Tesla Model S
  • Tesla Model S
  • Tesla Model S

  • tesla model s
  • tesla model s

  • Tesla Model S
  • Tesla Model S

  • Tesla Model S
  • Tesla Model S

  • Tesla Model S
  • Tesla Model S

  • Tesla Model S
  • Tesla Model S

  • Tesla Model S
  • Tesla Model S

  • Tesla Model S
  • Tesla Model S

  • Tesla Model S
  • Tesla Model S

  • Image Credit: Tesla Motors
  • Image Credit: Tesla Motors
  • Image Credit: Tesla Motors
  • Image Credit: Tesla Motors
  • Image Credit: Tesla Motors
Twenty years ago, Car and Drive wrote about "the emergence of the minivan as the new family car." If you believe Elon Musk, twenty years from now will be a lot more fun.

Flush with the success of the first production Model S deliveries, the Tesla Motors founder said most new vehicles will be battery-electric by 2032, and that the age of EV majority rule could come sooner than that, Reuters reports. Specifically, he said, "In 20 years more than half of new cars manufactured will be fully electric."

Musk, whose company plans to deliver 5,000 of the Model S battery-electric sedans this year, said in a press conference that he feels "quite safe in that bet," according to the wire service. Earlier this month, Musk forecast Tesla vehicle sales of 20,000 units for next year. The Model S base model starts at about $57,000, or about $50,000 less than the base price of the Tesla Roadster convertible that debuted in 2008. Venture-capital executive and Tesla investor Steve Jurvetson received the first production Model S, while Musk received the second, Reuters said. Nissan, which introduced its battery-electric Leaf to the U.S. in late 2010, has estimated that as many as 10 percent of new cars will be battery electric by 2020.

Meanwhile, speaking to BusinessWeek, Musk said that the advance of the electric vehicles will continue no matter who's in the White House. "Romney [winning] would have a minor impact. There's such momentum behind electric vehicles, and Model S is going to ensure that that happens."

Last week, the EPA give the Model S a miles-per-gallon-equivalent rating of 89, putting it 29 MPGe behind the Honda Fit EV – which has the highest rating among all U.S. cars – and 10 MPGe behind the Leaf. Tesla has estimated the single-charge range of the Model S to be 265 miles, which would be the longest of any production EV.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 130 Comments
      • 2 Years Ago
      ?....that 5k for the car and $2500 for the gas.....only a brit could think gas was that expensive!!!! on the plus side it my arguement is stronger in europe. thanks for pointing that out
      paulwesterberg
      • 2 Years Ago
      @Rotation: I do not get my electricity from PG&E & I do not have tiered pricing. Your calculations of inflated costs based on excessive use on a tiered pricing system are worthless. Nobody is going to drive a Model S 50,000miles a year. Sure model S owners could drive 137 miles every day, but their time is too valuable and if they want to go really long distance they will fly(because the US has a train system that Bulgaria would be ashamed of).
      Joeviocoe
      • 2 Years Ago
      Yeah, non swing states don't really get much campaigning. If you're blue state, then why would a blue candidate waste money when the state is already blue. If you're a red state, then why would a red candidate waste money when there is virtually no hope of winning. The two party system is probably the worst part of government. It causes a lot of dysfunction for the whole system. We don't have elected representatives, we have two sports teams that would rather win against their opponent than help the country.
      SNP
      • 2 Years Ago
      "good local" tends to mean of higher quality and expensive. it's like saying poor people HAVE to eat kosher or halal meats.
      • 2 Years Ago
      Tesla has NOT estimated the range to 265 miles. The EPA did. Tesla still maintains the 300 mile range - which you can achieve under optimal driving conditions.
        Grendal
        • 1 Month Ago
        I'd be most curious about the mileage at an even 75 MPH. That's the speed you'd using the most for a long distance trip on the highway. Whatever the number is, I wouldn't personally hold it against Tesla, but having that number would be very useful. When you've got the biggest pack you'll probably want to use it for a longer trip at highway speeds. I get your point and the majority of Tesla drivers will be more in tune with the capabilities of their car. But the 265 number is a good number to work with for the average driver.
          Anne
          • 1 Month Ago
          @Grendal
          I could venture a guess about the A/C. No need to account for open windows, since keeping them closed is the idea of an A/C. What I read on the Nissan forums is that the A/C draws very little power (some claim as low as 200 W). Ok, that's probably optimistic so let's take 3 kW. Driving 225 miles @ 75 mph takes 3 hours. 3 h x 3 kW = 9 kWh. So it is in the order of 10%. I believe 3 kW non stop for the A/C is a lot. I can observe this too in my Prius. Using the A/C has very little effect on fuel consumption. As long as you put it on a reasonable temp. I'm setting mine at 23 C. The general opinion on LEAF forums seems to be the same. I don't expect this to be any different for a Model S
          Rotation
          • 1 Month Ago
          @Grendal
          225 miles. If windows are closed and A/C is off (good luck with that). Pack under a year old. http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/model-s-efficiency-and-range Tesla gave us some good graphs to go by.
        Joeviocoe
        • 1 Month Ago
        It is called the LA-4 cycle (or UDDS) and it is still a valid test... and it is what the California Air Resources board uses to award Zero Emissions Credits to automakers. This is why EV manufacturers use this cycle for their range goals and estimates.
        Rotation
        • 1 Month Ago
        Doesn't matter. It's a misleading figure. Ranges for other cars are not advertised for "under optimal driving conditions". Tesla is intentionally misleading customers by quoting ranges that customers will not see under normal conditions. In order for customers to be able to compare vehicles without having to buy all them first, we need standardized testing and the customers have to be given the results accurately. Tesla's only goal by calling this a 300 mile car would be to imply it goes 3.5x as far as a LEAF instead of 3x. And this just isn't true.
      Grendal
      • 2 Years Ago
      Anyone notice that absolutely none of these articles on Tesla has made it over to the stard AB side? They readily publish the articles that are negative or controversial about the company - but nada on the official production of a new American made EV that is being reviewed spectacularly. What's up with that? The mean side of me would like to hear all the comments from those schmucks that said the car was vaporware. They will still make snide comments, but what can you do? Some might go hmm and reconsider their position.
        Grendal
        • 1 Month Ago
        @Grendal
        stard = standard &%$@$! - no edit button
        Joeviocoe
        • 1 Month Ago
        @Grendal
        No, I did not notice... probably because I don't visit that site. :)
      Ford Future
      • 2 Years Ago
      Still no Nano-tech batteries on the market. Let's wait and see how the EV market changes with they arrive. Musk might have better info on future developments.
        Elmo Biggins
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Ford Future
        Still? The EVs came out just a few years ago and you expect next gen tech already? I think it will happen. Soon.
          me
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Elmo Biggins
          Elmo go back to school .. First EV showed up back in 1901 @ the Paris Auto Show it was made by Ferdinand Porsche it was 4WD w/ a series-hybrid system aka VOLT it had a pair of generators driven by a 2.5 HP Daimler engine to extend it's range it could travel 65 km or 40 miles on a charge.. 111 years later & the Volt gets about 23-34 miles on a charge ..
      kEiThZ
      • 2 Years Ago
      That's a long time to hold the stock for a return.... Then again, anybody who held Apple stock for 20 years is probably a millionaire now...
      2 Wheeled Menace
      • 2 Years Ago
      ( visualize one of those meme images on facebook ) Someone makes a prediction 20 years out! .... Autoblog green top news story!
      Joeviocoe
      • 2 Years Ago
      So you call the Model S a $100K car... when that is the price only for the very limited signature series. That is what I mean by absurd. The VAST majority of Model S cars sold this year will be for the $77k price, and NOT signature price. And then, next year, it will go down to $57k for the cheapest model. So when you first mentioned $100k... it was pretty absurd to be referencing only the signature buyers... while ignoring the vast majority of Model S drivers. --------------------- Okay, I see where you got your numbers now. You are talking about Code B, Region W as an example having a baseline consumption of 18.5 kwh/day. Using E-9 Rate A TOU rates for off-peak... And going from Tier 2 to Tier 3 is going from [101%-130%] to [131%-200%] So I see where the huge jump in rates come from. But you got your numbers wrong. ♦ 350kwh per month (my number) might be considered a bit high. The Model S is EPA rated for 30 kwh/100 miles. For 1,000 miles per month (the U.S. average)... that is 300 kwh per month.* ♦ That region my have higher electricity prices, but it has lower baseline consumption because the average home in California uses about half of the average in the rest of the U.S. So a home consuming the CA average, 562 kwh/mo and paying the CA average of 0.1475/kwh or $83/mo for electricity for just the house. http://205.254.135.7/electricity/sales_revenue_price/xls/table5_a.xls (DOE, EIA link) So... Region W has a baseline of (18.5x31=) 574 kwh/mo... Let's calculate what an additional 300 kwh per month would do: The 1st 12 kwh will be on Tier 1 @ $0.03743/kwh. -- From 574 kwh (100% of base) to 746 kwh (130% of base) would be tier 2 rates. That is 172 kwh @ $0.05559/kwh Leaving the remaining 116 kwh on the tier 3 rate of $0.16011/kwh http://www.pge.com/nots/rates/tariffs/ResTOUCurrent.xls http://www.pge.com/nots/rates/tariffs/ResElecBaselineCurrent.xls They total $0.45 + $9.56 + $18.57 = $28.58 extra every month. (Total bill would be $112, up from $83) If you take an average against the 300kwh total... that is about $0.095 per kwh overall for an EV charging off-peak in region W, in an average CA home spanning 3 tiers of usage. Not bad! And although the EV consumes 53% more electricity than the home (300kwh EV + 562 CA home avg)... the percentage added to the utility bill is only 34.4% thanks to off-peak charge... even though the latter charging hit tier 3 @ $0.16/kwh! The early part of the charge more than makes up for the higher tier charges.
      Grendal
      • 2 Years Ago
      Sounds good to me. I'd really like to see some ultra efficient aerodynamic vehicles on the road too. Something available that gets 200+ MPGe. And it's probably not going to happen, but when electric cars do have a significant segment of the market, can we come up with something better than MPGe?
        2 Wheeled Menace
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Grendal
        I agree that MPGe is very silly. Electricity should not be measured in gallons... blasphemy! Watt hours per mile is what the DIY electric car builder world uses.
          Joeviocoe
          • 2 Years Ago
          @2 Wheeled Menace
          you mean watt-hours, right?
          Ryan
          • 2 Years Ago
          @2 Wheeled Menace
          Watts per mile or Kilowatts per 100 miles is the way to go. People are used to paying for kilowatts at home, so it is better for that. But to compare aerodynamics and weight between EVs, Watts per mile is better.
        Spec
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Grendal
        Well let's make the switch to the European system while switching to to electricity based system: KWH per 100 miles. Or better yet KWH per 100 kilometers.
          Joeviocoe
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Spec
          Oh.. and chemical fuel energy is usually given either BTUs or Joules... usually depending on the final desired outcome of the conversion. For heating fuel, BTU is used.. But for fuel that will be converted to mechanical energy, Joules.
          Rotation
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Spec
          If we're going to switch to a new unit, can it be Joules please? Joules per meter or something? It is the standard unit of energy. Why switch to a new measure and still use a non-standard unit?
          Anne
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Spec
          @2WM "I've never heard energy referred to as 'joules' [...] always watts." You make me cringe. watts is a unit of power, not energy. You probably mean watthours?
          Baldur Norddahl
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Spec
          Here in Denmark we use kWh when we pay for electricity and MJ when we pay for warm water (district heating). Both are SI units and equivalent. You use the unit that is most convenient. We use kWh because it makes it easy to go from kW to kWh (although people confuse those all the time). If I want to know how much is it going to cost me to turn on the 60 watt pulp for 1 hour I can instantly figure that will be 0.060 kWh at price X per kWh. The price in my local currency happens to be approximately 2 kr/kWh so that will be 0.12 kr. To do the same with joule I would have to say 60 J/s *3600 s = 216 kJ at 0.6 kr/kJ so that will be 0.12 kr. That required a calculator. We humans do not deal so well with time spans of only 1 second. That is also why we use km per hour instead of meters per second on our road signs.
          Joeviocoe
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Spec
          For EVs, either Joules or KWH would be appropriate. Since the energy path starts as electrical, but ends as mechanical. BUT, most of the calculations you would need to know the specs of the vehicle would be in Electrical units, since the energy spends most of the cycle as electricity and only gets to be mechanical at the wheels. KWH is especially preferred since matching an EV charger will be done by knowing the Volts of the outlet (120 or 240) and the rated continuous Amps of the circuit (12, 24, 48, etc) and the length of time to charge. KWH.
          2 Wheeled Menace
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Spec
          I'm on a few electric car, bike, and motorcycle message boards. I've never heard energy referred to as 'joules' from people posting from China, Europe, Japan, South America, etc.. always watts. I'm not sure where it is standard.
          DaveMart
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Spec
          @Rotation. There are too many noughts in joules. People get confused, or at least I do!
          Joeviocoe
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Spec
          2WM.... energy units are more specific to what is being measured rather than the geographical location. Really, the unit tends to be picked by what ever makes it easy to calculate. Chemical energy in biology tends to favor the calorie since that is the currency of cells Mechanical energy tends to be in Joules since you can calculate Work and Force easily Electrical energy tends to be in watt-hours since Power, Volts and Amps are easily used in it's formula. And, Electron-Volts is used in atomic level and below since that is the currency of particle energy. All are valid units of energy, used EVERYWHERE... and really only chosen depending on the scientific discipline.
        Nick
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Grendal
        Grendal Aerodynamics seem to matter less as cities are increasingly crowded. Even freeways do not allow for speeds exceeding 20mph most of the day due to traffic.... so I believe light weight and compact proportions would make the most difference.
          paulwesterberg
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Nick
          Ever ridden a bike into a 20mph headwind? Even at 20mph aerodynamics have a significant impact on the energy required for forward motion.
          Joeviocoe
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Nick
          35 mph seems to be a common speed for air drag to be significant in cars. Although it may be MUCH tougher to pedal through 20 mph air... but you only have about 1 HP to work with to start, maybe 2 HP. So that a significant percentage is going to overcome air. But a car cruising at 35 mph is producing about 10 HP, so it is not too significant. But as you go faster, the drag climbs exponentially. For a dense city, no, air resistance is not much of a worry.
      Anne
      • 2 Years Ago
      "Last week, the EPA give the Model S a miles-per-gallon-equivalent rating of 89, putting it 29 MPGe behind the Honda Fit EV – which has the highest rating among all U.S. cars – and 10 MPGe behind the Leaf. " Ok, wrong comparison here. How about rewriting that sentence to (also fixing that missing past tense) : "Last week, the EPA gave the Model S a miles-per-gallon-equivalent rating of 89, putting it 37 MPGe ahead of the Fisker Karma"
    • Load More Comments