2012 Tesla Model S: Coming In June, Projected 250-300 Miles At Highway Speeds
Nissan Leaf, Solar-Canopy Charging Station In New SIMS Game
The Nissan Leaf is no stranger to videogames. Last year, we had a little race between a Leaf and... Read More
- #6LEADERBOARD RANK
- 1818ARTICLES CONTRIBUTED
- 4COMMENTS POSTED
Related Photo Galleries
-
![Six 2012 Tesla Model S cars at "Get Amped" introductory drive event [photo: George Parrott]](http://static.hgmsites.net/images/cache/six-model-s-sedans-ready-for-test-drives_100398617_130x80.jpg "Tesla Model S 'Get Amped' Tour: 5,000 Test Drives In Sight")
Tesla Model S 'Get Amped' Tour: 5,000 Test...
-
2012 Tesla Model S: Seven Little Things A Buyer...
-
Buying A 2012 Tesla Model S: Pros & Cons Of...
See more photos »
Also See
-
2012 Tesla Model S: First Drive Video
-
Tesla Motors: Three New Stores Opening In North...
-
2012 Tesla Model S: Consumer Reports Joins...
See more video »
Tesla motors has announced that it is on schedule to deliver the first examples of its Model S electric sedan by June.
The company is also set to use all of its $465 million Department of Energy loan within the next six months, though Elon Musk says Tesla is still on target to turn a profit in 2013.
The next few years will be all about the hotly-anticipated Model S, as Tesla plans to sell 5,000 units of the $70,000 electric sedan. The first cars will be delivered in June, a month ahead of schedule, and Detroit News reports that Tesla expects the S to achieve a full five-star crash test rating from the NHTSA.
Tesla is releasing more details on the S all the time, and though the first customers will get to drive their cars before the motoring press is able to test the car, the company has set high standards for its performance and efficiency.
With the 85 kWh battery pack, Tesla has drawn up graphs showing the expected range at different speeds. The outlook is more positive than before, with as much as 200 miles still possible at a constant 80 mph on the freeway, almost 250 miles at 70 mph and over 300 miles at 55 mph. Using the new EPA 5-cycle test, the Model S should achieve a 265-mile range.
Hypermilers might manage even more, and Tesla suspects that a range of over 400 miles is possible. The company hasn't verified that claim, but is promising a special prize for the first owner to travel more than 400 miles on a charge.
Tesla also reveals that despite being heavier, larger and more practical than the Tesla Roadster, the Model S uses only 10 percent more energy at a constant speed, no doubt due in part to the incredibly low drag coefficient of 0.24--the best of any car in the luxury sedan market.
Tesla goes into more detail, suggesting that in very hot or cold climates and using the car's climate control, you could expect between 10-15 percent reduction in range at 55 mph.
Naturally, not all Tesla Model S owners will benefit from the same long range, as smaller battery pack options will be available--but for those who choose the top pack, the range should match many internal combustion vehicles.
Meanwhile, Tesla has confirmed it has also started delivering components for Toyota's RAV4 EV ahead of schedule. Toyota plans to sell 2,600 RAV4 EVs over the next three years, and Musk says the Toyota's city range will top 170 miles.
+++++++++++
Follow GreenCarReports on Facebook and Twitter.
Related Articles
-
Tesla Supercharger Coming To Midwest Too, Not Just Coasts
-
Tesla Repays $465-Million DoE Loan, Chrysler Bites Back At Claim
-
Audi Startled By Tesla Sales Success? Deleted Press Release Seems To Say So
-
![Elon Musk signs new 2013 Tesla Model S at Tesla Store opening, Austin, Texas [photo: John Griswell]](http://static.hgmsites.net/images/cache/elon-musk-signs-new-2013-tesla-model-s-at-tesla-store-opening-austin-texas-photo-john-griswell_100421929_130x80.jpg "Can Tesla Raise More Than $1 Billion On Soaring Stock Price?")
Can Tesla Raise More Than $1 Billion On Soaring Stock Price?
-
![Tesla owners & supporters gather in Statehouse in Austin to support company [photo: John Griswell]](http://static.hgmsites.net/images/cache/tesla-owners-supporters-gather-in-statehouse-in-austin-to-support-company-photo-john-griswell_100424739_130x80.jpg "North Carolina Wants To Make It Illegal For Tesla To E-Mail Customers")
North Carolina Wants To Make It Illegal For Tesla To E-Mail Customers
-
Follow Us
On Facebook
Most Popular This Week
More »
Audi Startled By Tesla Sales Success? Deleted Press Release... 
Can Tesla Raise More Than $1 Billion On Soaring Stock Price? 
Four Used Plug-In Electric Cars To Avoid 
How Are Electric-Car Batteries Made? Photos From Nissan's New... 
Toyota Accelerates Switch To Lithium-Ion Batteries, Still Lags... Find Green Cars
Photo Galleries
More from High Gear Media
- Follow Us
Have an opinion?
It's everything the electric car world needs: Style, performance, range, and relative affordability.
If & when the Fremont factory starts producing thousands of Model S cars, with customers buying and driving them, we'll report it. I hope it happens; it will be good for the industry (and GCR's traffic, LOL).
But please don't assume that because I report the challenges facing Tesla that I'm hostile to the company. I'm not. It's a brutally tough industry and it's my job to present context around events. Would you really prefer I were an uncritical fanboi ???
Antony's article is written in a flat neutral tone. Does that make it bad for not providing the "brutally tough industry" contextual side of the story, or make him a fanboi because he seems to be rolling out Tesla's media message? Don't think so.
Then again, what is the measure of success? I guess I feel very positive about Tesla because I don't expect them to sell vast quantities of vehicles. So I won't be disappointed if they don't. I am only looking to see them deliver on their promises will minimal quality problems.
Anyway, I don't really see Voelcker as being Anti-Tesla. But his articles are usual not as neutrally written as this one. Don't know if that is good or bad.
In June (instead of July), the Fremont factory will start producing tens of Model S, not thousands. So I'm not sure if you are going to report that. However indications are that many of the >10,000 reservation holders plan on actually driving them. ;)
(Initial conversion rate to orders, if that is the correct term, very high.)
The ramp-up to higher volumes will be later this year, and Tesla just re-iterated that the plan is still to produce 5,000 *this year*, and by then end of the year, to have increased the production capacity to a rate of 20,000 annually.
Where does the "If" come from?
That was a rhetorical Q, right?
Again: Where does the "if" come from? Are you just making that up because new companies don't have your respect?
The analysts and journalists present debated energetically as to whether the factory could be ready to produce cars in volume within 9 months. We will see.
The definition of "production" varies. Tesla will build very slowly at first to ensure quality issues are rectified. I suspect 5,000 cars by Dec 31 is at the upper end of likely, but it's possible.
I increasingly believe that the Model S will go into production sometime this year. Tesla faces huge uphill battles in general. [cont'd]
While Fisker and Tesla are two very different companies, the problems Fisker has had (some self-inflicted) in getting the Karma into production reflect some of the challenges and realities of the auto indsutry: It's very expensive, very complex, very regulated, and everything has to go right just to get the car out the door. I think Tesla's learned a lot from the Roadster experience, but any startup automaker has to be viewed with great skepticism until it has 10 years of success (meaning profits) under its belt. [cont'd]
"Here's a little quiz to point out the enormous odds Tesla faces. Name me the last car company founded from scratch in the U.S. by entrepreneurs (before 2000) whose brand survives today."
Thus far, it doesn't appear he's responded to that Q. Would you care to? (It will help if you then cite the reasons you think Tesla will break that pattern.)
The question of the company's long-term survival is a different one. Tesla has successfully produced products advancing the state of art, and these products were very well received (though the Roadster had initial problems which however had their own history). Its products have been used by Daimler for some time, and Tesla now signed a much larger agreement with Daimler. It is also starting to produce for Toyota.
These are serious companies, who are selective in their choice of business partners.[cont'd]
While he does like to mention things before they are official and final, in my mind that goes with the nature of his companies and their intrinsic long-term goals, which are not just innovative, but *based* (and depending) on innovation in essence. Only reporting about things after they turned into hard facts, would not only be so yesterday, but also in *contradiction* to what actually happens.
In any case, to me his reporting of facts about Tesla, is orders of magnitudes more accurate, and of higher quality, than that of those who criticize him in this regard.
But to stress the point: NO other car brand has been founded more recently in the States from scratch by entrepreneurs (as Tesla was) and survived. It has been 88 years since that has happened.
Will it happen for Tesla? Possibly. But the odds are long.
As the head of a publicly traded company, Musk has a clear legal and fiduciary responsibility not only to be accurate & factual but also to withhold certain info & not comment on various things.
He's getting better at that compared to early days. But Tesla still burns through Communications staff at a disturbing pace higher than any other maker. I surmise the challenges of dealing with Musk and his fallout may be part of the reason.
For many many years, a fan of the idea of solar powered electric cars. I think I saw a report or so on the EV1, and to me it looked Hollywood-ish (fictional). Once I saw the concept for the Model S, I think 2009, I had the feeling that this going to be it. The real thing.
I enjoy the reports about people having fun with the Roadster, but somehow it isn't really my thing. But also like Tesla's future plans. Then followed events more closely, and a little more than a year ago bought stocks, and more recently made a Model S reservation. In other words, if there is something wrong, I'd like to know ! [cont'd]
Not. A. Thing.
While Tesla has a fairly good track record, past performance does not guaranty future performance, as they say.
Besides, Voelcker didn't just say "if" he said "if & when" which shows more confidence than just "if".
For me, I would say "which fingers cross, when Tesla starts shipping next month..."
Let's all hope it is "on time and on quality"
that term is used to describe a car that a car company puts out so as to qualify for some minimum percentages.
tesla and coda only produce evs. irregardless of how many they sell, they certainly are not compliance cars.
As for my role, it's to report on *AND add context around* news in fuel efficiency, alternate fuels, hybrids, diesels, plug-in cars, and the rest, as a journalist schooled in how the auto industry actually works (rather than how some people would like it to work).
This article from a couple of months ago is probably relevant here:
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1073906_on-bad-electric-car-news-a-note-to-our-valued-readers
I very specifically stated the Model S was *NOT* a compliance car. Is it possible that your view of my coverage as negative could skew your reading of what I write about Tesla?
That is, of course, your privilege. I don't mind being criticized (it's part of the job), but I'd prefer the critiques to be based on what I actually write.
And I'd say the same thing about any other production car. The 2012 Honda Civic proved to be a disappointment, the 2012 Chevrolet Sonic was unexpectedly good, and so forth. You CANNOT assess a car until it's in production.
If you have concluded the Model S is *already* a competitive, viable, desirable vehicle that will sell in the tens of thousands--despite being a startup's first volume product--more power to you.
It would be irresponsible of me to do so until I see the car.
But Tesla may be difficult to get into that frame because it only makes electric cars.
Voelcker makes this point clear with ...
"The first round of requirements applies only to the carmakers with the highest California sales. In order, they are: Toyota, Honda, GM, Ford, Nissan, and Chrysler."
So Tesla cannot fall into the Compliance Car category because John has already put it outside of that frame.
The only way Tesla can work the compliance car angle is to sell its EV "credits" to another company which it has done once already with Honda (I believe).
One article stands out.
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1067021_2012-tesla-model-s-electric-sedan-industry-analyst-weighs-in
On the one hand, some of the questions seem very negative (like, is the Model S "real." and will Tesla survive).
On the other hand, the IHS analyst answers are very revealing. The analyst seems to have an improving opinion of Tesla, but is still very skeptical that the model S will sell the kinds of volume that Musk is talking about. 30,000 per year, seems difficult at these price points.
The well-respected analyst does not seem to know that the question about a possible volume of 30,000 is misleading, as the targeted annual capacity is 20,000 for the Model S in 2013.
Bragman does not appear to know, that there is a reservation list of over 10,000 (at least close to that in March already), an obvious argument in favor of sales. Given that the cost of reservations is $5k, a higher conversion rate is expected (by many), than that for the Leaf's $99 reservations. [cont'd]
Tesla has said numerous times it plans to produce up to 30,000 vehicles in the Fremont plant starting in 2013. That obviously includes the Model X as well as Model S... [cont'd]
He acknowledges that Tesla prefers to compare the Model S to cars like the BMW 5-series (MSRP $46,900 - $68,300), but claims "the most popular vehicles in that segment only sell a few tens of thousands themselves". However, production of 5-series in 2010 was ... 211,968. More than a "few thousands".
FYI, production of BMW 7-series (MSRP: $71,000 - $137,300) in 2010 was 65,814. (Even at that price level.)
Bragman would likely have been aware of Tesla's claims for its reservation list at the time he made his statement. I think you're right about the Model S having a higher conversion rate than the Leaf's (50% or so, yes?) but OTOH, look at what happened to Fisker, where it appears some substantial number of owners are not following through on their reservations.
Once more, for the record, my role is to provide context around the enormous challenges Tesla faces. Your role as a Tesla shareholder and general believer will differ. I've enjoyed our interchange in any case, and appreciate the link you provided.
I'm not aware of any legal definition of the term "base price". How about "starting price"? Or "base price minus likely tax credit"? I did say "likely".
It is correct that not everyone can claim the tax credit (only someone who pays as much tax, hence the name tax credit). However it is my understanding that once you made sure that it does apply, you can reduce the estimated tax payments and therefore have the benefits very soon, if you want.
In forum discussions, I see that the large majority of people who understand the situation very well, consider the tax credit an actual reduction of the price, and the use this reduced price to compare the purchase against ICE prices. That is also the purpose. [cont'd]
The Model X was mentioned, but the question (2) in that article was about "Model S" specifically. In 2013, only a small number of Model X will be produced. (See mentioned source), and the mentioned numbers for Model S have always been 20,000.
However my main point is that the BMW 5-series, which is comparable in its price segment especially if one admits gas savings (and a possible monetary value of HOV lane access of a few thousand $), has a production volume of about 210,000, and BMW 7-series, the next segment, has about 65,000
With that, I thank you for the discussion. :)
The Model S has a hi mileage tire/wheel combo for the 300 mile pack version which Tesla claims has added 20 miles of range, making them 320 mile packs. Hypermilers should have absolutely no problems obtaining 400 miles with those tires and wheels. The range per kWhr at speed is way better than what the roadster could do, whose speed/range performance has been illustrated for more than a year now. Tesla is so far ahead of everyone else it's
laughable. A 400 mile single charge performance headline would garner more positive PR for electric cars than everything every other automaker has done up to this point. It would be HUGE. HUGE.
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1075962_2012-toyota-rav4-ev-electric-suv-fewer-than-1000-a-year
The range of the RAV4 EV will not be 170 miles as you state, but roughly 100 miles according to Toyota, and the EPA rating may be up to 30 percent lower--though we'll see.
I specifically asked both Toyota and Tesla product guys on the RAV4 EV, and they resolutely declined to provide any estimates of the EPA range rating. Perhaps it was cited in some other source I missed, but I'd like to know where it came from.
If the product guys didn't tell you, then it probably wasn't an official and final announcement yet. And it didn't sound like one. If you'd like to know nevertheless, I'll just say you'd have heard the number "105" if you were interested in staying up-to-date about what happens at Tesla. Hint: Q&A. It's a bit between the lines. You might argue the meaning of "expected" is a bit stretched on my side.
But, yeah, I'm not aware that Toyota will comment and EPA range numbers not out yet, so as far as I'm concerned, it's not yet determined.
Tesla's website -> About Tesla -> Investors -> Events and Presentations (-> Archived Events) -> May 9th Q&A. (Audio webcast).
In case you care enough.
The RAV-4 battery pack is 42 KWH which is much larger than the 24 KWH in the LEAF which should result in better range. However, the RAV4 is a little larger and that may cut into the range a little bit. Overall, I would expect the RAV4 to have better range than the LEAF, but not dramatically more. But we can hope...
If in fact Toyota gets the car over a 100-mile rating, though, I think that'll be a big selling point. Too bad they'll only ever make 2,600 RAV4 EVs.
See our article on compliance cars, of which that car is one (and which kicked off this whole long thread, chuckle):
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1068832_electric-cars-some-are-real-most-are-only-compliance-cars--we-name-names
I don't for a moment believe Toyota will build more than the legally necessary 2,600 RAV4 EVs from 2012 to 2014. Advocates are already trying to help them sell the entire allotment in Year One, but Toyota *did not want* to build this car.
It believes the future for ZEVs in the hydrogen fuel cell vehicle it will launch in 2015. *Tesla* may say it may sell more packs to Toyota. We'll see.
it is an expensive car for the well to do. it plays almost no role in the ev industry, in terms of it making evs popular to the masses.
Its role is far more important than its numbers suggest too. If it succeeds, it'll be a huge image car for the EV industry - one that proves an EV can compete on even terms with internal combustion vehicles.
i simply dont think so. it needs to be a car that the average joe can buy, for it to play a significant role as an "image car".
the only advertising necessary is people driving them.
the way people drive them, is for them to purchase the ev.
and of course, the way to make purchases is to make them affordable to the masses.
at the moment, the supply is limited enough, such that the price is high, cuz they still have demand.
as the supply increases, the price will need to decrease in order to sell.
And as Elon is repeating over and over again, the Model S is only a step in between the high prices, very low volume roadster and the low priced, high volume gen-3 car "bluestar", which even the average american joe should be able to afford.
So please give Tesla a bit more time to show, that they can actually deliver what they are promising now.
The Model S may play a similar role by making it clear that it is possible to make a modern electric car that is great looking, very efficient, with good storage room. I suspect it is already impacting the thinking of auto designers around the world in the way that it wouldn't if it was a more affordable econobox EV.
EV Enthusiast - I fear you misunderstand the concept of an "image car" if you think it needs to be affordable to meet the criteria. Unless Ferrari, Lamborghini et al have been doing something wrong all these years. If only they'd been producing small hatchbacks, perhaps they'd have a better image?...
It would be stupid to name such a number to their investors, when they don't think its realistic, and I don't think they're stupid...
no way can there be enough teslas sold to create a market for electrical parts.
tesla is part of the "rich and famous" segment. i have no interest in it, because that segment will do nothing to solve world problems.
the rich and famous segment and the regular joe segment do not interact with any significance.
the regular joe will know as much about the tesla as i do about yachts - nothing, cuz it is useless info for us.
gm and toyota are not gonna do anything to help the ev market along. nissan is. i dont know about ford. coda is a small player. hopefully we will get more contenders in the average joe market.
the faster we build up supply, the faster prices will drop, the faster we get people driving them.
if something is within his reach, he will want to know more about it. and as evs are sold, it will become more and more likely that the average joe will know another average joe who is already driving an ev.
that is why the snowball starts off slowly, but is building up on more of an exponential basis.
i have said this before, but it bears repeating - if the bigwigs really want to sell evs to the masses, it will be done.
gm and toyota would be tickled pink if evs went in the tank. when they get involved, it will only be because they have no choice.
a lot of companies are talking about ev models, but is it just talk ? the next few years will tell.
the leaf and coda are at least directed in that way.
look at how many bugs were sold (in its heyday). and compare that to the number of cadilacs.
if they wanted to completely change over to evs, you would be amazed at how quickly battery technology would "improve", and prices fall.
it is real obvious that gm and toyota do not want this change to occur. nissan does.
i certainly agree with your last statement.
you know i dont like tesla - 100% because of its lying ceo.
however, if they add an additional car to their inventory that the average joe can buy, it is helpful towards that overall picture.
the mid-sized luxury cars are never gonna be plentiful enough that it would make any real inroads when compared to the overall car ownership.
i want evs to take over. this will only occur down at the average joe arena. if we get that arena, all other arenas are moot. if we dont get that arena, all other arenas are moot.
at the moment, even the leafs and codas are being sold to the upper middle class. but it is in the correct market.
if we get that supply up, prices will come down, and we will gradually reach the entire middle class.
dont know what you mean by "image car". but it is not relevant.
the average joe couldnt care less about lamborghinis, and it had nothing to do with him buying a chevy or a ford, or a toyota, etc.
and the tesla wont have anything to do with the average joe buying a leaf, a coda, a focus, etc.
people listen to their friends and acquaintances. those friends and acquaintances are not gonna be owning lamborghinis or teslas.
if you want to spread the "image" of evs, you do so by getting them in the hands of the average joe.
i have told you guys before, but i will tell you again - you are making the mistake of thinking that the average joe has the same mindset as you guys here on this ev forum.
no one here likes the looks of the coda, cuz it looks like cars from 15 years ago, so i am told.
well 15 years ago, that style was probably the top banana.
ever hear of fashion ? it changes faster than one changes his underwear.
i own a 2004 hyundai xgl. i have gotten a lot of nice comments about how my car looks. and when i look at it now, it looks somewhat similar to the coda sedan.
i dont want a "fancy" looking car. i tend to like simplicity.
the coda appeals to me much more than the leaf, visually.
however, looks are way, way down the list for me.
getting rid of our oil wars, the oil stranglehold upon us all, the pollution, etc. etc.
these are the truly important things. so i make a long sigh when i hear comments about how sexy a car looks.
to me, that is ridiculously immature.
Stop picking on Voelcker. He's a good man.
That's why it matters.
Have an opinion?Join the conversation!