Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Tesla Model S Gets Its EPA Rating

    William Maley

    Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

    June 21, 2012

    The EPA gave its ratings for the Tesla Model S are they are very good. The EPA rates the new Model S at 88 MPGe (miles per gallon equivalent) in the City, 90 MPGe on the Highway, and 89 MPGe combined. Range is estimated to be 265 Miles, a 12% decrease from Tesla’s original estimate.

    (Note, these EPA ratings are for the the top of the line Model S. We’ll learn what the ratings for the other Model Ss in time.)

    So where does the Model S fall into the EV MPGe ratings? Well it's behind the Honda Fit EV (118 MPGe), Mitsubishi i (112 MPGe), Ford Focus EV (105 MPGe), and Nissan Leaf (99 MPGe). But well ahead of the Coda Sedan (73 MPGe).

    However, the Model S is larger than any of the vehicles listed and can seat up to seven (five + two jump seats).

    Source: Autoblog

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at [email protected] or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    a large car like this that's fairly impressive. im sure some on here would argue otherwise. but a large full electric car getting 265 miles. coupled with recent breakthroughs in quicker charging. its not terrible. not perfect but not bad

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    yea. well you know people are going to nitpick the charge time saying "its not worth it" but like i said the recent breakthrough in charge time a public recharge station can now be as fast as 15 minuets for a full charge.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Checked out a production-ready Model S at the Tesla store in Palo Alto last weekend. Looks awesome, great tech, lots of attention to detail... only complaint I have is that rear headroom is a bit limited with that sloping roof. It's a rather large and imposing vehicle up close, about 4" larger than a 5-series, said the salesperson.

    The cool thing is that there's an integrated charger built into the car, so you don't need a pricey home charger built into your garage. A normal 240-volt dryer socket is all that's needed for Level 2 charging.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Nice looking car but a toy still. This is NOT a GREEN car no matter what anyone says.

    1) The battery pack produces 10 years worth of Green House Gas based on what a basic econo car running gas produces.

    2) Except for the PNW - Pacific Northwest with all it's Hydro power, most of the country use Coal to generate Electricity and this produces mountains of green house gas.

    End result, better to go CNG than Electric!

    Pass on this limited range car with lousy recharge times.

    In time Electric cars will get us there but not yet. Smart Stepping stone is CNG.

    How about you guys do a review of the CNG Bi-Fuel Trucks and Vans from GM! :D

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    its not a toy. the point of a car like this is to remove the direct carbon emission of the car. how it gets its power may change. but getting rid of the carbon emission is key to the auto industry. there are many ways to do this. all of them have their flaws. it just so happens that this version looks nice. gets a good distance for its size. and for someone WANTING electric over a gas or oil car. this is a fine choice. you dont want it? fine don't buy it. but don't look down on them for trying.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    its not a toy. the point of a car like this is to remove the direct carbon emission of the car. how it gets its power may change. but getting rid of the carbon emission is key to the auto industry. there are many ways to do this. all of them have their flaws. it just so happens that this version looks nice. gets a good distance for its size. and for someone WANTING electric over a gas or oil car. this is a fine choice. you dont want it? fine don't buy it. but don't look down on them for trying.

    I am NOT looking down on them. I commend them for what they have done, but I feel they went the wrong direction when there are far better options out there for making Green Cars.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So except for the distance on this lone car, electric cannot touch CNG for driving. Both do not have power/pumping stations everywhere like Petrol. That is about the only draw back I can see.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    a charging station would be a lot easier to install than a CNG station. not to mention you leave your house fully charged if you plug in every time you pull in your garage. the only drawback i see is the garage itself. those with on street parking are at a disadvantage. unless you have an extension cord out to your car lol.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    im not saying its perfect. my point all along is its what you like. oil cars wont be around forever. and ALL of the alternatives have drawbacks. i like electric because i dont like the idea of an compressed explosive in my trunk. sure cars today have the same danger. but compressed gasses have more boom behind them. this is MY TASTE. thumb me down idc.

    and dont call me son. your not my father. i dont even know you.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    good grammar is for professional papers and formal meetings. this is neither. i know batteries can explode. but i would much rather have a batter strapped to my car then a canister of compressed gas. again this is my personal preference. you may think gas is the better option. well guess what there will be CNG cars. you want a CNG car you buy one. if i want an electric car ill buy one. im just saying why i think the electric car is better.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Maximum range for a CNG Civic is 248 miles, and its trunk is tiny. Model S can go further and has two trunks, one of which is ginormous.

    Model S can be charged anywhere there is a plug, whereas with a CNG car, you must go out of your way to find a fueling station. Best of all, you can recharge Model S at home and never waste time at a gas station.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There are PLENTY of drawbacks to pure electrics, son.

    Plenty of advantages as well:

    Lower center of gravity

    Battery provides for additional structural rigidity

    More space for passengers and cargo (no exhaust, driveshaft, bulky engine and transmission, etc.)

    Instant torque

    Lower NVH

    Zero tailpipe emissions

    Greater efficiency

    Less maintenance

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, I'm not sure I want a battery providing structural rigidity.

    On a FWD vehicle, the motive mechanical parts are all up front. The fuel tank is under the back seat occupying negligible territory, and the exhaust system does not require a hump, the floor could be flat if the vehicle is engineered that way. I would prefer a RWD layout myself, with a floor hump and a differential under the back seat along with that gas tank.

    Zero tailpipe emissions, perhaps, but I think automotive emissions standards are already pretty stringent, moreso than power plants.

    What about the mining of materials used in battery manufacture, and all of the surrounding effort to extract and transport the raw material to the manufacturing plants (from finding minerals, to transporting workers, to earth moving machines, to ships, trains and trucks), and the disposal of all these batteries when they die?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, I'm not sure I want a battery providing structural rigidity.

    On a FWD vehicle, the motive mechanical parts are all up front. The fuel tank is under the back seat occupying negligible territory, and the exhaust system does not require a hump, the floor could be flat if the vehicle is engineered that way. I would prefer a RWD layout myself, with a floor hump and a differential under the back seat along with that gas tank.

    Zero tailpipe emissions, perhaps, but I think automotive emissions standards are already pretty stringent, moreso than power plants.

    What about the mining of materials used in battery manufacture, and all of the surrounding effort to extract and transport the raw material to the manufacturing plants (from finding minerals, to transporting workers, to earth moving machines, to ships, trains and trucks), and the disposal of all these batteries when they die?

    what i dont think you are looking at is that is such a small part of emissions. to make one car the mining of materials only create a fraction of what a normal car would produce in its lifetime. also to get that CNG the process is the same. i don't know what the fear is of batteries. what do you think starts your car in the morning?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, I'm not sure I want a battery providing structural rigidity.

    On a FWD vehicle, the motive mechanical parts are all up front. The fuel tank is under the back seat occupying negligible territory, and the exhaust system does not require a hump, the floor could be flat if the vehicle is engineered that way. I would prefer a RWD layout myself, with a floor hump and a differential under the back seat along with that gas tank.

    Zero tailpipe emissions, perhaps, but I think automotive emissions standards are already pretty stringent, moreso than power plants.

    What about the mining of materials used in battery manufacture, and all of the surrounding effort to extract and transport the raw material to the manufacturing plants (from finding minerals, to transporting workers, to earth moving machines, to ships, trains and trucks), and the disposal of all these batteries when they die?

    Model S is RWD; the motor (AC induction, so no rare-earth materials) rests between the rear wheels. Very compact.

    The 85-kWh battery on the top model is 4" thick, and it's a flat slab mounted as part of the floor, making the chassis very stiff. It also lowers the center of gravity to that of a Ford GT's (the chassis, incidentally, was done by the same person who engineered that supercar). The flat battery, along with other aero tricks, gives Model S the lowest drag coefficient of any production vehicle on sale.

    Only 15% of a BEV's life-cycle environmental harm comes from the battery. It's the operation, whether gasoline or electric, that makes up the majority of a vehicle's impact: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es903729a

    Oh, and did I mention in Performance trim, it does 0-60 in 4.4 seconds?

    • Agree 2
    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    ocnblu, on , said:

    Well, I'm not sure I want a battery providing structural rigidity.

    On a FWD vehicle, the motive mechanical parts are all up front. The fuel tank is under the back seat occupying negligible territory, and the exhaust system does not require a hump, the floor could be flat if the vehicle is engineered that way. I would prefer a RWD layout myself, with a floor hump and a differential under the back seat along with that gas tank.

    Zero tailpipe emissions, perhaps, but I think automotive emissions standards are already pretty stringent, moreso than power plants.

    What about the mining of materials used in battery manufacture, and all of the surrounding effort to extract and transport the raw material to the manufacturing plants (from finding minerals, to transporting workers, to earth moving machines, to ships, trains and trucks), and the disposal of all these batteries when they die?

    Model S is RWD; the motor (AC induction, so no rare-earth materials) rests between the rear wheels. Very compact.

    The 85-kWh battery on the top model is 4" thick, and it's a flat slab mounted as part of the floor, making the chassis very stiff. It also lowers the center of gravity to that of a Ford GT's (the chassis, incidentally, was done by the same person who engineered that supercar). The flat battery, along with other aero tricks, gives Model S the lowest drag coefficient of any production vehicle on sale.

    Only 15% of a BEV's life-cycle environmental harm comes from the battery. It's the operation, whether gasoline or electric, that makes up the majority of a vehicle's impact: http://pubs.acs.org/....1021/es903729a

    Oh, and did I mention in Performance trim, it does 0-60 in 4.4 seconds?

    woah i didnt know that thats amazing. though that does bring out some other good things about EV. they dont have to work as hard to pick up speed. no mechanical engine chugging to push the car. so the mechanical friction is reduced as well. making them very impressive when it comes to speed.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Kills the range though, drag racing. And air conditioning on a hot day. And heat and defrost on a cold day. And going up hill. And stop-n-go city traffic, and on and on. But we won't talk about those, will we?

    • Agree 1
    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    and yet it still gets an 88MPGe so all those still puts it MILES above a gas engine. and from what im seeing most CNG vehicles as well. point is all those things you mention STILL puts it above most cars

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    what are the testing conditions of any other car? really you are doubting the reliability of the test itself? its still a car they would test it the same way. even still that 88MPGe is too great of a number to judge. if you drive it like an idiot whats it going to drop to 66? so what? that's still really impressive

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yes I am doubting the reliability of the test. Who wouldn't when they've read anything about electric cars? Get your noggin out of the sand. You show your maturity level with these red marks, too son.

    • Agree 1
    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    get your noggin out of your butt. they test it the same and its a mathematical equation so obviously you have been reading some pretty crap material when it comes it the electric cars. 85f88f14289e958df7d8300fa0d19edf.png

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    My noggin is not in my butt. What I've been reading is long term tests and real world accounts of electric cars in operation by real people, "when it comes it the electric cars", whatever that means. You're an excitable boy, aren't ya.

    • Agree 1
    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    and you are senile, i'm done with you. I've proven my point and you have made yours and yours has proven unpopular not just by me. just another case of the cave man being afraid of the lightning in the sky.

    • Agree 1
    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Whoa. Lol. Easy there, folks.

    But just to be factual, the EPA's test cycle for range and MPGe have been accurate and are rather conservative. It gets 265 miles and 89 MPGe under the 5-cycle test, which includes A/C usage, ambient temperatures from 20F to 95F, brisk acceleration, and high speeds.

    Kills the range though, drag racing. And air conditioning on a hot day. And heat and defrost on a cold day. And going up hill. And stop-n-go city traffic, and on and on. But we won't talk about those, will we?

    Energy regeneration.

    Actually, a cool thing about Model S is that the brake pedal itself is purely friction braking; no blending of regen and friction like on a hybrid. Regeneration is triggered when you get off the accelerator, and effectively it acts like "engine braking." This allows for one-pedal driving in normal driving.

    Gasoline vehicles converted into EVs tend to have a lot of compromises. This is a clean sheet design that avoids current EV downfalls.

    Edited by pow
    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Maximum range for a CNG Civic is 248 miles, and its trunk is tiny. Model S can go further and has two trunks, one of which is ginormous.

    Model S can be charged anywhere there is a plug, whereas with a CNG car, you must go out of your way to find a fueling station. Best of all, you can recharge Model S at home and never waste time at a gas station.

    If you know your CNG, you can get a Home CNG Fueling Appliance and never have to go to a station except on road trips. Also compressed CNG is safer than a hot water tank.

    All in all CNG can be refilled faster and more car like that people are used to than the extended charging times. Electric will be there some day, but this car is still a toy for the rich, not the average person, CNG auto's are far more cost affective.

    There are PLENTY of drawbacks to pure electrics, son.

    Plenty of advantages as well:

    Lower center of gravity

    Battery provides for additional structural rigidity

    More space for passengers and cargo (no exhaust, driveshaft, bulky engine and transmission, etc.)

    Instant torque

    Lower NVH

    Zero tailpipe emissions

    Greater efficiency

    Less maintenance

    Pure Electric cars currently create MORE Emissions than a CNG auto. Just look at the WHOLE picture, the creation of the battery pack and the amount of coal needed to produce your electrical energy source.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, I'm not sure I want a battery providing structural rigidity.

    On a FWD vehicle, the motive mechanical parts are all up front. The fuel tank is under the back seat occupying negligible territory, and the exhaust system does not require a hump, the floor could be flat if the vehicle is engineered that way. I would prefer a RWD layout myself, with a floor hump and a differential under the back seat along with that gas tank.

    Zero tailpipe emissions, perhaps, but I think automotive emissions standards are already pretty stringent, moreso than power plants.

    What about the mining of materials used in battery manufacture, and all of the surrounding effort to extract and transport the raw material to the manufacturing plants (from finding minerals, to transporting workers, to earth moving machines, to ships, trains and trucks), and the disposal of all these batteries when they die?

    What i don't think you are looking at is that is such a small part of emissions. to make one car the mining of materials only create a fraction of what a normal car would produce in its lifetime. also to get that CNG the process is the same. i don't know what the fear is of batteries. what do you think starts your car in the morning?

    If you look at the sources for Lithium, you will find it is a far more destructive process to get it out of the ground, then ship it to the plants, refine it and create a battery and then ship it to the auto company to be built into a car. The whole process creates far more Green house gas than burning CNG.

    We will agree to disagree but you need to research better your electric short range love of a commuter car. They pollute far more than people are willing to admit.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    ocnblu, on , said:

    Well, I'm not sure I want a battery providing structural rigidity.

    On a FWD vehicle, the motive mechanical parts are all up front. The fuel tank is under the back seat occupying negligible territory, and the exhaust system does not require a hump, the floor could be flat if the vehicle is engineered that way. I would prefer a RWD layout myself, with a floor hump and a differential under the back seat along with that gas tank.

    Zero tailpipe emissions, perhaps, but I think automotive emissions standards are already pretty stringent, moreso than power plants.

    What about the mining of materials used in battery manufacture, and all of the surrounding effort to extract and transport the raw material to the manufacturing plants (from finding minerals, to transporting workers, to earth moving machines, to ships, trains and trucks), and the disposal of all these batteries when they die?

    Model S is RWD; the motor (AC induction, so no rare-earth materials) rests between the rear wheels. Very compact.

    The 85-kWh battery on the top model is 4" thick, and it's a flat slab mounted as part of the floor, making the chassis very stiff. It also lowers the center of gravity to that of a Ford GT's (the chassis, incidentally, was done by the same person who engineered that supercar). The flat battery, along with other aero tricks, gives Model S the lowest drag coefficient of any production vehicle on sale.

    Only 15% of a BEV's life-cycle environmental harm comes from the battery. It's the operation, whether gasoline or electric, that makes up the majority of a vehicle's impact: http://pubs.acs.org/....1021/es903729a

    Oh, and did I mention in Performance trim, it does 0-60 in 4.4 seconds?

    woah i didnt know that thats amazing. though that does bring out some other good things about EV. they dont have to work as hard to pick up speed. no mechanical engine chugging to push the car. so the mechanical friction is reduced as well. making them very impressive when it comes to speed.

    WOW, I have never read such a lopsided one way to make everyone think their way of life is positive write up.

    You can look up the details yourself, but the largest Lithium mine in the world, now owned by the Chinease and yet destroying a way of life for hundred of years is in Chile. The lithium lays under one of the worlds largest sources of natural salt. To get the lithium out, they are destroying the salt plains and how the local tribes have made money selling what is considered to be one of the purest and best salts around.

    I have to wave the :bs: flag on this report! 15% impact my ass, like anything in looking at works cited, while only looking at 5 of the 26 cited, it is very clear this is one persons interpretation of the data. The reports I looked at clearly state there is not enough data to really gauge the impact especially once the material is taken out of the ground, refined and then made into a battery as well as recovery, etc.

    But clear we will have various different camps on which technology is the next logical step.

    For me, CNG is the next logical step and as Ocnblue has pointed out, once battery technology gets to a point of having a normal car battery in size with a 300 mile range, then we can truly say electric is the way to go. Till then, it is a commuter car special only IMO.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    ocnblu, on , said:

    Well, I'm not sure I want a battery providing structural rigidity.

    On a FWD vehicle, the motive mechanical parts are all up front. The fuel tank is under the back seat occupying negligible territory, and the exhaust system does not require a hump, the floor could be flat if the vehicle is engineered that way. I would prefer a RWD layout myself, with a floor hump and a differential under the back seat along with that gas tank.

    Zero tailpipe emissions, perhaps, but I think automotive emissions standards are already pretty stringent, moreso than power plants.

    What about the mining of materials used in battery manufacture, and all of the surrounding effort to extract and transport the raw material to the manufacturing plants (from finding minerals, to transporting workers, to earth moving machines, to ships, trains and trucks), and the disposal of all these batteries when they die?

    Model S is RWD; the motor (AC induction, so no rare-earth materials) rests between the rear wheels. Very compact.

    The 85-kWh battery on the top model is 4" thick, and it's a flat slab mounted as part of the floor, making the chassis very stiff. It also lowers the center of gravity to that of a Ford GT's (the chassis, incidentally, was done by the same person who engineered that supercar). The flat battery, along with other aero tricks, gives Model S the lowest drag coefficient of any production vehicle on sale.

    Only 15% of a BEV's life-cycle environmental harm comes from the battery. It's the operation, whether gasoline or electric, that makes up the majority of a vehicle's impact: http://pubs.acs.org/....1021/es903729a

    Oh, and did I mention in Performance trim, it does 0-60 in 4.4 seconds?

    woah i didnt know that thats amazing. though that does bring out some other good things about EV. they dont have to work as hard to pick up speed. no mechanical engine chugging to push the car. so the mechanical friction is reduced as well. making them very impressive when it comes to speed.

    WOW, I have never read such a lopsided one way to make everyone think their way of life is positive write up.

    You can look up the details yourself, but the largest Lithium mine in the world, now owned by the Chinease and yet destroying a way of life for hundred of years is in Chile. The lithium lays under one of the worlds largest sources of natural salt. To get the lithium out, they are destroying the salt plains and how the local tribes have made money selling what is considered to be one of the purest and best salts around.

    I have to wave the :bs: flag on this report! 15% impact my ass, like anything in looking at works cited, while only looking at 5 of the 26 cited, it is very clear this is one persons interpretation of the data. The reports I looked at clearly state there is not enough data to really gauge the impact especially once the material is taken out of the ground, refined and then made into a battery as well as recovery, etc.

    But clear we will have various different camps on which technology is the next logical step.

    For me, CNG is the next logical step and as Ocnblue has pointed out, once battery technology gets to a point of having a normal car battery in size with a 300 mile range, then we can truly say electric is the way to go. Till then, it is a commuter car special only IMO.

    so you want an electric car that runs on the same size battery as a normal car? if i read this correctly you are out of your freakin mind. to ask for that as a must is stupid. the point of the large battery is to get the distance. a battery the size of a normal car battery no matter what you do would only get you a couple of miles. nothing on earth can change that. the distance is NOT A PROBLEM. a 300 mile range isnt unthinkable but what they need to focus on now is faster charging. (new breakthroughs have proven to give us a 15 minuet charge time. thats amazing compared to the hours it took before.) they also need to focus on more efficient ways of keeping the car charged longer. the regenerative breaks are a good step. just little things to get those extra few miles out. these are the things they should be working at not making a battery the size of a normal car battery. im not saying CNG is evil and we shouldn't look into it at all. but in my opinion the electric is a better option. again this is MY opinion. to simply write off the electric car is close minded. and lets face it even if the electric car met your outrageous requirements you people STILL wouldnt buy into it because "durrr its not furst and loud gotta have me that speed and gotta hear dem pipes roar"

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    ocnblu, on , said:

    Well, I'm not sure I want a battery providing structural rigidity.

    On a FWD vehicle, the motive mechanical parts are all up front. The fuel tank is under the back seat occupying negligible territory, and the exhaust system does not require a hump, the floor could be flat if the vehicle is engineered that way. I would prefer a RWD layout myself, with a floor hump and a differential under the back seat along with that gas tank.

    Zero tailpipe emissions, perhaps, but I think automotive emissions standards are already pretty stringent, moreso than power plants.

    What about the mining of materials used in battery manufacture, and all of the surrounding effort to extract and transport the raw material to the manufacturing plants (from finding minerals, to transporting workers, to earth moving machines, to ships, trains and trucks), and the disposal of all these batteries when they die?

    Model S is RWD; the motor (AC induction, so no rare-earth materials) rests between the rear wheels. Very compact.

    The 85-kWh battery on the top model is 4" thick, and it's a flat slab mounted as part of the floor, making the chassis very stiff. It also lowers the center of gravity to that of a Ford GT's (the chassis, incidentally, was done by the same person who engineered that supercar). The flat battery, along with other aero tricks, gives Model S the lowest drag coefficient of any production vehicle on sale.

    Only 15% of a BEV's life-cycle environmental harm comes from the battery. It's the operation, whether gasoline or electric, that makes up the majority of a vehicle's impact: http://pubs.acs.org/....1021/es903729a

    Oh, and did I mention in Performance trim, it does 0-60 in 4.4 seconds?

    woah i didnt know that thats amazing. though that does bring out some other good things about EV. they dont have to work as hard to pick up speed. no mechanical engine chugging to push the car. so the mechanical friction is reduced as well. making them very impressive when it comes to speed.

    WOW, I have never read such a lopsided one way to make everyone think their way of life is positive write up.

    You can look up the details yourself, but the largest Lithium mine in the world, now owned by the Chinease and yet destroying a way of life for hundred of years is in Chile. The lithium lays under one of the worlds largest sources of natural salt. To get the lithium out, they are destroying the salt plains and how the local tribes have made money selling what is considered to be one of the purest and best salts around.

    I have to wave the :bs: flag on this report! 15% impact my ass, like anything in looking at works cited, while only looking at 5 of the 26 cited, it is very clear this is one persons interpretation of the data. The reports I looked at clearly state there is not enough data to really gauge the impact especially once the material is taken out of the ground, refined and then made into a battery as well as recovery, etc.

    But clear we will have various different camps on which technology is the next logical step.

    For me, CNG is the next logical step and as Ocnblue has pointed out, once battery technology gets to a point of having a normal car battery in size with a 300 mile range, then we can truly say electric is the way to go. Till then, it is a commuter car special only IMO.

    so you want an electric car that runs on the same size battery as a normal car? if i read this correctly you are out of your freakin mind. to ask for that as a must is stupid. the point of the large battery is to get the distance. a battery the size of a normal car battery no matter what you do would only get you a couple of miles. nothing on earth can change that. the distance is NOT A PROBLEM. a 300 mile range isnt unthinkable but what they need to focus on now is faster charging. (new breakthroughs have proven to give us a 15 minuet charge time. thats amazing compared to the hours it took before.) they also need to focus on more efficient ways of keeping the car charged longer. the regenerative breaks are a good step. just little things to get those extra few miles out. these are the things they should be working at not making a battery the size of a normal car battery. im not saying CNG is evil and we shouldn't look into it at all. but in my opinion the electric is a better option. again this is MY opinion. to simply write off the electric car is close minded. and lets face it even if the electric car met your outrageous requirements you people STILL wouldnt buy into it because "durrr its not furst and loud gotta have me that speed and gotta hear dem pipes roar"

    YOU ARE WAYYYYY TOO FUNNY!!! :roflmao:

    I am anything but closed minded and as I have stated many times before, down the road electric will and should be the end result.

    Yet TODAY, Electric DOES NOT WORK for long road trips, we have the 2nd largest Natural Gas fields in the world. This is a stepping stone to bigger and better things, as they figure out how to make batteries last longer and stay charged and get an instant charge just like Gas or Natural Gas can be, this would be one, I think the best way to get us off Arab Oil and onto American Created Jobs and eventually onto electric cars. Green alone shows that Natural Gas is better than a battery in the short term solution till electric comes of age.

    I believe in looking at the long picture with the needed steps to get there -> OIL -> CNG -> Electric. We should also then convert our power plants over to Natural Gas also so they are cleaner.

    Thanks for the laugh, I needed one after this monday work day. :rofl:

    It's a moot point arguing with some people...some people will never embrace new and different ideas let alone understand them. They fear change.

    Hey Cubical, so are you saying I fear change or fullmoon or both? Change is good, just need realistic steps to get to the end result of a cleaner world. :)

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    again you say it does not work for long trips. but the distance is not a problem. 260 is a reasonable distance. some gas cars don't even get that. i know mine doesn't. but it has its issues. the big issue is quicker charging. again like i said before i don't think CNG is evil or anything but we need more then 1 option. CNG is not and should not be the only answer to a short term question. i think the electric cars are fine the workings of the cars are fine. its the charging that needs work. and you didnt really answer the question i asked you. are you seriously asking the electric cars to have a battery the size of a normal car battery? if so then that truly is close minded and silly. if not let me know i read wrong.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    :butthead: 97 misses my point, not a surprise. NO, you did not read it correctly.

    And fear is not a factor here. Never was. Electric vehicles have been tried off and on for a century and the result has been failure every time. What is there to be scared of? The scales haven't tipped in their favor just because it is 2012.

    When auto executives around the world only begrudgingly spend money on electric vehicle development because they KNOW they will not sell, (they're doing it to be questionably fashionable after all with huge negative return on investment), are they all wrong?

    Edited by ocnblu
    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Pardon me? I was the one that made the comment about the battery in my Patriot, not dfelt. His son has a Patriot though. Keep your antagonists straight.

    You chose your screen name. I was just using shorthand.

    And I have news for you. I'm not going anywhere. I've been hanging around this joint for nearly a decade.

    Edited by ocnblu
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    For me, CNG is the next logical step and as Ocnblue has pointed out, once battery technology gets to a point of having a normal car battery in size with a 300 mile range, then we can truly say electric is the way to go. Till then, it is a commuter car special only IMO.

    yea.... shut up... this is the text in question.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    jeez... morons

    Jeez, grade-schoolers. :rolleyes:

    Sounds Like a Double Jeez Please! :P

    So yes as Ocnblu has stated my son has an awesome black Jeep Patriot that is in the shop after some moron side swiped it over the weekend in a parking lot and did not leave a note.

    Yes this car is cool on this thread, but currently for the Rich only, not the rest of humanity. The Electric cars that the rest of humanity can afford are sadly stuck to 40-80 miles on a charge and long recharge times. Will the Telsa technology get licensed to other Auto makers so they can add it to their version of electric cars? No one knows.

    In regards to CNG, I stand by my long range vision that Gas -> CNG -> Electric.

    If we are to reduce our carbon footprint, then we need to take logical steps for the mass of humanity while the few spend on the R&D to get us to electric.

    Cheers from Rainy Seattle, Another Liquid Sun Shine Day!!! :ohyeah:

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • GMC Hummer EV drivers can now charge their gargantuan EVs on Tesla Superchargers, according to an announcement on GMC's website. Enabling Supercharging requires an update to the myGMC app; however, users can use the Tesla app and register temporarily as a Rivian R1S until the app update completes. Drivers who expect to use the Tesla Superchargers network regularly may wish to sign up for a $12.99 subscription through the Tesla app, which grants a 10c/kWh discount.  With a 200 kWh battery, just two charges from 20% - 80% per month would cover the membership fee. The myGMC app will also allow owners to purchase an official NACS to CCS adaptor.  While third-party NACS to CCS adapters are available for purchase, they are not officially approved for use on Tesla's network. With this change, GMC says that Hummer EV drivers now have access to approximately 195,000 charge points across North America.  Most Tesla Superchargers are of the 250kw variety, and while not specified in GMC's announcement, we suspect that the Hummer EV is not eligible to charge on the 150kw chargers, much like the Ford EVs, which cite the same 15,000 number for eligible Superchargers.  Limited to 250kw charging speeds, Hummer EV drivers may wish to limit the use of Tesla stations to a last resort while traveling as they will not reach the full 350kw charging speeds their vehicle is capable of. GM has also partnered with Flying-J / Pilot to offer 350kw charging at truck stops nationwide and is a founding member of the new IONNA Network that will offer both CCS and NACS charging without an adaptor. There is no announcement yet on Tesla Supercharger Access for their other EVs.  Drivers can identify 250kw chargers by the black collar at the end of the charging cable. View full article
    • COST, Apartment owners are very stingy even here in Liberal PNW, there is city mandates now to get apartment owners to install chargers as renters are complaining. Yet up north by my area where I live around Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Edmonds and Mukilteo Apartment owners who have installed L2 chargers rarely have vacancy so yes, it is valuable I believe and of course the Tesla Supercharger stations are packed all the time. Workwise, Seattle has been very progressive in having building owners install chargers and I had at one time posted pictures of all the chargers at my work where 2 years ago, there were 4 and now there is 20 and still they are filled up, so demand is truly there, but resistance to change is still very hard among older folks. With GOP Trump having control of the Rural he has them sold on Toxic Diesel is the life and EVs need to die, so I doubt rural will get chargers without the Feds forcing the install and then we have to deal with the idiots cutting the cables or icing the chargers. I hope there is a future way to have the cables shock the idiots that attempt to cut the cables as it is just stupid.
    • That's hella ugly, but people will buy it because it says "off road"   Look at how it tackles that gravel road that a Nissan Sentra could easily navigate.
    • True, but some larger apartment complexes or parking garages could put in level 2 chargers, maybe even level 1 for places like an airport extended parking.  If people have their car sit 12 hours at their apartment, or 8 hours in a parking garage while at work, there is opportunity there also for charing without having to build out expensive super chargers. And really it is rural America that should be embracing EV's way more because there aren't many gas stations when you get into farm country, you might have to drive 30-40 minutes to find a gas station in some parts of rural America, but they have houses with electricity and can easily charge.  
    • Meh, just another forgettable appliance...styling very similar to the Polstar something something...
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search