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

261–270 of 729 posts

Re: Tesla Roadster

#261

Post by thinkloop »

Neil44 wrote: post #219
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…

Paper stats are one thing but show me this beating even something like a GT3 in an actual circuit race, or posting a Nurburgring time worthy of the price tag. I’m sure in another 5 or 10 years they’ll get there but these figures are for headlines not the track.

Are you saying that the numbers aren't true, or that it has other weaknesses that would cause it to lose a race?

Re: Tesla Roadster

#262

Post by paganel »

Devthrowaway80 wrote: post #208
eliaspro wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Porsche Mission-E will handle continuous top-speed just fine without overheating, so I figure Tesla will come up with a competitive cooling solution until 2020 as well.

Porsche has hundreds of millions of dollars of R&D poured into the 919 hybrid Le Mans Prototype, which I imagine will translate to the Mission E. Tesla has no such experience.

Too bad almost no-one watches the E series, because they're boring af (and the whiny sounds are cringy). Porsche did the translation to Mission E because its parent company is called VW, i.e. a company that should have paid damages worth tens of billions of euros because its diesel engines have killed and worsened the health of tens of thousands of people all over Europe, but because VW is a German "national treasure" nothing of that really happened.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#263

Post by sgt »

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

The first thing I did was to compare against the Dodge Demon SRT and sure enough, I think overall the Tesla Roadster beats it. If you go to Dodge's website, they boast the claim "Fastest Production Car from 0-100 mph", with a little note saying "Excludes non-mass production vehicles and hybrids/electric."

Re: Tesla Roadster

#265

Post by varjag »

greglindahl wrote: post #202
0xbear wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too bad it can’t maintain that performance for any extended period of time. Battery is known to overheat if you drive it too hard.

If you look at Teslas, they have a grill in the front that sends air to a radiator that's shared by the battery cooling system and the cabin air conditioning. For S and X and 3, it's not beefy enough to handle an extended period of time. Also, the engine has to radiate heat. So, you're boldly predicting that Tesla, which understands basic physics well enough that their existing cars accelerate well and don't burst in…

Making snap engineering conclusions about technology that had tens of thousands hours R&D poured into them is a popular genre of fiction.

I just see how the thinking goes. "No way this issue that crossed my mind in the first 40 seconds I heard about the product was addressed by the bunch of hacks behind it".

Re: Tesla Roadster

#266

Post by saagarjha »

avar wrote: post #257
cperciva wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be precise, 1.44 g. For comparison, a Falcon 9 v1.1 rocket -- without payload -- at takeoff mass has 1.19 g of thrust.

For those that are unaware, all rockets then rapidly increase their G. For example the Saturn V had 1.20 g at takeoff but climed up to 4-ish: http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/saturnV.htm Someone on the Saturn V started experiencing more G than the Roadster about a minute into the launch. When you move a building-sized fuel tank under its own thrust it's going to start off slow, but accelerate as more fuel is burned.

Plus I'd expect thrust to be kept low until clearing the lower atmosphere so it's not all lost on drag.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#267

Post by MarkMc »

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…

Electric cars will fake it. For example, the electric BMW i8 has fake engine sounds and this guy loves it: https://youtu.be/EoojNzIL2cQ?t=241

Re: Tesla Roadster

#268

Post by gsnedders »

cheeze wrote: post #260
thinkloop wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shifting gears? Why does it have an advantage?

Teslas don't need gears since they use electric motors. So there is literally no time spent shifting gears. See https://www.quora.com/Why-don%E2%80%99t-Tesla-cars-need-a-ge...

The original Veyron could change gears in 8ms, and will, IIRC hit 60 in 2nd. Changing gear isn't going to be a considerable part of the time here.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#269

Post by nepotism2018 »

I'm hoping they actually tested that 250mph+...I'm no expert but that car looks bit too light and short to do that speed...can't see how it will stick to the road...unlessssss...they want it to fly away :)

Re: Tesla Roadster

#270

Post by gsnedders »

sago wrote: post #158
gsnedders wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chiron is traction limited for most of its run; I presume to beat the Chiron's time the Tesla Roadster has better tyres for initial grip.

> Chiron is traction limited for most of its run This sounds very dubious, unless it has negative aerodynamic downforce. Even then, the times for each successive mph drop off too fast for it to be traction limited. Even F1 cars are not traction limited for more than a brief spell of straight-line acceleration. Aero drag dominates very quickly. Cornering or braking, on the other hand...

From memory, I remember seeing something claiming that the Chrion's 0–60 and 60–0 times were identical.
Post reply on HN