Comments by "John Luetjen" (@jehl1963) on "Tedward"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It sounds like you need to take a vacation to Germany. Because of a business trip, I've spent the last two weekends driving around Bavaria, where many of the B-roads have 60 mph speed limits, and many of the Autobahns still have unlimited stretches. The cars are so competent! Even my humble 1.5 liter turbo'd VW T-Roc ( aka Taos in the US) was a comfortable 110-plus mph cruiser. You will also see many of the cars that you cover on your channel being driven around. Just this weekend, I've seen a Merc 300SL Gull-wing, a BMW 3.0 CSL, a few Lambos, Aston Healys, a Merc Pagoda, A BMW V12 coupe, and countless other Mercedes AMGs, BMW's and Porsches.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@76Aston I pulled out an old "Road & Track's Guide to Sports & GT Cars for 1979". Per the summary table -- the A-M V8 would go from 0-60 in 7.4 seconds, which was beat by the Pontiac Firebird Trans AM, the Chevy Corvette L82, the Porsche 911SC, the Porsche 928, the Ferrari 308, the Porsche Turbo (3.3 liter), Maseratii Khamsin and the Ferrari 512 BB. In the 1/4-mile, the A-M V8 could do it in 15.7 seconds and was matched or beat by pretty much the same list of cars. As far as the top speed, the A-M V8 could get to 140 mph, which was still matched or exceeded by the Maserati Merak/SS, the Ferrari 308, the Porsche Turbo, the Masarati Khamsin and the Ferrari 512 BB again. But none of this detracts from the Aston Martin, because it really wasn't trying to compete with any of those cars. Aston Martin was trying to make the best gentleman's GT, that could effortlessly cover great distances with speed and comfort (for about 230 miles until the 9.5 mpg had drained the tank, thus requiring 25 more gallons of fuel. But a gentleman who could afford an Aston Martin didn't worry about things like that!).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I think it's fair to point out a few things. 1) EV's are not "Emissions Free" vehicles. The emissions are merely outsourced to a different location. So while this Tesla was not emitting any emissions while Tedward was driving it , the Covanta Haverhill power plant was emitting emissions generating the electricity needed to charge up the car prior to the drive. 2) Kilowatts per mile, electric cars are no more efficient than gas or diesel cars. You could argue that they are cheaper to operate than internal combustion vehicles because electricity is cheaper, but that is because (at least in Massachusetts) electricity is not taxed, but diesel oil and gasoline are. Specifically gasoline is taxed $0.24 per gallon by Massachusetts, $0.026 for a fuel clean-up fee and another $0.183 cents of Federal tax. None of them apply to electricity. The difference in the tax policy is because it's politically difficult to tax the way that people heat their homes. If you subtract out the taxes on road fuels, the dollars/mile costs of an EV are not significantly different than a gas powered hybrid or an diesel vehicle. Once people stop buying gasoline and diesel fuel, you can be sure that governments will start to tax electricity to make up for the last revenue. 3) Finally, as Tedward points out, this is a $70,000 plus car. The reality is that Teslas should actually be even more expensive if costed fairly, but instead US tax policy has chosen to use taxpayer money for subsidies to Tesla (in the form of tax credits for EV purchases), as well as mandating increasing the overhead costs of non-EV vehicles by forcing their manufacturers to buy carbon tax credits from Tesla -- even as I have pointed out above -- Teslas actually do consume carbon based fuels -- just not within sight of their owners. If these credits and subsidies didn't exist, this $70K Tesla would be even more expensive.
Regarding the product, I think that a big oversight is the lack of a Heads-up Display, which should be "slam-dunk" for Tesla. Forcing the driver to take their eyes off of the road to pick-out information in a large, cluttered and constantly changing central screen is a big ergonomics goof. Even in the video ( for example at 4:00) you can see Tedward splitting his attention between the road and traffic ahead of him, and the touch-screen display.
1