Chevy Volt a Failure - GM to Layoff 1,300

A car runs out of gas. Which makes for the correct parallel, actually. If you bought a car and they told you the tank holds X gallons and the needle on the gas gauge showed a full tank, after driving 60 miles, you wouldn't expect the needle to be plummeting toward zero, and for the car ultimately not to be able to finish a trip that should be well within the range of a tank full of gas.

If what the Times writer wrote is correct, that is essentially what happened. Plus, this is not a 50 to 100 miles between fueling stations issue. They claim the car has a safe range of 260 miles (300 miles under "ideal" driving conditions). The fueling stations are 200 miles apart. They put in those fueling stations to make the point that their car could make that exact trip. If, the Times writer, took the trip he says he took (and the Times backed the story after Musk called their story "fake"), the car didn't come close to the promised range.

The biggest problem for Tesla -- if the Times writer is telling the truth -- is that he says he got to the Newark, Delaware charging station with half the car's juice left. He said it sat there on the high-speed charger for 49 minutes, and that it told him the car was fully charged and it showed a range left of 242 miles.

Take out the impracticality of having to stop for 50 minutes to charge your car in the middle of a trip (and that was only to supposedly replenish half the car's juice). If the writer had done something wrong in charging it, unless he is lying, how can this be?

 

The car the Times reporter drove was a $101,000 car (From his article) with all of its options, which included the 85 kWh battery that supposedly gives it its 265 mile range. The Model S STARTS at $61,000 and ranges up to more than $100,000. The $61,000 version doesn't have any added options, including the 265 mile range; it has a lower capacity battery.

 

Chelsea Sexton is a cheerleader for the EV industry. It is her life. I'd expect that kind of rationalization from her. She delivered. I don't blame her, but it isn't a very good argument.

There is a major difference between a cell phone and a hard-wired phone. Cell phones were adopted because they replaced hard-wired phones for people who used them. They give the same functionality, but don't tether you to one place.

Electric cars only stand a chance at adoption if they can do what internal combustion engine cars do, but offer some added benefit. Right now, what you get with an EV is a much higher price -- up front and over the life of the car when you factor in the cost of fuel versus electricity -- and all you get are limitations.

The reason the Times story got so much attention is that even on this deluxe EV model, what happened highlighted the limitations.

There may be a niche out there willing to spend $100,000 for a cool looking sports car with limited range to tool around with as a toy.

But for the vast majority of people, who own a car for transportation, for an EV to make sense, range limitations and a high price tag are a killer.