Tesla-Powered Cobra Racer

[Buzz]

I have to laugh at these tired anecdotes. You forget about the regenerative technology. Going up the mountain does consume a lot more range, but you get most of the excess back coming back down, with the added benefit of superior speed control without using your brakes.

From a Model S forum by folks who actually own and drive these cars:

Range performance in mountains:comparing steep uphill to descents
Submitted by ChetB on September 11, 2013

Hello everyone, this is my first post here. My father just ordered an S and I have been following the progress of Tesla Motors with great interest over the past few years.

I have a question about how much more quickly Rated Range declines when ascending long grades, such as the western slopes of the Sierra Nevada mountains from the California Central Valley floor to Tioga Pass, compared to driving an equivalent distance on the flats, and if there is in fact a more rapid loss of range going uphill is there a corresponding conservation of Rated Range when making long descents due to regeneration?

I live in the San Francisco Bay Area. My wife and I like to take trips to the mountains and based on the map at http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger of Supercharger stations that are being built out over the next couple of years, the closest station to the Sierra Nevada mountains on the west side is at Folsom, just east of Sacramento. A charge at that station will get an S85 to the South Lake Tahoe area and back, but it won't make it to the Yosemite / Sequoia area. Many of the places we stay at in the mountains do not yet offer a 240V outlet to their guests. We also like to go car camping where electrical outlets are even scarcer.

It is interesting to note on the Supercharger station map that it appears that no stations are planned to be built in the next 2+ years along Hwy 99 in the Central Valley. That is disappointing, as a station in the Merced/Fresno area would be well placed to support drives into the central Sierra Nevada mountains. The map does show a future station slightly east of the Bay Area and south of Sacramento but the map has so little detail that I can't determine where it will be located.

Thanks,

Barry

jbunn | September 11, 2013
It does gulp power on the way up, but you get about 80% of it back on the downhill if you stay off the brakes. I've found the car does really well on mountain passes based on several trips over the Grapevine, the range to the West of Coalinga (Harris Ranch), and the mountain range separating Oregon from California. It's a little scary going up as the mileage is dropping rapidly, but it's fun to watch the gauge recover on the way down.

Captain_Zap | September 11, 2013
This site will help you get an idea about how hills will impact range. You can choose your car, map your route, estmate your speed and get a good estimate.

GreenRace

Crow | September 11, 2013
I think a good rule of thumb is a mountain pass costs about 6 miles for every 1,000 feet in elevation. Depends on speed, temp, AC, heat, wind, grade. etc...

slipdrive | September 11, 2013
Here in Colorado I have recently been up and over several mountain passes over 11,000feet elevation. Yesterday was an example. 195 miles round trip over Berthoud pass and back for some mountian golf (no charging). The up-and-over was 150, and return only 45 range miles. My very rough estimate is the 2.8% average elevation gain up 6,800 ft, about doubled the kwh burn. I do use almost constant cruise control. For all the mountain trips, I have seen the round trip range miles almost exactly equal flat range miles.
Nice to hear people in the hills with these great cars. Mountain driving all my years, I've never had so much fun....

ChetB | September 11, 2013
Thanks for all the quick responses. On steep descents with the regenerative function set on maximum (or whatever the term is) can speed be controlled pretty easily with minimal brake use?

Captain_Zap | September 11, 2013
@chetb

That is one of the beauties of regen. It is much easier to control speed while going downhill and no unnecessary brake wear.

[olddog]

The regeneration coming down hill at 80% is superb if that is true. The motor will be lucky if it is 94% efficient, the drive that controls it likely looses another 5%, then the battery will loose at least 5% each way (in/out). If they have really achieved 80% that is fantastic.

Now the 6 mile for every 1000 foot of elevation comment, if true, means that when you come down hill you are only going to gain 80% of that back. So the fellow who claimed that it is like driving on flat ground if you come back down, is mistaken. He would still be 1.2 miles short for every 1000 feet.

Now in reality the car requires energy to roll. It require is to roll up hill and it requires it to roll down hill. Not all of the energy when going down hill is available to regenerate into the battery. Some of it is consumed by the car.

Also note they are opining there are too few charging stations. This is what is frustrating about this crowd. The real solution is a small diesel in the 25 Hp range that is slightly more than capable of maintaining highway speed. The batteries supply the instantaneous power needs and the engine can maintain the charge over the longer time period. Oh no they hate the internal combustion engine, but they will not allow the power plants to be built to power their electric cars. Hmmm how is this going to work?

[jhv48]

Let’s face it, electric autonomous vehicles are the wave of the future. Today’s millennials have no interest in internal combustion engines, or for actually driving a vehicle. Our hobby/sport/passion is on life support. Enjoy it while you can. For me it’s not about blind acceleration. Silent acceleration does nothing for me. I want things that go boom powering my ride. The sound of thousands of small explosions accompanied by neck snapping acceleration is my passion.
But, the next generation and the future do not share our passion.

[DanEC]

Originally Posted by Buzz

Comparing the range of the old cars that clunked along at a snail's pace to a car with the capabilities of a modern electric car like the Tesla is way beyond a ludicrous stretch!

A big, heavy, luxurious 4 door sedan that would blow the doors off any gas guzzler from the muscle car era - including the awesome 427 Cobra - what's not to like about that?

I don't think electrical vehicles will ever be mainstream until they can provide a least 700 miles driving range between recharges - 50, 150, 250 miles, just not sufficient for reliable, long distance travel. With 700 miles range you get in a pretty fair day's travel with a bit of reserve. Or, if they can perfect reliable and cost effective recharging in around 30 minutes or less, that might be a game changer. I mean yeah, they are modern looking, flashy, quiet, have great torque, west coaster love them - but they are still limited by the same issues they had 100 years ago. Maybe there will be a break through some day but I don't see it yet.

My ERA may only get about 180 miles on a tank or so, but I can fix that in about 10 minutes at any of hundreds of thousands of gas stations across the country and be on my way immediately. And I can keep that up as long as I can stay awake or someone else drives for awhile. But I would rather take my Mustang or wife's Highlander on a lengthy trip anyway and then I only have to refuel about every 350 - 400 miles.

[Buzz]

Originally Posted by DanEC

My ERA may only get about 180 miles on a tank or so, but I can fix that in about 10 minutes at any of hundreds of thousands of gas stations across the country and be on my way immediately. And I can keep that up as long as I can stay awake or someone else drives for awhile. But I would rather take my Mustang or wife's Highlander on a lengthy trip anyway and then I only have to refuel about every 350 - 400 miles.

Point well made Dan, but with what I think is an inevitable increase in EV production, there will be a growth in recharging infrastructure the same way gas stations blossomed all over the country in the golden days of the automobile. Every major manufacturer is dabbling with all-electric models and with charging stations at regular intervals, frequent (though never as quick as topping up a gas tank) partial recharges along the way may well be the answer to the issue of long cross country trips. Every system has its pros and cons, but the huge benefits and awesome performance potential of electric cars make the efforts to solve or mitigate their inherent drawbacks well worth the effort.
I just don't get the angry opposition to the technology. Our Cobras are very limited in their practical usefulness for long trips and winter or rainy weather driving, yet they aren't being drummed out of town as useless and unusable. It seems like it's just a polarised knee jerk reaction to something that's actually quite good simply because it's different from what we happen to like or are accustomed to. Similar to the curious brand loyalty to Ford products I see here - my daddy and his daddy before him drove Fords, so anything Chevy builds will always be a piece of crap, regardless of how good it actually is.
That tendency to be blindly polarised is being exploited today by people who see how easy and profitable it is to make masses of citizens do what they want by playing upon their blind loyalties to what's familiar and comforting; and their irrational fear of anything different or unfamiliar.

Sermon over - but as was said earlier - I guess that's just one of my pet peeves.

[Buzz]

Originally Posted by jhv48

Let’s face it, electric autonomous vehicles are the wave of the future. Today’s millennials have no interest in internal combustion engines, or for actually driving a vehicle. Our hobby/sport/passion is on life support. Enjoy it while you can. For me it’s not about blind acceleration. Silent acceleration does nothing for me. I want things that go boom powering my ride. The sound of thousands of small explosions accompanied by neck snapping acceleration is my passion.
But, the next generation and the future do not share our passion.

Well said, Jim. I love loud exhaust, tire smoke and the sound of a grumpy V8 as well, but that doesn't mean I can't also like the quiet whoosh of acceleration and the versatile technology of EV's.

There are many people who still prefer to collect and shoot black powder muzzle loaders, but they would be mad if they claimed they are actually better than modern cartridge firing guns. I get (and enjoy) passion and nostalgia, but I flatly reject dogmatism and closed mindedness.

[olddog]

The following is assuming 100% efficiency, for simplicity.

Ok let's assume it takes about 15 KwH to move a light car 75 miles - I'm being generous.

The goal is a 600 mile range.

600 mile / 75 miles * 15 KwH = 120 KwH

Recharge in 30 minutes or 0.5 hr.

Charging rate is 120 KwH / 1/2 H = 240 Kw.

Normal house hold power in America is single phase 240 volts.

W = E * I

240,000 W / 240 volts = 1000 amp.

So to charge your battery in 30 minutes with the most common power in this country, you need a 240 volt 1000 amp charger.

Most people have 200 amp service or less. Hmm.

Ok let's go to 480 volt 3 phase power.

1000 amp / 2 / 1.73 (square root of 3 for 3 phase)= 166.7 amp.

Now let's get real, a typical gas station has a dozen pumps. Let's say I can fill a gasoline car in 5 minutes and an electric takes 30 minutes. So to handle the same volume of cars, I need to be able to charge 6 times as many electric cars. So I need to be able to charge 72 cars, at a time, to handle the same volume of electric cars as gasoline cars. So, I need to build a 12000 amp 480 volt 3 phase electrical station.

Clearly I need to invest well over a million dollars to build this charging station. Any buisnes man wants a 3 year return on investment. So how much of a premium are you willing to pay me above the cost of electricity to make it worth my time to invest in this charging station you want some one to build for you???? And we would need millions of these charging stations. The power grid will need to be more than doubled and the power plants too.

Today we pay about a 65 cent tax on a gallon of gasoline to support highways and bridges. Electric cars have gotten a free ride. The cost to maintain this infrastructure is not going to go away and the Electric cars will have to pay that as well. So add 2 or 3 cents per mile for the highway up keep.

I am not closed minded, at all. I have fact checked the wild blue sky assumptions from the people who closed minded believe this is the way of the future. On what facts do these people believe we will be able to charge a battery in 5 min or 30 min or an hour?
Based on what? What is the advantage to making this change? In the end we still have to generate the power. It is not a clean energy solution.

The technology of electric cars has existed almost as long as the internal combustion engine. It is not new. What irritates me is people want to use my tax dollars to prop up and make viable a technology that no one will invest in on their own.

[Buzz]

I'm well aware of the logistics involved Dan and I have no quarrel with your calculations, but one of the beautiful things about EV's is that the vast majority of recharging can be done overnight at home. Gas powered vehicles cannot be refilled at home, hence the volume of traffic at gas stations. The only time EV owners need a recharge on the road is when the journey exceeds round trip range. Long trips just need to be planned around recharge stops. Hell - maybe there'll be rest stop type places that will offer meals and relaxation facilities to pass the time.

Use the gas car for longer trips - whatever. I'm not trying to be the champion of EV's taking over the world - I just like the phenomenal performance potential and the amazing things the cars will be able to do. If they end up being specialty or niche vehicles, then fine; but I do know one thing for sure - they offer supercar level performance, comfort, acceleration and speed at prices within the reach of normal people.

I'm excited as hell to see how the Tesla roadster will perform in the real world, and even if it falls a bit short of the range and recharging claims being made now - it will certainly be one of the fastest production cars of all time. Only a 300 or 400 mile range? With that kind of performance, who the heck cares?

[olddog]

Originally Posted by Buzz

I'm well aware of the logistics involved Dan and I have no quarrel with your calculations, but one of the beautiful things about EV's is that the vast majority of recharging can be done overnight at home. Gas powered vehicles cannot be refilled at home, hence the volume of traffic at gas stations. The only time EV owners need a recharge on the road is when the journey exceeds round trip range. Long trips just need to be planned around recharge stops. Hell - maybe there'll be rest stop type places that will offer meals and relaxation facilities to pass the time.

Use the gas car for longer trips - whatever. I'm not trying to be the champion of EV's taking over the world - I just like the phenomenal performance potential and the amazing things the cars will be able to do. If they end up being specialty or niche vehicles, then fine; but I do know one thing for sure - they offer supercar level performance, comfort, acceleration and speed at prices within the reach of normal people.

I'm excited as hell to see how the Tesla roadster will perform in the real world, and even if it falls a bit short of the range and recharging claims being made now - it will certainly be one of the fastest production cars of all time. Only a 300 or 400 mile range? With that kind of performance, who the heck cares?

I have no problem with an electric car, per say. The performance is pretty cut and dry. An electric motor is well known. Longevity is interesting. I can show you motors that have been running 24/7/365 for 30 years. They are only shut off every 5 years, when we take the plant down for electrical PM. There are many advantages to electric motors. Some of the problems is weight and cost.

Personally I believe with today's technology the best car would have a small power generation diesel (or gasoline) that only generates electricity. Motors would run the wheels. Batteries would supplement the high instantaneous power needs. It would regenerate as much power as possible. It would not need nearly as much battery, as a pure electric. None of the hybrids are a true electric car with its own power generator, as I am suggesting. It does not need a new infrastructure to support it. This could work today. It too would be expensive like the electric cars.

This could be done quickly and reduce considerably the need to burn fuel. For pure political reasons (internal combustion is bad) we have chosen to go for something that isn't going to happen anytime soon, if ever. When the half step, allows you to perfect over time a pure electric car, if that is ever needed. Talk about closed minded.

Oh buy the way, even if you charge them slowly over night every day, the power grid cannot handle it.

[Buzz]

I actually like the idea of a small auxiliary diesel powerplant - either for charging or maintaining highway cruise.

[EM-0785]

My two bits…

With a ‘societal goal’ of zero emissions, such developments may well result in a combination of battery powered electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel cell powered electric vehicles. In either case the fuel source to generate electric/battery power is non-petroleum with plug in electric and fast fill hydrogen distribution, both with as much self/re-gen as achievable.

I’ve watched this with interest for a few decades. From the early days of Ballard Company (Ballard Power) and their fuel cell developments, including agreements with GM, Daimler, Ford, etc. Back then I recall seeing GM (CEO I believe) publicly announce to the effect that GM passenger vehicles would be on an all fuel cell platform within 10 years, using a common chassis design with interchangeable bodies.

They then seemed to go silent on the topic, perhaps amid infrastructure logistics and public safety perceptions, as electricity seemed to gain initial market viability/popularity. The electric car development is likely a necessary step/component in the longer-term movement toward zero emissions including hydrogen.

I’ll likely always enjoy my Cobra most, and as long as I can, even as I partake in current in use technologies. When people look concerned over my old petrol Cobra, I tell them both tongue in cheek and in all seriousness proudly that we “manage my carbon footprint”!

That’s right, we produce way less emissions than most, and have more fun doing it, including a Cobra, that’s our hybrid approach! That is, given our combination of lower emission high mileage main drivers and our less driven, fire-breathing Cobra!

They stand there pensive, looking like I’ve just rocked their world. Our low emission commitment in place gives some cred there, they have no further comeback, those carbon wasters, go figure! As I belch black smoke trying to tune my choke (I’m still ahead!). ☺

We just use our gas or hybrid vehicle, or a rental, not the full electrics, for longer planned trips. The low-e vehicles work well for daily around town use and commutes throughout the year.

Brent

(PS: All that said, petroleum fuels for autos will likely be around for some time and have their moments and development applications. Particularly in the near term as I believe there's a focus now on higher octane being less pollutive and making a come back, potential increased drilling in AK for availiability, etc. It will certainly be intersting to see the developments in auto fuel sources over time).

[olddog]

The hydrogen fuel cell was once the holy grail that was just around the corner and it was going to make electric cars the future. It was touted much like the miracle battery is just around the corner from today.

Two things killed the hydrogen fuel cell. One, it is a bomb. Two, hydrogen does not appear in nature here on earth, it always has other molecules attached, when you find it. The energy required to split it away from the other atoms is more than the energy derived from it. Thus the doubling of the power generation is required to make it. Why bother, when you can just charge a battery?

[Bartruff1]

The three most popular vehicles in America are PU trucks....Ford, Chev/GMC and Dodge....our family owns 4 new car dealerships and by far the most sought after vehicles are PUs and SUVs.....

There are about 16,000,000 new cars being built in America and less than 1% are battery powered...

[Buzz]

Originally Posted by Bartruff1

The three most popular vehicles in America are PU trucks....Ford, Chev/GMC and Dodge....our family owns 4 new car dealerships and by far the most sought after vehicles are PUs and SUVs.....

There are about 16,000,000 new cars being built in America and less than 1% are battery powered...

Sooo...the sky isn't falling after all! Everyone can relax now

Merry Christmas all!