Tesla Model S range

This is a quote from the article below:

The Superchargers can charge the Model S cars with 100 kilowatts of power and provide three hours of driving at 60 mph in about half an hour.

Click to expand...

So that means the Model S can go 180 miles in three hours, recharge in half an hour and go another 180 miles. That's damn impressive. I'm hoping the techies here can provide some detail on how Tesla has achieved this. Is heat and battery degradation not an issue for the Model S battery? Is Tesla not disclosing that it is an issue? How does the Tesla supercharger differ from the level III charger we're familiar with? I'm very curious about this.

Thanks!

http://gigaom.com/cleantech/tesla-u...red-car-charging-stations-for-model-s-owners/

See also this about the superchargers:

http://gigaom.com/cleantech/now-live-teslas-solar-powered-superchargers-in-cali/

Not to be a spoiler, but isn't the base price on one of these like $85k, and the super charged model is probably $140k...that's how they do it. Pile on the cost.

They use a lot of batteries and I believe their charging apparatus is not compatible with the norm. The technology is there...it's just a matter of cost.

The model s with the 60 kwh battery starts at $60k.

http://www.teslamotors.com/models/options

These videos provide some answers:

http://translogic.aolautos.com/2012...charger-stations-free-energy-for-model-s-own/

http://translogic.aolautos.com/2012/09/24/translogic-113-tesla-model-s/

Apparently the supercharger pack will be included in the model with the 60 kwh battery, but it isn't clear if that's included in the listed $60k price. The supercharger looks like completely new technology, but I'm still curious about heat management and battery degradation.

Believe me, I'm not a potential customer for this car, but this car and associated technology moves ev's by leaps. This is not a baby step. The charging stations are solar powered and Tesla is promising fee charging. So, once you buy the model s, you never have to pay to drive, your miles are free and don't produce any pollution. That would be amazing.

I'm all for advancement of the technology...but there are some unrealistic things here.

No way are that many solar panels are going to charge 4 or 5 Teslas in 30 minutes. Especially not in the rain or at night. The solar panels are a rouse to make the technology look sexy.

Those super charge stations are in a very narrow corridor on the west coast. No way you are going to get nationwide acceptance of this car. Yeah...get free juice, but I've got to drive it to the west coast. No way Tesla is going to be able to build and maintain a few thousand stations across the country without charging for power, even with the high price they charge for the car.

Home charging would require more juice than the average home can provide and different style EVSEs. And to get the fastest charge at home, Tesla recommends two chargers. Costs would be way out of line...but if you bought the Tesla, I guess cost is not a concern.

Personally, I think EV makers should concentrate on affordable cars that can manage the range of a daily commuter and build from there, ala the Leaf and iMiev. Just because you can build a better mousetrap doesn't mean it will catch on.

Hi fjpod, I'm afraid I have to disagree with you regarding the logic of what Tesla is doing -

fjpod said:

...No way are that many solar panels are going to charge 4 or 5 Teslas in 30 minutes. Especially not in the rain or at night. The solar panels are a rouse to make the technology look sexy.

Click to expand...

The solar array is grid-tied and the writeup says they're net energy positive, which I'm sure they will be for quite a while. It's the grid that provides the peak power to simultaneously charge multiple vehicles.

fjpod said:

Those super charge stations are in a very narrow corridor on the west coast. No way you are going to get nationwide acceptance of this car. Yeah...get free juice, but I've got to drive it to the west coast. No way Tesla is going to be able to build and maintain a few thousand stations across the country without charging for power, even with the high price they charge for the car.

Click to expand...

Californians travel either up or down the state, or drive east via two corridors (Lake Tahoe/Reno or Las Vegas). Tesla's strategic placement of the six supercharging stations meets those needs. What they do elsewhere will depend on sales in other areas, but there certainly will be no need for 'thousands'. In the meantime, 240v 50A is readily available nationwide in RV parks.

The superchargers satisfy the needs of those few who wish to travel longer distances in their EVs in California. Perhaps more importantly for all of us, the Tesla S takes away the (innumerates' perception) arguments regarding range of EVs.

fjpod said:

Home charging would require more juice than the average home can provide and different style EVSEs. And to get the fastest charge at home, Tesla recommends two chargers. Costs would be way out of line...but if you bought the Tesla, I guess cost is not a concern.

Click to expand...

Just as most of us get by using the wimpy Mitsubishi 8A L1 EVSE for most (if not all) of our charging needs, the Tesla can easily use a relatively low-power EVSE at home for all their local driving needs.

fjpod said:

Personally, I think EV makers should concentrate on affordable cars that can manage the range of a daily commuter and build from there, ala the Leaf and iMiev. Just because you can build a better mousetrap doesn't mean it will catch on.

Click to expand...

Our iMiEV wonderfully meets most-everyone's commuter needs TODAY, and of course we all wish it had a lower front-end pricetag. The Tesla S meets the needs of those wishing an upscale attractive conventional-looking vehicle which addresses the primary argument against EVs - range.

Henry Ford popularized the ICE automobile in America, by making a car that was affordable to the masses...the Model T He was purported to have said, "You can have any color you want as long as it's black".

fjpod, I share your opinion that lowering the purchase price will be the best single factor for popularizing EVs, as Tesla has taken away the range argument. Unless manufacturers decide it's not in their economic interests to have pure EVs (note Honda and Toyota drawbacks), I'm pretty sure we'll get there as the EV should be cheaper to build than an ICE once the battery costs come down. For the battery's sake, I just hope that single color is white and not black.

JoeS said:

The superchargers satisfy the needs of those few who wish to travel longer distances in their EVs in California. Perhaps more importantly for all of us, the Tesla S takes away the (innumerates' perception) arguments regarding range of EVs.

Click to expand...

This. If Tesla can prove to the general public that ev's can get you anywhere you want to go, just like and ice, then wow, what a change in buyer psychology. And it's a luxury car at $60k which is not unreasonable for a luxury ice car. So, for the luxury market, this is a serious competitor even without any tax rebates.

But more than this, if the price for this car enables Tesla to make a profit, then the same car with the luxuries stripped should result in a mid-priced car affordable to many that also can avoid the range anxiety issues. Imagine a 40K car that allows you to go 180 miles in 3 hours and fully recharges in 1/2 an hour, giving you another 180 miles in range. We paid $10k less for a car that doesn't come close to that range. I think that if what is delivered actually meets what's promised, then this is great news for ev's. I'm excited.

The Superchargers will be free for the Tesla drivers, by the way. There will be enough solar PV panels to generate more power than the Super chargers use, so this is probably how they pay for it.

The Tesla Model S is a halo car for all EV's. They are very high performance -- perhaps the best performing 5 seat sedan, period. They look great -- anybody would be thrilled to drive one. So their price is actually pretty good; especially when you consider the low cost of driving them (just like any EV).

Tesla will start selling the Model X next year, and the Model E (their lowest cost model) will be out a year or so after that. I believe the Model E is intended to be ~$25K or so.

JoeS said:

fjpod, I share your opinion that lowering the purchase price will be the best single factor for popularizing EVs, as Tesla has taken away the range argument

Click to expand...

I agree . . . . and the only real holdup to lower priced EV's is developing lower cost batteries - And to improve range, those batteries should also have higher energy densities. A lighter car with the same storage capacity will certainly go further

. . . . I'm pretty sure we'll get there as the EV should be cheaper to build than an ICE once the battery costs come down.

Click to expand...

. . . . and the way to build cheaper batteries is to build LOTS more of them, which means someone needs to buy EV's in the meantime to increase the demand. Imagine how expensive flat panel HD TV's would still be if they were only selling a few thousand of them per year. They're selling for a small fraction of what they did when they were first introduced . . . . and they're lighter and more compact now too

Pricewise, modern EV's are about 50% electronics and that's the really good news - Nothing comes down in price faster than electronics . . . . the more you sell, the quicker the prices fall. Remember when a Gig of memory cost a hundred bucks? Now it's only a buck or two

Don

I wish Tesla all the luck in the world, BUT...raising the cost is not going to be good for the long term survival of the company. It's not like people are clamoring to buy BEVs. It is a niche market right now, and barring a total shutoff of oil from the MidEast, it will not expand enough to squeeze out ICEs anytime soon.

Battery cost will come down. Established BEV makers like Nissan, Mitsubishi, and maybe Ford and Toyota, will crank up the competitive pressures within 5 years. There will be a "race for the bottom"(in price). We've seen this time and time again in computers, cell phones, flatscreens, and yes, even in ICEs.

Even expensive car companies like Mercedes now produce "cheap" models affordable by even poor people, especially when you consider leasing. This had made the Mercedes name mainstream affordable. I think if Mercedes tried to market a high-end BEV, that would make more sense. They have the wealth and reputation to develop and sustain such a vehicle while trying to gain public acceptance.

I think it is a mistake that in this relatively early stage of BEV development and roll-out, that a company should roll the dice on producing a super BEV, that "is just like an ICE" when that goal is not realistically affordable right now.

I think manufacturers, should concentrate on cars that are daily drivers. Most Americans drive less than 50 miles per day. Sell a lot of them and force cost efficient development of the technology which will then lead to 100 and 200 mile range cars. Tesla, IMHO, is trying to put the cart before the horse.

In any case, I enjoy gasoline free driving 90% of the time right now, with a "reasonably" priced car. I'm willing to spend a little extra for the technology, but not willing to go overboard on capacity that I rarely need.

If a few people want to buy high priced luxury cars...I think most of them are going to buy ICEs.

fjpod said:

In any case, I enjoy gasoline free driving 90% of the time right now, with a "reasonably" priced car. I'm willing to spend a little extra for the technology, but not willing to go overboard on capacity that I rarely need.

Click to expand...

I think you hit the nail squarely on the head. I wouldn't be interested in paying $10K more for an EV which can go twice as far as the iMiEV we currently have, because it would only reduce that remaining 10% to maybe only 6 or 8% - Too little gain for the extra $$$

I *think* most folks don't yet have an idea of what percentage of their ICE trips could be done using a 50 mile EV - If they did, there would be lots more of them sold

The new Chevy Volt commercials seem to bear this out - "We haven't been to a gas station with our Chevy Volt for 3 or 4 months." Translated, that means "We bought the wrong car." If you're only getting 30 to 40 miles of EV range (and that obviously suffices most of your needs) because you're lugging around an engine and a gas tank you very seldom use, think how far you could go if you cut out all that dead weight!

Don

We will soon see several other EV's on the road: Chevy Spark EV, Smart Electric Drive, BMW i3, Honda Fit EV, Fiat 500e, and hopefully Ford sells a lot more Focus EV's. The 2013 Leaf will gain about 10-12 miles range with efficiency gains in the heater and motor and inverter, etc.

The Model S is a great "halo car" for all EV's. Remember, driving a Model S is about the same cost to drive as a $25K vehicle that only gets 15mpg; over 200K miles. So it does cost a lot up front, it costs a lot less over time. The Supercharger system will be *free* for Tesla drivers. And Tesla will come out with a 4 seat Model C in 2014 or so; that is expected to cost under $30K or so.

This is exciting stuff - Tesla Model S - Super Carros

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmVtfBBYdZA

A 45 minute video on designing and building the Model S.