ccap41

I completely understand that part but I think the track surface will hold it back more than the performance capabilities themselves.

No, that's what the light weight and high down force is for.

You genuinely think they will beat the all-time record by 40 seconds? You realize how absurd of a goal that is, right? I don't think it is bad to set a very high goal but there is only so much time to be taken off on such a bumpy and uneven track.

Well, as of now, the AMG One doesn't meet the WLTP standards either... ??‍♂️

You can't take tax losses on fines.

Yeah, when it's a former F1 engine.. That's already been done.. https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a23706900/lanzante-formula-1-engines-porsche-930/

Who would have thought it was about electricity, too? ??

It's way more than just displacement and exhaust. F1 cars idle at like 5000rpm. I know you've read or watched videos about the difficulties with using an F1 engine in a street car... Neither supply good quality racing/competition and neither will last unless they do. Formula E does a much better job as of now but they also started all using the same exact equipment so it should be more competitive. I know they plan to allow each individual company build their own cars and I'm not sure if they are there yet. I actually think once they do that the quality of competition will drop as it will likely turn into the teams who spend the most VS the field, like F1.

This isn't the reason why CAFE and other standards are pointless. Nobody is making MB use diesel as a fuel in consumer vehicles.

Truck engines are built much more for reliability and real work than any other engine in vehicles. Look/listen/read what engineers talk about when talking about engines that are in both trucks and cars(2.3 Ford, 2.7 Ford, 3.5 Ford, 6.2 GM, etc.). They talk about that in the new 7.3 Ford as well even though it isn't a shared engine. The buyers demand different characteristics and uses from them. What's 2020 power? 400/420? That's not all that significant. I would say it should be more efficient rather than more powerful.

It would drive me nuts if i was in the market for a Tesla seeing how they change pricing and stuff every other month. You could overpay one month by a very significant amount and the next month your neighbor bought the car for 10k cheaper and gets free Supercharger charges. I want them to succeed but doing things like this would just rub be in the wrong way if I was in the market for one. Like, when do you make a purchase? You and I see all of these constant changes so we would know to probably wait it out some but next thing we know they'll jump the price again.. I'm interested to see how the Model X(along with the other two you mentioned) does up the mountain they pull everything with. they did have a short clip that foreshadowed the run and they mentioned having to use throttle going downhill because it "engine" braked so well.

Thank god. Those were the next ugliest things in their lineup only slightly behind the X4 and X6.

Looking on their website, it is considered the "Long Range" model. They also don't state a larger battery for the "Performance" model. Oh yeah, those guys are good with staying within manufacturer specifications.

They mentioned it has the 20's and not 22's. 22's lowered the range and towing capacity but I don't remember by how much. Whatever battery pack gives them 325 miles of range, is what they had.

Anything else that is rated for 5000lb can drive 100 miles unloaded, 65 miles loaded, and 30 miles unloaded back to a station without having to turn the AC off.

Exactly, it isn't such an adventure that it should require a complete fuel-up for such a trip. At the very end of the video when they were down to 1% getting to the Supercharger the timer said 2hr 12m for a full charge.. Realistically, this isn't much of an issue because like Drew said, people aren't towing with their Teslas. BUT, these companies are working on semi trucks that are EV.. Are their 500 mile estimates realistically like 125 miles? Do they need 10,000 mile "estimates" to be able to actually do work?

No, the horse trailer was just a "thing" that weighed close to what it can tow. It could have been any trailer but then loaded with stuff to get to that weight. Instead they just chose a trailer that weighed what they needed. On the plus side of it all, they said it handled the trailer just fine and did a great job outside the decreased range.

But what vehicle can't do 100 unloaded miles followed by ~65 miles loaded and be completely out of fuel? They wouldn't have made it the ~65 miles without slowing down and turning off the climate control.

Yeah, it is a really long video. I only watched the whole thing through as I was doing cardio at the gym and it was entertaining enough to keep my attention. They chose not to recharge but they also couldn't without going ~30 miles out of the way as that was their closest Supercharger(their starting point for the whole trip). I don't think it would be NECESSARY to top off a diesel for a 200 mile trip though. Any diesel can make ~100 miles unloaded then ~65 loaded and the remaining ~30 back to a charger/station unloaded without worrying about running out of fuel. They did better than the ratings empty but when it had a trailer it consumed 33% of range in 33 miles when going 70mph. They only made it back because they had to drop their speed down to 52mph and turn off the climate controls. I think the solid state batteries will be a complete game changer. Once you can double the epa rating range in the same packaging, it'll be great. It isn't so much that 238 miles of range or 300 miles of range is too little for 99% of my trips, it's that there is so much variance from hot summers to 60 degree temps, then down to zero degree winters. That's my biggest issue at this point. It's common for an EV to lose 30% of range in the winter so that 238 mile range is now only 167..

The V8 is old and thirsty but it performs plenty well otherwise, 390hp/394tq w/ a 7spd.

@dfelt have you had the opportunity to check this video out? I know I was being a smartass but in all seriousness, it's really interesting.

It would have zero bottom end to mid range, not ideal for a vehicle like this.

Wait, WHAT? You sold the CRV for scrap and have a Cruze? When did this happen?

Yeah, not ideal but the people buying these likely have no clue and would welcome the no-shift feeling more than the rare instance where an enthusiast like Drew buys one.

@dfelt, Esssplain this.. The semi versions are going to be garbage if this is any indication. The future, where epa ratings mean absolutely nothing and you get less range than your computer tells you.