Live data from Hacker News

Tesla Roadster

tesla.com

571–580 of 729 posts

Re: Tesla Roadster

#571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. And electric motors are more efficient at higher RPMs. At high RPM, the voltage drop due to back-EMF (i.e. actual work) is higher but your voltage drop due to coil resistance is about the same, so you lose proportionally less energy in the form of coil resistance at higher rpm.

> electric motors are more efficient at higher RPMs. How big is the difference? It must be pretty substantial to offset both friction losses and gearing efficiency.

Gearing and friction losses can be fairly small.

Consider that at ~0mph and ~0rpm, producing any kind of torque at all is done with ~0% efficiency, all just resistive losses as the back-EMF is effectively zero. (Note this is no different for an internal combustion engine, although the heat generated is in the clutch or similar such device...)

Friction losses don't change much as a proportion of power as you increase speed. For aerodynamic drag, however, your losses do proportionally increase with speed, so "windage" (i.e. drag from spinning parts of the motor) needs to be cleverly reduced by making the rotor aerodynamic if you're planning on operating at high rpm.

EDIT: for properly designed electric motors (i.e. thin wire windings, iron core optimized for low eddy current losses), coil resistance usually dominates even at high rpms.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#572

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…

You have been reading too many finance blogs. Their finances are far from a mess, they are just not what finance people like to see. They have cash on hand and a roadmap to execute on. If they don't execute they will go out of business, and they will take my money as an investor with them. I'm OK with that and as long as they continue to have a path to profitability I am all on board. I want to see them burning money…

> Their finances are far from a mess, they are just not what finance people like to see. They have cash on hand and a roadmap to execute on.

In other words, their finances are a mess. Negative free cash flow of $1.4b in the most recent quarter with $3.5b in the bank is cutting it very close. They're going to have to raise a ton more capital or issue debt just to execute on the Model 3, let alone all the other stuff they keep talking about (anyone remember the Solar Roof?). Their recently issued junk bonds are already trading off par, another issue is going to be expensive.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And how is the acceleration after 100 mph? This. If you're buying a supercar to actually drive on a track, this is key. Any specs relating to what happens below 100 mph are worthless. If you spend any significant percentage of time going so slow, you need to spend ~$8k on a BMW E36 M3 instead, and learn how to drive. But if you buy a supercar mainly to park in front of Harrods, 0-60 time is... still worthless.

Some truth to that. But some wrong too. I drive a 2004 330i; I track it. I get better times than most drivers who have much better 100-140 high speeds in the straights - despite me only getting to ~100. Of course, somehome a pro driver in a lowered 140hp toyota pickup truck can get better times than all of us.

Most people don't have the nerves to take high speed turns at the limit. I used to take a Lotus Elise to the track and it requires courage to look for the limit when you go 100mph+. Going straight is easy.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#574

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…

$250mil sounds a lot - until you remember they currently burn through $400mil of cash in a month

Re: Tesla Roadster

#575
Multiple Porsche owner here. The acceleration on the Roadster is great obviously, however the sound of a car (or in this case lack of it) is definitely a factor in the experience.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#576
post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll be amazed, amazzzzed , if that car, stock, can create enough down force to keep itself on the road with stock tires, I don't care how good your TC is. Look at the size of the wing on the new Zr1 https://youtu.be/O_adY_b-aLQ?t=3m14s

Downforce is more than the wing. You see those giant diffusers in the back? Those work as venturi tunnels, creating a sucking force, sticking the car down. As a matter of fact, F1 cars in the 70s-80s were using venturi tunnels that extended the entire length of the vehicle. This is impractical in a modern gasoline-powered car. Theu were even getting so good with their aerodynamics that they were rumoured to be genera…

And the Roadster doesn't have real side skirts to seal up the tunnel, which significantly degrades any diffuser downforce.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#577
post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's just so odd that their website has the ultra fake video to demonstrate the 1.9 second 0-60 time!

That's because the actual ones can't make that time.

They absolutely seem to, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXWfL-1ieuE for example...

Re: Tesla Roadster

#578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Agreed, but they don't need to be. Remember, the magic number here is ~1.4G, for a 1.9s 0-60. The Pilot Sport Cup 2 – a track-friendly R-compound tire used in the webcast car and in the videos – can pull close to that on a skidpad (i.e. less than optimal conditions), meaning the grip is there. That's lateral grip, which isn't the same at all. Longitudinal grip, which is what's important here, is very different. The…

> That's lateral grip, which isn't the same at all. [...] There's a lot of clever things you can do to increase lateral grip, such as wheel camber, that don't really apply to purely longitudinal grip, so I'm not sure this is valid. Camber isn't a magical trick to get more grip; it's a way to restore grip that would otherwise have been lost because of uneven tire loading in a corner. In a straight-line drive situation…

> Camber isn't a magical trick to get more grip; it's a way to restore grip that would otherwise have been lost because of uneven tire loading in a corner. In a straight-line drive situation, the load is already ideal; the contact patch is the maximum size and fairly evenly distributed across the width of the tire.

Mostly. But only mostly. Tire grip is actually really, really, really complex however, and this is one of the places where a simplistic model breaks down really badly. If we were able to model tires with simple newtonian physics, then no car would be able to hold more than 1g in a corner, as at that point the force sideways would be more than the force of gravity holding it to the road. Manifestly this is not actually the case.

Tire grip through a corner is more than just coefficient of friction against a surface. There's a lot of complicated things that happen, but the one I'm going to very lightly cover here is that when you go around a corner your tires deform slightly. The sidewall of the tire is pulled out of place, and at the maximum cornering speed of a tire, it will actually be slipping slightly (which can be heard as tire squeal). Cambering the tire corrects for uneven loading, but it also changes the sidewall stress profile, and thus affects the way the tire deforms under lateral load.

I found a mathematical explanation of some the bits mentioned above here: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/5838/why-does-a-... but I haven't checked carefully through it to ensure it's actually correct.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#579
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…

GM could probably release an EV 'vett-like car that puts down similar numbers if they cared to invest the money to do so.

Building fast cars that are a little rougher in finish but can hold their own on the track compared to cars that cost a few times as much is kind of their thing. The teams that work on the Bolt are probably crossing their fingers for this.

Re: Tesla Roadster

#580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The top speed is quoted as being in excess of 400km/h? They have the same problem with speed rating of the tyres. I'm also curious as to how much it will weigh given the batteries (given the weight of other Teslas).

one is a real car however, the other a rendering. I don't expect figures to change drastically from the brochure, but still.

The new Roadster is definitely real, not a render. They were driving them around, at speed, and showing off the acceleration, at the announcement!
Post reply on HN