Comments on: Breaking: Tesla Expects to Receive $350 Million in Government Loans to Build Model S Sedan and Will Unveil it March 26

By: Herman

Herman — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 10:51:23 +0000

If i where tesla, and the Sedan version would be a great succes you can’t give it a 40K price tag. It will be more.

But you can also see: Tesla Roadster is also kinda expensive but this is also due the demand of the market.

In the beginning of the model S the demand will be big, because there is no competition.
( well you still have fisker or BYD but ye …. ) If you want to carry 4 or 5 people.

But electric cars will fail or win only on 1 thing: Battery’s.

When is there going to be breaktrue cheap ass technology….. =)

Anyway, there ain’t hanging a poster of a porsche or ferarri above my bed anymore. =) Tesla roadster is officialy my dream car!

By: Ken/Kent/Kerry Beauchrt/Beuchert/Beuchrt/Biker/Rider/Krider - Page 14 - Tesla Motors Club Forum

Sat, 14 Feb 2009 19:32:56 +0000

[...] here, #36. So Kent’s driven the Model [...]

By: Koz

Koz — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 00:04:17 +0000

Michael Robinson #103

Mercedes, Lexus, Cadillac, BMW, Acura, Infinity, Porsche, Audi, etc.

How many of them are under $30K? If you think about it, an electric vehicle that uses 75% or less gas is worth up to $15,000 (individual value will vary greatly) more on gas savings alone. These first generation cars don’t have to be first cost competitive Corollas to succeed.

Dave G #105

I beg to differ. Tesla did claim for a little while that there would be a REEV (Range Extended Electric Vehicle) version of the Model S.

By: Dave G

Dave G — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:47:47 +0000

#92 nasaman Says: “I’m surprised & disappointed that Elon Musk doesn’t discuss whether the Model S will be an E-REV ….could it be that he ousted the Tesla people that might have strongly favored an E-REV design when he took control of the company?”
————————————————————————————–
#96 Koz Says: “I thought Mr. Musk has been very clear that they changed direction and the Model S will only be a BEV. Perhaps they also quietly developing EREV (REEV in their terminology) tech too but that would be surprising giving the financial constraints. I think you are correct about change in personnel leading to a change in philosophy regrading this matter.
======================================================
There was never any plan to make the Model S (a.k.a. Whitestar) an EREV.

Tesla’s initial plans called for 3 models, codenamed Redstar, Whitestar, and Bluestar. The Redstar became the Roadster. The Whitestar is the Model S. The Bluestar is a $30K family sedan.

In late 2007, Musk said the 3rd model (a.k.a. Bluestar) may be an EREV (or REEV as he called it).
http://gm-volt.com/2007/12/22/tesla-motors-chairman-elon-musk-on-production-plans/
and Tesla really seemed to be embracing the EREV concept
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog3/?p=67

But then in in late 2008, Musk started saying that the 3rd model would be a pure BEV, and that range extenders don’t make sense.

I suspect the change had to do with Tesla not wanting to compete head-on with the GM. Musk has said publicly he doesn’t really want to do that. It could also have to do with Tesla’s relatively limited financial resources. Pure BEVs are much easier to build than EREVs.

By: Dave G

Dave G — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:09:22 +0000

#103 Michael Robinson Says: “Hydrogen harvested from the ocean is the answer.”
————————————————————————————–
Hydrogen is the biggest scam going. It’s the big oil companies that are pushing hydrogen. They know it will never make sense economically, and if it ever does, hydrogen will be made from natural gas, like it is now. That’s why they call them Fool Sells. They are meant to deceive us. Classic red herring.

Ulf Bossel heads up the European Fuel Cell Forum. He writes:
“There is a lot of money in the field now,” he continues. “I think that it was a mistake to start with a ‘Presidential Initiative’ rather with a thorough analysis like this one. Huge sums of money were committed too soon, and now even good scientists prostitute themselves to obtain research money for their students or laboratories—otherwise, they risk being fired. But the laws of physics are eternal and cannot be changed with additional research, venture capital or majority votes.”

Why a hydrogen economy doesn’t make sense
http://www.physorg.com/news85074285.html