Tesla Completes L.A.-to-New York Electric Model S Drive Chargers • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla Completes L.A.-to-New York Electric Model S Drive Chargers

#71

Post by rdl » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 8:06 PM UTC

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #63

rdl wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Regrettably the 328d is the smallest diesel BMW bothers to bring to the USA.

Part of that now might be that we went from dirtier diesel than Europe to cleaner (at least, lower sulfur, but I think otherwise cleaner) in the past few years, and have more strict emissions standards. But that shouldn't necessarily hurt the 2.0 diesel.

Re: Tesla Completes L.A.-to-New York Electric Model S Drive Chargers

#72

Post by thrownaway2424 » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 8:07 PM UTC

jcurbo wrote: post #60

rdl wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nice thing is most US states have reciprocity with Germany, so you don't actually have to take the tests. I noticed a fair number of "bad" (by German standards) drivers on the southern Autobahnen over the past few weeks, but they were mainly non-Germans; I'm 99% sure the drunk guys in the 15 year old Honda were US military, and by the plates, most of the other bad drivers were also not German. So it's not foolpro…

Worth noting that US military that are stationed in Germany must take a test before receiving a US Army Europe license (they run the program for all US military in Germany) in order to drive in Germany. Based on my experience (got there in 2004), the test was not that easy and did require a bit of studying, especially for road signs and the rules at intersections, which are a little bit different than US rules, from…

The US military is semi-enlightened with regard to traffic safety in that they often insist on extra training even for domestically stationed personnel. For example some branches and some bases require all enlisted personnel to undertake basic motorcycle safety training before they are permitted to ride motorcycles, even though most states do not require such training. There are also branches and/or bases where servicemen returning from overseas deployments are required to take refresher driving courses before they are permitted to drive their cars again. On any installation the local regulations are up to the post commander; some of them are more strict than others.

It is amusing that the US military is in some ways the most highly regulated and the most European-like in their regulations, due to the fact that commanders have broad authority and the services provide universal health care and housing for enlisted men and their families. They have good incentives to establish standards of vehicle safety.

Re: Tesla Completes L.A.-to-New York Electric Model S Drive Chargers

#73

Post by agumonkey » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 8:07 PM UTC

MartinCron wrote: post #27

Pxtl wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 30-minute break every 3 hours seems just a little bit high - if 30 minutes got you closer to the full charge, it would be fine for road trips. 4 or 5 hours seems the upper limit for reasonable "driving without a half-hour break" and taking only 1/10th of your time instead of 1/7th recharging would be more palatable. But either way, driving screws up our concepts of convenience and efficiency. Drivers aren't rationa…

Drivers aren't rational actors That's at the heart of most of these discussions. So many of the decisions people make about driving aren't rational decisions, they're rationalized decisions. Just to be clear, I'm guilty of this as well. I bought a large luxury station wagon (mostly) because it had rear-facing rumbleseats that I've used exactly once .

I can't stand sitting rear-facing without feeling nauseous, I'm surprised it's even a selling point.

Re: Tesla Completes L.A.-to-New York Electric Model S Drive Chargers

#74

Post by masklinn » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 8:11 PM UTC

NickM wrote: post #58

masklinn wrote: post #47

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…

> 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.

It's a heavy car, and one built for highway, ramping up and slowing down all the time is extremely expensive.

> With a 70L tank at 250km/h you may well exhaust the tank in under an hour.

No. That would be a fuel consumption of above 28L/100, that's twice the worst case I've seen from any user of the car.

Hell, you can run long-haul trucks with a better efficiency than that: http://newsroom.scania.com/en-group/2011/05/27/scania-fuel-e...

> These are worst case numbers though

They're closer to lunacy than worst-case numbers (and the autobahn is not free-speed throughout). Although we'd need an actual 535d with an actual driver to know for sure.

Re: Tesla Completes L.A.-to-New York Electric Model S Drive Chargers

#75

Post by protomyth » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 8:11 PM UTC

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #56

protomyth wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the speed limit is 70mph or 75mph, it is less than every three hours.

Isn't it counterproductive to drive a model s at high speeds cross-country? You get an extra ~40 miles of range by going 65 instead of 75.

Going 65 on a 75 highway is going to be a problem since your speed difference with most cars is what causes the problems in highway driving. Breaking flow of traffic is not a good idea.

I can assure you that doing 65mph on I-90 through South Dakota is a really, really bad idea. Its listed as 75mph and that would be the low-end for what people do. Nevermind the wind that is probably going to kill your range.

Re: Tesla Completes L.A.-to-New York Electric Model S Drive Chargers

#76

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 8:12 PM UTC

rdl wrote: post #65

NickM wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Actually it doesn't look that bad. 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…

[deleted]

Re: Tesla Completes L.A.-to-New York Electric Model S Drive Chargers

#77

Post by josefresco » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 8:12 PM UTC

offmango wrote: post #64

I find it fascinating how Tesla is approaching this from both ends, supplying both the vehicles and the power. If the electric vehicle trend goes their way, they'll have an enormous advantage in the market. But if Tesla goes belly-up for whatever reason and the charging stations had to close, Tesla owners could lose their primary fuel source.

I would imagine the primary fuel source for a Tesla owner would be their home charging station.

Re: Tesla Completes L.A.-to-New York Electric Model S Drive Chargers

#78

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 8:13 PM UTC

rdl wrote: post #65

NickM wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Actually it doesn't look that bad. 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…

[deleted]

Re: Tesla Completes L.A.-to-New York Electric Model S Drive Chargers

#79

Post by revelation » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 8:14 PM UTC

Avshalom wrote: post #59

revelation wrote: post #50

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…

Sure, if you leave out the reality that the US had already expanded to the west coast by the time the car was invented.

So? They went straight for the west coast and skipped all the barren nonsense in the middle. In most every vast country, population density is a function of distance to water.

Re: Tesla Completes L.A.-to-New York Electric Model S Drive Chargers

#80

Post by rdl » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 8:14 PM UTC

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #72

jcurbo wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worth noting that US military that are stationed in Germany must take a test before receiving a US Army Europe license (they run the program for all US military in Germany) in order to drive in Germany. Based on my experience (got there in 2004), the test was not that easy and did require a bit of studying, especially for road signs and the rules at intersections, which are a little bit different than US rules, from…

The US military is semi-enlightened with regard to traffic safety in that they often insist on extra training even for domestically stationed personnel. For example some branches and some bases require all enlisted personnel to undertake basic motorcycle safety training before they are permitted to ride motorcycles, even though most states do not require such training. There are also branches and/or bases where servi…

A lot of that is that losing your forces due to non-combat accidents can hurt your mission. In addition to broad authority to regulate lives, they're given responsibility for accomplishing a mission; that doesn't really exist in the wider world (what is the "mission" of the USA, or really any country, w.r.t. its citizens? This becomes a philosophical debate rapidly.)

IIRC, more junior enlisted Marines were dying from motorcycle accidents, per capita, back at their home bases (it might have been specific to San Diego), than in combat in Fallujah.

(OTOH, they went overboard with things like the PT belts...)