2007 Tesla Roadster EV Production Model

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: kevinthenerd
Making a cheaper car isn't all that hard. Just look at the differences between the Camaro Z28 and the Corvette. The Z28 was quite a capable poor-man's Corvette.

Using that line of thinking, what would a poor man's Lotus Elise be?

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: MBrown
The website says it takes 3.5 hours to fully charge it. If I had the money and the smarts I would design an electric car that doesn't even need to be charged. I would design the car so that the car would charge itself when the wheels are spinning. I'm suprised nobody has come up with something like that yet.

So a perpetual motion machine, eh?

Design it and I'll take two...

 

[CombatChuk]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: kevinthenerd
Making a cheaper car isn't all that hard. Just look at the differences between the Camaro Z28 and the Corvette. The Z28 was quite a capable poor-man's Corvette.

Using that line of thinking, what would a poor man's Lotus Elise be?

A Fiero...

 

[CombatChuk]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: CombatChuk
Instead of relying on plugging it in to a wall outlet to charge. Why don't they integrate a small (think 400cc) diesel engine to provide the power to the car. The weight of the engine can be offset by having a less amount of batteries in the car.

Look at the hybrids already on the market. See what kind of performance and mileage they get from a 1.5+ liter engine and motor.

Adding gasoline or diesel to the car defeats the purpose of having an all electric system. By having to plug the car into the grid, you're moving energy consumption to the power plants, which are more efficient and can be better regulated. Ideally, the power plants would generate electricity using a cleaner fuel source, like nuclear, wind, water, etc.

The real argument should be, over the lifetime of the vehicle from manufacturing to recycle, which uses more energy? An all electric or all gasoline system?

If everyone had a car to plug in to charge, would the power systems be able to handle the load? It uses a 185KW motor and the batteries last (say 3 hours) you're looking at a lot of current being drawn. Most power grids have problems dealing with Air Conditioning unit.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: CombatChuk

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: kevinthenerd
Making a cheaper car isn't all that hard. Just look at the differences between the Camaro Z28 and the Corvette. The Z28 was quite a capable poor-man's Corvette.

Using that line of thinking, what would a poor man's Lotus Elise be?

A Fiero...

Heh...well if I was gonna say something that's no longer in production, I would go with the MR2, personally

 

[MBrown]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: MBrown
The website says it takes 3.5 hours to fully charge it. If I had the money and the smarts I would design an electric car that doesn't even need to be charged. I would design the car so that the car would charge itself when the wheels are spinning. I'm suprised nobody has come up with something like that yet.

A generator on the axles would cause extra drag on the motor, which would cause the motor to work extra hard just to keep the car moving. You would end up using more electricity just to keep the car moving then you would get charging the batteries with the spinning wheels.

There is no free lunch. You can't get more energy out of a system then you put into it. Hybrids already have a regenerative system on the brakes that charges the batteries when the car is slowing down. In that case, the drag caused by the generator is OK, since you're trying to slow down anyway. But even with the hybrid systems, you are adding energy to the system (car) in the form of gasoline.

Perpetual motion, FTL.

edit: I think MercenaryForHire put it little more succinctly then I did.

But what if the energy it will be creating is greater than the energy it takes to generate energy? It seems possible to me.

 

[SupaDupaCheez]

Originally posted by: MBrown

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: MBrown
The website says it takes 3.5 hours to fully charge it. If I had the money and the smarts I would design an electric car that doesn't even need to be charged. I would design the car so that the car would charge itself when the wheels are spinning. I'm suprised nobody has come up with something like that yet.

A generator on the axles would cause extra drag on the motor, which would cause the motor to work extra hard just to keep the car moving. You would end up using more electricity just to keep the car moving then you would get charging the batteries with the spinning wheels.

There is no free lunch. You can't get more energy out of a system then you put into it. Hybrids already have a regenerative system on the brakes that charges the batteries when the car is slowing down. In that case, the drag caused by the generator is OK, since you're trying to slow down anyway. But even with the hybrid systems, you are adding energy to the system (car) in the form of gasoline.

Perpetual motion, FTL.

edit: I think MercenaryForHire put it little more succinctly then I did.

But what if the energy it will be creating is greater than the energy it takes to generate energy? It seems possible to me.

Helloooooooo Nurse!

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: MBrown

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: MBrown
The website says it takes 3.5 hours to fully charge it. If I had the money and the smarts I would design an electric car that doesn't even need to be charged. I would design the car so that the car would charge itself when the wheels are spinning. I'm suprised nobody has come up with something like that yet.

A generator on the axles would cause extra drag on the motor, which would cause the motor to work extra hard just to keep the car moving. You would end up using more electricity just to keep the car moving then you would get charging the batteries with the spinning wheels.

There is no free lunch. You can't get more energy out of a system then you put into it. Hybrids already have a regenerative system on the brakes that charges the batteries when the car is slowing down. In that case, the drag caused by the generator is OK, since you're trying to slow down anyway. But even with the hybrid systems, you are adding energy to the system (car) in the form of gasoline.

Perpetual motion, FTL.

edit: I think MercenaryForHire put it little more succinctly then I did.

But what if the energy it will be creating is greater than the energy it takes to generate energy? It seems possible to me.

Seems possible to you? Based on what?

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: MBrown
But what if the energy it will be creating is greater than the energy it takes to generate energy? It seems possible to me.

It's not possible. Your system would violate the second law of thermodynamics. If you aren't adding energy to the system in the form of gasoline or electricity, you aren't moving. And no, you cannot create more energy from the generators than it takes to make the car move.
Please read this.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that "in all energy exchanges, if no energy enters or leaves the system, the potential energy of the state will always be less than that of the initial state." This is also commonly referred to as entropy. A watchspring-driven watch will run until the potential energy in the spring is converted, and not again until energy is reapplied to the spring to rewind it. A car that has run out of gas will not run again until you walk 10 miles to a gas station and refuel the car. Once the potential energy locked in carbohydrates is converted into kinetic energy (energy in use or motion), the organism will get no more until energy is input again. In the process of energy transfer, some energy will dissipate as heat. Entropy is a measure of disorder: cells are NOT disordered and so have low entropy. The flow of energy maintains order and life. Entropy wins when organisms cease to take in energy and die.

 

[EvilYoda]

Originally posted by: MBrown

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: MBrown
The website says it takes 3.5 hours to fully charge it. If I had the money and the smarts I would design an electric car that doesn't even need to be charged. I would design the car so that the car would charge itself when the wheels are spinning. I'm suprised nobody has come up with something like that yet.

A generator on the axles would cause extra drag on the motor, which would cause the motor to work extra hard just to keep the car moving. You would end up using more electricity just to keep the car moving then you would get charging the batteries with the spinning wheels.

There is no free lunch. You can't get more energy out of a system then you put into it. Hybrids already have a regenerative system on the brakes that charges the batteries when the car is slowing down. In that case, the drag caused by the generator is OK, since you're trying to slow down anyway. But even with the hybrid systems, you are adding energy to the system (car) in the form of gasoline.

Perpetual motion, FTL.

edit: I think MercenaryForHire put it little more succinctly then I did.

But what if the energy it will be creating is greater than the energy it takes to generate energy? It seems possible to me.

Do you even think about what you write? Or is it just like logorrhea of the hands...

 

[Shawn]

Originally posted by: SophalotJack

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: SophalotJack
That car looks real nice, so it prob won't be affordable.

Now if they just made a cheapo version of it (same drivetrain, safety, and quality of core components)... then it would be something to catch the eye of ALOT of ATOT.

That and every new driver, college kid, hippy would at least consider it.

How is that even possible? You basically said, if they would make a "cheapo version of it... without actually changing anything".

dude.... did you a actually look at the pics of the car? I mean.... not to be a tredby slang tosser... but "lolomgzwt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1"

That "car" can be tuned down for the av US citizen,,,, son.

don't be dumbtard fvck up.... this car is 100% affordable to non-hippy phagtard cali h0m0s

hey asshat, you fvcked up the tables. :|

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: Xanis

Originally posted by: kmr1212
awesome! one small step closer to getting out of the middle east

Bah, not even close. America is so dependent on oil, we'll be lucky to ever get our buisness out of the middle east.

One step out of 10,000 steps required. Hell, this isn't even a full step, it's half a step because the cars won't be common for at least 30 years anyway

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: marvdmartian

Originally posted by: bignateyk
How long does it take to recharge a 100% electric? 250 miles would be nice for day to day usage, but would render the car useless on trips over about 3 hours if it took a while to charge.

I would imagine most wouldnt be buying the car for long trips though.

That's when you have to spend another $10K for the "Mr Fusion" upgrade!! :laugh:

While a car like this will likely only ever be driven by the trendy elite few with the bucks to spare, I can see where it could also inspire companies to come out with a more "economic" (less powerful) version, that would do 0-60 in 7 to 9 seconds, and get maybe 400 miles highway on a charge, by using a smaller (more economical) motor, or keep the range the same, and go with a smaller number of high-priced batteries, that could bring the out the door price of one down to the $40K level that more people could afford.
Give them enough time to start really mass-producing models like I've described, and the price will only continue to go down (at least, until the UAW moves in on it! :roll: ).

For those of you that truly would like to see this country move towards more all-electric modes of individual transportation, start bugging your political representatives to push for two things that will make it happen faster and easier. One, better batteries than we currently have available (think twice the capacity at half the weight of current batteries, or better). If you can drop the weight of an electric car by using lighter batteries, that also have longer range (due to higher capacity), you extend your range dramatically. Two, we have to start building more nuke power plants. Not the old style "build whatever you want" that were put up in the 60's and 70's, but the newer plans that the DOE (dept of energy) has pre-approved for use. They have done this to help streamline the process of building new power plants, but the tree huggers still make it almost impossible to do so. While we have to be environmentally concious, we also have to stop allowing 2% of the population dictate how the other 98% will live. While I would love to see a viable alternative to fission nuke power plants, there simply isn't anything available with today's technology. And if you're wanting electric cars, and a break from supporting the middle east/OPEC, you're going to have to come up with some method for making all that electricity, right?

I agree with the nuclear power plant point. Seriously, the plants of 40 years ago weren't even dangerous. The nuclear plants that we can build today with modern technology are practically straight out of a dream. There have also been advancements in nuclear waste containment and disposal technology.

Hell, if we just replaced all of our old plants that are still in operation we'd be doing a favor for the environment and still be increasing energy output. We need more nuclear power. On top of that we need more solar farms, there are huge stretches of desert that are perfect for high levels of power production year-round, and in the longrun they are cheaper than using nuclear power.

In another 80 years or so we might have a viable alternative in fusion.