Court rejects Tesla’s latest libel spat with Top Gear Tesla's on-going libel case with the BBC over a negative portrayal of its Roadster electric sports car on Top Gear suffered another setback when the courts ruled that it could not amend its claim. "We are pleased Mr Justice Tugendhat has ruled in favour of the BBC on both the issues before the court, first in striking out …
I think Top Gear's point was not so much the 55 miles they calculated it would do ("we _worked_ out that on our track it would run out after just 55 miles") because actually that's fairly comparable to other sportscars they tested at race speeds do on their track. It's the 17 hours for a recharge vs the 10 minutes for a refuel.
And the fact that a blown fuse means you have no breaks is frankly scary and I hope Tesla has implemented a failsafe for that.
In fact reading a Top Gear producer's highly disingenuous explanation of their biased and faked broadcast, what actually happened was a fuse to the vacuum assist pump for the disc brakes blew, the same sort of fault as you would get in a conventional engined car with a leaky brake assist hose.
So there was no total loss of braking, but just about everyone who saw the report would tell you that there was, just as they would say that the Roadster ran out of power and had to be pushed into the garage, where it would have taken 17 hours to charge up (actual charge time with a proper charger: 4 hours).
Top Gear were very specific about the charging times - if you use a standard UK 13A socket (~3000VA), it'll take 17 hours.
The "4-hour" charger is a 240VAC, 70A connector and apparently needs a 90A supply breaker so probably draws that on the supply side (at least sometimes).
My house service fuse (like most UK houses) is 100A. Thus charging this vehicle using the 4-hour charger requires 70 to 90% of my entire household electricity supply - leaving me a grand total of 10A to (maybe) 30A to run my entire house.
Thus if you turn on the kettle, or (god forbid!) while charging - pop! You're in the dark. Computer, TV and lighting? Forget it! And don't even consider an electric oven, hob or shower!
If you're unlucky then you'll blow the service fuse - which then requires an electrician callout to replace.
In other words, the 4-hour charger actually requires its own dedicated supply to be installed from the local substation. In the UK this can only be installed by the electrical supply company - in the US this varies from place to place.
The 6-hour charger needs a 50A circuit, so is plausible assuming you only have one of electric hob, oven or shower and not too many gadgets around the house.
I thought that wasn't bad, considering most super/hyper cars can easily average 3mpg compared to 20mpg if not ragged by Mr Clarkson.
Didn't see anything bad about the actual review as I was under the impression they were a lot worse than what they portrayed (i.e acceleration handling and most importantly the fun factor etc...)
This post has been deleted by its author
Elon Musk has made the first decent electric sports car. Credit where it's due.
Besides, inefficient reciprocating lumps of metal, explosive fuel and all those extra moving parts (gearboxes - how quaint) are so last Century. May as well keep making better horse whips.
@Da Weezil: As opposed to the GT40 which Jeremy RAN OUT OF MONEY to fill up in ?France? on their super car test^H^H^H^Hjolly.
Yes battery technology, or more specifically charging technology, is improving rapidly - but how often do you actually drive more than 200 miles in a day?
I can't remember the last time I did.
Most of the miles clocked up on a regular basis in this country is probably down to various Sales Reps for whomever, and Long distance lorry drivers.
I know our Reps can comfortably clock up 200-300 miles per day when they're on the road. For long distance lorry drivers, the clue is in the name!
For electric cars to really take off, they need to have a place in the company fleet. That's when big businesses will invest in the infrastructure, and in 3 years time when they're all up for renewal, that's when there will be a flood of electric cars on the 2nd hand market.
Some minicab firms and local couriers are starting to introduce alternative fuels, but they tend to be short range city driving. We need to hit the nationwide oil burners.
This post has been deleted by its author
At least once a year, at Christmas, to visit the reles up north (more often if there's a significant birthday, marriage, funeral or whatever) - 230 miles give or take; takes about 4 hours. In an efficient, fairly modern, small petrol car that's a bit over half a tank... granted you'd not get that from a petrol-powered Lotus Elise but you could refill that at any motorway service station in a matter of minutes.
Plus the odd trip to Scotland now and again.
200+ miles in a day is not really a stretch tbh - unless you need to spend 8 hours recharging the battery, necessitating an overnight stop at some shonky motel somewhere on the M1, then it would be.
I'd argue that battery-tech is NOT the future; it's a stop-gap at best... while the car itself may be "greener" - you've still got the wonders of chlorine polluted water-systems where the lithium has been strip-mined, air pollution from the ageing fossil fuelled power stations (unless you go nuclear of course but that still leaves you with a disposal issue of depleted rods) and landfill full of dead li-ion batteries. Battery cars are basically NIMBY-tech ... they shift the pollution into someone else's back yard, they don't solve the problems (unless your problem is not making enough money from your holdings in lithium mining, battery companies or Tesla of course).
"but how often do you actually drive more than 200 miles in a day?"
Of course, 200 miles is when the batteries are new, and it's not wintertime. I wouldn't be surprised if after 4-5 years and in cold weather it would be more like 100 miles.
And I drive 700 miles in a day at least once a month. 4-5 times a month I'll drive well over 100 miles.
Unfortunately John, my weekend work requires me to drive between 100 and 300 miles *ONE WAY*. But then again, that said, I wouldn't use a Tesla for that work, although that would raise some appreciative eyebrows. I just won't sell my soul, a kidney, an eye, and part of my liver for one.
;-)
I used to commute 96 miles each way daily for over three years. It's not that unusual. I currently have a 'short' commute of about 45 miles each way. And when was the last time that you left on a journey without any means of refuelling with less that a 25% margin or error? Who knows when you will get stuck in traffic/diverted? I certainly would not want to do more than a 150 mile journey in a car with a maximum range of 200.
Also, 200 is when it is new. How will it work after a years worth of daily recharging?
This post has been deleted by its author
Funny.
Most weeks I drive 720 km+ split over two days. Avg speed about 100 kph. (takes me 3:40 to cover 360 km, including a bit of traffic at the very end)
On the positive side of things: My car runs on E85 (Ethanol) which is the most environmentally friendly fuel known to man. It literally grows on trees, soaking up the sun's rays along the way.
I know of two companies with Electric cars in their fleet.
In both cases, the electric car was brought in as a 'green' option. In both case, there have been problems.
In one company: 3 electric cars, 1 back and forth to the dealer as it keeps developing faults, the other 2 are run alternately - 1 on charge/maintenance, 1 on the road. Current view: Nice idea but bloody expensive.
In the other company, they were building a small fleet of electric cars. They had a dozen in at the time with another dozen on order. They had 2 that were proving faulty - not holding a charge, the rest seemed okay, but they were setting up a separate garage for them for charging. Of the others, they were, again, running half the cars while the rest were charging or undergoing maintenance. Again, it was a lovely idea but bloody expensive.
Electric cars are a nice idea. I've looked at them when considering my last car purchase. Unfortunately they are rather expensive for what you get. Worse than hybrids, and they priced themselves out of my budget.
Petrol might be quaint, inefficient and so last century, but electric isn't ready and while Hybrids are better, they're still too expensive.
Well that's how they told the story. They're not exactly known for embracing electric cars so it's a bit odd that they started out so positive - unless they were trying to make a good story? And that's what Top Gear's about - a good story and people should be happy with that. Blame the stupid investors for taking Top Gear's information as factual! :-)
This post has been deleted by its author
Now they're (possibly) leaking confidential information about owners that complain of bricked batteries:
http://jalopnik.com/5887499/who-is-trying-to-smear-the-tesla-battery-problem-whistleblower
And it's hard to imagine the lamentable "warnings" from Tesla regarding the $40,000 consequences of allowing the battery to deplete will stand up in a court of law having read the following:
http://theunderstatement.com/post/18030062041/its-a-brick-tesla-motors-devastating-design
This post has been deleted by its author
Its the one thing companies usually never think about when they lend a product to a reviewer: what if the reviewer doesn't end up with a positive but a negative opinion on the product ?
I've seen this happening myself one time.. I'm not a professional reviewer, but I do like to write (PS3) game reviews every now and then which usually received quite some positive feedback. However; I've always been positive /and/ negative alike. Some Sony employee's have approached me in the past asking if I could review a certain game (low to midrange). Which by itself is cool, sure, but I still let them know that I could not guarantee that my review would be a positive one. That's not how I work, I write what I see and I'm not the kind of guy who will make things nicer than they are (or what I think it to be).
Unsurprisingly enough the request was cancelled ;-)
But honestly I think that's the main problem; some companies are all too happy to lend their products to reviewers and have it turn up on TV but will hardly - ever - think about the consequences..
And others like Tesla seem too stupid to realize that their lawsuits are WAY more damaging than the Top Gear episode itself. When I saw it for the first time I have to admit that my first reaction was "Whoah!?" because usually the crew isn't that critical. But then I also quickly learned that T.G. is critical by default when it comes to "environmental stuff".
Something Tesla could have known up front as well... Every time the lawsuit comes into the news I'm sure there will be more people going to look for this episode (easily found on the Top Gear website!) and will make others like me clearly remember the negative comments regarding the Roadster again.
This post has been deleted by its author
You can convert your own car, but the cost of parts are also very high until they get mass produced. It's hardly a rip off.
The interest in Telsa is due to the fact they make a nice looking sportscar. Nobody seems to give a monkeys about the uglier reliable cars. Once battery technology improves, it will be a no brainer versus the 30% efficeint internal combustion engine.
Whilst it's a nice looking motor, I can't ever help but feel Tesla are/were barking up the wrong tree with the Roadster. As something of a car nut with a daily banger and a weekend toy, I almost feel part of Tesla's target market, yet the problem for me at least, is they've got it arse about face. I would never in a million years choose a Tesla Roadster, or indeed any electric car over a 911 as a 2nd, fun car. The Porsche is engaging, dramatic, lairy and downright fun, in a way that a fully electric car will never be. Ever.
What I want, is a car that can manage 100 miles, has a reasonable turn of pace, a 100mph top speed and a £15K price tag, so that I can commute to work and back each day. Someone, anyone, go!
Problem for electric vehicles are the batteries you need for the range are expensive, heavy and take too long to charge. I really don't see much chance of an EV taking off until at least 1 or 2 of those things change.
However there is certainly scope for hybrid vehicles. A hybrid could make do with a 30 mile battery range and flip over to a petrol engine. Or even a micro turbine. Turbines are especially promising IMO since you get the range, the reduced weight, more fuel effiency vs petrol and potentially a simpler power train too. Problem is they're still in the experimental / prototype phase.
A hybrid has both electric and petrol power delivered directly to the wheels. A diesel-electric train uses a diesel engine to generate electricity, the wheels are driven by this electricity, there is no mechanical link between the diesel engine and the wheels.
This is the main difference between hybrids like the Prius and diesel-electric vehicles.
Look up the Fisker Karma for a car that uses an internal combustion engine to produce electricity for the drivetrain rather than using a mechanical link.
Why were Tesla suing a remake of "Last of the Summer Wine" sitcom?
It's the same scripts... three idiots (the bombastic one, the thinker and the short one) doing crazy things, usually involving fanciful constructions that fall apart. Hugely entertaining, but surely no-one could mistake it for a factual documentary.
IE come out fighting.
As such what would have been a *non* story ( for something produced for the immensely wealthy muesli eating tree hugging set who want to be seen to *care* about the environment it is actually *quite* nice, but they would have liked the option for the higher grip tyres) has continued to be talked about 3 *years* after it appeared.
And now (Act II) we get the reports of battery issues *specifically* not covered in the warranty, which suggests substantial *prior* knowledge of the problem.
Europe (and the UK) is *not* America.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
