Is Elon Musk a superhero, or super villain? You decide.
UPDATE: Meanwhile the newest Tesla model is so good it broke the scale at Consumer Reports.
The all-wheel-drive Tesla Model S P85D sedan performed better in our tests than any other car ever has, breaking the Consumer Reports Ratings system.
The P85D is brutally quick, with instant acceleration. The car’s thrust is forceful and immediate. Its near-instant g-forces can otherwise be achieved only by leaping off a building—literally.
That this electric car accelerates from 0 to 60 mph in 3.5 seconds without an engine’s roar makes it frighteningly eerie in its silent velocity. It’s so explosively quick that Tesla has created an “insane” driving mode. (See our complete Tesla Model S P85D road test—for free at ConsumerReports.org/tesla.)
With a six-figure price tag, the P85D is expensive, meaning its virtues will be experienced by a rare few. But its significance as a breakthrough model that is pushing the boundaries of both performance and fuel-efficiency is dramatic (even more so because it is coming from the factory of an American startup company). The Model S precedes additional electric cars coming from Tesla Motors. The Model X crossover is due to arrive in 2016, followed in 2018 by a more attainable compact sedan, named Model 3, targeted to start at about $35,000.
The P85D also has better braking and handling than our top-scoring standard Model S. And yet it’s more energy-efficient, getting the equivalent of 87 mpg.
Despite its sharper focus on performance, the P85D also maintains its practicality and luxury.
In rating it, however, we faced a quandary: The Tesla initially scored 103 in the Consumer Reports’ Ratings system, which by definition doesn’t go past 100. The car set a new benchmark, so we had to make changes to our scoring to account for it. Those changes didn’t affect the scores of other cars.
Musk featured prominently in my video about the solar energy revolution, below.
Musk will never have any credibility until he stops making statements about man colonizing Mars. Until he does that, he is just another attention-seeking self-promoter with a big ego.
I don’t agree – he is still a hero, ego or not.
Colonizing Mars is not impossible, but it would be a very long time before it could support a community of meaningful diversity beyond being an outpost or insurance policy against extinction.
It is also a fantastic challenge – some people do things because they haven’t been done before, or because they can. This is how we progress.
My approach would be to excavate a big hole 50km deep so that the atmosphere would become dense enough to protect against radiation, support a large biodome and allow parachutes to be used effectively.
Solar energy could be collected, concentrated and piped down via optical fibres.
It still wouldn’t be as hospitable as Earth, so we really have to step up efforts to look after it.
You’re joking, of course—-this is some obtuse Ginger Baker style “sarcasm” you’re laying on us, isn’t it?
Musk is a hero, ego or not? Let’s invoke Godwin’s Law right up front and say that Hitler was also a hero to the German people (and some Americans and Brits), and that ultimately led Germany to seek liebensraum, among other things—it’s not hard to draw a parallel with Mars there, and any attempts to colonize Mars will meet with similar failure. So, on that basis, Musk is a super villain!
An “insurance policy against extinction”? If Mankind is reduced to a few thousand specimens living in an artificial environment on Mars, Man WILL be extinct for all practical purposes. Any living thing that can no longer live in the natural environment in which it evolved is “extinct”. The fact that a few organisms that still carry its genes are living in a “zoo” is moot, and particularly iof that zoo is on a different planet.
And YES, the 50 km deep hole is an excellent idea! Perhaps you should share it with Musk? If we wanted to spend the time, we could calculate exactly how deep it would have to be to produce earth-like atmospheric pressure and radiation protection (what that atmosphere will consist of is another story—-it’s presently 95%+ CO2—-and some thought should be given also to Mars’ lack of a magnetosphere).
Yes,the need for “stepped up efforts to look after it” is REALLY something that Musk needs to think about. (I wonder how much $$$$ he will raise when he starts selling tickets to the first Mars colony?)
As for “It is also a fantastic challenge – some people do things because they haven’t been done before, or because they can. This is how we progress”, I am reminded of all the “progress” represented by such things as climbing Mt. Everest, the evolution of military weaponry, and the political system in this country (especially after Citizens United)
I try not to do sarcasm unless it’s obvious…
I agree with almost everything you have said over the years, but I really don’t get your antipathy to Musk who really is one of the movers and shakers in helping to move us forward.
Is there something going on between you two we don’t know about?
There is “nothing going on” between Musk and I that you don’t know about. Never met the man and have never been in his presence at a meeting. I have read much and viewed many video clips of him, thought about Musk and his activities, and I think I have been clear and consistent in my comments on his cars, batteries, rockets, hyperloop trains, supersonic electric “jets”, and Mars colony ideas. IMO, he is arrogant and a hypocrite that is too impressed with himself, and has gone in directions that distract from the “visionary” good he has done with cars and solar power (and he’s not quite there yet with either of those—he should make them work and turn a profit there before going to Mars).
Regarding the “nuke Mars” idea specifically:
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/space/would-elon-musks-idea-nuke-mars-work-n425001 (Comments below from Shara, an astrophysicist)
“It could take firing thousands of them over the course of decades to start the greenhouse effect, Shara said. After that, it might only be centuries before people could start buying vacation homes on Mars”.
“It’s a clever idea in principle,” Shara said. “Whether it would really work, I don’t think anyone has worked up the physics in enough detail to say it would.”
I’ve got an alternate “clever idea” to present for consideration. Let’s try to save the Earth in the near future rather than keep distracting people with Mars BS.
IMO, Musk needs to stop playing Mars games and seeking attention, and get down to the serious business of saving the Earth with solar power, better batteries, and electric cars. Until he does, he has NO credibility (or am I repeating myself?).
PS Has anyone ever considered what the little green men that might be on Mars might think if we started raining “thousands” of nukes on them? Or what we on Earth might think if some aliens decided to do that to us because they wanted our planet?
The article raises other questions, but the one that strikes me most is what about the possibility of pre-existing lif on Mars?
Bill Maher did a New Rules closing rant not long ago about “the smart stupid person” of which there have been more than a few.
With his Mars fantasies, Musk seems to be going that route.
But even though he doesn’t appear to agree that humanity doesn’t have a Planet B, he is trying to make meaningful changes on this Pale Blue Dot of ours.
Until he stops talking about Mars, I will continue to believe that the “meaningful changes” he wants to bring about on the Pale Blue Dot are driven more by a need for attention and his ego than by a real sense of the greater good. “Smart stupid people” should not be trusted.
There is NO freakin’ Planet B, and Musk does great damage by trading on his celebrity to talk about Mars as if it were an option for the survival of the human race..
New frontiers, that old American dream. Stale blather meanwhile. Before going to Mars you folks should secure the base station. Leaving behind scorched earth is not an option. That would be bad engineering. If Musk doesn’t want to sound like the classic ‘merrican blatherer he should talk about the base station first.
So, DOG….. I’m a little unclear. Do you even HAVE an opinion about Mars colonization or not?? ;>D
And, btw, “Gingerbaker” is one word. Ginger Baker is the incredibly talented drummer of Cream, etc who is also one very irascible character whom you would not want to tick off. (He must not read the intertubes much, because if he ever googled himself, he would find me pretty quick, and try to cause me psychological or physical harm. Which he hasn’t. Probably because he knows I almost preternaturally powerful, yet with a liquid cat-quick gracefulness.
Peter Edward “Ginger” Baker is NOT one word. Your appropriation of his name as a handle IS one word. I will try to remember that.
PS Congratulations on being ALMOST “preturnaturallly powerful, yet with a liquid cat-quick gracefulness”. Heaven help us if you ever manage to go all the way and take over the world.
PPS And Yes, I do have an opinion on Mars colonization, Moon colonization, and virtually all manned space flight beyond low Earth orbit. IMO, It’s a distraction and a waste of resources, and cannot be justified on any scientific basis (beyond being a “make work” project for astronauts and a source of income for corporations, which is perhaps “good for the economy” in FL and TX). Going to Mars is a particular sore point because it is virtually guaranteed to be a death mission for all who attempt it—-there are far cheaper and more environmentally friendly ways to commit suicide for those who want to do so.
Hi.
I have no Tesla because I have no money to buy it. 🙂
Alex
Same here, the Tesla is superior to other EV’s in driving distance between charges and is on the leading edge, but in that annoying group of superior cars and superior prices. Hopefully the more attainable version will be released soon, and will attract the more modest, but larger market of people, more like me . . . .That way it will make a difference ..
Living in a country with a modest 700 EV’s, and hoping to see a great and swift change to the popularity sometime soon . .. .
http://www.thecarconnection.com/news/1099874_tesla-model-3-priced-around-35000-debuts-in-march-2016-arrives-in-2018
If and when I get to that item on my bucket list, I’m going to buy a lightly used Ferrari with a V-12 engine. I will be able to drive it at enjoyably high rates of speed (and with that beautiful V-12 sound) across Nevada, Montana, and North Dakota without carrying a 200 mile long extension cord.
“six-figure price tag”. Elitist #fail
Don’t let the “elitists” know about Musk’s secret commie agenda which has been a deep secret for at least nine years.
http://www.teslamotors.com/en_CA/blog/secret-tesla-motors-master-plan-just-between-you-and-me
A deep secret for NINE freakin’ YEARS? LOL.
Perhaps Musk has been too busy making megabucks off the Model S, blowing up rockets, and BS-ing us about Mars to keep things moving on the E-model?
They still haven’t built an Alpha version of the car, it looks like 2017 or 2018 before they will be ready to sell any, and then priced at $35-40K, which isn’t likely to attract many Joe Sixpacks.
By then, the “deep secret” will be 11 or 12 years old, and maybe even older if Musk keeps getting distracted by Mars rather than trying to make Tesla profitable.
Right now, Tesla stock appears to be way overvalued considering the lack of progress, but the “elitists” who are the likely purchasers can afford to be disappointed. The last stock offering raised $3/4 billion, and Tesla blew over $1 billion in just the first half of 2015), so he’ll be looking for more “investors” soon. (Andrew Fez—-do you own any Tesla stock?)
(And I’m giving Omno a rare “thunbs up” for “elitist #fail”—not 100% sure what he’s talking about, but we need electric cars that will compete at the Joe Sixpack level, not ones with 0-60 times of three seconds and six-figure price tags)
What was the founding date of the last American car company that has achieved as much as Tesla has?
If you are asking “What American car company has not yet managed to show a profit, but is still attracting huge amounts of money from investors based on producing an over-the-top car that is not what we need, and is affordable only by the rich, and is run by a man who thinks we should colonize Mars?”, I would say “We have never had such a company”.
Delorean comes close, founded in the mid-70’s, and Deusenberg comes to mind (although the big D did manage to survive for decades and DID turn a profit).
“DeLorean comes close” – that’s not even wrong.
John DeLorean had a master’s in automotive engineering, was a former GM executive with work experience at both Chrysler and Packard Motor before striking out on his own so he had deep connections in the biz yet it still took 8 years to deliver the 1st and only model, the DMC-12 – which used a 3rd-party engine.
DeLorean received almost a billion in current dollars from the British gov’t to manufacture in Northern Ireland and produced only 9000 cars but probably sold only 1/2 of those.
Fortunately for him, he did not have to spend hundreds of millions building his own rapid fueling stations.
“Duesenberg comes to mind” / “although the big D did manage to survive for decades and DID turn a profit”
Wrong again. Despite terrific engineering, the Brothers D were terrible at sales & management and sold barely 800 cars on their own.
They were acquired in 1926, after only a dozen years of building sport & luxury vehicles, by Auburn Automobile but neither company survived the Great Depression.
All told, only a few thousand Duesenbergs were ever made.
Not sure what you’re saying is “wrong”. The DeLorean was a rather rapid and costly failure that COULD be a template for Tesla. Deusenberg (Cord-Auburn) DID manage to sell some very fine and expensive cars for two+ decades, and the J is right up there among the Ferraris among the 20 or so most valuable cars today.
Unless you have a crystal ball, we will have to wait and see what happens with Tesla. Right now, except for the S model, it’s all “projections”.
(And DeLorean failed even though he was an automotive engineer with “deep connections” and experience in the auto biz? I wonder how much worse the failure would have been if he had wasted time and energy blathering on about colonizing Mars instead of concentrating on building cars?)
Tesla has already far surpassed both DeLorean & Duesenberg, except that Duesenberg’s cars were intended for an even more upscale market than the typical Tesla owner.
By the way, a LOT of Tesla’s customer are middle to upper-middle class but not at all rich. If you want the performance model, that’s quite costly but the lower-end models are well within the reach of many non-stinkin’-rich folks especially when you factor in lower running costs.
Yep, Tesla has already far surpassed both DeLorean & Duesenberg in its potential for being a disaster for anyone who buys its overpriced stock.
And WHAT “lower end” models? Your love affair with Tesla has blinded you to the fact that the only cars Tesla has yet sold or will sell for the near future are the Model S, and this Reuters article from a month ago says it all.
Headlined: “Tesla burns cash, loses more than $4,000 on every car sold”
“It’s crunch time for Tesla Motors”.
“The Silicon Valley automaker is losing more than $4,000 on every Model S electric sedan it sells, using its reckoning of operating losses, and it burned $359 million in cash last quarter in a bull market for luxury vehicles. The company on Wednesday cut its production targets for this year and next. Chief Executive Elon Musk said he’s considering options to raise more capital, and didn’t rule out selling more stock”
“Tesla reports its finances in a different way from the Detroit automakers. Using the generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, used by GM or Ford, Tesla’s operating losses per vehicle have steadily widened to $14,758 from $3,794 in the second quarter of 2014.”
Read the rest of the article at http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/10/us-teslamotors-cash-insight-idUSKCN0QE0DC20150810
Then wake up and smell the bullshit.
I am FOR electric vehicles, FOR solar energy, FOR better batteries, and FOR saving mankind from extinction. I will support all those who work towards those goals, but don’t trust anyone who works in those fields AND thinks that it makes any sense to colonize Mars.
PS I am reminded of the Solar Roadway folks and their little “income for life” scheme—-maybe they’d be considered more “visionary” and could raise even more money if they also had plans to colonize Mars? (Or am I repeating myself? Us old guys tend to do that, especially when people don;t listen to us).
I have already mentioned the “smart, stupid person” so I won’t go into that again.
Now the claim that Tesla is losing money on every car doesn’t hold water because it’s ignoring quite a few facts.
1) Tesla doesn’t hold much inventory of cars, probably no more than a couple hundred at a time. All others are build-to-order.
So unlike DeLorean, if Tesla folds tomorrow, there won’t be thousands of unsold cars sitting around.
2) The Model X has over 20,000 reservations. At a likely base price of $80k each, that’s at least $1.6 billion in nearly assured revenue.
3) Tesla’s reinvestment & buildout is very high and seems to be quite productive.
Consider that in about 5 years, they’ve done the following
a) learned how to make a quality, performant EV from scratch, taken it through several upgrades that allows a 5000 lb SEDAN to match near-supercars that cost much more, weigh much less, and can’t fit 3 average Americans up to speeds in excess of 100-120 mph
b) developed their very own high-power charger, smaller and lighter than any other and can charge 2-3x as quickly. And in the space of 2 years and with their own funds have built several hundred stations with a total of 2500 charging bays across the world. And also installed hundreds more 80 amp charging stations at malls & hotels ( at least in the USA)
c) started Tesla Energy to deliver energy storage to homes, businesses and utilities with claimed pre-orders of $500+ million
d) are on the cusp of starting deliveries for what could be the most badass SUV short of a Land Rover, that from a standing start can dust any Porsche 911 Turbo more than a couple years old.
e) broke ground on the world’s biggest battery factory, convincing a conservative Japanese corporation to take a huge risk, aimed at doubling the global output of Li-on battery cells.
No startup in my lifetime could have done as much in so short a time without incurring significant debt. Nissan & Chevy have had EVs on sale longer than Tesla and HUGE manufacturing experience.
How much progress have they made since the launch of the Leaf & Volt?
Yes, I think Musk’s Martian dreams are crazy but he’s more sane and productive than some of the folks who have held launch codes. If a Mission to Mars is the extent of his delusion, I can live with that so long as he’s delivering on his more tangible goals.
“Now the claim that Tesla is losing money on every car doesn’t hold water because it’s ignoring quite a few facts”. Really?
1) It is 100% true that “if Tesla folds tomorrow, there won’t be thousands of unsold cars sitting around”. Swell, except that the $4K to $14K has already been lost on the cars they HAVE sold, and that appears to be a FACT. How does that constitute a sound business plan? Aren’t you supposed to turn a profit on your product?
2) “The Model X has over 20,000 reservations. At a likely base price of $80k each, that’s at least $1.6 billion in nearly assured revenue”. Also swell, UNLESS Tesla loses $4K to $14K on each Model X also, which would add up to a LOSS of $80 to $280 million on those 20,000 cars. I will ask again, aren’t you supposed to turn a profit on your product? Oh, I forgot, if you can’t make a profit on what you sell, you simply sell some more stock to keep up the “cash flow”.
3) “Tesla’s reinvestment & buildout is very high and SEEMS to be quite productive”. True enough, if you’re being brightsided, but I suggest you reread the Reuters article. Why is there a “sell” recommendation for Tesla?
I am again reminded of Solar Roadway, who has built a small demo project somewhere in Idaho. It is swell that Tesla has “…built several hundred stations with a total of 2500 charging bays across the world. And also installed hundreds more 80 amp charging stations at malls & hotels (at least in the USA)”, but that’s really small potatoes.
And this is swell, too”…started Tesla Energy to deliver energy storage to homes, businesses and utilities with claimed pre-orders of $500+ million”, especially the CLAIMED part.
All I can say to “…the most badass SUV short of a Land Rover, that from a standing start can dust any Porsche 911 Turbo more than a couple years old”, and that $80,000 is a reasonable price to pay for a car is “someone needs to grow up”.
“No startup in my lifetime could have done as much in so short a time without incurring significant debt”? That’s because Tesla relies on raising cash through selling stock and simply burns the capital—-Viola!—no “debt”, other than that implied to the shareholders, who would like to see a return on their $$$$.
“Nissan & Chevy have had EVs on sale longer than Tesla and HUGE manufacturing experience. How much progress have they made since the launch of the Leaf & Volt?” Would you care to extend your thinking into what that might mean for the future sales of Tesla EV’s that are at least twice as expensive as the Nissan and Chevy products, especially since Tesla loses money on every car sold?
Musk’s Martian dreams are crazy, and he may be more sane than some of the folks who have held launch codes, but it remains to be seen if he can be “productive” and deliver on his more tangible goals. I would feel much better about it all if he concentrated on those “tangibles” and never mentioned Mars again (or am I repeating myself?).
Please stop comparing Tesla or Elon’s other ventures to failed companies that couldn’t sell 10 cars a week if they were lit on fire and flogged or daydreaming wannabes who after 10 years have only managed to light up one bike path.
Mars fantasy or not, Musk has a good track record of getting stuff done and being a pretty good multitasker.
That’s gotta count for something although I suspect I probably wouldn’t enjoy working too closely with him.
The Supercharger stations were announced in Fall 2012 and it took about 1.5 years to get to 100 stations.
As of Sep 1st, 2015, there are FIVE HUNDRED stations with a grand total of ~2800 charging bays. The costs per station varies by location, number of charging bays and if there’s a solar canopy but the best guess is that Tesla has invested ~$100 million in this build-out.
Or to put it in your preferred terms, they’ve lost $1300 per car building useless stations.
I’m going to stop talking about Musk and Tesla with you, simply because I don’t want to be considered “insane”—-you know, “doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results”.
You are so enamored with what you see as Musk’s “visionary” activities that you refuse to accept the economic FACTS surrounding his enterprises. Have you really read anything I’ve posted? Have you done any research at all into Tesla’s finances and prospects? Read this one and then tell us you’re going to rush out an buy Tesla stock. Self-delusion can be painful.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-to-sell-500-million-of-stock-1439466076
Here’s another. Considering the source, you might say that they’re trying to sabotage Musk, but the numbers and comments on what the rest of the auto industry is doing look pretty solid.
http://www.breitbart.com/california/2015/07/22/tesla-ubs-sell-recommendation-tanks-stock-by-5-5/
Only an insane person could expect starting a car company from scratch, in this day & age would NOT be hugely expensive and highly risky. Especially with the goals & aspirations of Tesla Motors.
We’ve already discussed Duesenberg which failed despite a larger parent and DeLorean which burned a couple dozen truckloads of British government money.
Lotus is an iconic English automaker but at many times during its history, its bank balance couldn’t pay for one of its own cars. And to this day, they can’t turn a profit – after 63 years in business.
I’d hazard a guess that one of their most successful periods was when they were making Roadster gliders for ….you guessed it…..TESLA.
Land Rover and Jaguar are even greater icons of British automaking but have been in the hands of one colonial car manufacturer or another since 1990. I wonder just how stiff those Imperial upper lips would have been had their current Indian owners renamed the merged acquired company to Tata Jaguar or Tata Rover instead of Jaguar Land Rover.
Even if Musk achieves his stated goals for the Gigafactory, the Model 3 and hypothetical annual sales by 2020, he won’t have caught up to the total sales of Saturn, who’ve left nothing behind but a cool logo.
It took powerhouse GM 8 years to go from concept of a no-haggle, independent brand to the first vehicles, the S-series.
And it took 12 years to get to an SUV, the Saturn Vue.
One could be forgiven for thinking they were learning to build cars from scratch (sound familiar?) and not being an arm of one of the largest global manufacturing companies.
It’s estimated that experiment added $5 billion in red ink to GM’s balance sheet, despite selling a couple million autos.
I said I’m done with this discussion because I don’t want to seem insane. Sorry to see that you don’t care what we think about your sanity and keep repeating (and arguing from) irrelevancies about the histories of other car companies (most of them quite ancient) rather than look to the present and future prospects of Tesla and Musk.
I will only say that even though some of GM’s automotive efforts may have resulted in some red ink, the company still managed to turn a profit, perhaps because making cars is not the only thin GM does.
But wait! Musk is into many other things besides making cars. And hasn’t made a profit on ANY of them yet. Have you read ANY of the links I posted?
PS You need to study up on the non-feasibility of Mars missions a bit also. Perhaps you will then understand why I don’t much trust anything Musk says.
http://www.npr.org/2015/03/17/390995619/are-humans-really-headed-to-mars-anytime-soon
When have I ever even implied that I thought a Mars colony was feasible?
I expect very smart people to have some very crazy ideas.
Robert Goddard dreamed of going to Mars too.
My point is that despite his lofty aspirations for the Red Planet that are flying high above Cloud Nine, Elon is getting significant stuff done here on Terra Firma.
And not terribly behind schedule although I do think that, now that he’s gotten the established players to sit up and take notice, Tesla needs to pick up the pace.
But so does Renault / Nissan and Chevy / GM.
And VW.
Robert Goddard??!!!! A man who has been dead for 70 years and had his “visions” of travel to Mars before 1900? Overreach much? Lord love a duck!! I would bet that Goddard, who was a smart and practical man, would now agree with our modern understanding of why it won’t happen.
You have never implied that you thought a Mars colony was feasible. You have merely held out Musk as a visionary, and I have pointed out that the thinking of anyone who thinks a Mars colony is feasible (as he does) is not to be trusted.
Of course, if we want to get into degrees of separation, we could argue that you ARE supporting Musk’s Mars ideas, particularly when you refuse to see ANY negatives in his other ventures. As in “Oh, crazy Elon babbles on about Mars, but isn’t he so right on with all his ‘visionary’ stuff—like hyperloop trains and supersonic electric planes”.
“Elon is getting significant stuff done here on Terra Firma”. Not yet—-lots of promise, and I’m rooting for his solar, battery, and car ventures to bear fruit—-but it’s too soon to tell if he will succeed on any of them.
FYI—founding dates of those companies:
Renault (1898)
Nissan (1934)
Chevy (1911)
GM (1908)
VW (1937)
Tesla (2003)
“Renault (1898)
Nissan (1934)
Chevy (1911)
GM (1908)
VW (1937)
Tesla (2003)”
Those founding dates only serve to make the established cars companies look weaker against an upstart who, by Musk’s own admission, is “tiny”.
I’ve lost count of the number of proposed, supposed, theorized, purported and presumed “Tesla-killers” that will debut between next year and the 5th of never.
Croatian whiz kid Mate Rimac produced a fine EV supercar called the Concept One about 4 years ago with specs, a few of which Tesla is only now matching, 0-60 in 2.8s / 90 kWhr battery but he also had lots of carbon fibre, almost 1100 hp and 4 in-wheel motors and pretty good torque vectoring.
Trouble is the car costs a million buck$ – and only 8 have been sold to date.
Mercedes had a EVersion of their green-tinged canary-yellow gullwing 2 seater SLS AMG, 60 kWh battery, 750 HP / 737 lb-ft, great torque-vectoring that impressed both Chris Harris & Jeremy Clarkson.
Presumably both were equally flattened by the $550,000 USD price. About as much as its 0-60 time of 3.6s has been flattened by 2 iterations of the Model S Performance.
I don’t really consider Musk to be a visionary and find referencing him to be the “real Tony Stark” to be ridiculous. But he’s a driven businessman with engineering skills or knowledge who’s trying to put all the pieces together for what he considers to be a sustainable future, with a mad escape plan if we, as he put it, “frack” ourselves. ( I imagine that’s in the Battlestar Galactica sense”
As we’re only too likely to do.
The depth of your cognitive dissonance and motivated reasoning is awesome. I’m quite surprised, since I have pretty much agreed with your past contributions on Crock. PLEASE snap out of it!
“Those founding dates only serve to make the established cars companies look weaker against an upstart who, by Musk’s own admission, is “tiny”, you say? That rates a response usually reserved for the clueless one—-Omnologos the Magnificent—-a loud WHAT???!!!
You obviously haven’t read the links I posted, or you would know that Porsche (1931), Audi (1909), and Mercedes-Benz (1926, but it goes back to Benz in 1888, who invented the freaking gas-powered automobile!) are not asleep at the wheel. An article in today’s WashPost talks about Porsche’s newest effort, the “Mission E”, which is taking direct aim at the Tesla S. The other companies you mentioned are working to take the low end of the EV market away from Tesla.
Instead of facing the facts, you mindlessly throw up straw men and try to beat the stuffing out of them. Rimac?—Rimac who? A Mercedes SLS AMG? Once Mercedes decides to move away from the half million dollar “concept car” stage, they (and Porsche and Audi) will rely on their many decades (over a century even) of building cars AND MAKING A PROFIT DOING SO, something that “tiny” Tesla has yet to achieve.
Those founding dates and that history of making a profit from selling millions of cars (to anyone not mired in wishful thinking) actually serve to make the established car companies look stronger, not weaker, and emphasize the fact that Tesla is a “tiny” (and so far unprofitable) “upstart”. And my biggest bone is that Musk keeps talking about Mars rather than concentrating on making his companies successful enough so that 100 years from now we’ll be talking about their founding dates and the fact that they survived because they made a profit and paid dividends to shareholders.
Right now, the Musk companies have survived only because they have received ~$5 BILLION in government subsidies and enough greedy “investors” think they can make $$$ from the stock and throw their $$$ at Musk so he can burn it. If Musk doesn’t get off his Mars kick and start making money, 100 years from now he will be just a footnote as “the guy who had some good ideas but….”.
I heard about Porsche’s Mission E today. Looks like a nice car but it’s a concept and the raw numbers are already slightly worse than what you can get in a P90D although no Tesla car can yet do the Nurburgring in 8 minutes – best I’ve seen is sub-9 min in an original P85.
I did a bit more digging about the Mission E and found out that it has an 800 volt chargers that allows an 80% refill in 15 minutes. That’s pretty amazing and it’ll be even more amazing (if and) when those Ultra-Hyper-Superchargers get built.
Now will that be with VW Group money or government funds?
But that thorny question doesn’t have to be answered today, tomorrow or even next year.
Because Porsche doesn’t expect the Mission E will be for sale in less than FIVE years.
What do you think this’ll be at retail? $150k? $200k? More? A 911 Turbo S starts around $160k now.
Audi has been showing off variants of their e-tronsince the 2009 Frankfurt show.
What has come of their efforts? The A3 Sportback hybrid doesn’t seem to be wowing too many over in Europe and I’m not sure if it’s even being offered for sale yet in NorthAm.
But the rather lackluster reviews do indicate that it can blow the doors off of a Nissan Leaf, especially downhill. Bravo.
And I’d already mentioned MercBenny.
Mate Rimac is a young genius and I wouldn’t discount his engineering skills but he doesn’t yet have access to the kinds of resources needed to make something that’ll compete with a Model S on BOTH price & performance.
I hear a lot about Tesla and government money but so many big companies feed at the trough some in more ways than one. How many times has Chrysler been rescued? And why??
Do you think GM built & refurbed the NUMMI plant entirely with goodwill & rainbow sprinkles?
Ford Motor likes to brag how they didn’t need taxpayer money to get through the financial crisis like those dullards GM & Chrysler………but little mention of the $4-6 billion they took to retool plants to make more supposedly fuel efficient cars.
The company that Henry Ford founded, that essentially built the automaking industry couldn’t figure out how to make better cars without a handout? At at time when most of their domestic competition was struggling to keep the lights on?
And then had to pay “good faith” money for “accidentally” mis-stating the mileage of those selfsame efficient models by an average of 5 mpg.
200,000 of those were sold in the USA alone. Did the company really pay those funds out of their own pockets or did that someone end up on the taxpayer’s plate?
Since Toyota moved most of their CA staff to TX last year, Tesla became the largest automaker in CA and have been steadily expanding their local workforce since.
Nissan got $1.4 billion for the Leaf battery and assembly plant in Smyrna.
But no one talks about that when they see one of those bug-eyed golf carts whirring by. Amazing what you learn with a century of manufacturing under your belt.
The Automotive Crisis of 2008 – 2010 showed just how lame & lethargic these Titans of industry truly are. And they and their foreign competitors needed government / public support around the world to keep breathing.
And what do we have to show for it? It’s true that cars are better than ever but not really hugely so and the major reason is that modern autos are heavily computerized. But look at what the computer industry has accomplished in 1/2 the time.
I said that I don’t consider Musk to be a real-life Tony Stark and I’m not sure where to categorize him. Perhaps a latter-day Henry Ford, but Ford didn’t have such a set of entrenched industries to compete with – he was up against horses & trains.
And Musk isn’t building an entire industry from scratch but he, more than any other today, has been doing so systematically & synergistically.
If it’s of any comfort, Musk has said he doesn’t plan to be running Tesla day to day for more than a few more years and will probably bow out sometime after the Model 3 debuts or the Gigafactory reaching full production.
I’m all for calling out scammers & frauds especially ones who are sucking up public funds but to look at what had already been accomplished, what’s being built and what is about to be released and not be impressed is puzzling.
Is Tesla’s success guaranteed? Hell no. But without them, there would be no real hope for a true EV industry. Toyota, with its huge head start, couldn’t get it done and they should call that plodding fuel-cell behemoth the Mirage.
Renault-Nissan is moving along but not really making the general public sit up & take notice despite having a more complete EV portfolio than anyone else.
GM is trying to make up for the EV1 debacle and will be the first with an under-$40k, 200 mile BEV – but have already admitted that 30,000 per year is likely to be the max possible sales for several years.
But, almost singlehandedly, it’s been Tesla who has brought EVs to the fore, have fundamentally changed the conversation, have made Stuttgart & Bavaria reconsider what an “ultimate driving machine” could be and made it an almost certainty that no one can kill the electric car again.
So, as you set aside funds for your 2ndhand Ferrari, rail against Musk all you want.
But don’t forget to thank him.
You ARE hopeless when it comes to Musk and Tesla. Just how much money have you got invested in Tesla stock anyway? I would guess a lot. and way more than you probably should have, considering the uncertainties of Tesla and the EV market.
Thank you for making my point for me with all the statistics about how ALL the car companies are NOT making much progress with selling EV’s. We know that Tesla is losing money on every car it sells, is running out of capital and is about to sell some more stock, and has yet to show a profit of any sort. Quite a business plan! (Quick, buy more Tesla stock! He needs your money to keep the doors open!)
Can you explain to us, in the face of all that, exactly why you think Tesla and Musk are going to “make it” when in your mind, NO ONE else, including a dozen car companies that have been making cars (and a profit) for an average of 80 or 90 years don’t seem to be able to do so?
As for your fantasies of the Nurburgring and mine of a V-12 Ferrari, it appears that the biggest fulfilled “fantasy” among car buyers in the U.S. is to buy a PICKUP TRUCK. For the 30th+ year now, the Ford F-150 is the top selling vehicle in America (753.000), followed by the Chevy Silverado (530,000), and the Dodge Ram (440,000). That’s ~1.723,000 TRUCKS before the first car shows at #4 on the top 20 list, and the Prius is down in 20th. place at 207,000 sold. EV’s are nowhere to be seen on the list—maybe they’d start to appear if we extended it to the top 40 or 50.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/01/06/pickups-best-selling-vehicles-2014/21334373/
I will thank Musk when he stops talking about Mars colonies and “nuking” Mars with thousands of bombs to make it (maybe) habitable in a few centuries, and instead turns his energies and talent solely towards his car, battery, and solar PV ventures. Or am I repeating myself yet again? Am I going insane, trying to talk some sense into you and failing time and again? WWET? (What Would Einstein Think)
With the announcement that Mars may have liquid water, it won’t be easy to stop Musk from talking about colonizing it ad nauseum.
For your sake, I hope tomorrow’s planned Model X launch event and the VW cheating fiasco are enough to distract him for a while.
“With the announcement that Mars may have liquid water, it won’t be easy to stop Musk from talking about colonizing it ad nauseum”.
I suspect you may be right, even though the announcement is a “MAY” and just more wishful thinking and brightsidedness (as well as a job-preserving measure for all those who are involved in the “Let’s go to Mars at huge expense and die there” project).
For MUSK’s sake, not mine, I hope tomorrow’s planned Model X launch event and the VW cheating fiasco ARE “enough to distract him for a while”. He needs to concentrate on his enterprises here on Earth rather than bloviate about Mars. Until they start to make a profit, he is going nowhere, never mind to Mars.
PS Have you read the link about the Dutch Mars One “project”? A job-for-life scheme that puts Solar Roadway to shame. They thinks he can raise $45 BILLION dollars. Perhaps they watched Musk raise his several billion and were inspired by that?
This Dutch Dream is news to me but what have they accomplished besides putting up a website and possibly scamming some Trekkies?
Mars may be a long, long way away but at least SpaceX has managed to get rockets into space and have a achieved several milestones for a private civilian space corporation.
I can’t resist. The Mars One folks have scammed some “trekkies” the way Musk is scamming some “techies”.
Back to cars. Here’s and interesting article that talks some about the Nissan Leaf and the Chevy Volt, and points out that just about 50% of all Model S’s sold have been sold in CA.
http://www.edmunds.com/industry-center/analysis/drive-by-numbers-tesla-in-all-50-states.html
I doubt anyone is surprised that CA leads in Model S purchases as they do in every green vehicle. And if you’re in the SF Bay Area, EVs and hybrids seem to make up nearly 1/3 of all passenger cars.
Of the 4 days I spent in Anaheim last year, I truly cannot recall seeing a single Leaf or Model S and the Priuses were outnumbered by the 10+ yr old rusty trucks.
But that info is nearly 2 years out of date; here’s one more current
http://insideevs.com/california-leads-nation-in-tesla-model-s-sales-but-which-other-states-are-in-top-10/
That still shows CA with 45% of the American market for Model S but a surprising amount of sales in states where one cannot directly purchase from Tesla Motors.
damn elitists and their clunky, expensive cell phones
http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s–LQfOh7hr–/17zi4m9wu0gvtjpg.jpg