Tesla Roadster II back on?

JeffKeryk said:
You provided an opinion, not proof. Conjecture is not proof. I completely agree EVs are too young a product for data driven evaluation. I would make the case they will evolve in quality and longevity just as ICE has.
My point is, some ICE drive trains have proven themselves while others have not fared as well.
By the way, I have several ICE vehicles over 50 years of age. I would drive my 2001 Tundra anywhere right now. For my truck uses, ICE is a far better drive train than EV.
Click to expand...
Ah the word game, gottcha. So of the well over a billion ICE cars in the world there aren't tens of millions of ICE cars on the road that fit that bill? Regarding "opinion" OK I think my "opinion" is spot on. Maybe you can show facts to prove my "opinion" wrong.
 
demarpaint said:
Ah the word game, gottcha. So of the well over a billion ICE cars in the world there aren't tens of millions of ICE cars on the road that fit that bill? Regarding "opinion" OK I think my "opinion" is spot on. Maybe you can show facts to prove my "opinion" wrong.
Click to expand...
I think he said the same thing you did, the difference is just saying something is an opinion and not proof of any form of truth in general.

I think people are calling things that they have an opinion on these days as their truth, so it's kind of the same thing I guess.
 
demarpaint said:
Ah the word game, gottcha. So of the well over a billion ICE cars in the world there aren't tens of millions of ICE cars on the road that fit that bill? Regarding "opinion" OK I think my "opinion" is spot on. Maybe you can show facts to prove my "opinion" wrong.
Click to expand...
That's not my intention. I never said your opinion was wrong. I said it was opinion, not proof. You make a lot of great points. I do feel you seem to struggle with the experiences of owners like me. My 5+ years of EV ownership has taught me a lot and changed many of my EV "beliefs". I was wrong; sometimes being wrong is a great learning experience.
 
Torrid said:
I think he said the same thing you did, the difference is just saying something is an opinion and not proof of any form of truth in general.

I think people are calling things that they have an opinion on these days as their truth, so it's kind of the same thing I guess.
Click to expand...
Go back to post #31. "IMO" means just that. If you're referring to the tens of millions of cars in the range 15-25 years of age, I don't see a problem there either. My guess is some good Googling will prove that correct too. I'm not seeing the problem, sorry. We can revisit this in a few years and see how the EV's are doing when the age and the numbers equal the ICE cars I mentioned here.
 
demarpaint said:
Go back to post #31. "IMO" means just that. If you're referring to the tens of millions of cars in the range 15-25 years of age, I don't see a problem there either. My guess is some good Googling will prove that correct too. I'm not seeing the problem, sorry. We can revisit this in a few years and see how the EV's are doing when the age and the numbers equal the ICE cars I mentioned here.
Click to expand...
Time will tell for sure. It's a bit of a constant useless debate. Can't even discuss an upcoming model without the viability of EVs being considered for some reason. That's every thread in this forum though.
 
JHZR2 said:
Range??
Click to expand...
The M3P Ludicrous might be released in Q2; all we have is rumor except for a few pictures and videos. Even videos are suspect as Musk likes to play with people...
The current M3P has more power but less range than the Long Range; perhaps the new car will follow suit. Who knows? I've heard it will not use the CATL batteries like the RWD and Long Range versions.

I would like to see around 300+ miles of real world range. Our 2018 Mid Range offers about 200 miles; I charge to 85% and can fly up to Petaluma (90 miles) and back without topping off.
 
JeffKeryk said:
Elon Musk says we will see the Roadster II late this year; production next year. @UncleDave get your check book out!
Oh yeah, the top model will do 0-60 < 1 second...

Elon time again? Well, somebody's gotta show the Nevera ($2M) and Battista ($3M) how America builds a real Supercar!

"Tonight, we radically increased the design goals for the new Tesla Roadster.
There will never be another car like this, if you could even call it a car."

View attachment 205910
Click to expand...
Read some techical articles of why this is extremely shady and far fetched. Elon is trying to pump the stock again.Why the roadster won't likely do 0-60 under 1 second.
The McMurty Sperling does 0-60 in 1.4 seconds, weighs 1,000 lbs and is 1,400 horsepower. The "roadster " will be waaay heavier than 1,000 lbs. There's a number of technical articles on this. A) do you want a several thousand psi canister in your back seat? No that would be an accident waiting to happen. B) Tesla had to rig the 1.99 second test, and this was published by many, many car magazines. A Tesla model S plaid was never able to achieve that time without A brand new paved blacktop road, wider wheels and tires that were barely DOT legal, and The killer, gallons upon gallons of Trackbite. The cybertruck was delivered with mediocre specs not even close to musks promise. Why are you expecting anything better from the company that makes it up as they go along? From the autopian
"
Another word for “thrust” is “force,” and force is equal to mass times acceleration. I’ll assume the Roadster speeds up at a constant acceleration, which probably isn’t true but is close enough for my purposes. To get to 60 MPH in 1.1 seconds, the car needs an acceleration of a touch over 24 meters per second squared, or nearly 2.5 g. Going back to high school physics, we know the force required will be that acceleration times the car’s mass. The battery pack may be around 800 kg, so I’ll assume that the car will be around 1600 kg. That means the car needs nearly 39,000 newtons of thrust to reach that speed.
Click to expand...
So, if we adapt the 1.1 seconds-to-60 numbers to the new 1-second-or-less to 60, we are now dealing with about 2.75-ish g instead of 2.5, and we get to about 43,000 newtons of thrust. Which is a lot! That’s about half the amount of thrust the main engine of the Apollo Service module made, and that was enough to send the **** thing into lunar orbit from Earth orbit.
Tesla owners astound me that they believe this is realistic or even going to be road legal.
 
97prizm said:
Read some techical articles of why this is extremely shady and far fetched. Elon is trying to pump the stock again.Why the roadster won't likely do 0-60 under 1 second.
The McMurty Sperling does 0-60 in 1.4 seconds, weighs 1,000 lbs and is 1,400 horsepower. The "roadster " will be waaay heavier than 1,000 lbs. There's a number of technical articles on this. A) do you want a several thousand psi canister in your back seat? No that would be an accident waiting to happen. B) Tesla had to rig the 1.99 second test, and this was published by many, many car magazines. A Tesla model S plaid was never able to achieve that time without A brand new paved blacktop road, wider wheels and tires that were barely DOT legal, and The killer, gallons upon gallons of Trackbite. The cybertruck was delivered with mediocre specs not even close to musks promise. Why are you expecting anything better from the company that makes it up as they go along? From the autopian
"

So, if we adapt the 1.1 seconds-to-60 numbers to the new 1-second-or-less to 60, we are now dealing with about 2.75-ish g instead of 2.5, and we get to about 43,000 newtons of thrust. Which is a lot! That’s about half the amount of thrust the main engine of the Apollo Service module made, and that was enough to send the **** thing into lunar orbit from Earth orbit.
Tesla owners astound me that they believe this is realistic or even going to be road legal.
Click to expand...
Truly why the Tesla marketing and Elon leaks are frustrating. 1 second isn't impossible, but it's darn close with current tech. One thing is for sure as you've shown here the Roadster won't do it, especially on the street.

The Sperling is such an odd modern marvel. I'm amazed the car even exists.

As far as the 1.99 0-60, it does sound shady until you realize this is how all performance car companies advertise their performance specifications, with rollout subtracted. Sure it's not entirely accurate, but it's a lot more repeatable which is why it is likely used. Once the car is moving, this is what it can do. That's how Dodge got their 1.66 as well. Whether it's the right way to publish numbers or not is debatable, but the car companies seem to think it's fine.
 
JeffKeryk said:
The M3P Ludicrous might be released in Q2; all we have is rumor except for a few pictures and videos. Even videos are suspect as Musk likes to play with people...
The current M3P has more power but less range than the Long Range; perhaps the new car will follow suit. Who knows? I've heard it will not use the CATL batteries like the RWD and Long Range versions.

I would like to see around 300+ miles of real world range. Our 2018 Mid Range offers about 200 miles; I charge to 85% and can fly up to Petaluma (90 miles) and back without topping off.
Click to expand...
Yikes. Wouldn’t buy a CATL battery even if it is domestically made.

200 miles isn’t enough. Hoping they get a version with 350 real world miles.
 
Torrid said:
Some do. I always hear the comment that the car has no soul because it doesn’t make any noise sitting still. I get that sound can be part of the experience, though for some that seems to be an absolute deal breaker and the whole experience.

That’s more one trick than some claim about EVs. You know, the whole thing where they’re supposedly only fast in a straight line. Many of them handle extremely well, but that’s almost never considered.
Click to expand...

Honestly, if I were in a position to buy a $2.5M car, I'd have a bunch of different types, new/old, ICE/EV/steam/etc. Like Jay Leno.

His comedy does nothing for me, but I can wholly agree with his love and appreciation of all vehicular flavors.
 
Trav said:
Sure it is fast but less than 1 second to 60 is nothing more than pure fantasy for anything driven on the road. Unless it is being launched by a steam or electromagnetic catapult or rocket engine there is no way the tires and chassis can withstand that kind of torque and rpm.
Click to expand...
Some of the crazy fast 3000+ hp Audi DSG equipped stuff on slicks pulls 0-60 in the mid 1s or so. There is zero way Musk is pulling sub 1. None.
 
Cujet said:
How so? Dragsters do it without rocket engines and without artificial downforce

Remember, these electric motors are electrically limited for traction reasons, until 60mph or so
Click to expand...
Top fuel dragsters are now pushing 10,000 horsepower plus, and the rear tires are used once.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Eureka, I'm back.
Replies
14
Views
4K
gfh77665
N
  • Locked
Tesla missed delivery goals for Q2 - a pattern
Replies
11
Views
2K
Bladecutter
H
  • Locked
Elon Musk was very lucky, NASA saved his behind !
2
Replies
32
Views
6K
Nick R
H
  • Locked
Volkswagen bets big on EV(Electric Vehicle)
Replies
19
Views
4K
HTSS_TR
S
Overview of AWD Systems
2 3
Replies
57
Views
20K
Al
Back
Top Bottom