[The Final Dakar]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/au...way.html?_r=1&

Looking back, I should have bought a membership to Butch’s and spent a few hours there while the car charged. The displayed range never reached the number of miles remaining to Milford, and as I limped along at about 45 miles per hour I saw increasingly dire dashboard warnings to recharge immediately. Mr. Merendino, the product planner, found an E.V. charging station about five miles away.

But the Model S had other ideas. “Car is shutting down,” the computer informed me. I was able to coast down an exit ramp in Branford, Conn., before the car made good on its threat.

A Most Peculiar Test Drive | Blog | Tesla Motors

Here is a summary of the key facts:

• As the State of Charge log shows, the Model S battery never ran out of energy at any time, including when Broder called the flatbed truck.

• The final leg of his trip was 61 miles and yet he disconnected the charge cable when the range display stated 32 miles. He did so expressly against the advice of Tesla personnel and in obvious violation of common sense.

• In his article, Broder claims that “the car fell short of its projected range on the final leg.” Then he bizarrely states that the screen showed “Est. remaining range: 32 miles” and the car traveled “51 miles," contradicting his own statement (see images below). The car actually did an admirable job exceeding its projected range. Had he not insisted on doing a nonstop 61-mile trip while staring at a screen that estimated half that range, all would have been well. He constructed a no-win scenario for any vehicle, electric or gasoline.

• On that leg, he drove right past a public charge station while the car repeatedly warned him that it was very low on range.

• Cruise control was never set to 54 mph as claimed in the article, nor did he limp along at 45 mph. Broder in fact drove at speeds from 65 mph to 81 mph for a majority of the trip and at an average cabin temperature setting of 72 F.

• At the point in time that he claims to have turned the temperature down, he in fact turned the temperature up to 74 F.

• The charge time on his second stop was 47 mins, going from -5 miles (reserve power) to 209 miles of Ideal or 185 miles of EPA Rated Range, not 58 mins as stated in the graphic attached to his article. Had Broder not deliberately turned off the Supercharger at 47 mins and actually spent 58 mins Supercharging, it would have been virtually impossible to run out of energy for the remainder of his stated journey.

• For his first recharge, he charged the car to 90%. During the second Supercharge, despite almost running out of energy on the prior leg, he deliberately stopped charging at 72%. On the third leg, where he claimed the car ran out of energy, he stopped charging at 28%. Despite narrowly making each leg, he charged less and less each time. Why would anyone do that?

• The above helps explain a unique peculiarity at the end of the second leg of Broder’s trip. When he first reached our Milford, Connecticut Supercharger, having driven the car hard and after taking an unplanned detour through downtown Manhattan to give his brother a ride, the display said "0 miles remaining." Instead of plugging in the car, he drove in circles for over half a mile in a tiny, 100-space parking lot. When the Model S valiantly refused to die, he eventually plugged it in. On the later legs, it is clear Broder was determined not to be foiled again.

[OAW]

Assuming these logs are legit .... then sounds like Broder "has some s'plainin to do!"

And I absolutely love that line ...... "in obvious violation of common sense." Awesome!

OAW

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Awesome. A car that logs test reviewers? Beautiful idea - far too many car reviews are clearly based around the manufacturers' press release or have some other clear bias.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Awesome. A car that logs test reviewers?

He only started doing it because apparently reviewers giving Tesla the shaft (pun intended). Supposedly the reviewer was told too.

[freudling]

I agree with Elon on the one hand. IF his logs are true, then the Journalist provided some inaccurate information. Notice I'm not saying "false"... is it intentional? It's not clear.

On the other hand, Elon is really splitting hairs. He reminds me of every engineer I've ever worked with. Stubborn to a fault. You know what Elon? He might not have ran out of juice if he followed your every instruction. But his deviations were slight... unfortunately, they can result in major consequences... because range sucks so bad... and because it takes so long to re-energize a battery... and because of a lack of infrastructure... a person can't be near as free as they are with a gas powered vehicle.

What I take away is that, unless you adhere to a very strict checklist and confine your travels to a strict path, range anxiety and tow trucks abound.

Elon, does it really matter that he took a detour to pick up his brother? Actually, I'm glad he did... because that's real world testing. And imagine if he didn't have a "checklist" of dos and don'ts...

Overall, this shows that while the Model S is a pretty cool car with high range for an electric, it's still very flawed with a lack of infrastructure. I realize he's trying to change that... but with the massive cost (~$80 k for the full package/large battery), electronic vehicles are still rich toys.

After $400 million spent on the Model S and years of development... with the Tesla Roadster retired from production... I question how long this company can continue. Surely the Model S isn't going to pay its bills, and they've tapped every investment they could to date and are burning money daily.

The two biggest problems for Tesla are:

1. Range and infrastructure, which go hand-in-hand; and
2. Manufacturing.

For point 2, they're dog bloody slow. They can't make them nearly fast enough. Tesla has struggled with this forever... and Elon is a moron for not making this his number 1 priority next to battery technology. 1 year wait for a Model S? Oh no... not this again... Is Arnold in front of you in the line?

Come on Elon, wake up. Steve Jobs managed to build an automated factory to produce the original Macintosh. Some have said that Apple's greatest success wasn't the Macintosh itself, but the manufacturing plant and process they built to automate the production of the Macintosh. So they could supply enough units to meet demand and get some real revenues going. And Steve Jobs was largely credited with inventing a lot of that manufacturing.

Tesla is in a load of trouble. If you look at their last SEC filing from November, they lost about $110 on operations (on $50 mil. in revenues) and were, at that point, in debt about $25 mil.

They're expanding dealerships, etc., yet they're losing money. Elon, stop. Get your manufacturing in order to sell on volume.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Actually, I'm glad he did... because that's real world testing.

In the real world do you often drive circles in parking lots on zero fuel, and when refueling stop before putting enough in to take you to your next destination?

Edit: God damnit, the troll got me

[BLAZE_MkIV]

He could have easily made the article about the charge / range issue without coming close to fabricating anything if he simple contracted what he had to do for the Model S compared to another gas car he has driven in a similar situation. The problem with that is someone griping about how long it tales to charge an electric car, while useful information for the public to have, is salacious enough for the "news" getting reported today.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

In the real world do you often drive circles in parking lots on zero fuel, and when refueling stop before putting enough in to take you to your next destination?

Edit: God damnit, the troll got me

Yes, I do drive around in circles in the real world, sometimes...

[mattyb]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Edit: God damnit, the troll got me

freudling, the one and only person on my ignore list.

[mattyb]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

He only started doing it because apparently reviewers giving Tesla the shaft (pun intended). Supposedly the reviewer was told too.

Tesla need to get proof of this. Reminds me of the Suzuki Jeep tipping thing that happened a few years ago.

[OAW]

Splitting hairs? Surely you jest?

This bears repeating .....

The final leg of his trip was 61 miles and yet he disconnected the charge cable when the range display stated 32 miles. He did so expressly against the advice of Tesla personnel and in obvious violation of common sense.

I mean seriously? Who does that? If you had a gasoline powered vehicle and were driving across the Mojave desert where the next gas station was 200 miles away ..... would you put 100 miles worth of gas in the car? Do you consider that a "slight deviation" from the posted warning sign on the side of the highway?

OAW

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by mattyb 

freudling, the one and only person on my ignore list.

O RLY?

Originally Posted by mattyb 

Tesla need to get proof of this. Reminds me of the Suzuki Jeep tipping thing that happened a few years ago.

Tesla need proof of what? To me its immaterial whether they warned him his actions were being recorded or not.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Assuming these logs are legit .... then sounds like Broder "has some s'plainin to do!"

Not just Broder, but the NYT. He's staff and they should have vetted the article.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Assuming these logs are legit .... then sounds like Broder "has some s'plainin to do!"

And I absolutely love that line ...... "in obvious violation of common sense." Awesome!

OAW

No doubt.

I own one of these things. So far it's been more reliable than any other new car we've purchased, and my wife drives the s*** out of it. 60-90mi every day. Plus, now that it actively reminds her, she never forgets to plug it in at night. I'd rather fight a rabid tiger with my bare hands than try to take it away from her.

[mattyb]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Tesla need proof of what? To me its immaterial whether they warned him his actions were being recorded or not.

Proof that the reviewer was told to shaft Tesla. Isn't that what you wrote?

[mattyb]

lol, I missed an 'o'.

Told too.

Told to.

Go on Dakar, insult away. You know you want to.

[BLAZE_MkIV]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

No doubt.
I'd rather fight a rabid tiger with my bare hands than try to take it away from her.

Until the crossover model comes out that is.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by mattyb 

lol, I missed an 'o'.

Told too.

Told to.

Go on Dakar, insult away. You know you want to.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV 

Until the crossover model comes out that is.

She prefers cars, as is proper, not SUV wannabes.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Splitting hairs? Surely you jest?

This bears repeating .....



I mean seriously? Who does that? If you had a gasoline powered vehicle and were driving across the Mojave desert where the next gas station was 200 miles away ..... would you put 100 miles worth of gas in the car? Do you consider that a "slight deviation" from the posted warning sign on the side of the highway?

OAW

We get it. Everyone can see that what the reporter reported, SOME of it was inaccurate. The few examples cited doesn't detract away from the main point to walk away from all of this... and that's the fact that the car still has range issues and the charging infrastructure is very weak. And it's expensive. That anyone driving this car is severely limited in where they can drive and how they drive their commute.

This is a car that costs over $72 k loaded (after government subsidy). And when I say loaded, I really mean the model that has the largest capacity batteries. The entry level is $53 k (after government subsidy) or about $60 k without the subsidy. The entry has about a 50% less capacity than the $73 k model. The entry level takes you up to 160 miles on a charge. That's pretty good for range, but bloody expensive for the car because the range is still pretty weak.

That's a very high cost for this car. The Nissan Leaf, although a much simpler car with less range (~83 miles on a charge), goes for $29 k, and that's before any government subsidies. With subsidies it's about ~$22 k. These are the prices electrics need to get down to to get volume... and the range needs to really go up.

The problem for Tesla is they're bleeding money and their debt is rising everyday yet they can't make any money off the Model S. It's a neverending pit of expenses because they can't produce enough volume. They'll need, on my estimate after reviewing their financials, about another $500 million asap to carry them another year. Their SUV is still a couple of years away, so the Model S is pretty much all they have. The expenses their bleeding on selling the Model S... for every Model S they sell, their operating expenses are about double the price of the sale of the car. In other words, for every $50 million in revenue, there's $100 million in expenses. It's insane.

Not only do they need a ton of cash to get production going much faster, they need to invest hundreds of millions into their SUV still. If I were Elon, I'd be throwing everything into volume production, because there're enough suckers out there waiting in line to buy the Model S.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Awesome. A car that logs test reviewers? Beautiful idea - far too many car reviews are clearly based around the manufacturers' press release or have some other clear bias.

Pretty much all media fleet cars have the equivalent of black boxes that broadcast back to the manufacturer, if for no other reason than that media cars get put through an insane amount of abuse, so it's a very useful diagnostic tool.

[Shaddim]

If I were Elon, I'd be throwing everything into volume production, because there're enough suckers out there waiting in line to buy the Model S.

Are people "suckers" for buying a luxury sedan or a nice sports car? Because the Model S is both. ATC, it's very competitive with European cars in its class. That's the point. This isn't a Leaf, it's a luxury sports sedan, and a damned fine one. People may bemoan their inability to own one, but that's not related to the car itself.

[The Final Dakar]

Alright, you mother****ers just made me post from home. This thread is for discussion about the NYT article brouhaha. If you want share your views or rants on Tesla or electric cars in general, start a thread.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Are people "suckers" for buying a luxury sedan or a nice sports car? Because the Model S is both. ATC, it's very competitive with European cars in its class. That's the point. This isn't a Leaf, it's a luxury sports sedan, and a damned fine one. People may bemoan their inability to own one, but that's not related to the car itself.

Don't take my comments to harshly... I actually think the Model S is a really cool car.

Where my comments are based is in business. I know how hard, like you and others, it is to build a business. I see Elon and am concerned. He's dumped so much into this and it doesn't seem to have an end. The costs for making a car are insane. By the way, when I said they were $25 million in debt in November, that was with cash of $150 million in deposits. Their debt position right now has ballooned since then. I don't know the exact figure but we will soon.

Anyway, they simply can't make these cars in enough volume to make any money. And at their current burn rate, if they go 1 year with the same volume of output, they'll be ~$500 million in debt.

What I'm questioning isn't the value of the car, it's the business strategy. Elon has followed along in Steve Jobs's shadow... he quotes him... talks about an interface that can change (touchscreen dash)... and is producing "the best car we know how to do"... competing in the high end... but what we're seeing is that... selling a high end car isn't paying the bills. Not by a long shot. And the difference here is that the car industry is nothing like the PC industry. The PC industry is full of cheap junk. It's most of the market. Nobody really makes high end computer stuff. But there's lots of competition in the auto industry for it. Every manufacturer competes in that space. It's all a class system. So bingo: major barriers to entry Mr. Musk.

Let's look at the economics... the Nissan Leaf costs between half a billion and $1 billion in R&D. It's really hard to pin an exact figure because so much technology from Nissan has been poured into it... that technology has been cultivated over many years at Nissan. Anyway, over the past 2.5 years, the Leaf has generated ~$1.6 billion in revenue for Nissan. It's more than paid for the R&D and is contributing to helping Nissan's bottom line. I see the end in sight for Nissan... it's already happen.

I see no end in sight for Tesla in terms of a money sucking pit. The car is so expensive to make and hard to make. It's like someone said the other day about the new iMacs: Jobs and Apple were really good at not only engineering amazing products, but they engineered them to a point where they could actually be manufactured in large volumes. The new iMacs seem really hard to make in volume and that's a product development mistake because in the end, it's a huge business blunder.

I hope Elon and Tesla find a way out of this, because the investment community, for them anyway, has been really tapped out. I wish them nothing but the best because I really love Tesla and think Elon is an awesome guy.

"In his March interview, Bragman notes that annual sales of such luxury entries as the BMW 7-Series (11,299), the Mercedes-Benz S-Class (12,258), and even such high-performance models as the Porsche Panamera (6,879) form a very small segment--as do plug-in cars in general (less than 18,000 last year)."

[freudling]

The Times responds:

New York Times reporter refutes Tesla's allegations but 'cannot account' for some discrepancies in data | The Verge

Looks like the only thing the reporter is reluctant to talk about is breaking the speed limit. That's understandable.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Alright, you mother****ers just made me post from home. This thread is for discussion about the NYT article brouhaha. If you want share your views or rants on Tesla or electric cars in general, start a thread.

I don't think you can divorce the company, or electric cars in general, from the article about the company.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I don't think you can divorce the company, or electric cars in general, from the article about the company.

Oh, I think you can. This is about discrepancies between what each side claims. Not the company or technology overall.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

I would like to say that I disagree entirely with Dakar.

Also, you would think this is a controversy that could be easily solved - apparently Tesla has actual recorded data, and the reporter has "his notes". So, you know.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

I would like to say that I disagree entirely with Dakar.

Also, you would think this is a controversy that could be easily solved - apparently Tesla has actual recorded data, and the reporter has "his notes". So, you know.

Would a thread about a beef over an iPad review be the right place to complain apple, steve jobs, their strategy, and tablets in general?

You'll pardon me if I don't want the thread to be derailed by one guy who has an axe to grind and has very little to say about the actual topic – the discrepancies.

[shifuimam]

Broder's posted not one, but two responses to Tesla's blog:

The Charges Are Flying Over a Test of Tesla's Charging Network - NYTimes.com

That Tesla Data: What It Says and What It Doesn't - NYTimes.com

I find it a little odd that both responses are coming from Broder, rather than perhaps a neutral third party. His claims may or may not have validity, particularly where he has rebuttals for specific parts of Elon's post. Top Gear did script their review for maximum entertainment value and didn't accurately represent the car. That doesn't help Broder's case any.

Then again, I'm not sure why he'd want to eviscerate the Tesla car so harshly. Kind of goes beyond entertainment value.

Maybe both sides are manipulating the data for their benefit, and the truth is somewhere in the middle.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Meh, it's a great discussion. And there's not much to discuss re: discrepancies - until/unless Tesla releases data or files a lawsuit, all we have is them saying one thing and the NYT another.

Freudling's "issues" aside (what ever happened to some sort of bet re: the 7" mini? Did that ever get resolved?), I do agree with him that Tesla clearly needs some backing. But the real issue on that point is that - to my knowledge - none of the large car manufacturers have shown interest in doing so. Is this a deliberate effort by Tesla not to go that route, or another "Who Killed the Electric Car" conspiracy....?

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

Broder's posted not one, but two responses to Tesla's blog:

The Charges Are Flying Over a Test of Tesla's Charging Network - NYTimes.com

That Tesla Data: What It Says and What It Doesn't - NYTimes.com

I find it a little odd that both responses are coming from Broder, rather than perhaps a neutral third party. His claims may or may not have validity, particularly where he has rebuttals for specific parts of Elon's post. Top Gear did script their review for maximum entertainment value and didn't accurately represent the car. That doesn't help Broder's case any.

Then again, I'm not sure why he'd want to eviscerate the Tesla car so harshly. Kind of goes beyond entertainment value.

Maybe both sides are manipulating the data for their benefit, and the truth is somewhere in the middle.

The claims of talking to Tesla personnel and getting bad advice worry me, and imagine phone logs would make it verifiable.

Still, the one glaring thing that strikes out at me is him not charging it overnight. As some people point out, in very cold weather regular cars need to be plugged in to start. Not doing so for a car that needs the juice to run feels like malicious ignorance.

[shifuimam]

Yeah, him naming specific Tesla employees who he claims gave him certain information could be pretty damning.

Then again, I've worked in tech support for a long time, and angry customers make up all kinds of crazy shit to keep their pride intact.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

Yeah, him naming specific Tesla employees who he claims gave him certain information could be pretty damning.

I imagine Elon's probably grilling that guy as we speak.

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

Then again, I've worked in tech support for a long time, and angry customers make up all kinds of crazy shit to keep their pride intact.

Stupid people misunderstand, too.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Yeah, any time I've ever gotten a MacNN warning I've told the mods that Dakar said I could do that

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Yeah, any time I've ever gotten a MacNN warning I've told the mods that Dakar said I could do that

I'm a well-respected veteran member with clout. If this is a lie, let a mod ban me right now.

go for it mods, I'm game for the joke

[imitchellg5]

What annoys me the most about this whole situation, and how people perceive electric cars in general:

If you drive a petrol or diesel powered automobile flat out or very hard, you'll burn through gas like crazy. No one disputes this or complains about it. Even if you're driving a diesel Polo flat out on the Autobahn, it's gonna struggle to make 200 miles on a tank.

If you drive an electric car flat out, it uses battery quickly, and everyone freaks out.

Why?

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

What annoys me the most about this whole situation, and how people perceive electric cars in general:

If you drive a petrol or diesel powered automobile flat out or very hard, you'll burn through gas like crazy. No one disputes this or complains about it. Even if you're driving a diesel Polo flat out on the Autobahn, it's gonna struggle to make 200 miles on a tank.

If you drive an electric car flat out, it uses battery quickly, and everyone freaks out.

Why?

My take is that electric cars are little more finicky – there's talk about the cabin temperature in this article. That's just not a concern in a gas powered car.

Second, range is inferior, and the difference between refueling that diesel Polo and the Tesla is 5 minutes vs. what? Several hours?

Edit: Honestly after reading some comments in another forum, I feel like iPhones aren't a terrible metaphor for electric cars. You don't want to charge it every night, but if you're a "power user" chances are you'll need to. If you're draining the battery often you'll also want to look at how you're using it.

I wonder, did this guy charge his phone over night while he was letting the car sit?

Bottom line, part of the problem with electric cars is you just can't treat them like regular cars. Its certainly why I've always considered it sort of a dead-end (so long as we have to store the energy), and think hybrids are superior.

Edit 2: Maybe that's what he was trying to show with his article, but from the looks of it, he went out of his way to deceive because the test drive he agreed to didn't lend itself towards his agenda.

[sek929]

[shifuimam]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Edit: Honestly after reading some comments in another forum, I feel like iPhones aren't a terrible metaphor for electric cars. You don't want to charge it every night, but if you're a "power user" chances are you'll need to. If you're draining the battery often you'll also want to look at how you're using it.

I wonder, did this guy charge his phone over night while he was letting the car sit?

Good point. You can't leave a smartphone idle overnight and expect the battery to not drain at least partway, because it's always doing stuff in the background. I'd wonder what sort of things the Tesla car does when it's not actually turned on. If you leave a car in the garage long enough, the battery drains, right? That battery is only used for a handful of things, though (although the whole part about starting the car is important, once the car is on, the battery isn't being used to RUN the car). You can't expect a battery-only device to not use battery while idle unless it's completely turned off...

Bottom line, part of the problem with electric cars is you just can't treat them like regular cars. Its certainly why I've always considered it sort of a dead-end (so long as we have to store the energy), and think hybrids are superior.

Fuel cells. I want to see more from the Honda Clarity.

[BLAZE_MkIV]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Edit 2: Maybe that's what he was trying to show with his article, but from the looks of it, he went out of his way to deceive because the test drive he agreed to didn't lend itself towards his agenda.

I don't think he was trying to show that at all. He didn't do anything to suggest he was comparing it to the range performance of another car. And the biggest issue worrying about range he lied about. He could have said he wanted to drive at traffic speeds and then had to stop and recharge it 4 more times and moaned about it. But that wouldn't have been news to anyone who RTFM.

[sek929]

Considering one of the first vehicles ever made was powered by a lead-acid battery I think it's pretty telling how much the tech has been set back over the years that we still don't have a viable electric car.

I consider Hybrids to be useless vehicles. Especially when an efficient regular car can get upwards of 40mpg. I think Hybrid tech is very cool, don't get me wrong, but the complexity of the system doesn't sit well with me from a longevity standpoint.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Bastard, you beat me to it.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

Fuel cells. I want to see more from the Honda Clarity.

Bigger infrastructure problem than electric. At least everyone has a 120v outlet.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV 

I don't think he was trying to show that at all. He didn't do anything to suggest he was comparing it to the range performance of another car. And the biggest issue worrying about range he lied about. He could have said he wanted to drive at traffic speeds and then had to stop and recharge it 4 more times and moaned about it. But that wouldn't have been news to anyone who RTFM.

So is he just a giant idiot? He knew going in that he'd have to worry about timing with supercharging stations and yet every time he charged the car he didn't 'fill it up'. WTH?

Originally Posted by sek929 

Considering one of the first vehicles ever made was powered by a lead-acid battery I think it's pretty telling how much the tech has been set back over the years that we still don't have a viable electric car.

Where's our steam cars?!

Originally Posted by sek929 

I consider Hybrids to be useless vehicles. Especially when an efficient regular car can get upwards of 40mpg. I think Hybrid tech is very cool, don't get me wrong, but the complexity of the system doesn't sit well with me from a longevity standpoint.

You do have a point, last I checked hybrids weren't blowing the MPG of regular cars as far out of the water as one would expect.

[mattyb]

Interesting that the focus is on the car instead of the journo.

[The Final Dakar]

Test drive: DC to Boston in a Tesla Model S - Feb. 15, 2013

On Thursday, I took the same drive -- and I made it to Boston, though not without some anxiety that I would run out of juice.

The key issue is not the car itself, but the location of charging stations, since the Tesla (TSLA) battery pack is good for only 270 miles.

The most scary part of the trip: the 200 miles between charging stations in Newark, Del., and Milford, Conn. That's not a lot of cushion, especially after I missed an exit adding a few miles to that leg.

Tesla has a load of instructions to maximize battery power, and I think I followed them pretty well.

I kept the cruise control pegged to between 60 and 65 much of the way, and kept the climate control at 72 degrees. I minimized stops.

That seemed smart, until we hit traffic. While it wasn't as bad as the epic parking lot that is the Cross Bronx Expressway, I had gone 30 miles out of our way to avoid traffic and I got it anyway. This did not seem like the road to success.

But as I drove into Connecticut, I realized something amazing. Not only did I have enough battery range left, I had plenty. I had at least 40 miles -- more than an entire Chevy Volt's worth of electricity -- left to play with. I sped up, cruising over 70, riding in the left lane, mashing the gas pedal just to feel how fast the car could shoot from 65 to 80. I was practically giddy.

In the end, I made it -- and it wasn't that hard.

There were some differences with my ride and the one from the New York Times. The weather for mine was about 10 degrees warmer. And I did mine in one day; the reviewer from the Times split it into two.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

You do have a point, last I checked hybrids weren't blowing the MPG of regular cars as far out of the water as one would expect.

Yeah....the original Honda Insight could get high-70s MPG with a solid tailwind on the highway; I'm not sure if this is still the case, but as of a couple years ago it was still the best mileage ever obtained from a mass-produced hybrid vehicle. Granted it was a two-seater, but the car itself wasn't terribly small; a large part of the back end was the batteries.

I would have thought that hybrid technology improved tremendously in the past 10-14 years, but apparently it never really transferred over to hard mileage numbers...?

[BLAZE_MkIV]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Considering one of the first vehicles ever made was powered by a lead-acid battery I think it's pretty telling how much the tech has been set back over the years that we still don't have a viable electric car.

I consider Hybrids to be useless vehicles. Especially when an efficient regular car can get upwards of 40mpg. I think Hybrid tech is very cool, don't get me wrong, but the complexity of the system doesn't sit well with me from a longevity standpoint.

There is a place were hybrid tech is huge and there is an automotive analog for it. Trains. Diesel electric trains have been hybrids for years. They just don't have large batteries. They either need crazy amount of torque or barely any at all. The killer app for hybrids is actually regenerative breaking which is fantastic for city driving or delivery trucks. A commuter car doesn't break enough to make serious regenerative breaking useful. But the vehicle has to spend 90% of its time off the highway so it's very specialized.

[BLAZE_MkIV]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Where's our steam cars?!

Steam! We were promised flying cars.