digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at engadget.com

Tesla Model S: a $60k, all-electric five passenger Sedan

engadget.com — Our favorite Terminator (and Governor of California) Arnold Schwarzenegger has just helped Tesla Motors make an announcement that's probably sending chills through traditional automaker's boardrooms. The company has just introduced a fully-electric, five passenger sports sedan dubbed the Model S, which will be selling for an affordable $60K.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • drew52686, on 06/30/2008, -1/+88I have been following Tesla ever since Wired did a cover story on them a few years ago. I really hope this -- along with more solar, nuclear, wind, thermal, etc. power -- comes to fruition, especially at the $60,000 price point. More than anything, I just hope this (Tesla) doesn't end up like the EV-1.
    • krets, on 06/30/2008, -3/+25I would be the first person in line to buy a nuclear powered hot rod.
      • tippmann1, on 07/01/2008, -1/+7you mean your rods not nuclear powered already?
    • FrankTheTank17, on 07/01/2008, -0/+10I'm sure the Tesla cars will last a long time. The demand for alternative fuel automobiles are in MUCH HIGHER demand than it was when the EV-1 hit the market.
      • humperdeath, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3This is more than an opportunity to go green. This could be a hit or miss, either way, it will be a collectible, like the Delorean. Wait 5-10 years, it is worth double.
    • smacksaw, on 07/01/2008, -2/+4As long as they don't hire Bob Lutz to be the CEO of Tesla, I think they'll be fine.
    • Pstall, on 07/01/2008, -4/+12Last time I checked the average income level for the US was around 40,000 a year. Since when is 60,000 (not including options) an "affordable" price? I would be more excited if it was selling for 20,000 that way more then maybe 10% of americans could afford this car.
      • cmiller1, on 07/01/2008, -0/+5but 60,000 price point should put it in the range of upper middle class americans and your average american used in a few years
        If we could get just 10% of people on electricity it would have dramatic effects on our oil consumption
      • jrattner1, on 07/01/2008, -10/+1Get a real job
      • Schrodinger2, on 07/01/2008, -0/+20This is america. Credit means get it.
      • groo68, on 07/01/2008, -1/+6The price point when it was first announced was put at 200,000 dollars, I'd say that this is comparably affordable.
      • Y0tsuya, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2That's why God invented credit cards and HELOC.
      • oldgal, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4They're business plan was to do high end first and use the revenue from that to get to the lower end. They put out the sports car first, now they are going to the sedan. Have looked lately to see what's next, but I expect that in 10 years they will have something that is affordable for the rest of us.
      • Tenoq, on 07/01/2008, -0/+6I guess when you take into account $5k-$10k in running a gasoline vehicle each year, it starts to look more affordable.
      • OtterStratton, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3The original tesla roadster is priced at 100K, so this is affordable compared to that, at the very least.
      • LocalDocal, on 07/01/2008, -2/+1I agree. The article was extremely premature in saying that automakers are feeling a chill when the Tesla cost $60,000. At that price, automakers may begin to worry, but they're not going to be afraid yet. Of course, some people here are suggesting that Tesla are trying to sell to the upper middle-class Americans first, but somehow, I highly doubt that's going to be the good market. Upper middle-class Americans are, I think, more likely to either buy BMWs or, if they're into efficient and environmentally friendly cars, the more well known Prius/Tahoe.

        Frankly, the middle class and the lower middle class will be the group that needs cars like this the most.
      • Zlorp, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3uhm, 60k is affordable? if i could spend 60k on a car it sure as ***** wouldnt be one of these things.
    • Computer_Kid, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2How many people went out and spent 50k on a Hummer an then another 10k each year in fuel?
      • Sheff, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1I think a lot of people got a Hummer based on its weight which gave them a write off as a farm/work vehicle.

        Not sure if that is still allowed, but if it's over 6000lbs, then maybe you'll get credit on top of using an electric vehicle.
    • sankethkatta, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2tesla's press site
      http://www.teslamotors.com/media/press_room.php?id ...

    • reaperhatch, on 07/01/2008, -3/+2Why is a hybrid, that uses 2 types of engines and energy storage systems, cheaper then the single electric engine automobile? I believe that oil companies just don't want the public to get off of oil. This tesla company seems to just want to give people false hope and distract the public. They appear to want to distract us from the fact we can already convert some existing small cars to all electric for 10k dollars in material.

      Survival takes responsibility at this moment.
      • ArmandoM, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1Because the battery pack in this car that allows it to go 200+ miles probably costs $40,000.

        With a hybrid you don't need near as much battery capacity.
    • JohnLawson, on 07/01/2008, -1/+1Who killed the electric car? No one, GM tried and failed and now it's back in black and out to kick there ass. It's too bad that an United States based company is getting it's ass kicked though.
    • mrjhmm, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3Who Killed the Electric Car?

      It was among the fastest, most efficient production cars ever built.

      Full movie:

      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-720274006 ...
  • Zandarrr, on 06/30/2008, -1/+108The Tesla is closer to being affordable! Huzzah! Once they have a model that dips below $30k I will make a serious attempt to purchase one.
    • Zandarrr, on 06/30/2008, -0/+86And about 5 minutes later...

      http://www.engadget.com/2008/06/30/tesla-motors-el ...
      • TSSaloic, on 07/01/2008, -0/+6Nice.
      • reaperhatch, on 07/01/2008, -3/+2in 4 years they promise this? The technology was available a couple of years ago. I admit it wasn't efficient as today's models but we should be angry at how they are keeping us from it. We are being taxed at the gas pumps. We have become slaves.
        The oil ties our feet together. Laws ties our hands behind our back. constant disasters and wars confuse and keep our eyes away from the criminals. And we lay here lapping up the piss as they drain us dry.

        again I must ask Why is a hybrid, that uses 2 types of engines and energy storage systems, cheaper then the single electric engine automobile? the Lithium Ion batteries are 3k and can be bought back after use and recycled. the engine and other stuff is purchased for 6k.
      • strafefire, on 07/01/2008, -0/+5@reaperhatch:

        The amount of lithim ion batteries it takes to propel a vehicle 50 miles on a single charge and get up to speed of 65mph does not cost only $3k. I have looked this up, it averages around $10-14k.

        That is because, for even a SMALL car, you will need 144V, 200ah total capacity of your battery.

        Start here, and use the EV calculator:
        http://www.evconvert.com/tools/evcalc/?s=b

        notice the major difference between lithium battery price and lead acid battery price.

        Now, you could build a car on just lead acid batteries, however the WEIGHT added on begins to lower efficiency thereby getting you very little gain the more batteries you use. And, if you are doing a conversion and you violate gross vehicle weight, you are just driving a ticking time bomb.

        Now, NiMH batteries are cheaper than Li-Ion batteries, but are harder to come by due to patent being owned by a company called Cobasys....which is owned by Cheveron Texaco:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel_metal_hydride_ ...

        You can find more info on it here:
        http://www.evforum.net

    • wrxpert, on 06/30/2008, -1/+7I will be in line with you brother.
    • davidrools, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2Agreed, which is why I put down my reservation for an Aptera. Granted it looks crazy and doesn't have the range that the Teslas promise, but it'll be available to Californians next year and charges on a regular 10A circuit.
    • Muyoso, on 07/01/2008, -9/+4The main problem with this car is the range. 225 miles? That won't allow me to drive from college back home, and vice versa. And I would have to pull over to a charging station and wait for MINIMUM 3.5 hours? I don't think so.
      • RoflcopterFUEL, on 07/01/2008, -3/+2It takes you 5 hours to get to college? You need to move man.
      • davidrools, on 07/01/2008, -1/+6So don't buy it. A 15 passenger van doesn't sound like a good car for you either, but we're not complaining. The 225 mile range is more than enough for almost everyone's daily commute and normal weekend routine. The only thing it doesn't give you the freedom to do is go on a road trip. But honestly, when's the last time you actually did that, or how often do you, that it justifies driving a dirty inefficient gasoline car the rest of the time? I'm going all-electric and renting/borrowing/using a secondary gas car for the occasional long trip.
      • fixty, on 07/01/2008, -1/+6A comparative math/mileage/thought experiment seems in order. Assume you have a gas car and you now have that extra 3.5 hours to spend as you will since you didn't have to wait while an inconvenient electric car charges. Assume you spend those 3.5 hours being productive, working, at $10 an hour (to keep the math easy). You've made $35, minus taxes. So 3.5 hours spent not waiting for a charge added somewhere in the neighborhood of around $25 to your wallet.

        But how much do you have to dip into your wallet to pay for the gas for your trip? You're implying college is more than 225 miles so let's assume 350 miles and that your gas car gets 35 miles per gallon (again, to keep the math easy). That's 10 gallons each way for your trip home and back. Now assume gas reaches $5 per gallon. That's 10 x $5 X 2 or $100 for the round trip.

        So at $10 an hour you'd have to work ~14 hours (when you account for taxes) to pay for the gas for your trip.

        Tesla say's less than 2 cents a mile for the performance roadster. Take that number, 2 cent x 700 miles or $14.

        After taxes that $14 would take about 2 hours to earn at $10/hour.

        So, for your trip, using gas costs you 14 hours of your life as a wage slave. Or use electric and work ~2 hours and wait 3.5 hours (doing what/who ever) during charge time for a total ~5.5 hours.

        Gas is a much bigger waste of your time, plus you'll never refine your own gasoline, but there are a zillion ways to make your own electricity. Also, charge times will continue to drop and gas prices will continue to rise. And electric cars have only ~10% of the parts of gas cars, so they're simpler and more likely to be reliable as there's not as much stuff to break.
      • Muyoso, on 07/01/2008, -6/+3@ RoflcopterFUEL

        3 hours, 260 miles. And try reading, I said to drive from college, where obviously I was in an apartment, back home, to my parents house.

        @ davidrools

        Just got back from one yesterday in fact. 360 miles. It takes 6 hours to drive. It would take bare minimum, 9.5 hours to drive with this car, and that is most likely using no A/C or radio or anything else to tax the battery.

        @ fixty

        You completely disregard convenience. Who wants to be on the road for 8 hours when a gas car can do it in 4? And you disregard the probable MASSIVE cost of the replacement battery. And you disregard use of radio or A/C or headlights which would reduce range of your car.

    • rockefeller2, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3Even with gas at $4/gal. I could still get a new subcompact for ~13k and it would take me 10 years to put 17k worth of gas in it. Notice I haven't even factored in the cost of recharging the car on a daily basis.
      • Tenoq, on 07/01/2008, -1/+4Because the cost is negligible? And what about servicing? Servicing an electric car costs f'all when compared to your average internal combustion engine.

        But you are right, it would be cheaper to buy a gasoline-powered car. But I don't think your subcompact is going to be anywhere near as fast or fun to drive as this little Tesla. Perhaps if you'd said motorcycle... :p
  • jiqiren, on 06/30/2008, -1/+12so where can I put a deposit down?
    • 48snickers, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3At their one and only dealership, right next door to me in west L.A.
      • smacksaw, on 07/01/2008, -1/+4You're at that glory hole? Yeah, baby!
    • Twee, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1I'm glad there is a company actually willing to SELL an electric car, instead of leasing them like all of the major auto manufacturers who are in bed with big oil..
  • silver26, on 06/30/2008, -0/+39GM better get the Volt rolling ASAP.
    • wrxpert, on 06/30/2008, -2/+26It is really very sad that Tesla is already well along in this area while GM with all of it's money and resources is so far behind.
      • Praelior, on 07/01/2008, -0/+8GM has the volt prototype at the autoshow and says it'll be out by 2010... the tesla car probably wont be out for another year at least... and even then more than likely in very limited production. How is that being "so far behind"?
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3I really don't think GM is far behind. If Tesla makes once itsy bitsy mistake they will be gone. They have no depth as far as their balance sheet goes. This is a new technology and it needs to be well tested. Once the cars are on the production line and you have lets say five thousand of them out the door it will be too late to make any major modifications.

        Does anyone remember the Bricklin. I thought they were going to be around for a long time too. And Dan Bricklin was nobody's fool.
      • PatrickBrown, on 07/01/2008, -2/+10GM had a chance at dominating this market with the EV1. They instead chose to kill it and build more SUVs for quick profits.

        Unfortunately, that move hurt more than just the GM executives that made the decision, it hurt the employees that relied on GM who couldn't prevent the stupid direction the company was going in in the late 90s and early part of this decade.
      • darkNiGHTS, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4@Praelior

        Except for the fact that the Volt only has a 40 mile electric only range.
    • olsonick, on 06/30/2008, -0/+8It's not that they're so far behind, I don't think. What reason does GM have to push new technology when old technology is making money like crazy? Just today I listened to a GM advertisement for NEW BIG TRUCKS AND SUVs. I'm really getting sick of putting 60 bucks into my 4-Cylinder Accord every week. It's ridiculous.
      • bobbarkerbilly, on 07/01/2008, -2/+10A company like GM has to use some foresight if they wan't to stay competitive. Instead they end up looking like buffoons that put out gas guzzlers when gas prices are high. Look at Toyota - when gas prices were on the rise years ago, they had the Prius on the street and continued the line despite the prices cooling off. What did GM do? Release a new line of Trucks and SUVs. /facepalm
      • cdigioia, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3While the old technology is making money for SOME companies like crazy- GM isn't one of them - they posted a loss of almost $40 billion last year.
      • olsonick, on 07/01/2008, -1/+0Agreed. After thinking about it, I'd say that GM isn't stepping their game to Tesla and they'll likely need new blood to take a new direction.

        I wish I could afford to 'buy American'.
    • mikedoth, on 07/01/2008, -4/+2Isn't that a two seater?
    • whitej, on 07/01/2008, -3/+3The only thing I dislike about the volt is it's 40 mile range and gasoline generator. If I owned a volt, I would still be purchasing gasoline because my commute is about 60 miles round trip. I'd like be driving something fully electric like the tesla. Baby steps in the right direction though for GM.
    • videographer, on 07/01/2008, -8/+4The Volt will NEVER reach mass production. You heard it here first.

      Even if it did, I don't want some dip$#!t-designed car that looks like it rolled out of the Dick Tracy movie. Just a normal sedan would be fine, GM. Don't try to wow us with what you think of as "styling" - just put the gear into the Malibu and call it good!

      Won't happen.
    • DDMX, on 07/01/2008, -1/+6Volt: 40 Miles on Electricity Only, Then it's back to hybrid

      Tesla: 225 Miles on Electricity
      • stretch611, on 07/01/2008, -3/+6Volt: 40 Miles on Electricity, Then Hybrid, and eventually (after charging while on gas) electric again for another 40 miles.

        Tesla: 225 on Electricity then dead on the road until a tow or charge.

        That really is not meant to be a slam against Tesla, it is a reality. I am actually intrigued by the Tesla.

        However, it proves that you have to evaluate your needs and pick the best option. If you are traveling cross-country, the Volt would work wonders. For a daily commute or a trip to the store/beach/park the Volt is good but the Tesla is better. If you get a tesla and need to go cross country, leave it at home and take your gas guzzler on one of its rare trips...
      • buddyfarr, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2@stretch -
        AND?? who the heck drives 225 miles round trip every day? almost no one. thanks anyway. for the other 99% of us 225 miles is more than enough for their everyday life. 40 miles round trip is not enough for a lot of us and you would be back to gas. Equip the tesla with solar panels on the roof and you are set to go. You can also get a new SkyStream wind turbine to charge it at night at home and spend no $$$ for the electricity to charge it.
  • mikesly, on 06/30/2008, -2/+96The Terminator did not run on gas, coincidence i think not...
    • buddyfarr, on 07/01/2008, -1/+0that is right! we all need those small fusion reactors. I myself liked my old one but it made my skin glow after wearing it for more than 6 hours.
    • ValShecht, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2what did he run on ?
  • yazheirx, on 06/30/2008, -1/+11The only part that concerns me is the retrofit some of us would need for the home charging station. The Roadster requires a dedicated 90 amp circuit. This may be a bit difficult for some people to do. for a comparison most air conditioning systems only require a 30 amp circuit.

    I still want one.
    • BradMajors, on 07/01/2008, -0/+6Electric ovens normally have dedicated 40 to 60amp circuits.
    • tnoy, on 07/01/2008, -0/+11If you're about to drop $100k+ on a new car, having a electrician come in and install the charging system would be an insignificant cost.

      At most it would be a few hundred dollars.
    • Burn, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2I believe what it requires is actually a 70 Amp circuit (Not 90A) and they can provide an optional Mobile Charger kit which allows charging from any standard outlet.
      • minoss, on 07/01/2008, -2/+5I don't think you quite understand how electricity works. Plugging a car into a standard outlet won't work if the standard outlet has a 15-30A breaker on it which is typical of most homes. Also, people are way underestimating the cost increase on their electricity bill. It's probably going to be a similar increase as running your air conditioner 24/7 would be if you're a heavy driver. Cheaper than gas to be sure but not free by any stretch of the imagination.

        Then you've got the other problems of how you now have a $60,000 car that can't go more than 112 miles from your home.
      • ArmandoM, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3You realize that with the tesla roadster, that's already out, they let you plug it into any standard outlet with their mobile charge kit right? Explain to them why it doesn't work. It just takes longer to charge that way.

        As for underestimating the cost on my electric bill, I think "cheaper than gas" is a bit of an understatement. They say it's like 2 cents/mile, that's a whole lot cheaper than gas. Once these cars become affordable (and I'm not talking about $60k, I mean really affordable.), I'll happily accept that massive 2 cents/mile increase on my bill.
    • casualsurfer, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3That's a good point... imagine the draw on the grid when everybody plugs in their car at the same time after a hard day's work.
  • chrisbaskind, on 06/30/2008, -2/+24Still too expensive. But at least someone other than football players, movie stars, and well-heeled early adopters will be able to snag this one.
  • greenjestur, on 07/01/2008, -5/+168since when did 60K become affordable?
    • badfrog, on 07/01/2008, -2/+5Affordable to the top 5 percent of incomes, of course!
    • dafragsta, on 07/01/2008, -3/+26No *****. It's not accessable to most Americans until it's in the $20K range.
      • minoss, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2Well yea, first generation cars built on entirely new engine dynamics are rarely cheap. 60k is actually quite a low price point.
    • rodrigorules, on 07/01/2008, -2/+15compared to the first tesla at 100,000
    • MildApplause, on 07/01/2008, -1/+10Maybe they'll offer good financing?

      You won't be paying for gas, so you'll have several extra hundred dollars per month to play around with.
      • casey148, on 07/01/2008, -4/+7You're not taking into account the rapid growth of your electricity bill. Electricity isn't free you know.
      • smacksaw, on 07/01/2008, -0/+5We'll all have Mr. Fusion Home Energy Reactor flux capacitors by 2015. So no worries there, casey148.
      • Anand999, on 07/01/2008, -0/+14Electricity isn't free but it's comparatively cheap compared to gasoline. Tesla estimates the cost of electricity to be around $0.01/mile. In a 25 MPG car with $4/gallon car, you're looking at $0.16/mile. At 1000 miles per month, that's $10 vs. $160.

        For a standard 5 year car loan with a decent interest rate, $1000 financed will cost about $20/month. So with that ~$150 a month you save on gas, you could afford a car that cost about $7500 more and still be spending the same amount of money. Depending on your driving habits and the car you're replacing, it could an even bigger difference. Keep in mind none of this even considers tax credits and other privileges that come with having an electric vehicle.
      • Spartycus, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2In that case smacksaw, I want my flying delorian, hover board and powered laces!
      • tnoy, on 07/01/2008, -0/+7It would save me about $150 a month in gas.

        Then again, the monthly payments would be a lot more than the $0 I'm paying now.
      • 11b1p, on 07/01/2008, -1/+1@casey148 It's called extension cord and neighbors socket
    • redDC143C, on 07/01/2008, -1/+14Well, if you think about it in the long term with savings in gas, it probably will be very affordable.

      According to Tesla, the roadster costs roughly 2.5 cents for every mile driven. Lets take an guesstimate of around 20 MPG for an average car on the road nowadays and do some math. Lets also assume a conservative number of annual mileage to be 10K.

      $4.00 / 20 MPG = $0.20 per mile, again, $4 is a conservative number since gas prices will never go down
      10,000 * $0.20 = $2,000 in gas
      10,000 * $.025 = $250 in electricity

      $2,000 - $250 = $1,750 annual savings

      multiple that with the estimated battery life of the roadster (10 years) and you've saved a *very* conservative $17,500

      essentially this car will be only $42,500 -- not bad at all. This also doesn't take into account gas prices probably doubling by the end of those 10 years, as well as tax rebates and the such for your particular state (sometimes very substantial).
      • bobartig, on 07/01/2008, -2/+9And that battery, which costs (lets say) $5000 today, will probably be $700 by the time you need to replace it.
      • logdesigner, on 07/01/2008, -3/+1I get my power from T.V.A, among the cheapest in the nation, and if I can't use my toaster without an extra $250 increase a year. How many kilowatts do you think a 90 amp current will draw? How long does it take to charge?
      • smacksaw, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2The more you drive it the more you save. CAFE is supposed to be 26mpg, but it's not. However, very few places are less than 10k mi/yr. If that were the case, leasing would be much more popular.
      • dollar0dot02, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2You also need to deduct from your annual saving the difference in the insurance premium for driving expense sports car with few mechanics/body shops who know how to fix it.
      • tas08, on 07/01/2008, -3/+3A $40,000 car is still not at all cheap, and I drive a '97 Ford Escort that gets 28-30 MPG (I know this for sure, I keep track of how much gas I put in and mark down the trip meter) and still running great at 93,000 miles. So, if money is at all tight and I can get a car that gets 24+MPG for less than $7,000 vs. an electric that will cost me $60,000 up front with the promise of effectively going down to
      • deMonkey, on 07/01/2008, -1/+2And you won't have to pay for many of the routine services on a regular car, such as oil changes.
      • Risingashes, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1You have failed to account for the depreciation of money over time. This disqualifies you from making any kind of monetary calculations that involve more than 1 time period.

        Please educate yourself before making future attempts at being relevant.
    • desertDenizen, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2Look at the other cars around you on the highway. It's more than 5%. Nearly all debt financed, of course, but still.
    • cheesylobster, on 07/01/2008, -1/+4MANY cars (BMWs, Audis, Mercedes, lots of nice SUVs, e.g.) that you see on the road cost around 60k. Given this is not affordable to much of America's middle class, it still opens up a very large sector of the automotive market. Also, the demand for a sedan will be much higher than that of a two-seater sports car.
    • corevette, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2the Tesla S is being sold in the bay area first....
      in the bay area....$60,000 is affordable for a lot more people than a lot other places in the u.s.
    • Bagrad, on 07/01/2008, -1/+1Bill Gates wrote that article.
    • stpirate, on 07/01/2008, -0/+05 yr payments = $1000/month plus financing costs
      Leasing would probably be closer to $600-700/month.
      That's about what you'd expect for other luxury brands.
    • BigPapi, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1This is targeted towards the 5 series/A6 crowd, which I definitely wouldn't consider affordable to most people.
  • Britney90210, on 07/01/2008, -9/+1Now this is news!
  • myk7, on 07/01/2008, -6/+0***** YES. Sign me up.
  • MrTito, on 07/01/2008, -10/+130"Affordable $60K"

    Yeah, it'll go great with my $185K 108-inch LCD TV.
    • Zaneris, on 07/01/2008, -1/+5Well, I can afford a $30k car through financing with $800 in other bills each month while making $40,000/year...

      So I'd assume anyone making $80,000/year or more would be the bracket that this is affordable to.
      • rockefeller2, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1nevermind
      • d3matt, on 07/01/2008, -0/+6ummm... no...

        You buy a house that is at most 3*your yearly salary and you total vehicle value is at most 1/3 * your yearly salary... ie 80,000/year salary shouldn't have more than $27,000 of capital tied up in vehicles.

        House usually maintain or gain value. Cars always lose value.
      • bwa236, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3Unfortunately we can't really double things like that, though I wish we could. I make 6-7 times what I did in college (~$70k now), but I also live in a more expensive area and my other expenses are way up. If I still lived with 3 other guys and paid $300/mo for rent/electricity/etc and made 70k, I've have one.
        You make more, you spend more. Unfortunately.
        I am not willing to pay $1000+/mo for a car. Maybe if I made another 30-50k a year, then I MIGHT consider it, but it's just not sensible even in the 80k range.
      • Zaneris, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1Failed to consider the probable cost of living increases, so I guess in reality a $60,000 car would have to be your priority over many other things to be feasible for anyone not making 6 figure salaries.
      • antonio97b, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1Hmm. No wonder people are in debt. They think just because it is finanaciable that it is affordable.
      • grizzlybrice, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1What about electricity costs to charge the thing at home? How much juice will this sucker be pulling annually?
    • ExRe, on 07/01/2008, -4/+6If I had $60k to spend on a car, I'd buy the best I can find for under $4k, put $1k into my computer, and then just throw the rest in a savings account.

      Spending $60k on a car is stupid if you don't make $500k+ per year. I see all these people with cars that cost more than their house is worth and wonder what the ***** is going through their brain.
      • rockefeller2, on 07/01/2008, -1/+2I agree. It's the people that live paycheck to paycheck. They max their monthly incomes out to look the best they can. Behind the scenes, they don't have *****, just a bunch of debt. No assetts.
      • OtterStratton, on 07/01/2008, -2/+8Really? Since the average price of a home was 260,000 as of four years ago(which was the most recent I could find), how many people do you see with cars more expensive than their homes?

        I saw a Lamborghini once
      • antonio97b, on 07/01/2008, -1/+2Let me put it this way.

        Some people think putting 1k into a computer is stupid. You can get away with a 400$ Dell so why to you pay more? Because you want more.

        Did you ever think that someone feels the same way about a car? They want more because they like it. It's a matter of perspective. Don't call someone stupid if they think otherwise.

        Of course this is digg so I'll be buried because I equated computers as a hobby with evil cars.
      • ExRe, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1There is a huge difference between spending $600 more on a PC and $10-20,000 more on a vehicle.
  • Rousterfar, on 07/01/2008, -2/+19I'm curious what it would do to your electric bill to charge a car like this every night. I know gas is expensive, but would you really be saving that much money, all things equal?
    • umdigger, on 07/01/2008, -4/+11yes
      • Rousterfar, on 07/01/2008, -0/+5I'm not saying you are wrong, but I would love to see someone do the math.
      • umdigger, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3I've seen it done before, comes out to something like 3-4 cents / mile as opposed to 10+ that gas is currently. Don't have the link though, sorry.

        But think of it this way too. The US is "the Saudi Arabia of coal" so at least our energy would be coming from our country (for those of us in the US).
      • Rousterfar, on 07/01/2008, -1/+1Awesome. Toss some aftermarket solar panels on the roof to extend your range and you are all set.
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3umdigger, does the cost at 3 to 4 cents per mile include replacing the batteries and any other system malfunction? The motors have not been tested for 200,000 mile road tests in all sorts of weather.
      • robgies, on 07/01/2008, -0/+7Here in the lower mainland of British Columbia gas is around $1.50 per litre. Gas has an energy density of 35 MJ per litre . That is 4.3 cents per MJ. Electricity cost around 6.5 cents per KWHr or 1.8 cents per MJ. When you take into account that a car with good fuel efficiency is still very inefficient overall after you take into account thermal and drivetrain frictional losses it means that an electric car is far ahead in terms of efficiency over a gas car. Electric cars also have the potential to recover some energy with regenerative braking which gives even higher overall efficiency. Gas engines for most cars will have an efficiency of somewhere in the range of 20 to 30 percent. Electric motors can be designed with efficiencies in the high 90s. For future electric cars this means that there is the potential for a possible cost ratio of 10 to 1 for electric over gas vehicles.
      • tkstock, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2From their website:

        The Tesla Roadster gets an equivalent 256mpg, or about 2 cents per mile.

        "That depends on how far the battery has been discharged and what source is being used to charge the batteries. A full charge using the Home Charging Station (included in the price of the Tesla Roadster) can be achieved in as little as 3.5 hours."

        The new sedan probably has similar specs.
      • umdigger, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1QuadZ, currently replacing batteries is probably a bit more than most people would like to pay (IIRC it is like 4k for the Prius). But I can assure you that as technology improves the cost will go down. And sadly for me, my Audi allroad probably cost more to maintain than new batteries would. So it all depends on the vehicle too.
    • 48snickers, on 07/01/2008, -0/+7While it stretches the definition of 'free' (someone is paying for it), you can charge electric cars for free at public charging stations all over L.A.
      • rockefeller2, on 07/01/2008, -8/+3Louisiana is the *****!!!!
      • Twee, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1He's talking about Los Angeles, not Louisiana, thus the dots in between L.A.
    • psylence, on 07/01/2008, -2/+6If you're running off a nuke plant like we are it's *definitely* cheaper. ***** coal!
      • Wasyu, on 07/01/2008, -0/+5I agree we do need to build more nuclear plants they solved the waste issue well the navy did some years ago.
        Plus a nuclear plant creates less radioactive material then a coal plant running with out a scrubber since coal has trace amounts of radon,radium, and thorium in it.
    • Muyoso, on 07/01/2008, -0/+6I read about this car. The car uses 58 Kwh to charge. I pay 7 cents a Kwh. It comes to $4.06 to fill it up.
      • xienze, on 07/01/2008, -6/+0That's assuming it takes one hour to charge, which it doesn't. I think it's in the neighborhood of 8 hours or so. You're really looking at $30-40 to "fill up". Cheaper than gas (generally), but not pocket change. The range is also something like 200 miles. When compared against a car that gets 20+MPG and gas at approximately $4/gallon, the costs are much closer than you let on.
      • tkstock, on 07/01/2008, -6/+1It's in the neighborhood of 3.5 with the home charging station (included). So you're looking at $14.00 to fill up or so, and it gets 225 miles on a full charge.

        This is assuming the specs are similar to the roadster.
      • Wasyu, on 07/01/2008, -0/+9KWh is the total energy used not the rate at which it takes power.
        Rate would be KW not KWh so yes it would only cost $4.06 to charge it.
      • tkstock, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4duh! good catch Wasyu!

        Wait, if it takes 3.5 hours to charge at 58KWh, that means it's charging at a rate of 16,571 watts per hour. That's roughly 1657 volts on 10 amps - that will kick the crap out of you if you get shocked by it!!! Standard service only goes up to 440 volts, so I wonder if they're requiring a 40 amp circuit...?
      • perral1, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3Someone above said it requires either a 70 or 90 amp circuit.
    • Warbick, on 07/01/2008, -0/+6Its a few cents a mile, I've heard about 2 cents per mile.
    • pr0t0, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4It's definitely cheaper. Put up a small wind turbine and the savings will pay for the turbine and then put a small dent in the cost of the car.
      • rockefeller2, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3Put up a small wind turbine, ***** the electric car, ride a bike.
    • videographer, on 07/01/2008, -1/+5Put solar panels up and it is a wash. It's like paying for your fuel in advance, but the price will never go up, just down.

    • LoudMusic, on 07/01/2008, -0/+11Using the specs on the previous announced Tesla Roadster compared to a comparable gasoline car, the Roadster was achieving roughly $0.03 / mile versus a gasoline car at around $0.22 / mile.

      So, yes, your electric bill will go up. But you won't be visiting the gas station, at all. If you are like me and make a 60 mile daily round-trip commute you'd be saving $60 / week in commuting fuel. Which becomes $3,120 / year. Not to mention the dramatically reduced maintenance costs. No more oil changes, far fewer brake pads, longer lasting tires, no engine belts ... Another three to four hundred dollars a year there.
  • KMyHero, on 07/01/2008, -1/+41Ironic that the man who helped bring the Hummer to civilians is on the cutting edge of green car technology.
    • dafragsta, on 07/01/2008, -1/+1Yep. I wonder if he still drives his Hummer.
      • smacksaw, on 07/01/2008, -5/+3The only hummer Arnold has is what he gets from his wife. Er, umm, err...gulp.
      • redfred18t, on 07/01/2008, -1/+9smacksaw, you better get to the choppa for that comment :D
      • oldgal, on 07/01/2008, -0/+7He has quite a few - they all run on bio-fuel.
  • Thrilltone, on 07/01/2008, -8/+15We'll have a selection of cool $20,000 electric cars within 2 years.
    None of which will be American made, sadly.
    • Rousterfar, on 07/01/2008, -1/+13Bring it on.
    • stretch611, on 07/01/2008, -0/+7No, some will be American made... just not paying an American exec. It seems now that Toyota and Honda build more cars in the US than GM and Ford.
    • Wolfcaster, on 07/01/2008, -5/+3why is that sad? stupid nationalist
      • Thrilltone, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2Pardon me for wishing that our economy wasn't in the toilet
  • erikivy, on 07/01/2008, -6/+45On what planet is $60,000 affordable? I realize it's a breakthrough and all, but the average car buyer can't afford anything like this.
    • thegreatgazoo, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3No, but it is a reasonable price for early adopters. It's cheaper than a BMW M5, or 7 series, many Mercedes models.

      And it was what, 5 years ago that a 50" plasma TV was $25,000 (look it up), now they are what, $2,500? I don't see that much of a price drop for the entire car, but I can see that type of drop for the electrical components.

      Think of a Toyota Camry. They start at $19,000, but lets just start at $20,000. Assume that there is 5,000 in powertrain 'stuff' in it. That gives us a car shell of $15,000.

      At $60,000 for the car, that gives $45,000 for power train 'stuff'. Assume that it goes to 20% of the price, that's $9,000. Add the 15k, and that gives a final car price of $24,000.

      • d3matt, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4it isn't the powertrain... it's the batteries. Lithium-ion batteries aren't expected to drop to much in cost in the very near future.

        I will gladly eat my words if I'm wrong!
      • benmiller313, on 07/01/2008, -0/+0Im glad you diddnt just make up numbers and took the time to look up facts! your analysis is duly noted.
    • desertDenizen, on 07/01/2008, -2/+3High-end electrics will help legitimize the category in the lower price ranges and among the less socially aware. And connect green with aspirational themes, which must happen for the mainstream to fully embrace self-constraining consumption.

      To all the browns on digg who call every green who wants to reduce consumption and C02 a "hippy" -- ***** YOU, you have no idea what changes are happening beneath your own cloddish feet. You're about to become a grease stain on the highway of epic trends.
      • Y0tsuya, on 07/01/2008, -1/+2Calm down, go eat a granola bar or something.
      • desertDenizen, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1That was pretty funny. :)
      • desertDenizen, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1The S-curve is playing out in very provocative ways in this go 'round with diffusion. What amazes me is that a pattern can happen over, and over, and over, and still catch a majority of people totally by surprise (I'm reminded of people in '95 who said nobody would ever buy anything online.) I'm torn between spending my time evangelizing vs. just sitting back, doing research, and picking stocks, where all of the advantage comes from information asymmetry. I've already made $35K in green stocks and the party hasn't even begun yet.
    • PatrickFisher, on 07/01/2008, -2/+1$60k isn't that much compared to the average salary here (Fort McMurray, Canada, same goes for some other places). Of course, salaries here are only so high because of the oil industry :)
  • Praelior, on 07/01/2008, -6/+1560k? pretty pointless. You know the Volt is going to be half that price. I've been reading these articles about Tesla motors for years now. By the time it finally comes out, they'll be the last ones out the gate.

    I'm sure itd be environmentally more friendly to spend 20k on a small ICE car, and spend the remaining 40k planting trees or buying solar panels.
    • Abomonog, on 07/01/2008, -3/+4Tesla Roadsters already on sale buddy. It's just been blocked in the US. Just like this Tesla sedan will be.
      • Praelior, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3The production numbers now are in the "hundreds", thats a drop in the bucket. And this sedan won't be in production anytime soon.

        Blocked in the US? Did you just make that up?
      • honesttussey, on 07/01/2008, -1/+5"It's just been blocked in the US. Just like this Tesla sedan will be."

        Source? Oh you pulled it out of your ass? Ah ok.
      • Twee, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Praelior, RTFA. It says that they are preparing to construct a manufacturing facility for the cars in California. New factory = mass production is on its way.
    • TSSaloic, on 07/01/2008, -1/+6The Volt will be $40K.
    • JointVenture, on 07/01/2008, -1/+1Not only that, they can only make a few dozen a year.
  • kalvinb, on 07/01/2008, -2/+17Let's see, my current car payment is $365 + $500 in gas every month. That works out to $51,900 in five years. That car would pay for itself in about 6 years were you to get it interest free. Not including the cost of recharging.

    Hardly affordable even for someone with a long commute. I'll stick to carpooling until an all electric that's actually affordable comes out.
    • matu4251, on 07/01/2008, -1/+11I'm pretty sure your electricity bill would seriously increase during those 5 years.
      • d3matt, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4If one ever is cheap enough, I plan to drag an extension cord to work :-P
    • benmiller313, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1yah, and I dont pay a cent for this apartment im renting(except rent and utilities)
    • smartmlp, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3What are you driving that requires so much fuel? At 20MPG, that is enough to travel over 2,200 miles per month at $4.40 a gallon. ($500 / $4.40 * 20). This makes me think you are driving a large vehicle that gets less than 20MPG, amazingly that means you probably could save alot more RIGHT now by just getting a smaller car! At 30MPG, $500 a month is enough to go almost 3,500 miles, or over 40,000 miles a year and that is 110 miles PER day, 365 days per year!
  • kolyana, on 07/01/2008, -6/+41C'mon guys, it IS affordable. Now, granted, it's more in the range of a nice BMW or Mercedes, but it's NOT a super-car price tag. Can I afford one? No! But it's not just top 5% material here. I have 3 friends who could get one of these if they were so inclined, and none are millionaires. This is a great step in the right direction and - like everything else - the price will come down.

    I remember buying my first flat panel LCD monitor for like $1,600 - it was only a 15" thing; ridiculous price; but at the time it was the first of it's type. Not long later and prices tumble as everyone gets in on the action and this will be no different; it's great news.
    • Rousterfar, on 07/01/2008, -1/+5Who is digging this guy down? He's right! The price is falling.
    • frieddonuts, on 07/01/2008, -0/+360,000 dollars seems to be the tipping point where enough could be sold to decrease the costs of production. They're not aiming for middle-class people as early adopters- more like the upper middle class.
      • Twee, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1I think my parents could probably afford this car.
    • jhawk16, on 07/01/2008, -0/+0I agree the cost is going down. I can wait to see what these cars look like in five years. I want two of them.
  • Beanbones, on 07/01/2008, -3/+29For all those saying that a $60k isn't affordable, let's look closer.

    The site (teslamotors.com) advertises "2 cents per mile" as a measure of how efficient their cars run. Well, let's crunch some numbers and see if this would be a good reason to buy.

    My 2006 Toyota Corolla consistently gets about 32 miles per gallon; one refill of my 10 gallon tank costs me about $45. So, the fuel cost per mile for my car is $45 divided by 320 miles, roughly... 14 cents per gallon. So far, so good. Now, let's see how many miles I'd have to drive to make up the cost difference.

    Per mile, I'd be saving 12 cents if I were to drive a TM car. The price difference between my car and theirs is roughly $48k. 48.000 / 0.12 = 400000 miles. Wow, that's actually a lot. I don't think I've ever put that many miles on any car before replacing it, and I don't think the "average consumer" will, either.

    Who killed the electric car? Cost efficiency. As usual.

    EDIT: However, those who are in the market for a sedan, and are therefore looking for cars in a similar price range... you'd be stupid NOT to buy this car, since your price difference would be much smaller and you'd have to put far fewer miles on the car to make up for the difference.
    • rsHoratio, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3Priceless
    • Praelior, on 07/01/2008, -1/+4Perhaps the energy cost would be 2 cents per mile. If anything breaks on this car, its going to be extremely expensive to replace, and probably your corner mechanic wont be capable of fixing it. Any first run car (by any company), usually has lots of problems. Id assume a brand new car company with a fairly new technology would have even more.
      • Beanbones, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4Well, naturally. Early adopters ALWAYS get burned.
      • Logicexe, on 07/01/2008, -0/+5Cars do come with warranties you know. Electric motors aren't new technology, they've been around for over a century so I doubt you'd have many problems on that end. Heck, your maintenance costs will probably be smaller considering how much more simple an electric motor is compared to a more complex ICE which has far more moving parts and little pieces to wear down and break over time.

        Any flaws in the design of the car are very likely to arise early in the car's lifetime. Tesla has already had a few problems with the Roadster that they promptly fixed up so even if there were problems Tesla would fix them up free of charge. These guys aren't idiots, they're fully aware that they're a new company and that there exists a large amount of skepticism, heck even I'm wary of buying a car from them and I mostly support them. I doubt they'd release a car with serious design flaws and not do their best to fix any problems at absolutely no charge.

        That said, I'd like to see what they can do in the sub 30K range. I'd really like to see a good plug in electric gasoline hybrid out of these guys. They seem to get that there are tons of people out there who want to buy an electric car but don't want to drive around in some tiny plastic looking two seater.
      • mconstan, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2With electric cars there is far fewer things to break. Much less maintenance and much simpler engine design. The lack of repair and maintenance items has been one of the main reasons auto companies have been slow to embrace electric cars.

        It's true early adopters always get burned, but once this technology advances a bit more the reduced cost of repair and maintenance will be a big reason to get one.
    • desertDenizen, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4Good stuff, but the caveat should have come at the beginning. A 60$ sports sedan is not a substitute for a Corolla, total apples and oranges.
    • brandf, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2"$48k. 48.000 / 0.12 = 400000 miles. Wow, that's actually a lot."

      so you're driving a brand new $12,000 car? If not, the comparison is meaningless.

      also, you're using today's prices for gas. If the gas price doubles between now and 2010 (could happen), and if you didn't compare a used car to a new one, the math would have worked much differently:

      At 24 cents per mile & compared to a modest $25k new car, it would only take ~150k miles. Factor in oil changes and burned out transmissions and you could be down near the 100k mile break even point.

      I'd say electric cars aren't too far off.
      • benmiller313, on 07/01/2008, -0/+0arent the first gen tesla's notorious for having their transmission break down constantly?
    • diggingaround, on 07/01/2008, -1/+5You are forgetting one very important thing and that is... ehm.. you are not giving ONE SINGLE PENNY to Big Oil Corporations.. and you are not financing another war for OIL. And to me my friend, that is a good enough reson to buy Tesla electric car. I want MY money to go into development of "blood for oil" free technologies.

      Now regarding batteries.. let me remind you that Toyota has stopped selling their Electric RAV4 in 2002.. yet you can see those cars even today running down the street. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV
      • viggooo, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1Not only are they running in the streets. They have actually increased in value since Toyota were selling them. The Wikipedia article states an MSRP of $42,000. Still today, used RAV4 EVs are sold for $50,000 and more.

        http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/05/26/2001-toyot ...
      • dcshiderly, on 07/01/2008, -0/+0That's not really true. All the machines used to dig the raw materials from the ground are powered by diesel engines. All the transport of the raw and finished product is powered by petroleum-fed vehicles. All the plastics involved (and there area bunch, weight is the enemy for cars) are derived by necessity from petroleum.

        /Just saying
  • pstroll, on 07/01/2008, -8/+3Oh great ... only Kevin Rose and Schwarzenegger can actually afford one.
  • itchie, on 07/01/2008, -7/+060k is affordable, thats news to me.......

    Please call me when it hits 20k, kthxbye.
  • EEdesigner, on 07/01/2008, -6/+0Nice optimism, folks. Somehow I must have missed the news on new types of batteries. This thing'll do about 60 miles (if they're lucky - and if they don't use the lights, radio, A/C, etc). Oh, and it won't be out for at least a year or two. Wanna bet?
    • Muyoso, on 07/01/2008, -1/+5It will do what they say, 225, but you bring up a good point about the A/C and radio. You KNOW they are running NOTHING when they pull out those 225 figures. Add in a radio, headlights, and the A/C, and you can cut that number WAY down.
    • xenoc1de, on 07/01/2008, -2/+2The current Tesla on the market gets 250 miles per charge. Don't joke yourself.
    • pbon, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1Yup.. it's called Lithium-ion. It's been around for a couple decades and they're really very common. As a previous digger mentioned, it's how the Roadster gets 250mpc, as promised.

      And nope.. The energy it takes to move a 2000-pound(?) object 100mph is many many times higher than the energy it takes to power headlights, power windows, radio, wipers, and the like. Think of how much parasitic power loss you get from belt-driven accessories like an alternator or an ac compressor (not much.. few hp.. even guys I've known who raced 3rd gen f-bodies never bothered to take the compressor off)

      I'm just curious, why the number 60? I've seen that number passed around and around.. Where did it come from?
    • pbon, on 07/01/2008, -0/+0One thing that is worth mentioning is the fact that the battery pack should start to lose its ability to hold a full charge after I'm not sure how many years.. Now that would be a potentially annoying situation that I CAN'T WAIT to experience.
  • DaDiggydiggyDOC, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2All things have to start somewhere and this is a good direction IMO. This is a great alternative to gas and the more interest in this type of vehicle the faster "WE" will actually be to owning one of these things.

    Looking ahead if we all start using electric cars as our primary mode of transportation...we better start upgrading our ***** power grid system, or we are going to have to also start living with constant brown or black outs from all of us recharging our cars.
    • Logicexe, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2Not too long ago they conducted a study showing that with current off peak power production America could theoretically power 85% of all the cars on the road without making any changes. That's a huge amount of electricity that's essentially going to waste that we could put to work with electric vehicles. Realistically, even if every auto manufacturer put an electric car up for sale it would probably take a good decade or two before we get remotely close to replacing 85% of all the cars on the road with efficient electric cars. There's lots of time to improve and expand current electricity production.
      • DaDiggydiggyDOC, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2Let's hope they do! You know that people tend to forget and would have to charge their car during the daytime..that's what worries me is the daytime loads. Good info on the off peak loads, I guess we would need or hope most just charge while they sleep.
  • webpoet73, on 07/01/2008, -1/+260k is 4x what I paid for my car... so, yeah, not affordable for me. but this bodes well for the future. All we need to do is build more nuclear power plants to be able to power all of these electric vehicles... no harm in building more nuclear power plants or is there?
    • Typhoon2009, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2Depends, there's the risk of nuclear waste contaminating its containment environment... but I've never heard of that happening. Honestly, nuclear energy has proven extremely safe in its 50/60 years of usage. Chernobyl was the only major accident... Three Mile Island was a joke. More people probably died of heart disease that day than from the 3MI accident (note to the slow: nobody was killed or injured at Three Mile Island).
    • videographer, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1No need for nukes. Put 4Kw of solar panels on your roof (yeah, not free) and you can cancel out your overnight charging. People are doing this now - TODAY - with the Toyota Rav4-EV. it's real, working, and has been on the road for over eight years. Check it out.

  • Br3ach, on 07/01/2008, -6/+1Affordable for who?
  • sqeakingkev, on 07/01/2008, -2/+8"pic or it didn't happen"
  • CatsAreGods, on 07/01/2008, -1/+7My first house was $63,000, and that was in the 1980s, not a million years ago.
    • Pstall, on 07/01/2008, -1/+1Yeah... how much is that house worth now though? 200k+?(unless its a home on wheels or manufactured)
      • Twee, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1That must be a ***** house if it's only worth $200k, hell, even $300k.
    • koft, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2The dollar was worth more then.
    • senatorpjt, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3In 1980, the average price of a new car was $7210.
    • reaperhatch, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2it's not so much the value of the item has increased but that the value of the paper (monopoly money) everyone trusts in is decreasing in value. Pretty clever way of cheating people.
  • MildApplause, on 07/01/2008, -1/+27Nobody could afford the first TV sets or computers, either.

    I'm just happy that a step is being taken in the right direction.
    • reaperhatch, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1This is not the first technology of its kind.
  • Evildudetx, on 07/01/2008, -6/+4Wow, nice idea, horrible execution. Why aren't they making cars for the common man? The people who can afford this POS don't need an electric car - they can afford gas regardless of the cost. And honestly, I could give a ***** if I see Ed Begley Jr. or some other enviro-fag driving around in one. I want to see an average joe driving one and giving me his honest opinion of whether it is saving him money......
    • parsap, on 07/01/2008, -1/+8Because this is the first generation.
    • senatorpjt, on 07/01/2008, -0/+6The people who could afford the first gasoline-powered cars could afford a horse and carriage, while the common man had to walk.
    • apeweek, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2This is the classic Henry Ford strategy. Ford didn't come from nowhere to mass-produce the Model T.

      He started out by making cars for the wealthy. The income from that bankrolled his mass production ideas.
  • tekism, on 07/01/2008, -3/+7What happens when everyone comes home around 6ish and plugs in their car to recharge, will the electric companies be able to keep up with the demands?
    • smacksaw, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3California can barely keep up with the demands of AC.
      • Typhoon2009, on 07/01/2008, -1/+2Why does CA have such a huge energy problem?
      • Twee, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1California has the largest population out of any state.
    • apeweek, on 07/01/2008, -1/+2Yes, the electric companies can indeed keep up with increased demands in the evening and nighttime. This is off-peak electricity.

      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/12/06121 ...

      Mileage From Megawatts: Study Finds Enough Electric Capacity To 'Fill Up' Plug-in Vehicles

      "Science Daily — If all the cars and light trucks in the nation switched from oil to electrons, idle capacity in the existing electric power system could generate most of the electricity consumed by plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. A new study for the Department of Energy finds that "off-peak" electricity production and transmission capacity could fuel 84 percent of the country's 220 million vehicles if they were plug-in hybrid electrics."
      • Jektal, on 07/01/2008, -1/+2It's only off-peak if nobody's using it.
      • apeweek, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1The presumption that drivers would charge overnight is not a stretch - my own utility here in Detroit has an off-peak rate available that's half of the daytime rate. I'm certainly going to charge my car when I can cut my bill in half.
      • Twee, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1CTRaider, we don't use coal plants in California.
  • logdesigner, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2I wonder if it is like most other electric cars with a ten year life span or less on the batteries? With a price tag of over 10k, this should be factored in to the purchase. Still, things are looking good for our energy independence outlook.
    • JointVenture, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1Some companies are toying with the idea of "leasing" the batteries.
      • SuperCujo, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1And the battery packs are expected to be down to under $2K in the next few years.
    • apeweek, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2Depends on the type of batteries used. Newer nanotech lithium batteries have lifespans of twenty years or more.
  • krahzee, on 07/01/2008, -2/+23A few unanswered problems to what is a great start:

    1) Where do you charge it on the go? Likewise, what if you live in an apartment, where do you charge it? Not everyone is a homowner.

    2) Lifespan/ cost of replacing batteries, motors etc. They have to be resonable or people will avoid it once word gets out. $10k for new motors every 10 years? No thanks. Too expensive

    3) How does the car perform in the cold Northeast winters. Better yet, what about our neighbors in Canada? Sure the motors may still work, but as anyone who has tried to start a conventional engine on a brutally cold day will tell you, an old battery is a lot less likely to give you the juice you need. What happens to this in that situation, especially if you can't garage it over night?

    4) How accurate is that range? Since conventional cars run accesories off of power genrated by the gas engine on it is on, how much impact will AC, heat, headlights, stereo have on the range of this car? Will driving home in at night in December mean no radio or heat for me since turning them on will use more of the battery than I can let it and still make it home and see along the way?

    Looks very promising because it is a CAR, not a 3 wheeled trike that most drivers would be afraid to drive for safety reasons. The $30k price point will make it affordable in that the gas saving make it worth it, unlike the $60k one, which makes it harder to swallow.
    • PatrickBrown, on 07/01/2008, -0/+5(1) is a good point.

      I wish the government would begin to transition towards electric cars rather than pursuing hydrogen fuel cells. The hydrogen required has to be generated from... electricity! Surely it is not more efficient to use electric to create hydrogen and then convert that back into energy compared to simply using the electricity in the first place. It isn't cheaper to move hydrogen around compared to electricity.

      (2) Assuming the technology progresses I hope this improves.

      (3) According to a an editor on a blog post at teslamotors:
      "Editor’s response: The battery pack will need to be plugged in and heated before use if it has become cold-soaked to below -20C. However, in many cases even if the outside temperature drops somewhat below -20C the battery will still be warmer because of the thermal insulation and large thermal mass. It is the battery temperature that matters not the outside air temperature. "
      http://www.teslamotors.com/blog4/?p=43

      (4) I doubt the efficiency would be reduced that much (unless you are driving 200 miles / day ... perhaps you are but that is unusual as I think typical is fewer than 50 total).

      Hopefully the price will continue to come down. Too expensive for nearly everyone at the moment. However, at 60,000 maybe they can sell enough / technology will get better to have price come down further.
    • apeweek, on 07/01/2008, -0/+61) Where do you charge it on the go?

      I'm an EV driver - I charge my car at work as well as at home. This is ideal, if you have an agreeable employer.

      2) Lifespan/ cost of replacing batteries, motors etc.

      Varies a lot. My own EV is quite old, but at least lead-acid tech is cheap. Battery replacement cost works out to about 4 to 5 cents/mile (and electricity is 1 to 2 cents/mile.)

      At the opposite end are nanotech lithium batteries (Altairnano for example) which are quite expensive, but last the lifetime of the car (20 years or more.)

      3) How does the car perform in the cold Northeast winters.

      Not an issue for me - I drive my EV in a very cold state - Michigan. If you charge overnight, the batteries are toasty warm in the morning.

      4) How much impact will AC, heat, headlights, stereo have on the range of this car?

      Not an issue with larger battery packs. The larger the power pack, the smaller the percentage of that power the heat/AC needs. Headlights and stereo are non-issues because these have their own accessory battery, just like in your own car.
    • bwdd, on 07/01/2008, -1/+2For 1: if you can afford this car, I'm assuming you have a home.
      • krahzee, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2maybe not. What about condos or city parking garages. There are people living high rise buildings in Manhattan who could buy 30 of these, but do not have a place to plug it in in the buildings parking garage.

        I have friends who own detached homes in the city without driveways., or one car wide driveways where the spouse parks on the street. To them this car is just impractical in that they have nowhere to charge it.
  • AmericansRevolt, on 07/01/2008, -4/+1still 300% over the affordable point...
  • koft, on 07/01/2008, -0/+860k isn't affordable for most people, though it is affordable for an awful lot of people. This is a step in the right direction.
  • senatorpjt, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1If it's a sedan, performance isn't as much as a consideration, I hope they'll throw a gas-powered generator in the back to extend the range when you need it.
  • allhailtheking, on 07/01/2008, -6/+3$60k = affordable?
  • JointVenture, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4They can only make a few dozen of their high end model a year right now, I dont think Detroit is too nervous.
  • caw18, on 07/01/2008, -2/+1Gee, given how long it took them to develop the $100k roadster, I am not holding my breath that they can pull off a $60k sedan. I'll believe it when I see it.
  • Taiyoryu, on 07/01/2008, -0/+6How about an affordable one- or two-seater all-electric or plug-in hybrid under 10K? At the 20K price point, it's competing against existing ULEVs and hybrids. As versatile as a 5-seat vehicle is, the majority of the time a car is carrying one person.
    • apeweek, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2It is possible to get an electric car for about $10k. The Zap Xebra, for example, or an EV conversion. More examples: http://www.squidoo.com/cheap-electric-car
      • Taiyoryu, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1I should probably amend my requirements to under 10K, looks good, is fun to drive (i.e. decent acceleration, handling, and highway speeds), and a range that goes beyond the grocery store (which most lead-acid battery EV conversions are limited to).

        FYI Zap Motors has done very little but waste investors money. The Xebra is the latest in a long line of promised but yet-to-be delivered models from Zap.

        Unlike the Xebra you can get a Myers Motor NmG now (formerly Corbin Sparrow) but it's not under 10K nor is the range all that great. http://myersmotors.com/
      • apeweek, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Yes, I know Zap has been pushing vaporware - however the Xebra is real, a number of them are on the road.
  • trenchfever, on 07/01/2008, -1/+4Thus begins the demise of jizzlam.
  • guyster2, on 07/01/2008, -1/+20From someone who’s actually ridden in and studied the Tesla Roadster:
    * 60K being “affordable” is relative to the $100K of their first model.
    * They are targeting a $30K model in 2012, so these prices will come down in time. That’s in “Prius range”.
    * Your electric bill will be higher, but less than your current gasoline budget. You will save money in the end.
    * “By the time it finally comes out, they'll be the last ones out the gate.” No, they are actually the only “production car”, and are currently shipping the Roadster. By “production”, I mean that none of the competitors are crash-tested at full-speed. Furthermore, they now have a growing engineering presence in Detroit (and New Mexico, for production) where they expect to be a “real” car company.
    * What some of you are missing is the elegant simplicity, which further improves the “green” rating. For example, there is no catalytic converter, no O2 sensors, no crankcase oil (or filter, or pump), no emissions system, no plugs, ignition system, starter, alternator, belts, chains, or even (in the most recent twist) a transmission! (reverse is accomplished electrically). And due to the regen braking the brake pads won’t need replacement very often. Compare this to the Prius with its two motor/generator/starter units, two differentials (one for the wheels, one for power transmission), exhaust "thermos", etc. The Prius is impressive, but you could never call it “elegant”. It is grossly complex.
    * “This thing'll do about 60 miles”: Uh, no. Range rated by the EPA at well over 200 miles, due to lithium batteries. “Oh, and it won't be out for at least a year or two”: Perhaps, but they are already shipping the Roadster model to happy customers.
    * “Where do you charge it on the go?”: They have a “travel cable” which allows you to recharge from a standard 120v outlet. A major hotel has agreed to provide hi-speed charger stations.. Marriot? I forget.
    * “How does the car perform in the cold Northeast winters”: The battery pack has a heater built in for when the temps are very low.
    * “They can only make a few dozen of their high end model a year right now, I dont think Detroit is too nervous.” No, actually, they made 10 a month early this year, but are now making 100 a month for the rest of this year, to deliver the first 650 units this year. Detroit being nervous, or not, has never been relevant. Detroit was never nervous about Toyota clobbering them, with obvious results.
    • VladII, on 07/01/2008, -1/+4Thank you for putting all those arguments together. The comments for this were starting to make me want to punch my monitor.
    • ToRoE, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1Helpful response's.

      I would like to know just how 'green' it is to prduce and dipose of the huge chunk of Lith-ion Batteries and how long are they projected to last.

      Thanks
    • MaximusD, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2Good job -- another important point is that electric cars accelerate faster and have more torque. Without a regulator they will go way faster than normal gas cars. I drove an EV1 once and it was pretty bitchin' from a performance standpoint .
    • Twee, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Toroe, NiMH and Li-Ion batteries can be recycled. Don't you ever see those little bins at Circuit City and Radio Shack where you can deposit your old cell phone batteries and such?
  • alvarezg, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3I'll believe the 200+ mile range when they demonstrate it.
    • chapmaster, on 07/03/2008, -0/+0Our most recent EPA driving cycle tests, conducted February 2008, at an EPA-certified facility, resulted in the following numbers:

      * 231 mi EPA city
      * 224 mi EPA highway
      * 227 mi EPA combined (city/highway)

      That's for the Tesla Roadster which goes from 0-60 in 3.9 seconds. I guess I don't share your pessimism about the range of the Sedan.
  • Wasyu, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2The price will go down when the price for the A123 LiPO cells used in it go down with mass production .
    60K isn't too insanely high as many people do pay 50K or more for an SUV or luxury sedan.
    Do you expect cutting edge technology to cost the same as a Civic when it first comes out?
    Plus the Whitestar is supposed to be a luxury car in the same league as a BMW or Mercedes.
    There is a cheaper model called the blue star in the works due out in 2012.

    BTW even a decent brand new conventional ICE car is around 20K to 40K not 10K.
    Try pricing a new one with all the good options.
  • Nudar, on 07/01/2008, -3/+1While I love most of the specs on the car, until these Teslas can recharge in under 10 minutes they will never replace gas powered cars.
    • Nudar, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2By the -2 diggs, I guess people traveling on vacation want to stop every 200 miles and wait 3.5 hours for a fillup.
    • BigPapi, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1I don't know why you're getting dug down. It's very true. All-electric cars are perfect for local commuting, but it doesn't solve long road trips. The Aptera Type-1, Prius Plugin and Chevy Volt are the only "electric" cars that can meet all those requirements because they can use gasoline.
    • Twee, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1This is why rental cars exist. How often do you go on a road trip? Maybe once a year? Two years ago when I went on a road trip with my family the transmission crapped out and we ended up paying around $3000 to get it replaced. Never again will we use our own car for a road trip. It's not terribly expensive to rent a car for a week or so if you're going on a road trip. Most cars aren't suited for climbing up the mountains and other steep terrain you'll probably encounter on a road trip anyways.

      On a side note, why not just fly there? Driving for days on end is extremely boring and the cost of gas is just as much as if you were to buy a plane ticket.
  • punkrawkintrev, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2pics or it didnt happen...JK but seriously i want some pics
  • Namesbond, on 07/01/2008, -0/+360k I think I'll keep cycling
  • gregorypierce, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3Affordable does not equal affordable to everyone, just means affordable to MORE people. More importantly is that this car is more for the people that buy high end BMW, Mercedez, and Lexus imports. For those people this car is VERY affordable since the car requires NO gas whatsoever.
  • gadgetman17, on 07/01/2008, -0/+0how can we make this car even greener? get them to use waste CO2 (R744) to power their MAC (Mobile Air Conditioning). That way they reduce their 'real emissions' even further with this eco-friendly alternative. Check out www.R744.com for more info about companies working with this technology around the world.
    • brandozilla, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1It doesn't use any friggin gas, thats green enough for the time being. Christ the car already costs 60k, they should focus on streamlining the engine and making it affordable for the entire public and not just whining Hollywood elitists who are trying to out green each other.
  • robbiedo, on 07/01/2008, -0/+1Fundamentally, electric cars are the answer for transport power. Yet, I am not hearing any serious talk about ditching long range batter technology, and just electrifying all the main thoroughfares, and only use batteries for the capillary roads.

    Note that this article link is freaking 1990:

    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,9 ...
  • SwedishNinja, on 07/01/2008, -1/+1"Affordable"

    "$60,000"

    lol wat?
    • GTPro, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2For an all-electric revolutionary automobile that can carry the average family in comfort and not have to pay another expensive fuel bill in their lives, yes. Go compare this to other all-electric cars of similar great quality and size, I think you'll be surprised how affordable this really is.

      And failing that, this is Tesla's first all-electric vehicle to go public - from here on it's inevitable and already amazingly evident popularity will see it produced more massively to the general population and as a result, lowering the cost to feed the low income-earners such as yourself.

      Like it or not, this vehicle, and the others to follow, are the beginning of a completely fossil-fuel free future. Their price will take some time to dive.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 73 of 73 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.