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

401–410 of 729 posts

Re: Tesla Roadster

#401

Post by doikor »

aerophilic wrote: post #146
tdiggity wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Founder series limited to 1000 requires full deposit, that's $250 mil Base model requires $45k deposit. Not sure what semi requirements are. Even if they are biting off more than they can chew, they can gauge reaction and devote more/less to this. I'm thinking that these ventures give their engineers a space to get really creative and push the envelope. And, these advancements make their way into the mainstream model…

I think that may be the core point of why they are doing this. They are in a cash crunch, if they get enough deposits it can certainly help their bottom line... without dilution.

Developing a car like to a car to that state (drivable at the event) will have taken 2 or 3 years already so I doubt it originally started as a fix for cash flow.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#402

Post by dEnigma »

robotresearcher wrote: post #272
benjaminl wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Tesla Model S P100D has the exact same 0-60 and 60-0 times. So Tesla has already achieved that, but with a much heavier car.

I can't find better than 2.28 seconds documented. http://www.motortrend.com/cars/tesla/model-s/2017/2017-tesla...

The parent just wanted to point out that braking is just as fast as accelerating. They didn't mean to say that the Model S can accelerate as fast as the new Roadster.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#404

Post by lovemenot »

adamlett wrote: post #254
digitalzombie wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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? It's a halo car... Car companies build halo car to get consumers attention to their brand and to sell other models. Nissan didn't have to build the GT-R R35 but it did because it's a halo car. Another example is Toyota LFA.

But why does Tesla need a halo car? They already have the consumers’ attention. Lots of people would buy Teslas today but can’t because Tesla is unable to mass produce the Model 3.

Maybe because the target is investors, rather than consumers.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#405

Post by amdavidson »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #355
danappelxx wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had the same thought [0]! They cite their wheel torque, not their engine torque, which is what we're all used to seeing. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15719411

In electric cars, isn't it basically the same?

Even if there is not a traditional transmission, there is still a gearbox behind the electric motor.

Tires only rotate at ~1000 RPM on the freeway where the electric motor in a Tesla might be at 10k rpm. That 10x reduction still needs to be factored in.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#406

Post by DennisP »

in3d wrote: post #365
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…

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…

MotorTrend's review of the Model 3 makes me optimistic about the Roadster:

"What’s blanching, though, is the car’s ride and handling. If anybody was expecting a typical boring electric sedan here, nope. The ride is Alfa Giulia (maybe even Quadrifoglio)–firm, and quickly, I’m carving Stunt Road like a Sochi Olympics giant slalomer, micrometering my swipes at the apexes. I glance at Franz—this OK? “Go for it,” he nods. The Model 3 is so unexpected scalpel-like, I’m sputtering for adjectives. The steering ratio is quick, the effort is light (for me), but there’s enough light tremble against your fingers to hear the cornering negotiations between Stunt Road and these 235/40R19 tires (Continental ProContact RX m+s’s). And to mention body roll is to have already said too much about it."

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/tesla/model-3/2018/exclusive-...

Re: Tesla Roadster

#407

Post by glandium »

gsnedders wrote: post #268
cheeze wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The Veyron does 70 in first gear. I don't know if its 0-60 times require a gear change or not.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#408

Post by InternetOfStuff »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #355
danappelxx wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had the same thought [0]! They cite their wheel torque, not their engine torque, which is what we're all used to seeing. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15719411

In electric cars, isn't it basically the same?

It can be, even though many electric vehicles apparently use a fixed-ratio gear as well. But it's still an apples-to-oranges comparison since traditional ICE-driven cars tend to publish engine torque, not wheel torque.

Of course, they weren't trying all that hard to alleviate any confusion, and it worked even on the fairly tech-savvy HN crowd.

Ed: improved both facts and wording.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#410

Post by rottyguy »

tdiggity wrote: post #131
wintermute2001 wrote: post #125

Am I the only one who's worried that Tesla is really starting to bite off more than they can chew? Right now their finances are a mess, they are publicly struggling to produce their most important car ever, their CEO is spending time figuring out how to dig holes underneath LA...and now they're announcing a semi truck and a roaster in the same day? Don't get me wrong, Teslas are incredible cars. But this seems like a…

Founder series limited to 1000 requires full deposit, that's $250 mil Base model requires $45k deposit. Not sure what semi requirements are. Even if they are biting off more than they can chew, they can gauge reaction and devote more/less to this. I'm thinking that these ventures give their engineers a space to get really creative and push the envelope. And, these advancements make their way into the mainstream model…

What's even more amazing is that F or GM couldn't possibly do this. First mover advantage plus the allure of someone like Musk is what is needed. I know many bash him for spreading himself too thin among all his other ambitions but it gives him good will capital (which can translate to economic capital) when needed.
Post reply on HN