News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Roadster 3.0 by finid on Friday December 26, 2014 @01:30PM (#8799612)
> ... we can achieve a predicted 40-50% improvement on range between the original Roadster and Roadster 3.0. There is a set of speeds and driving conditions where we can confidently drive the Roadster 3.0 over 400 miles.

That has been the range where I'll even begin to consider a car of that sort. I'm seriously rooting for Tesla.

Re:Roadster 3.0 by revelation on Friday December 26, 2014 @03:23PM (#8800206)
Because you drive 400 miles daily?

It seems you are stuck in a go till empty mentality. You don't drive an electric car until the battery is empty and then recharge. You plug it in at home and wake up to the battery charged to the same level every day. You'll actually save time not spent at a gas station in everyday use.

Re:Roadster 3.0 by baddox on Friday December 26, 2014 @03:52PM (#8800323)
It doesn't matter all that much what your average daily drive is, if you have several road trips a year where an EV's range is prohibitive. That is, of course, until the EV saves you enough money over a full-time gas car that you can afford to buy or rent a spare gas car for your road trips. Or until charger or battery hot swap stations are everywhere.
Re:Roadster 3.0 by ams6110 on Friday December 26, 2014 @04:24PM (#8800457)
This is a good point. Early model range was still too low (I have days where I end up driving a couple of hundred miles on little advance notice). But given a realistic (not some next-to-impossible "ideal") 300-400 mile range, in most cases when I need more than that I know about it far enough in advance to arrange a rental. That also assumes that total cost of ownership is lower by enough that it's practical to use rentals as a "second" vehicle and still come out ahead.
Re:Roadster 3.0 by finid on Friday December 26, 2014 @04:05PM (#8800371)
I don't drive 400 miles daily, but at the same time, I don't want to have one car for short distance commutes and another one for long distance travels.
Re:Roadster 3.0 by greglindahl on Friday December 26, 2014 @03:02PM (#8800114)
People who actually own Teslas are, on the whole, less fanatic than you are about range. If you can charge in your home garage, then you start every morning with a full battery. How many days do you drive more than 265 miles? And for long trips, there's the supercharger network, and the first battery swap station is in beta along the SF/LA route.
Re:Roadster 3.0 by mcot2 on Friday December 26, 2014 @02:16PM (#8799887)
Range is less important to me than ease and availability of recharging or refueling.
Re:Roadster 3.0 by finid on Friday December 26, 2014 @02:20PM (#8799902)
Not if recharging takes hours.

If you combine a decent range (400+ miles) with a fast recharge time, say, an hour or less, then you've got a real winner.

Re:Roadster 3.0 by waterlesscloud on Friday December 26, 2014 @05:09PM (#8800624)
Not sure why this is downvoted. What you've stated are the magic numbers for widespread electric car use. 400 mile range with sub-hour recharge. Shouldn't really be a controversial point.
Re:Roadster 3.0 by threeseed on Friday December 26, 2014 @04:16PM (#8800423)
Shame you were downvoted when everyone that replied to you is pretty clueless about how most of the world lives.

Most people don't have powered garages. And most of the world doesn't have power points on street parking or in apartment/work parking lots. So this "I will just refuel every day" concept really falls apart if you're trying to scale out your product.

Tesla desperately needs to get from this early adopter phase into targeting the mass market. And that means catering for people such as yourself that expect a range comparable to their previous car.

Re:Roadster 3.0 by Htsthbjig on Friday December 26, 2014 @04:46PM (#8800540)
"Most people don't have powered garages. And most of the world doesn't have power points on street parking or in apartment/work parking lots."

Most of the people have an electric network already installed on their house. If you have already a garage, putting a 5 meters cable is not such a big problem.

You will need a new installation anyway, because you will need more power.

Most of the world ALREADY HAVE power points on apartment-parking lots. It is called Street lighting, not used during daylight, and designed for when LED lighting did not exist. You can replace 1000+ Watts old bulbs with a 100W LED one easily today.

I have an electric car that I use a lot. Most of the fear I had when I bought it was non sense.

Re:Roadster 3.0 by threeseed on Friday December 26, 2014 @05:11PM (#8800635)
> Most of the people have an electric network already

I meant most people don't have powered garage suitable to support an electric car. And likewise there is no solution for street parking or people who live in apartments.

> Most of the world ALREADY HAVE power points on apartment-parking lots.

No they don't. Show me where there is individual or even shared power points available for public use. The fact is that most parking lots will require expensive modifications in order to support electric cars.

You can argue the points but the fact is that for electric cars to be successful you need to address these issues. Not just put your head in the sand and pretend they aren't real. Range IS critically important to Tesla's success (or failure).

Re:Roadster 3.0 by ericd on Friday December 26, 2014 @10:57PM (#8801631)
Most parking lots have power run throughout - in parking garages, there's lighting wiring which can be dropped. In most large outdoor lots in the US, there are street lights. And when those aren't present apply, this still isn't exactly an enormous investment, and it can be rolled out piecemeal. We're not prepared for everyone to have an electric car right now, but that's because not everyone has an electric car, and there's a bit of a chicken and egg problem. With demand will come solutions.

Street parking is an issue, but I imagine that we'll see a solution to that before too long.

Basically, I think you're making a big deal out of a minor speedbump.