61–70 of 196 posts
If so, it wouldn't be a bad long-term car for those of us who like to keep cars more than 5 years.
It's too bad you couldn't just hitch a secondary external battery pack to a mini-trailer hitched to the car for long distances. Roll into a station, unhitch the pack, swap for charged one, go on your way maybe 15 min later. I know there are proposals for swappable internal packs, with automatic swap machinery at the station, but a trailer hitch and external plug requires a lower capital investment, and is much less i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heh. The BMW 535d mentioned has a 70L tank, and even on worst-case drives (sporty behaviour, not highway), it's quoted (by users) around 15L/100. On standard highway (not unlimited-speed autobahn, euro highway 120~130km/h) it's quoted (again by users) around 7~8L/100. edit: and do note: your 5~10mn refuelling break on a normal car brings you back to full range, on a Model S it's 170 miles not the original 260-ish. [0…
At 160-180 km/h in a rental 116d with winter tires I was actually getting about 6L/100km. I was able to do Berlin to Auschwitz (Poland) on a single tank, with 0.2 tank left over. (Poland technically has speed limits I think, but they weren't enforced) For a combination of high-speed-autobahn and city/etc driving, I was basically refilling for EUR 65 or so every 600-700km. The rental 116d couldn't do >200 km/h, so I'd…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heh. The BMW 535d mentioned has a 70L tank, and even on worst-case drives (sporty behaviour, not highway), it's quoted (by users) around 15L/100. On standard highway (not unlimited-speed autobahn, euro highway 120~130km/h) it's quoted (again by users) around 7~8L/100. edit: and do note: your 5~10mn refuelling break on a normal car brings you back to full range, on a Model S it's 170 miles not the original 260-ish. [0…
Sporty behavior not on a highway is still going to get better consumption than extremely high speed driving, because wind resistance rises as the square of the velocity. If you double your velocity, then air drag increases by 4x, so if users are quoting 8L/100 on 120-130km/h then you can expect to get about 32L/100 going 250km/h. With a 70L tank at 250km/h you may well exhaust the tank in under an hour. These are wor…
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/economy/2014/1900655/bmw_5...
Fuel consumption:
in liter / 100 km
Estimated fuel consumption by constant speeds on top gear, steady ride without acceleration or braking, flat concrete or tarmac surface, no wind
by 50 km/h (31 mph): 8 l/100 km
by 60 km/h (37 mph): 6.8 l/100 km
by 70 km/h (44 mph): 6.5 l/100 km
by 80 km/h (50 mph): 4.9 l/100 km
by 90 km/h (56 mph): 4.9 l/100 km
by 100 km/h (62 mph): 4.9 l/100 km
by 120 km/h (75 mph): 5.2 l/100 km
by 140 km/h (87 mph): 5.6 l/100 km
by 160 km/h (100 mph):6 l/100 km
by 180 km/h (112 mph):6.5 l/100 km
by 200 km/h (124 mph):7 l/100 km
by 220 km/h (137 mph):7.6 l/100 km
by 240 km/h (149 mph):8.4 l/100 km
by 260 km/h (161 mph):9.3 l/100 km
Clearly around 200 km/h is where the wind resistance (and gearing) is starting to become a factor, but I think you could probably hit 280 or so without being over 12 l/100km.
The other factor is that when I've driven >250 km/h I've gotten tired much faster, as you need to be hyperaware. (I did almost 200mph in a "very nice" Corvette Dubai-Abu Dhabi for about 20 seconds, and could see the fuel dial dropping)
200-250 seems like a reasonable high cruise speed for parts of the Autobahn, though.
The smarter option is probably Berlin to Munich/Frankfurt/Prague/etc. by train, of course, but I like having a car.
Is it reasonable to buy a Model S now hoping that within 6-7 years you can swap out the "old" tech batteries for newer / better / faster / higher capacity battery packs which will be introduced in 5-7 years? If so, it wouldn't be a bad long-term car for those of us who like to keep cars more than 5 years.
Alternatively, you could find someone to build your own pack in 5-10 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gee, how did this happen? I always find this line of thought amusing. It's like people just woke up one day to the America we have now and then pretend its forever. Distances aren't big because "but America is so big!", they are because cheap gas enabled people to live hours away from their place of work or everyday infrastructure in some suburb. If we would properly price gasoline for the collective damage its consu…
Distances aren't big because gas is/was cheap, they're big because nobody wants to pay $2,000/month for a crappy one-bedroom apartment within biking distance of their job. Distances ARE big because America is so big, and even now there's still plenty of land to be cheaply bought and decently priced housing built upon. For the past decade everyone's been balking at the rising gas prices, and so far as I know no two pl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keep in mind, that's not the only size jump you can do. You'd probably start with a full charge, and so could drive a solid 3.5 hours before your first break. You're only limited to 170 miles if you stay just 30 minutes. Personally after 3.5 hours on the road I', looking for a food and bathroom break, which may take 45+ minutes, giving you a longer range for the next jump as well. Of course, you're more limited by wh…
Many of these chargers are also conveniently located at hotels, so when you take your inevitable sleep break you can start the day off with a full charge.
Personally, I'd rather see hotels spend a few thousand bucks to install a bunch of NEMA 14-50's outlets or EVSEs with J1772 plugs. The cost of the electricity is pretty minimal, and it's certainly no worse than the upkeep on amenities like the gym or swimming pool (which nobody ever seems to use). If it really became an issue, the hotel could always charge a $5 fee for parking in the charging spot overnight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that fits your pace, that's great, but that would have driven me nuts last time I was driving cross-country.
People said exactly the same thing when the automobile was introduced and it was horribly less convenient than a horse and cart. Of course a new tech is slightly less convenient out the outset, and of course it will only appeal to a certain percentage of the population, and of course it will get better over time. Which side of history are those people on? Which side of history will you be on?
I understand that early adopters are damn useful, especially for all the startup creator here on HN. But seriously, "Right side of history" is pushing it. You can buy a regular car today and an electric one next time; it is not like electric car makers will refuse your business because you failed to be on the right side of history 10 year before.
A perfect solution would be to switch your empty battery with a full one and just go. Let the charging station fill it up. Are there any drawbacks to this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5V0vL3nnHY Tesla already demoed this.
Charger stations seem the better option. But I still think there could be bottleneck issues if electric cars really took off. You could reach some midpoint somewhere, say, Primm, NV, and be stuck there circling lots for hours waiting for a charger station to free up (assuming one could circle a lot for extend periods of time on a dead battery). The gas station there is pretty much hell on earth already.