[antzcrashing]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

[Please note I'm not a Greenie by any stretch and don't believe cars are killing the Earth]

My point is the electric car has been recently reintroduced mainly for the purpose to satisfy the left-leaning Green Peace types who believe the "carbon footprint" of automobiles is harming the environment and causing "Global Warming", or worst-yet-sounding... "Climate Change". With that ideology in mind, making an electric car with a high capacity for acceleration is counterproductive to the purpose of forcing the societal switchover to electric vehicles. The purpose of the EV is to reduce carbon emissions to prevent climate change, make the immediate atmospheric area around the vehicle more breathable, and to conserve energy. So EVs should have reasonable acceleration to safely meet current traffic requirements (i.e. not 0 - 60 in 3.2 seconds) and be as efficient as possible.

You stated we all are calling good on the forthcoming Tesla 3 all but for just knowing the price and not much else. Except that Tesla has stated the car will have a 200-mile range. Seeing that Tesla stated the S would have a 300-mile range (and it does in an ideal situation), we can believe Tesla when it says the 3 will have 200 miles. Now about the price of $35K. Based on Tesla's website you can get a base-model Model S for 57,500, but that's a bit of smoke and mirrors; being that the car is actually $75,000, then less the $7,500 tax rebate, and an estimated $10,000 in fuel savings over 5 years, so I'd expect the Tesla 3 to have a real price of around $53K.

To your point about the Tesla S and it's excellent acceleration capability, think about how more efficient the car could be without a 0 - 60 time of 3.2 seconds and the two motors needed to achieve it. The base version of the S makes 60 mph in 5.2 seconds, perhaps a second too fast if you wanted to trade the energy for for some more range. Tesla makes versions of the S to hit 60 MPH in 3.2 sec. to prove EVs don't have to be slow (your point), but for efficiency sakes it's too fast. That type of acceleration means chassis and suspension parts have to be robust (so as not to beak from the torque loading), and the brakes have to be bigger to slow the thing down (it does carry a very heavy battery) and the wheels bigger (heavier), etc. Make the S slower and some more weight can come out of it, which gains efficiency or range.

If the Tesla 3 gets to 60 MPH in 6 seconds to achieve a range of 200 miles and that requires a smaller battery that recharges to 80% in 20 minutes, then I could see buying one.

The 2017 Chevy Bolt looks promising in this regard too. I'm looking forward to the race between Tesla and GM to see who gets their car out first. My money is on GM.

Efthreeoh, thanks for the great post, you have clearly spent some careful consideration of the current and future electric offerings from Tesla GM and others, and therefore are not the type of person I was addressing in suggesting that the upcoming model 3 may be disappointing based and people's desire to 'have their cake and eat it too'. Your comment after the effective price of the model 3 I believe is right on point, and should tesla come out with a car like that in your proposed effective price range (53k starting), it will certainly be a consideration for many families that have good incomes, but to my point not a home-run/no brainer for anyone as many seem to be expecting.

To bring this back around to bmws electric offerings, bmw is playing it much more conservative and not banking on the high miles, big battery options like tesla because of the raw cost and infrastructure needs of a charging network. As of now BMWs offering dont have the attention or pizazz of teslas, but they may be better in the long run, especially if offering like the model 3 do not turn out to be widely successful. It will be very interesting in the next 5-10 years

[PopsnBurbles]

The i3 looks like a piece of turd

The i8 looks both amazing and horrendous depending on the angle (mostly good though) but sadly saddled with disappointing performance for what I thought it was going to be and how much it costs

The upcoming ToyotaBMW hybrid 2-door sports car looking thing seems to have potential as it has taken the good visual cues from the i8. Hopefully it has performance to back it up.

The SUV/SAV/Crossover concept art up there looks like crap

The other concept art is okay.

Why don't these manufacturers build a seriously good looking car (with seriously good performance) that's hybrid/EV? By hybrid, I mean hybrids with actual economic gain and/or serious performance advantage. No, the Activehybrids BMW has been putting out do not count because they lack either one of those. I'm only talking about affordable cars for the masses.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by antzcrashing

Efthreeoh, thanks for the great post, you have clearly spent some careful consideration of the current and future electric offerings from Tesla GM and others, and therefore are not the type of person I was addressing in suggesting that the upcoming model 3 may be disappointing based and people's desire to 'have their cake and eat it too'. Your comment after the effective price of the model 3 I believe is right on point, and should tesla come out with a car like that in your proposed effective price range (53k starting), it will certainly be a consideration for many families that have good incomes, but to my point not a home-run/no brainer for anyone as many seem to be expecting.

To bring this back around to bmws electric offerings, bmw is playing it much more conservative and not banking on the high miles, big battery options like tesla because of the raw cost and infrastructure needs of a charging network. As of now BMWs offering dont have the attention or pizazz of teslas, but they may be better in the long run, especially if offering like the model 3 do not turn out to be widely successful. It will be very interesting in the next 5-10 years

Thanks. My interest in electrics has to do with getting off the gasoline grid, where the price fluctuation just becomes annoying. I look at everything as a lifecycle cost. EVs are not yet there. Google "GE Electrak". My Dad was a first adopter. Excellent machine it was.

[Forbes]

A big i3?

[David70]

Originally Posted by C17MooseDriver

If you think the current supercharging network is only for emergencies, then you are seriously behind on what Tesla has accomplished. Plus, they are adding to their super charger network every year.

There's plenty of YouTube videos of people driving their Teslas coast to coast, without spending a dime on gas. I think that shows it's quite practical. It just takes some planning but it's no where considered an "emergency" to use the supercharging network

Being able to do something doesn't make it practical. I have run 26 miles in marathons but it doesn't mean it is a reasonable way to get somewhere. Also, the only reason it is free right now is Tesla is paying for the land, facility, taxes, maintenance, electricity, etc. at some point they will need to charge for it. There are about 160,000 gas stations and less than 500 Tesla charging stations, odds of it being where you want it is extremely unlikely.

I can imagine this trip with the family. For the first leg we will be driving 170 miles to the next charging station today, we could go farther but we wouldn't make it to the next charger after it. There are two in the next city, they aren't on the our route but that's ok. Also, since we didn't start on time (supposed to leave at 8:00, now it is 10:00), we will be having lunch at 2:00 and don't worry about what you want for lunch, we will plug in, look around and start walking.

[C17MooseDriver]

Originally Posted by David70

Being able to do something doesn't make it practical. I have run 26 miles in marathons but it doesn't mean it is a reasonable way to get somewhere. Also, the only reason it is free right now is Tesla is paying for the land, facility, taxes, maintenance, electricity, etc. at some point they will need to charge for it. There are about 160,000 gas stations and less than 500 Tesla charging stations, odds of it being where you want it is extremely unlikely.

I can imagine this trip with the family. For the first leg we will be driving 170 miles to the next charging station today, we could go farther but we wouldn't make it to the next charger after it. There are two in the next city, they aren't on the our route but that's ok. Also, since we didn't start on time (supposed to leave at 8:00, now it is 10:00), we will be having lunch at 2:00 and don't worry about what you want for lunch, we will plug in, look around and start walking.

I'm not quite sure why you don't think it's practical? People use the super charger everyday. You just need some planning ahead of time if you're driving far distances.

As for normal everyday driving, a tesla will go over 200 miles so you just need to charge it at home.

And Elon Musk has already said the super Chargers will be free for life. I'm sure the cost of those super chargers are already built into the price of these cars

You need to think outside the box, if your driving normally, your house is a gas station. The super chargers are mainly if your driving long distances.

[David70]

Originally Posted by C17MooseDriver

I'm not quite sure why you don't think it's practical? People use the super charger everyday. You just need some planning ahead of time if you're driving far distances.

As for normal everyday driving, a tesla will go over 200 miles so you just need to charge it at home.

And Elon Musk has already said the super Chargers will be free for life. I'm sure the cost of those super chargers are already built into the price of these cars

You need to think outside the box, if your driving normally, your house is a gas station. The super chargers are mainly if your driving long distances.

There is not enough benefit for most people to deal with it. I can see having a Tesla as a second car where you use the gas car for long trips but in a two car family I don't see one ICE going away.

I picture my drive from Cincinnati to Cleveland. Tesla couldn't make it the whole way (270 miles) so instead of a 4 hour drive to the hotel in Cleveland I need to drive to Columbus, find the charger, sit there for 30 minutes, then drive to Cleveland and drive to the charger and sit there for 30 minutes (if I don't charge up I will never make it around town and then back to Columbus). Then on way home I stop again in Columbus and charge for 30 minutes. Even if the chargers were exactly where I wanted them to be (like a gas station) I would still have driven for 8 hours and spent over an hour and half recharging. This would be the ideal if the Superchargers were exactly where I wanted them to be.

With a family, and buying a $65k Tesla, they aren't going to be willing to spend an hour and a half at recharging stations when this used to take 10 minutes total (5 at each station). Especially when there isn't a real financial benefit to this family (their level of income makes the gas irrelevant to their finances).

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by David70

There is not enough benefit for most people to deal with it. I can see having a Tesla as a second car where you use the gas car for long trips but in a two car family I don't see one ICE going away.

I picture my drive from Cincinnati to Cleveland. Tesla couldn't make it the whole way (270 miles) so instead of a 4 hour drive to the hotel in Cleveland I need to drive to Columbus, find the charger, sit there for 30 minutes, then drive to Cleveland and drive to the charger and sit there for 30 minutes (if I don't charge up I will never make it around town and then back to Columbus). Then on way home I stop again in Columbus and charge for 30 minutes. Even if the chargers were exactly where I wanted them to be (like a gas station) I would still have driven for 8 hours and spent over an hour and half recharging. This would be the ideal if the Superchargers were exactly where I wanted them to be.

With a family, and buying a $65k Tesla, they aren't going to be willing to spend an hour and a half at recharging stations when this used to take 10 minutes total (5 at each station). Especially when there isn't a real financial benefit to this family (their level of income makes the gas irrelevant to their finances).

This is exactly the point. And you're assuming there is an open (unoccupied) charging "pump" when you arrive at the Supercharger station.

I don't think it is available within the laws of chemistry and physics to ever be able to recharge an electrical battery (of even a composition not yet invented) at the rate a petrol-powered automobile can be recharged for an equal amount of range. I think the energy density of gasoline/diesel is just too hard to overcome to ever have an electrical battery powered EV reach near equivalency. Sure, one can use a Tesla for longer distances than its battery range provides with careful planning, but that's the point "careful planning". Sometimes the randomness of life gets in the way of careful planning. Petrol-powered automobiles have such a great surplus of range, combined with convenient (availability and speed of recharging), that any anomaly which may perturb a planned route of travel is easily overcome. Battery EV's are heavily handicapped by anomalies of the universe.

What manufacturers should be working on is vastly increasing the efficiency of the internal combustion engine, or inventing a more efficient method of converting the stored energy in petrol fuels to kinetic energy.

For my specific daily commute of 160 miles round trip, I am seriously considering a 2017/2018 purchase of an EV. The Tesla 3 and Chevy Bolt are on my replacement list for the E90. But I have 3 other ICE-power vehicles that are highly range-supportive of my other transportation needs (like last Sunday and the 250-mile day my Wife and I spent ripping around the Virginia countryside in the Z4 - with just one 5-minute fill up, because we started out with 35 miles left in the tank ).