Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla Roadster

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 729 posts

Re: Tesla Roadster

#231

Post by aerovistae »

neya wrote: post #223
ardit33 wrote: post #17

The Tesla roadster specs are insane! No exotic carmaker will be able to match it (taking price as a consideration). (no Ferrari, or Lambo, can get that close. This is Formula 1 acceleration speeds). Plus 620 miles of range, and it is a 4 seater. Expensive as hell, but this is exotic car territory. Base Specs Acceleration 0-60 mph1.9 sec Acceleration 0-100 mph4.2 sec Acceleration 1/4 mile8.8 sec Top SpeedOver 250 mph…

10,000 NM of torque. That's INSANE. I drive a car with 400NM torque and that thing scares the sh*t out of me when I accelerate. 10,000 NM? Isn't that something along the lines of a tram or a train (I'm not sure, I'm asking you guys). This is CRAZY. I'm getting one for sure.

may i ask what you do for a living

Re: Tesla Roadster

#232

Post by jacobush »

kirse wrote: post #161
bwang29 wrote: post #19

I'm thinking what this means to gas car makers. Wave 1: "It's all about legacy and prestige, not speed/acceleration". Wave 2: "The track handling isn't all that good, how can drivers take that corner at full power without losing traction". Wave 3: "Alright, we will go electric too".

Gas will always have sound. The growl of an Aston Martin V12 on startup, or a Lexus LFA screaming through a tunnel, or the flat-plane V8 burble from a Mustang GT350. EM cars only have a dull whine the faster they go. Motorheads are secretly all musicians who happen to love driving. The best combination is ultimately both though, hybrid systems are already used quite frequently in everything from LMP1 WEC racers to mo…

I am sure you can engineer an electric motor to sound very enticing. Even without resorting to speakers. As a kid, wouldn’t you have wanted your family station wagon to sound a little more Star Wars?

Re: Tesla Roadster

#233

Post by aerovistae »

Animats wrote: post #23

Does this mean that Tesla is pivoting from their attempt to produce a medium-priced car in quantity and going back to hand-building high-end cars? Tesla is good at high-end, low volume products. But the Model 3 production fiasco shows they don't know how to do what Detroit and Wolfsburg and Toyota City do. This is in a way a step backwards. Tesla is going back to targeting the 1%. There are lots of little supercar co…

They've been saying they would make a second roadster for years. This isn't like some surprise change of plans.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#234

Post by _ph_ »

_ea1k wrote: post #26

I would really love to know how they are getting such a large battery capacity in a vehicle of this size. Is this a generational leap in energy density? What kind of materials are being used here?

I was just about to write my own comment about this: the battery capacity is the real eye-opener in this announcement, I think. The new roadster looks like a car which is rather smaller than the Model 3, certainly not larger. And as a sporty car it wouldn't be heavier either.

So how in all worlds do they fit a 200kWh battery in there?

This can only mean, it has more than twice the capacity per weight and volume than the current Tesla battery tech. Very intriguing. Of course, it could be a very obvious case of history repeating itself. The original Tesla roadster pioneered the current Tesla battery tech, what would be more appropriate (and reasonable) than to launch the next generation battery tech with the next gen roadster? The high price and corresponding smaller sales numbers allows for an easy introduction of experimental technology.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#235

Post by aerovistae »

bonestamp2 wrote: post #183
eagsalazar2 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This car isn't surprising considering the existing Model S performance in any way except that range. WTF?? 650 miles in a car that size is totally game changing. Will next gen of Model 3 and Model S also have 3X their current range?

Probably not. Normal practical cars need space to put stuff that you want to bring with you. This car doesn't appear to have much of that kind of space, probably in lieu of batteries.

Don't bet on it. Battery density will keep increasing and price will keep decreasing.

It might take 20 years, but it'll happen.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#236

Post by [deleted] »

ardit33 wrote: post #17

The Tesla roadster specs are insane! No exotic carmaker will be able to match it (taking price as a consideration). (no Ferrari, or Lambo, can get that close. This is Formula 1 acceleration speeds). Plus 620 miles of range, and it is a 4 seater. Expensive as hell, but this is exotic car territory. Base Specs Acceleration 0-60 mph1.9 sec Acceleration 0-100 mph4.2 sec Acceleration 1/4 mile8.8 sec Top SpeedOver 250 mph…

[deleted]

Re: Tesla Roadster

#237

Post by tlrobinson »

digitalzombie wrote: post #227
Animats wrote: post #23

Does this mean that Tesla is pivoting from their attempt to produce a medium-priced car in quantity and going back to hand-building high-end cars? Tesla is good at high-end, low volume products. But the Model 3 production fiasco shows they don't know how to do what Detroit and Wolfsburg and Toyota City do. This is in a way a step backwards. Tesla is going back to targeting the 1%. There are lots of little supercar co…

> Does this mean that Tesla is pivoting from their attempt to produce a medium-priced car in quantity and going back to hand-building high-end cars? It's a halo car... Car companies build halo car to get consumers attention to their brand and to sell other models. Nissan didn't have to build the GT-R R35 but it did because it's a halo car. Another example is Toyota LFA.

I imagine some of the technology in "halo" cars trickles down to mass-produced cars too?

Re: Tesla Roadster

#238

Post by tigershark »

Jdam wrote: post #67
ardit33 wrote: post #17

The Tesla roadster specs are insane! No exotic carmaker will be able to match it (taking price as a consideration). (no Ferrari, or Lambo, can get that close. This is Formula 1 acceleration speeds). Plus 620 miles of range, and it is a 4 seater. Expensive as hell, but this is exotic car territory. Base Specs Acceleration 0-60 mph1.9 sec Acceleration 0-100 mph4.2 sec Acceleration 1/4 mile8.8 sec Top SpeedOver 250 mph…

> No exotic carmaker will be able to match it. Did you fact check that? Actually, Bugatti is pretty close and partially outperforms, although at a way higher price point. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugatti_Chiron

I wouldn't call 1600Nm of torque over 2k rpm pretty close to 10000Nm flat...

Re: Tesla Roadster

#240

Post by danappelxx »

neya wrote: post #223
ardit33 wrote: post #17

The Tesla roadster specs are insane! No exotic carmaker will be able to match it (taking price as a consideration). (no Ferrari, or Lambo, can get that close. This is Formula 1 acceleration speeds). Plus 620 miles of range, and it is a 4 seater. Expensive as hell, but this is exotic car territory. Base Specs Acceleration 0-60 mph1.9 sec Acceleration 0-100 mph4.2 sec Acceleration 1/4 mile8.8 sec Top SpeedOver 250 mph…

10,000 NM of torque. That's INSANE. I drive a car with 400NM torque and that thing scares the sh*t out of me when I accelerate. 10,000 NM? Isn't that something along the lines of a tram or a train (I'm not sure, I'm asking you guys). This is CRAZY. I'm getting one for sure.

I had the same thought [0]! They cite their wheel torque, not their engine torque, which is what we're all used to seeing.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15719411

Post reply on HN