That Tesla truck....

[RobDad]

Imho a bit like vapeing. Wants to say Bladerunner, actually says nerd. Good try or ridiculous nonsense?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pete D]

Aimed at macho environmentalists......an interesting audience!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[thieuster]

150,000 contracts already signed...

[junglebert]

150,000 contracts already signed...

150,000 tiny, refundable deposits paid, not quite as impressive.

[thieuster]

150,000 tiny, refundable deposits paid, not quite as impressive.

On what point in automotive history was another brand capable of luring in that amount of interested buyers after a bad presentation? Last cars that spring to mind were the original Mini and the Citroen DS back in the 50s. I remember the same 'what ifs' when the Tesla 3 was introduced. Despite production problems and delays. Currently the 3 is the most-sold car in The Netherlands. The truck will go the same route: it will become immensely popular here because it's tax free!

I think that the car is as ugly as ... but I admire the gung-ho attitude of Musk and his team.

Menno

[Argee1977]

Lets be honest, they'll sell well if they ever come in properly, remember a few years back, folk bought a tesla because they were rare and a talking point, now they're pretty widespread this truck will be the same.

It does look space age, but it'll have the best of tech underneath it, and will be more of an attraction around the world than a porsche or ferrari.

[Papa Hotel]

I absolutely love it, I'd have one in a heartbeat if the charging infrastructure was better around my way.

[bootneck]

I absolutely love it, I'd have one in a heartbeat if the charging infrastructure was better around my way.

I’m the same I think it’s brilliant

[Tooks]

I absolutely love it, I'd have one in a heartbeat if the charging infrastructure was better around my way.

Where is ‘around your way’?

With a 250 mile range, it’s probably not the chargers in your area you have to think about, unless you can’t charge it at home.

The Tesla Supercharger network is good, outside of Scotland anyway.

[bootneck]

I didn’t realise preorders where available in the UK now too gives me a couple of years to save up lol

[jameswrx]

The guy’s kind of like some sort of Religious cult leader. Watching that presentation the other day and people we’re whooping and cheering like some load of brainwashed fanatics.

What I’d like to see is a ban on EV’s performing like super cars! The whole (supposed) point is for environmental reasons yet they make them perform crazy fast and by proxy the batteries drain just as fast.

If I had my way I’d make it illegal for them to be over say 150bhp equivalent. It’s a total waste of energy IMO and if we’re killing off my type of vehicle for “cleaner” vehicles let’s actually make them do what they’re supposed to and not just be huge drains of electrical energy.

[HookedSeven]

The guy’s kind of like some sort of Religious cult leader. Watching that presentation the other day and people we’re whooping and cheering like some load of brainwashed fanatics.

What I’d like to see is a ban on EV’s performing like super cars! The whole (supposed) point is for environmental reasons yet they make them perform crazy fast and by proxy the batteries drain just as fast.

If I had my way I’d make it illegal for them to be over say 150bhp equivalent. It’s a total waste of energy IMO and if we’re killing off my type of vehicle for “cleaner” vehicles let’s actually make them do what they’re supposed to and not just be huge drains of electrical energy.

You’d also ban IC engines of 150bhp and above ?

[Brighty]

It looks like the back to the future delorean rendered on a Sega master system game

[bomberman]

[jameswrx]

You’d also ban IC engines of 150bhp and above ?

I thought the idea was to rid the world of IC engines?

My point is, if this is the case (ie for environmental reasons) then these vehicles shouldn’t be inefficient to such an extent they can throw away all that stored energy in a matter of minutes of drag launches or 0-100 sprints.

The energy stored in their battery comes from power stations, 40% of the energy we consume in the UK comes from burning fossil fuels to create this electricity! It seems against the very principle of EV to make them as inefficient as physically possible (ie big saloon cars that perform as much as their chassis can take)

Even the 20% of power coming from nuclear being ‘clean’ means we risk a nuclear accident maybe or if not we have radioactive waste to deal with in years to come which can ruin things for thousands of years?

I just don’t understand the point of them when efficiency is an argument. I get a small EV car that’s frugal with its energy consumption but an energy guzzling EV just seems like a contradiction to me. And the argument a lot of owners always give is “it’s better for the environment” If they really cared they’d not want one that wastes so much energy.

As an IC car owner I’m being told I’m part of environmental problems and governments are convinced by environmentalists that EV’s are the way to go to rid wasting polluters like me from the roads. Yet the same people are allowed to suck huge amounts of unnecessary electricity from the grid, you know the same stuff that has to be produced by some process (quite often wasteful)

If IC was to be banned I’d sure as hell be campaigning for EV’s to be restricted to little more than mobility scooters.

Unless we have some major solar energy technological revolution then these type of over performing EV’s shouldn’t be allowed just like IC cars.

I’d wager an ultra modern petrol engine’s car will have less carbon footprint than one of these fast EV’s over 15 years. Aside from the crazy mining situation that exists for the battery media (I read there’s already less left in the ground than in batteries currently? May be BS) you’ve got the work needed on the grid, the recycling of it all at the end etc.

The whole EV and crazy performance is bonkers when you think of where it’s energy comes from. Someone can fill their tesla and 40% of that energy stored in the polluting battery (to make and dispose of) is made from burning fossil fuels! Then you can go and drain it in a matter of minutes and be really inefficient with that energy (because your car is ‘clean’) pay less (or no) tax and do it as many times as you want.

[junglebert]

On what point in automotive history was another brand capable of luring in that amount of interested buyers after a bad presentation? Last cars that spring to mind were the original Mini and the Citroen DS back in the 50s. I remember the same 'what ifs' when the Tesla 3 was introduced. Despite production problems and delays. Currently the 3 is the most-sold car in The Netherlands. The truck will go the same route: it will become immensely popular here because it's tax free!

I think that the car is as ugly as ... but I admire the gung-ho attitude of Musk and his team.

Menno

What I meant, but didn't say very well, is that no one has really committed to anything, the buyers can back out and the seller can never provide the goods, Tesla have managed to raise £15,000,000 on a very vague promise, that's impressive, but it's all refundable.

[Andyg]

By 6 seater, do they mean, 2+2+2 or 3+3 or something else? If it's the later then it sure will be wide. Something like a F250 wide, rather than a smaller Euro Pick-up. in which case good luck parking it.

Also, surely Musk would have been better going with lightweight composite or aluminium panels (bolt on) rather than stainless steel, which will be a bugger to repair when they get scratched/ dented.

Nothing wrong with invitation and new technologies, but why make something look hideous, especially when there is not practical reason for it.

[HookedSeven]

I thought the idea was to rid the world of IC engines?

My point is, if this is the case (ie for environmental reasons) then these vehicles shouldn’t be inefficient to such an extent they can throw away all that stored energy in a matter of minutes of drag launches or 0-100 sprints.

The energy stored in their battery comes from power stations, 40% of the energy we consume in the UK comes from burning fossil fuels to create this electricity! It seems against the very principle of EV to make them as inefficient as physically possible (ie big saloon cars that perform as much as their chassis can take)

Even the 20% of power coming from nuclear being ‘clean’ means we risk a nuclear accident maybe or if not we have radioactive waste to deal with in years to come which can ruin things for thousands of years?

I just don’t understand the point of them when efficiency is an argument. I get a small EV car that’s frugal with its energy consumption but an energy guzzling EV just seems like a contradiction to me. And the argument a lot of owners always give is “it’s better for the environment” If they really cared they’d not want one that wastes so much energy.

As an IC car owner I’m being told I’m part of environmental problems and governments are convinced by environmentalists that EV’s are the way to go to rid wasting polluters like me from the roads. Yet the same people are allowed to suck huge amounts of unnecessary electricity from the grid, you know the same stuff that has to be produced by some process (quite often wasteful)

If IC was to be banned I’d sure as hell be campaigning for EV’s to be restricted to little more than mobility scooters.

Unless we have some major solar energy technological revolution then these type of over performing EV’s shouldn’t be allowed just like IC cars.

I’d wager an ultra modern petrol engine’s car will have less carbon footprint than one of these fast EV’s over 15 years. Aside from the crazy mining situation that exists for the battery media (I read there’s already less left in the ground than in batteries currently? May be BS) you’ve got the work needed on the grid, the recycling of it all at the end etc.

The whole EV and crazy performance is bonkers when you think of where it’s energy comes from. Someone can fill their tesla and 40% of that energy stored in the polluting battery (to make and dispose of) is made from burning fossil fuels! Then you can go and drain it in a matter of minutes and be really inefficient with that energy (because your car is ‘clean’) pay less (or no) tax and do it as many times as you want.

That’s a heck of an answer which I can’t really answer knowledgeably. The only thing I’ll say is that efficiency is about turning one form of energy into another whilst minimizing losses. Just because a vehicle will accelerate rapidly doesn’t mean it’s inefficient. It’s probably a waste of energy though, but at least in an electric vehicle the unneccessary energy that’s used for wasteful acceleration can be recaptured on deceleration.

And I don’t know this, but I’d guess that just because a EV has huge performance potential it doesn’t mean it’s inefficient when the performance isn’t being used. And most EV owners don’t buy them to do repeated all out accelerations which will ruin the range figures.

[jameswrx]

That’s a heck of an answer which I can’t really answer knowledgeably. The only thing I’ll say is that efficiency is about turning one form of energy into another whilst minimizing losses. Just because a vehicle will accelerate rapidly doesn’t mean it’s inefficient. It’s probably a waste of energy though, but at least in an electric vehicle the unneccessary energy that’s used for wasteful acceleration can be recaptured on deceleration.

And I don’t know this, but I’d guess that just because a EV has huge performance potential it doesn’t mean it’s inefficient when the performance isn’t being used. And most EV owners don’t buy them to do repeated all out accelerations which will ruin the range figures.

Correct.

EV’s are way more efficient than IC at converting fuel into energy I don’t dispute that but what I’m getting at is, if we have to have EV’s because of environmental reasons why not have ones that aren’t bananas fast and can potentially waste all that stored energy in acceleration?

Everyone with these Tesla’s can’t help gunning them everywhere to show off (kind of get that as I like performance cars) but it’s not efficient use of that precious energy that’s been made partially with fossil fuels. A friend of mine has one and was desperate to get me out in it to “show me how fast” it is.

I personally can’t see a big change soon anyway but I can guarantee you if we got rid of IC tomorrow and had the infrastructure in place to cope with charging the government would tax the hell out of the fast EV’s on a new pollution scale.

40% of electricity power from burning fossil fuels, imagine if we had EV’s completely replaced IC over night. I don’t know any figures but for example let’s say we make 500 tonnes of polluting gases making electricity per year now, after the sudden EV takeover we now need a 30% increase in electricity production. That could mean an extra 150 tonnes of polluting gases to make that electricity to power the EV ‘green’ cars.

There’s no way the govt would miss that and we’d have the same tax scale we have now for IC but for EV (and rightly so)

My point really was they’re not as efficient as they should be considering the angle and the persecution of ICE car drivers. They can’t have it both ways IMO. Take away our fun and we take away yours.

[Saint-Just]

Your point will have a little validity if it’s enforced on the same day all new IC vehicle sales are banned.
In the mean time 150bhp+ EV are a great selling point to lure people away from IC, especially when they come with that sort of autonomy.

[HookedSeven]

Correct.

EV’s are way more efficient than IC at converting fuel into energy I don’t dispute that but what I’m getting at is, if we have to have EV’s because of environmental reasons why not have ones that aren’t bananas fast and can potentially waste all that stored energy in acceleration?

Everyone with these Tesla’s can’t help gunning them everywhere to show off (kind of get that as I like performance cars) but it’s not efficient use of that precious energy that’s been made partially with fossil fuels. A friend of mine has one and was desperate to get me out in it to “show me how fast” it is.

I personally can’t see a big change soon anyway but I can guarantee you if we got rid of IC tomorrow and had the infrastructure in place to cope with charging the government would tax the hell out of the fast EV’s on a new pollution scale.

40% of electricity power from burning fossil fuels, imagine if we had EV’s completely replaced IC over night. I don’t know any figures but for example let’s say we make 500 tonnes of polluting gases making electricity per year now, after the sudden EV takeover we now need a 30% increase in electricity production. That could mean an extra 150 tonnes of polluting gases to make that electricity to power the EV ‘green’ cars.

There’s no way the govt would miss that and we’d have the same tax scale we have now for IC but for EV (and rightly so)

My point really was they’re not as efficient as they should be considering the angle and the persecution of ICE car drivers. They can’t have it both ways IMO. Take away our fun and we take away yours.

For every acceleration there must be a deceleration. If you gun it between the lights, full on acceleration followed by full on braking, then you’re wasting a huge amount of energy in an IC powered vehicle. That energy is being lost in the form of heat in the brakes during deceleration. It can’t be recovered. In an EV it can be recovered to an extent. It would be interesting to know how much energy is recovered in a typical EV versus how much is lost through regular mechanical braking. If the recovery percentage is reasonably high, then acceleration isn’t as wasteful as it might appear.

[Tooks]

I thought the idea was to rid the world of IC engines?

My point is, if this is the case (ie for environmental reasons) then these vehicles shouldn’t be inefficient to such an extent they can throw away all that stored energy in a matter of minutes of drag launches or 0-100 sprints.

The energy stored in their battery comes from power stations, 40% of the energy we consume in the UK comes from burning fossil fuels to create this electricity! It seems against the very principle of EV to make them as inefficient as physically possible (ie big saloon cars that perform as much as their chassis can take)

Even the 20% of power coming from nuclear being ‘clean’ means we risk a nuclear accident maybe or if not we have radioactive waste to deal with in years to come which can ruin things for thousands of years?

I just don’t understand the point of them when efficiency is an argument. I get a small EV car that’s frugal with its energy consumption but an energy guzzling EV just seems like a contradiction to me. And the argument a lot of owners always give is “it’s better for the environment” If they really cared they’d not want one that wastes so much energy.

As an IC car owner I’m being told I’m part of environmental problems and governments are convinced by environmentalists that EV’s are the way to go to rid wasting polluters like me from the roads. Yet the same people are allowed to suck huge amounts of unnecessary electricity from the grid, you know the same stuff that has to be produced by some process (quite often wasteful)

If IC was to be banned I’d sure as hell be campaigning for EV’s to be restricted to little more than mobility scooters.

Unless we have some major solar energy technological revolution then these type of over performing EV’s shouldn’t be allowed just like IC cars.

I’d wager an ultra modern petrol engine’s car will have less carbon footprint than one of these fast EV’s over 15 years. Aside from the crazy mining situation that exists for the battery media (I read there’s already less left in the ground than in batteries currently? May be BS) you’ve got the work needed on the grid, the recycling of it all at the end etc.

The whole EV and crazy performance is bonkers when you think of where it’s energy comes from. Someone can fill their tesla and 40% of that energy stored in the polluting battery (to make and dispose of) is made from burning fossil fuels! Then you can go and drain it in a matter of minutes and be really inefficient with that energy (because your car is ‘clean’) pay less (or no) tax and do it as many times as you want.

So, you’re not a fan of EVs then?! :-D

You need to go on a bit of a fact checking mission to be honest, and if you want to compare the pollution of an EV with an IC vehicle, don’t forget to include the energy consumption of the petrol or diesel you’re burning from the well to your fuel tank.

The greener our electricity generation gets, then by default all the electric cars get greener too. That can’t be the same for fossil fuelled cars, and that’s before you consider the benefits of having zero tail pipe emissions where you want them, ie in the towns, city’s and village’s where we live.

I’m no lentil munching greenie, but I do now drive a full EV after a few years of hybrids and I wouldn’t go back to a petrol car now.

Not everybody is gunning their Tesla’s everywhere either, the novelty wears off after a while, and even then it hardly dents the energy stored in the battery.

It’s no different to when you floor your petrol car really, a bit of excitement, a bit more fuel used, but over a tankful hardly the crime of the century.

[jameswrx]

So, you’re not a fan of EVs then?! :-D

You need to go on a bit of a fact checking mission to be honest, and if you want to compare the pollution of an EV with an IC vehicle, don’t forget to include the energy consumption of the petrol or diesel you’re burning from the well to your fuel tank.

The greener our electricity generation gets, then by default all the electric cars get greener too. That can’t be the same for fossil fuelled cars, and that’s before you consider the benefits of having zero tail pipe emissions where you want them, ie in the towns, city’s and village’s where we live.

I’m no lentil munching greenie, but I do now drive a full EV after a few years of hybrids and I wouldn’t go back to a petrol car now.

Not everybody is gunning their Tesla’s everywhere either, the novelty wears off after a while, and even then it hardly dents the energy stored in the battery.

It’s no different to when you floor your petrol car really, a bit of excitement, a bit more fuel used, but over a tankful hardly the crime of the century.

People are missing my point. If we’re told EV is the way forward for the environment then they should be as efficient as possible that doesn’t mean a big truck doing a 10 sec 1/4 mile!.

It’s very easy to make an EV extremely fast but it eats power and it just makes a mockery of the “it’s for the environment” line when it gets a portion of its power from the very fossil fuel people want banning from ICE cars.

All I’m saying is, if us petrolheads aren’t allowed gas guzzlers then the EV heads shouldn’t be allowed gas guzzlers either.

[Saint-Just]

You’ve kind of ridiculed your reasoning right there.

[HookedSeven]

People are missing my point. If we’re told EV is the way forward for the environment then they should be as efficient as possible that doesn’t mean a big truck doing a 10 sec 1/4 mile!.

It’s very easy to make an EV extremely fast but it eats power and it just makes a mockery of the “it’s for the environment” line when it gets a portion of its power from the very fossil fuel people want banning from ICE cars.

All I’m saying is, if us petrolheads aren’t allowed gas guzzlers then the EV heads shouldn’t be allowed gas guzzlers either.

Does it take more energy to accelerate quickly ? Obviously it takes more power, but that power is required for a shorter time. Can you explain why fast acceleration is inefficient ?

The real waste of energy in cars is in braking. EVs have the possibility to recover a portion of that energy.

[Tooks]

All I’m saying is, if us petrolheads aren’t allowed gas guzzlers then the EV heads shouldn’t be allowed gas guzzlers either.

The fact that there are EVs out there (Porsche Taycan/Model S & 3/iPace etc) can still deliver the ‘thrill of driving’ in electric form should be good news for all petrolheads, of which I still am one.

[ragerover]

I think Mr Tesla is the same as Mr Delorean

Loads of grants and scamming the public and governments

[jameswrx]

Does it take more energy to accelerate quickly ? Obviously it takes more power, but that power is required for a shorter time. Can you explain why fast acceleration is inefficient ?

The real waste of energy in cars is in braking. EVs have the possibility to recover a portion of that energy.

I’ve no ability to give you a technical explanation but the more KW’s the electric motors are the more power/torque they have and the more energy they’ll use. Surely a 100kw motor and a 50kw motor both set to accelerate the same car as fast as they can to 60mph the 100kw motor will get there quicker (torque) and in line with the laws of physics require more energy consumption to do so?

I will say again, I’m not disputing an EV is more efficient at burning fossil fuel than an ICE, it is way more efficient for the same performance obviously but, by proxy an EV still burns a percentage of fossil fuel (just further up the line) and if the EV route really is about the environment then the high power ones should also be the work of the devil?

[Chris_in_the_UK]

I’ve no ability to give you a technical explanation but the more KW’s the electric motors are the more power/torque they have and the more energy they’ll use. Surely a 100kw motor and a 50kw motor both set to accelerate the same car as fast as they can to 60mph the 100kw motor will get there quicker (torque) and in line with the laws of physics require more energy consumption to do so?

I will say again, I’m not disputing an EV is more efficient at burning fossil fuel than an ICE, it is way more efficient for the same performance obviously but, by proxy an EV still burns a percentage of fossil fuel (just further up the line) and if the EV route really is about the environment then the high power ones should also be the work of the devil?

No.

The aspiration is to share EV from non-fossil fuels.

All of this aside, the EV vehicle debate is currently a false flag which is used to pay for development etc.

Coal fired power stations/steel mills and air travel are the bigger issues.

[jameswrx]

The fact that there are EVs out there (Porsche Taycan/Model S & 3/iPace etc) can still deliver the ‘thrill of driving’ in electric form should be good news for all petrolheads, of which I still am one.

Yes indeed but they’d be easily killed off in a complete EV environment.

Imagine if ICE cars went tomorrow and we only had EV’s, the high power ones would be the target for taxation and anyone wanting one would be paying the top rate of tax that ICE payers do now to make up the revenue.

The more I read about EV’s though the more I think they’re doomed to fail unless we can harness solar energy better. Makes me wonder if the tech is out there to do so.

Just thinking about the cost to fill a powerful ev at home & looks like it could be circa £12? Imagine using it a lot and your electricity bill being an extra £240 a month (that’s discounting weekends too) I’m not getting at the cost here at all (for obvious reasons - petrol) but that’s tripling your electricity usage. So put that out across every car owner having an ev now and can you imagine the power network even getting anywhere near supplying that!

And before someone says certain charging is free, I’m talking about a situation where we all had EV’s, that wouldn’t be the case anymore that’s for sure. I’m sure I heard something on Irish radio the other day about them ditching free charging already at the quick chargers.

[chicaneuk]

I think Mr Tesla is the same as Mr Delorean

Loads of grants and scamming the public and governments

Respectfully, that's a load of tosh.

[oldoakknives]

Imagine everyone in your town/village/city having an electric car, and all coming home from work and plugging them in. Gonna need a lot more leccy, probably more than the kettles going on in Coronation Street ad breaks!

[Tooks]

Yes indeed but they’d be easily killed off in a complete EV environment.

Imagine if ICE cars went tomorrow and we only had EV’s, the high power ones would be the target for taxation and anyone wanting one would be paying the top rate of tax that ICE payers do now to make up the revenue.

The more I read about EV’s though the more I think they’re doomed to fail unless we can harness solar energy better. Makes me wonder if the tech is out there to do so.

Just thinking about the cost to fill a powerful ev at home & looks like it could be circa £12? Imagine using it a lot and your electricity bill being an extra £240 a month (that’s discounting weekends too) I’m not getting at the cost here at all (for obvious reasons - petrol) but that’s tripling your electricity usage. So put that out across every car owner having an ev now and can you imagine the power network even getting anywhere near supplying that!

And before someone says certain charging is free, I’m talking about a situation where we all had EV’s, that wouldn’t be the case anymore that’s for sure. I’m sure I heard something on Irish radio the other day about them ditching free charging already at the quick chargers.

But the transition isn’t happening overnight, so it’s a false argument. And, of course the government of the day will need to find ways to replace the oil revenue with new taxes, and vehicle electricity is an obvious target along with road charging.

To quote Mr Musk, if we stopped using petrol tomorrow, all the electricity used to make it would power all the EVs in the world.

It’s arguable how true that is, but it takes enormous amounts of electricity (or more fossil fuels) to power refineries, and other energy to transport and deliver the fuel to road vehicles.

I drive about 25k miles a year, in my old Golf GTE I spent about £270 a month on petrol and about £30 on electricity.

In my e-Golf, I’m spending £90 a month on electricity, on a green tariff. Before you say ‘but it’s the same electricity’, the electricity I buy has to be generated/brought in by the supplier as renewable, so sure I get the same stuff as my neighbour but somebody somewhere at some time uses the generated renewable electricity I paid for. That helps the overall UK energy mix move to more renewables.

My car usage consumes 6250 kWh of electricity per year, producing 1769kg of CO2 per annum, according to the U.K. grid calculator.

My old Golf GTE produced over 4000kg of CO2, even allowing for the electricity used, and I think that’s a worthwhile difference.

Compare a car like the Tesla Model S with a petrol car of similar size and performance and you’ll see a similar difference.

I don’t see any logical reason why electric cars should be limited to low performance variants, any more than petrol or diesel cars should only be 100 bhp in the interests of efficiency.

At the end of the day, the only green motoring is no motoring at all, and that day may come, but meantime we can do things slightly differently.

[Tooks]

When the ICE car started to take over from horses and public transport, I’m sure arguments about where the fuel would come from and what about when everybody had a car raged the same.

The petrol station infrastructure didn’t appear overnight, and nor will the electricity generation or charging points appear overnight either. But it will build along with the sales of electric vehicles, or not, obviously!

What’s the alternative? Do nothing and carry on as we are? Hydrogen? Ban personal car ownership of any sort?

I understand that some people don’t like EVs, and I’ll say that Musk both helps and hinders the cause to be honest, and I get that.

[Gurmot]

Imagine everyone in your town/village/city having an electric car, and all coming home from work and plugging them in. Gonna need a lot more leccy, probably more than the kettles going on in Coronation Street ad breaks!

We all need a paradigm shift on this one as many other things are set to change, not just EV’s. I know of a company working on smart grid technologies which plan to use AI to control what is connected, when and for how long. Your Coronation St ad break kettle is likely to be supplied by your (or a blend other) EV generating back into the grid at times of demand.

Sure we will need more electricity generated and that means more nuclear power stations for the base load plus wind and other renewables, but the smart grid will smooth out the load and use your EV when it likes, and it will ensure your car is charged and ready for the morning commute.

[xellos99]

Aimed at macho environmentalists......an interesting audience!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aimed at drug dealers and criminals more like it.

They just invented the new scum bag mobile.

[Dr.Brian]

I put in my order. It’s so unique and over the top. Strong performance, AWD, etc.
I’m not sure if I want to splurge for the 3 motor or just the 2.
I had high hopes for the new Defender but I was not impressed with the style.
His model 3 and Y are mainstream and will continue to appeal to the masses, the Cybertruck is a game changer and he’s pulled out all the stops.
As for size, it’s a 3+3 and basically the same size as a crew cab Ford F-150 with a 6 foot bed in the back.
The whole thing is crazy, I had to hold a spot.
Almost 200k reserved so far. Of course the deposit is only $100 and refundable, so we will see who completes the order 24 months from now. However at $100 many jumped on board and it’s the talk of the town. That’s a marketing win.
The botched window thing was pretty funny, but again, it got people talking, on the news, etc. Free marketing.

[HookedSeven]

I’ve no ability to give you a technical explanation but the more KW’s the electric motors are the more power/torque they have and the more energy they’ll use. Surely a 100kw motor and a 50kw motor both set to accelerate the same car as fast as they can to 60mph the 100kw motor will get there quicker (torque) and in line with the laws of physics require more energy consumption to do so?

I just want a logical explanation. Yes a 100kW motor produces more power than a 50kW motor, but you then jump from power to energy with no explanation. Energy is power multiplied by time. Your home energy bill is in kWh. So if you need 100kW continuously for 10 seconds, that’s the same energy as 50kW continuously for 20 seconds. Would those two scenarios result in a different final speed ?

Seeing as your argument is based on the premise that faster acceleration in an EV is less efficient, it would be nice if you could explain roughly why that’s the case. I appreciate this is over-simplified, but I think you’re confusing power with energy.

[Raffe]

On what point in automotive history was another brand capable of luring in that amount of interested buyers after a bad presentation? Last cars that spring to mind were the original Mini and the Citroen DS back in the 50s. I remember the same 'what ifs' when the Tesla 3 was introduced. Despite production problems and delays. Currently the 3 is the most-sold car in The Netherlands. The truck will go the same route: it will become immensely popular here because it's tax free!

I think that the car is as ugly as ... but I admire the gung-ho attitude of Musk and his team.

Menno

Yeah, the Tesla 3 is the most sold car in the Netherlands.

Not that much of an achievement if you consider how much money they lose on every single one of those cars, you can buy market share if you sell lots of cars below cost of production, financed by a gullible following on the financial markets.

Over its lifetime, Tesla has taken 18bn USD of funding and has 25bn USD of debt on its balance sheet (most recent quarter). Add to that about 2bn it made from selling carbon emission credits and the company has received at least 45bn of external funding. Only very recently has its market capitalisation jumped above that number (engineered by Q3 results which were surprisingly profitable, but which had nothing to do with building cars but was all down to accounting tricks).

Despite its more than lofty valuation, it's difficult to argue that Tesla has created any value for its investors. Besides that, their cars are nearly impossible to repair. But I suppose that doesn't matter for the cult followers.

[jameswrx]

I just want a logical explanation. Yes a 100kW motor produces more power than a 50kW motor, but you then jump from power to energy with no explanation. Energy is power multiplied by time. Your home energy bill is in kWh. So if you need 100kW continuously for 10 seconds, that’s the same energy as 50kW continuously for 20 seconds. Would those two scenarios result in a different final speed ?

Seeing as your argument is based on the premise that faster acceleration in an EV is less efficient, it would be nice if you could explain roughly why that’s the case. I appreciate this is over-simplified, but I think you’re confusing power with energy.

I don’t know why it needs an explanation, if a more powerful motor is flat out it’s consuming more battery than one less powerful?

It seems you’re saying it doesn’t matter how hard you drive them? Just google how fast can you drain an ev battery and see people talk about thrashing them hard and doing 70% of the battery in 12 minutes. I even found a forum where they discuss who can drain their battery the fastest (which seams a little backwards to me)

My whole argument is, why have powerful EV’s (which WILL be driven hard as every vid I see on them is “it’s so addictive to accelerate hard” my friend does the same thing) when we could have even greener EV’s that aren’t able to be driven so mad? If the whole argument against ICE is the environment and we should replace them, why not with EV’s that you can’t drain that precious energy easily so you have to re-charge it every night.

Maybe I’m totally wrong (yes you all shout) but how can a 100kw motor accelerating as hard as possible to 60mph use the same energy from the battery as a 50kw motor accelerating as hard as it can to 60mph? Also the range on different power EV’s quoted is lower on the more powerful cars, no? That would suggest even cruising they use power battery?



And I know it’s not going to be over night, it’s just an example of how much the electricity supply would have to grow (using current charging costs to guess how much extra electricity we’d need). It’d be decades before we could get to that level and we’d need 3 times the amount of nuclear power stations just to keep the dirty power station percentage level with how it is no. Even in that scenario we’d be producing 3 times the amount of dirty power)

So if EV champions are to be believed we’d need to negate this dirty fuel. Fair enough, I agree but as the majority of clean electricity comes from nuclear energy, are we going to build, what 10 times as many nuclear power stations to take over the extra power needed and remove the dirty? May even be more and that’s not going to happen. The tiny percentage of proper green electricity would have to grow impossibly. We’d have to have wind farms round the entire coast and the whole countryside full of solar panels to satisfy battery charging for every car driver now doubling to tripling their electricity usage.


has anyone got any thoughts on solar energy tech? Is it being held back? The irony is, if we had the tech one of the best places to have a solar farm would be the Middle East. Surely it’s the one thing we could take and not use or disrupt?

[sweets]

I just want a logical explanation. Yes a 100kW motor produces more power than a 50kW motor, but you then jump from power to energy with no explanation. Energy is power multiplied by time. Your home energy bill is in kWh. So if you need 100kW continuously for 10 seconds, that’s the same energy as 50kW continuously for 20 seconds. Would those two scenarios result in a different final speed ?

Seeing as your argument is based on the premise that faster acceleration in an EV is less efficient, it would be nice if you could explain roughly why that’s the case. I appreciate this is over-simplified, but I think you’re confusing power with energy.

As with all cars (ICE and EV), it is the speed that is the inefficient bit. Hurtling through the air at 80 mph uses a lot more energy than doing so at 60. For the same distance.
I guess that, with a more powerful car, the likelihood is that you will spend more time at higher speed, because it is much easier to get to that speed. Indeed if your car is under-resourced, you probably won't get to the speeds that will cost the most energy.
The only other 2 things that cost more energy are weight (not in anyone favour for EVs at the moment) and shape. It takes a lot more energy to thrust a tall brick through the air than a slim blade.
Powerful EVs can also carry more weight than lower power versions, as they are frequently specified with larger batteries to give them an effective range. So that too is not in their favour, but doesn't have to be, if you order the powerful one with a smaller battery, and fancy a severe case of range anxiety.

If you minimise speed, weight and travel in an aerodynamic vehicle, you will minimise the quantity of energy to get from A to B.

[HookedSeven]

As with all cars (ICE and EV), it is the speed that is the inefficient bit. Hurtling through the air at 80 mph uses a lot more energy than doing so at 60. For the same distance.
I guess that, with a more powerful car, the likelihood is that you will spend more time at higher speed, because it is much easier to get to that speed. Indeed if your car is under-resourced, you probably won't get to the speeds that will cost the most energy.
The only other 2 things that cost more energy are weight (not in anyone favour for EVs at the moment) and shape. It takes a lot more energy to thrust a tall brick through the air than a slim blade.
Powerful EVs can also carry more weight than lower power versions, as they are frequently specified with larger batteries to give them an effective range. So that too is not in their favour, but doesn't have to be, if you order the powerful one with a smaller battery, and fancy a severe case of range anxiety.

If you minimise speed, weight and travel in an aerodynamic vehicle, you will minimise the quantity of energy to get from A to B.

I’m not sure that more powerful cars spend a significantly longer time at higher speeds. Well, at least in the UK or other countries with speed limits that are so far under most vehicles capabilities. Here in Germany it’s true that you see some guys blasting down the unrestricted sections of autobahn at 200kph, but it’s really not that common.

[HookedSeven]

I don’t know why it needs an explanation, if a more powerful motor is flat out it’s consuming more battery than one less powerful?

It seems you’re saying it doesn’t matter how hard you drive them? Just google how fast can you drain an ev battery and see people talk about thrashing them hard and doing 70% of the battery in 12 minutes. I even found a forum where they discuss who can drain their battery the fastest (which seams a little backwards to me)

My whole argument is, why have powerful EV’s (which WILL be driven hard as every vid I see on them is “it’s so addictive to accelerate hard” my friend does the same thing) when we could have even greener EV’s that aren’t able to be driven so mad? If the whole argument against ICE is the environment and we should replace them, why not with EV’s that you can’t drain that precious energy easily so you have to re-charge it every night.

Maybe I’m totally wrong (yes you all shout) but how can a 100kw motor accelerating as hard as possible to 60mph use the same energy from the battery as a 50kw motor accelerating as hard as it can to 60mph? Also the range on different power EV’s quoted is lower on the more powerful cars, no? That would suggest even cruising they use power battery?



And I know it’s not going to be over night, it’s just an example of how much the electricity supply would have to grow (using current charging costs to guess how much extra electricity we’d need). It’d be decades before we could get to that level and we’d need 3 times the amount of nuclear power stations just to keep the dirty power station percentage level with how it is no. Even in that scenario we’d be producing 3 times the amount of dirty power)

So if EV champions are to be believed we’d need to negate this dirty fuel. Fair enough, I agree but as the majority of clean electricity comes from nuclear energy, are we going to build, what 10 times as many nuclear power stations to take over the extra power needed and remove the dirty? May even be more and that’s not going to happen. The tiny percentage of proper green electricity would have to grow impossibly. We’d have to have wind farms round the entire coast and the whole countryside full of solar panels to satisfy battery charging for every car driver now doubling to tripling their electricity usage.


has anyone got any thoughts on solar energy tech? Is it being held back? The irony is, if we had the tech one of the best places to have a solar farm would be the Middle East. Surely it’s the one thing we could take and not use or disrupt?

I’m not saying that it doesn’t matter how hard you drive them, but logically it should matter less as wasted energy on acceleration in an EV can be at least partially recaptured. It can’t with an ICE. And I think the idea that high performance electric vehicles ‘WILL’ be driven hard all the time because lots of online videos show it is a bit of a stretch. Who’d post a video of themselves pottering around at pedestrian speeds ?

And I’d guess that the range on a high power EV with the same battery should be less. That’s logical if for no other reason than the mass is likely to be higher. But how much less is it ? Is it significantly less ?

Edit to add: reading that back it sounds like I’m insinuating that range isn’t much less with a bigger motor. I’m not. I genuinely have no idea... it’s just a straight question.

[walkerwek1958]

Ye cannae change the laws of physics.

Most cars thesedays are big bloated fat boys, check the kerb weight of even the smallest cars and compare to similar models 30-40 years ago, cars have become very heavy over the years. Aerodynamics has improved hugely, which mitigates the weight somewhat, but that doesn`t help in stop-start driving or driving in hilly areas.

I don`t know how electric vehicles compare on weight, but there are obvious compromises between extending the range by fitting bigger batteries and keeping the weight down, the two are mutually exclusive. Perhaps smaller vehicles will become the norm?

[Tooks]

It seems you’re saying it doesn’t matter how hard you drive them? Just google how fast can you drain an ev battery and see people talk about thrashing them hard and doing 70% of the battery in 12 minutes. I even found a forum where they discuss who can drain their battery the fastest (which seams a little backwards to me)

If you Google for something, then of course you’ll find it. Did you google the videos where people are doing maximum range tests with their EVs? There’s are a lot more of them...

My whole argument is, why have powerful EV’s (which WILL be driven hard as every vid I see on them is “it’s so addictive to accelerate hard” my friend does the same thing) when we could have even greener EV’s that aren’t able to be driven so mad?

Even the most powerful EVs still emit much less than an equivalent petrol car, even allowing for the UKs energy mix. When a Tesla Model S is being driven like a Nissan Leaf, it’s using broadly the same energy as a Nissan Leaf.

When a high performance petrol car is being driven like a Honda Jazz, it’s still consuming fuel like a performance petrol car.

If the whole argument against ICE is the environment and we should replace them, why not with EV’s that you can’t drain that precious energy easily so you have to re-charge it every night.

That isn’t the whole argument, but it’s the one that gets pushed by people opposed for some reason to electric vehicles. Who says they need to be the equivalent of mobility scooters? You should be embracing the fact that car companies are picking up the baton and building stuff that is fun to drive when you want it to be and yet can still whisper through town like a Nun.

Maybe I’m totally wrong (yes you all shout) but how can a 100kw motor accelerating as hard as possible to 60mph use the same energy from the battery as a 50kw motor accelerating as hard as it can to 60mph? Also the range on different power EV’s quoted is lower on the more powerful cars, no? That would suggest even cruising they use power battery?

The range of all EVs is tested under the WLTP regime, the same as all cars, and they aren’t tested to the point of the battery running out, the same as ICE cars aren’t tested until they run out of fuel. The biggest impact on range is battery size, along with driving style. The same as fuel tank and driving style in an ICE car if you like.

‘Fuel’ consumption on electric cars is measured in miles per kWh. A Tesla with a 90 kWh battery can travel up to 350 miles if driven ‘normally’.

My e-Golf has a 35 kWh battery and can travel about 130 miles on a charge driven normally.

The Tesla has a nearly 3 times bigger battery, and it can travel nearly 3 times as far, but it’s still efficient. The bigger battery is one of the reasons it’s able to be a high performance vehicle as the power pack can deliver the necessary amps.

You seem to be suggesting that EV drivers can’t be trusted with their right foot, whilst ICE drivers are left alone because we already know they’re damaging.

And I know it’s not going to be over night, it’s just an example of how much the electricity supply would have to grow (using current charging costs to guess how much extra electricity we’d need). It’d be decades before we could get to that level and we’d need 3 times the amount of nuclear power stations just to keep the dirty power station percentage level with how it is no. Even in that scenario we’d be producing 3 times the amount of dirty power)

So if EV champions are to be believed we’d need to negate this dirty fuel. Fair enough, I agree but as the majority of clean electricity comes from nuclear energy, are we going to build, what 10 times as many nuclear power stations to take over the extra power needed and remove the dirty? May even be more and that’s not going to happen. The tiny percentage of proper green electricity would have to grow impossibly. We’d have to have wind farms round the entire coast and the whole countryside full of solar panels to satisfy battery charging for every car driver now doubling to tripling their electricity usage.

A lot of that is pure speculation or confirmation bias I’m afraid.

What an opportunity we have to make a step change in how we generate our electricity. It could create a lot of skilled jobs, and is something we should be doing anyway regardless. We can’t carry on as we are.

If EVs help drive that step change, then personally I think that’s a good thing.

has anyone got any thoughts on solar energy tech? Is it being held back? The irony is, if we had the tech one of the best places to have a solar farm would be the Middle East. Surely it’s the one thing we could take and not use or disrupt?

Solar is a viable energy generation method, even here in the UK, what we need is a way to store all the energy generated so that it can be used at peak times and when solar generation is low or zero. Actually, the humble EV might be the key here, if we had millions of cars that between them are storing Gigawatts of electricity in their batteries, and some of that energy can be fed back into the grid when they’re parked up and connected to the grid? Think of it like a cloud power station/battery.

The trials are happening, and the results are encouraging.

I read a while back that a solar farm covering the Sahara would supply the energy needs of the whole planet.

If anything is holding solar power back, it’s because it’s easier to just carry on doing what we’re doing.

I’m only responding to you over this not to try and crush you under a ‘green wave’, but because you seem to be interested in talking about it.

If not, then I’ll shut up! :)

[nick wood]

Not the best looking motor I've ever seen

[kace]

Be interesting to see what it looks like when or if it goes on sale. Pedestrian protection, bumpers, lights and mirrors, wheels that don't protrude from the arches....

[alfat33]

Crash protection/crumple zones seem to have been ignored. I wouldn’t like to be in that truck if it was in a collision; even worse to be hit by it.

[Chinnock]

Not the best looking motor I've ever seen

Roof on wheels?

[Mr.D]

Love it