What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Give a Genuine Gibson Guitar for $99 (Price, Not a Typo) view!
bestbuy.com - World-class starter guitar--sweet sound, killer craftsmanship and yeah, you read that price right.
94 Comments
- inphu510n, on 03/28/2009, -3/+35I'm not entirely sure what the previous digg commenters are smoking but whatever it is, they're getting ripped off.
Tesla Motors is a truly amazing company.
They started in 2003 and have produced over 250 of their Roadsters. They used the manufacturing principles of the Elise which gave it both styling and reduced development costs. The sedan uses advanced chemistry lithium-ion batteries which can be quick charged in 5 minutes on 480v AC. What's that? You're whining about the lack of 480v outlets? Telsa is partnering with a government contractor to create charging stations. The car will charge in 4 hours on 220v which is easily installed in household wiring, your dryer runs on it.
Daimler-Chrysler is licensing Tesla technology to use in their Smart cars.
Tesla took 6 years and several hundred million dollars to create and proof what GM has had 60+ years and trillions of dollars to do.
GM just announced that they would start production of the Volt on June 1st. The Volt goes 40 miles on electric power and then the hybrid system kicks in, burning fossil fuel. The Tesla sedan gets 300 miles on a charge, is purely electric and will smoke the paint off of a Volt.
You're telling me that GM deserves a bailout?
You're telling me that someone who has created a viable $50k electric luxury sedan before any other company in the US doesn't deserve stimulus money which is earmarked for electric vehicle development in the US?
This is aside from the point that Tesla isn't looking for a government bailout like the other US auto manufacturers. They're looking for grant money so that they can build a manufacturing plant in California to ramp up production. Big, BIG difference. - 2Six119, on 09/10/2009, -5/+37They should give the GM Bailout money to Tesla instead, then rub it in their faces. That's what I'd do If I was president.
- jasdf, on 03/28/2009, -1/+25This really is a game changer. It is a truly stunningly beautiful car. This is really the first car that has come out that challenges European luxury cars in terms of styling, as an added bonus it is an electric car.
- Paulorific, on 03/28/2009, -6/+21One of the only projects that deserve some money will probably not receive any.
- gcnaddict, on 03/28/2009, -1/+16I was under the impression that they were looking for low-interest loans, not grants.
Even if it was a grant they were after, I'd support it. The fact that they're going after a loan, though, makes me support them that much more simply because going after a loan shows a willingness to pay it back once they're successful.. - johnwiz, on 03/27/2009, -0/+12I love the idea of these fossil-fuel free cars, the air quality here in Chicago sucks. I imagine it does in every other big city as well.
- NavS, on 03/28/2009, -1/+11Deposits don't pay for the development of the car... heck they don't even pay for most of what it costs to make it... unless they're taking 100% deposits.
To top it off, this is not a hand out, its a loan... - P8ntBal1551, on 03/28/2009, -1/+10they shouldn't give it to the companies that are getting it, they had their chance, give it to a new company that needs the money and is better for the environment
- DiggDuggin, on 03/28/2009, -5/+14***** loaning them $450 million, we should be GIVING them $450 million, which is a tiny fraction of the trillions of wasteful spending that has already taken place. I consider this scientific research that is ridding the US of our oil dependency, and that is a problem that is bankrupting our country. I mean this car goes 300 miles on a 45 minute charge...that is a fully functional electric car, which means in 5-7 years once more companies can adapt this technology and bring the price down, nobody should be buying gas vehicles anymore. The whole country wins.
- SkinnerBox, on 03/28/2009, -0/+9/s ?
- ImOnYourTeam, on 03/28/2009, -1/+10The reason only rich celebrities can buy them, is because this company is a small business. If they get the money to mass produce them, the price will go down. Think about it for a second.
- ImOnYourTeam, on 03/28/2009, -1/+8/s
- SkinnerBox, on 03/28/2009, -1/+8Creating a car company is not like creating a web app startup.
- mksmothers, on 03/28/2009, -0/+7Why on earth are we assuming that a private company deserves money from tax payers? Has the world gone mad? If Tesla is a good car let it compete head on with GM. GM failed in the market place let Tesla come in and take their market share. Its how the real world SHOULD work.
- gcnaddict, on 03/28/2009, -2/+8So how exactly is a company supposed to get itself off the ground and build the concept if they don't have the cash? I do believe that's the purpose of a loan.
Oh *****! That's all Tesla wants: a loan! - NavS, on 03/28/2009, -0/+6"The Roadster was developed by Tesla Motors with design help from Lotus Cars in certain areas."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Roadster - ageedoy, on 03/28/2009, -0/+6It would be awesome if the battery could charge in 5 minutes, but from what I've read it takes 5 minutes for a battery chaNge. What they're working with the gov't for is to set up infrastructure for battery swaps.
- SwiftKick34, on 03/28/2009, -1/+6You class-warfare ass hats are so ***** annoying.
- johnpaul191, on 03/28/2009, -1/+6As opposed to some mythical auto industry that doesn't get government handouts? Let's also remember that almost every vehicle purchased by federal and local governments is from one of the 3 remaining US auto makers.
This claims "government loan", and if that's true... who cares. The government can afford to loan something like this $450 million.
Look how much bailout money we GAVE the oil companies, banks and whatever else in the last few years. I'm not going to lose sleep over a loan for something that has potential to get up and run on its own. - DiggDuggin, on 03/28/2009, -2/+7The whole country wins if we get off oil, if you can't see that you are a moron. I don't support gov't giving out handouts, but if it is something that every single person in this country is going to benefit from (which hardly ever happens), I am all for it.
- stizz, on 03/28/2009, -0/+5This is akin to people with horses complaining about how noisy those 'horseless carriages' are.
- SkinnerBox, on 03/28/2009, -1/+6You mean like creating an all-electric car company in the Bay Area?
- gcnaddict, on 03/28/2009, -0/+5Like NavS pointed out, Lotus helped in the design of the roadster.
The S looks more like a Jag, but it still looks excellent if you ask me. I don't really see any Maserati in the body design at all, actually... - nullcodes, on 03/28/2009, -1/+6The Model S oughta be cheaper than the Chevy Volt (which is plug-in too has an all electric mode), but it isn't. The Chevy Volt should cost more because GM has to put a gasoline engine in there too.
Although the center console panel on the Chevy Volt looks hideous, busy, plasticky, and cheap (no USB) -- it doesn't account for costing $20K less because of it.
If the Model S is so brilliant how come no bank is willing to take a risk loaning the money? - trisweb, on 03/28/2009, -0/+4It's a possibility that high-voltage high-current charging stations could charge batteries designed for them in a 5-10 minute time frame. See http://gm-volt.com/2009/03/13/qa-with-lithium-batt ... for a description of similar technology. However I'm not sure this is the technology currently in use.
Battery swap stations seem more practical at this point, but the infrastructure and manufacturing commitment would be huge. Especially if the charging/battery technology develops such that charging speed competes with battery-change speed, then the antiquated mechanical battery-changing stations would become quickly obsolete. But it's a good idea, if implemented well would allow electric cars to be marketable. - Countess666, on 03/29/2009, -0/+4but those aren't in the city center. and they are at least twice as efficient as a internal combustion engine.
even with losses in the grid and charging the batteries it still uses less fuel.
just 20% of the fuel's energy energy reaches the wheels in a normal car, a power plant puts 60 to 70% of the fuels energy into the grid. with some grid losses and a battery charge at around 70% efficient (lithium ion batteries) and 95% electric motor efficiency that still leaves a lot of saved power.
and if the batteries are recycled when they reach their end of life, then they aren't a environmental problem either.
and ofcourse that electricity could also come from windmills or solar power plants or a algae fired plant
http://ecoworldly.com/2009/03/27/algae-a-new-fuel- ... - mksmothers, on 03/28/2009, -3/+7No project deserves my money unless I'm willing to pay for it. Shame on you communists for thinking you can spend my money better than anyone else.
- DiggDuggin, on 03/28/2009, -2/+6Dude, there are like 300 roadsters total...It is also one of the fastest cars in production, so if your claim does hold any merit (which I don't think it does), 0-60 in under 4 seconds couldn't have anything to do with that, now could it?
- lennybird, on 03/28/2009, -0/+4When are you running?
- TheThirdLevel, on 03/28/2009, -1/+4Well considering how GM got a bailout....you're asking a small private company with a car that is good for the environment and reduces dependence on oil to get the cash on it's own, which we bail out the Big Three who make gas guzzlers?
- sirdarksoul, on 03/28/2009, -1/+4Let's see drive 300 miles, stop for lunch, charge....drive 300 miles, dinner time, recharge...maybe a couple hours more, time for sleep, charge. Nawwww you can't take it on a long trip. Given, the infrastructure for charging needs to be in place but you can bet your ass that restaurants, hotels and probably even Walmart will build the infrastructure if the demand is there.
- mksmothers, on 03/28/2009, -0/+3That's my point, GM should have simply failed.
- Aphelion27, on 03/28/2009, -5/+8One of the major problems with the roadster has been an increase in crashes vs pedestrians. This is because the roadster is so quiet the morons walking across the road against the lights can hear it coming and get hit.
When the sedan comes out I will be replacing my current sedan with it. Saving my pennies now so I can use the 100% down financing method. - johnpaul191, on 03/28/2009, -0/+3I feel like any case of a Tesla hitting a human would have been all over Digg. If any have been posted, i missed them.
- blurplevtx, on 03/28/2009, -0/+3The only thing green about these movements is they want everyone elses green.
- fatbobsmith, on 03/28/2009, -1/+4So, you're saying that new technology was subsidized by the rich before it was available to the common folk? Please explain to me how that is different than this situation.
Also, please explain how a company developing an electric-powered luxury sedan will revert the country back to horse and buggy. - Countess666, on 03/29/2009, -1/+4bailed out? they want a LOAN so they can get production up much quicker.
NORMALLY that's something the banks are for. but as you may have noticed, they are kinda busy at the moment saving their own asses.
its very normal for a company to take out a loan to expand production quickly but at the moment its just not that easy so they are asking the government for the loan, the one party that can still borrow them the money. - johnpaul191, on 03/28/2009, -2/+5They had to start big to change the view of electric cars. People claim the $100,000 rivals other cars with that price tag. Let's face it, it is also a status symbol. Once they get going, the technology will trickle down. If the S is successful, i am sure some American car companies will pay attention. Nobody is going to buy a $100,000 electric Buick, but i could see a $35k electric Cadillac in 10 years.
- Countess666, on 03/29/2009, -0/+3the volt goes 40 miles on a charge, then the engine kicks in.
the model S goes 300 miles on a charge. that's where the extra money comes in. all that extra battery power.
(al thou 30 miles in the average daily American commute so the volt could be great for that, while still being able to drive across the country which the model S cant until the charge stations are in place) - deema1, on 03/28/2009, -0/+3Model-S? It should have been called the Model-E.
- alwilson, on 03/28/2009, -1/+3If everyone had your attitude, we'd all be living in shacks on the prairie using horses and mules to get around. I just think you're bitter because you didn't get that raise from Chucky-cheese that you were counting on.
- blurplevtx, on 03/28/2009, -1/+3The reason these projects fail is because they are unproven. They need to be subsidized because in a free market they would FAIL. Same with windmills and solar power, they are inefficient and won't sell.
Also I get a kick out of hearing how green these cars are. People plug these into their house's electricity, which is probably delivered directly from a coal fired generating plant kicking out boatloads of CO2. Brilliant! - scamper22, on 03/28/2009, -1/+3Alright, here's what you do. All the above people, get our their pocket books. Put down a down payment one of these cars. Hand it over to Tesla. Problem solved. Tesla gets its money. You get a good idea.
Oh sorry. I forgot. People for the green movement, don't want to put up their own money. Apologies. - Countess666, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2its actual your children that will have wanted you to put money into this project.
so the government is doing it for you. - sirdarksoul, on 03/28/2009, -1/+3Sorry the word is socialist S-O-C-I-A-L-I-S-T
- inactive, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2if you don't care about the environment there's the fact that the US produces coal so we are less dependent on oil and we can eventually make electricity out of something else. here in miami we have nuclear energy
- sleestakslayer, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2Yeah. Guess what I saw at the Columbus Car Show? A Camaro with retro styling!
- 2Six119, on 09/10/2009, -0/+2That was a great comment.
- Countess666, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2internal combustion engine car : power of fuel reaching the wheels : 20%
electric car :
powerplant efficientie 60 to 70%
grid efficiency, unknown varies with distance
battery charge efficiently 60 to 70% for now
electric motor efficiently : 95%
energy reaching the wheels : 35% at worst still leaving 15% that could be lost in the grid and still be just as efficient.
and at best you get 46.5% - grid losses.
and the battery charge efficiencies are still going up. (and they can be recycled)
wind is actually very viable without subsidies in a lot of places, so is solar al thou the initial investment is much larger and the payback takes more then 3-5 years so inverters aren't usually interested.
thermal-solar is better but only works with direct sunlight, limiting the places where it works enough of the time.
and charging a car with power sources that may not be on full tilt 100% of the time is perfectly fine
using solar to charge your car while your at work for example. - Countess666, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2they want a LOAN. one that they will pay off, making a nice start with saving the plant while they are at it.
the banks are to busies trying to save their own asses and wont take on any risks, so they go to the one party that can still spend money: the government. -
Show 51 - 96 of 96 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is