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

41–50 of 729 posts

Re: Tesla Roadster

#41

Post by ambulancechaser »

baron816 wrote: post #35
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…

I would have to guess that they didn't decide to make a Roadster in the last month or two.

I think that that is the person's point. This is several years of development which amounts to wasted resources in light of the manufacturing setbacks of their truly disruptive product.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#42

Post by oppositelock »

danappelxx wrote: post #28

Sorry, 10,000 nm of torque? This can't be real. edit: misunderstood

That's wheel torque, not engine torque. Existing high power cars, like the Hellcat, exceed that number, at least in first gear. Hellcat makes 10875 Nm (8021 ft-lb). That's 650 engine torque at peak, * 4.71:1 first gear ratio * 2.62:1 rear axle ratio.

Of course, electric engines have much flatter torque curve, so they'll be at torque peak all the time until they exceed pack wattage limts.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#43

Post by alexanderstears »

ukulele wrote: post #2

0-60 in 1.9 seconds is ABSURD

It's darn near the limit of what we can do with current tire technology, don't be surprised if this drops - all we need is a tire that can deal with it.

You're right that it's absurd but most sports cars can do 60-0 in about the same amount of time, it's interesting to think about running that acceleration in the oppisite direction.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#44

Post by coryl »

pilingual wrote: post #15

It would seem over 200 mph isn't useful, except the Boring company could change that. A private tunnel could enable such leisurely travel for only cars that had level 3+ autonomy safety features.

At this price point, the target market probably isn't prioritizing for usefulness / raw utility as a purchasing criteria.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#47

Post by wjn0 »

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…

1,000 reservations @ $250k means they can pay for 5% of their new gigafactory, and that's just the founder's run. If that means they can scale better, I'm all for it. And I say that as someone who won't be able to afford a car like this for a looong time, if ever.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#49

Post by danappelxx »

oppositelock wrote: post #42
danappelxx wrote: post #28

Sorry, 10,000 nm of torque? This can't be real. edit: misunderstood

That's wheel torque, not engine torque. Existing high power cars, like the Hellcat, exceed that number, at least in first gear. Hellcat makes 10875 Nm (8021 ft-lb). That's 650 engine torque at peak, * 4.71:1 first gear ratio * 2.62:1 rear axle ratio. Of course, electric engines have much flatter torque curve, so they'll be at torque peak all the time until they exceed pack wattage limts.

Ahh, that makes more sense, then. Thanks for clarifying!

Re: Tesla Roadster

#50

Post by azifali »

The specs are insane but it would be better if Tesla focuses on getting its mass market car out in the market, in the hands of consumers.
Post reply on HN