Throwing in the towel...electric cars are going to be the future.

There are already components available off the shelf to handle that kind of electric power. There are DIY builds putting out near-4-digit horsepower already, there was the standing-mile Mustang featured in a video just last week.

EVs will be sourced through the current auto industry, but some of the big manufacturers are making it super-easy for scrappy upstarts to give them a nasty wake-up call.

(Again the tech industry/internet analogy is a good one...the big companies that thought the Internet was a fad are still around)

In reply to GameboyRMH:

Sorry, but there are DIY builds that have mustangs doing well under 10 seconds for decades now- but that's not really translated well to a production 10 second mustang.

Still, I'm not sure why you think startups are somehow ahead of what OEM's are doing.

alfadriver wrote: In reply to GameboyRMH: There are a lot of downsides to high output electrics. Read my post again. 500hp = 1000Vx348A = 100Vx3,480A. I may be not all that familiar with electric, but that seems very, very far from easy or trivial. From the storage system being able to deliver it to the motor...

And yet the Model S has over 400 hp in a 250 mile range car with present battery technology. And the Lithium-Aluminum or Aluminum-air batteries can give the same power output in a smaller package. So I don't really think it is "very very far from trivial" at all.

alfadriver wrote: Sorry, but there are DIY builds that have mustangs doing well under 10 seconds for decades now- but that's not really translated well to a production 10 second mustang.

That's because metal and machining don't get meaningfully cheaper, while batteries and electrical parts do. Also with EVs performance and efficiency are truly 2 sides of the same coin, while there's no way to turn that 10-second ICE Mustang's performance into a 60MPG Mustang with ultra-low emissions.

alfadriver wrote: Still, I'm not sure why you think startups are somehow ahead of what OEM's are doing.

They don't have access to better technology, but they're making the effort that OEM's aren't. I'm sure a big manufacturer could have built a Tesla S first but they chose not to.

GM did.. they had the EV1 with almost 10 year jump on Tesla.. but chose to end the project and scrap the cars rather than develop them

GameboyRMH wrote: They don't have access to better technology, but they're making the effort that OEM's aren't.

What makes you think that?

The Tesla S is what it is because Tesla understood that for the cost of EV's, the car had a massive premium over an ICE- so they had to go ultra premium to market it.

No other utra premium brand was going to do an EV anytime soon.

Still, I don't see that car with some kind of magical tech. It's a really well done EV. But an ICE in it, and it would sell for $15k less, and still be a great car.

mad_machine wrote: GM did.. they had the EV1 with almost 10 year jump on Tesla.. but chose to end the project and scrap the cars rather than develop them

This is what makes start-ups so powerful...They do not have a QUIT button with a built-in pension. We all grow-up with the oft repeated ""Don't put all your eggs in one basket". Entrepreneurs pretty much did not listen. "Do or die" is a great motivator.

NOHOME wrote:

mad_machine wrote: GM did.. they had the EV1 with almost 10 year jump on Tesla.. but chose to end the project and scrap the cars rather than develop them

This is what makes start-ups so powerful...They do not have a QUIT button with a built-in pension. We all grow-up with the oft repeated ""Don't put all your eggs in one basket". Entrepreneurs pretty much did not listen. "Do or die" is a great motivator.

I like that perspective. It's a good observation.

However, I would add that entrepreneurs and startups also do not have some things. They do not have sustainability (yet), nor the same level of liability/ warranty costs/ R&D costs/ legacy costs, etc.

The achilles heel for entrepreneurs is that they are entrepreneurs. An extremely small percentage ever make the transition from being an entrepreneur to being a CEO.

It's a different skillset. In fact, they are polar opposites. An entrepreneur is a creative risk-taker. Doesn't need to be a manager, nor care at all about the financial well-being of the company, risk management, structure, etc. A CEO needs to run the company, and keep the stockholders happy, which means he better not be too much of a risk-taker, and he had darned well be a good business manager.

The American buying public doesn't want to take the risk on a startup. They want stability, which entrepreneurs can't offer.

Tesla recently broke sales records on the S. They sold 2,500 of them in Sept. Compare that to Toyota who sells about 40,000 Camrys per month. Or better yet, compare it to luxury car sales which are about 100,000 per month.

That means the Tesla S has a 2.5% market share for it's market segment. Millions of people are talking about Tesla, but we are not buying. And Tesla may the top dog entrepreneur owned automotive company.

The 1/4 mile EV Mustang previously mentioned (which may arguably be one of the best recent start-up efforts) has not sold it's first car. I'm not ready to buy, and neither are you, nor are millions of Americans, apparently.

We LOVE the IDEA of entrepreneurship. We prefer to BUY from establishment companies.

It's going to take a lot more than love for an idea to fundamentally change the American buying patterns. I think that is what alfadriver is saying (in part).

Well said, the bolt or the upcoming small tesla may change perspectives and sales quantities.

Just to throw a little water on the EV party, I was told last night that Chevy has more than 200 days of Volt supply right now and is idling production for the foreseeable future. Thoughts?

SVreX wrote: Tesla recently broke sales records on the S. They sold 2,500 of them in Sept. Compare that to Toyota who sells about 40,000 Camrys per month. Or better yet, compare it to luxury car sales which are about 100,000 per month. That means the Tesla S has a 2.5% market share for it's market segment. Millions of people are talking about Tesla, but we are not buying. And Tesla may the top dog entrepreneur owned automotive company.

Let's compare apples to apples. The Model S is a large, expensive luxury car. Not much of the market is shopping in this segment, but buyers who are are buying Teslas. The Model S is outselling every other model except for the brand new S Class (which it outsold last year): http://evobsession.com/top-large-luxury-cars-usa-2014-sales/

EVs are still expensive, so they're only really viable in expensive segments... Today. The technology isn't standing still, nor is it going away.

bastomatic wrote: Just to throw a little water on the EV party, I was told last night that Chevy has more than 200 days of Volt supply right now and is idling production for the foreseeable future. Thoughts?

they are getting ready for the next gen Volt, which requires idling the plant for the tooling makeover.

Also, since they haven't advertised the present Volt since the first model year, most people don't even know it's still available. And sales guys aren't trying to sell them. Both those situations need to change with the 2nd gen product.

Okay. What I'm going to say does not apply to the echo chamber here. We true car nuts are a tiny percentage of the car buying public so it does not do to apply our views and values to the marketplace. 10 second electric Mustangs are cool and all but won't sell in meaningful numbers. Just push that right out of the picture.

The vast majority of car buyers care about only a few things: reliability, gas mileage utility and comfort. Ease and accessibility of service is up there too. Toyota has figured that out, it's why there are so many Camrys running around. Yeah I know they are boring bland yada yada but that is what the vast majority of car buyers want: boring and gets from Point A to Point B. Again, Toyota has figured that out; so have the other manufacturers and that's why there are so many boring blandmobiles out there.

BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT SELLS. YOU MUST SELL CARS TO MAKE A PROFIT OR YOUR COMPANY WILL DIE. Don't ever forget this point.

Right now, electrics do NOT tick all the boxes for the average individual. First is 'refueling'. An ICE car can be refueled damn near anywhere in about 5-8 minutes. An EV cannot. It requires some fairly sophisticated equipment which isn't necessarily readily available. Put it like this: if a Tesla runs out of zap in some dinky town in the Rocky Mountains somewhere, what do you do? Plug it in to 110v, that takes like FOREVER to recharge (comparatively speaking), maybe 4 hours as compared to 5-8 minutes. The average person is NOT going to stand for that. Strike 1.

Utility: see above. The average person has things to do and places to go, they don't have time to wait around for the thing to recharge.

Reliability: Tesla's figures are hard to come by but like all manufacturers they've had problems which they have worked mightily to overcome. Comfort: Musk shot for the high end of the market, he's got that knocked.

Musk is a smart guy, he knew the average goober wasn't going to buy his product so he aimed his launch directly at the 1% who want more than anything to be the first to have that latest prestige nameplate. That he did it with taxpayer money and has yet to turn a profit is another discussion entirely.

So now he's moving downmarket with the 3, or X, or whatever it's called, due out in 2016 or 2017. Preliminary figures show the vehicle will be in the $35k range, or roughly where the Volt etc are. He's also going right up against a vast array of ICE cars which have proven themselves and every bit as important have a large dealer and service point network behind them. Tesla has very few service points and no dealer network, because Musk chose not to go that conventional route. That's his prerogative, of course. But here is where the problem comes in:

The car will have the exact same problem the Model S does, it's not going to be as utilitarian or convenient as existing ICE cars for the reasons laid out above. And if you don't think the average person won't take that into account you are sadly mistaken.

Next will be the distance to a service point. That is going to whack a lot of sales right there, in cities where the car can't be serviced quickly. So what, you say? They will come pick it up and drop off a loaner. Sounds good, till you stop to think that if it's 200 miles to the nearest service point that's a 400 mile round trip, or roughly 6-8 hours. But the local Nissan dealer sells Leafs and is ~45 minutes away. Strike 2.

Comfort: I don't think he's going to ignore that, the car should be pretty nice. Certainly nicer than the Leaf. But Nissan is getting ready to release a redesigned Leaf shortly. Concept car called the Sway:

If they can make it roughly the same size, give it the same range etc as the Tesla but back it with a nationwide dealer network Tesla is going to be in big trouble. By the way, the Nissan will still have the same refueling/utility problem as Tesla so right now the Leaf probably won't be any more than a niche player, again like Tesla. The difference is Nissan sells a E36 M3pot of ICE cars which bring in enough revenue to cover any shortfall that may come from the Leaf.

If y'all don't think the above is what truly drives/controls EV sales and marketplace success then you haven't thought it all the way through.

Fearless prediction: Musk overextends himself, Tesla loses money like crazy, the gummint refuses to back him again (see Solyndra) the stock price crashes, it goes bankrupt and one of the big car manufacturers picks up the pieces for cheap. It then becomes a badge engineered whatever and at that point may start seeing true success.

Range anxiety is a problem, true, but education is the cure. MOST people drive less than 40 miles a day and rarely tke trips longer than that. EVs come with home chargers that are not "fairly sophistaicated and hard to come by." If people can plug in their phones daily, they can plug in their cars daily. It's just not that hard. Those of us that have made the jump are realizing that starting out every day with a "full tank" is better than running an ICE car to empty them hoping you can make it to a gas station. Also, almost 2/3rds of housholds also have 2 or more cars already, so adding an EV to the fleet still gives you a car for those occasional long trips.

And those of us in the know are responsible for educating everyone else instead of complaining about all the reasons why the general public won't "get it."

You are looking at this from the point of 'car nut' which does not apply to the vast majority of people who buy cars. Those people give not two E36 M3s about anything you said. This is the kind of person who will try to look at the engine through the key hole. And they drive the market. They typically buy new cars because they want the security of the bumper to bumper warranty etc. There is a reason leases expire either before or at the same time as those warranties.

For that reason, the average person does NOT have another vehicle to whip out for traveling. Insurance etc is just too expensive. They are going to look at the least amount of aggravation because they are in no way concerned about 'getting educated by those in the know' they just want to go A --> B with the least amount of thought. Thus they will continue to buy ICE cars because the infrastructure etc is already in place.

In another 10? years if battery range and recharge time get down close to ICE refuel figures then these people may very well buy them. Till then, no.

Most people I know drive their kids all over for sports/academic activities. They do 40 miles before lunch.

I agree with Curmudgeon. For now, EVs are a niche product. They won't have mass market acceptance until they can bludgeon range anxiety to death with excessive range and/or extremely quick charges, and I'd say that's at least 3 years away.

racerfink wrote: Most people I know drive their kids all over for sports/academic activities. They do 40 miles before lunch.

Doesn't matter, dozens of nationwide studies have proven that 80% of people drive less than 40 miles a day. That's 160 million drivers that they ARE perfect for. So we, as the car nuts, need to educate the non car nuts that these cars WILL inded fit their daily lifestyles, instead of just railing on about the fact that they don't know it yet.

The Volt is the only one with an EV range that is minimal, and so it has the gas generator for long trips. The rest of them do indeed work just fine for most people RIGHT NOW. This isn't a case of an enthusiast mindeset, it's case of ingorance, and that can be fixed! And it's up to those of us that know it to actually be the solution, instead of part of the problem. In fact, it does seem as if some of you are actively trying to be part of the problem...

And Curmudgeon, it's you whom the point went flying over. We, as the ones who recommend cars to non-car enthusiasts, are the ones to teach the average consumer, who doesn't know better, that plugging in the car every night means you don't have range anxiety and don't need to find quick charge stations to get them through their average day.

Curmudgeon wrote: ...it goes bankrupt and the Chinese pick up the pieces for cheap. It then becomes a badge engineered whatever and at that point may start seeing true success.

The Chinese might do better with the car because they are fighting a huge pollution problem and the infrastructure for the automobile is still developing and hence to a degree still malleable. If it becomes their homegrown solution, it will get political support to make it thrive in the face of the ICE competitors or other imported EVs in the segment.

And by the way, I agree with pretty much all the post as it regards the tsunami that Tesla is about to run into.

In reply to Curmudgeon:

On the recharge issue, the Leaf has another advantage over the Tesla.

You can pull into any Nissan dealer in the country and get a free fast charge. And it's a pretty big network.

It's an idea Musk might consider, that is if he had dealerships.

It's not a complete solution, but it's better than other options (or lack thereof).

Tesla's biggest mistake IMO is their love of proprietary charging technologies and wacky, fleetingly-useful ideas like battery swapping.

Chris_V wrote: And Curmudgeon, it's you whom the point went flying over. We, as the ones who recommend cars to non-car enthusiasts, are the ones to teach the average consumer, who doesn't know better, that plugging in the car every night means you don't have range anxiety and don't need to find quick charge stations to get them through their average day.

And since when am I the one who is to convince someone that a certain car fits their needs? Answer: I am not. I cannot in good faith recommend an EV to, say, a single mother who can only afford 1 car and may find herself in a situation where she's suddenly got to cover 1000 miles in a single emergency trip where she will have to stop every 150 miles for 2-4 hours each time to recharge the thing. That's stopping 6.667 times, each time for an average of 3 hours, adding 20 hours- or almost a full day- to her trip.

THAT'S JUST TO CHARGE THE DAMN THING.

We have not touched the trip itself. You go 'head on and preach it from the mountaintop if you want. I'm going to live in Practicalville, USA.

I like the idea of EV's, love pure bleeding edge tech. It fascinates the hell out of me. I'm also mature enough to realize that right now for the vast majority of the population they just are not practical as an only vehicle just yet. Another 10, 20 years? Possibly.

In reply to Chris V:

Doesn't matter, dozens of nationwide studies have proven that 80% of people drive less than 40 miles a day. That's 160 million drivers that they ARE perfect for. So we, as the car nuts, need to educate the non car nuts that these cars WILL inded fit their daily lifestyles, instead of just railing on about the fact that they don't know it yet. The Volt is the only one with an EV range that is minimal, and so it has the gas generator for long trips. The rest of them do indeed work just fine for most people RIGHT NOW. This isn't a case of an enthusiast mindeset, it's case of ingorance, and that can be fixed! And it's up to those of us that know it to actually be the solution, instead of part of the problem. In fact, it does seem as if some of you are actively trying to be part of the problem... And Curmudgeon, it's you whom the point went flying over. We, as the ones who recommend cars to non-car enthusiasts, are the ones to teach the average consumer, who doesn't know better, that plugging in the car every night means you don't have range anxiety and don't need to find quick charge stations to get them through their average day.

If you are willing to accept the limitations of an EV, you are welcome to buy one. If enough people like you want to buy them at a price that someone else is willing and able to sell them, that's great for all of you. But for most people- car people and non car people- it's reasonable to expect that they will get equal to or more than they already have, especially when they have to pay more money. And the plain truth is, EV's are lacking in many areas. They don't go as far as the cars people currently own. And they take many, many times longer to re-fuel. It's unfair to call people who observe that fact ignorant. So what if they only drive an average of 40 miles a day? Most people don't buy a car with capabilities based on average. They buy based on the max that they think they will need- HP, cargo capacity, seating, towing- until EV's can get close to ICE's as a whole, I don't see them getting anywhere past a small fraction of the market. And the truth is, as others have mentioned, there are still significant technological hurdles on the storage and recharge side. Another aspect overlooked by those that think the ICE's are on the way out is what our automotive market looks like. We don't all drive small cars from which EV's would be an easier transition. We love our trucks and SUV's. They are a much tougher vehicle to replace with an EV.

Don't get me wrong, there is a lot to like about the concept of EV's. But I think much if it is a bit premature and unrealistically ambitious.

GameboyRMH wrote: Tesla's biggest mistake IMO is their love of proprietary charging technologies and wacky, fleetingly-useful ideas like battery swapping.

Battery swapping would get rid of a lot of range problems, that's what the guy in Israel (Better Place) was looking to do. http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/06/21/6-reasons-teslas-battery-swapping-could-take-it-to-a-better-place/ He was leasing batteries and dealing with much shorter ranges than Teslas offer, among other things.

It's not like it's a new idea; forklifts have done battery swaps for years.

The weird thing about this type battery swapping: it would be similar to buying, say, a Ford here in the States and then being only able to gas it up at a Ford gas station. If you were in East Timbuktu and there was only a Chevy gas station you'd be screwed. Notice also in that article that Musk is saying there would be a charge for battery swapping 'based on gas prices in the area'. So much for EVs being cheaper to run than ICEs because no gasoline.

Case in point for Curmudgeon's argument.

My sister is a bit of a eco freak. She's been driving a Prius since they came out and loved it. When the Leaf hit the market she was thrilled, she traded in her Prius and bought one. She lives in downtown Charlotte and her commute is 10 miles. She loved the idea of a electric car and just knew it would be perfect for her.

She hated the thing. She didn't want to have to fiddle with the charger. She didn't want to own another car. She didn't want to have to even think about her car. She wanted hot heat, cold A/C without watching the meter on the dash. She just wanted something that she could drive where she needed, when she needed and when she wanted to. She wanted to put the key in it and go. That's it.

The Leaf is gone and she's back in a Prius. Until electrics can make a customer like her happy, they don't stand a chance.