6 ms·
If that fits your pace, that's great, but that would have driven me nuts last time I was driving cross-country.
by sliverstorm 13y ago
If that fits your pace, that's great, but that would have driven me nuts last time I was driving cross-country.
- Pxtl 13y agoA 30-minute break every 3 hours seems just a little bit high - if 30 minutes got you closer to the full charge, it would be fine for road trips. 4 or 5 hours seems the upper limit for reasonable "driving without a half-hour break" and taking only 1/10th of your time instead of 1/7th recharging would be more palatable. But either way, driving screws up our concepts of convenience and efficiency. Drivers aren't rational actors, so even if you were only spending 10% of your time recharging it would make you crazy just like any other delay makes us go a bit nuts when we're behind the wheel.
- MartinCron 13y agoDrivers aren't rational actors That's at the heart of most of these discussions. So many of the decisions people make about driving aren't rational decisions, they're rationalized decisions. Just to be clear, I'm guilty of this as well. I bought a large luxury station wagon (mostly) because it had rear-facing rumbleseats that I've used exactly once.
- agumonkey 13y agoI can't stand sitting rear-facing without feeling nauseous, I'm surprised it's even a selling point.
- MartinCron 13y agoWhen you're a kid, the novelty of sitting rear facing in "the way way back" is enough to stop the nausea, at least for short trips. And if you're not a kid, there's no way in hell you're going to fit in the rear-facing seats, I'm pretty short and I still can't fit back there.
- agumonkey 13y agohaha I guess you're right, I remember some rides in the trunk long ago and not feeling sick.
- tobtoh 13y agoExactly this - I remember my parents had a Volvo with similar seats and my brothers and I loved sitting back there. We always imagined we were in the gun turrets of the Millennium Falcon shooting down cars.
- stcredzero 13y agoGrew up in a 240 wagon myself. Sometimes I would pretend a bug-spot on the windshield was a gunsight and pretend to shoot other cars, thinking of Star Wars the whole time.
- protomyth 13y agoIf the speed limit is 70mph or 75mph, it is less than every three hours.
- thrownaway2424 13y agoIsn't it counterproductive to drive a model s at high speeds cross-country? You get an extra ~40 miles of range by going 65 instead of 75.
- protomyth 13y agoGoing 65 on a 75 highway is going to be a problem since your speed difference with most cars is what causes the problems in highway driving. Breaking flow of traffic is not a good idea. I can assure you that doing 65mph on I-90 through South Dakota is a really, really bad idea. Its listed as 75mph and that would be the low-end for what people do. Nevermind the wind that is probably going to kill your range.
- encoderer 13y agoAside from perhaps Montana/etc I've never seen a highway with a single 75MPH speed limit. There is always a lower limit for big trucks, usually 55 or 65mph. You in a Tesla driving 65 in the right lane is not going to affect traffic much. In the wide open spaces, there's enough room it doesn't matter. In cities, there's enough traffic to push realized speeds below posted limits anyway.
- protomyth 13y ago"Aside from perhaps Montana/etc I've never seen a highway with a single 75MPH speed limit" Well, South Dakota I-90 where Tesla put their chargers is a single 75mph on a very busy two lane interstate with a lot of truck traffic. Minnesota is a single 70mph on I-90. Thinking about it, I haven't seen a split speed limit in the upper plains. "You in a Tesla driving 65 in the right lane is not going to affect traffic much." "In the wide open spaces, there's enough room it doesn't matter." You are going to be a nice blocker in traffic that generally flows along at 75 - 85 mph. It is a very busy truck corridor and you going 65mph is going to be a problem.
- melling 13y agoYeah, but it's still cool that someone can drive across the country in a Tesla. Shouldn't we get something like a 50% improvement in battery technology within 5 years? That should push it over the limit for most people.
- sp332 13y agoBatteries have been improving at what, 6% per year? If that keeps up it will take 7 years to get 50% better.
- ics 13y agoSame, but it's only going to get better from here. Plus, if I owned a Tesla I don't think I'd be making that sort of cross-country trip again, at least not in that way.
- grecy 13y agoPeople said exactly the same thing when the automobile was introduced and it was horribly less convenient than a horse and cart. Of course a new tech is slightly less convenient out the outset, and of course it will only appeal to a certain percentage of the population, and of course it will get better over time. Which side of history are those people on? Which side of history will you be on?
- sliverstorm 13y agoThe side of history that can't afford a Tesla S anyway. Small-minded of me, I know.
- grecy 13y ago> The side of history that can't afford a Tesla S Yet. There were millions that couldn't afford an automobile when they came out too you know..... Give it time, stop thinking a new product has to be everything to everyone so early on.
- r00fus 13y agoRange is a significant factor of the Tesla's cost, and it'd require a order of magnitude of efficiency increase to both support a cheaper model while also keeping the same charging range and keeping Tesla's profit margins in place.
- grecy 13y agouh-huh, and you can say exactly the same thing about the first cars, computers, commercial (or private) planes, and about 10 million other things. Why do you think complaining about the Tesla is somehow different from complaining about all those other things when they were in their infancy?
- toomuchtodo 13y agoThe more you make of something, the cheaper it gets to make each one. The price will come down.