The Tesla Roadster 2.0 has been released!

Idk about their 2.0 roadster, but that auto pilot or whatever it is should have function to steer back to right lane. Amount if Tesla’s I almost ran over in left lane in CA amounts to amount of Priuses.
 
The sad part is the solo was supposed to have a $9999 MSRP, might have almost been interesting, at twice the price it should offer inline 2 passenger seating.
A one seater doesn’t work even for me.

dishdude said:
And here I thought Tesla actually released a new product.
Click to expand...
TSLA is sort of like the idea behind the original Ford Model T

They are mass produced and technically don’t really have options like a traditional car and use modern robotic assembly lines in more places than normal.

The payback is longer, let’s see if the model S stays in production as long as the model T
 
Last edited:
earlyre said:
actually it is... The ElectraMeccanica Solo.

Xos | EMV

www.emvauto.com www.emvauto.com
single passenger Commuter vehicle, Starting @$18,500. supposed to have a 100 mi range...
Click to expand...
This was a crowd funding venture started by the guy who started Sondors electric bikes. I had a couple and they are very good bikes. Guess he sold it or joined this other company.
 
MRC01 said:
Down to about 2.5 sec seems reasonable because the best sticky tires can give about 1.1 G of traction.
Less than that, I don't know. They're accelerating faster than normally available traction.
The Aspark Owl doing 0-60 at 1.67 secs means an average of 1.6 Gs of acceleration. Where do they get tires with that kind of traction? R compound tires can do that, but most are not street legal, and the street legal ones (like Hoosiers) don't last more than 1000 miles on the street.
Click to expand...
I just thought of another simple sanity test to check whether these 0-60 numbers are realistic. Most cars are already traction limited for stopping distance & time. So if the car is traction limited for acceleration, then it will accelerate 0-60 in the same time & distance it takes to stop. The 60-0 stopping distance is usually provided. Assuming constant deceleration (not true but close enough for an approximation), we can compute the 60-0 stopping time. Then compare that with the given 0-60 acceleration time.

As a baseline, 0-60 at 1 G is a distance of 117 feet. At 1.1 G is 110 feet. At 1.2 G is 102 feet.
So for example if that Aspark Owl has a 60-0 stopping distance of 102 feet or more, then it's traction limited at 1.2 G and its quoted 0-60 time of 1.67 secs is poppycock.
As another baseline, 0-60 in 2 seconds flat means 1.375 G of acceleration and is done in a mere 88 feet. So if a car claims a 0-60 time of 2 seconds then it should have a 60-0 stopping distance of 88 feet. I've never seen a car that can stop that quickly, but maybe it's possible? At least it gives a sanity check.
 
Rmay635703 said:
TSLA is sort of like the idea behind the original Ford Model T

let’s see if the model S stays in production as long as the model T
Click to expand...
The S is a superb car In just about every way. But it’s not cheap like the T was. I can’t afford an S. Otherwise I’d have one
 
Interesting thoughts on tire traction limits. I do think there is a slight difference in the fact that a 0-60 starts out with a static tire that has more grip initially.
 
Cujet said:
Interesting thoughts on tire traction limits. I do think there is a slight difference in the fact that a 0-60 starts out with a static tire that has more grip initially.
Click to expand...
When the 0-60 numbers get below 2 secs I think they are publishing a theoretical number based on P/W ratio, not a real-world measurement. For example, the Aspark Owl says 1.67 secs but TopGear measured it at 1.92 seconds. And that was with R compound tires. Any car with street tires (like the Tesla) would be slower.
In short, some of these cars are lying about 0-60 times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top