Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Tesla Model X Launch, Tonight 8pm PST (teslamotors.com)
94 points by Flemlord on Feb 9, 2012 | hide | past | favorite | 65 comments



Is this the model that's supposed to be $30,000 and ship in 2015? I love Tesla's strategy of releasing a new model every 3 years for half the price of the previous model. Does this mean they will have a $15,000 model in 2018? That would be great.

Starting with 2020 electric cars should start going mainstream, which is not too bad. I think many people wouldn't have expected this until 2050 (when we'd be really running out of oil) about 5-10 years ago.


Subtract about 100 years and a similar statement could have been made about petroleum-based cars potentially replacing electric cars in the near future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car#1890s_to_1900s:_Ea...


I remember reading that they were working on an SUV body with essentially the same mechanics as the Model S. However, the back-lit profile in my email looks like another sedan.


The Model X is supposed to be a crossover (aka hatchback), not a full SUV.


Model X is their SUV.


Yes, based on same platform as Model S.


Reading this headline before my first cup of coffee this morning and having a dim awareness that Elon Musk is involved in spaceflight (no doubt conflating Model X with SpaceX) I was disappointed to find discussion of cars instead of rockets.


In 2 months SpaceX will send a Dragon capsule to do a near docking with the ISS. That will be an exciting milestone.


Electric cars will go mainstream when:

1. They become priced like regular cars 2. They have the range of regular cars 3. They come in form factors similar to regular cars 4. They are cheaper to own and operate than regular cars 5. They stop being about "the environment". San Francisco is not the entire US.

It looks like we're getting a bit closer to all of these milestones, which is good.


All of your points are valid, but I think you miss the main one, which Clarkson nailed: electric cars will go mainstream when they don't take three hours for a "quick" charge. They already have the range of gas-powered cars (~300 miles for the S), but once you hit that, you're stuck. It makes long-distance trips onerous, if not impossible.

Anyway, they're getting cheaper all the time, batteries are getting better, and when you can convincingly pitch the TCO as being less than a gas car, you'll start to see people jump on it. Infrastructure will follow from there.


Clarkson is professionally paid to be an elitist fool.

Most Europeans already believe 300 miles range and room for eight passengers is a luxury. Why? Their gasoline costs about twice as much per liter/gallon. Their automakers build mostly hatchbacks to match demand. It's rare to even see a large van on the roads. When you see an SUV/crossover in Europe, it's the sign of a wealthy person who lives to excess.

As I pointed out in my article, ten minute chargers are only five to ten years from commercial release. You can charge your Nissan Leaf from 0 to 80% in 25 minutes using today's Level 3 charger without waiting for any new technology. That'd be ~45 minutes for a Tesla Model S.

If gasoline prices predictably rise and it only takes as much time to top up at the local mall as it takes to stop there for a latte and a sandwich, you'd be a fool to not own an electric vehicle.


That charger is $10,000. About the cost of 208 fill-ups in my Mazda in the Chicagoland area. I fill up once every other week.

The Leaf already costs double what my car does. We're not quite at the point where this makes sense.


Indeed. I won't pay $10k for one of those chargers. Car dealers, shopping malls, and Starbucks will. I'm getting a Level 2 charger because I don't need thirty minute charges at home when the car spends all night in a garage anyway.


That is so true.

But the thing is most europeans do not have garages next to their house. They just park their cars on street. I am curious about how they will handle charging system.


Clarkson goes way out of the way to stage cases where electric cars fail. Then he gets caught red-handed. The guy has no responsibility to the truth. His program is pure entertainment, not a scientific case study, and should be enjoyed as such.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/aug...


Oh, I know he's anti-electric, anti-environment, pro-seal clubbing, etc. That doesn't detract from the fact, however, that he has a point about charge times.

Also, Tesla complained about that episode, and Top Gear responded that everything shown was an accurate portrayal of how it went. Who you choose to believe, I suspect, has a great deal to do with the distance between one's home and SV. As for me, I imagine the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Top Gear regularly embellishes for the purposes of entertainment, but I find it highly unlikely that they would flat-out make shit up just to slag a particular company.


Well, considering Tesla engineers showed that the battery levels never dropped below 20% for the duration the cars were on loan, I think it's a pretty open and shut case?


How about a towable electric generator for long trips? It could run on diesel, gasoline, ethanol, or whatever.


That's a good point too, but I actually think charging time is the one downside car owners wouldn't mind getting used to, if the rest of the issues were solved.

With a decent range, say 200+ miles, planning for a 3 hour charge isn't too terrible a shift. Long distance travel is another story. Charging stations at rest stops and restaurants would be a big help there, but I'm worried that the premature installation of those GE power stations, which have been subsequently torn out in many places, have left a bad taste in the mouths of people who can make that happen.


Long distance travel is the primary reason I have not wanted to buy an electric car. I only have one car at the moment, so I need it to be good both for commuting and long distance.

I can make a 12 hour trip from SF to UT or 7 hr SF to LA. With an electric you add in 3hrs * 2 going to UT and 3hrs * 1 going to LA. That totally changes travel plans because I'd have to stop for the night or else push through on nothing but uncomfortable naps in the car during the charge cycles. So electric is out.

If I had 2 cars (if I didn't live in a small apartment complex, and if I had a bunch of kids so I needed a separate van or something) then I'd have one electric for commuting and one gas for road trips.


This is the market for a series hybrid.


So Better Place and their switchable Car Batteries then? http://www.betterplace.com.au/drivers/solution-for-drivers/d...


That would be fantastic.


I really hope they come through with it. It sounds like such a clever model.

// Although some of the dates seem to be slipping (ie - the 2011 Canberra roll-out)


1. Base Model S is $50k after subsidies. 2. I have driven a roadster for three years/12k miles and never had a range issue. It gets 200-240 miles per charge. Very, very few folks break 200. 2b. The Model S has a 300 mile range version. 3. The Model S is better than any sedan in the market in terms of storage because it doesn't have all the parts of a carbon car. 4. they are cheaper to operate in my experience. i can go 200 miles on a $2 charge. of course, the roadster is an expensive up front cost. They will have a $30k cars in five year I'm certain. 5. i drive the Roadster because it's as fast as a lambo/ferrari/corvette, is super sexy and because it say F-U to the human right violating middle east. The environment is way down my list..... i'm for getting off middle east oil and human right way before being green.


"Carbon" car?? What's the fuel your electric utility uses?


Depending on where he's based (I'm assuming California), a large fraction is likely fossil fuel based, but there's lots of natural gas (which is at least a low-carbon FF), but also nuclear, hydro, and wind. It's also not unreasonable to assume that a Tesla Roadster owner might have put down the up-front costs for solar photovoltaics on his home.


TCO. Total cost of ownership.

I ran the numbers here: http://colintheshots.com/node/10

They have: 5 cents per mile variable cost of driving. Cheapest insurance for vehicles in their price range due to five star safety ratings. Federal and state incentives.

They're cheaper than regular cars, if you can find affordable financing. Right now, financing is the cheapest it's ever been if your credit is good. Think of it as buying your fuel years in advance at low interest rates.


Also:

In Chicago, we desperately need a battery that can make it through a morning commute when it is 15 below zero.


I live in Chicago. I had no problem putting $5K down on a Model S. Its good enough for my needs. If I'm traveling more than 300 miles in a day, I'm renting a car or flying.


Is this a serious issue with current electric cars? I would assume there's something you can do with a heating mechanism or something for the batteries when they're in danger of getting really cold and losing their charge.


It's enough of an issue that Nissan offers a cold weather trim package on the Leaf, which it "strongly recommends" for operation in below freezing climates.


OH: And for sports cars, find a way to add a clutch pedal and more "gears". I know it doesn't make sense in an electric car, but find a way to make it make sense!


I was thinking first "what an ass, makes us curious now when it is almost a year away".

Then i remembered how you write dates.


This is supposed to be a crossover vehicle that Elon Musk claims will be "faster then a Porsche 911 and roomier than an Audi Q7". Also he claims the most interesting view of it is with its doors open (a reference to something rumored to be called Falcon doors, some sort of folding doors).

The next model after this is the one he wants to make for like $15000-$20000

They seem to think Model X will be very well received.


Here's an outline shot Elon Musk just posted with the doors open: https://twitter.com/#!/elonmusk/status/167648387313840128/ph...

His next tweet said they are not gull-wing. They definitely do something interesting though.


I wonder if I can turn my Model S deposit into a Model X deposit after tonight.


Seeing the design elements that went into making the Model S from the ground-up, I am excited to see what a "family" all-electric car built from the ground-up will look like. I wonder if there's going to be another HUGE touchscreen panel.

And how many seats? I'm pretty stoked. And maybe my Tesla stock will have a nice bump after the unveiling. [weak disclosure] :)


I saw the early prototypes... it's awesome. I'll be there tonight and will post some photos to @jason


I don't follow the car business; Is it normal or unusual to have a car launch event like this?


Auto show season is starting.


>Does this mean they will have a $15,000 model in 2018? That would be great.

I wouldn't want Tesla to release a car even at $30,000. It takes away the from the rarity and coolness. Electric cars certainly do need to evolve and Tesla has done an incredible job, but there are dozens of other manufacturers out there that are just as capable. If you could buy a Bugatti or Koenigsegg for $75,000 they would certainly be less attractive to auto enthusiasts. It's human nature to want what we can't have. If Prada (not knock-offs) started selling their bags at $50 a pop do you think girls would still worship them?


Having a luxury brand and affordable products is not mutually exclusive. Many car manufacturers function this way. Just an example:

Audi cars are nice, but ultimately nothing special. Anybody can own an Audi, because the cheaper ones aren't that expensive. That doesn't prevent them from having the R8, though, which at $130,000 is purely a luxury sports car. Everybody who sees an R8 knows that whoever owns it is probably a millionaire. The fact that there are cheaper Audis doesn't minimize the value of the luxury model. The luxury brand essentially becomes "R8," not "Audi."

Other examples: Mercedes and the McLaren SLR, BMW and the i8 supercar. Ford and the Ford GT. So can it be with Tesla and the Tesla Roadster.


>Audi cars are nice, but ultimately nothing special.

I'm not quite sure why you picked BMW and Audi as examples. Everyone knows they're luxury and in the premium class. I'll give you the Ford GT, but as far as Mercedes goes, they're still viewed in the upper-class spectrum in the car world. The C class is currently the cheapest Mercedes and you're lucky to find one for less than $38k on a dealer's lot.


I drove a BMW in highschool^. BMWs and Audis are not "luxury or premium class" cars. Luxury and premium class BMWs and Audis are "luxury and premium class".

^A 3 series almost as old as myself.


The price accessibility of older BMW and Audi cars is convenient, because both brands are still perceived as higher-end, allowing a highschool or college student to buy one for relatively cheap and people will still think "expensive."


I can't tell if you're trolling at this point because this conversation has spun to some irrelevant cost vs brand appearance logic. First of all, we've been talking about new cars and 15 year old models are being brought into the discussion. Secondly, I can buy a 25 year old used Rolls Royce for $20k. Does that mean that Rolls Royce as a brand is not viewed as exclusive and not in the upper echelon of the auto industry?


No, just an off-topic aside directed solely at burgerbrain's comment. I bought a BMW in college for cheap (though a bit more than burgerbrain's).


"allowing a highschool or college student to buy one for relatively cheap and people will still think "expensive."

Indeed, I got mine for 2.5k so that I could pick up "classy chicks". ;)

Surprisingly it worked, to some degree.


>I drove a BMW in highschool^. BMWs and Audis are not "luxury or premium class" cars

You're taking this far out of context and acting as if the current models don't matter just because they were designed one way 15+ years ago. The only "cheap" BMWs are the base model 1 and 3 series. Compare the average new 3 series to a high end model from Toyota, Dodge, Chevy, etc... They don't stand a chance in terms of aesthetics and overall "feel."


In some countries, BMW and Audis are always considered luxury cars (ie. Australia).

A car that sells for 15k pounds in the UK can easily sell for over $50k AUD. (which is 1:1 USD atm)


Even high end lines sometimes have low-end kit. It's not as flashy, it's not as stylish, and everyone knows you got the low-end model. Apple still sells the previous model iPhone for very cheap.

In this case though, Tesla wants to make electric cars affordable. They're only rare and exclusive right now because they're expensive and brand new. They may continue to be rare even at $15,000. A Lotus Elise is cheap and fast and everyone wants one, but I never see them driving down the road.


A Lotus Elise is cheap and fast and everyone wants one, but I never see them driving down the road

That's because of practicality, and because not everyone actually wants one.


True point on practicality, but there are plenty of two-seaters (or virtually two-seaters) driving around. The point was, just because it's inexpensive doesn't mean it's automatically popular.


The thing is, the Elise makes your garden variety two-seater look achingly practical in comparison. But yes, you are right on the last bit.


If caring about the environment and going electric becomes a high-priced elite-tribal-consumerist trend just take me off this planet; I'm not interested in it anymore.


You must have missed when I said "Electric cars certainly do need to evolve and Tesla has done an incredible job, but there are dozens of other manufacturers out there that are just as capable."

Are you trying to argue that you're not paying for a brand? If so, by your logic then stores like Saks Fifth Avenue's "green" brands or high end auto manufacturers with hybrid vehicles have no place in America.


I get what you were saying, but this is (one of?) the first commercially available full-electric car manufacturers and it would be really depressing if it turned into a Ferrari-like club where only millionaires can afford to own it. It's a specific type of market where either you're all in, or you're out. Bugatti doesn't make a point-A to point-B winter-beater and never will. The FIRST EVER electric-car company becoming one of those luxury brands would push the democratization of electric-car ownership that much further into the future.

The Tesla S is great because it seems that upper-middle class folk will be able to own it, and I hope they continue down that path bringing electric cars to everyone.

EDIT: Also the other large manufacturers weren't interested in investing in electric because their analysis showed them they wouldn't see enough return. Tesla is there to prove them wrong. (Some large car-companies are only now building electric cars but it feels rather like a green-washing campaign - it's usually only one model, cars are dinky and impractical...etc)


From what I've heard, Elon Musk has been clear that his vision is to make electric cars mainstream. They just started at luxury brands because the margins are better for small production runs, which finances the technology development.


I'll try to translate this to another industry for you.

Think about premium brands such as Sony, Apple, and Samsung. They make high end electronics that cost a pretty penny. Not everyone can afford a $2,500 laptop or $3,000 TV. When these giants come out with new technology it's terribly expensive at first(think plasma TV's 7+ years ago). Well, after a few years of production and a limited market, the lower-rung guys are able to catch up and get their share too(Vizio, Olevia, Sanyo) granted their products generally aren't as polished. The technology has evolved enough that others are able to produce it so everyone can afford it, while the big name guys still reign king because not only did they offer it at first, but their product is still superior. This same thing is happening right now. Tesla is the premium brand leader, and the other guys (Chevy, Ford, Nissan) are finally starting to get their act together.

The majority of people would rather have a Sony TV than a Vizio(assuming the picture quality is very similar) all because of that little Sony logo. Brands rule America. It's sad but true. Otherwise there would be no reason to spend $100 on a t-shirt.


I'm not sure why your post is down-voted. It's just an opinion and I don't believe well articulated opinions should be down-voted.

I don't think Sony, Apple Samsung are the "premium/luxury" brands (Apple maybe was considered one when it first came out but it certainly wasn't in the same class of exclusivity as a Bugatti is in the car world). I see all of those electronics manufacturers as the GMs or Toyota's of the hardware industry. They make a wide variety of electronics at different price points for different buyers. There's nothing exclusive or elitist about owning a Samsung or an Apple product.

I'd like to see Tesla as the disruptive force among the well-entrenched car brands like GM or Toyota, but I'd rather it not become the super-rare and expensive alternative to them. I realize we pay some premium based on what brand we choose but I was just expressing what I hope the Tesla brand would come to represent (and also what I had heard its mission was initially).


>Not everyone can afford a $2,500 laptop

Apple also makes a sub $1k laptop, and a $600 desktop.



Huh, I think you have misunderstood the business Tesla is in. Tesla aims to be the leading mainstream car manufacturer in the future. They have realized that all cars suck and they are just exploiting the electric car disruption to have a chance on the markets.


Obvious solution: hire Damien Hirst to personally respray your boringly cheap, commodity Tesla. Pure snob value!




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: