I read the thread already. I didn't find any of the arguments, the few that were there, convincing.
It pretty much is in terms of maintenance and these cars tend to have quite a few issues.
You'd probably have to seriously take it apart to get to the important stuff to ye?
Mhm.
Plus the danger of high voltages. Plus the documentation isn't there yet. Plus many of the issues are electrical or computer based so it is a different skill set. Much less just replace the part.
Think about how often you actually drive more then 215 miles in a day. I never drive that far in a singular day unless its a road trip, and then I usually actually rent a cheap car for the days when I'm traveling so as not to put the miles on my day-to-day car. 215 miles is way more then enough for me.
There is a lot of wind energy in my area. It depends on where you live, like almost every other factor about whether this car is practical for you or not. Maybe it doesn't make sense for you, but it does for others.
Renewables receive over 3 times as much in subsidies in the US as fossil fuels do, for less than 10% of the total output of fossil fuels.
Efficiency is a comparative term. Efficient compared to what?
Did you know that it is more efficient to burn gasoline in your car to travel 10 miles than it is to walk?
I think the word you're looking for is clean, not efficient.
I'm not an advocate for fossil fuels. The point I'm trying to make is that fossil fuels are the most efficient method of producing energy, and that is why it is profitable.
Mind you, I'm not including nuclear power production, as I feel that is an enitrely different debate.
I do not buy into the hype that electric cars are better for the environment either though. as DerKrieger suggested, the manufacturing process for batteries requires a lot of energy to be spent, not to mention the environmental impact these processes currently present.
However, assuming that we do in fact one day solve the issue of energy storage, in electrical form, it will be much more efficient to produce electricity in large power plants, and then directly convert said electrical energy into kinetic energy in our vehicles, as opposed to each vehicle independently converting energy as they do now with gasoline.
Hydrogen is not the future. While this is a valid energy storage solution, a lot of energy is wasted producing the hydrogen.
On the subject of Tesla, I think the role they play at the moment is to spur the development of the infrastructure needed for future electric vehicles.
1 Like
I dunno about that. I want a Model S to do outrageous silent launches around town. That said, I don't give a shit about the environment when it comes to cars. I'd love to help the environment in other ways, just don't take away the 525 Hemi that's in my '71 barracuda.
Depending on the car and how you drive it, you could totally do it. The problem with his example is that the fiesta, for all the problems it has, is fun to drive. You'll wind up doing 90 down the freeway in that little shitbox after a
week.
Gotta agree with you, since I live in San Diego. We put solar in last year, 15KW system, makes me about $110/month from utility buyback and that's with using the AC all summer. I'm a major energy consumer, we will go through about 3-4MW a month, but with the solar system in place, we don't need to worry about money.
100% disagree. My experiences say the opposite. in 4 years, my $32,000 system will have paid for itself. We were getting power bills that were up to $900/mo before we put in the system. This was even before the rate hikes that San Diego saw.
Solar has a high up-front cost, but take a home equity line of credit for it if you don't want to finance. That's what we did and it worked out great.
I'm looking at efficiency in price per MW, compared to buying from the Utility. It looks pretty damn good from where I'm standing. The thing that people who don't agree with solar is that they don't look at the long term. I have no intention of leaving this house for at least 30 years. With that said, I won't see a payoff from solar for another 4ish years, but when I do, it will start saving me about $7000/year.
1 Like
Um, gas has already been $6/gal here in Canada, and electricity is still very inexpensive.
Not everyone has 32k, nor will they save up that much
my point stands
This is a combination of your currency becoming less valuable, and that the Arabs are crushing your domestic oil production with cheap prices, same is happening in USA (in the oil production part at least)
do you live near a hydro plant? thats why
This was when the dollar was at parity, good try tho. Gas was $1.59/L or like $6/gal
BC, where I live, is mostly hydro powered. Electricity is pretty reasonable.
i personaly dont like electric cars in general.
Also all those modern autonome electronic assistend systems in cars, is not realy my thing either.
i personaly prefer just oldschool.
1 Like
No one is addressing the glaring problem with the original post?
The calculations are all wrong.
The car chosen for comparison isnt comparative as the Model 3 is closer to an Audi A3 than a ford focus (focus is way to small).
your comparing base price cars even though one car has seizably more features, the comparison would be better suited if the cards were spaced closer together, which in turn would significantly reduce your price difference.
Your amount of hours to do 195,000 miles, did this include fuel stops, driving breaks, food/rest stops? Answer: it didnt. Its not comparative, one has rest stops the other doesnt, you didnt even include fuel stops for the ford.
At least make your argument more sound and base it off proper calculations and research if your going to say something a massive waste of money and a toy.
If im in the market for a 24k car, the model 3 best or not at that price, hits a lot of marks
1 Like
Totally called that response , I don't think he actually read the post lol.
Neither one has driving breaks and food or rest stops included. You're acting as if I included it for the tesla but not the fiesta. you'll also note that those figures say......
Which is not possible for a human being to do. It's a direct comparison of what the car can do , not the pointless information of how long it take a tesla driver to make coffee at the gas station verses a fiesta driver.
the ford doesn't take 75 minutes to refuel , infact it doesn't even take 10 minutes to refuel. refueling time on a gas vehicle , is 100% a non issue in todays world. However the FASTEST you can refuel a a tesla using the fast charge system is 75 minutes. Which is more than noteworthy.
Not that any of this matters as even if the ford took 75 minutes to fill with gasoline it would still be ahead of the tesla simply due to range and needing to stop less than half of the time as the tesla.
again , try reading the post before responding. The car chosen was a fiesta.
You quite literally would have to not read the post to not know what cars were being compared.
Woops your right, my eyes read fiesta and brain wrote focus, in fact the focus would be closer to the model 3 than a fiesta, the fiesta is even smaller which is what was actually in my head. Regardless both cars are not suitable comparisons, though the focus would actually be a closer fit.
The electric does, because it takes more than 3 minutes to fill up, your automatically taking a break, and its the reason you need to include rest breaks. 200~ miles is often the recommended time to take a break, in fact, you supposed to take breaks every 2 hours not every 4 which would be every 100 miles. Not taking breaks is reckless.
I JUST typed that the vehicles are driving 24/7 , not sleeping at all would also be considered reckless . This is the minimum time required by the speed chosen
AGAIN , not that this matters at all. Go ahead and factor in rest stops , no really go ahead and factor in food and rest stops , and sleeping.....
.... are you saying that these factors will somehow make the tesla complete it's trip sooner than the gas car? All you're doing is adding time to both results. lol. Should we factor in basket weaving classes in between pit stops while we're at it?
Not at all, a comparable diesel/petrol car may likely complete the journey faster than the model 3 (ive not said will because ive not tested it, but I believe it probably would).
I'm only saying that it doesnt necessarily mean its cheaper or better, and that your comparison is flawed, it has no basis in reality so shouldn't be used to make your conclusions.
There are much better metrics that could be used to make this comparison, and a lot of real world routes that could be used to make the comparison that would have a real basis in reality that we could make real conclusions on.
For example, a real world example you could use the Scotland - England M1A1 route, roughly 400 miles, average speed over the whole route is around 50-55mph depending on start and end destination, it requires at minimum 1 rest stop.
A comparable diesel car would not need to be refuelled but would need a rest stop, the model 3 would need one recharge to at least 85%~ roughly.. or multiple recharges. the car calculates the best method for the drive, I think this tends to be multiple recharges.
All Eden has done is add in some variables by requiring rest stops & food etc but by adding those in it changes nothing (or did we forget our basic algebra classes?). It is also important to note that emosun needs to add in fuel stops for both cars regardless of its needing to be there because they are different variables (one is gas and one is electric). Though one could argue that the tesla driver could be doing rest&food while fueling where the fiesta driver could not do so. By that argument then the rest/food stops would become a factor. The original math, while not incorrect, does leave out certain significant variables (of course implementing these variables can be difficult depending on how in depth we want to go with this).
Im reasonably confident that you could find a comparable car and still come out ahead over the model 3 in overall cost.. possibly. But I dont know the full specs of the car except for a few main features (that the fiesta doesnt have) so its hard to say at this moment
My point here is saying that there are a ton of variables that we could account for. Yes, OP was flawed in comparing the fiesta to the model 3 and not accounting fore some significant variables. But, there are literally an infinite number of variables we could throw at it to skew the data one way or another. Essentially there is a line we must draw to make the data relevant. OP drew the line too short thus cutting off relevant data, others have drawn the line too far to include irrelevant data. Once we where the line falls then we can make good conclusions but until then the data is skewed and conclusions rendered moot.
1 Like
Thats why I feel data based on actual real life scenarios tend to being better more accurate results in experiments than simulated data which tend to project results but arent necessarily correct.