Jump to content

Recommended Posts

G. David Felt
Alternative Fuels & Propulsion writer
www.CheersandGears.com

 

Tesla Roadster 3.0 and 400 mile range reality?

 

Tesla gave a late Xmas present to electric advocates on December 26th 2014. Roadster 3.0 was posted covering the following top 3 topics: 1. Batteries, 2. Aerodynamics and 3. Rolling Resistance.

 

Tesla talks about the how their battery from 2008 was revolutionary in the auto industry and while it was good then and up till now for their current S sedan, lithium ion battery advances have pushed them to get 31% more energy from the same size battery pack. This new cell now gives approximately 70k Wh in the original battery package.

Tesla then moves on to talk about their drag coefficient of .36 on current Roadster and how with a new Retrofit aero kit they can drop it to .31 a 15% improvement.

 

The final bit of technology info is how Tesla talks about rolling resistance on the current Roadster which has a 11.0 kg/ton. An upgrade will give a 20% improvement by allowing the Roadster 3.0 to have a Crr of approximately 8.9 kg/ton. With this improvement come additional improvements for residual brake drag and wheel bearing to reduce drag.

This last part is particularly noticeable as anyone who has driven a Chevy Suburban and then gotten into a Cadillac Escalade ESV will notice how much better the Cadillac glides showing that the quality of Bearings, brakes, seals, etc. all can help to reduce drag.

 

Tesla's summary of these improvements is that Roadster 3.0 can achieve an estimates 40-50% improvement on Range over the original Roadster. Tesla goes on to say that they expect to prove this in the early weeks of 2015 with a drive from San Francisco to Los Angeles that is to be non-stop.

 

Tesla finishes up by stating that they will open up for appointments to be made starting Spring of 2015 for existing Roadsters to be upgraded with these 3 major focus points once the battery pack finishes safety validation. They go on to say this will not be the last of the upgrades for existing and new Roadster owners.

 

As of this writing there were 45 comments posted. As expected they are all positive, and yet many also are giving suggestions for powertrain upgrades for performance rather than battery life, reduced weight for better handling or a combination of them. Seems many want their cake and eat it too.

 

This brings up an interesting question, if Tesla is getting ready to release a battery pack that can go 400 miles on a charge, what will Volt 2.0 be for GM or Toyota have for the Prius family of autos?

 

Could we see a change over from gas to electric faster than people have expected?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Volt will get a 12% bump in range and stronger regenerative braking... that's about it on the electric side of things.  Most of the improvements they can make at this point will be on the regenerator. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Volt will get a 12% bump in range and stronger regenerative braking... that's about it on the electric side of things.  Most of the improvements they can make at this point will be on the regenerator. 

That is what I do not get, with all the advancements in battery technology, you would think they would want to step up to trump Tesla as well as get this powertrain into a AWD CUV or at least a FWD CUV.

 

I could see the VOLT having a 120-160 mile range battery pack come in the following format's

 

4 door sedan

5 door hatchback

4 door CUV with lift gate style

4 door CUV with Tilt glass and mini stage coach doors

 

Powertrains being FWD or AWD with choice of gas, Diesel or CNG generator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because this is a Volt refresh (though I'm sure GM will call it all new) rather than an all new car.

 

The innovative thing about the Volt is under the hood, not the battery pack. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't .36 cd pretty crappy for 2015? Trans Am was at .29 in 1982.

IMO, this again points to the 95th percentile of automotive design progress that we are in.

Yes I would agree that for Tesla Roadster, the original .36 was pretty crappy. So be interesting to see what the new roadster looks like. Course that Trans Am was also fully enclosed compared to the open air Roadster from Tesla which is what this .36 is for. So I guess a .31 for the new Roadster 3.0 removable roof version is pretty good then.

Because this is a Volt refresh (though I'm sure GM will call it all new) rather than an all new car.

 

The innovative thing about the Volt is under the hood, not the battery pack. 

I agree that under the hood is important but then GM needs to be setting the standards rather than just following or doing mid level. I would think using the existing battery design and updating the cell design to maximize the Lithium battery packs for range would be a huge win for them in the eyes of the public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GM is putting a lot of money into battery research... it's just not ready yet for 2016..... 

 

Keep in mind that neither is Tesla's.... Elon has a habit of making promises for release dates and then they get pushed back by a year or 3.  Until the first 3.0 battery back is installed in a paying customer's car and proven the claims true, Tesla has not actually delivered on its promise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Solid Point made Drew, Elon does have a habit of slipping dates.

 

Hopefully GM will do a mid year refresh of battery pack when they do have newer better batteries ready that push the length of driving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Isn't .36 cd pretty crappy for 2015? Trans Am was at .29 in 1982.

IMO, this again points to the 95th percentile of automotive design progress that we are in.

Yes I would agree that for Tesla Roadster, the original .36 was pretty crappy. So be interesting to see what the new roadster looks like. Course that Trans Am was also fully enclosed compared to the open air Roadster from Tesla which is what this .36 is for. So I guess a .31 for the new Roadster 3.0 removable roof version is pretty good then.

Most of the pics I see on Google show a lid/roof panel, assumedly the released number is with that in place. Guess the 'formal' rear glass is killing the flow, tho the windshield looks rather upright, also. Just surprised to hear it's where it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Isn't .36 cd pretty crappy for 2015? Trans Am was at .29 in 1982.

IMO, this again points to the 95th percentile of automotive design progress that we are in.

Yes I would agree that for Tesla Roadster, the original .36 was pretty crappy. So be interesting to see what the new roadster looks like. Course that Trans Am was also fully enclosed compared to the open air Roadster from Tesla which is what this .36 is for. So I guess a .31 for the new Roadster 3.0 removable roof version is pretty good then.

Most of the pics I see on Google show a lid/roof panel, assumedly the released number is with that in place. Guess the 'formal' rear glass is killing the flow, tho the windshield looks rather upright, also. Just surprised to hear it's where it is.

 

Makes one wonder if that upright windshield will change with the retro kits for the Roadster 1.0 and 2.0 versions when they release the upgrade kits and start producing 3.0 version cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Isn't .36 cd pretty crappy for 2015? Trans Am was at .29 in 1982.

IMO, this again points to the 95th percentile of automotive design progress that we are in.

Yes I would agree that for Tesla Roadster, the original .36 was pretty crappy. So be interesting to see what the new roadster looks like. Course that Trans Am was also fully enclosed compared to the open air Roadster from Tesla which is what this .36 is for. So I guess a .31 for the new Roadster 3.0 removable roof version is pretty good then.

Most of the pics I see on Google show a lid/roof panel, assumedly the released number is with that in place. Guess the 'formal' rear glass is killing the flow, tho the windshield looks rather upright, also. Just surprised to hear it's where it is.

 

Makes one wonder if that upright windshield will change with the retro kits for the Roadster 1.0 and 2.0 versions when they release the upgrade kits and start producing 3.0 version cars.

 

 

Windshield angles are one of the few things you really can't change on a car as a factory thing.  Most likely, they're changing the front and rear clip in some fashion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   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.




  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      For the past couple of years, Tesla has been offering an $8,000 "full self-driving" feature for their Autopilot system. But you couldn't use this feature as Tesla had not yet activated this feature. Basically, you were buying a system that Tesla promised would come online sometime in the near future. But that is not happening as Tesla has pulled the option for the time being.
      Last night, Tesla CEO Elon Musk tweeted the option has been taken off due to it causing "too much confusion".
      Since Tesla began offering the option in October 2016, the company has seen a number of top managers and engineers leave the Autopilot program. A number of owners who paid for the $8,000 option have filed a class-action lawsuit, "alleging they were deceived into buying a feature that didn’t exist."
      However, this feature isn't going away. Bloomberg obtained an internal email where Musk told employees they needed about 100 more people to join an internal testing program that is linked to full self-driving feature. 
      Source: Bloomberg

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      For the past couple of years, Tesla has been offering an $8,000 "full self-driving" feature for their Autopilot system. But you couldn't use this feature as Tesla had not yet activated this feature. Basically, you were buying a system that Tesla promised would come online sometime in the near future. But that is not happening as Tesla has pulled the option for the time being.
      Last night, Tesla CEO Elon Musk tweeted the option has been taken off due to it causing "too much confusion".
      Since Tesla began offering the option in October 2016, the company has seen a number of top managers and engineers leave the Autopilot program. A number of owners who paid for the $8,000 option have filed a class-action lawsuit, "alleging they were deceived into buying a feature that didn’t exist."
      However, this feature isn't going away. Bloomberg obtained an internal email where Musk told employees they needed about 100 more people to join an internal testing program that is linked to full self-driving feature. 
      Source: Bloomberg
    • By William Maley
      Tesla finds itself without a chairman of the board as Elon Musk has stepped down due to a settlement with Securities and Exchange Commission. A possible replacement for Musk could be James Murdoch, chief executive of 21st Century Fox and a member of Tesla's board according to a report from the Financial Times.
      The SEC is wanting the next chairperson to be independent and not beholden to Musk. Murdoch is the closest thing as he has more financial independence than another candidate, Antonio Gracias. The FT report says Gracias' venture capital firm, Valor Equity Partners was an early investor into Tesla, though it had sold its shares when Tesla had its IPO. Gracias is also a stakeholder in Musk's SpaceX, which clouds his independence. 
      That isn't to say Murdoch's independence is clear either as he is friends with Musk, and has sided with him on a number of decisions.
      Sources tell the FT that Tesla is also looking outside of the company for a possible replacement.
      Tesla didn't respond for comment, but Elon Musk took to Twitter last night to respond.
      "This is incorrect," he wrote.
      Source: Financial Times (Subscription Required), Bloomberg

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Tesla finds itself without a chairman of the board as Elon Musk has stepped down due to a settlement with Securities and Exchange Commission. A possible replacement for Musk could be James Murdoch, chief executive of 21st Century Fox and a member of Tesla's board according to a report from the Financial Times.
      The SEC is wanting the next chairperson to be independent and not beholden to Musk. Murdoch is the closest thing as he has more financial independence than another candidate, Antonio Gracias. The FT report says Gracias' venture capital firm, Valor Equity Partners was an early investor into Tesla, though it had sold its shares when Tesla had its IPO. Gracias is also a stakeholder in Musk's SpaceX, which clouds his independence. 
      That isn't to say Murdoch's independence is clear either as he is friends with Musk, and has sided with him on a number of decisions.
      Sources tell the FT that Tesla is also looking outside of the company for a possible replacement.
      Tesla didn't respond for comment, but Elon Musk took to Twitter last night to respond.
      "This is incorrect," he wrote.
      Source: Financial Times (Subscription Required), Bloomberg
    • By dfelt
      To say that today the average auto is a supercomputer would be an understatement. Auto's are being asked to do so much now that many take it for granted what they can do and others wonder why self driving auto's are not already normal here after years of self driving auto's being promised. Part of this is computer tech only now getting up to speed, other reasons is adoption by people. 
      Consumer Reports decided to check out just how good is autonomous driving and is it more of a Semi-automated driving. Consumer Reports has compared the Cadillac Super Cruise, Tesla's AutoPilot along with Nissan's ProPilot and Volvo's Pilot Assist.
      While GM, Tesla and Volvo did not respond to Consumer Reports request for response, Nissan did issue a statement saying that their ProPilot Assist system is available on several models all of which cost tens of thousands of dollars less than the others in the report. While CR has tested the automated driving systems for years, this is their first official in depth testing of the systems. The testing was conducted on both private and public roads to insure real world results. With a system that uses a combination of cameras, radar and other various sensors to map, monitor and react to traffic conditions, each system had its limitations.
      Cadillac Super Cruise only works on divided highways that have been mapped by GM. Tesla Autopilot can work on small, curvy roads with poor lane markings but operates erratically in those situations. Nissans ProPilot did better than Tesla and Volvo for keeping the drivers engaged but just under Cadillac's Super Cruise. Over all Cadillac's Super Cruise was judged to be the best balance of High-tech capabilities with car operational safety and driver engagement.
      Consumer Reports does point out that Super Cruise is NOT GM's Cruise self-driving technology that Honda has just bought into to help bring to market.
      Reuters Story
  • My Clubs

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Reader Rides

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×