Tesla Motors has received over 560 reservations out of a planned goal of 800 for the 2008 model.
The Tesla Roadster is a stylish, high-performance, 100% electric sports car, that can accelerate to 60 mph in about 4 seconds and has a range of more than 200 miles on a single charge. They expect to start shipping Roadsters to customers this Fall.
Boys with toys!! Actually, I expect them to disappear into the night with investors funds.
Posted by: kit p | July 25, 2007 at 11:58 AM
~knees weaken, drool comes from corner of mouth, hand reaches for wallet, a deep moan comes from within his head~
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!
Posted by: fjh | July 25, 2007 at 01:28 PM
This is simply a status symbol for those wealthy men with huge egos and tiny...
Anyway, it really just a "new age" hummer.
Posted by: Tim | July 26, 2007 at 10:44 AM
Tim that's a sacrilege. wtf are you smoking? that's like saying the internet is just a "new age" version of cable tv. the tesla is 100% electric. if charged by solar panels installed in your garage this would be a ZEV. it's not JUST a status symbol, it's an economically friendly status symbol. and besides Hummer == Gluttony. the Tesla is way cooler than a hummer. Not to mention faster, and more powerful. (power:weight especially)
Posted by: Jamie | July 26, 2007 at 01:07 PM
Tim that's a sacrilege. wtf are you smoking? that's like saying the internet is just a "new age" version of cable tv. the tesla is 100% electric. if charged by solar panels installed in your garage this would be a ZEV. it's not JUST a status symbol, it's an economically friendly status symbol. and besides Hummer == Gluttony. the Tesla is way cooler than a hummer. Not to mention faster, and more powerful. (power:weight especially)
Posted by: Jamie | July 26, 2007 at 01:08 PM
Jamie, you are correct sir. This is one toy that actually matters.
Posted by: Justin | July 26, 2007 at 02:22 PM
A toy eh? If everyone drove one of these "toys" there wouldn't be any oil canundra, now would there be?
Posted by: Calamity | July 26, 2007 at 03:21 PM
Unfortunatly Tesla is using unsafe lap-top Li-ion batteries and not the safe nano-phosphates.
Do you want to replace the battery pack after 500 charges (1.5 years)? Probably a $20,000 price tag for battery replacement.
The safe nLiFePO4 nano-phosphates last 8000 or more charges. That is 20 years.
Posted by: Beek | July 28, 2007 at 01:13 AM
Well they do have an excellent cooling/monitoring system for the bats, or so they say. Besides increasing safety, that should also extend battery life quite a bit, at least compared to laptops. Battery replacement is still a problem of course, but you're assuming 1 charge every day. Who drives that much? If someone drives 50 mi/day on average, then an average of ~2 charges a week will suffice.
I think 3-5 years is a more reasonable battery life for most drivers. Even more for those who accept significantly smaller range.
That's still not very good, but then, if you can afford a 100k vehicle that extra 20k may not be all that much of a problem.
Keep in mind, Tesla could easily switch to more advanced batteries in the near term. Right now, the battery pack sounds decent enough, so they should just get a bunch of cars on the road, otherwise their credibility might suffer. When Tesla actually delivers, more people will know that high power EV's are for real.
Posted by: Calamity | July 28, 2007 at 04:50 AM
@Calamity - agreed. But they are wasting their time and brainpower resources on older technology. I don't need 200 miles a charge. 100 would do. And the safety concern during an accident is real.
They should have an on-board removable generator option for those who need to do the occasional extended trip.
The price of lithium phosphates (non-nano) is the same as older Li-ion. Checkout
http://www.batteryspace.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWCATS&Category=1072
Tesla should offer the following options:
nano-phosphate or li-phosphate, 50 miles, 100 miles, 200 miles, and removable generator carry-on.
I would take a batteryless Tesla to Hymotion and they could conceivably put A123 batteries in it.
Posted by: Beek | July 28, 2007 at 01:23 PM
Beek - checkout the safety tests they've done on the Tesla. These batteries aren't going to explode. (see this blog entry - about half way down - http://www.teslamotors.com/blog2/?p=49)
Tesla have decided to take the approach of a car that "makes no excuses" - an exotic high performance car that can do 200+ miles (most exotics don't get driven for 200 miles at a time - but saying it "only" does 100 miles weakens Tesla's "no excuses" position).
I agree with Calamity - much better to get a vehicle on the road and then replace the battery pack in a newer model. Remember the Tesla didn't happen overnight - a couple of years (or more) ago they decided on the Li-Ions and stayed committed to it. That was a wise move - if they jump ship everytime a potential new battery comes along they'd never deliver...
Posted by: John H | August 02, 2007 at 10:00 PM
John H, Lifepos have been around for over 10 years. Its not a fly by night thing. It was a bad decision by Tesla's part. Everyone in winter 2006 knew that Black & Decker was introducing lifepos. They probably have lost a year just designing the liquid cooling/heating system for the old lithium batteries and figuring how to cut its weight. Not to mention the cost increases.
Tesla is loved for its simplicity. Now they have to put in fire extinguishers and steel casings and liquid cooling and heating, etc. and the excuse I see is that it is older technology and too many things can go wrong due to the unwarranted complexity.
And then cycle life of 500 for Tesla, vs. 5000 to 10000 for lifepos.
And now the price of lifepo is dropping below the older lithiums. Some think lifepo will be 1/3 the price of lithium-cobalt.
Too many excuses .....
Posted by: Beek | August 06, 2007 at 07:24 PM
Beek,
Lifepo may have been out a while but not for 10 years in large format. It seems to me that Tesla couldn't wait for large format Lifepo to mature enough and went with the more mature (and temperature-finicky) LiCoO2 large format batteries instead. Chevy's Volt is proposed to use large format nano-Lifepo and it won't be out till 2010...
Posted by: gosamer | August 13, 2007 at 11:25 AM
Gosamer - Tesla is NOT using large format LiCoO2. Tesla is using 6400 tiny 18650 cells. These cells are 7.5 Wh. Compare that to Taiwanese produced LiFePO4 at 800 Wh single cell. I doubt these huge cells require liquid cooling and heating. I am not aware of any larger than 18650 LiCoO2 cells manufactured in China.
Also, Chevy's Volt will not be out till 2010 because they started testing the battery just in 2006 and they have to manufacture the vehicle from scratch. Furthermore, being a large established manufacturer and having to produce the Volt in volume, they have certain processes to follow for production - unlike Tesla. Compare that to Tesla that has a 2 year or more headstart and does not have to manufacture the vehicle and can sell it at $100K.
Posted by: Beek | August 13, 2007 at 02:47 PM
Beek - I stand corrected on the Tesla cells. But I think Tesla is using some type of active cooling for the pack.
Don't Kokam (Korea) and Thundersky (China) make large format LiCoO2 (sub-500 Wh)?
Posted by: gosamer | August 13, 2007 at 03:13 PM
Yes, it has taken Tesla 2 years to develop the active liquid cooling for its pack, and coupled with all the safety mechanism they had to install due to the cobalt chemistry, their pack is now at 130 Wh/kg, as compared to 125 Wh/kg for lifepo (without packaging), and about 110 Wh/kg with packaging.
Not to mention that LiCoO2 requires 6800 cells for Tesla, vs. only 66 cells for 800 Wh lifepo. Imagine the reduction in complexity due to the use of lifepo.
This was a disasterous decision on part of Tesla, AFAIK.
Posted by: Beek | August 13, 2007 at 04:06 PM
Gosamer - the Kokam battery is Lithium Cobalt Polymer. This technology has many problems, one is safety, the other is high cost. Also cycle life is 1200 (3 years). Also the power is low (1C - 2C). Therefore, you would need some lifepo in parrallel with polymer in order to get the horsepower needed by Tesla. Might as well go to lifepo all the way.
The Thundersky battery is LiFePO4. So here we go back to the original argument.
Posted by: Beek | August 13, 2007 at 04:37 PM
Beek, you mentioned above that LiFePo may be 1/3 the cost of LiCoO2. Do you have a timeframe for this? 2 years down the road? Do you have any tech info (or URL) on the A123 large format cells (M1 Ultra/HD)? I cannot find any details on them.
Regarding Thundersky, I believe the LCP series is cobalt-based, and the LFP series is LiFePo4, both in the 3C continuous/10C max range.
Posted by: gosamer | August 14, 2007 at 08:01 AM