Elon Musk Reveals Details On Upcoming $35,000 Tesla

griffinhart said:
I'd guess that brakes will need to be serviced more often since it's estimated that this tesla will weigh some 2500lbs more than a Ford Fusion.
Click to expand...

No, you hardly ever use the brakes since once you take your foot off the accelerator, regenerative braking kicks in and it's quite potent, charging back up to 60kW and only needing to brake at the very end.

99% of the time I am commuting to and from work, so it is best to have a car that benefits the most for that situation, and having a full charge every morning means never having to stop for gas or anything, ever....If on a long trip, then I would be stopping every 3-4 hours anyway so having to charge for free for around half an hour is not a problem for me. The major highway routes all have superchargers the whole way, people who have drove NY to FL added only a few hours to the trip, totally worth it if you ask me.

There is also no battery longevity issue as far I am concerned.....I don't think any Roadster owner has seen less than 90% range after 6 years, and the Model S uses a superior custom battery chemistry and active heating/cooling to greatly increase longevity to the point that at 60,000 miles there can be as few as 4 miles range loss as one owner saw, and the packs can last for hundreds of thousands of miles, which will take many years for most people. By that time, they will be better and cheaper even if not under warranty after 8 years. I don't know if you'll still be able to get $7500 subsidy by the time the Model 3 comes out, but right now the top carpool lane privileges Teslas come with are worth the price of the car to some folks, and I fully expect the Model 3 battery to continue the trend of improvement.

There's also no transmission, fuel pumps, oil pumps, water pumps, head gaskets, fuel injectors, cylinder misfires, exhaust, timing belts, valve leaks, various airflow sensors, and a host of dealer service items that make up the bulk of their profits. The amount of things you learn that can go wrong after owning a gasoline car for years is staggering, and for the $100k+ German sedans that these cars compete with, very expensive to fix. And if you're going the zero-emissions route, why settle for a more complex hydrogen system (unless all you do is take road trips....mea culpa) that can still be supply-constrained by energy market manipulators and still cost $40 - $50 a fillup with no infrastructure? And instead of converting electricity or gas to hydrogen back to electricity, why not just use electricity directly, and with your own home solar/wind array or at the superchargers, do it for free?

CreepyUncleGoogle said:
Mmm, more explode-y batteries and catch-y on fire cars.
Click to expand...

50,000+ cars and not one fatality? 1 fire from a moron thief crashing into a building at 100MPH, 2 fires after 25+ tons of force from heavy metal debris piercing 1/4 inch armor that would kill someone sitting in its path in another car, and now there's titanium armor and deflecting shields that anyone can have retrofitted for free....One other fire in Mexico at 100+MPH after going AIRBORNE through a CONCRETE wall and then hitting a tree, yet everyone in the car not only lived, but was uninjured enough to actually run away. Any other damage involving charging has only been from faulty wiring or installation and not the charging system itself, and Tesla even proactively provided new adapters, again for free, to reduce the risk from improper installation or current draw.

Don't forget the 4/2/13 head-on collision between a Honda Accord and Tesla in which both occupants of the Honda were killed, while the Tesla driver not only suffered minor injuries, but the Tesla was intact enough that the driver could open the door on his own and walk out. And....NO FIRE....5/2/14 in PA, a Tesla was rear-ended by an 18-wheeler and pushed 100 feet....The big rig was disabled and needed to be towed - the Tesla driver drove his car home. The car is cheap to insure in spite of its price and more costly aluminum collision repairs because of its safety record and the lack of medical and personal damages claims which make up the majority of what insurers pay out. Deathtraps indeed.
 
nilepez said:
I assume that's the regular battery. If not, then it's it's not good enough for some people's commute (unless they all have charging stations at works, and they won't).
Click to expand...

I don't care where the hell you live, a 100+ mile commute (1 way) isn't worth it. I'd sooner chew an arm off than have that hellish drive to work every day.
 
Grahamkracka said:
I don't care where the hell you live, a 100+ mile commute (1 way) isn't worth it. I'd sooner chew an arm off than have that hellish drive to work every day.
Click to expand...

Go back and read what I wrote. Yup, that's round trip. Do you have charging stations at work? Then your commute would be limited to 50 miles each way, and realistically, you probably want to have a 10-20 mile buffer....just in case.

IMO, it has to be a 200 mile battery. Anything less than that, and the car is an expensive toy.
 
Synful Serenity said:
No, you hardly ever use the brakes since once you take your foot off the accelerator, regenerative braking kicks in and it's quite potent, charging back up to 60kW and only needing to brake at the very end.

99% of the time I am commuting to and from work, so it is best to have a car that benefits the most for that situation, and having a full charge every morning means never having to stop for gas or anything, ever....If on a long trip, then I would be stopping every 3-4 hours anyway so having to charge for free for around half an hour is not a problem for me.
Click to expand...

Not sure how you drive, but I can easily go 300+ miles in 4 hours (and I probably wouldn't stop on a 400 mile drive...my cars range is close to 500 on an open highway) and while I like that you can go from L.A. to NY with super chargers, if you wanted to travel to FL, you're SOL, because there are no super chargers between AZ and San Antonio and none between Houston and the east coast. I doubt you could get from El Paso to San Antonio.

With that said, I think it's a beautiful car and if I was in the luxury market, i'd consder it for a 2nd car. Technically the III could fill that niche too.
 
So minimum $40k out the door... I have a hard time swallowing spending much more than 20k on a car. The value-return drops exponentially after that as far as I'm concerned. I have the world's most boring car--a 2010 toyota camry--but I have a very hard time legitimately excusing spending much more on a daily-driver car--be it electric, hybrid, or traditional gas.

I get that tech still needs to advance, but I'm a bit disappointed that 35k is what Tesla is considering 'cheap' for an electric car. Then again, when the model s is what you're comparing it to, ~1/2 to 1/3 the price is pretty cheap! :D
 
I agree, a 100 mile commute is just too far IMO. That said, there are times where you drive 25 miles to work, then 25 miles to a f-buddies house after work, have breakfast and want to head back to work and don't want to experience range anxiety the whole time. It can be tedious to HAVE to ensure that you get home to your charging station, and never forget to charge your car after you picked someone up at the airport.

I have an electric lawn mower (love it), but I bought two batteries for it for that reason... I often get lazy and forget I was going to plug in the battery later, and want to mow the lawn but have no juice. Having a spare on hand means I always have a fresh one on the charger.
teh_chem said:
The value-return drops exponentially after that as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...
Electric cars in general have the worst resale value of any vehicles on the market. Reason being is that batteries, just like in your laptop or cellphone don't have as much capacity at day 1000 as they do at day 1, and not only are the batteries expensive, but how they are mounted with the cooling systems and what not integrated makes it about as fun as swapping an engine.

The highest loser in resale value in the world at present is the Fiat 500e (electric version) for example, even though technically its not that bad a car and got positive reviews.
 
nilepez said:
Not sure how you drive, but I can easily go 300+ miles in 4 hours (and I probably wouldn't stop on a 400 mile drive...my cars range is close to 500 on an open highway) and while I like that you can go from L.A. to NY with super chargers, if you wanted to travel to FL, you're SOL, because there are no super chargers between AZ and San Antonio and none between Houston and the east coast. I doubt you could get from El Paso to San Antonio.

With that said, I think it's a beautiful car and if I was in the luxury market, i'd consder it for a 2nd car. Technically the III could fill that niche too.
Click to expand...

The "you can't drive from CA to FL" thing is kinda bullshit. You can get a rental car for $35 a day if you really, really need to do that. If it's something you regularly do, you should either be driving a truck, or someone needs to tell you about these things that go through the air at hundreds of miles an hour.

People should stop buying vehicles for the 1% use. It's the reason there are so many god awful SUVs and immaculate, giant pick up trucks on the road. "Sometimes I like to carry a mattress home from Ikea." Oh, by all means, get the extended bed with the 6L V8...
 
teh_chem said:
So minimum $40k out the door... I have a hard time swallowing spending much more than 20k on a car. The value-return drops exponentially after that as far as I'm concerned. I have the world's most boring car--a 2010 toyota camry--but I have a very hard time legitimately excusing spending much more on a daily-driver car--be it electric, hybrid, or traditional gas.

I get that tech still needs to advance, but I'm a bit disappointed that 35k is what Tesla is considering 'cheap' for an electric car. Then again, when the model s is what you're comparing it to, ~1/2 to 1/3 the price is pretty cheap! :D
Click to expand...

For $25k you can get a BRZ which is at least way, way more fun than a Camry.

Though I drive a Ford Fusion fleet vehicle. They weren't offering BRZs, and it's super hard to argue with "free car."
 
Romale23 said:
on the bright side they are bringing a ford focus ST Diesel..... the focus STD

(just for record i drive a ford and am VERY happy with it, never owned a vehicle with no problems before)
Click to expand...

So not only is Ford killing SEX but they're bringing STD! :eek:
 
Getting back to the Model 3, has Tesla announced bringing back a coupe? Their first model was a very limited production model Roadster. What Tesla should do is make the $35k sedan the 3S and make a coupe version call the 3C (something that would compete w/ the BMW "2" or "4" series).
 
Aluisious said:
The "you can't drive from CA to FL" thing is kinda bullshit. You can get a rental car for $35 a day if you really, really need to do that. If it's something you regularly do, you should either be driving a truck, or someone needs to tell you about these things that go through the air at hundreds of miles an hour.

People should stop buying vehicles for the 1% use. It's the reason there are so many god awful SUVs and immaculate, giant pick up trucks on the road. "Sometimes I like to carry a mattress home from Ikea." Oh, by all means, get the extended bed with the 6L V8...
Click to expand...

I drive to visit friends that are 250-400 miles away at least a dozen times a year. I don't want to buy a car that forces me to rent a car every time I take a road trip. If I buy a 40k car, that's not acceptable. He implied that you can drive anywhere using Tesla's charging stations, but the reality is that a huge chunk of the country doesn't have any access right now. That will change by the time the III comes out, but it's not now. Right now you if you had a Tesla in San Antonio, you'd be hard pressed to leave Texas and you'd certainly have trouble getting back without one or more long charging sessions.

I don't buy a truck to get a mattress, but buying an expensive car and then having to rent a lesser car to take any trip isn't acceptable (and in case you don't get it, I love the Tesla, but I wouldn't buy one right now, even if the III was available).
 
Aluisious said:
For $25k you can get a BRZ which is at least way, way more fun than a Camry.

Though I drive a Ford Fusion fleet vehicle. They weren't offering BRZs, and it's super hard to argue with "free car."
Click to expand...
:) I was actually considering it. But the baby's seat doesn't fit so well in the back... :(
 
I am somewhat familiar with efficient diesel cars. What I am not familiar with, though, are performance-oriented diesel cars that are still highly efficient. This probably just shows my ignorance.
 
the_servicer said:
I am somewhat familiar with efficient diesel cars. What I am not familiar with, though, are performance-oriented diesel cars that are still highly efficient. This probably just shows my ignorance.
Click to expand...
Performance oriented diesel cars generally use lower friction lighter components for higher RPMs in lighter aerodynamic chassis for top speed. This actually improves efficiency, although it typically raises costs. As an example:
Trident-Iceni-diesel-sports-car.jpg


Trident diesel sports car... notable specs:
Range: 2,000 miles (not a misprint.. two THOUSAND miles)
Top Speed: 190 mph
Torque: 700 ft lbs
Fuel economy: 57 mpg (turns just 980rpm on the highway w/ its 6-speed automatic)
 
Remind me again: Why is the selection of diesel cars so limited in the States?

A diesel engine would make many of the more exciting and affordable cars, such as the Focus ST, just that much more enticing.
 
the_servicer said:
Remind me again: Why is the selection of diesel cars so limited in the States?

A diesel engine would make many of the more exciting and affordable cars, such as the Focus ST, just that much more enticing.
Click to expand...

My guess is a lack of demand. I also think they tend to neuter the cars in the states. A friend had a VW Golf (think that's the name) in Europe, and it was a 4 cylinder, but it good acceleration and was fun to drive. When he moved back here, he was going to buy another, but the U.S. versions were geared very differently and he didn't like it.

My understanding is they require more maintenance than gas cars and of course fuel is more expensive. Whether diesel or a hybrid probably is better probably comes down to the type of driving you do. Maybe they should make Diesel hybrids ;)
 
Fuel is less expensive but people have a difficult time calculating that 3.99 per gallon beats 3.89 when the diesel vehicle is getting 40+ mpg vs the gasser getting 25-35.

Maintenance is less. Diesels are just breaking in at 200k miles, oil changes every 10k. Maintenance costs are marginally higher because you'll need a diesel tech but if you don't do your maintenance the costs skyrocket. And you guys can speculate how much maintenance gets done regularly by average joe. Hondas and to toyotas can drive to work and back without oil or a big hole punched in the radiator. But the maintenance thing is more of a European staple than a diesel specific issue.

The main reason we lack options is because of the billions of dollars companies spend convincing Americans we need things we don't. It's not just diesels it's gas sippers in general. Cars like metros and front wheel drive, few cylinder cars just don't make it very well here. The surge in econo box popularity came about because of gas shortages and lines and those cars stayed on the road a long time and Asian imports were able to maintain for a variety of reasons...mainly cost and lack of maintenance not fuel economy.

We have really cheap fuel costs compared to the rest of the world so we just haven't needed to focus on economy historically. But in terms of performance turbo diesels that have been tuned run like raped apes and don't lose much on the economy scale.

Remeber, were dealing with a population that by and large hasn't changed from 3k oil changes to 7-10k synthetic, doesn't understand that in daily driving torque rules over horsepower, and that the diesels of today aren't the neutered versions of the 70s and 80s
 
the_servicer said:
Remind me again: Why is the selection of diesel cars so limited in the States?

A diesel engine would make many of the more exciting and affordable cars, such as the Focus ST, just that much more enticing.
Click to expand...
USA NOx emission standards are tougher than Europe. European diesel engines would need more expensive emissions equipment or modification to meet those standards.
 
Synful Serenity said:
50,000+ cars and not one fatality? 1 fire from a moron thief crashing into a building at 100MPH, 2 fires after 25+ tons of force from heavy metal debris piercing 1/4 inch armor that would kill someone sitting in its path in another car, and now there's titanium armor and deflecting shields that anyone can have retrofitted for free....One other fire in Mexico at 100+MPH after going AIRBORNE through a CONCRETE wall and then hitting a tree, yet everyone in the car not only lived, but was uninjured enough to actually run away. Any other damage involving charging has only been from faulty wiring or installation and not the charging system itself, and Tesla even proactively provided new adapters, again for free, to reduce the risk from improper installation or current draw.
Click to expand...

GM has a known issue with their ignition switch causing billion dollar recalls and high liability claims. The fatality rate of the issue is 1 out of millions. 50,000 sounds big. Its a tiny population by automotive quality & safety standards
 
the_servicer said:
Remind me again: Why is the selection of diesel cars so limited in the States?
Click to expand...
1) Diesel fuel is subsidized in Europe, its not in the US and expensive.

2) California has very specific emissions requirements that are harder on diesel engines than gas engines. Clean diesel doesn't pollute more, just differently.

3) The "green" segment of our population that is into high fuel economy vehicles believe that diesels are dirty.

4) Turbodiesel engines carry a price premium, although the improved reliability long term makes it a wash.

The ironic thing is that diesel vehicles make more sense for the United States market and hybrids more for Europe. Diesels are more efficient at hybrids for highway cruising, and hybrids are more efficient in more congested environments. The US has a much higher average speed for its traffic than Europe, yet the US has all the hybrids and Europe has all the diesels... kinda sad, lol!
 
jpm100 said:
GM has a known issue with their ignition switch causing billion dollar recalls and high liability claims. The fatality rate of the issue is 1 out of millions. 50,000 sounds big. Its a tiny population by automotive quality & safety standards
Click to expand...

0 fatalities. Hell, no serious injuries, even (at least for those driven even close to legally).
 
Parja said:
0 fatalities. Hell, no serious injuries, even (at least for those driven even close to legally).
Click to expand...

Not good at math?

My whole point was 0 fatalities out of 50,000 is not an achievement. Not even close to one.

And that is 0 fatalities identified so far. One day burning battery goo will ooze out on a person and bizarre circumstances won't matter.
 
I don't mind more electrical vehicles for city use to cut back on smog and the like. Personally though, I could never own an electric vehicle unless it has a minimum 300 mile range, averaging 80 mph, in 100 degree (F) weather, with the A/C cranked.
 
PCMusicGuy said:
I don't mind more electrical vehicles for city use to cut back on smog and the like. Personally though, I could never own an electric vehicle unless it has a minimum 300 mile range, averaging 80 mph, in 100 degree (F) weather, with the A/C cranked.
Click to expand...

Probably at least a couple generations away for those kinds of specs. I'm guessing in 10 years, we'll see 400 mile range in ideal conditions, so about 300 miles with the conditions you identified. Just a guess.
 
jpm100 said:
Not good at math?

My whole point was 0 fatalities out of 50,000 is not an achievement. Not even close to one.

And that is 0 fatalities identified so far.
Click to expand...

Yes, because I'm sure there's a pro-Tesla agenda that's hiding all kinds of fatalities out there. So I guess you won't be happy until they're able to achieve less than 0 fatalities (you seem to have left out the serious injury part, too...an oversight, I'm sure).

One day burning battery goo will ooze out on a person and bizarre circumstances won't matter.
Click to expand...

Almost a guaranteed certainty, wouldn't you say? Like just doused in a vat of gooey battery acid. Bet that person will go on a crazed rampage and decide people's fate with the flip of a coin, too. Let's not let facts and knowledge and silly stuff like that get in the way of a good whackjob prediction.
 
Ducman69 said:
The ironic thing is that diesel vehicles make more sense for the United States market and hybrids more for Europe. Diesels are more efficient at hybrids for highway cruising, and hybrids are more efficient in more congested environments. The US has a much higher average speed for its traffic than Europe, yet the US has all the hybrids and Europe has all the diesels... kinda sad, lol!
Click to expand...

65mph speed limit is still a joke.
 
Droc said:
I live I Ontario and the cost of electric power is exploding.
Click to expand...

The nice thing about electricity though, is that if it does get to pricey, it can be generated from other sources.

-coal
-natural gas
-hydro
-nuclear
-wind
-solar


This is one of the biggest reasons I want an electric car. If you hate electricity costs enough, you can go solar and pay next to nothing.

What are your options if you do not like gasoline/diesel costs?

Go slam your head against a brick wall. Every scuffle in the middle east or reduced production by the opec cartel sends prices higher.

I am sick of having the fates of nations and economies beholden to this volatile substance with too few players holding the production cards. That is the OPPOSITE reality with electricity generation.
 
mope54 said:
Fuel is less expensive but people have a difficult time calculating that 3.99 per gallon beats 3.89 when the diesel vehicle is getting 40+ mpg vs the gasser getting 25-35.
Click to expand...

The diesel delta is always greater than that when I look (and the price of gas is also about 20% less as well)

Maintenance is less. Diesels are just breaking in at 200k miles, oil changes every 10k. Maintenance costs are marginally higher because you'll need a diesel tech but if you don't do your maintenance the costs skyrocket. And you guys can speculate how much
Click to expand...

Most people don't do their own maintenance. I've had a few friends that do it, but it's very few.
 
beowulf7 said:
Probably at least a couple generations away for those kinds of specs. I'm guessing in 10 years, we'll see 400 mile range in ideal conditions, so about 300 miles with the conditions you identified. Just a guess.
Click to expand...

And that's when they're going to take off. When it becomes a vehicle that can be used for virtually anything, Electric will win. Ideally, they'll have some sort of solar charging built in, just in case you need it...plus it'd extend your range, charge while you're at the store and so on.
 
nilepez said:
And that's when they're going to take off. When it becomes a vehicle that can be used for virtually anything, Electric will win.
Click to expand...
Assuming that there are no other technological advances from competing technologies (greater efficiency + biodiesel blends for example), and no rise in cost for the resources required to produce batteries (remember, those are produced with resources that aren't infinitely renewable).

Remember at present, even with government subsidy, Nissan loses money not only on every Leaf sold, but they lose money on every replacement battery: http://www.autoblog.com/2014/07/24/nissan-loses-money-each-leaf-replacement-battery/

The technology can't take off until its viable WITHOUT subsidies.
nilepez said:
Ideally, they'll have some sort of solar charging built in, just in case you need it...plus it'd extend your range, charge while you're at the store and so on.
Click to expand...
Extremely unlikely. Its a 67 ah battery. With five peak hours of sun per day, and a solar panel that can't be aimed and has limited surface area to the roof/hood/trunk of the vehicle, it'd take days of sitting stationary to even put a dent in the recharge capacity of such a large battery. The added weight would also reduce range far greater than what you'd gain.

Remember the Aptera's roof mounted solar panel was only powerful enough to run a cooling fan while the vehicle was parked.

More likely is that some covered parking would use solar panels as the roof, and have coin operated chargers on the legs.
 
nilepez said:
The diesel delta is always greater than that when I look (and the price of gas is also about 20% less as well)



Most people don't do their own maintenance. I've had a few friends that do it, but it's very few.
Click to expand...
I don't know where you are located but it's cheaper per mile for diesel in Washington, Oregon, and California.

My second sentence may have been written confusingly, but the cost of maintenance is not more for a diesel. You don't need to physically change your oil, it doesn't cost any difference to change one's oil for a diesel than a gas vehicle, but if you *don't* do regular oil changes or take the vehicle in for its scheduled checkups (which are included in the price of the vehicle when purchased from VW, Audi, and BMW) and something breaks down *then* it's more expensive to fix.

Regardless, I've own a gas BMW and a TDI and cost of ownership is the same or less for the TDI. If you want to believe what people say about diesels without actually owning them then that's your choice but it's simply not true that maintenance costs and fueling are more expensive than gas. Those aren't the reasons for diesel cars not being as popular as they could be in the US.
 
nilepez said:
And that's when they're going to take off. When it becomes a vehicle that can be used for virtually anything, Electric will win. Ideally, they'll have some sort of solar charging built in, just in case you need it...plus it'd extend your range, charge while you're at the store and so on.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think that's when it'll be called hitting "critical mass", when there's a huge surge for something new. Kind of like smartphones from a couple years ago, when literally everyone and their mothers were getting one.

While I'd like an e-car if it looked good (which Teslas do), I need that range and gas-engine price. So I'll wait it out another couple generations and continue to get a gas engine car or 2 until that time comes.
 
mope54 said:
Fuel is less expensive but people have a difficult time calculating that 3.99 per gallon beats 3.89 when the diesel vehicle is getting 40+ mpg vs the gasser getting 25-35.

Maintenance is less. Diesels are just breaking in at 200k miles, oil changes every 10k.
Click to expand...


You are basically quoting ancient mythology at this point.

Old non-turbo, non-pollution control, over-engineered Diesels from Mercedes in the 1970s are the bullet proof ones.

Modern pollution controlled turbo diesels are way more expensive, way more maintenance intensive than a gas car. DPF issues, oil dilution from the DPF cleaning cycles, DPF clogging. Urea tanks.

The modern Diesel is a Rube Goldberg machine that get 2 MPG more than some gas cars.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=33906&id=33817
 
nilepez said:
I drive to visit friends that are 250-400 miles away at least a dozen times a year. I don't want to buy a car that forces me to rent a car every time I take a road trip.
Click to expand...

Then don't. For most people this isn't an issue at all. Every-time electric cars come up, someone chimes in with their oddball commute or their sales job that has them driving 80 000miles a year across country like that is somehow normal. Lots of people can come up with excuses, why an EV won't work for them, but it is their loss and they can work for most people.

The $35K Tesla will have a 200 mile range in the base model. Which will work fine for most people other than the price still being a little steep for some (Average sale price of car in the USA is just over $30K IIRC).

Most households in the USA already have more than one car, the majority of households could just replace one car with electric, and keep the other for road trips.

Even one car owners like me. I only drive more than 100 miles in a day once or twice a year when I go to see distant family. I could rent a car for those one/two trips.

I can't wait till the day when EVs reach my price point. Every time I dive it, will be like raising a middle finger to the Oil companies, instead of bending over every time I visit a gas station.
 
Snowdog said:
The modern Diesel is a Rube Goldberg machine that get 2 MPG more than some gas cars.
Click to expand...
#1) All engines, especially turbocharged ones, are rather complicated these days. There is nothing inherently more complicated about a diesel than a turbo gas engine.
#2) One thing that annoys me is when people compare apples and oranges. You can't compare the fuel economy of a very powerful diesel engine with a very weak gasoline engine, or compare one vehicle with a diesel with a completely different vehicle with a gasoline engine.... if you're looking at a turbo-diesel pickup truck for example with 450ftlbs of torque, you need to compare it to a gasoline option in that vehicle with about the same power output, not with a Ford Fiesta special MPG version with highway shutters, low rolling resistance tires, and other aero improvements for ultra-high MPG.

For example, lets take the 2014 VW Beetle convertible:

Diesel vs Gasoline:
Range: 600 vs 400 miles
Horsepower: 140 vs 170
Torque: 236 ft-lbs. @ 1750 vs 177 ft-lbs. @ 4250
MPG: 41 vs 27

So if you want a lot further range, and a sacrifice of a bit of peak horsepower for a LOT more torque that you don't have to rev out to get to (available just off idle practically) and a fuel efficiency difference of 14mpg, the diesel is the no brainer. Not that there aren't often more attractive options in gasoline, especially for sports cars (where peak HP matters so much more), but at least stay with more apples/apples approach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top