REPORT: Next Tesla Roadster aims at 911 Turbo with AWD and usable space
Tesla Roadster - Click above for a high-res image gallery
Electric drivetrain aside, the Tesla Roadster isn't the most practical sports car on the market. Like its Lotus counterpart, the Roadster is lacking space for both passengers and parcel, something Tesla CEO Elon Musk is all-too-happy to admit. But as you'd expect from the plucky upstart and its confident chief executive, Tesla has big plans to expand beyond the Roadster and Model S sedan, and it's got the Porsche 911 in its sights.
Although we've known for some time that Tesla plans to base future models on the Model S platform – ranging from a base model to a full-fledged GT – the automaker's been tight-lipped about the specifics of future sports cars. However, Musk let it slip during an interview that a 911 Turbo shares a space in his garage with a Roadster, and he loves its ability to schlep the kiddies to school in its diminutive back seats. Inspired, Musk said that the next Tesla sports car would be a 2+2, boasting 10% more room for rear-seat passengers and 50% more trunk space than the 911, along with all-wheel drive. Additionally, the Model S' flat architecture means that styling won't be completely influenced by the drivetrain, allowing for "greater functionality with avant garde, aggressive" styling. Although this new coupe's future is largely dependent on the success of the Model S, if Tesla can keep the lights on and continue R&D, we might see the GT as early as 2012 or 2013.
Gallery: Jason Calacanis' Tesla Roadster
[Source: WebRidesTV]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
why not the LS2LS7? 8:02PM (6/01/2009)
No problem. That's doubling the size and weight and adding rotating mass, so to get the range back, they just need to about double the size of the battery pack. What, me worry?
Reply
VW GTi 8:08PM (6/01/2009)
Don't forget the added weight of said battery.
tankd0g 10:09PM (6/01/2009)
I think Elon is smuggling reactors out of Russia.
VW GTi 8:11PM (6/01/2009)
Unfortunately, you can't build a bigger electric car without sacrificing range. AWD would kill the battery life. Battery life will be even less if people were to drive this like a true sports car.
Reply
homunculus 8:21PM (6/01/2009)
There is a work-around: electric motors for each wheel. That's true all wheel drive and there's no transmission, no engine, no drivetrain, which means a hell of a lot of extra space. I'm pretty sure this is where Tesla will be going.
kballs 8:24PM (6/01/2009)
Electric AWD can mean an individual motor for each wheel, whether hub mounted or mounted inboard connected via CV axles. It doesn't have much efficiency or weight penalty vs 2WD because instead of one or two big motors you have 4 motors at 1/2 or 1/4 the size/power each. The rotating mass and friction can be close to the same... it's not like in an ICE vehicle where 4WD requires all the extra rotating mass and friction of extra drive shafts and another differential, and the binding/tire scrub that happens in turns.
P.V. 8:30PM (6/01/2009)
Motors at each wheel? That sounds like a really nice idea, actually.
VW GTi 9:50PM (6/01/2009)
That didn't cross my mind. That is a great idea. Tesla will probably go this route.
why not the LS2LS7? 10:10PM (6/01/2009)
kballs:
If multiple motors made so much sense, the current Tesla would have two motors and no diff instead of the setup it has. I know the front is more complex due to the steering, so maybe they'd consider 2 motors up front. But the rear likely would remain with a single motor for both wheels.
I still strongly believe it will add significant rotating mass. This is why I said it would double above. With a gas car it would more than triple (including going from not one to two diffs, but one to three diffs) if it changed from rear engine, RWD to AWD, so saying it will double seems doesn't seem like I'm over-reaching.
tankd0g 10:10PM (6/01/2009)
More unspung mass. Sounds sporty.
Lemon 9:25AM (6/02/2009)
@tankdog: hah.. exactly what I was thinking. The idea of connecting them via a short driveshaft and CV joints could counter the unspring mass though. As for the front, good luck to the engineer who has to design that suspension and steering system!
someEEguy 2:55AM (6/02/2009)
Having 4 wheel motors (e.g. one motor per wheel) doesn't necessarily mean "in-wheel" motors, making unsprung weight a non-issue (the Fisker Karma for instance has one motor for each of its rear wheels). That said, taking Tesla's current design language into account; they'll likely end-up with two differentials or some combination of the two... unfortunately.
Sanfam 3:35AM (6/02/2009)
The reason why Tesla didn't already provide wheel-bound motors on the first-gen roadster is simple: Engineering cost. The current model is largely a standard chassis modified slightly to fit battery packs wherever possible. The lotus it is based on uses an FR arrangement (front engine, rear drive) with the suspension configured to allow for the differential and axles to stand where they are. One cannot simply add two motors to the back without substantially redesigning the suspension and thus substantially increasing development costs. Tesla already has enough problems with money as it is, and don't even think about the pain of working out the early production quirks in a first-generation system of that design when it's the first model your company has ever produced.
By developing their next platform in-house, they gain the ability to tailor the suspension to their specific needs, allowing the distinct possibility of either hub-drive or multiple onboard motors in place of a more "standard" FR drivetrain with a transmission, a driveshaft, and a differential.
And I do agree, four independently driven wheels is the only way they could pull it off. All that additional space gain from moving to four motors could easily be used to store batteries, too.
I'll also state that I firmly believe Mr. Musk is talking straight out of his ass, as they they have yet to prove that they have the expertise to engineer a vehicle from the ground up...affordably...on a timely basis. And then they need to build it! (but that's a problem for another day)
Toy Yoda 9:00AM (6/02/2009)
Actually 4 electric motors has been an idea that's been around at least as long as the Lightning GT. An article from autoblog:
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/06/lightning-gt-all-electric-sports-car-revealed/
Jim 2:54PM (6/02/2009)
Mitsubishi has been testing the in wheel electric motor in the AWD Lancer Evo since 2005. The technology on the motor and battery should be much improved by now.
http://www.autoblog.com/2005/08/24/mitsubishi-testing-lancer-evo-with-in-wheel-electric-motors/
johncuyle 8:24PM (6/01/2009)
One other nice feature of a 911 is the ability for me to hop in and drive it from Seattle to LA in 18 hours or so. Until you can do that in a Tesla, they'll just be toys for people that can afford one in addition to a real car.
Reply
Sam 8:29PM (6/01/2009)
*Aim* at the 911 Turbo: fine.
*Hit* the 911 Turbo: good luck.
Reply
Jim 8:34PM (6/01/2009)
Sorry, Elon. The 911 is just a competitive car. The car with 2+2 AWD to beat is the Nissan GTR. Focus on your company strengths and that is good handling efficient electric cars.
Reply
cdaltonrowe 1:51AM (6/02/2009)
You make a good point. A GTR is probably a better goal to attack. Regardless of the quality and performance, it's hard for a newcomer to top the classic styling and pedigree of a 911.
steve 8:59PM (6/01/2009)
I wonder if they will do something about the handling - the thing needs much better rubber for starters (not conducive to range, but...)
Reply