC circa 1895.  Baker at least made the batteries easy and cheap to rebuild.

Ever watched the Tesla roadster corner hard?  The body roll is atrocious, especially when you compare it to the Lotus that uses the same chassis.  Why?  The batteries throw off the weight distribution.


Batteries are getting better all the time, but they still aren't there yet.  This has been the most exciting that I've seen lately:
Shorai Light Weight Lithium Iron Motorcycle Batteries http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GD4QtZL5M4
 
2013-02-12 12:29:30 AM  
Unlock the g'damn car Hal!


sustainableheritage.princes-regeneration.org
 
2013-02-12 12:31:48 AM  

Lsherm: Because People in power are Stupid: Looking over his article titles he seems to shill for big oil.

I read his article and it seems it should be pretty easy to cross check his multiple phone calls to Tesla, verify the story with the tow truck driver, and check (from Tesla) that the car went where he said it did.


So we should trust a hack, a tow truck driver, and a car salesman?
 
2013-02-12 12:32:46 AM  

ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.


Have you really never heard of OnStar?  This capability has been available in a large number of vehicles for over a decade.
 
2013-02-12 12:33:11 AM  
I think it will actually be cool if they can prove this reporter wrong. Not only will it put him and his employer in a situation of having to prove their results, but if they don't, it will open up a full can of worms for media.......again. Maybe, Tesla, if they are right, will help to bring our news outlets to being held responsibe for all of their innacurate reporting. I doubt it, but, please, hopefully in sometime in the near future, news outlets will actually report, true news.

/doubtfull
//wishfull thinking
 
2013-02-12 12:33:54 AM  

jake_lex: That's why I think this may backfire on Tesla.  They might get a "Wait, what, everything I do in my car can be logged?" reaction they don't want.


How many people pay for the privilege?

www.underconsideration.com
 
2013-02-12 12:35:38 AM  

jtown: ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.

Have you really never heard of OnStar?  This capability has been available in a large number of vehicles for over a decade.


That's why my cell phone is a carrier pigeon.
 
2013-02-12 12:36:34 AM  

jake_lex: ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.

That's why I think this may backfire on Tesla.  They might get a "Wait, what, everything I do in my car can be logged?" reaction they don't want.

I mean, yeah, every car built now has a black box, but you don't like hearing a car company admitting "We can see everything in that black box at any time."


Except they didn't say they could view it at any time or that they could activate it remotely.
 
2013-02-12 12:36:34 AM  

Happy Hours: Jeremy Clarkson is amused


That whole show should have subtitles saying "Not intended to be a factual statement"
 
2013-02-12 12:36:55 AM  

jake_lex: ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.

That's why I think this may backfire on Tesla.  They might get a "Wait, what, everything I do in my car can be logged?" reaction they don't want.

I mean, yeah, every car built now has a black box, but you don't like hearing a car company admitting "We can see everything in that black box at any time."


Where did you get the impression that the GPS can be accessed remotely?
 
2013-02-12 12:37:55 AM  
"You're a bunch of dorky nerd losers."

"Not so fast!  I will prove you wrong using my system logs."
 
2013-02-12 12:38:58 AM  

Oldiron_79: The EPA doesnt actually test vehicles these days they just apply a math formula based on weight and hp. Anyways the formula consistantly over estimates mileage for small vehicles andunderestimates mileage for large vehicles because it doesnt account for the fact that volume increases by the cube area increases by the square, so it does not take aerodynamics in to account at all.


According to this government website, they test about 10% of the car models themselves and take the auto companies' word for it on the rest.

Got a citation on your version? Not calling you a liar, I'd seriously like to know more about this.
 
2013-02-12 12:44:37 AM  
Hmmm. Car manufacturers and dealers are doing everything they can to prevent Tesla from selling directly to consumers. Now a "reporter" trashes Tesla.

I'm shocked to find out someone would be sucking old business cock...
 
2013-02-12 12:45:39 AM  
Elon Musk loves to come out and be argumentative but at some point you have to wonder if there is a giant media conspiracy against Tesla (especially a lean leaning paper like the NYT which ought to love electric cars) or, I dunno, maybe Tesla exaggerated a little bit?
 
2013-02-12 12:45:57 AM  
I wonder if Tesla will sue the NYT and lose like it did the BBC?


In a statement following today's ruling, the
 
2013-02-12 12:46:12 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: Lsherm: Because People in power are Stupid: Looking over his article titles he seems to shill for big oil.

I read his article and it seems it should be pretty easy to cross check his multiple phone calls to Tesla, verify the story with the tow truck driver, and check (from Tesla) that the car went where he said it did.

So we should trust a hack, a tow truck driver, and a car salesman?


If all their stories agree, then sure.
 
2013-02-12 12:46:36 AM  
Haven't people learned to respect the power of Tesla?
 
2013-02-12 12:46:46 AM  
This reminds me of one of the middle plots from Cloud Atlas, and which I'm sure I've also seen in other TV shows and movies.

1. Tesla CEO secretly pays a reviewer to write a bad review (perhaps through an intermediary that has some affiliation with big oil).
2. Reviewer then writes the bad review.
3. Tesla CEO claims to have car logs proving the reviewer faked the review.
4. Scandal arises as reviewer is shown to have lied.
5. Tesla gets lots of positive press and publicity about how their car is able to drive great, and how the media and big oil is out to get them through any means possible in order to shut down this great new technology.
6. Profit.
 
2013-02-12 12:47:13 AM  
Where do you people get the remote logging activation? I didn't found the reference in the article.

Since it was loaned to a journalist, you would think it would have been easier to activate the logging before loaning the car and read the logs on the car return.

Or does the Tesla car has On-Star like cell-phone communications capability?
 
2013-02-12 12:48:11 AM  

ISO15693: Throw in the fact that there is an actual log of actual data, and motives dont matter. The data will indicate who is lying. No need to motive speculation.


Because data has never been faked, ever.
 
2013-02-12 12:49:30 AM  

harpagon: Where do you people get the remote logging activation? I didn't found the reference in the article.

Since it was loaned to a journalist, you would think it would have been easier to activate the logging before loaning the car and read the logs on the car return.

Or does the Tesla car has On-Star like cell-phone communications capability?


Take a look at the 3 tweets at the top of the article
 
2013-02-12 12:49:38 AM  

Cyno01: How many people pay for the privilege?


I have OnStar and love it.  No idea why people are so farking paranoid about somebody being able to see where your vehicle is.  I bet you'd think differently if your car was ever stolen or you drove off the road into a ditch and couldn't call for help.  Being able to send driving directions and starting my car from my phone rocks as well.
 
2013-02-12 12:49:43 AM  

mikaloyd: I wonder if Tesla will sue the NYT and lose like it did the BBC?


In a statement following today's ruling, the
...battery ran out before you finished the quote. Tesla must be making computers now, too.
 
2013-02-12 12:52:28 AM  
In a statement following today's ruling, the BBC said: "We are pleased Mr Justice Tugendhat has ruled in favour of the BBC on both the issues before the court, first in striking out Tesla's libel claim against the BBC; and secondly in describing Tesla's malicious falsehood claim as so 'gravely deficient' it too could not be allowed to proceed."
 
2013-02-12 12:52:51 AM  

mediablitz: Hmmm. Car manufacturers and dealers are doing everything they can to prevent Tesla from selling directly to consumers.


You'll find it's state laws that prevent that, not car manufacturers. GM was wildly successful selling directly to consumers in Brazil.
 
2013-02-12 12:53:03 AM  
What the hell is a  New York Times?
 
2013-02-12 12:53:28 AM  
I like the Plug tag for this.

That is all.
 
2013-02-12 12:55:24 AM  
The need to get this car done so they can get working on this...

media.moddb.com
 
2013-02-12 12:55:30 AM  

ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.


Anybody that actually cares what you are up to can track you with your cell phone, freeway and street cameras, store cameras, your banking records, purchase receipts, your garbage's contents, your email and text messages, and that's just for starters. You know that crown your dentist put on your molar? Well, about that....
 
2013-02-12 12:55:37 AM  

mediablitz: Hmmm. Car manufacturers and dealers are doing everything they can to prevent Tesla from selling directly to consumers. Now a "reporter" trashes Tesla.

I'm shocked to find out someone would be sucking old business cock...


That's an old anti-trust law car manufacturers have to put up with.  They don't like the law, but they are accurately pointing out that Tesla isn't adhering to it.

Ford, GM, Toyota, etc. would LOVE to sell you cars direct, all over the country.  They aren't allowed to.  So they are justly asking why Tesla can set up showrooms that don't sell cars all over the country but you have to order from them directly.
 
2013-02-12 12:56:47 AM  

mikaloyd: In a statement following today's ruling, the BBC said: "We are pleased Mr Justice Tugendhat has ruled in favour of the BBC on both the issues before the court, first in striking out Tesla's libel claim against the BBC; and secondly in describing Tesla's malicious falsehood claim as so 'gravely deficient' it too could not be allowed to proceed."


...which would be why Tesla now logs data when reporters get a loaner.  If you can't sue 'em when they lie, shame 'em.
 
2013-02-12 12:58:18 AM  
Seems the journalist's article gives a miles covered / time allowing calculation of his average speed to be 81MPH along a route that is largely 55 to 65 MPH.

Problem? Yes, speed kills mileage, gas or electric. Take a gas powered car to the race track and it will be lucky to get a third of it's EPA mileage.

If he was driving it like he stole it then had the gall to complain about the range, he deserves to be strung up.
 
2013-02-12 01:01:30 AM  
Meanwhile before Tesla sued the BBC

Rachel Konrad, a spokeswoman for Tesla told MediaGuardian.co.uk: "The image of them pushing it off the track was so searing," she said.
But she said she was generally happy with the overall tone of the review. "I thought it was a positive piece for Tesla by Top Gear standards. I personally like the show - it savages cars in a very entertaining way.
"My concern was with American viewers who were tuning in for the first time and might not understand the whole angle of the show. We wanted to make clear that range was not a concern over the entire time of the [Top Gear] test."
She said the company would not be pursuing the matter with the BBC. "We would love to have them drive it again whenever they want."


So there you go. Tesla tells whoppers just as good as the NYT
 
2013-02-12 01:01:31 AM  
Why does it have to be a Big Oil conspiracy? Why not just plain old laziness?

"Conventional wisdom is that the range sucks on electric cars, nobody really buys these things, it's 4:30pm and who's going to check anyway?"

You expect people who majored in journalism to suddenly sprout a work ethic?
 
2013-02-12 01:02:33 AM  
DeVuJa
 
2013-02-12 01:03:18 AM  
Note to self:  do not buy said car, they keep track of your comings and goings.
 
2013-02-12 01:03:37 AM  
Tesla: If it aint a good review, we sue
 
2013-02-12 01:04:21 AM  

g4lt: mikaloyd: In a statement following today's ruling, the BBC said: "We are pleased Mr Justice Tugendhat has ruled in favour of the BBC on both the issues before the court, first in striking out Tesla's libel claim against the BBC; and secondly in describing Tesla's malicious falsehood claim as so 'gravely deficient' it too could not be allowed to proceed."

...which would be why Tesla now logs data when reporters get a loaner.  If you can't sue 'em when they lie, shame 'em.


They logged data then too
 
2013-02-12 01:04:22 AM  
 
2013-02-12 01:07:31 AM  
The New York Times is standing by its reporter, however. "The Times's article recounting a reporter's test drive in a Tesla Model S was completely factual, describing the trip in detail exactly as it occurred. Any suggestion that the account was 'fake' is, of course, flatly untrue," a spokesperson from the newspaper told CNET. "Our reporter followed the instructions he was given in multiple conversations with Tesla personnel. He described the entire drive in the story; there was no unreported detour. And he was never told to plug the car in overnight in cold weather, despite repeated contact with Tesla."
 
2013-02-12 01:07:33 AM  
Here in CA, where the weather is never that cold, I get ~200 mi/charge on mine (same model as the review) with very aggressive driving. Li-On batteries are known to suffer in performance (capacity wise) in cold (sub-zero F) weather. Parts of the report aren't very far-fetched. With 200 miles between superchargers, it's very conceivable to run out before reaching the next charging station.

That being said, when in a situation where the range to be covered is borderline, it would take all but a small detour and some more-aggressive-than-necessary driving to turn the road trip from "it was painless" to "omg, I'm gonna die out here".
 
2013-02-12 01:08:35 AM  

I sound fat: Note to self: do not buy said car, they keep track of your comings and goings.


Nope.

Only of the cars they lend to journalists.

"Tesla data logging is only turned on with explicit written permission from customers, but after Top Gear BS, we always keep it on for media. "
http://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/301053361157988352
 
2013-02-12 01:10:02 AM  

This text is now purple: mediablitz: Hmmm. Car manufacturers and dealers are doing everything they can to prevent Tesla from selling directly to consumers.

You'll find it's state laws that prevent that, not car manufacturers. GM was wildly successful selling directly to consumers in Brazil.


State laws written by car manufacturers and dealers. It wasn't lawmakers that thought, independently, "hey, let's force car sales to be this way!"
 
2013-02-12 01:13:49 AM  
I'd just like to have a word with all of you about a particular word and its usage.

The word I keep seeing used incorrectly is  bias.

You are biased. You are not bias.
The reporter is biased toward the oil industry. The reporter is not bias toward the oil industry.
The media has a biased view. The media does not have a bias view.
You can have a bias. You can also  be biased.
When you have a bias, you are biased. When you have a bias, you are not bias.

That's all. May Gozer have mercy on your soul. You're welcome.
 
2013-02-12 01:16:46 AM  

mikaloyd: Tesla: If it aint a good review, we sue


For Tesla's target market, range anxiety is a higher impediment to purchase than price. A NYT review which feeds range anxiety could harm sales.
 
2013-02-12 01:17:30 AM  
Times, Times, everywhere the Times,
Reviewing all the EVs, changing people's minds.
"Drive here, don't drive here!"
Didn't you read the Times?
 
2013-02-12 01:17:42 AM  

ZeroCorpse: I'd just like to have a word with all of you about a particular word and its usage.

The word I keep seeing used incorrectly is  bias.

You are biased. You are not bias.
The reporter is biased toward the oil industry. The reporter is not bias toward the oil industry.
The media has a biased view. The media does not have a bias view.
You can have a bias. You can also  be biased.
When you have a bias, you are biased. When you have a bias, you are not bias.

That's all. May Gozer have mercy on your soul. You're welcome.


What kind of affect are you hoping to have with such a post?
 
2013-02-12 01:18:51 AM  

firefly212: Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?

[www.pbs.org image 440x250]

I dunno whether you're late to the NYT having ethics problem party, or late to the apres party of libs being pissed about it, but either way, you're late.


You realize that's a picture of a headline from the Washington Post, right?  You can tell from the pixels . . . I mean, the font.  Plus the "Washington Post Staff Writer" under the byline.
 
2013-02-12 01:24:04 AM  

Notabunny: mikaloyd: Tesla: If it aint a good review, we sue

For Tesla's target market, range anxiety is a higher impediment to purchase than price. A NYT review which feeds range anxiety could harm sales.


I think restaurants should sue for poor reviews as well. Because it isnt the price of the meal so much as if the food stinks in the minds of the well-to-do.
 
2013-02-12 01:25:24 AM  

mediablitz: State laws written by car manufacturers and dealers

.

As I understand it, these state laws are designed to protect dealers, not car manufacturers  Traditionally, there have been lots of car dealers and their friends/ families in local state legislatures.

I've always wondered why no car manufacturer has challenged these laws under the interstate commerce clause of the constitution.  If any state tries to prohibit Tesla from selling direct to the customer, Tesla may be the test case.
 
2013-02-12 01:28:02 AM  

RandomRandom: I've always wondered why no car manufacturer has challenged these laws under the interstate commerce clause of the constitution. If any state tries to prohibit Tesla from selling direct to the customer, Tesla may be the test case.


Tesla and lawsuits just seem to fit together.
 
2013-02-12 01:28:25 AM  

mikaloyd: Notabunny: mikaloyd: Tesla: If it aint a good review, we sue

For Tesla's target market, range anxiety is a higher impediment to purchase than price. A NYT review which feeds range anxiety could harm sales.

I think restaurants should sue for poor reviews as well. Because it isnt the price of the meal so much as if the food stinks in the minds of the well-to-do.


And if the milage claim in the NYT article is documented to be untrue?
 
2013-02-12 01:30:23 AM  

skazzytl: 1. Tesla CEO secretly pays a reviewer to write a bad review (perhaps through an intermediary that has some affiliation with big oil).
2. Reviewer then writes the bad review.
3. Tesla CEO claims to have car logs proving the reviewer faked the review.
4. Scandal arises as reviewer is shown to have lied.
5. Tesla gets lots of positive press and publicity about how their car is able to drive great, and how the media and big oil is out to get them through any means possible in order to shut down this great new technology.
6. Profit.


1. Tesla's logs prove that they recorded the towing as if it was driving.
2. Reporter produces paperwork regarding having to call someone.
3. The tow guy corroborates the reporter's story.
4. Bankrupty.
 
2013-02-12 01:30:51 AM  

I sound fat: Note to self:  do not buy said car, they keep track of your comings and goings.


UGH! This thread is so full of stupid, it actually physically hurts.

1)ALL cars keep logs. These logs include various things from engine and wheel speed to error codes thrown during operation to any interaction with any system in the car (hitting the brakes, turning on the wipers, ATC/TCS having to step in, etc.), and in some cases directional heading if there is a compass built in or GPS coordinates if there is a GPS unit (as there might be with Tesla), as well as additional car-specific features (battery charging/consumption, AWD state, etc).
2)The only system that lets cars "phone home" with the contents of the log is OnStar. That's it. Tesla does not have a cell radio in their black box.
3)The tracking  CAN be turned on with the owners permission by Tesla. The owner has to sign a consent form when picking up the car. This is much like when software companies ask you to submit an anonymous crash report after a system crash. This data is not sent automatically, but rather is pulled from the logs when the car comes in for service or is otherwise returned to Tesla.
4)Journalists have logging turned on by default. I assume they are simply required to sign a consent as a prerequisite to getting a review loaner. This journalist probably signed the review loan paperwork without reading it. When he  returned the car, Tesla pulled his logs. When the review went up, Tesla reviewed the logs they had pulled  MANUALLY WHILE THE CAR WAS IN THEIR HANDS.
5)
 NO ONEis monitoring your coming and going. If they are, you either consented to it, you have a warrant out, or someone is playing fast and loose with the law and is in deep shiat if you find out and press charges.
 
2013-02-12 01:31:00 AM  

Notabunny: mikaloyd: Notabunny: mikaloyd: Tesla: If it aint a good review, we sue

For Tesla's target market, range anxiety is a higher impediment to purchase than price. A NYT review which feeds range anxiety could harm sales.

I think restaurants should sue for poor reviews as well. Because it isnt the price of the meal so much as if the food stinks in the minds of the well-to-do.

And if the milage claim in the NYT article is documented to be untrue?


Sue more restaurants?
 
2013-02-12 01:31:17 AM  
Oh man if this is true, that reporter is boned.  I bet he's having a wonderful evening right now.

Let's see the data.
 
2013-02-12 01:32:05 AM  

Jarhead_h: TomD9938: Assuming an EVs heat is operating at full blast (max temp / max fan speed) what does that do to the theoretical 400 mile range? Five percent less? Fifty percent?

It's not just the heater running.  Cold zaps batteries, and since batteries have always been the Achilles heel of the electric car, that's kinda info that might be good to know.

Nissan Leaf has the same problem - not enough range for a long commute, quick charge often and drastically reduce the life of the batteries.

Charging time is what killed the Baker electric which was actually quite popular with women in NYC circa 1895.  Baker at least made the batteries easy and cheap to rebuild.


According to what I've found online, Baker Electrics was founded in 1899, and they produced cars until 1914. You're off by a bit.

As for what killed them, it seems to have been a combination of their later models being very expensive for the time ($4,000 in 1908! To compare, you could get a VW Beetle in the 1960s for around $2,000!) and the fact that they merged with Rauch & Lang in response to Detroit Electric outselling them. They concentrated on commercial vehicles after this, and then R&L was bought out by Stevens-Duryea in 1920, which itself had financial problems and ended up being sold to Ray Owen (of Owen Magnetic) in 1923 to produce cars under the R&L name. This failed by 1924 (they sold what they had already built until 1927), and they fell back to building coaches for other companies.

So it wasn't so much the recharge time that killed Baker Electrics; It was the fact that in the early 1900s there were a lot of players on the field and the ones who delivered an affordable vehicle were the ones who made it. The others were bought out (or pushed out) until they died, or ended up part of the big boys.

The average person-- Heck, even the rich person-- couldn't afford a $4,000 car in 1908.
 
2013-02-12 01:32:59 AM  

Lsherm: ameeriklane: I read the NYT article. What I don't get is why the author didn't just stop at a conventional electric car charging station. Those are all over the place (well, compared to Tesla's own ever few hundred miles). I assume the Tesla also has an adapter for the standard electric car chargers.

Maybe they don't?  He said the tow truck had to attach a special Tesla adapter to charge the car on the side of the road.


Yes, the Model S ships with an adapter that lets you use a standard J1772 charger (same standard the Leaf and Volt use). You can charge a Model S at any Blink or Chargepoint station, among others.
 
2013-02-12 01:33:47 AM  

ZeroCorpse: I'd just like to have a word with all of you about a particular word and its usage.

The word I keep seeing used incorrectly is  bias.

You are biased. You are not bias.
The reporter is biased toward the oil industry. The reporter is not bias toward the oil industry.
The media has a biased view. The media does not have a bias view.
You can have a bias. You can also  be biased.
When you have a bias, you are biased. When you have a bias, you are not bias.

That's all. May Gozer have mercy on your soul. You're welcome.


Someone had to say it!
 
2013-02-12 01:34:53 AM  

Happy Hours: Jeremy Clarkson is amused

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x315]


Didn't James May review a Tesla in the last series and conclude that it was, in fact, an amazingly awesome vehicle (and quicker than a 1920's Bentley, to boot)?

/Seriously bonkers to look at
//Would drive one in a heartbeat...
///...if it wasn't so bloody expensive
 
2013-02-12 01:34:56 AM  

imgod2u: ZeroCorpse: I'd just like to have a word with all of you about a particular word and its usage.

The word I keep seeing used incorrectly is  bias.

You are biased. You are not bias.
The reporter is biased toward the oil industry. The reporter is not bias toward the oil industry.
The media has a biased view. The media does not have a bias view.
You can have a bias. You can also  be biased.
When you have a bias, you are biased. When you have a bias, you are not bias.

That's all. May Gozer have mercy on your soul. You're welcome.

What kind of affect are you hoping to have with such a post?


I will hope and assume you did that on purpose just to get a laugh.

/effect.
 
2013-02-12 01:35:23 AM  

mikaloyd: Tesla and lawsuits just seem to fit together.

Why the hate?

The state laws that prohibit out of state vehicle sales seem to clearly violate the commerce clause.  The only question is why no other car company has challenged them.  The only answer I can imagine is that the big car companies didn't want to anger their dealer base.

Tesla doesn't have independent dealers to take umbrage, they sell direct.  They've removed a completely unnecessary crowd of often unscrupulous middle men.  From where I sit, litigating against those laws would be doing god's work.
 
2013-02-12 01:36:31 AM  

ZeroCorpse: I'd just like to have a word with all of you about a particular word and its usage.

The word I keep seeing used incorrectly is  bias.

You are biased. You are not bias.
The reporter is biased toward the oil industry. The reporter is not bias toward the oil industry.
The media has a biased view. The media does not have a bias view.
You can have a bias. You can also  be biased.
When you have a bias, you are biased. When you have a bias, you are not bias.

That's all. May Gozer have mercy on your soul. You're welcome.


Teslas come stock with radials
 
2013-02-12 01:37:32 AM  

mikaloyd: Notabunny: mikaloyd: Notabunny: mikaloyd: Tesla: If it aint a good review, we sue

For Tesla's target market, range anxiety is a higher impediment to purchase than price. A NYT review which feeds range anxiety could harm sales.

I think restaurants should sue for poor reviews as well. Because it isnt the price of the meal so much as if the food stinks in the minds of the well-to-do.

And if the milage claim in the NYT article is documented to be untrue?

Sue more restaurants?


I'd settle for a lifetime supply of A&W rootbeer floats and Papa burgers.
 
2013-02-12 01:38:16 AM  

RandomRandom: mikaloyd: Tesla and lawsuits just seem to fit together.
Why the hate?


A day in court is worth two in  hell.
 
2013-02-12 01:40:05 AM  
Few sources are less worthy of respect than the New York Times, but if there's an integrity dispute between the Times and Elon Musk -- a man who has lied repeatedly to both his investors and his customers and built much of his company on a hand-out (thinly disguised as a loan) from the DoE -- I'm gonna go with the NYT.
 
2013-02-12 01:40:21 AM  

Notabunny: I'd settle for a lifetime supply of A&W rootbeer floats and Papa burgers.


What is the dfference between a momma  burger and a papa burger? I know baby burgers are tiny
 
2013-02-12 01:40:53 AM  
There are a quite a few people, it seems, that don't want the EV to succeed.
 
2013-02-12 01:41:21 AM  
mikaloyd: A day in court is worth two in  hell.

Ok.... So if a company uses the courts to strike down a raft of unconstitutional, anti-consumer laws, why is that not a good thing?

Because court = bad? ?
 
2013-02-12 01:43:40 AM  

mikaloyd: Notabunny: I'd settle for a lifetime supply of A&W rootbeer floats and Papa burgers.

What is the dfference between a momma  burger and a papa burger? I know baby burgers are tiny


I think the momma burger has a single patty and the papa is a double. I'm not sure, though. I've always ordered what I guess to be the embiggened one because American.
 
2013-02-12 01:44:57 AM  

RandomRandom: mikaloyd: A day in court is worth two in  hell.

Ok.... So if a company uses the courts to strike down a raft of unconstitutional, anti-consumer laws, why is that not a good thing?

Because court = bad? ?


You are so far only hoping that is the new kind of lawsuit Tesla plans rather than examining the old ones Tesla has brought. Do ambulance chasers suddenly become free lawyers working for the people? do their clientèle? My gut instinct says no.
 
2013-02-12 01:45:04 AM  

Popcorn Johnny: You know how the EPA determines highway fuel economy?  They run the car on a dynamometer using a program that lasts for 12.5 minutes at an average speed of 48mph.


As unreal as that seems, doing the testing this way is far better than actually driving on the highway.  Yes, the number may not accurately reflect what one might get in real life, but it's useful for comparisons with other cars. If car A has 45 mpg highway and car B has 35 mpg highway, you can pretty much be sure that A will get better mileage than B in highway driving conditions (unless B is tuned to drive more efficiently at 65mph and A's efficiency drops off past 50mph).
 
2013-02-12 01:46:33 AM  

jake_lex: ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.

That's why I think this may backfire on Tesla.  They might get a "Wait, what, everything I do in my car can be logged?" reaction they don't want.

I mean, yeah, every car built now has a black box, but you don't like hearing a car company admitting "We can see everything in that black box at any time."


Insurance companies and the NTHSA (or whatever is the acronym) like it too because it gives very important information at time of accident.
 
2013-02-12 01:47:50 AM  
From the comments:  As Hanlon said: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"
 
2013-02-12 01:49:37 AM  
My guess is that the NYT journalist wasn't completely honest about his route or style of driving.  His own article suggests his average speed may have been 20 mph over the speed limit.  Most of his dishonesty will probably be through omission.  His defense will be something like, I never said I didn't drive it like I stole it.  My article never said I didn't do a dozen 0-60 4.x second jackrabbit starts.

Now if the GPS logs really describe a significant undocumented detour, I hope Tesla has the brains to quickly hire some private investigators to acquire video tapes from convenience stores and traffic cameras along the detour route.  Otherwise, the reporter will just say Tesla is lying and it will be a big he said / they said.

If the reporter denies the detour, then Tesla provides independent proof, it's reporter firing time.
 
2013-02-12 01:51:51 AM  

Happy Hours: Jeremy Clarkson is amused

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x315]


Top Gear definitely rigged that test to make the Tesla look bad for several reasons:

1.  It's an American car, so they have to trash it
2.  It didn't have a lick of British technology, so they had to trash it
3.  It wasn't a Ferrari, so they couldn't lick its balls
4.  It wasn't a fuel guzzling supercar, so they had to trash it.

You will notice they always rig these tests to make certain cars win, or cars win in general.  Like the car vs plain, car vs train, etc.

Entertaining show, but just recognize what they try to do.
 
2013-02-12 01:54:08 AM  

Aidan: ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.

My 2001 Neon is sitting in my driveway, and I admit that I'm dragging my heels on taking it to the junkyard. They were good solid little cars with more heft and less frou than my current car (an Accent). However I do love having a USB port. Just not sure it's worth everything I gave up...


If you wanna sell it, EIP.

/that said, y'know, you can get a cigarette lighter to USB thingamabob these days to charge stuff...
 
2013-02-12 01:57:47 AM  

soupbone: I bet Edison's sedan can electrify its potential customers...and elephants.


Yeah, that was pretty messed up. Edison was a real asshole. In the end, Tesla was right anyway.
 
2013-02-12 01:58:01 AM  

Mi-5: 1. It's an American car, so they have to trash it
2. It didn't have a lick of British technology, so they had to trash it
3. It wasn't a Ferrari, so they couldn't lick its balls
4. It wasn't a fuel guzzling supercar, so they had to trash it.

You will notice they always rig these tests to make certain cars win, or cars win in general. Like the car vs plain, car vs train, etc.

Entertaining show, but just recognize what they try to do.


#1 was enough for Clarkson to trash it.  A big part of his schtick is slamming the USA.  That and he hates the fact that electric cars are definitely, positively, absolutely going to replace gas cars, though certainly not in his lifetime.  52 year old men that look 67 don't tend to have a lot of years left.  (yes, he's only 52).

(Clarkson hates electric cars so much, that he even ignored your point two.  The chassis for the Tesla roadster was built by Lotus in the UK, though I think they were owned by the Malaysians by that time and are probably about to go completely bankrupt unless the Malaysian government bails them out... again)
 
2013-02-12 02:05:27 AM  

Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?


It's not unheard of for NYT reporters to just make up lies for the lulz, or because they're too lazy to do real journalism.  Jayson Blair much?
 
2013-02-12 02:06:20 AM  

ZeroCorpse: imgod2u: ZeroCorpse: I'd just like to have a word with all of you about a particular word and its usage.

The word I keep seeing used incorrectly is  bias.

You are biased. You are not bias.
The reporter is biased toward the oil industry. The reporter is not bias toward the oil industry.
The media has a biased view. The media does not have a bias view.
You can have a bias. You can also  be biased.
When you have a bias, you are biased. When you have a bias, you are not bias.

That's all. May Gozer have mercy on your soul. You're welcome.

What kind of affect are you hoping to have with such a post?

I will hope and assume you did that on purpose just to get a laugh.

/effect.


He's hoping to effect the proper usage of bias/biased.
 
2013-02-12 02:10:47 AM  

Mi-5: Happy Hours: Jeremy Clarkson is amused

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x315]

Top Gear definitely rigged that test to make the Tesla look bad for several reasons:

1.  It's an American car, so they have to trash it
2.  It didn't have a lick of British technology, so they had to trash it
3.  It wasn't a Ferrari, so they couldn't lick its balls
4.  It wasn't a fuel guzzling supercar, so they had to trash it.

You will notice they always rig these tests to make certain cars win, or cars win in general.  Like the car vs plain, car vs train, etc.

Entertaining show, but just recognize what they try to do.


Meanwhile, James May adored the Tesla he drove in Florida (in the last series?).
 
2013-02-12 02:11:33 AM  

Mi-5: Happy Hours: Jeremy Clarkson is amused

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x315]

Top Gear definitely rigged that test to make the Tesla look bad for several reasons:

1.  It's an American car, so they have to trash it
2.  It didn't have a lick of British technology, so they had to trash it
3.  It wasn't a Ferrari, so they couldn't lick its balls
4.  It wasn't a fuel guzzling supercar, so they had to trash it.

You will notice they always rig these tests to make certain cars win, or cars win in general.  Like the car vs plain, car vs train, etc.

Entertaining show, but just recognize what they try to do.


I liked the one where they raced from their studio to London city airport. James May took a car, Richard Hammond bought himself a new road bike, Jeremy Clarkson took a boat down the Thames, and they put the Stig on public transport.

The car lost by a hilariously huge margin. Richard Hammond, riding a bike, won rather easily, followed by Clarkson and the boat.

Actually, they usually rig them so that the car barely loses.
 
2013-02-12 02:13:47 AM  
Actually, it might not have been their studio, it was just some point on the western outskirts of London, with City Airport being on the eastern outskirts.
 
2013-02-12 02:24:36 AM  

Notabunny: harpagon: Where do you people get the remote logging activation? I didn't found the reference in the article.

Since it was loaned to a journalist, you would think it would have been easier to activate the logging before loaning the car and read the logs on the car return.

Or does the Tesla car has On-Star like cell-phone communications capability?

Take a look at the 3 tweets at the top of the article


You mean the ones that make no mention whatsoever of remote activation and collection ability?  What exactly am I looking for there?
 
2013-02-12 02:25:51 AM  

GranoblasticMan: ZeroCorpse: imgod2u: ZeroCorpse: I'd just like to have a word with all of you about a particular word and its usage.

The word I keep seeing used incorrectly is  bias.

You are biased. You are not bias.
The reporter is biased toward the oil industry. The reporter is not bias toward the oil industry.
The media has a biased view. The media does not have a bias view.
You can have a bias. You can also  be biased.
When you have a bias, you are biased. When you have a bias, you are not bias.

That's all. May Gozer have mercy on your soul. You're welcome.

What kind of affect are you hoping to have with such a post?

I will hope and assume you did that on purpose just to get a laugh.

/effect.

He's hoping to effect the proper usage of bias/biased.


Your not helping.
 
2013-02-12 02:25:57 AM  

jake_lex: That's why I think this may backfire on Tesla. They might get a "Wait, what, everything I do in my car can be logged?" reaction they don't want.

I mean, yeah, every car built now has a black box, but you don't like hearing a car company admitting "We can see everything in that black box at any time."




Reading comprehension fail. Tesla's cars only log their info if their owners explicitly set them to do so, which the owner needs to supply a password to turn it on. With that reporter, the car owner was Tesla, and they intentionally set up the car specifically to log the test.

Easy with the tinfoil hat.
 
2013-02-12 02:27:05 AM  

maram500: Didn't James May review a Tesla in the last series and conclude that it was, in fact, an amazingly awesome vehicle (and quicker than a 1920's Bentley, to boot)?


I'm not sure. I might be a whole series behind...I'll have to check Netflix...or look for it on the internet
 
2013-02-12 02:27:19 AM  

Lusiphur: I sound fat: Note to self:  do not buy said car, they keep track of your comings and goings.

UGH! This thread is so full of stupid, it actually physically hurts.

1)ALL cars keep logs.


Ugh, this statement is so full of stupid I hope the hurt you're feeling is for your own stupidity.

At the very least, you should realize there are plenty of vehicles still on the road the without any sort of computer.
 
2013-02-12 02:29:55 AM  

debug: You mean the ones that make no mention whatsoever of remote activation and collection ability? What exactly am I looking for there?


Posted this earlier in the thread.

"Tesla data logging is only turned on with explicit written permission from customers, but after Top Gear BS, we always keep it on for media. "
http://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/301053361157988352
 
2013-02-12 02:32:07 AM  

mikaloyd: ZeroCorpse: I'd just like to have a word with all of you about a particular word and its usage.

The word I keep seeing used incorrectly is  bias.

You are biased. You are not bias.
The reporter is biased toward the oil industry. The reporter is not bias toward the oil industry.
The media has a biased view. The media does not have a bias view.
You can have a bias. You can also  be biased.
When you have a bias, you are biased. When you have a bias, you are not bias.

That's all. May Gozer have mercy on your soul. You're welcome.

Teslas come stock with radials


That's funny. I was thinking the same thing. To quote another farker in this thread, "Somebody had to say it."
 
2013-02-12 02:34:25 AM  
RandomRandom: "That and he hates the fact that electric cars are definitely, positively, absolutely going to replace gas cars, though certainly not in his lifetime."


Sadly, you're probably right. Not because they should -- we're farking bonkers to live in a place with distances as great as ours and be fighting so hard for a REDUCTION in energy density -- but because we can all feel more smug and less guilty when the smokestacks are somewhere beyond city limits...as far away from our consciences as the landfills that will receive hundreds of millions of expired batteries. Progress.
 
2013-02-12 02:37:19 AM  

TwowheelinTim: At the very least, you should realize there are plenty of vehicles still on the road the without any sort of computer.


To be fair, On-Board Diagnostics (ODB-II specifically) has been a requirement for all cars since 1996. Most cars since about 1987 had ODB-I systems onboard. So yeah, while there's a number of 25+ year old cars on the road, they're pretty rare these days. I'd wager that at least 90% of road going cars have computers.

Many cars since 2005 have "black-boxes" in their too, especially Toyota cars and trucks. Look in your owners manual for a page that says something like "in the event of a serious crash or death, the manufacturer and/or insurance agency can take data from the data recorder without consent." In my Toyota Tacoma, it records the final few minutes of speed, throttle position, brake position, gear, RPM's, steering wheel angle, ABS activation, and even stability control gyroscope data before an airbag deployment
 
2013-02-12 02:38:44 AM  

mikaloyd: So there you go. Tesla tells whoppers just as good as the NYT


That's an idiotic thing to say.  Wanting to take advantage of free marketing, which is what top gear is good for, does not mean that Tesla's people are lying.

And you picked the wrong case to let your idiocy flag fly, because top gear was caught red-handed in lying about Tesla's range. Although they showed Top Gear's people pushing the Tesla out of the track, insinuating that it ran out of juice, when Tesla's people called shenanigans on the whole deal, BBC's people were quick to state that "[a]t no time did we claim that the cars ran out of charge"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/dec/24/jeremy-clarkson-top-gear -t esla-electric-car

So, yeah.  Top Gear really lied about the thing and Tesla got burned.
 
2013-02-12 02:40:48 AM  

SevenizGud: 1. Tesla's logs prove that they recorded the towing as if it was driving.
2. Reporter produces paperwork regarding having to call someone.
3. The tow guy corroborates the reporter's story.
4. Bankrupty.


5. SevenizGud wakes up, needs to take a cold shower.
 
2013-02-12 02:42:12 AM  
After the reporter was accused of lying, the NYT said the article was "completely factual, describing the trip in detail exactly as it occurred. Any suggestion that the account was 'fake' is, of course, flatly untrue." Assuming they didn't just ask the author "did you lie," then they must have proof to counter Tesla's claims, whether it's their own GPS logger, cellular location tracker, a dash cam, or some other objective evidence as the basis for their statement. Given how cheap these devices are, they may be standard equipment for car reviewers, the way audio recorders are used in many verbal interviews, for reporters to refer back to when writing a story.
 
2013-02-12 02:50:52 AM  

T Baggins: After the reporter was accused of lying, the NYT said the article was "completely factual, describing the trip in detail exactly as it occurred. Any suggestion that the account was 'fake' is, of course, flatly untrue." Assuming they didn't just ask the author "did you lie," then they must have proof to counter Tesla's claims, whether it's their own GPS logger, cellular location tracker, a dash cam, or some other objective evidence as the basis for their statement. Given how cheap these devices are, they may be standard equipment for car reviewers, the way audio recorders are used in many verbal interviews, for reporters to refer back to when writing a story.


Obviously that's what the NYT, or any paper, is expected to say at the start of this sort of scandal.  They wouldn't simply admit that it would be possible they might have lying shills within their ranks, churning falsified reports paid by the highest bidders.  They will obviously completely refuse this is possible.  Later, if their reporter is honest or is able to weasel himself out of the tight spot then their life goes on as usual, but if their reporter is found to be at fault then they simply say "oops, our bad. never gonna happen again, we promise" and quickly go on with their lives.  So, they have absolutely nothing to lose in stating publicly that they don't lie and all their staff are perfectly impartial and somehow rigorous scientists who systematically employ the scientific method with a religious fervor, including the food reviewers.
 
2013-02-12 02:52:01 AM  

spmkk: ly, you're probably right. Not because they should -- we're farking bonkers to live in a place with distances as great as ours and be fighting so hard for a REDUCTION in energy density -- but because we can all feel more smug and less guilty when the smokestacks are somewhere beyond city limits...as far away from our consciences as the landfills that will receive hundreds of millions of expired batteries. Progress.


Yeah, I doubt this. Most manufacturers that have electric car or hybrid batteries offer a couple hundred dollar bounty for old batteries (when the unit fails, there's typically many usable cells left in the battery for re-use and resale). The battery pack label on the Prius even points this out.

The plants that recycle NiMH hybrid car batteries are already equipped to deal with Li-Ion batteries. And the battery recycling & shipping is paid for by the auto manufacturers. Heck, nearly 100% of the components of the electric cars Li-Ion batteries are recyclable.
 
2013-02-12 02:54:24 AM  

mikaloyd: RandomRandom: mikaloyd: Tesla and lawsuits just seem to fit together.
Why the hate?

A day in court is worth two in  hell.


FTFY
 
2013-02-12 02:57:46 AM  
Elon Musk - coolest name ever?
 
2013-02-12 03:01:30 AM  

spmkk: RandomRandom: "That and he hates the fact that electric cars are definitely, positively, absolutely going to replace gas cars, though certainly not in his lifetime."


Sadly, you're probably right. Not because they should -- we're farking bonkers to live in a place with distances as great as ours and be fighting so hard for a REDUCTION in energy density -- but because we can all feel more smug and less guilty when the smokestacks are somewhere beyond city limits...as far away from our consciences as the landfills that will receive hundreds of millions of expired batteries. Progress.


First Litium Ion Batteries can be recycled
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/can-electric-car-batteries-be-recycled. h tm">http://auto.howstuffworks.com/can-electric-car-batteries-be-recyc led.h tm
Tesla Motors already has a contract with Toxco to recycle them.

Secondly, the technology is already available to be transitioned to a "diffuse energy" and localized storage format that can be hubbed around cities or localized for rural areas, and once the transition is completed, we will no longer have smokestack driven powerplants.
Electric driven cars will have an cost of operation MPGE of about $0.85 once the complete infrastructure change neccessary takes place, and around $2.25 MPGE during the current and transition period. Of course this will vary with sourcing, as a full charge in the Pacific Northwest would be about $6 dollars for a full charge while on the east coast it could be as high as $22.00 for 260 miles of driving.

However the expense of delivering electricity vs actual gasoline is no contest in terms of reliability, cost and ease/safety of delivery.
 
2013-02-12 03:03:23 AM  

spmkk: Sadly, you're probably right. Not because they should -- we're farking bonkers to live in a place with distances as great as ours and be fighting so hard for a REDUCTION in energy density -- but because we can all feel more smug and less guilty when the smokestacks are somewhere beyond city limits...as far away from our consciences as the landfills that will receive hundreds of millions of expired batteries. Progress.


No, I think the public will push gasoline engined cars to the side, not government.

Lithium air batteries designed for rapid charging will probably be close to gasoline equivalents.   With lithium air, the cathode uses ambient air, greatly increasing energy density.   Perhaps not quite the density of hydrocarbons, but close enough, with far greater reliability and far less pollution.  Lithium air is not here yet, but there's so much money invested in their development it's hard to bet against.  When it's ready, it should deliver the death blow to the gasoline vehicle.

Even though a lot of the electricity to power these cars will come from coal, it's a lot easier to scrub and monitor a few hundred power plants than a few hundred million tail pipes.  Old batteries?  Just like now, core charges and recycling.  Given the size and cost of main propulsion batteries, no one is going to be tossing them in a a landfill, even if they did, lithium isn't nearly as nasty as lead acid.

What will really sell the public is abundant, fast fueling locations, fueling at home, and the the far greater reliability of electric cars.  I couldn't begin to list all the components that can fail on an internal combustion vehicle that aren't even present on a fully electric vehicle.  Tires and brakes, that will be the maintenance for electrics.  Unless a repair shop is doing tires and brakes, they'll be out of business.

Still, I agree that the current lithium battery formulations aren't dense enough for electric to take over, yet.
 
2013-02-12 03:16:42 AM  

RandomRandom: debug: You mean the ones that make no mention whatsoever of remote activation and collection ability? What exactly am I looking for there?

Posted this earlier in the thread.

"Tesla data logging is only turned on with explicit written permission from customers, but after Top Gear BS, we always keep it on for media. "
http://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/301053361157988352


Exactly.  That makes no mention of remote activation or of remote data collection.  They turn it on before giving the car over to the media and collect the data after it is returned.
 
2013-02-12 03:17:50 AM  

maggoo: So, yeah.  Top Gear really lied about the thing and Tesla got burned.


No, they didn't really lie.
http://transmission.blogs.topgear.com/2011/04/02/tesla-vs-top-gear-a nd y-wilman-on-our-current-legal-action/
 
2013-02-12 03:18:18 AM  

T Baggins: was "completely factual, describing the trip in detail exactly as it occurred. Any suggestion that the account was 'fake' is, of course, flatly untrue." Assuming they didn't just ask the author "did you lie," then they must have proof to counter Tesla's claims, whether it's their own GPS logger, cellular location tracker, a dash cam, or some other objective evidence as the basis for their statement. Given how cheap these devices are, they may be standard equipment for car reviewers, the way audio recorders are used in many verbal interviews, for reporters to refer back to when writing a story.


Lets say Tesla is right, the reporter's left out a significant detour. What's the reporter's response?

A good reporter who is self assured would immediately admit an innocent omission and move on.  A reporter with an ego problem might get pissed off, deny everything and hope that Tesla's only proof is a data log.  A log that came from Tesla, a log that the reporter can deny is accurate.  It's a he said, they said.

How would the NYT brass know for sure that their reporter is telling the truth?  Pull his cell phone records?  Most cell phone providers are not in the employee tracking business, it's unlikely they'd do anything without a subpoena.

Which is why Tesla needs to hire some private investigators to acquire surveillance camera footage from the detour route.  Convenience stores, banks, highway cams.  Local PI's often have the ability to get that sort of thing, but the video usually rolls over after a week or so, they have to act fast.  If Tesla can catch the reporter in an outright lie, the NYT will almost have to fire the guy.
 
2013-02-12 03:19:34 AM  
RandomRandom don't forget that they are still working to couple supercapacitors into the power distribution systems in future electric battery drive trains, and once they do, accelleration for the LI power discharge systems will become as predictable as the steady travel rates for electric cars currently.
Accelleration is what drops the 300 mile range to ~260 miles. With supercapicitors, they can increase power density and distribute energy smoothly from battery to drive train without compromising performance.

Here is a good update about supercapacitor energy storage density and expected increases in production and uses with other battery technology.
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/122763-graphene-supercapacitors-ar e -20-times-as-powerful-can-be-made-with-a-dvd-burner">http://www.extre metech.com/extreme/122763-graphene-supercapacitors-are -20-times-as-powerful-can-be-made-with-a-dvd-burner
 
2013-02-12 03:23:26 AM  

Oldiron_79: Popcorn Johnny: Lsherm: I do have to say, I have a 2006 Infiniti G35 sedan and the EPA estimates were a little low.  It was listed at 17/22 and I get about 23 on the highway.  They've only dropped about .2 mpg over the years, but the car has 140,000 miles on it, so that's expected.  When the AWD kicks in it can really hurt the mileage so it's good it doesn't snow much around here.

What's strange is that it seems that every car I've had with a huge motor and low mileage estimates does better while fuel efficient vehicles do worse than the EPA numbers.

The EPA doesnt actually test vehicles these days they just apply a math formula based on weight and hp. Anyways the formula consistantly over estimates mileage for small vehicles andunderestimates mileage for large vehicles because it doesnt account for the fact that volume increases by the cube area increases by the square, so it does not take aerodynamics in to account at all.


My 2012 Miata is getting slightly better than expected mileage.  The estimate is 22 city, 28 highway, 25 combined.  I'm getting 27.2 combined.  Not bad at all.  Most of my driving is my morning and evening commute,  which is on the highway but has the typical rush hour traffic that makes it more like combined driving.
 
2013-02-12 03:25:34 AM  
-Cost to fuel my 05 Toyota Tacoma 15,000 miles annually (18 mpg @ $3.50 a gallon) = $2,916 ($243 a month)

-Cost to fuel my 12 Nissan Leaf 15,000 miles annually (3.5 miles per kWh @ $0.08 a kWh) = $342 ($29 a month)

Even when I factor in the $199 a month lease for the Leaf, I still come out ahead - plus the fact that I'm driving a brand spank'n new car. If gas prices bump back up to $4 a gallon, I'll be coming out way ahead by driving the electric Leaf. Considering the average American is spending $368 on gasoline a month (May 2011), financially it's kinda stupid not to have one electric car in the household .
 
2013-02-12 03:26:07 AM  

Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?


Scandals sell newspapers.  They are a dying industry that needs every little bit of a boost to keep going.  They have every reason in the world to lie, and their history proves that have no ethical issues with doing so.
 
2013-02-12 03:28:28 AM  

RandomRandom: Which is why Tesla needs to hire some private investigators to acquire surveillance camera footage from the detour route.  Convenience stores, banks, highway cams.  Local PI's often have the ability to get that sort of thing, but the video usually rolls over after a week or so, they have to act fast.  If Tesla can catch the reporter in an outright lie, the NYT will almost have to fire the guy.


All assuming, of course, that Tesla is telling the truth.

Which is a heck of an assumption to make as a layman with absolutely zero knowledge of the matter beyond biased claims from both sides.
 
2013-02-12 03:32:08 AM  

Klopfer: No, they didn't really lie.
http://transmission.blogs.topgear.com/2011/04/02/tesla-vs-top-gear-a nd y-wilman-on-our-current-legal-action/


Yeah, they pretty much did lie, though not with words, with visuals.  There were extra careful that way.  In truth, most gasoline powered cars wouldn't get 10 MPG on their test track, the supercars they test probably get half of that or less.  Supercars probably wouldn't go many more miles on the test track than the Tesla Roadster would have achieved, had they, as they very clearly implied, actually tested it to loss of power.

Tesla probably shouldn't have sued, but Top Gear lost one hell of a lot of esteem from that sham.  I still watch from time to time, but now firmly for entertainment purposes.  I don't believe a damn thing they say, or show, especially after learning how Ferrari provides specially tuned race cars with race rubber for their tests.

Top Gear has never mentioned a thing about this dirty business, yet they have the journalistic imperative to call out Tesla?  They're a bunch of farking hypocrites.

http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins
 
2013-02-12 03:41:53 AM  

MrSteve007: -Cost to fuel my 05 Toyota Tacoma 15,000 miles annually (18 mpg @ $3.50 a gallon) = $2,916 ($243 a month)

-Cost to fuel my 12 Nissan Leaf 15,000 miles annually (3.5 miles per kWh @ $0.08 a kWh) = $342 ($29 a month)

Even when I factor in the $199 a month lease for the Leaf, I still come out ahead - plus the fact that I'm driving a brand spank'n new car. If gas prices bump back up to $4 a gallon, I'll be coming out way ahead by driving the electric Leaf. Considering the average American is spending $368 on gasoline a month (May 2011), financially it's kinda stupid not to have one electric car in the household .


That's 2.98 gallons per household, per day. I'm sorry, but that's just not a believable figure as an *average* for every household in the country. Even if you assume the average fuel economy is just 15 mpg, that's an *average* of 44.7 miles driving per household, per day, every single day of the month. (16,327 miles per year, and that's even with the probably-low 15 mpg assumption; assume a more realistic 20mpg and you're up to 21,769 miles per year.) It just sounds nonsensical, as an average.

And comparing to my own personal experience, it's far more than double what my own household (two full-time working adults and one four year old child) drives.

Plus you're not accounting for the difference in costs of the vehicles other than gas/power and initial purchase price. The Leaf's only been available for two years: you literally have zero idea what the running costs will be next year, let alone a few years down the road.

A high-efficiency gas vehicle based on proven technology, at this stage in the game, makes far more sense than a hybrid or EV for the average consumer. And most importantly, one that cuts out the weight -- because it's not gas versus electric that saves money. They both have to do the same amount of work. Cutting down vehicle weight is what really saves money, because that is what really saves money. Our daily driver vehicle weighs less than half the bloated "Leaf" (which should be called the Tree Trunk, because it weighs almost exactly the same as any other typical Japanese car on the road.)
 
2013-02-12 03:42:27 AM  

Klopfer: No, they didn't really lie.
http://transmission.blogs.topgear.com/2011/04/02/tesla-vs-top-gear-a nd y-wilman-on-our-current-legal-action/


One can lie without using words.

"We never said that the Tesla was completely immobilized as a result of the motor overheating. We said the car had "reduced power". This was true."
www.autoobserver.com

Hey Chums, this car is in reduced power mode while it cools down. Let's show all 4 of us having to push it over to a 110v plug be recharged for eleventy hours, to pretend what electric car drivers will end up have to do if they run out of juice. But the kicker is, we won't tell anyone that we're actually pretending that the car broke down.
 
2013-02-12 03:42:37 AM  

gweilo8888: All assuming, of course, that Tesla is telling the truth.

Which is a heck of an assumption to make as a layman with absolutely zero knowledge of the matter beyond biased claims from both sides.


No, I don't think it's a wild assumption at all.

Logically, it doesn't make any sense for Tesla to lie.  The downsides are far greater than the upsides.  They don't know what tracking gear the journalist had with him, cameras, etc.  Not to mention this is the New York farking Times.  In that part of the country, they have a lot of feet on the ground, a lot of contacts.  It would be far too easy for Tesla to be caught in a lie.

On the other hand, the journalist might feel he could get away with the lie.  It will be his word versus Tesla's tracking information.  Unless Tesla can come up with some outside corroboration, it could stay that way.  The journalist would have a decent chance of getting away with it.  If his article was a sham job, or just very lazy, he could have adequate motivation to lie.

The other possibility is that they're both, mostly telling the truth.  The journalist did make a detour, but it wasn't all that significant.  A lie by omission, yes, but not a long enough detour to keep the car from reaching the next charging station.  This is probably the most likely end game, but the other possibility is too much fun to ignore.
 
2013-02-12 03:45:44 AM  

RandomRandom: Yeah, they pretty much did lie, though not with words, with visuals.  There were extra careful that way.  In truth, most gasoline powered cars wouldn't get 10 MPG on their test track, the supercars they test probably get half of that or less.  Supercars probably wouldn't go many more miles on the test track than the Tesla Roadster would have achieved, had they, as they very clearly implied, actually tested it to loss of power.

Tesla probably shouldn't have sued, but Top Gear lost one hell of a lot of esteem from that sham.  I still watch from time to time, but now firmly for entertainment purposes.  I don't believe a damn thing they say, or show, especially after learning how Ferrari provides specially tuned race cars with race rubber for their tests.

Top Gear has never mentioned a thing about this dirty business, yet they have the journalistic imperative to call out Tesla?  They're a bunch of farking hypocrites.

http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins


Top Gear has never (since their new format started) even come close to claiming to be journalistic. They are and clearly emphasise the fact that they are for entertainment and nothing more. Show me an episode where they *don't* call whatever supercar they're driving the "best they've ever driven" or some other similar hyperbole, for example.

And other supercars don't claim to do anything except go fast. Tesla does. Tesla claims the range as a major selling point for their vehicles; Top Gear would be amiss to simply ignore that.
 
2013-02-12 03:47:57 AM  

RandomRandom: Logically, it doesn't make any sense for Tesla to lie.  The downsides are far greater than the upsides.  They don't know what tracking gear the journalist had with him, cameras, etc.  Not to mention this is the New York farking Times.  In that part of the country, they have a lot of feet on the ground, a lot of contacts.  It would be far too easy for Tesla to be caught in a lie.

On the other hand, the journalist might feel he could get away with the lie.  It will be his word versus Tesla's tracking information.  Unless Tesla can come up with some outside corroboration, it could stay that way.  The journalist would have a decent chance of getting away with it.  If his article was a sham job, or just very lazy, he could have adequate motivation to lie.

The other possibility is that they're both, mostly telling the truth.  The journalist did make a detour, but it wasn't all that significant.  A lie by omission, yes, but not a long enough detour to keep the car from reaching the next charging station.  This is probably the most likely end game, but the other possibility is too much fun to ignore.


How does the journalist stand to profit from the lie? Opportunity isn't proof; you need motive. Without it, it makes no more sense to suggest the NYT are lying than it does to suggest Tesla are. Tesla at least stand to profit out of a lie, because if they can successfully lie and squash evidence to the contrary, they potentially sell more cars. What does the NYT stand to gain from lying?
 
2013-02-12 03:55:55 AM  

gweilo8888: RandomRandom: Logically, it doesn't make any sense for Tesla to lie.  The downsides are far greater than the upsides.  They don't know what tracking gear the journalist had with him, cameras, etc.  Not to mention this is the New York farking Times.  In that part of the country, they have a lot of feet on the ground, a lot of contacts.  It would be far too easy for Tesla to be caught in a lie.

On the other hand, the journalist might feel he could get away with the lie.  It will be his word versus Tesla's tracking information.  Unless Tesla can come up with some outside corroboration, it could stay that way.  The journalist would have a decent chance of getting away with it.  If his article was a sham job, or just very lazy, he could have adequate motivation to lie.

The other possibility is that they're both, mostly telling the truth.  The journalist did make a detour, but it wasn't all that significant.  A lie by omission, yes, but not a long enough detour to keep the car from reaching the next charging station.  This is probably the most likely end game, but the other possibility is too much fun to ignore.

How does the journalist stand to profit from the lie? Opportunity isn't proof; you need motive. Without it, it makes no more sense to suggest the NYT are lying than it does to suggest Tesla are. Tesla at least stand to profit out of a lie, because if they can successfully lie and squash evidence to the contrary, they potentially sell more cars. What does the NYT stand to gain from lying?


Really? You can't imagine any way that a journalist would get more publicity from a story of "look at these crazy terrible electric cars! I got stranded in the cold!!" than "I was the 2000th person to write an article about how I drove a Tesla and it was cool"?
 
2013-02-12 04:01:43 AM  

gweilo8888: Top Gear has never (since their new format started) even come close to claiming to be journalistic. They are and clearly emphasise the fact that they are for entertainment and nothing more. Show me an episode where they *don't* call whatever supercar they're driving the "best they've ever driven" or some other similar hyperbole, for example.

And other supercars don't claim to do anything except go fast. Tesla does. Tesla claims the range as a major selling point for their vehicles; Top Gear would be amiss to simply ignore that.


That's not true.  The top gear boys put on their journalistic hat to test products they want to slam, then put on their entertainment hat to show off products they lust after.  I can guarantee you that a lot of their viewers see them as a journalistic car show with an entertainment flair.

I'm not saying they should have ignored the Tesla's range, I'm saying they should have treated the Tesla roadster no differently than than they would have a gasoline powered car.  There are certainly some gasoline cars they've tested that couldn't get 55 miles on their race track without running out of gas.

If they were really concerned about range, there is absolutely no excuse for their fabricating power outages for both the Tesla and the Nissan electric.  WTF?  Funny because electric?  I really don't get it.  Could you imagine what would happen had they staged such a thing with a Ferrari?   They'd never have another Ferrari on their show, ever.

If they're just "entertainers", why did they even feel the need to test the range?  They're not journalists, why test?  Well, they didn't test, but they pretended to.  That's why I say the top gear boys like having it both ways.  Sometimes they're journalists, sometimes entertainers.  You're right of course, they're entertainers, full stop.  It's just unfortunate that much of their audience doesn't realize this.
 
2013-02-12 04:03:51 AM  

gweilo8888: That's 2.98 gallons per household, per day. I'm sorry, but that's just not a believable figure as an *average* for every household in the country. Even if you assume the average fuel economy is just 15 mpg, that's an *average* of 44.7 miles driving per household, per day, every single day of the month. (16,327 miles per year, and that's even with the probably-low 15 mpg assumption; assume a more realistic 20mpg and you're up to 21,769 miles per year.) It just sounds nonsensical, as an average.


There's your gut feeling, and then there are the facts: here's 2012 stats from the US Government - released a week ago . . .

"The average U.S. household spent $2,912 on gasoline in 2012, which amounts just less than 4 percent of their pre-tax income, according to research released Monday by the U.S. Energy Information Administration. That's the highest percentage in three decades." Link

Since average gas prices were down in 2012 vs. the peak of 2011, $242 a month in gas makes sense. It's also more than what I pay for an electric car lease and electricity to fuel it, combined.

gweilo8888: Plus you're not accounting for the difference in costs of the vehicles other than gas/power and initial purchase price. The Leaf's only been available for two years: you literally have zero idea what the running costs will be next year, let alone a few years down the road.


Ummm, yeah, I do. I'll just pay for electricity to fuel it, and for insurance. All service and parts are covered under warranty during the lease period. I won't be paying a cent more. At the end of the lease, I'll either give it back, or if the rates are reasonable, lease a new one. I could buy out the end of the lease, but considering the 2013 models are much improved, I consider this car a fun start into driving an electric car.

On the other hand, since my truck now has 150,000 miles, I know over the past year I've paid some $3,000 in service and maintenance (replacing oil 3 times, replacing trans fluid, replacing coolant, replacing front and rear diff oil, replacing transfer case fluid - plus paying for one repair on the transmission). At minimum, the truck will face replacement of the tires ($1,000), 3 oil changes ($40 each), and brake fluid change (approx. $120)  in the coming 15,000 miles.

gweilo8888: Our daily driver vehicle weighs less than half the bloated "Leaf" (which should be called the Tree Trunk, because it weighs almost exactly the same as any other typical Japanese car on the road.)


Wow, really? Your car weighs less than half of 3,354 lbs? Is your daily driver an Ariel Atom?
 
2013-02-12 04:07:18 AM  

gweilo8888: How does the journalist stand to profit from the lie? Opportunity isn't proof; you need motive. Without it, it makes no more sense to suggest the NYT are lying than it does to suggest Tesla are. Tesla at least stand to profit out of a lie, because if they can successfully lie and squash evidence to the contrary, they potentially sell more cars. What does the NYT stand to gain from lying?


No, I don't think the NYT is lying, not on purpose.

Their journalist though?  I wouldn't be so sure.  A single journalist who has written an article he knows the facts don't support?  Yes, he'd have one hell of a motive to lie.  Maybe he was lazy, or maybe as Gdiguy suggests, he purposefully wrote a hit piece to raise his profile.

The most likely explanation is that he took a small, undocumented detour that didn't impact his ability to reach the next charging station.  So a little lie by omission by him and no lie at all by Tesla.  That's probably how this ends, but maybe not.  If there's a big lie here, it's probably by the journalist.
 
2013-02-12 04:09:14 AM  

Mi-5: Top Gear definitely rigged that test to make the Tesla look bad for several reasons:

2. It didn't have a lick of British technology, so they had to trash it


Other than being assembled on a glider which was designed, engineered, and built in England.
 
2013-02-12 04:14:28 AM  

FarkinNortherner: Other than being assembled on a glider which was designed, engineered, and built in England.


That tells you just how much Clarkson hates electric cars.  He slammed it even though the chassis was built in the UK.  He loves every contemporary car built in the UK, and even most of the older, complete crap.

/Clarkson needn't worry.  As a 52 year old guy that looks 67, he's never going to live the 15 years it will take for electric cars to displace gas.
//15 years best case, 25 outside
///Self driving cars, yeah, he might live to see those.
 
2013-02-12 04:16:20 AM  

RandomRandom: Tesla probably shouldn't have sued


Tesla definitely shouldn't have sued. In arguably the most litigant friendly libel environments in the world they were laughed out of court. Twice.
 
2013-02-12 04:20:55 AM  

ameeriklane: I read the NYT article. What I don't get is why the author didn't just stop at a conventional electric car charging station. Those are all over the place (well, compared to Tesla's own ever few hundred miles). I assume the Tesla also has an adapter for the standard electric car chargers.


On the Roadster you have to buy a special charger (about £2000) to use fast charging points. Otherwise you have to use standard mains (a day to charge) or a Tesla charging station (an hour to 80%).

Friend of mine has a Roadster. Awesome acceleration. Cramped, uncomfortable and flimsy.
 
2013-02-12 04:30:39 AM  

RandomRandom: He loves every contemporary car built in the UK, and even most of the older, complete crap.


You say that, but he constantly refers in disparaging terms to the "footballers'" "Cheshire" Bentley Continental and Range Rover Sport, assembled in Crewe and Solihull respectively and, at least in the case of the Conti, an almost universally lauded car.

I think the reality is that, while he mocks American cars and electric cars with a particular passion, Clarkson hates everything (with the possible exception of Margaret Thatcher). Top Gear isn't a car show, it's light entertainment presented by someone playing a right wing blowhard. It used to be a car show, but it used to have 17 viewers, six of whom couldn't work out how to retune for the snooker on BBC1.
 
2013-02-12 04:32:30 AM  

FarkinNortherner: Tesla definitely shouldn't have sued. In arguably the most litigant friendly libel environments in the world they were laughed out of court. Twice.


You're right about the litigation environment, the UK libel laws are an abomination.

That's probably why Tesla sued, and had Top Gear actually said in words what their visuals implied, I expect Tesla would have won.
 
2013-02-12 04:33:08 AM  

Mi-5: Top Gear definitely rigged that test to make the Tesla look bad for several reasons:

1.  It's an American car, so they have to trash it
2.  It didn't have a lick of British technology, so they had to trash it


Apart from the Lotus chassis and suspension, you mean. The Lotus-from-Hethel-in-Norfolk-which-is-in-the-UK-dammit chassis and suspension.
 
2013-02-12 04:33:55 AM  
Before this thread I never realized that there were people who took Top Gear seriously.
 
2013-02-12 04:33:58 AM  

orbister: Friend of mine has a Roadster. Awesome acceleration. Cramped, uncomfortable and flimsy.


Horrible car in almost every respect. Buy an Elise. Cramped, uncomfortable and flimsy, but there's some luggage space and you don't need the services of an EEng grad if (when) it breaks down.

Anybody driven an S? The fit and finish of the dealership examples is absolutely abysmal, I can only assume that the carpets are 'fitted' as part of a rehabilitation program for the blind, but reports of the driving experience seem positive?
 
2013-02-12 04:34:15 AM  

orbister: On the Roadster you have to buy a special charger (about £2000) to use fast charging points. Otherwise you have to use standard mains (a day to charge) or a Tesla charging station (an hour to 80%).


Electric cars charge like this (give or take a little, depending on model):

Level 1= 110v wall outlets: 4 miles, per hour of charge

Level 2= 220v outlets: 12 or 20 miles, per hour of charge. This depends on the size of the car's onboard charge controller, either 3.3KW or 6.6KW - Tesla has a "dual" 220v outlet solution that does 40 miles, per hour of charging.

Level 3= 480v commercial stations: 80 miles in 25 minutes of charging.

Tesla's "Supercharger"= 150 miles with 30 minutes of charging
 
2013-02-12 04:37:29 AM  

swahnhennessy: Before this thread I never realized that there were people who took Top Gear seriously.


Top Gear is Fair and Balanced!
 
2013-02-12 04:43:22 AM  

FarkinNortherner: I think the reality is that, while he mocks American cars and electric cars with a particular passion, Clarkson hates everything (with the possible exception of Margaret Thatcher).


You're not wrong about his general derision for all things.  Still, he does act the journalists when it suits him.

I wouldn't say Clarkson is playing a Stephen Colbert-like character.  Colbert plays his opposite and plays him well over the top.  Based on Clarkson's many public escapades, his TV version seems to be little more than an amped up (coked up?) version of the real Jeremy Clarkson.
 
2013-02-12 04:44:18 AM  

RandomRandom: I'm not saying they should have ignored the Tesla's range, I'm saying they should have treated the Tesla roadster no differently than than they would have a gasoline powered car.  There are certainly some gasoline cars they've tested that couldn't get 55 miles on their race track without running out of gas.


I don't watch Top gear any more, but I remember that when they reviewed the Bugatti Veyron they pointed out that at top speed it has a pathetic range - something like 20 miles.
 
2013-02-12 04:47:23 AM  

gweilo8888: RandomRandom: Yeah, they pretty much did lie, though not with words, with visuals.  There were extra careful that way.  In truth, most gasoline powered cars wouldn't get 10 MPG on their test track, the supercars they test probably get half of that or less.  Supercars probably wouldn't go many more miles on the test track than the Tesla Roadster would have achieved, had they, as they very clearly implied, actually tested it to loss of power.

Tesla probably shouldn't have sued, but Top Gear lost one hell of a lot of esteem from that sham.  I still watch from time to time, but now firmly for entertainment purposes.  I don't believe a damn thing they say, or show, especially after learning how Ferrari provides specially tuned race cars with race rubber for their tests.

Top Gear has never mentioned a thing about this dirty business, yet they have the journalistic imperative to call out Tesla?  They're a bunch of farking hypocrites.

http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins

Top Gear has never (since their new format started) even come close to claiming to be journalistic. They are and clearly emphasise the fact that they are for entertainment and nothing more. Show me an episode where they *don't* call whatever supercar they're driving the "best they've ever driven" or some other similar hyperbole, for example.

And other supercars don't claim to do anything except go fast. Tesla does. Tesla claims the range as a major selling point for their vehicles; Top Gear would be amiss to simply ignore that.


Well, if you RTFA from the NYT, you'll see that you CAN'T push it off the track when the battery goes, the reporter says that when he overdrove the battery, he couldn't even get it on to the towtruck, because the wheels were locked...  So the pushing off the track was a lie, no?
 
2013-02-12 04:50:21 AM  
There is also a possibility that both the journalist and Tesla are right. It may be that the battery had more charge than was displayed in-car. In my brief experience of the Roadster (a couple of hours as a passenger) the "range remaining" indication went up and down like a Tampa socialite's underwear as the car tries to predict what sort of driving is being done. Head up a steep hill, range plummets at about 4 miles/mile. Head down a steep hill, range increases at about the same rate. Before throwing accusations around as Tesla have done, they would be wise to take the same car on the same route at the same temperatures and record the information presented to the driver, not just the information stored internally.
 
2013-02-12 04:54:35 AM  

orbister: There is also a possibility that both the journalist and Tesla are right. It may be that the battery had more charge than was displayed in-car. In my brief experience of the Roadster (a couple of hours as a passenger) the "range remaining" indication went up and down like a Tampa socialite's underwear as the car tries to predict what sort of driving is being done. Head up a steep hill, range plummets at about 4 miles/mile. Head down a steep hill, range increases at about the same rate. Before throwing accusations around as Tesla have done, they would be wise to take the same car on the same route at the same temperatures and record the information presented to the driver, not just the information stored internally.


Just here to point out that Tampa socialites' underwear only goes one direction: Down.
 
2013-02-12 04:56:42 AM  

MrSteve007: Tesla has a "dual" 220v outlet solution that does 40 miles, per hour of charging.


Most of those who are spending 80 to 100k on the car are probably going to get dual 220v installed for a few grand more.  Full charge from empty in 6 to 7 hours, depending on battery size.

When electric's get cheaper, dual 220 will probably get cheaper too, but may not be a huge seller.  Given that the average US commuter travels on-average, 30 some miles per day, on most days, most cars would be fully recharged in less than an hour with the dual 220v.  Plugged into a standard wall socket would fully recharge most cars, most days, overnight, for very little money. Expect parking lot outlets to appear at more and more workplaces.  Standardized commercial fast charge stations probably aren't that far away.
 
2013-02-12 05:05:20 AM  

orbister: There is also a possibility that both the journalist and Tesla are right. It may be that the battery had more charge than was displayed in-car. In my brief experience of the Roadster (a couple of hours as a passenger) the "range remaining" indication went up and down like a Tampa socialite's underwear as the car tries to predict what sort of driving is being done. Head up a steep hill, range plummets at about 4 miles/mile. Head down a steep hill, range increases at about the same rate. Before throwing accusations around as Tesla have done, they would be wise to take the same car on the same route at the same temperatures and record the information presented to the driver, not just the information stored internally.


Tesla didn't say he was lying about that.  As far as I know, this is all they've said thus far:"NYTimes article about Tesla range in cold is fake. Vehicle logs tell true story that he didn't actually charge to max & took a long detour."

If the journalist took a long enough detour to have otherwise made the next charging station, he's grossly misinformed his readers. I read the article, it says nothing about a detour, that would qualify as a huge lie, perhaps a career ender.

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.  At a guess, he took a small, unreported detour (not enough to miss the charging station) and drove the car like a bat out of hell.  Combined with the cold and the not fully charged car, caused him to miss the next charging station.
 
2013-02-12 05:10:32 AM  

Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?


I suppose, like most "libs", I'll take the factually correct answer, whichever it is. Whoever lied is the liar.
 
2013-02-12 05:11:43 AM  

MrSteve007: Klopfer: No, they didn't really lie.
http://transmission.blogs.topgear.com/2011/04/02/tesla-vs-top-gear-a nd y-wilman-on-our-current-legal-action/

One can lie without using words.

"We never said that the Tesla was completely immobilized as a result of the motor overheating. We said the car had "reduced power". This was true."
[www.autoobserver.com image 398x266]
Hey Chums, this car is in reduced power mode while it cools down. Let's show all 4 of us having to push it over to a 110v plug be recharged for eleventy hours, to pretend what electric car drivers will end up have to do if they run out of juice. But the kicker is, we won't tell anyone that we're actually pretending that the car broke down.


Yeah, sorry, I like top gear and all, but when you see bullshiat, call bullshiat. Top Gear lied and slandered the product. fark 'em.
 
2013-02-12 05:14:36 AM  

ilikeracecars: Suckmaster Burstingfoam: God, RTFA. Tesla puts a data logger on THE CARS THEY LEND TO JOURNALISTS.

No, according to tweets, they only turn it on when they lend it to journalists.


Sharpen your tin foil hats people, most modern cars have the ability to log your every move with onboard computers. Any vehicle equipped with On-Star (which is most GM cars), can remotely control and collect data from the car. Tesla's technology to do this is far from state of the art.
 
2013-02-12 05:20:30 AM  
This just in:

"He took an unplanned detour through downtown Manhattan, in heavy traffic," accused Musk, "instead of going on the interstate to the next supercharger station." While the Times' map does indeed show Midtown Manhattan as a waypoint, Broder's story suggests he ran into range issues before making it to New York. "He also exceeded the speed limit quite substantially," says Musk, a point that the Times' piece disputes: Broder wrote that he set the car's cruise control to 54 miles per hour during the journey.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/11/3977414/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-accuse s- new-york-times-lying-tesla-range-anxiety


The detour to Manhattan probably gets Tesla off the hook and makes the journalist look bad, but not firing bad. It was on the waypoint map with the article, so not an outright lie.  On the speed though, he may be busted.  Speed destroys mileage on electric cars.  Others have pointed out that in the NYT's own data (miles traveled / time) in the article, if calculated out, results in an average speed of 81 MPH on one of the legs.

Not positive, but I think most of the highways around there are 55 MPH.  Two strikes against the journalist.
 
2013-02-12 05:26:25 AM  

RandomRandom: This just in:

"He took an unplanned detour through downtown Manhattan, in heavy traffic," accused Musk, "instead of going on the interstate to the next supercharger station." While the Times' map does indeed show Midtown Manhattan as a waypoint, Broder's story suggests he ran into range issues before making it to New York. "He also exceeded the speed limit quite substantially," says Musk, a point that the Times' piece disputes: Broder wrote that he set the car's cruise control to 54 miles per hour during the journey.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/11/3977414/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-accuse s- new-york-times-lying-tesla-range-anxiety


The detour to Manhattan probably gets Tesla off the hook and makes the journalist look bad, but not firing bad. It was on the waypoint map with the article, so not an outright lie.  On the speed though, he may be busted.  Speed destroys mileage on electric cars.  Others have pointed out that in the NYT's own data (miles traveled / time) in the article, if calculated out, results in an average speed of 81 MPH on one of the legs.

Not positive, but I think most of the highways around there are 55 MPH.  Two strikes against the journalist.


I'd find it high-larious is the newspaper has to retract, but lets off the journo with a warning, but the gendarmerie have a math whiz in their ranks and send him a ticket...
 
2013-02-12 05:28:35 AM  

orbister: There is also a possibility that both the journalist and Tesla are right. It may be that the battery had more charge than was displayed in-car. In my brief experience of the Roadster (a couple of hours as a passenger) the "range remaining" indication went up and down like a Tampa socialite's underwear as the car tries to predict what sort of driving is being done. Head up a steep hill, range plummets at about 4 miles/mile. Head down a steep hill, range increases at about the same rate. Before throwing accusations around as Tesla have done, they would be wise to take the same car on the same route at the same temperatures and record the information presented to the driver, not just the information stored internally.


Isn't wide variation on range fairly common on regular combustion engines especially when you've just filled up?

I usually put mine on average fuel economy after filling up.but it can go from about 5 mpg if I creep out of a gas station and hit a red light followed by it hitting 25 mpg relatively quickly. I'm sure if I checked the range it would vary considerably too.
 
2013-02-12 05:31:14 AM  

MrSteve007: There's your gut feeling, and then there are the facts: here's 2012 stats from the US Government - released a week ago . . .

"The average U.S. household spent $2,912 on gasoline in 2012, which amounts just less than 4 percent of their pre-tax income, according to research released Monday by the U.S. Energy Information Administration. That's the highest percentage in three decades." Link

Since average gas prices were down in 2012 vs. the peak of 2011, $242 a month in gas makes sense. It's also more than what I pay for an electric car lease and electricity to fuel it, combined.


Yeah, no. Your second link directly contradicts your first link. That's $243 per month in gas in 2012, versus the nonsensical $342 claimed in one specific month (May 2011) from your previous post. So your May 2011 figure is 41% higher than the yearlong average for 2012 from a more realistic source.

Here's the national average gas prices for 2011 and 2012 (courtesy of GasBuddy):

img542.imageshack.us
Note that 2012, overall, was MORE expensive for gas than 2011. If you go to  http://ycharts.com/indicators/gas_price you'll find you can get the average weekly price for every week of the year; do the math and you'll find 2012 averaged precisely US$3.679. For May 2011 to have been 41% higher the gas prices would have had to be US$5.187; they weren't anywhere near that. In actual fact, May 2011 averaged US$3.960, just 8% above the 2012 average.

So to account for that 41% difference, people would have had to increase their driving in May 2011 (despite the higher gas prices) by ~31% above the monthly average driven.

In other words, either the 2012 figures from the second citation are rubbish, or the first set of figures are rubbish. And given that the second set of figures are far closer to what I'd expect, you'll pardon me if I ignore the first set.

Ummm, yeah, I do. I'll just pay for electricity to fuel it, and for insurance. All service and parts are covered under warranty during the lease period. I won't be paying a cent more. At the end of the lease, I'll either give it back, or if the rates are reasonable, lease a new one. I could buy out the end of the lease, but considering the 2013 models are much improved, I consider this car a fun start into driving an electric car.

On the other hand, since my truck now has 150,000 miles, I know over the past year I've paid some $3,000 in service and maintenance (replacing oil 3 times, replacing trans fluid, ...


So now you're comparing a prehistoric truck to a brand new car. Yeah, you're not actually interested in a valid comparison, are you?

Your figures are nonsense and you know it.
 
2013-02-12 05:34:46 AM  
400 miles would be a little over a weeks driving for me. However the Model S costs what two of my TDI wagons cost, new (and a little more).

As for the EPA, they rate all passenger diesels with 4-cyl motors are 42 highway. I got 48 in it last month on an impromptu beer run to Georgia. (Why would I drive over 300 miles for beer? It's delicious, and I'm outside the distribution network. I've yet to strong arm the local yokels into carrying it, but I keep working on it..)

I'm not getting the low-40s combined I'm used to, but this is a brand new car with only 11,000 miles. My last "reliable" 45-56mpg TDI had 275,000 miles on it...

I want to see a Tesla in 250,000 miles.
 
2013-02-12 05:46:31 AM  

ElBarto79: The one thing I noticed from that article was the journalist didn't fully charge the battery. He charged it to the point that it indicated he should> have enough juice to get to his destination. Of course the indicator was inaccurate and he ran out. The thing is he had already used the car in the cold and knew full well it would lose charge under these conditions. Instead of compensating for this however he just let the car fail the test and wrote his scathing review. It almost seemed like he was setting the car up to fail. Either that or the guy is not particularly intelligent.


So, he had a testable hypothesis that the indicated range was probably wrong, he performed a test to prove that his hypothesis was correct, and then he reported the results of that test?

What an asshole!  When I read a car review, I expect to read about how cool the looks, see some empty compliment about how the seats and instrument made the reviewer feel 'ensconced', see exactly one paragraph of some  very minor criticism about the cup holders (followed by a paragraph saying that problems won't matter to most buyers), and then read about how much fun the car was to drive.  Those are the only things I expect to see in a car review, and 99% of all automotive journalists get it exactly right.  I don't know where this guy gets off thinking he can bring "evidence" or "fact checking" or "investigation" into a car review!  There's no place for it.
 
2013-02-12 05:47:49 AM  

kcfoxie: 400 miles would be a little over a weeks driving for me. However the Model S costs what two of my TDI wagons cost, new (and a little more).

As for the EPA, they rate all passenger diesels with 4-cyl motors are 42 highway. I got 48 in it last month on an impromptu beer run to Georgia. (Why would I drive over 300 miles for beer? It's delicious, and I'm outside the distribution network. I've yet to strong arm the local yokels into carrying it, but I keep working on it..)



Did you sing "East bound and down" by Jerry Reed while doing it at least? ;P
 
2013-02-12 05:49:05 AM  

RandomRandom: If the journalist took a long enough detour to have otherwise made the next charging station, he's grossly misinformed his readers. I read the article, it says nothing about a detour, that would qualify as a huge lie, perhaps a career ender.


I think any issue of detours is trivial. The point is not the distance between charging stations or the route taken; the point is the claim that the car would do nothing like the range it suggested it would, and that the "miles remaining" were going down faster than the "miles covered". Not being able to get to a charging station would be a symptom of that problem, but not the problem.

Anyway, he says in the article that he took a "short break in Manhattan".
 
2013-02-12 06:01:31 AM  

orbister: RandomRandom: If the journalist took a long enough detour to have otherwise made the next charging station, he's grossly misinformed his readers. I read the article, it says nothing about a detour, that would qualify as a huge lie, perhaps a career ender.

I think any issue of detours is trivial. The point is not the distance between charging stations or the route taken; the point is the claim that the car would do nothing like the range it suggested it would, and that the "miles remaining" were going down faster than the "miles covered". Not being able to get to a charging station would be a symptom of that problem, but not the problem.

Anyway, he says in the article that he took a "short break in Manhattan".


So, it's like a download progress bar?
 
2013-02-12 06:03:14 AM  

orbister: I think any issue of detours is trivial. The point is not the distance between charging stations or the route taken; the point is the claim that the car would do nothing like the range it suggested it would, and that the "miles remaining" were going down faster than the "miles covered". Not being able to get to a charging station would be a symptom of that problem, but not the problem.

Anyway, he says in the article that he took a "short break in Manhattan".


So he's running low on charge, barely enough to make the next charging station, but takes a "short break in Manhattan", in heavy traffic instead of heading for a recharge?

It certainly looks as though he was purposefully trying to run the car out of juice.  If the allegations that he was actually driving 20 some miles over the speed limit are true, then his article has been doubly disingenuous.
 
2013-02-12 06:03:50 AM  
I don't know who big brother is...
The oil companies are controlling the media
Tesla is monitoring our every move (and presumably trying to control our minds)
On Star is a nanny state machine

/Damn the man!
//No, the OTHER one!!
///OK the first one.
 
2013-02-12 06:14:38 AM  

The Larch: So, he had a testable hypothesis that the indicated range was probably wrong, he performed a test to prove that his hypothesis was correct, and then he reported the results of that test?


He never wrote that.  He wrote that he was running out of charge on his way to the next charging station and didn't make it.

Now, the telemetry shows that instead of driving directly for the next charging station when he was running low, he left the highway and detoured into heavy Manhattan traffic.  Additionally, it seems his own data published in the article has him driving one leg at an average of 26 MPH over the speed limit. Tesla's seems to be suggesting their telemetry confirms this. It also seems he neglected to fully charge the vehicle prior to his distance test.

But he was "just testing a hypothesis", he certainly wasn't trying to run the car out of charge on purpose.  Heavens no, that would be artificially sensationalizing.
 
2013-02-12 06:18:37 AM  

RandomRandom: But he was "just testing a hypothesis", he certainly wasn't trying to run the car out of charge on purpose.  Heavens no, that would be artificially sensationalizing.


If the stated range on the instrument panel is wildly inaccurate, that is an incredibly important piece of information that buyers have a right to know before they buy the car.

But I know... car reviews are supposed to be thinly disguised advertisements, and provide absolutely no useful information of any kind to prospective buyers.
 
2013-02-12 06:26:21 AM  
the prestigious New York Times

[let-me-laugh-harder.jpg]
 
2013-02-12 06:30:33 AM  

The Larch: But I know... car reviews are supposed to be thinly disguised advertisements, and provide absolutely no useful information of any kind to prospective buyers.


So a negative review has to be the truth?  No, a negative hack job no better serves the public than a puff piece.

He claimed to be testing whether he could reach one charging point from the previous charging point, then when running low on juice, took a detour into heavy Manhattan traffic.  In what world does that qualify as "useful information"?

Maybe he set out to test a hypothesis.  If so, he did an absolute crap job of it.  Since this actually IS his job, I'd say he earns a massive fail.  If it turns out he also drove legs at speeds that would earn him a reckless driving ticket, he deserves to be fired.  Not for the speeding, for the massive lie.
 
2013-02-12 06:42:28 AM  
Gyrfalcon: jake_lex: ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.

That's why I think this may backfire on Tesla.  They might get a "Wait, what, everything I do in my car can be logged?" reaction they don't want.

I mean, yeah, every car built now has a black box, but you don't like hearing a car company admitting "We can see everything in that black box at any time."

You don't hear them ADMITTING it...but that doesn't mean they can't.

Guess you don't have onStar....
 
2013-02-12 06:43:04 AM  

g4lt: mikaloyd: In a statement following today's ruling, the BBC said: "We are pleased Mr Justice Tugendhat has ruled in favour of the BBC on both the issues before the court, first in striking out Tesla's libel claim against the BBC; and secondly in describing Tesla's malicious falsehood claim as so 'gravely deficient' it too could not be allowed to proceed."

...which would be why Tesla now logs data when reporters get a loaner.  If you can't sue 'em when they lie, shame 'em.


Cui bono? Follow the money.
Who are the largest tax payers in your county?
That is the reason why local governments petition the federal government not to allow direct car sales from the manufacturer.
 
2013-02-12 06:56:30 AM  

RandomRandom: He claimed to be testing whether he could reach one charging point from the previous charging point, then when running low on juice, took a detour into heavy Manhattan traffic.  In what world does that qualify as "useful information"?


Look, the article is an undisguised hit piece.  Nobody is arguing that it isn't.

But that doesn't give you an excuse to lie about what the article says. There's plenty in the article for you to complain about without making up stuff.

His complaint was that the range that displayed on his dashboard wasn't the real range of the car, and that when you run out of juice it can be very difficult to find a place to recharge, and recharging is a PITA.  He demonstrated those things.

(The article really is undisguised crap, and the NYT shouldn't have run it, but boo hoo)
 
2013-02-12 07:01:09 AM  

Lsherm: Because People in power are Stupid: Looking over his article titles he seems to shill for big oil.

I read his article and it seems it should be pretty easy to cross check his multiple phone calls to Tesla, verify the story with the tow truck driver, and check (from Tesla) that the car went where he said it did.


That simply would prove that he called a tow truck.  That is evidence only that he called a tow truck.
 
2013-02-12 07:13:06 AM  
Link

Meanwhile....

 
2013-02-12 07:16:10 AM  

ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.


This may be just a 'test' car, specially equipped with monitoring equipment to track data.  A lot of loaned out sport cars will have the same kind of systems so the engineers can fix whatever the tester is complaining about.
 
2013-02-12 07:22:22 AM  

The Larch: ook, the article is an undisguised hit piece. Nobody is arguing that it isn't.

But that doesn't give you an excuse to lie about what the article says.

His complaint was that the range that displayed on his dashboard wasn't the real range of the car, and that when you run out of juice it can be very difficult to find a place to recharge, and recharging is a PITA.  He demonstrated those things.

I'm not lying about what the article says or making stuff up.  I never even addressed those points.

He may very well be right that the estimated range remaining changes with driving style.  That same phenomenon exists with many gasoline powered cars that have a range estimation feature.  Floor the pedal, estimated range goes down, coast down a hill it goes up.  Try it in a Prius or Chevy Volt, you'll see the same.  Perhaps those cars average it a bit better and don't show wild swings to the driver, that's a software change Tesla will probably have to make.

The points I've made reflect the actual allegations against the reporter.  And no, some of the posters here don't seem to think it was a hit piece.  I wasn't sure it was a hit piece either when I first read it.  Now that I know he took a detour into farking Manhattan when he was already low on juice and unlikely to make the next charging point, it became obvious that he was purposefully trying to run the car out of juice.

The reporter purposefully worked to sensationalize what would be an otherwise boring article.   He forced a breakdown and the drama of a tow truck. That in itself wont get him canned, but if it's proven he lied about key factors, his speed for instance, he may not be with the Times for long.
 
2013-02-12 07:28:34 AM  

gweilo8888: ISO15693: Throw in the fact that there is an actual log of actual data, and motives dont matter. The data will indicate who is lying. No need to motive speculation.

Because data has never been faked, ever.



www.youhoser.com

I'd like to point out that this data has not been faked, or altered in any way. In fact it has time coding, which is very hard to fake.
 
2013-02-12 07:28:35 AM  

RandomRandom: The points I've made reflect the actual allegations against the reporter.


can you post a link to the allegations?  Because all I saw in the article was a couple of vague tweets that said nothing at all like you've claimed
 
2013-02-12 07:34:43 AM  

The Larch: RandomRandom: The points I've made reflect the actual allegations against the reporter.

can you post a link to the allegations?  Because all I saw in the article was a couple of vague tweets that said nothing at all like you've claimed


Check the update at the bottom of this article:

http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/11/3977414/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-accuse s- new-york-times-lying-tesla-range-anxiety
 
2013-02-12 07:38:46 AM  

lack of warmth: What! You don't say.  A media member has once again took a bias view and tweeked the test to get the desired results.  Good thing the car didn't have a gas tank.  They would've added a sparking device to blow the tank (chevy truck).  Or like the Ford Explorer, when a tv crew ran a test to prove how safe the vehicle was by only blowing a rear tire while driving a straight line.

/somebody paid this journalist


Yeah, that whole "strap the flare to the truck" scandal is actually what woke me up to the fact that just because it's reported, doesn't mean it's true.

/was kinda naive back then
 
2013-02-12 07:49:37 AM  

anuran: Oldiron_79: Tesla has every reason to lie, NYT has none, guess which Im gonna believe.Or are you libs just gonna label the NYT a conservative rag now?

Unlike conservatives and libturdarians we're going to find out the facts, not jump to conclusions based on who said it.


Yes, this thread is full of people waiting for the facts and not jumping to conclusions like, say, the NYT reporter was paid off by oil companies.
 
2013-02-12 08:16:47 AM  

MrSteve007: Is your daily driver an Ariel Atom?


Oh, if they were only street legal.
 
2013-02-12 08:18:39 AM  

Lsherm: If he started driving with a 50% chard and took a roundabout way home, that's inexcusable.


What a 50% chard might look like:

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-02-12 08:26:36 AM  
'We'll have to wait for the details to be entirely sure'

Great journalism, asshole.
 
2013-02-12 08:35:49 AM  
The NYT's own data shows the reported drove the first leg at 78mph, far from the "planted in the right lane at 54mph" he mentions in the article, and above the speed limit, too.
 
2013-02-12 08:39:01 AM  
I had to think about this one for a moment, because it was a curveball.  The New York Times against energy efficient automobiles?  It didn't make sense.  Then I realized Tesla is competing directly against Obama, and the New York Times is always trying to prop up Obama.  So maybe the NYTimes political angle here is to carry the water for GM and the Chevy Volt to make it look (relatively) more attractive compared with competitors?
 
2013-02-12 08:39:37 AM  

cmunic8r99: MrSteve007: Is your daily driver an Ariel Atom?

Oh, if they were only street legal.


Depends on the state, but you can make it street legal.  Essentially, you're looking for an exemption for kit cars.  It still needs headlights, taillights, etc., but you'll get a pass on emissions and pesky safety regulations like supplemental restraint systems (airbags).
 
2013-02-12 08:44:55 AM  
Unpossible, journalist lying? Is it FOX NEWS? Then it cant be true and i blame Bush
 
2013-02-12 09:13:44 AM  

RandomRandom: If they were really concerned about range, there is absolutely no excuse for their fabricating power outages for both the Tesla and the Nissan electric. WTF? Funny because electric? I really don't get it. Could you imagine what would happen had they staged such a thing with a Ferrari? They'd never have another Ferrari on their show, ever.


I don't think most people understand what motivates these types of shows (and some journalists frankly) as well as what you laid out above. The threat of loss of access is enough for bias to come out and rear it's ugly head. It's the primary reason why those business reporting and stock tips shows are such garbage - CEO Joe Bloggs won't come out and be on your show if he knows that you're going to do a decent analytical look at his company and their actual P/E ratios and value. Instead he wants a few soft balls, the chance to get on TV for his ego and potentially an opportunity to shill his company's stock.

I look at TopGear the same exact way. They won't be truthful about any "reviews" they do, because doing so implies that as a vendor if you give them a bad car, you will get bad press. Instead they fall back on the entire "We're only an entertainment show!" because frankly they won't piss off the Ferrari's of the world because they like to drive them, but are more than happy to lie about a company like Tesla because they could care less if they ever got another one to drive.

I understand this, which is why I don't take any of this shiat seriously. However, between you, me and the wall - I think most people don't get it. Which is unfortunately the problem here - too many naive people in the world not understanding what a downright cynical shiat hole it really is and adjusting their actions acordingly.
 
2013-02-12 09:35:29 AM  

ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.


They didn't. Maybe you should find out what you are talking about before jumping to conclusions.

Only the cars they give to the media logging is turned on for this very reason.
 
2013-02-12 09:58:04 AM  

RandomRandom: That same phenomenon exists with many gasoline powered cars that have a range estimation feature.  Floor the pedal, estimated range goes down, coast down a hill it goes up.


True. I was driving a friend's BMW 316d (with Efficient Dynamics package) and the distance to empty started off at around 900km and was up to 1,000km after I had it on the highway for half an hour. I'm sure I was driving it more gently than my friend does, since I was borrowing his car.
 
2013-02-12 10:22:24 AM  

Mi-5: Happy Hours: Jeremy Clarkson is amused

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x315]

Top Gear definitely rigged that test to make the Tesla look bad for several reasons:

1.  It's an American car, so they have to trash it
2.  It didn't have a lick of British technology, so they had to trash it
3.  It wasn't a Ferrari, so they couldn't lick its balls
4.  It wasn't a fuel guzzling supercar, so they had to trash it.

You will notice they always rig these tests to make certain cars win, or cars win in general.  Like the car vs plain, car vs train, etc.

Entertaining show, but just recognize what they try to do.


And this is a surprise to anyone?
 
2013-02-12 10:26:02 AM  

jnoel: 'We'll have to wait for the details to be entirely sure'

Great journalism, asshole.


Yeah, much better to just jump to conclusions and come up with something dramatic, edgy, and snarky. That's what gets the pageviews!
 
2013-02-12 10:43:48 AM  
Interesting point, that may or may not mean anything.

Who was the BBC Director General when Top Gear lied about the Tesla breaking down? Mark Thompson.
Who is CEO of the NYT now? Mark Thompson....
 
2013-02-12 11:02:16 AM  

Mi-5: Happy Hours: Jeremy Clarkson is amused

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x315]

Top Gear definitely rigged that test to make the Tesla look bad for several reasons:

1.  It's an American car, so they have to trash it
2.  It didn't have a lick of British technology, so they had to trash it
3.  It wasn't a Ferrari, so they couldn't lick its balls
4.  It wasn't a fuel guzzling supercar, so they had to trash it.

You will notice they always rig these tests to make certain cars win, or cars win in general.  Like the car vs plain, car vs train, etc.

Entertaining show, but just recognize what they try to do.


1. Why does Richard Hammond own a Mustang? Why did all three praise the American cars they tested last year? (From memory a Corvette, a Cadiliac with the same engine as the 'Vette and a Charger.)
2. Tesla chassis is British. It's a Lotus Elise.
3. Clarkson slated the Ferrari FF,
4. They have frequently praised econoboxes highly. The Skoda Yeti for one.
 
2013-02-12 11:05:17 AM  
The EV is the future, it's just a question of how fast it gets adopted.

We can't generate gasoline.
 
2013-02-12 11:10:44 AM  

TwistedFark: I look at TopGear the same exact way. They won't be truthful about any "reviews" they do, because doing so implies that as a vendor if you give them a bad car, you will get bad press. Instead they fall back on the entire "We're only an entertainment show!" because frankly they won't piss off the Ferrari's of the world because they like to drive them, but are more than happy to lie about a company like Tesla because they could care less if they ever got another one to drive.

I understand this, which is why I don't take any of this shiat seriously. However, between you, me and the wall - I think most people don't get it. Which is unfortunately the problem here - too many naive people in the world not understanding what a downright cynical shiat hole it really is and adjusting their actions acordingly.


See I look at it slightly differently.  TopGear knows that they do this, and they try to tell their viewers that.

Awhile ago some fan wrote in asking where all the "serious" reviews of obtainable vehicles were.  In response top gear did a segment reviewing the Ford Fiesta: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7e7R3y-qwZ0 ...They took it through a mall blues-brothers style, and used it in an amphibious assault with the Royal Marines.  In a not at all subtle way, they try really hard to tell you not to take their reviews too seriously.
 
2013-02-12 11:18:29 AM  
FTFA: "...but I don't think Elon Musk would pick a fight with the biggest newspaper in the world if he didn't have a lot of data to back his claims."

No, no. Of course not. A businessman would never do a thing like that, just like they would never bundle bad mortgages up and sell them off to investors. Everyone knows that American Businessmen are the epitome of integrity and morality.
 
2013-02-12 11:18:52 AM  

RandomRandom: FarkinNortherner: Other than being assembled on a glider which was designed, engineered, and built in England.

That tells you just how much Clarkson hates electric cars.  He slammed it even though the chassis was built in the UK.  He loves every contemporary car built in the UK, and even most of the older, complete crap.


This is the Clarkson who always told people that TVRs broke down every three miles? The Clarkson who bought a Ford GT after raving about it?
 
2013-02-12 11:18:54 AM  

RandomRandom: MrSteve007: Tesla has a "dual" 220v outlet solution that does 40 miles, per hour of charging.

Most of those who are spending 80 to 100k on the car are probably going to get dual 220v installed for a few grand more.  Full charge from empty in 6 to 7 hours, depending on battery size.

When electric's get cheaper, dual 220 will probably get cheaper too, but may not be a huge seller.  Given that the average US commuter travels on-average, 30 some miles per day, on most days, most cars would be fully recharged in less than an hour with the dual 220v.  Plugged into a standard wall socket would fully recharge most cars, most days, overnight, for very little money. Expect parking lot outlets to appear at more and more workplaces.  Standardized commercial fast charge stations probably aren't that far away.


Why would you think that installation of dual 220 outlets would be "a few grand"?

\a few hundred, perhaps
\\more if your current panel is full
 
2013-02-12 11:35:30 AM  

RandomRandom: It certainly looks as though he was purposefully trying to run the car out of juice trying to use the car as normal people might and not as a hypermiler would.


FTFY. Incidentally, slow moving urban traffic is very easy for an electric car.
 
2013-02-12 11:37:23 AM  

RandomRandom: . It also seems he neglected to fully charge the vehicle prior to his distance test.


As I read it, he charged it until the charge indicator said that he had ample range available. The problem seems to be as much to do with the cars range estimates as with the battery capacity.
 
2013-02-12 12:02:31 PM  

Yogimus: Screw you, buddy. If the facts don't fit my preconceived views, I will regard them as lies, and further proof of the evil (LEFT/RIGHT)* conspiracy!


* circle applicable political spectrum


Both Sides The Same... amiright?
 
2013-02-12 12:10:53 PM  

studebaker hoch: We can't generate gasoline.


Actually, we can get close enough given adequate input power. But it comes down to a question of cost - at $30 a gallon, gasoline use will indeed be quite different.
 
2013-02-12 12:11:18 PM  
I think the reason the reporter lied is pretty obvious.  He couldn't tell his wife about his little side trip for some side action and when he broke down he had to blame the car instead.
 
2013-02-12 12:15:38 PM  

MrSteve007: blahblahblahshiatIdon'tcareabout 3,354lb...



Seriously?! That's the weight of the Leaf? Is this thing a whole lot bigger than I thought it was? That's about the weight for a '00 Dodge Grand Caravan.
 
2013-02-12 12:16:26 PM  

FarkinNortherner: orbister: Friend of mine has a Roadster. Awesome acceleration. Cramped, uncomfortable and flimsy.

Horrible car in almost every respect. Buy an Elise. Cramped, uncomfortable and flimsy, but there's some luggage space and you don't need the services of an EEng grad if (when) it breaks down.

Anybody driven an S? The fit and finish of the dealership examples is absolutely abysmal, I can only assume that the carpets are 'fitted' as part of a rehabilitation program for the blind, but reports of the driving experience seem positive?


I drive an S. Fit and finish of my car is nearly flawless, on par with the BMW and Audi I drove prior to owning the Tesla.

The carpets (carpet?, carpeting?) are perfect in my S.

It's far and away the best car I've ever driven.
 
2013-02-12 12:23:28 PM  

SomeoneDumb: jnoel: 'We'll have to wait for the details to be entirely sure'

Great journalism, asshole.

Yeah, much better to just jump to conclusions and come up with something dramatic, edgy, and snarky. That's what gets the pageviews!


Why not, it seems to work for every other outlet that panned Tesla: Top gear and ElReg, to name the obvious ones.  Maybe the NYT just wanted in on that sweet, sweet, snarkolepsy action (you know, hammer out a snarky article, then roll over and go back to sleep during the time you were supposed to be researching)
 
2013-02-12 12:33:28 PM  

gweilo8888: In other words, either the 2012 figures from the second citation are rubbish, or the first set of figures are rubbish. And given that the second set of figures are far closer to what I'd expect, you'll pardon me if I ignore the first set.


And if you go ahead and use the most recent figures, you'll have to agree that leasing an electric car is cheaper than driving my current truck.

gweilo8888: So now you're comparing a prehistoric truck to a brand new car. Yeah, you're not actually interested in a valid comparison, are you?

Your figures are nonsense and you know it.


You consider this truck to be prehistoric?
memimage.cardomain.com
(not mine, but identical model and condition to mine)

As many folks will point out that a typical Toyota Tacoma will reliably last well past 250,000 miles. I certainly expect that of mine - but as I point out, it's cheaper to lease and drive an electric car for my commuter, and leave my paid-off truck for weekend road-trips, scuba diving or skiing trips, and instead depreciate a cheaply leased electric car that is still under warranty. There's no nonsense in that decision
 
2013-02-12 12:39:55 PM  

MrSteve007: You consider this truck to be prehistoric?
[memimage.cardomain.com image 575x431]
(not mine, but identical model and condition to mine)

As many folks will point out that a typical Toyota Tacoma will reliably last well past 250,000 miles. I certainly expect that of mine - but as I point out, it's cheaper to lease and drive an electric car for my commuter, and leave my paid-off truck for weekend road-trips, scuba diving or skiing trips, and instead depreciate a cheaply leased electric car that is still under warranty. There's no nonsense in that decision


By comparison to a car that you'll be replacing at the end of the lease period over and over, but not doing the same for the truck, yes. And when you're comparing an extremely inefficient class of vehicle with significant cargo-carrying capability to an extremely efficient class of vehicle with almost zero cargo-carrying capabilities.

You're comparing apples to actuaries -- the comparison makes absolutely zero sense and is of zero relevance to anybody who isn't you.

And good job ignoring the fact that the meat of your previous posts re: typical annual gas expenditure was rubbish, too.
 
2013-02-12 12:41:35 PM  

RINO: Seriously?! That's the weight of the Leaf? (

3,354lbs) Is this thing a whole lot bigger than I thought it was? That's about the weight for a '00 Dodge Grand Caravan.

Which is about the same weight of a '13 Honda accord (3217 lbs). The similar sized Toyota Matrix is 2844 lbs these days. A '00 Grand Caravan is 3,680 lbs.

They shed about 100 pounds in the 2013 Leaf - it's down to 3,256 lbs for a base model.
 
2013-02-12 01:16:38 PM  

imgod2u: ZeroCorpse: I'd just like to have a word with all of you about a particular word and its usage.

The word I keep seeing used incorrectly is  bias.

You are biased. You are not bias.
The reporter is biased toward the oil industry. The reporter is not bias toward the oil industry.
The media has a biased view. The media does not have a bias view.
You can have a bias. You can also  be biased.
When you have a bias, you are biased. When you have a bias, you are not bias.

That's all. May Gozer have mercy on your soul. You're welcome.

What kind of affecteffect are you hoping to have with such a post?


FTFY, sorry, pet peeve.
 
2013-02-12 01:18:14 PM  

MrSteve007: You consider this truck to be prehistoric?
memimage.cardomain.com



Oh my god! It's Dorner! I win the million dollars!!!!!!11!1!2!
 
2013-02-12 01:25:13 PM  

kcfoxie: 400 miles would be a little over a weeks driving for me. However the Model S costs what two of my TDI wagons cost, new (and a little more).

As for the EPA, they rate all passenger diesels with 4-cyl motors are 42 highway. I got 48 in it last month on an impromptu beer run to Georgia. (Why would I drive over 300 miles for beer? It's delicious, and I'm outside the distribution network. I've yet to strong arm the local yokels into carrying it, but I keep working on it..)

I'm not getting the low-40s combined I'm used to, but this is a brand new car with only 11,000 miles. My last "reliable" 45-56mpg TDI had 275,000 miles on it...

I want to see a Tesla in 250,000 miles.


Hybrids in particular are the most reliabile cars there are.  Why?  Because there is less wear and tear on the mechanical components like the gasoline engine and the brakes.  In theory, a mass-produced all-electric car should be amazingly reliabile.  Now, Teslas are basically hand made in small batches and may not be as reliabile as a Toyota for that reason alone, but not because they are all-electrics.
 
2013-02-12 01:25:38 PM  

RINO: MrSteve007: blahblahblahshiatIdon'tcareabout 3,354lb...


Seriously?! That's the weight of the Leaf? Is this thing a whole lot bigger than I thought it was? That's about the weight for a '00 Dodge Grand Caravan.


Batteries be heavy, yo.
 
2013-02-12 01:26:20 PM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: Your not helping.


Never not help with a well place your, told me so my grammar teacher did.
 
2013-02-12 01:30:10 PM  

gweilo8888: You're comparing apples to actuaries -- the comparison makes absolutely zero sense and is of zero relevance to anybody who isn't you.

And good job ignoring the fact that the meat of your previous posts re: typical annual gas expenditure was rubbish, too.


I'm comparing Apples, to what I have. I have a 2005 Toyota Tacoma (worth about $15,000). It costs me an arm and a leg to drive with current gas prices. I have the options of:

A: Use what I got. Drive what I have at 18mpg, for about $3,000 a year in gas + ongoing maintenance costs = spending roughly $4,000 a year.

B: Trade-in, buy an efficient small car. selling the truck, and buying a new compact gasoline car. Let's say a base Honda Civic LX, that gets 32 mpg combined and costs $20k. Driving 15k miles a year, I'll spend ~$1,600 in gas, and need to pay about $7,500 to cover the difference in value from my truck and taxes. Pay $7,500 up front to save $1,400 a year in gas - going down to a econo-box.

C: Go used. Sell my truck, and buy a used car (~$1,600 in gas) + have unknown reliability. Possibly save $1,400 a year in gas.

D: Lease an electric car. Keep my truck for occasional use, and lease an optioned-out electric car with heated seats, nav system, Bluetooth, backup cam, etc, for $2,400 a year + $342 in electricity (although I recharge for free at work during the day, halving that number). Pay $700 up front to save $500 a year in gas.

Out of those options, I chose to keep my truck for the occasional road-trip and drive a new, decked out electric car. Considering there's a $7,500 tax deduction and electric cars are sales tax free in my state, those only sweetened the deal for me. Being that I charge the car via rooftop solar panels at home and at work, only adds to the deal.
 
2013-02-12 01:46:18 PM  
Electric vehicles just aren't practical or even possible for a large segment of the population.  I live in a condo and have no way of plugging one in.  I also don't want to have to worry about finding a place to plug in if I decide to take a weekend road trip.
 
2013-02-12 04:29:45 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: Electric petrol vehicles just aren't practical or even possible for a large segment of the population.  I live in a condo and have no way of plugging one in refuelling at home.  I also don't want to have to worry about finding a place chemist's shop to plug in buy a few pints of petrol if I decide to take a weekend road trip.


Put that in historical context for you.

I like the idea of a Tesla S, but I would be put off by a manufacturer which sues every time they get a bad review.
 
2013-02-12 05:12:15 PM  
Elon's Future

3.bp.blogspot.com

PS the Tesla is a turd, it's bricks when the batteries die, no real warranty and forget any residual resale value on $40K batteries that only have a 8-10 year life...  Good luck clowns.
 
2013-02-12 05:15:39 PM  

BraFish: I think the reason the reporter lied is pretty obvious.  He couldn't tell his wife about his little side trip for some side action and when he broke down he had to blame the car instead.


Are you sure you're talking about the NYT reporter? 'Cause that sounds more like Clarkson.
 
2013-02-12 06:09:31 PM  

ajgeek: Just the ability of a company to (remotely?) turn on full logging on any vehicle anytime makes me want to do everything I can to keep my 96 Neon running forever.


I doubt it was turn on remotely.  More than likely, it was turned on before handing it over.
 
2013-02-12 11:27:10 PM  
Non-news does not change my assessment of the car. It is still far too expensive for me to buy.

I like the idea of it, but the reality sucks. Great acceleration, nice looks, reasonable range but totally unaffordable unless I win the lotto. Its twice what I paid for the most expensive car I have ever bought, or plan to ever buy, and well over 4x what I plan to spend on my next car (think used yaris or versa).
 
2013-02-12 11:30:21 PM  
I also just realized that it probably doesnt even have a manual transmission option, which is pretty much a requirement for me.  For the right price I suppose I might be talked into a car with a slushbox but the cost would have to be significantly reduced.  For example I might pay 12k for a lightly used Versa with a manual but if it is an auto it better be under $7500 all other factors being equal.
 
2013-02-12 11:54:27 PM  

Ima4nic8or: I also just realized that it probably doesnt even have a manual transmission option, which is pretty much a requirement for me.  For the right price I suppose I might be talked into a car with a slushbox but the cost would have to be significantly reduced.  For example I might pay 12k for a lightly used Versa with a manual but if it is an auto it better be under $7500 all other factors being equal.


The Tesla S only needs one forward and one reverse gear, so that's all it has. No manual, no slushbox. If the engine is on, the car moves. When the car doesn't move, the engine is off. In an electric there's no idling with the engine on and when the engine is on, it immediately produces its maximum torque so that a multi-ratio transmission isn't strictly necessary.

Yup, it's too expensive for your current budget. Still, you must subtract government incentives and the savings in fuel and maintenance. Those savings mean the cost of owning and operating a Tesla S make it viable for a greater number of buyers than its initial purchase price might suggest, especially in those areas of the world where electricity is clean, cheap and plentiful.
 
2013-02-13 07:29:53 AM  

Ima4nic8or: I also just realized that it probably doesnt even have a manual transmission option, which is pretty much a requirement for me.  For the right price I suppose I might be talked into a car with a slushbox but the cost would have to be significantly reduced.  For example I might pay 12k for a lightly used Versa with a manual but if it is an auto it better be under $7500 all other factors being equal.


Internal combustion engines need a transmission to prevent them from stalling. Electric motors don't have that limitation.
 
2013-02-15 01:08:16 AM  
erveek

Internal combustion engines need a transmission to prevent them from stalling. Electric motors don't have that limitation.

The sea change will happen when the EV is affordable. 

Your muscle car is no match for my golf cart.  No really, let's go.
 
Displayed 272 of 272 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report