×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Consumer Reports Says Tesla Model S Is Best Overall Vehicle

Soulskill posted about 10 months ago | from the opinionmaker-has-opinion dept.

Transportation 318

cartechboy writes "When one thinks of Consumer Reports, refrigerator ratings and car seat reviews usually come to mind, but the organization actually reviews cars too. In fact, it just released a new round of top vehicle picks and it said the Tesla Model S is is the Best Overall Car you can buy. It's unusual, to say the least, for an outlet that typically names a Toyota or Lexus to choose an electric car that costs nearly $100,000 in most popular configurations from a Silicon Valley upstart. Interestingly, the Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car. Isn't the Model S green? But I digress. A company that many thought would be bankrupt and closed by now has produced a brand-new electric car from scratch that Consumer Reports feels is the best car it's actually tested since 2007."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Film at 11! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339573)

$100K car is better than a bunch of $20-30K cars.

Re:Film at 11! (2, Insightful)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | about 10 months ago | (#46339655)

To be fair, you could spend $100k on a Merc or a BMW and get something that looks like a $40k Merc or BMW but is less reliable.

Re:Film at 11! (5, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | about 10 months ago | (#46339867)

Or you could spend three times that on a Bentley and have a reupholstered Volkswagen Phaeton that delivers all the mileage of a 1980s pickup truck (and is also less reliable).

Over priced as the Model S is, that price is going no where but down, and range is going to go up. [discovery.com]

Re:Film at 11! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46340133)

Reliability is not tied to initial price. BMW's and AMG's are in the shop just as much as any other car and their average bill on exiting the shop is about 2x-3x higher. Even for things like bulb changes, brakes, belt changes, plugs, wires, alignments, shocks, struts, batteries, fluids etc. All of those are routine wear items that every car has to have done regardless of who made it and how much it initially cost.

Re:Film at 11! (2)

Moheeheeko (1682914) | about 10 months ago | (#46340017)

then why isnt the Bugatti Veyron #1 on the list at ~2 million dollars?

Re:Film at 11! (2, Interesting)

macpacheco (1764378) | about 10 months ago | (#46340217)

Because more expensive doesn't mean better.
The Tesla Model S isn't better because it costs more, it's better because it's better.
An electric car with a powerful motor gets awesome acceleration, yet a quiet ride.
But its the car's electronics are better than any other car out there.
Plus a hundred grand is a lot of money, but its a number that doesn't require to be a 1% to be able to afford it, it's like a 10% or 15% richest person car.
The cheapest one at less than 60 grand after credits are affordable to maybe the top quarter of the US population.
Musk was right, EVs will be the best cars from now on.

Required South Park Reference (2, Funny)

Virtucon (127420) | about 10 months ago | (#46339579)

"f you wanna live, you'd better step on the gas! Oh wait, is this a Tesla? Shit! Well press on the prissy pedal!" - Cartman

last rite to remain silent collapsing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339595)

keep it to ourselves? people will talk, always happens

Scam (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339607)

Le Car, anyone?

And for that matter, Nobel Peace Prize, anyone?

Re:Scam (2)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about 10 months ago | (#46340035)

You're talking about a scam in a Tesla article and mention Le Car and the Nobel Peace Prize? Do you know what the definition of a scam is?

This is old news (0)

pudding7 (584715) | about 10 months ago | (#46339617)

This was a big deal when it was announced, almost a year ago.

Re:This is old news (4, Insightful)

DogDude (805747) | about 10 months ago | (#46339789)

It's a big deal because a year later, lots of people STILL think it's the best car on the market.

Um, so CR is biased? (0)

gwstuff (2067112) | about 10 months ago | (#46339627)

And the submitter isn't

"choose an electric car that costs nearly $100,000"

$89,500 is nearly $100,000.

Re:Um, so CR is biased? (-1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 10 months ago | (#46339699)

And the submitter isn't

"choose an electric car that costs nearly $100,000"

$89,500 is nearly $100,000.

Hmm ... $9,000 is nearly $10,000 .. $10,000 is nearly $11,000 .. etc etc etc .. $89,500 is nearly $100,000 .. etc etc etc .. $2,700,000,000,000 is nearly $3,000,000,000,000 ..

I think I'm beginning to see how government thinks.

By the reverse logic you could rationalize there's almost no impact to your budget to buy one. I'm seeing dozens of these things zipping around, and they really do sneak up on you on the road, with no air compressor, exhaust or squealy belts to give them away. People actually seem to like them.

Re:Um, so CR is biased? (2)

garyebickford (222422) | about 10 months ago | (#46340099)

Home version:
"It was on sale for 50% off, so I was able to buy it with the money I saved!"

Silicon Valley version:
"We lose $40 on each one but we make it up in volume!"
(see Osborne Computer [wikipedia.org] )

Re: Um, so CR is biased? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339879)

You lost me at Um.

Re:Um, so CR is biased? (1)

macpacheco (1764378) | about 10 months ago | (#46340223)

The cheapest Tesla can be had after credits for about 60 grand. It's just that most people don't want the small 40kWh (software limited 60kWh) battery.

Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339665)

Hybrid cars are actually greener than electric ones. It has to do with manufacturing costs and the fact that electric cars are no greener than what the energy company uses to generate and transport electricity.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car. (1)

meustrus (1588597) | about 10 months ago | (#46339703)

Correction: Hybrid cars can be greener than electric ones. I'm sure you didn't mean to lump the hybrid SUVs in when you blanket claimed all hybrids were greener than all electrics. Especially since technically a golf cart should also count as an electric car (or at least could be retrofitted into one) and that would definitely be greener, if a bit less refined than a Tesla.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car. (1)

cbhacking (979169) | about 10 months ago | (#46339767)

I wanted to read TFA (no, I'm not new here) to see if they said anything about that... but apparently CR can't take a slashdotting? Lame.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car. (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 10 months ago | (#46339901)

CR is paywalled. Have to subscribe to read the full report.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339817)

Your typical power station is much more efficient in converting fossil fuels into electricity than a typical ICE is at converting fossil fuels into kinetic energy.

Coal Power: 40-45% efficient
Natural Gas Power: 50-60% efficient

ICE: 25-30% efficient

Even with transmission loss, you are still ahead of the efficiency game compared to an ICE.

Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46340073)

Yes, but then how green are the batteries in your all electric vehicle? Ah.

Another Tesla story? (0, Troll)

Experiment 626 (698257) | about 10 months ago | (#46339679)

Wow, we haven't had one of those since yesterday. It's great that Slashdot has car stories, but when most of them are slashvertising the same car over and over, and the rest ignore anything that isn't EV / Hybrid / Autonomous it gets pretty boring and repetitive.

Re:Another Tesla story? (4, Insightful)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 10 months ago | (#46339725)

Where are the other cars with interesting technology? Having stories for run of the mill ICE cars would be a mistake. But geeks do tend to be interested in EVs and AVs.

Re:Another Tesla story? (1)

Experiment 626 (698257) | about 10 months ago | (#46339829)

I have to disagree with you there. The Hennessey Venom GT's 270.49 mph run on the space shuttle landing strip was a far more interesting technological accomplishment than this, and completely ignored by the Slashdot editors. Why should a car somehow count as "interesting technology" because electricity makes it go? So what, golf carts can do that.

Re:Another Tesla story? (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 10 months ago | (#46339877)

The Hennessey Venom GT's 270.49 mph run on the space shuttle landing strip was a far more interesting technological accomplishment than this, and completely ignored by the Slashdot editors.

It might be interesting for gear-heads. It's not interesting for geeks. Perhaps you're on the wrong site.

Why should a car somehow count as "interesting technology" because electricity makes it go? So what, golf carts can do that.

And if golf carts were new, they'd be interesting too.

Re:Another Tesla story? (1)

Experiment 626 (698257) | about 10 months ago | (#46340097)

I get the Slashdot love for autonomous cars. Running off of computer, pushing the limits of AI, society having to come to terms with legal and liability issues raised by new technology. Good stuff.

But why should running off of electricity somehow make a car interesting? Because it's "new"? No, people have experimented with electric cars since the 19th century, the main difference now is we have batteries that make it semi-practical. Because storing power in a battery gives it something in common with geeky devices like laptops and tablets? Because some geeks also happen to be into environmental causes? Seriously, what is so exciting about this car that it gets so many Slashdot stories?

Re:Another Tesla story? (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 10 months ago | (#46340237)

I get the Slashdot love for autonomous cars. Running off of computer, pushing the limits of AI, society having to come to terms with legal and liability issues raised by new technology. Good stuff.

But why should running off of electricity somehow make a car interesting? Because it's "new"? No, people have experimented with electric cars since the 19th century, the main difference now is we have batteries that make it semi-practical. Because storing power in a battery gives it something in common with geeky devices like laptops and tablets? Because some geeks also happen to be into environmental causes? Seriously, what is so exciting about this car that it gets so many Slashdot stories?

It isn't that it runs off of electricity -- it's that it does it in a way that is comparable with an ICE vehicle, combined with the development strategy that Musk uses at the company, plus the fact that this is an OTA reprogrammable software-controlled drive-by-wire vehicle.

Basically, there's a lot of nerdy stuff going on here, and nerds are interested in how it turns out. If this were done in an ICE vehicle, there'd probably also be a significant amount of interest -- but all the traditional manufacturers tend to stick to traditional design, manufacturing, and development methods (we even had a slashdot article on this exact issue not too long ago). Batteries? They're really not what all the hoopla is about. Nerds are fascinated by design and implementation, not by batteries.

As for your last question... Nissan is apparently asking the same question :) I hope they find the answer, as it would be great to have competition in the "let's do things in a new way" department.

Think of it as Indy music vs the RIAA, but swap Tesla in for the Indy producer and the MV conglomerate for the RIAA. Same story, different industry. So far though, the MV industry seems to be getting it, even if they're moving slowly. Probably due to the fact that our lives are on the line in their industry.

Re:Another Tesla story? (1)

gutnor (872759) | about 10 months ago | (#46340273)

Because of Musk. Geeks have also a thing for famous people voyeurism, just not regular star or singer.

Re: Another Tesla story? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339883)

'Car with huge enginegoes faster' is interesting? 'Production car (sort of) (almost) sets new speed record' is interesting? No, thanks.

Re:Another Tesla story? (1)

div_2n (525075) | about 10 months ago | (#46339949)

We haven't had any major technological investments in propulsion of any type for a long time now, so going by your criteria we haven't had anything interesting happen in about 40 or 50 years now related to vehicular transportation.

Re:Another Tesla story? (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about 10 months ago | (#46340081)

I'd argue that the new electronic (no mechanical link) steering and ability of the car to drive itself under certain conditions make the Infinity Q50 worthy of a mention. It's at least as geeky cool as coupling a battery to an electric motor.

Re:Another Tesla story? (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 10 months ago | (#46340277)

I'm not sure how many people are interested in the electric motor in the Tesla; I'm not. I'm more interested in their development methodology and their software/hardware interface.

That said, the Q50 is indeed worthy of a mention -- why not submit a few articles about it? After all, that's what gets Tesla mentioned -- people find it interesting enough to submit articles until a few of them stick to the front page.

Re:Another Tesla story? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46340121)

Where are the other cars with interesting technology?

Well let's see. From this current season of Top Gear, they've already reviewed the McLaren P1, and are due to put it against the Porsche 918 Spyder (and Porsche already have the 997 GT3 R Hybrid).

In terms of "interesting technology" the McLaren contains technology developed directly from the Formula 1 KERS systems, which is pretty damn interesting in itself.

Of course neither McLaren or Porsche are called "Tesla" so Slashdot never report them. Because "muh tesla", or whatever.

Re:Another Tesla story? (1)

meustrus (1588597) | about 10 months ago | (#46339757)

Are you saying that boring cars that aren't EV / Hybrid / Autonomous are really that interested to the "news for nerds" crowd? For that matter, what about Ford F-150 story [slashdot.org] ? That's definitely not EV / Hybrid / Autonomous, unless you count the little spies built into the vehicle [slashdot.org] . But go ahead. You were busy trying to downplay the newsworthiness of a vehicle which manages to impress everybody despite a sizable contingent devoted to grinding all EVs into dust.

Re:Another Tesla story? (1)

steelfood (895457) | about 10 months ago | (#46340205)

Because in terms of geeky, nerdy topics of discourse, Tesla Model S pretty much is the perfect trifecta: environmentally clean, advanced (computer) technology, and cars. The only thing that's anywhere near as close is Google's autonomous car, but that only hits two of the three, and doesn't have nearly as much going on around it as the Model S currently does.

Oh yeah, Tesla is also something of an underdog, taking on Big Auto and Big Oil at the same time.

"Green" (4, Interesting)

jxander (2605655) | about 10 months ago | (#46339681)

Interestingly, the Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car. Isn't the Model S green? But I digress

Because the Prius is completely ordinary (or even sub par) in every aspect EXCEPT for it's "green" profile.

The Tesla S is a genuinely great car. From power to handling to in vehicle infotainment systems, everything in the Model S is top notch.

That might be related to the price tag of a Model S being about triple that of the Prius, but hey, you get what you pay for.

Re:"Green" (-1, Flamebait)

chelunick (3421509) | about 10 months ago | (#46339777)

Ummm I drove the model S several times and it's handling isn't top notch, it is slack , vague and inert and gives no actual feel of the road your wheels are on. It is very deceptive. The car is also too low, prone to scrapes and bottom slappers and try driving it up hill and it will empty those batteries in very little time. The ride is also too flat. It's comfortable but again, deceptive and gives of surreal feeling of insecurity. The Model S is far from being a genuinely great car. It is hardly a car to start with, it's just an expensive gadget. Many people praise the car, and then drive home in something else and I am willing to bet so did the editor from CR. It is rather surprising , though, how popular the thing is here on /. It's like someone gets paid to advertise Tesla here.

Re:"Green" (1)

icebike (68054) | about 10 months ago | (#46339899)

Wow, just about every professional reviewer disagrees with you.
But hey, haters going to hate.

Re:"Green" (3, Interesting)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 10 months ago | (#46339913)

A poster who's made almost no posts except anti-Tesla posts. Someone has an axe to grind. Probably an employee of another car company.

Re: "Green" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339921)

I wanted to read and appreciate everything you had to say - but when you start a sentence with "Ummm" it just makes you seem kinda dopey. Like someone standing out in front of the building smoking a cigarette, even though it's going to kill you. Sorry.

Re:"Green" (1)

Narcocide (102829) | about 10 months ago | (#46339927)

"slack/vague" or "inert/flat"

pick one.

Re:"Green" (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339993)

It is slack , vague and inert and gives no actual feel. It is very deceptive. It is also too low, prone to scrapes and bottom slappers. It is also too flat. It's comfortable but again, deceptive and gives of surreal feeling of insecurity.

Spoken like a true audiophile. I couldn't tell if you were talking about a $30,000 preamp or $75,000 speakers

Re:"Green" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46340157)

If he were a true audiophile, that would have been a reference to a cable not "tuned" for digital signals or a codec operating at 240 kbps instead of 320.

Re:"Green" (1)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about 10 months ago | (#46340071)

Talk about surreal feelings of insecurity. Does Tesla threaten your livelihood, or something? Do you own a dealership? Not a single negative thing you said about the car is objective. In other words, your criticism was slack, vague, inert, and deceptive.

Re:"Green" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46340105)

Yes, it's very surprising that the latest in technology is popular on /. I mean it's like a bunch of nerds hang out here talking about new for them and stuff they thing matters!

They gave Obama the Peace Prize (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339717)

for doing nothing.

Re:They gave Obama the Peace Prize (2)

cbhacking (979169) | about 10 months ago | (#46339739)

Consumer Reports controls the Nobel prize committee, or at least did in 2008? Whoa, when did that happen?

Bronco Bama the man of the people! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339733)

I remember with considerable sourness how the Reagans' social life and state dinners were described by the media and derided by the left.

"Arrogantly rubbing the noses of the poor in their flashy profligacy" and such. Why, Nancy Reagan wore _designer dresses_. She bought new china for the state dinners!

Now the country is experiencing an economy that makes the Reagan economy at its most dire early 1981 nadir look pretty damned good by comparison.

While alongside those crummy economic prospects for ordinary Joes and Janes, we have a level of flashy profligacy in the White House that has literally never been equalled in the entire history of the country. You never saw the Reagans' pets eating off of that White House china the way that the Obamas show theirs doing.

Suddenly the left have completely lost their voices when it comes to "speaking truth to power" about the differential between how people on Main Street live versus how those at 1600 Pennsylvania are living.

It's almost as though the left never really believed any of that crap and were just mouthing it for temporary tactical political purposes. But we know that can't possibly be the case.

Re:Bronco Bama the man of the people! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339783)

I don't have mod points so I'm just posting the warning to everyone else:

Do not feed the off-topic trolls.

Re:Bronco Bama the man of the people! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339849)

Off topic? How is this off topic?

Obama, man of the people, saved the world from gas guzzling internal combusion engines by singlehandedly inventing the battery. In fact he invented lead and the silicon chip, the wheel.

And he's going to make sure that if you like your Tesla model S you can keep your Tesla model S, and what's more it will save you $2500 per year!

Just wait until the website is working.

The Tesla is not a Green Car (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339743)

Tesla vehicles are not green. The fact that it costs close to $100k should indicate that it is a very resource intensive product. Some things that cost a lot are not necessarily resource intensive (e.g., legal services or software), but for a manufactured good, price is generally a good indication of how many physical resources went into making it. The Prius is cheaper, and that reflects a lower relative resource cost to manufacture.

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car (1)

icebike (68054) | about 10 months ago | (#46340003)

You know, its priced at 89K, but that does not indicate its cost, so your analysis is at best flawed, and that's being generous.

Some things are priced simply to get what the market will bear.
Other things are priced to hold down demand, because they have only managed to build 30,000 of them, and they believe quality is more important than quantity.
Some things are priced to pay back the investment, so that they can expand and add new production capacity and build battery plants.
Somethings are priced high so that the labor can be paid a good wage.

But very few things (other than commodities) are priced based on the cost of raw materials that went into them.

Next time you go shopping, wander into a jewelry story and look at a Rolex (any Rolex) and compare it to a similar sized watch.
Then come back and tell us how price is a good indication of resources consumed.

Re: The Tesla is not a Green Car (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46340219)

....believe quality is more important than quantity.

Yeah? What an interesting way to forward the "green" project as the way to save the world. Build few expensive products that only a few rich document bags can afford.

Fuck you

Re:The Tesla is not a Green Car (1)

macpacheco (1764378) | about 10 months ago | (#46340327)

Tesla's are expensive due to:
  1-Extensive Aluminum construction, Aluminum is called bottled electricity due to costing far more in electricity than anything else to make it. But Aluminum can be recycled. And electricity could come from solar, wind or nuclear. Steel pretty much needs to be made with coal (metalurgical coal), melting aluminium doesn't require putting all that electricity in again
  2-Battery components are expensive, but much like Aluminum, can also be recycled
And yeah, Tesla is expensive because it's a startup company that is growing with cash flow instead of borrowed money. They already have a 25% gross margin on the car. And unless they drop the price, in 3 or 4 years that margin should get above 30% with the battery cell cost reduction from the giga factory and other economies of scale.
Sure, Steel can be recycled, but it's not as expensive to make to begin with.
Musk said raw materials alone on a li-ion battery pack costs US$ 80 / kWh, or US$ 6800 on the big 85 kWh alone. I bet the aluminium costs another US$ 25k.
But there's one factor you are ignoring. A Tesla durability should easily exceed a regular car except for the battery pack and motor, Aluminium doesn't corrode like steel (over decades).
Tesla already states that except for the battery, the model S should last 15 years, essentially requiring replacing the motor by then.
If you keep your model S for 15 years and drive about 20k miles / year, just the hard cash savings on gas and maintenance will fully pay the car compared to a non hybrid car. For a heavy commuter or a cab, it might pay itself (as in the whole cost of the car) in 10 years.

If you want to be green, keep your car for 10 years or more.

eulogy for btc on network news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339749)

now our media is 100% bi-polar with fear of change features

Best car overall?? (2, Insightful)

David_Hart (1184661) | about 10 months ago | (#46339763)

So, the best car overall is a $100,000 luxury vehicle that can drive, at most, 4 hours and then needs to recharge for 5 hours??? Obviously Consumer Reports has a different set of standards than 99% of people who live in North America. Most of us are lucky if we afford one car worth $30K, let alone two (Tesla for city driving and another one for long distance).

I thought that the Consumer Reports mission was to test and report on consumer items not luxury goods...

Re:Best car overall?? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339827)

It only needs to recharge for 20 minutes. AND, in teh long run, the Total cost of ownership is way less than that "$30K" car. Difference is the cost basis is loaded up front. Look at what your monthly overall bills are for the life of your vehicle, including fuel and repairs, and you'll see that a Tesla is cheaper in the long run.

Re:Best car overall?? (1)

David_Hart (1184661) | about 10 months ago | (#46339889)

So you don't pay for repairs to the Tesla or any battery replacements?

Re:Best car overall?? (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 10 months ago | (#46339969)

Prius batteries are still going 15 years later. Too early to get anything more than an estimate for Model S batteries, but don't assume they need replacing/reconditioning any more often than an ICE car needs it's engine replaced/reconditioned.

As to repairs, there's far less to go wrong on EVs.

Re:Best car overall?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46340077)

Tesla Repairs are factored into the calculation. The only real comparison is the cost of wearable components - like tires and brake pads. (Batteries last a looong time.)

Re:Best car overall?? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339923)

Total cost of ownership is way less than that "$30K" car.

You're on a Linux website, buddy. We don't allow talk about TCO in this part of town.

Re:Best car overall?? (1)

OhPlz (168413) | about 10 months ago | (#46339987)

$70k is going to buy a heck of lot of gas and routine service, especially if the comparison vehicle is a relatively efficient hybrid.

Figure $3.50 for gas.. that's 20k gallons. 40mpg, that's 800k miles. Subtract a bit for periodic 6mo maintenance, I bet a lot of us would be trading in for something newer before we ever hit the point where the Tesla ends up cheaper. The Tesla owners almost certainly would be trading in sooner, shiny object complex. Repair costs remain to be seen.

Re:Best car overall?? (1)

ranton (36917) | about 10 months ago | (#46340051)

It only needs to recharge for 20 minutes. AND, in teh long run, the Total cost of ownership is way less than that "$30K" car. Difference is the cost basis is loaded up front. Look at what your monthly overall bills are for the life of your vehicle, including fuel and repairs, and you'll see that a Tesla is cheaper in the long run.

Well, considering repairs are usually more expensive for more expensive cars, I doubt that the Tesla saves you on anything but gas. And if driving 15k miles per year at 20 mpg while paying $4 per gallon, it would take 20 years to break even on your Tesla purchase. Considering you probably won't keep your Tesla for 20 years, I doubt it is cheaper in the long run.

Re:Best car overall?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46340195)

It takes 20 minutes to charge to 50%, if you drive out of your way to a special charging station. That's only 100 miles on the largest battery.

You didn't know it was only to 50% because Tesla are past masters at PR and misleading people like you.

Re:Best car overall?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46340197)

Consumer Reports gave the Model S a score of 99 out of 100 because it takes almost 6 HOURS to recharge.

The Tesla website claims 29 miles of range per hour of charging when plugged into a 240V / 40A socket. With the Tesla high poer charger installed in your home, you can get up to 58 miles of range per hour of charge.

The Supercharge stations are rated at up to 170 miles for a 30 minute charge.

Re:Best car overall?? (2)

DogDude (805747) | about 10 months ago | (#46339853)

I don't know about most people, but if I'm driving more than an hour or two, I'm renting a car so as not to put the miles on my own cars. I would never drive my commuter long distances

Re:Best car overall?? (1)

David_Hart (1184661) | about 10 months ago | (#46339959)

I don't know about most people, but if I'm driving more than an hour or two, I'm renting a car so as not to put the miles on my own cars. I would never drive my commuter long distances

I do that for work trips but it doesn't work for me for vacation trips. When I drive home for Christmas (6.5 hr drive) in the Northeast we usually have snow, ice, etc. and I wouldn't trust the tires on a rental car as far as I could throw them. During the summer I need to tow stuff and, unfortunately, you cannot rent a tow vehicle...

Re: Best car overall?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339985)

Then why do you have a car? To not drive it?

Re:Best car overall?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46340013)

You're not most people. The cost of the rental car is significant enough that it would triple the cost of running your own vehicle (assuming only oil and gas expenses).

I am absolutely certain the average person does not spend triple the cost of the gas and oil they put into their cars on repairs and maintenance.

Re:Best car overall?? (1)

IndigoDarkwolf (752210) | about 10 months ago | (#46340031)

When I drive more than an hour or two, I'm making a journey that crosses state lines. If I felt I had that kind of money to waste driving a rental across state lines, I wouldn't be worried about putting miles on the car I have.

Re:Best car overall?? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 10 months ago | (#46340313)

You're not most people. Most people have a car in part so that they can make trips like those. A two or three-hour trip in a car turns into an epic on public transportation.

Re:Best car overall?? (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 10 months ago | (#46339943)

What makes you think expensive products for individuals aren't consumer products?

CR is not called "Thrifty Reports".

Re:Best car overall?? (1)

David_Hart (1184661) | about 10 months ago | (#46340075)

What makes you think expensive products for individuals aren't consumer products?

CR is not called "Thrifty Reports".

My definition of a consumer item is one that most people can afford, even if it is a tiny bit of a stretch. You have to admit that a $100,000 car is well outside of the price range of most consumers. I'm not saying that it has to be the cheapest POS that everyone can afford. Just that it should be, in my opinion, somewhat affordable...

Their mission is to report on ALL good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339995)

And it starts at $50,000 (take-home price for most people.) Still well in to "luxury" territory for most people, but it's disingenuous to always refer to it as a $100K vehicle.

Also, the "recharge for 5 hours" is *ALSO* disingenuous. There are plenty of quick chargers now.

Almost nobody buys two new cars at once for two separate purposes. Almost nobody goes from zero cars to two cars. Anyone buying a Tesla is almost guaranteed to already have another vehicle that would be their "road trip" vehicle. When we bought our last new car, we kept BOTH of our prior vehicles - I used the new sedan for commute, my wife used the old compact car for commute, we kept the SUV for "fun" (camping, trips to the mountain for skiing, etc.) A couple years later, we inherited a Subaru Forester from my wife's mom, so we were able to replace both older cars with it. Yeah, my wife's commute got a little more expensive, but it's not like we went "Oh, we don't want to keep both the compact and the SUV - let's buy both a sedan AND a new SUV..."

Lastly, according to multiple studies, 98% of trips taken by car are under 50 miles in length. That means that even the lowest-capacity Tesla can handle 98% of trips. Yes, there are people who need more range in their primary vehicle - this vehicle isn't for them any more than the Tesla Roadster was for general contractors. Or a Ford F-450 is appropriate for an urban pizza delivery person. I have a mid-length commute: 11 miles each way. The LOWER capacity Model S would last me nearly two weeks between charges. I wouldn't buy a Hummer to replace my sedan for daily commuting, just as I wouldn't buy a Miata for camping!

Re:Their mission is to report on ALL good. (1)

David_Hart (1184661) | about 10 months ago | (#46340159)

And it starts at $50,000 (take-home price for most people.) Still well in to "luxury" territory for most people, but it's disingenuous to always refer to it as a $100K vehicle.

I can only go by what was printed in the article. If the true take home cost is $50,000 after rebates, tax deductions, etc. then that makes it more affordable. But I can't find anything that backs this figure up.

Re:Best car overall?? (1)

icebike (68054) | about 10 months ago | (#46340167)

vehicle that can drive, at most, 4 hours and then needs to recharge for 5 hours??

Quote [topspeed.com] :

Despite all these challenges, a full seventy-six hours after leaving Los Angeles, the team rolled into New York City. The total trip was 3,427 miles and the team only spent 15 hours and 57 minutes tied to a charger.

So lets do the math: 76(Total time) - 16(charge time) = 60 hours drive time.
60h drive time is 4.75 greater than 16h charge time.

So somewhere your math went off the rails.

Of course most people sleep.
So they can charge at home or on the road at a slower rate without inconveniencing themselves.

"Vehicle" (-1, Flamebait)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 10 months ago | (#46339765)

"Consumer Reports Says Tesla Model S Is Best Overall Vehicle"

OK, so I guess they are recommending that that the army sell its jets, and planes, and boats, and cars, and tanks to replace them with this electric consumer grade car, as it is the "best" vehicle; Clearing better than 747s and apache attack helicopters.

Even such a thing as a best consumer grade car is a rather suspect title, expanding that to best vehicle is beyond absurd.

Re:"Vehicle" (1)

meustrus (1588597) | about 10 months ago | (#46339845)

Alright Mr. Pedantic, let me fix that headline for you:

"Consumer Reports Says Tesla Model S Is Best Overall Land-based Self-moving Street-legal Consumer Vehicle"

Re:"Vehicle" (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 10 months ago | (#46339991)

Best vehicle does not imply it can do everything every other vehicle can. If that was a necessary qualification, then no vehicle could ever be awarded a "best" award.

Re:"Vehicle" (2)

beltsbear (2489652) | about 10 months ago | (#46340015)

Ok. The Tesla S is the best vehicle that does not require either a ground support team, a special license or a two man crew.

Re:"Vehicle" (1)

icebike (68054) | about 10 months ago | (#46340179)

expanding that to best vehicle is beyond absurd.

Not half as absurd as your examples.

Stock Bump too (4, Interesting)

icebike (68054) | about 10 months ago | (#46339793)

The Consumer Reports article plus solid financial news and analyst forecasts [go.com] for Tesla today and widely circulating speculation about their planned Gigafactory [bloomberg.com] to be announced in a couple weeks with an aim of cutting battery costs by at least 50%, all lead to a surge in the stock today (2/25).

Even the confirmation that the Model X would indeed not surface until 2015 [cleantechnica.com] seemed to have no effect.

The stock was up as high as 17%, and closed up just under 14% (+$30 on the day to $248). With Morgan Stanley estimating a $320 price there is probably significant growth left, It seems they will have no problem funding that 5 to 7 Billion dollar battery plant. The "giga" refers to Tesla's need to build the equivalent of all of the world’s current production of lithium ion batteries under one factory roof. May be time to invest in on Lithium stocks as well.

Of course, the next drunk that crashes his car and lives to watch it burn will provide a stock dip, but that just sounds like importunity knocking.

Still, I predict Haters going to Hate. They should be arriving in about 3 seconds.....

Re:Stock Bump too (1)

Lucidus (681639) | about 10 months ago | (#46340131)

I don't know whether 'importunity knocking' is original to you, but that phrase made my day.

Re:Stock Bump too (1)

icebike (68054) | about 10 months ago | (#46340209)

I save my best proof reading for those who pay me. But you're welcome.

Tesla hate? (1)

meustrus (1588597) | about 10 months ago | (#46339815)

A company that many thought would be bankrupt and closed by now has produced a brand-new electric car from scratch that Consumer Reports feels is the best car it's actually tested since 2007.

I have yet to meet anybody who thought Tesla "would be bankrupt and closed by now" who wasn't actively scheming toward that end. And yes, FUD counts as actively scheming.

Is Tesla great because they have to be? (1)

swb (14022) | about 10 months ago | (#46339855)

Is Tesla and their cars great because they have to be -- selling a new kind of car at a high price to a customer base that demands to be catered to, in small enough quantities to care?

Or are they great because they're doing it better and even if some magic happens to the basic technology and they can sell a mid-sized sedan with model S specs in the mid-$40s will they still be great, or will they just devolve into yet another car company with all the car company shenanigans?

Or, to put it another way is the Tesla S a really great car with a great ownership experience and can owning any future Tesla aimed at the larger marketplace remain this way?

I was thoroughly impressed with the interior (1)

BLToday (1777712) | about 10 months ago | (#46339893)

I haven't driven one but played around with the interior at the mall. The human/car interface is by far the best one I've used. The multitouch screen is responsive and intuitive. The material quality is top of the line. I totally would buy one if I had the money.

Don't trust tests you haven't faked yourself... (1)

ffkom (3519199) | about 10 months ago | (#46339933)

... and that even includes surveys from pretending-to-be-non-profit-organisations, as recently exposed about the ADAC "Car of the Year" [24allnews.com] survey.

Or I could buy three Ford Fusion Hybrids (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46339953)

A fully loaded Fusion Hybrid Energi Titanium is about $35K.

And from 50 feet away it's nearly indistinguishable from a Tesla.

It also has a gasoline engine that'll get me home when the batteries are depleted.

I've seen 'em, sat in them. I think it'd be a tough sell convincing me it's $55K better.

Green depends on where you live/work (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | about 10 months ago | (#46339957)

The reason they gave the Prius "most green" is that is green in many areas - city, country, and for long commutes.

In the True West (BC, WA, OR, CA) the Tesla S would be greener, in that we have cheaper electricity that is anywhere from 2/3 to 99.8 percent green (hydro, wind, solar) and we have the highway infrastructure of Tesla charging stations to allow long drives (say from Vancouver BC to San Diego CA) on all electric without more stops than a gas powered car would use.

Different measures. If you lived in a place where your electricity for most of your trips came from coal or natural gas, you'd want to buy a Prius.

Note: a 60 mpg car (they do exist in Canada) that you own for 10 years is greener than a full electric car that you power with coal-based electricity.

Re:Green depends on where you live/work (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 10 months ago | (#46340175)

Actually, every dollar spent on acquiring your vehicle is a dollar which has been burned as energy somewhere in the chain. Until renewable sources of energy come on line in a significant fraction, and are self perpetuating (i.e. the sources themselves produce most of the energy to produce), the truth is that every dollar spent has been (or will be) respent on energy. Coal is free, oil is free, gold is free, steel is free. What costs money is the extraction and processing, roylaties (profit for the resource "owner") plus overhead and profit...the last two of which get respent on "stuff" which is really just raw materials converted into goods via energy.

For a vehicle with a 200,000mi life expectancy, $90,000 purchase price means you have to save more than $60,000 in fuel costs, or 30c/mile, over a $30,000 vehicle just to break even. And that's not going to happen. While you could argue that *your* electric is nuclear/solar/hydroelectric, the fact is that *on average* electricity is still based largely on a non-renewable fuel.

I didn't rtfa (since it's probably paywalled as all of CR are), but I stand by my theory - the less expensive it is over it's full life cycle, the more green it really is.

Re:Green depends on where you live/work (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | about 10 months ago | (#46340291)

I agree. We need to look at total supply chain from cradle to grave. Which is why you can buy a "green" car and wreck it at 3 years and it causes more climate change than a non-green car that someone drove for 10 years.

The comparisons become more difficult when we look at what the $90,000 could have gone to - if invested in converting your house to high insulation passive solar it would have been more green than if spent on a Tesla. But if you already have such a house, replacing an older car with a Tesla in the True West is usually a good choice.

No disrespect to Tesla but (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46340043)

My Porsche with PASM, PDCC, PSM, PTM and PTV Plus all working together, so I don't drive right into a tree, seems more technologically advanced. Oh, and it's riding on PCCBs.

2013 Motor Trend Car of the Year (4, Funny)

Buck Feta (3531099) | about 10 months ago | (#46340149)

And now CR Best Overall? Tesla's on fire!

*ducks*

"Overall" vehicle? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46340169)

I would have figured some kind of pickup truck to be the best overall vehicle, that or some kind of tractor.

One thing that gets overlooked (1)

NotSoHeavyD3 (1400425) | about 10 months ago | (#46340207)

Besides how much the car costs how much does it cost to get your electrical installation in your house upgraded to support charging the car? (My house was built in the 50s and it can barely handle the load of a modern house. I'm thinking I'd need to upgrade it if I want to have a tesla. I know I have to upgrade it if I wanted to add central air.)

Re:One thing that gets overlooked (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 10 months ago | (#46340331)

First, you have to be able to upgrade. If you have 100 amp service, and you live in a dense residential neighborhood, you may not be able to upgrade to 200 amp service. You might just be SoL.

If you can upgrade, you have to pay a contractor to bless your new service connection, and you need to pay for the connection. You may well need a new panel, and you'll need a new circuit.

Fai7zoRs (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46340215)

and Juli-et 40,000 Disgust, 0r been
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?