LA -> NYC is about 2,800 miles. If you had to stop for 30 minutes every 170 miles, that'd be 16.5 stops, for a total of about 8.25 hours of charging stops.

If you assume 25mpg in a car with a 12 gallon tank, and 10-minutes per gas station stop, the same 2,800 mile trip would require about 9.5 gas stops, or about 1.5 hours worth of total gas stops.

In the real world for drivers not going straight through, you're going to be spending at least a couple nights in a hotel when you could (assumedly) plug your car in overnight, as well as starting out with a full charge and more like 240 miles of range in the mornings. So I expect the real world difference would be about 4-5 hours of additional time waiting around for your car to charge in a Tesla vs. a traditional gas car. Not a huge difference on a 46 hour drive.

However, the mental difference of being forced to stop 30 minutes every 170 or so miles might make it feel like much longer than an additional 4-5 hours.

You'd also save about $365 in fuel costs in a Tesla vs. a gas car, but that's probably not a huge concern when you've already purchased a $75K+ car to begin with.

This is an edge case of course. I'm 31, and drove the entire ~15 hour drive at once with breaks only for fuel/bathroom at the same time. If I owned a Model S, I'd just fly.

You have to look at the model s like the first macintosh. It does some revolutionary things very well and it's an astounding achievement. It will however take a few years to overtake the mainstream. It would be a little short-sighted to go on about how the Apple II is so much more practical, even though it was at first.

I used to really want a Model S, but I just don't think paying for that much battery is worth it as long as your commute isn't over 60 miles. Instead of a Model S, you can lease a Leaf for city driving and buy luxury gas car for road trips, both combined for a smaller total payment. Plus you now have two cars!

Going on a vacation for us means, the less time we spend getting there the more time we have on vacation since we have to work it in between what work allows.

Still I cannot believe even on this site all the people justifying stopping every couple of hours for thirty minutes. Even traveling with dogs that isn't necessary. Top it off, all those stops extend the trip which means yet another hotel.

Plus my number one issue, the supercharge network governs how you do your trip, which routes you take. That can simply put some locations out of practicality.

[EDIT] I used this website to calculate http://calculator.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx?tab=4

Total cost to offset ~2 metric tons of CO2: ~$20 (http://www.terrapass.com/shop/)

  +--------------------------+------+--------+
  | Name                     | Qty. | Price  |
  +--------------------------+------+--------+
  | Littering                |    1 |  $6.95 |
  +--------------------------+------+--------+
  | Water lawn in drought    |    1 | $34.95 |
  +--------------------------+------+--------+
  | Let's do this mega-trip  |    1 | $19.95 |
  | in a sports car! And     |      |        |    
  | drive really fast too!   |      |        |
  +--------------------------+------+--------+

Also I take issue with the logic that fuel savings don't matter if you're spending that much on a car anyway. I don't see it that way at all. Being able to pay like $1k/mo car payment doesn't yet put you in "money is no object" territory IMO.

There is definitely a time penalty at stops. Meals are the only one of those things that takes longer than 10 minutes. You do that maybe a couple times a day.

With the model s you are stopping about every 2.5-3 hours for 30 minutes. Exactly one or two of those stops might involve a half hour meal, where it doesn't make a difference. The rest of the time, it does. To characterize this as not "affecting you all that much" vs. a traditional gas trip is just not accurate.

But you know what? That's ok. I don't get why some enthusiasts feel the need to pretend there are no compromises. It's ok for the model s to have some drawbacks at this stage. It's early. That's how the technology cycle works. Like I said elsewhere, the model s is like the first macintosh. It's the future and it's already pretty cool. No need to pretend it does more than it can. That just polarizes people.

Last year I drove from Florida to San Francisco. We did it over 5 days, my wife and I with our dog.

We stopped as-needed and always more than 10 minutes. Just filling the tank & handling payment takes that long. But in reality, you NEED to clean the windshield to clear off the bug splatter. And you NEED to use the facilities. Probably you and your passengers. And you really WANT a moment to stand up and stretch your legs anyway.

Does it always take 30 minutes? Certainly not. Twenty? Probably more like it.

"Just not accurate"? "enthusiasts need to pretend?" From where I'm sitting your comment here is a contender for A-hole of the Thread award. Congrats, you must be so proud.

I take issue with your accusations. I wrote what I wrote in good faith based on my somewhat recent experience with the cross-country road trip. I don't look politely on somebody like yourself suggesting otherwise.

The first line of the abalone's post was needlessly insulting. I'm not saying that tit-for-tat is OK, but I can see what provoked the outburst.

See comments here for a recent cross-country trip. Where the driver notes his average speed it's around 50-55mph. http://www.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/heading-cross-countr...

(Also of note: planning around cold weather seems to be a significant consideration.)

78.5.

I own a car I would consider sporty, and I can still get over 35mpg when driving on motorways at a sensible speed.

I'm in the UK. Are we using some other metric to establish MPG or are cars in the USA really that absurd that they get your quoted 25mpg on a long journey?

(4.54 L vs 3.78 L)*

*(note how I used the universal 'Liter' measurement to stunn you all! ;-) )

But it's still early days and that should improve with future cars.

But either way, driving screws up our concepts of convenience and efficiency. Drivers aren't rational actors, so even if you were only spending 10% of your time recharging it would make you crazy just like any other delay makes us go a bit nuts when we're behind the wheel.

That's at the heart of most of these discussions. So many of the decisions people make about driving aren't rational decisions, they're rationalized decisions.

Just to be clear, I'm guilty of this as well. I bought a large luxury station wagon (mostly) because it had rear-facing rumbleseats that I've used exactly once.

And if you're not a kid, there's no way in hell you're going to fit in the rear-facing seats, I'm pretty short and I still can't fit back there.

I can assure you that doing 65mph on I-90 through South Dakota is a really, really bad idea. Its listed as 75mph and that would be the low-end for what people do. Nevermind the wind that is probably going to kill your range.

Well, South Dakota I-90 where Tesla put their chargers is a single 75mph on a very busy two lane interstate with a lot of truck traffic.

Minnesota is a single 70mph on I-90. Thinking about it, I haven't seen a split speed limit in the upper plains.

"You in a Tesla driving 65 in the right lane is not going to affect traffic much."

"In the wide open spaces, there's enough room it doesn't matter."

You are going to be a nice blocker in traffic that generally flows along at 75 - 85 mph. It is a very busy truck corridor and you going 65mph is going to be a problem.

This is a good point, I wonder what the energy burden is going to be from that. You also need to factor in the impracticality of travel in the winter season (ie, near 0 deg F) in the east, or the very cold desert west of the Continental divide, particulalry at night (which is also extended in the winter).

It gets into the negatives for a lot of the winter. As I type this, it is -4F in Sioux Falls (just off I-90) with a mild 5-10mph wind with an expected low of -8F tonight.

There are a lot of windmills near I-90 since you can pretty much guarantee a constant wind.

http://rredc.nrel.gov/wind/pubs/atlas/maps/chap2/2-01m.html

Of course a new tech is slightly less convenient out the outset, and of course it will only appeal to a certain percentage of the population, and of course it will get better over time.

Which side of history are those people on?

Which side of history will you be on?

I understand that early adopters are damn useful, especially for all the startup creator here on HN. But seriously, "Right side of history" is pushing it. You can buy a regular car today and an electric one next time; it is not like electric car makers will refuse your business because you failed to be on the right side of history 10 year before.

Precisely. So people need to stop complaining the Tesla S doesn't meet their needs. Wait until it does, then buy one. If it never does, don't buy one, and don't complain about it.

Why is it so common for consumers to complain when a popular company makes a product that doesn't precisely fit their needs?

I personally am happy when I have no use for an expensive product, as it means I don't have any desire to spend money on it, and my $500 car will continue to meet my needs.

Yet.

There were millions that couldn't afford an automobile when they came out too you know..... Give it time, stop thinking a new product has to be everything to everyone so early on.

My personal suspicion is that electric cars will hit mainstream sales levels by around 2020 and by 2025 they'll dominate new car sales.

[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/11/06/teslas-b...

Why do you think complaining about the Tesla is somehow different from complaining about all those other things when they were in their infancy?

Shouldn't we get something like a 50% improvement in battery technology within 5 years? That should push it over the limit for most people.

Personally, I'd rather see hotels spend a few thousand bucks to install a bunch of NEMA 14-50's outlets or EVSEs with J1772 plugs. The cost of the electricity is pretty minimal, and it's certainly no worse than the upkeep on amenities like the gym or swimming pool (which nobody ever seems to use). If it really became an issue, the hotel could always charge a $5 fee for parking in the charging spot overnight.