Tesla : Consumer Reports' best car ever tested

[silvrsvt]

http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/09/autos/tesla-model-s-consumer-reports/index.html

 

 

Hmmmmm.....

 

 

[akirby]

Yeah, right.

[calypsocoral]

The only issues I have with the Tesla S is that it is an electric car, which, depending on where your electricity comes from, is really no better (or, in some cases, worse) for the environment than gasoline, has a very limited range-- even with the bigger 85kWh battery-- and places a massive strain on the power grid.

 

From what I've seen, heard, read, and felt (got to sit in one at a car show) it really is a good car, just with the inherent shortcomings of an electric powertrain.

[aneekr]

Tesla Model S is easily the most impressive passenger car produced by a U.S. based automaker in a long time.

 

Incidentally, Consumer Reports evaluated the Model S' drifting capability. It does quite well in this regard.

 

[timf]

I'm a huge Tesla supporter but try and temper my emotions a bit since they are still early in their strategy. The cars truly drive like nothing else out there. They are more powerful and responsive than most gas-powered cars, have a very spacious cabin and cargo space, and a perfectly adequate range for all but the longest trips. The downsides present themselves mostly in the fact that they don't have years of experience in cabin design or automotive technologies. Simple features like hooks, handles, cubbies, vanity lights, and adjustable headrests that you take for granted in other cars aren't there. It's also missing many commonplace options such as parking sensors, blind spot indicators, ventilated seats, and adaptive cruise control, although there are indications some of these features may be coming soon. The 17" touchscreen is very cool but even harder than MyFord Touch to use while driving, so I'm surprised CR didn't mark it down more points just for that.

 

Tesla has proven that electric cars can be powerful and practical. They need a few more years of iterating to get the prices down, the range up even more, and the features on par with other manufacturers, but I'm sure they'll get there. In the meantime they have an attention-grabbing product that should continue to sell well to those who aren't afraid of new technologies (and can afford it).

[RichardJensen]

Did Rupert Murdoch buy Consumer Reports?

[jpd80]

So how does it go on a drive from say, LA to San Francisco?

 

Depending on price, the Model S has driving range of between 208 and 265 miles.

A full charge takes about six hours from an ordinary 240 volt outlet, according to Tesla.

[twintornados]

Did Rupert Murdoch buy Consumer Reports?

Nope...Elon Musk did....

[aneekr]

Did Rupert Murdoch buy Consumer Reports?

 

No way. The CU (Consumer Reports' parent organization) position on Murdoch and corporate media "empires" in general is summarized in this commentary by CU vice president Gene Kimmelman. The owner of Pravda is more likely to close a deal acquiring CU and Consumer Reports than News Corp. or any private business for that matter.

[aneekr]

So how does it go on a drive from say, LA to San Francisco?

 

Just fine. As needed, a Model S operator can use any of the four Tesla Supercharger stations located in or between Los Angeles and San Francisco to replenish the vehicle's battery charge and get nourishment for himself/herself and fellow passengers.

Edited May 10, 2013 by aneekr

[RichardJensen]

No way. The CU (Consumer Reports' parent organization) position on Murdoch and corporate media "empires" in general is summarized in this commentary by CU vice president Gene Kimmelman. The owner of Pravda is more likely to close a deal acquiring CU and Consumer Reports than News Corp. or any private business for that matter.

I was being facetious given the breathless, 'we'd give it 110%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!' review of a vehicle with a great many obvious flaws.

 

Somehow the gigantic touch screen scores 100% in its category, while CU bellyaches about MFT? And I ask you, what would happen if a Fiesta or Fusion was offered to CU with a 150 mile driving range? Think CU would only dock it ONE POINT in that category? And the price? You mean to tell me a $60k car scores 100% on CU's affordability scale? Come-freaking-on here, man! Congratulations mister and missus Consumer Reports subscriber, we are pleased to announce that the greatest car that we have ever tested, one with absolutely no flaws other than the inability to take it on a trip of any length, is a $60k vehicle that you can't afford. But boy is it awesome. Just listen to our professional, competent, unbiased auto test editor, as he gushes ecstatically, and assures us that if this vehicle didn't have a limited range, he would've bent the rules by which we rate vehicles to give this vehicle an otherwise impossible score.

 

Come ON! This represents---in Fisher's first big splash as auto test editor---a change FOR THE WORSE from David Champion, who at least did his best to hide his prejudices.

Edited May 10, 2013 by RichardJensen

[RichardJensen]

Just fine. As needed, a Model S operator can use any of the four Tesla Supercharger stations located in or between Los Angeles and San Francisco to replenish the vehicle's battery charge and get nourishment for himself/herself and fellow passengers.

 

Yes. Because when I drive, I would love to stop every two hours for twenty minutes or more. Because, you know, I don't like getting anywhere in an expeditious fashion.

[rprobst]

The only issues I have with the Tesla S is that it is an electric car, which, depending on where your electricity comes from, is really no better (or, in some cases, worse) for the environment than gasoline, has a very limited range-- even with the bigger 85kWh battery-- and places a massive strain on the power grid.

 

From what I've seen, heard, read, and felt (got to sit in one at a car show) it really is a good car, just with the inherent shortcomings of an electric powertrain.

 

There is no place in the US where an electric car is worse for the environment than a gas car that gets 30 mpg or less (and the average for all gas cars is less than 30 mpg): http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/images/cv/electric-cars-global-warming-emissions-fact-2.jpg

 

So unless you are driving a very small gasser that gets above 30 mpg, an electric car would be better for the environment, no matter where you live. And for much of the country, electricity is so clean that an electric car beats a gas car that gets 50 mpg -- and how many of those are there?

 

The idea that electric cars strain the power grid is another myth. Maybe that might be true after years of robust sales of electric cars... but that would give the power distributors plenty of time to adapt to the anticipated increased load.

 

That all said, I never want to worry about range, so I prefer a plug-in hybrid and I am very happy with my Fusion Energi. But Tesla has been incredibly successful. I see many more Teslas on the streets than Fusions.

[mustang_sallad]

There is no place in the US where an electric car is worse for the environment than a gas car that gets 30 mpg or less (and the average for all gas cars is less than 30 mpg): http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/images/cv/electric-cars-global-warming-emissions-fact-2.jpg

 

So unless you are driving a very small gasser that gets above 30 mpg, an electric car would be better for the environment, no matter where you live. And for much of the country, electricity is so clean that an electric car beats a gas car that gets 50 mpg -- and how many of those are there?

 

The idea that electric cars strain the power grid is another myth. Maybe that might be true after years of robust sales of electric cars... but that would give the power distributors plenty of time to adapt to the anticipated increased load.

 

That all said, I never want to worry about range, so I prefer a plug-in hybrid and I am very happy with my Fusion Energi. But Tesla has been incredibly successful. I see many more Teslas on the streets than Fusions.

 

True that. At best (in Washington, Vermont, Oregon, or anywhere if you have your own solar setup) an EV can be truly zero emissions, or damn near enough. On average, an EV will be significantly cleaner than a gas car. At worst, you'll probably break even with a particularly efficient gas car in terms of overall emissions. That said, your car will get cleaner as more and more clean energy projects get underway.

 

To rip on the Tesla for being expensive is kinda silly, this car is good value for it's market segment, plain and simple. Of course, just like any EV, it's major flaw is that it's not well suited for very long distances. But perhaps consumer reports is weighing that flaw against all the advantages this car has over combustion vehicles - it pollutes a whole lot less or not at all depending on where you get your electricity, you never have to go to a gas station for your daily driving, electricity costs are low and much less volatile that fuel costs. On top of all that, Tesla has done the most out of anybody to address the long distance driving aspect - very large capacity battery that'll take care of most weekend trip-type distances for a lot of people, and really fast recharge times through a growing network of free-to-use charge stations.

 

No it's not the perfect car for everybody, but neither is an F-150 or a Corvette. That doesn't mean those cars aren't amazing at what they do.

[RichardJensen]

No it's not the perfect car for everybody, but neither is an F-150 or a Corvette. That doesn't mean those cars aren't amazing at what they do.

 

Those cars didn't score 99 out of a hundred, with the chief editor gushing that they could've scored 110 out of 100 if only they had greater range.

 

You can say whatever you want about Tesla; this isn't about Tesla, this is about Consumer Reports making a mockery of the only thing they have going for them: A reputation for staid, almost stodgy, assessment of vehicles.

 

And, son, no $60k passenger car is a 'good value'.

[rprobst]

That said, your car will get cleaner as more and more clean energy projects get underway.

Really good point. Once a gas car has shipped, that is as clean as that particular car is ever going to be. But for an electric car shipped to a state that uses coal to produce some of its electricity, that car will "magically" become cleaner when that state's energy mix shifts over time, with coal generation being decommissioned and replaced by natural gas or wind or solar.

[mustang_sallad]

And, son, no $60k passenger car is a 'good value'.

 

I'd say the Corvette is damn good value. It all comes down to what you're comparing it to. If the Model S gets you more for your money than another comparable car from a competitor, that counts to value in my books. And Consumer Reports' books as well apparently.

[RangerM]

I'd say the Corvette is damn good value. It all comes down to what you're comparing it to. If the Model S gets you more for your money than another comparable car from a competitor, that counts to value in my books. And Consumer Reports' books as well apparently.

I understand what you're saying here, but when the metric you're using is wholly dependent on the circumstance, then it isn't a metric at all. It's subjective.

 

I haven't read the CR article, but if "value" is part of the score, the score is meaningless; especially given that the Model S essentially has no competitor in the "luxury, all-electric class".

Edited May 15, 2013 by RangerM

[RichardJensen]

I'd say the Corvette is damn good value

 

That's just silly. Its value proposition is that it performs a subset of supremely unnecessary tasks in a manner comparable to much more expensive vehicles.

 

It does not perform any of the basic tasks required of a vehicle any better than vehicles costing tens of thousands less.

 

I mean, if you want a vehicle that does those unnecessary things, fine, but don't delude yourself into thinking that you're being practical and shopping for a good value.

Edited May 15, 2013 by RichardJensen

[woodrowwilson]

...in Washington...solar setup...

 

:hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical:

[mustang_sallad]

:hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical:

 

no need for solar when you've got hydro power coming out your ears. there's something for everybody!

[mustang_sallad]

That's just silly. Its value proposition is that it performs a subset of supremely unnecessary tasks in a manner comparable to much more expensive vehicles.

 

It does not perform any of the basic tasks required of a vehicle any better than vehicles costing tens of thousands less.

 

I mean, if you want a vehicle that does those unnecessary things, fine, but don't delude yourself into thinking that you're being practical and shopping for a good value.

 

So this is just semantics then. All you're saying is that Consumer Reports needs to come up with a better word to describe offering a better price than your competition for a similar level of content. Your definition of value doesn't really convey much more useful information that you couldn't get by simply looking at the price of the car without even looking at what you get for it.

[RichardJensen]

I love when people who don't understand what semantics are say, "it's just semantics".

 

But, waiving that, the whole dang thing hinges on subjective assessments.

 

 

Your objection to my subjectivity is an insufficient defense of CU's subjectivity.

 

And, as I said earlier, this is not about the Tesla (although I note that I could buy two very well appointed PIHs for the price of their Tesla Model S), this is about Consumer Reports' decline as a credible evaluator of vehicles.

 

All you have to do is look at the list of their best rated vehicles here and give them the ol' sniff test. http://autos.yahoo.com/news/consumer-reports-names-its-top-scoring-cars-222313172.html

 

The $38k subcompact BMW 135 scoring 97? The undependable A6 & A8 scoring over 90 points apiece? Over 90 points for the Corvette Z06?

 

Sorry. CU has no credibility with me. They didn't under David Champion and this new guy seems like a fool.

[jpd80]

Now we know the reason for the need for a quarterly profit, a $450 million stock float where Musk buys $100 million of them to keep control?

[RichardJensen]

Hmm.

 

How does this: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/tesla-issues-new-shares-notes-to-speed-u-s-loan-payment.html

 

square with this: http://gigaom.com/2013/05/08/tesla-delivers-1st-profit-record-revenue-and-boosts-model-s-guidance-to-21k/

 

 

Musk said Tesla has no plans right now to raise more funding.