8 ms·
But isn't the result at least somewhat biased, as the car is mostly sold to environmentally conscious consumers, who might knowingly or not ignore car's potenti
by deletes 13y ago
But isn't the result at least somewhat biased, as the car is mostly sold to environmentally conscious consumers, who might knowingly or not ignore car's potential problems to promote the nature friendly aspect of it.
- keithwarren 13y agoI am not an environmentally conscious consumer and I am going to buy one when our current lease is up. I am a monetarily concious consumer who sees the value in a high quality car which maintains its value well, has good purchase incentives. I also have a family and have seen the amazing safety record the car has put together so far and I am a hacker on top of all of it and have been to a Tesla center and explored the Model S. It is a technical marvel imho. All of these things make me want one, not some green aspect.
- twoodfin 13y agoJust out of curiosity, would you be likely to buy one without the assorted tax incentives?
- keithwarren 13y agoYes, the federal is the only one that applies for me. My states has nothing in addition.
- alexeisadeski3 13y ago>I am a monetarily concious consumer who sees the value in a high quality car which maintains its value well... Wouldn't battery degradation bite into that?
- stcredzero 13y agoWouldn't battery degradation bite into that? Not nearly as much as for some other cars, as it's a modular part that can literally be swapped out in 90 seconds.
- count 13y agoWhich degrades and cost more to fix - a battery or a transmission and other mechanical parts? People act like current cars have no parts or things that go bad over time. Tesla batteries look like they should be at 85% capacity at 100K miles.
- alexeisadeski3 13y agoWell that's exactly what I'm asking right?
- koenigdavidmj 13y agoIf the quick charging mechanism is going to be "have a robot physically remove the battery and put a new one on" in a few years, then that's not as much of an issue.
- alexeisadeski3 13y agoI wasn't aware that Tesla were planning to go that route! Awesome if true :)
- dandrews 13y agoSwap demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZU0wnpyhF8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZU0wnpyhF8
- keithwarren 13y agoI will flip it before that becomes a concern, I am usually in and out of a car in under 3 years. I get bored easily.
- sukuriant 13y agoHave you considered leasing? That might be more financially reasonable for you. Then again, you may be in the money range where when you sell your car, it is worth more money than you have left on the loan, so you're more or less ahead.
- UnoriginalGuy 13y ago> I am a monetarily concious consumer who sees the value in a high quality car which maintains its value well, has good purchase incentives. That makes no sense. How does buying an $89K car instead of a $25K hybrid save you money? These incentives better be of $64K in value, otherwise there is no monetary argument to be made here. Don't get me wrong, I like the Model S, I think it is a wonderful car with tons of innovative technology inside (and, no, I am not just talking about the battery power). But there is no financial argument you could make that would justify buying one over a Prius or Ford Fusion. The only reason the Model S appears to have such a good resale value is that there was a huge backlog for a while, and people were paying OVER retail price just to get ahold of one. Kind of like the Nintendo Wii the first christmas it came out, doesn't mean a Wii maintained that value over the medium to longer term.
- Consultant32452 13y agoYou're looking at it from the perspective of a person that can't really afford a Tesla. When you look at the world and say "What's the best bang for the $100k I'm going to spend on my next car?" then you may feel a Tesla is a good monetary value based on resale value or other factors even though it's not the most economical way you could transport yourself back and forth to work.
- alexeisadeski3 13y agoTesla S competes with E Class MB, latter costs ~55-65k. 100k S Class is much better car than Tesla S.
- keithwarren 13y agoI disagree on the S class. It is bigger but I find nothing else about it 'better' and certainly not 'much better'
- alexeisadeski3 13y agoDe gustibus non est disputandum No doubt there are components of the Tesla S which are nicer than the S Class. But taken holistically, they are not in the same class. Wheelbase, length, interior volume, rear legroom & headroom, overall refinement are all quite different between the Tesla S and M-B S. Though they do weigh about the same... But as I said, de gustibus non est disputandum.
- grecy 13y ago> But isn't the result at least somewhat biased, as the car is mostly sold to people looking for V8 noise and performance, who might knowingly or not ignore car's potential problems to promote the HEMI V8 aspect of it. It works both ways.
- deletes 13y agoThat is way to meta. Can you elaborate on that "quote", what part of Tesla is HEMI V8?
- BlackDeath3 13y agoThe suggestion is that almost everybody is biased in some way, so that while biases may or may not balance each other out, to focus on one side particularly may be a little unfair.
- bal00ns 13y ago"Electric cars aren't green" is a myth spread by a few op-ed pieces written in the LA Times and WSJ. The production of a battery is a tiny constant in comparison to the lifelong use of fossil fuels. Electric vehicles become more environmentally friendly as grid power becomes more renewable, and grid power is becoming more renewable every day. When you invest in an electric vehicle you're investing in the future of renewable energy.
- cwal37 13y agoSpecifically, there was a hit-job white paper (I think it was from a marketing firm, can't remember the title) published in the past 5-10 years arguing that Hummers were more eco-friendly than a Prius. The paper was thoroughly debunked, but it got a lot of media traction initially. That sort of headline sticks in the back of someone's mind, particularly if they never follow up on it. EDIT: Right, it was called Dust to Dust. Here's a pretty simple rebuttal from Slate(2008): http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_green_lantern/2008/03/tank_vs_hybrid.html http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_green_l... And yeah, it was a "market research" firm. I feel confident saying I write with a closer attention to facts and accurate calculations on my personal blog than their "business" did in the report.
- morsch 13y ago> When you invest in an electric vehicle you're investing in the future of renewable energy. Yeah, that's a bit of a stretch. Renewable energy doesn't need electric cars to take off, buying an electric car is not an investment in renewable energy in any real meaningful way. In the meantime, the US grid is currently 12.x% renewable, so you're running on 85+% non-renewable (2012). Not to mention the fact that running all those vehicles off electric would mean adding a huge amount of capacity.[0] So yeah, powerful electric vehicles that enable you to continue to drive around like mad people while actually feeling smug about it is terrible for the environment. Buying non-powerful, non-oversized cars and using them a little bit (or a lot!) less is. We're much better of using the renewable electricity we manage to generate in other ways. [0] To elaborate, electric power makes up about 40% of the total energy budget of the US, transportation makes up about 28% (2008 figures).