The Oil Drum | DrumBeat: March 26, 2007

102 comments on DrumBeat: March 26, 2007

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Show without comments | PDF version

Donal on March 26, 2007 - 10:23am

Tesla Motors claims it's taken 350 deposits for their Lotus Elise-based, lithium ion-propelled, $92k Roadster. Despite this success, Tesla's hyper-exotic may be nothing more than hype-fuelled vaporware. The company refuses to allow any independent product evaluation. Even before they've delivered a single Roadster, they're promising two additional, mass market electric vehicles– whose enabling technology is, at best, under-developed. Meanwhile, they've raised $60m in venture capital and scored $20m in state subsidies a new New Mexican factory. To find out if the Tesla Roadster is keeping it real for planet Earth, or DeLorean/Tucker redux, we sent our man Shoemaker to Tesla for a "test drive."

... the Roadster houses 6831 lithium ion cells. The battery pack weighs 900 pounds and costs $20k to replace (try not to misplace it Bond). Tesla rates the four pole electric motor at 248 horsepower. It can be charged in six hours (if your home has 30 - 40 Amps of power) or as little as three hours (if you’re rigged with 90 Amps). Although the Roadster’s maximum range is 250 miles, the company says spirited driving will yield “substantially less.”

Before we share Shoemaker’s “driving” impressions, keep in mind that all these numbers reflect Tesla's ambitions, not demonstrable reality. Again, no independent organization has evaluated any aspect of the Roadster's performance or construction. While Tesla Motors is happy admitting their Roadster's range could be “substantially less” than advertised, anyone thinking about buying a Roadster should consider those words carefully. Would you purchase a sports car that can only drive 90 miles between 12 hour recharges?

Tesla admirers/intenders also note: our man was not allowed behind the wheel. Indeed, all Tesla’s media coverage has been carefully supervised and controlled. While "you can't touch this" restrictions are not unknown in an industry that produces million dollar plus prototypes, there are plenty of electric car companies happy to let responsible journos do what responsible journos are supposed to do.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=3383

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

thomas deplume on March 26, 2007 - 12:12pm

Donal,
Good job of quoting others. Do you have any original thoughts about what you quoted?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Donal on March 26, 2007 - 12:35pm

tom deplume is a good contributor - I assume you're just a troll ripping off his clever name. Time for todban.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

RBM on March 26, 2007 - 1:44pm

Donal,

Thanks for the update on Tesla. I think you quoted the high points regardless of the suspect troll's comment.

IIRC, this company was the result of a split between 2 guys who had a partnership. It's still on ongoing story and well worth keeping an eye on. The limited comments I read underscores the bugs that will have to be worked out, like the LiIon battery choice.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

chemE on March 26, 2007 - 2:22pm

I am unable to understand the message that you are trying to convey with your write-up.

Is there a larger warning buried in the message ?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Donal on March 26, 2007 - 3:16pm

Not at all - go ahead and put down your deposit :-)

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

capslock on March 26, 2007 - 2:17pm

Hmm . . . Well, Tesla himself was the Father of Vaporware. I had no idea before that article that they weren't already cranking those cars out and that no one was even allowed to drive the prototype.

If any one out there is keeping track, one of the most bizarre vaporware car stories was the Dale.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

jokuhl on March 26, 2007 - 8:32pm

Can't comment on these cars yet, but I'd say Tesla's 120v60hz is some firmware that's worn pretty well, and the math underlying its 3-phase generation was done in his head, so the story goes. I'd say the stuff he 'supposedly' invented has been pretty well justified by the things he actually accomplished.

-First Radio controlled boat, central park, 190?
-Fluorescent Lighting

etc, etc.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

RBM on March 26, 2007 - 9:12pm

"Father of Vaporware" was so outlandish to me that I held back from posting. I don't own any of the many books written about Tesla and it's been decades since I've done the kind of reading required to addequately refute the label.

I would be surprised if a large portion of this particular board's readership was well informed of Tesla's contributions. Most here seem to have a high degree of formal education in the sciences, which I certainly don't. That can create a tunnel vision.

Your points are just the obvious contributions of his career. The non-obvious is what was taken by the Yugoslav authorities after the FBI took what they wanted.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Donal on March 26, 2007 - 9:27pm

Caps, your link takes me to some website where math geeks argue about curves all day.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

DIYer on March 27, 2007 - 8:51am

He probably meant to post this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dale_%28automobile%29

I see that Wikipedia has a whole category for them, with several hundred entries.

The problem will solve itself.

But not in a nice way.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Laurence Aurbach on March 26, 2007 - 5:57pm

The most recent post from the Tesla Motors blog seems to contradict most of that article.

Excerpt from Tesla Roadster Progress - From EP to VP:

So, it’s one VP [Validation Prototype] built and nine others on their way. Why would we want nine more? Yup, you’ve guessed. Four of them get the pleasure of a short life – they are sacrificed for the final validation crash testing. It is necessary to confirm that none of the detail-level changes has invalidated the crash performance we achieved with the EPs [Engineering Prototypes]. Crash testing is always in the spotlight but there are numerous FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) that also need to be tested and reported. These include low speed bumper impacts, lighting, demist/defog, and field of view from mirrors. Even the powered windows need to meet FMVSS requirements.

Durability testing of the Tesla Roadster must also be repeated, since we need to ensure that the latest iteration of parts that are destined for production meet our stringent life expectancy requirements. Then there is the dynamic tuning of the many vehicle systems to be finalized.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Donal on March 26, 2007 - 6:56pm

I don't see the contradiction. TTAC said Tesla has no cars available for them to review, and the Tesla blog says:

These VPs will also be used for “first drive” reviews by major car magazines and other members of the media.

Tesla has built one "validation prototype" and must build several more before journalists have something to drive and review. That is way behind where I thought they were from reading Green Car Congress blurbs.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

solar1 on March 26, 2007 - 8:36pm

Hmmmmm.......... Donal, Thanks for the post. There is a very similar car called the TZero that operates and looks about the same. It has well documented acceleration and range, about the same as the Tesla, I believe. It is not vapor, although there are no plans to put it into production that I have heard of. You can go to their official web site at: http://www.acpropulsion.com/tzero/ The Tzero has raced and beaten supercars, so Tesla can do the same. As with any cutting-edge product, they will have their problems. I hope it isn't vapor.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Squalish on March 27, 2007 - 1:14am

???

The Tzero defines vaporware. It's expected to go into production in 2002, according to their site. They've been pushing it for a solid decade, since '97. Their next car is expected to begin volume production in 2005.

It's 2007 and they JUST managed a standard EV hack of a scion Xb, and sold it to Tom Hanks.

This shit isn't rocket science. Ask the many amateurs that have built EVs on a shoestring budget. It's all about getting things into volume production, in a nice package, at a cheap price. Materials science produces the breakthroughs, a car only benefits anyone when it actually uses said breakthroughs in a commercially successful package.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Engineer-Poet on March 27, 2007 - 2:14am

AC Propulsion only built a few tzeros, and has no plans to sell them. Straight from your own link:

The tzero is not for sale. It is a concept & development vehicle to demonstrate that cars could be both fast and efficient. AC Propulsion built three prototype tzeros, and considered selling tzeros to the public, but production plans were dropped in mid-2003. All three tzeros still run and continue to delight those who drive them. Beyond those lucky few, the tzero exerts its influence through new electric vehicles whose creation it has inspired.

Those vehicles include the Tesla roadster and the E3 Enigma.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Laurence Aurbach on March 26, 2007 - 10:02pm

The article says the Tesla is vaporware, has not been independently tested, and has not proven safety, range, reliability, battery life or build quality. The article asserts the battery is unsafe. It says the Tesla should be considered nothing more than a toy.

However, those assertions appear to be incorrect.

The Tesla prototype has undergone independent Motor Industry Research Association (MIRA) durability testing, including 1-hour pavé, 25,000-mile durability, and environmental heating and chilling.

The journalist passenger confirmed that the car's acceleration seemed to match claimed specs.

The battery system has multiple redundant and passive safety cutouts that prevent ignition-type failures. The company claims the car meets all Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. This of course cannot be independently verified until a production model is available for crash testing. In fact, the Tesla's program of crash testing is the strongest argument that the vehicle is not a toy.

Tesla has always been clear and open about its development schedule. Notwithstanding any impressions you may have gotten from the media, the company is meeting the milestones it promised to investors and first-round customers.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Donal on March 27, 2007 - 8:42am

To be precise, TTAC said Tesla *may be* vaporware, and that *until* it is independently reviewed, the Tesla should be considered another concept car or a *fabulous* toy.

Given the track record of EVs, I think those are reasonable cautions.

In any case, after a long exchange of comments between TTAC and a Tesla VP, and many others, they've edited out the v-word and lightened the cautionary tone - a bit. If you're a fan of the EV, I'd strongly recommend reading these comments.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.