[deleted]
Tesla Roadster
371–380 of 729 posts
Re: Tesla Roadster
#372Earlier quoted context omitted.
To get featured the list of fastest cars in magazines etc., to go to car shows, to get people into a show room, to get featured on TopGear/The Grand Tour, for kids to talk about at school and so on. All of which boost Tesla's brand (outside the tech echo-chamber, where it is already strong).
Model x is enough for all of that.
I don't think kids are going to be lusting after an SUV the way we used to lust after the Lamborghini Countach. This, on the other hand, is lust-worthy.
Re: Tesla Roadster
#373The 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…
Sounds really good on paper but the production is scheduled for 2020, so it’s unfair to compare it to the cars currently on the market. No other manufacturers announce cars so far ahead so it seems at least partly like a hype for Tesla investors. Acceleration is just one part of what makes a great sports car. And how is the acceleration past 100 mph? That’s the traditional weakness of electric cars and it matters mor…
> No other manufacturers announce cars so far ahead
Surely, you're joking? Virtually every carmaker has announced a whole bunch of electric cars for 2020-2021 (without giving nearly as many details or demoing the cars already). And that's discounting their "concept cars".
Re: Tesla Roadster
#374Re: Tesla Roadster
#375Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very unlikely. With power you weight beyond useful (this has basically been "solved" since the day someone built a cat around a ww2 military aircraft piston engine), acceleration is determined by aerodynamics (drag and downpressure), tires and the time spent shifting gears . It's pretty evident where Tesla has the advantage.
I don't think you're right about this. If the 60-0 time and the 0-60 time are the same for the Chiron then it's limited by traction (assuming brakes that are strong enough to break traction at 60). Most high performance cars only shift once before 60, and with modern dual clutch transmissions it only costs a fraction of a second. The only way Tesla are going to get below 2 seconds is either with non-street legal tyre…
Their demo car uses Pilot Sport Cup 2 tires, which are also used on the Buggati Chiron and Koenigsegg Agera RS (which recently set two records for fastest 0-400kph-0 and fastest production car road speed). These tires are street legal.
The Roadster is significantly faster than other supercars from 0-60 on the same tires, so the advantage must come from much more efficient anti-wheel slipping from the three electric motors coupled to AWD. This dramatic speed advantage is probably a result of the ability to quickly alter the power output per wheel to minimize efficiency losses from breaking traction.
Re: Tesla Roadster
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds really good on paper but the production is scheduled for 2020, so it’s unfair to compare it to the cars currently on the market. No other manufacturers announce cars so far ahead so it seems at least partly like a hype for Tesla investors. Acceleration is just one part of what makes a great sports car. And how is the acceleration past 100 mph? That’s the traditional weakness of electric cars and it matters mor…
> No other manufacturers announce cars so far ahead Surely, you're joking? Virtually every carmaker has announced a whole bunch of electric cars for 2020-2021 (without giving nearly as many details or demoing the cars already). And that's discounting their "concept cars".
With their acceleration stats that cause all the excitement?
Re: Tesla Roadster
#377I 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…
You're discounting the fact that this will be released in 2020. We've had a 4x increase in density between 2010-2016.
Also, Model 3 benefits from the new smaller gigafactory-made battery packages (at least a 35% increase in density over older Model S battery packs).
When you take all of this into account, it's very likely that they could fit an older Model S-size battery pack (which is more from 2015-2016 era) in a Roadster 2 with 2x the density.
Re: Tesla Roadster
#378The specs are astonishing, and I believe they can deliver. The original Roadster is the iconic car that made electric vehicles cool.
Would be nice if they could get production of the Model 3 properly ramped up so us peasants who've been drooling over performance electric cars since before we had our driver's licenses can actually get our hands on them...
Re: Tesla Roadster
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey folks. I was the one that took that video. let me know if you have any questions.
Why did you sped up the video instead of posting the original? You can see it by the movement of people around the car at the moment of acceleration.
Probably not sped up. What you're seeing is a sudden acceleration of the camera's viewpoint when panning to the left in order to keep up with the 1.9s to get to 60mph.
Re: Tesla Roadster
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
For those of us in the US, and vaguely familiar with traditional hot rods, the Chevy big block engine generally came with ~500-700 lb-ft of torque, which in a lead sled, relatively speaking, such as a 60-70s era Camaro or Chevelle would throw your head back and shake your chest like a roller coaster as the car started to slightly drift sideways. 10,000nm in comparison is 7,375lb-ft, which sounds like Harry Potter lan…
Look at my sibling post https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15720518
700lb-ft is apparently 950Nm. So assuming the same gearing as in the sibling post (very likely a false assumption -- I guess these cars had longer gears), you'd end up with 12.7kNm of torque at the wheels.
BTW, if such traditional hot rods had automatic transmissions (they did, didn't they?), the torque converter would have amplified the torque even beyond the numbers I just gave you.