Tesla Model X

[coolfilmaker]

I think it's actually a completely justifiable feature. If you don't drive your roadster for a long time the fine is $40,000.

 

[Rokeby]

Q. Are all types of electric car batteries potential victims of total irreversible failure?
A. All batteries will eventually fail if left to drain slowly for many years, but bricking
is avoidable with a fail-safe provision that could sustain some level of charge for years.

Nissan said in a statement that the Leaf’s battery pack “will never discharge completely,
thanks to an advanced battery-management system designed to protect the battery
from damage.”

And, said a Nissan spokeswoman, Katherine Zachary, “Never means never.”

New York Times

 

[evnow]

I think it's actually a completely justifiable feature. If you don't drive your roadster for a long time the fine is $40,000.

You mean drain ?

Yes - even small stupid things can cost you a lot of money.

Think of keeping your heater switched off in winter when you take a long foreign vacation. If you are in a cold place, the pipes can break as the water solidifies causing extensive water damage to the house. Easily avoidable and yet costly. This is not a hypothetical example - it happenned to my brother-in-law a couple of winters back. They ended up with over $100k repair bill that home insurance refused to cover.

Infact small stupid things can cost a life.

People pretend that somehow life is extremely safe - and drive over 70 mph when talking on cell phones (or worse texting). Yet they want "others" to do the impossible and make life absolutely safe. I don't know how it is in other countries - but in the US we seem to specialize in this hypocracy.

 

[palmermd]

I think it's actually a completely justifiable feature. If you don't drive your roadster for a long time the fine is $40,000.

You mean drain ?

Yes - even small stupid things can cost you a lot of money.

Think of keeping your heater switched off in winter when you take a long foreign vacation. If you are in a cold place, the pipes can break as the water solidifies causing extensive water damage to the house. Easily avoidable and yet costly. This is not a hypothetical example - it happenned to my brother-in-law a couple of winters back. They ended up with over $100k repair bill that home insurance refused to cover.

Infact small stupid things can cost a life.

People pretend that somehow life is extremely safe - and drive over 70 mph when talking on cell phones (or worse texting). Yet they want "others" to do the impossible and make life absolutely safe. I don't know how it is in other countries - but in the US we seem to specialize in this hypocracy.

+1 spot on.

 

[derkraut]

I think it's actually a completely justifiable feature. If you don't drive your roadster for a long time the fine is $40,000.

You mean drain ?

Yes - even small stupid things can cost you a lot of money.

Think of keeping your heater switched off in winter when you take a long foreign vacation. If you are in a cold place, the pipes can break as the water solidifies causing extensive water damage to the house. Easily avoidable and yet costly. This is not a hypothetical example - it happenned to my brother-in-law a couple of winters back. They ended up with over $100k repair bill that home insurance refused to cover.

Infact small stupid things can cost a life.

People pretend that somehow life is extremely safe - and drive over 70 mph when talking on cell phones (or worse texting). Yet they want "others" to do the impossible and make life absolutely safe. I don't know how it is in other countries - but in the US we seem to specialize in this hypocracy.

+1 spot on.

+2 I agree 100%

 

[JPVLeaf]

The CA Energy Commission (CEC) gives $10 million to Tesla Motors, Inc. to purchase equipment
for the production of their all-electric Model X at the company's facility in Fremont, CA.

This is another step towards the eventual production of the Tesla Model X. I don't need a BEV SUV,
but I need Tesla to keep pumping out the vehicles so that they can continue their work on the
Gen III sedan. In the meantime, I'll be saving my 'gas money' pennies for that one.

http://www.energy.ca.gov/releases/2012_releases/2012-10-10_energy_commission_awards_nr.html

Energy Commission Awards More Than $20 Million
for Clean Transportation Projects
Funded Projects Will Put More Electric and Alternative-Fuel Vehicles on the Road
and Boost the Development of Vehicle Batteries

SACRAMENTO - Moving California closer to a clean energy transportation sector, the California Energy Commission today approved funding of more than $20 million for innovative transportation projects.

"These investments in clean vehicles will reduce petroleum use, improve air quality, and create jobs, while demonstrating California's commitment to a greener transportation future," said Energy Commissioner Carla Peterman.

These awards, totaling $20,093,718, are made through the Commission's Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program, created by Assembly Bill 118. For the current fiscal year, 2012-2013, the program is slated to invest approximately $90 million to encourage the development and use of new technologies and alternative and renewable fuels, with the goals of reducing petroleum dependence, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and improving air quality. The program is funded through a small surcharge on vehicle and boating registration and smog check fees.

The investments of public money through this AB 118 program are safeguarded by matching-fund requirements for awardees, and by making payments on a reimbursement basis.

The award recipients are:

Tesla Motors, Inc., will receive $10 million to purchase equipment for production of a new SUV/crossover vehicle, the all-electric Tesla Model X, at the company's facility in Fremont (Alameda County). Tesla is providing $50,200,000 in match funding for this project, which is expected to create more than 500 new manufacturing jobs in California. The project will leverage existing investments in Tesla's manufacturing and assembly line for the currently available Model S. As with the Model S platform on which it is based, Tesla expects the Model X to have a driving range of more than 250 miles on a single charge. It will be the first sport-utility crossover vehicle in California's electric vehicle market. To support this emerging plug-in electric vehicle market, the Energy Commission has invested more than $20 million to assist in the development of 5,000 charging stations statewide; and has awarded approximately $2 million to help local governments plan for more plug-in electric vehicles.

[text snipped]

 

[JPVLeaf]

And ...

Tesla Motors (NASDAQ: TSLA) Receives $10 Million
Grant to Fund Factory Expansion

http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/tesla-motors-nasdaq-tsla-receives-10-million/2679

By Brianna Panzica

Tesla Motors (NASDAQ: TSLA) lit up the market when it finally began deliveries of its Model S.

The long-awaited electric sedan was released in June to rave reviews. Starting at $49,900 after a $7,500 federal tax credit, the sedan comes with a broad range of options.

And even though the company has fallen behind on production—revising its estimated deliveries for this year from 5,000 down to 3,000 late last month—the hype surrounding it hasn't died down.

It's next project has been in the planning stages, but as the year draws to a close it comes closer to reality.

The Model X, its next generation of electric vehicles, is a sport-utility vehicle slated for debut in 2014.

The SUV is distinct for its “Falcon Wing” rear doors, which open upward and call to mind Doc Brown's DeLorean—albeit with a more sophisticated technology. Tesla boasts that with these doors, it's easy to get in and out of the vehicle in even the tightest of parking spots. As they say, “You easily step, not climb, into the Model X.”

And with the Model X, Telsa hopes to avoid the production shortfall that's occurring right now with the Model S.

The California Energy Commission (CEC) revealed this week that it is providing Tesla with a $10 million grant to expand its plant in Fremont, California.

The plant, which was acquired back in 2010, was previously owned by Toyota Motor Corp. (TYO: 7203) and General Motors (NYSE: GM). Though its production capacity is currently low, much of the plant is unused—it actually has an annual capacity of 500,000, which Tesla CEO Elon Musk hopes to take advantage of in the future.

This grant could help the company get there.

It was part of a $20 million round of “clean transportation” awards, given to companies that have shown innovation in the sector.

And this round is just part of the $90 million the state has set out for the fiscal year 2012-2013 for development in alternative and renewable fuels.

From the press release:

“These investments in clean vehicles will reduce petroleum use, improve air quality, and create jobs, while demonstrating California's commitment to a greener transportation future,” said Energy Commissioner Carla Peterman.

For Tesla, the grant will go toward making room at the plant for the Model X. Production of the next vehicle will create between 500 and 700 jobs, and the company hopes to work up to an annual production capacity of 20,000.

And, http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddwoo...10-million-to-build-the-model-x-electric-suv/

 

[scottf200]

This short video indicates the front and rear motors will be used for different purposes (gear ratios? size?)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5exluH4XUpc[/youtube]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5exluH4XUpc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[scottf200]

It took me some searching to find this height of the Model X (or guestimates). I was curious if it would fit in my garage (yes! - you know to replace my SUV and NOT my Volt). Perhaps I'm a bad searcher. Anyhow ...

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/7227-Model-X-Falcon-Doors/page24?p=111642&viewfull=1#post111642" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NigelM - Try this.....Assuming the Tesla webpage is to scale (and they would be pretty stupid if it isn't!) they show a Model S and a Model X side by side and we know they have stated that the Model S will be 56.5" high. Just some simple measuring and multiplying suggests that the Model X will have a maximum open doors height of 84.75" [7' 3/4"]:

The arrows and inches are [NigelM] additions to this pic!

 

[abasile]

Looking at that side-by-side photo ('S' and 'X'), my wife cracked up laughing. As I pointed out a year ago, Tesla's designers obviously didn't have snow in mind when designing those "falcon" doors. It's ridiculous that you'd have to clear snow and ice from the roof before being able to open the doors. If an AWD SUV isn't designed for snow country, that's a serious error. Don't get me wrong - I'd love to own an 'X'. But those doors are silly. My wife says, "Can you image pulling into the Trader Joe's parking lot and opening those doors?" She's still laughing at the potential spectacle.

 

[scottf200]

Looking at that side-by-side photo ('S' and 'X'), my wife cracked up laughing. As I pointed out a year ago, Tesla's designers obviously didn't have snow in mind when designing those "falcon" doors. It's ridiculous that you'd have to clear snow and ice from the roof before being able to open the doors. If an AWD SUV isn't designed for snow country, that's a serious error. Don't get me wrong - I'd love to own an 'X'. But those doors are silly. My wife says, "Can you image pulling into the Trader Joe's parking lot and opening those doors?" She's still laughing at the potential spectacle.

I clear the snow from the top edge of my SUV already because snow falls in. You could see from the Model S that you'd need to do that too. Not as big of deal as people are making it out to be IMHO. [aside: I've lived in MT, CO, and now IL so I get snow issues)

 

[GRA]

The thing I've always wondered about is does Tesla feel none of their potential customers kayak or canoe? You can put skis, bikes, short surfboards etc. on rear racks, but you're SOL for self-propelled non-inflatable boats unless you want to pull a trailer. I've always thought the Gull Wing doors (Tesla can call them Falcon doors all they want) were dumb on an SUV, even one with such limited range that you really don't want to put a lot of draggy gear on the roof.

 

[abasile]

I clear the snow from the top edge of my SUV already because snow falls in. You could see from the Model S that you'd need to do that too. Not as big of deal as people are making it out to be IMHO. [aside: I've lived in MT, CO, and now IL so I get snow issues)

Yes, I clear snow from the top edge of our LEAF as well, for the same reason. You'd definitely have to clear more from the roof of the taller 'X', though, and I'd also be concerned about those doors getting iced shut. The charge port door on our LEAF gets iced shut at times, but thankfully it's easy to access and I can use a card to knock the ice loose.

Given that the 'X' is expected to be the only AWD/4WD BEV on the market and should otherwise be an awesome vehicle, however, I imagine many folks will learn to work around those issues.

 

[Herm]

I'm sure they will end up using sliding doors, the first electric minivan

 

[scottf200]

The thing I've always wondered about is does Tesla feel none of their potential customers kayak or canoe? You can put skis, bikes, short surfboards etc. on rear racks, but you're SOL for self-propelled non-inflatable boats unless you want to pull a trailer.

This always get brought up but of the percentage of folks that seriously would consider a Model X ... what percentage of those genuinely are needing those racks (vs thinking the may someday). Pretty low I'd suspect. Probably a lot of "early adopters"/buyers that do NOT need the racks that could get a model year or two out the door. Racks would likely need to be detachable as well when not being used. Most information I've read indicate they make use loose a few MPGs (EV miles). Could be impactful depending on your travels. Look what they did to the door handles after all.

There have been entire articles on this topic as well: http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1072840_2014-tesla-model-x-falcon-doors-may-limit-crossover-utility" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is one cool CUV / Crossover Utility Vehicle as it is commonly thought of: https://www.google.com/search?q=Crossover+Utility+Vehicle+%22Model+X%22" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[GRA]

The thing I've always wondered about is does Tesla feel none of their potential customers kayak or canoe? You can put skis, bikes, short surfboards etc. on rear racks, but you're SOL for self-propelled non-inflatable boats unless you want to pull a trailer.

This always get brought up but of the percentage of folks that seriously would consider a Model X ... what percentage of those genuinely are needing those racks (vs thinking the may someday). Pretty low I'd suspect. Probably a lot of "early adopters"/buyers that do NOT need the racks that could get a model year or two out the door. Racks would likely need to be detachable as well when not being used. Most information I've read indicate they make use loose a few MPGs (EV miles). Could be impactful depending on your travels. Look what they did to the door handles after all.

You really don't want to get me started on the idiocy of those motorized door handles, suitable only for people who don't care if they have to pay $1,000 to repair/replace one. Talk about needless complication - if they wanted flush handles to reduce drag, car companies have been doing that for decades without needing to use motors.

As to what percentage of possible buyers might actually want to use a roof rack, judging by the number I see loaded on any given weekend in the Bay Area, I'd say it's a lot. To be sure, most of those are bikes or skis which can be carried on a rear rack, if you don't mind having to swing the thing out of your way every time you need rear access. But perhaps the Range Rover set is different, kind of like no one who buys one will ever likely make use of the Range Rover's ability to ford up to 36". Image is all.

 

[Zythryn]

You really don't want to get me started on the idiocy of those motorized door handles, suitable only for people who don't care if they have to pay $1,000 to repair/replace one. Talk about needless complication - if they wanted flush handles to reduce drag, car companies have been doing that for decades without needing to use motors.

Personally I love them and I have found them to work flawlessly (granted, I haven't owned the car for 10 years yet).

Many people have said the same thing about power windows, navigation, sunroofs, heck even automatics vs stick shifts.

 

[GRA]

You really don't want to get me started on the idiocy of those motorized door handles, suitable only for people who don't care if they have to pay $1,000 to repair/replace one. Talk about needless complication - if they wanted flush handles to reduce drag, car companies have been doing that for decades without needing to use motors.

Personally I love them and I have found them to work flawlessly (granted, I haven't owned the car for 10 years yet).

Many people have said the same thing about power windows, navigation, sunroofs, heck even automatics vs stick shifts.

Nav. is hardly a critical capability, but the others may be. My dad had some first gen power windows on his porthole ('48?) Buick convertible, which I think he said were part hydraulic. Whatever they were, they used to malfunction constantly. Although electric power windows are highly reliable now I'm still partial to manual windows, given some of the locations and climates I drive in and the fact that I often sleep in the car. Unfortunately, both of my Subies were only available with power windows.

Sunroofs same/same, although you can usually opt out of one (and I have; after owning my Datsun Roadster, a sunroof seems like a poor substitute not worth the cost or the potential leakage, malfunction and repair issues). The trade-offs for an automatic transmission versus a manual are known, they're convenient and allow virtually brain-dead one-handed driving, versus higher purchase and maintenance costs (assuming you aren't the sort of person to burn out a clutch every year) and AOTBE lower highway mileage, at least.

Edit: Fixed some text that got munged up somehow.

 

[Phoenix]

Yes, I detest power windows too. Unnecessary use of energy--you have to turn the car on to use it. You can't get it to open just right without moving the control several times up and down. It's much easier and simpler to just crank open a manual window!

Sure wish Tesla would produce their BlueStar before Model X which does not appeal to me. I much prefer a LEAF-size car but with Tesla's 150 miles or longer range. The Toyota (Tesla) EV RAV-4 already fits the SUV crowd.

 

[Zythryn]

...
Sure wish Tesla would produce their BlueStar before Model X which does not appeal to me. I much prefer a LEAF-size car but with Tesla's 150 miles or longer range. The Toyota (Tesla) EV RAV-4 already fits the SUV crowd.

I agree with you, would much rather see a smaller sedan first. However I understand why they aren't.
If the Leaf had the range we need (150 miles) we would be driving one of those instead of the S.
I expect we will start to see more BEVs in the 100-150 range over the next few years, but who knows.