NHTSA Gives the Model S Best Safety Rating of Any Car In History 627
cartechboy writes "Even crashing into a wall is good news nowadays for Tesla Motors. Independent testing by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has awarded the company a 5-star safety rating, not just overall, but in every subcategory. While its five-star score across the board has been attained by other vehicles (around one percent of all cars tested are capable of such a score) its ratings in individual categories are higher than any other vehicle, including larger SUVs and minivans. What's really interesting is that part of the safety rating may be because the car is electric."
Five Star (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
You invent a cheaper rechargeable battery that matches LiIon on energy density, and congratulations, you've reduced the price of a model S.
Re:Five Star (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes it is a top end luxury vehicle, and it is also the best in its class, for a lower cost than comparable vehicles. It is also green.
It just isn't a cheap family sedan. We are still at least 5 to 10 years from an affordable all electric inexpensive family car.
Re:Five Star (Score:4, Insightful)
The Nissan Leaf starts at $28k, The federal government gives you $7500 back and many states have further rebates. Most people will save at least $100/month by not buying gas anymore. There are certainly cheaper cars, but you can get an all-electric car that comfortably seats 4 adults right now for half the price of a Model S. I've owned one for 3 months and I absolutely love it.
Re:Five Star (Score:5, Insightful)
Its not supposed to be in the same galaxy as a family sedan. Its supposed to be in the same galaxy as the other $80k-$100k high end luxury performance cars, and it is much "greener" than those.
Re:Five Star (Score:5, Insightful)
You invent a cheaper rechargeable battery that matches LiIon on energy density, and congratulations, you've reduced the price of a model S.
If the battery was free, it would still cost twice what I paid for a decent car. This is a top end luxury vehicle, not a green vehicle.
And if were built to the same standards as your decent car, it wouldn't have received the 5 star safety rating. Everything is a tradeoff.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, it doesn't seem fair that you have to pay extra to have something better. What about those people who can't afford any more, shouldn't they have the best things too?
Re:Five Star (Score:4, Insightful)
You invent a cheaper rechargeable battery that matches LiIon on energy density, and congratulations, you've reduced the price of a model S.
If the battery was free, it would still cost twice what I paid for a decent car. This is a top end luxury vehicle, not a green vehicle.
But this isn't what you would call a "decent car", its a luxury performance electric.
It starts in the same price range as a Cacillac CTS-V Coupe. (67K). Where as Cadillac (perversely) proudly displays the $2600 gas guzzler [cadillac.com] line item on their website, the Model S lists a $7,500 tax credit [teslamotors.com].
That you wouldn't consider paying that much for a decent car is not germane. It is still comparable to vehicles in its class. And contrary to your assertion, it is a GREEN vehicle, using the standards of "Green" that are commonly applied to cars.
But there are other models in the pipeline, at cheaper price points. And if the same frame construction is used for these, and they could earn the same safety ratings, it will clearly be a good thing.
They will always cost more than your ricer. But that's hardly the market segment this car is aiming for.
Re: (Score:3)
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/carpool/carpool.htm#vehicles [ca.gov]
Re: (Score:3)
Well, I'll admit the price is exactly the reason I am not buying one, but the good news is, the more they sell at this price, the stronger the secondary market will be. Electric cars have vastly lower maintenance costs with how little metal-on-metal goes on inside them, so it's forseeable for used Teslas to stay on the market longer than gas cars, thus driving down the used car price.
We'll see if that hold true 3-10 years from now.
Re: (Score:3)
Electric cars have vastly lower maintenance costs
That's debatable, considering how much it costs to replace batteries.
The last time I checked, the break-even point for electrical vehicles compared to gasoline powered ones was 7 years, if disregarding buying incentives. And quite soon after that, you'll need the batteries replaced...
Re:Five Star (Score:4, Informative)
The Model S starts in the $60k range and for many people who finance and factor in the gas savings monthly the payments are equivalent to that of more reasonably priced car right out the door. Also Tesla has stated that they are planning a more mass market mid-priced car in 2-3 years.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
His calculation is even using the very low mileage of 15k miles. Use a more mid range value of 30k miles and you are in the 5 year break even point. Nice.
30,000 miles/year is the "mid range"? I used 15K since that's what AAA uses for an average driver. I can't find any good statistics for the USA in general, but in Florida,the average is 13K miles/year [dot.gov]
I can't believe that 30,000 miles/year is the national average - that's 80 miles/day (or 120 miles for each business day) which seems absudly high in a nation with an average commute distance of 12 miles [dot.gov].
Re: (Score:3)
Wait a minute, did you just estimate I could drive a TESLA for about the same total price as an Honda Accord?
No - he pointed out that a Tesla costs as much as an Accord + 10 years worth of gasoline.
Damn, and I thought I had math problems...
Re:Five Star (Score:5, Informative)
Why would you compare it to BMW's cheapest entry level car? It is much closer to the 5 series in creature comforts, size, and target audience than any 3 series car and I think you will find they cost a bit more (55K base price for a 535i).
Re: (Score:3)
I haven't sat in a Tesla, but apparently it's a nicer, arguably cooler, and now apparently safer car than a 320i. BMWs also have a pretty atrocious cost of maintenance & repair by all accounts (Google is your friend). Of course, a BMW or Mercedes doesn't pencil out vs. a Camry on cost either - will a $60,000 BMW or Mercedes drive down I95 (legally) twice as fast as a Camry? Will it get twice the mileage? Nope. No high-end car pencils out on cost. However the driver's side automatic ball scratcher
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but what is the 0-60mph rating of that BMW 320i? 7-12 seconds
http://www.zeroto60times.com/BMW-Bimmer-0-60-mph-Times.html [zeroto60times.com]
The Tesla Model S is 3.9-5.9 seconds
Oh, and that's a 7 seater. With way better build quality. Way more features. And way nicer handling.
Re:Five Star (Score:5, Informative)
They're working toward that. Iteration 1 was a $110,000 sports car. Iteration 2 is a $60,000 sedan. Iteration 3 is an SUV. Iteration 4 is aiming for a $30,000 every-man's car.
Re:Five Star (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a great car, but Iteration 2 is more like $80,000, and iteration 3 (SUV) will be comparable to a comparable Model S in price according to the web site. A $50k car is possible, but $30k is unlikely for quite a while.
Re: (Score:3)
umm, 80k is the higher end iteration 2 with all the options and extras.
the low end does indeed start around 55k.
Re:Five Star (Score:4, Informative)
The average new car price in the US is about $30,000 [ftc.gov].
Considering you're talking about a price that's over 1.6 times that of the average, I think it's pretty damn fair to say that $50K is quite a bit for a car in 2013. It's not "very expensive" or "outrageously expensive", but you are well above what most people are buying.
Re:Five Star (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Five Star (Score:5, Insightful)
And are you of the opinion that improvements in safety haven't always come in on the high end first and then trickle down?
Airbags. ABS. That 3rd eye brake-light. Tire pressure sensors. Probably even more -- all of these things appeared first in higher-end cars and then made their way down to the rest of the models.
If anything, I expect a car at that price point to have more engineering and safety features in it. You don't just start out putting everything into the cheapest cars on the market.
Re:Five Star (Score:4, Informative)
And are you of the opinion that improvements in safety haven't always come in on the high end first and then trickle down?
Airbags. ABS. That 3rd eye brake-light. Tire pressure sensors. Probably even more -- all of these things appeared first in higher-end cars and then made their way down to the rest of the models.
Interestingly, many of those safety innovations were developed by Mercedes [mbusa.com]:
Re:Five Star (Score:5, Insightful)
A lot of stuff actually appears in racing cars first, and trickles down to high-end cars, then down to every day cars. DSG-type transmissions (the so-called 'flappy-paddle gearbox') were an F1 technology first, I believe.
My 6-year-old VW Jetta is more technologically advanced than a Merc from the 90s, but it's BECAUSE someone paid for a Merc in the 90s that I can have a VW that's such a good vehicle.
Good for Tesla. This is how you change an industry.
Still A Toy (Score:3, Interesting)
Don't get me wrong, the numbers are quite impressive - especially the following passage from TFA:
However, at a price point of $80 - 100K, it's going to remain a playtoy for people with money, not become the OMG super-car replacement for mom's $30K Volvo.
Re:Still A Toy (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
If you make over $100K you can afford one of these, you just chose not to. You are probably spending your money on other things - like large mortgage, retirement savings, kid's college, stay at home spouse... all very reasonable things.
Re:Still A Toy (Score:5, Informative)
In some parts of the U.S., $100K a year barely covers rent and utilities on a decent apartment.
Re: (Score:3)
Really? $8k/month? "Some parts"? There are about TWO parts of the U.S. that might qualify there, and even in those two -- San Francisco [craigslist.org] and Manhattan [craigslist.org] -- there are plenty of decent places for less than half that. Closer to 1/3, even in the best neighborhoods. Methinks the man doth exaggerate a bit.
Citation: my family owns a two-flat house on 19th Avenue in San Francisco and we're renting it out for $1800/mo. That's less than ONE QUARTER your cited figure. 2br/1ba with a decent dining room and a good-sized li
Re:Still A Toy (Score:5, Insightful)
#1 & #2 include a lot of people. #3 includes nearly everyone else. :p
Re:Still A Toy (Score:5, Informative)
I make a bit over $100K and live in Silicon Valley yet I had no problem affording this car, in part due to careful money management and paying off my house early and not living beyond my means. I have met a number of other owners, and not all of them are super wealthy. One of my coworkers bought one as well. For years I poured every extra cent into paying down my mortgage since it started at over 7%. Of course it also helps that I bought before the dot com boom. I financed a majority of the car, but less than many people in order to keep investing my money.
By financing I took some of the money that I didn't spend on the loan and bought some Tesla stock when it was at $35. It's the best investment I've made. I just wish I bought more stock when I did.
I met many people at the Teslive convention a month ago. Many of the Tesla owners are not what I would consider super wealthy. Many are retired. In fact, a breakdown of what people drove before the Model S was rather interesting. Many did not drive luxury cars. My previous car was a 2006 Prius which is sitting in my driveway and hasn't been driven in two months. I'll probably sell it.
Yes, the Tesla is an expensive car. In my case, it's my midlife crisis car.
Tesla has repeatedly said that they plan to come out with a car in the $30-40K range. Their biggest problem is batteries. During the last earnings report they stated that there is simply no way to get the volume of batteries they need. They need to ramp up the production facilities and their suppliers before they can hope to meet the demand. In order to meet the demand for the lower priced car they would need to manufacture more 18650 lithium batteries than are made for all laptops combined. While there is no shortage of lithium, they need to build up production.
As it is, right now Tesla is limited in the number of cars they can sell by their suppliers. They're supply limited, not demand limited.
Re:Still A Toy (Score:5, Informative)
Long ago, folks who lived in 'black' neighborhoods were redlined - it was pretty much impossible to buy a house in those areas because the banks wouldn't lend the money, even if you were a doctor or lawyer; and often the entire neighborhood was owned by a single landlord who wasn't selling anyway. It was commonly also impossible to buy a house outside the neighborhood because the realtors wouldn't show them to you, or would say "sorry, it's already sold", or (again) the banks wouldn't loan the money. (I observed a recent incident of this type in my own town, so it's not completely gone even today. Racist idiots are less common but still around.)
So it got to be a thing back in the 1950s or 1960s for blacks to buy big fancy cars, as that was the only big-ticket outlet for their desire to move up to a nicer lifestyle. So big fancy cars got to be a tradition back then. As a result it was relatively common to see a brand new Cadillac sitting outside a run-down slum apartment. (an interesting subtext - the Detroit automakers were pretty good at hiring minorities as well & brought many blacks into the middle class, so buying a Cadillac was helping 'brothers' out.) ... or so I'm told. Traditions die hard, and slowly. So for lots of folks today, having a nice car is more meaningful than having a nice house. And it's their choice, don't knock it - different strokes, so to speak.
Re:Still A Toy (Score:4, Informative)
As I mentioned, with anything short of what we would consider 'millionaire' class wealth, they could not buy or fix up the dwellings, nor could they move to a 'nice' neighborhood. The houses were not available. In some places there was a de facto inability to even record the deed for a house as yours if you were not 'white' - the lawyers wouldn't do the paperwork, the clerk would not enter it into the register. It was not a matter of money.
This can happen even if you're not a minority. Back in my early days I lived in the third floor of an old rundown house - the landlord refused to fix the leaky roof or bad plumbing, because if he did his property taxes would go up. He owned several houses in a row. He tore them all down to put in a new business office a few years later, he was just waiting for the right time and collecting free money in the meantime.
For some ideas about the roots of this social insanity, I suggest reading "Making Whiteness: The Culture of Segregation in the South, 1890-1940" (Grace Elizabeth Hale). The book is a bit controversial, but I felt the primary idea made sense. When the South lost the Civil War, this violated the heroic culture of honor that permeated the South's psyche. So in order to preserve some semblance of self-respect, a demon had to be found, which was the Negro (and what was really the beginnings of the Northern corporate state).
So the Southern view of blacks/negroes and of History changed after the war. For 60+ years the South was stuck in a kind of psychological fugue state, adopting a fantasy about the "Old South" where everything was perfect and everyone, blacks and whites, loved each other and their proper roles. Because at that time the South constituted about 1/2 of the Nation, the national political scene had to accommodate this Southern insanity. Part of this insanity involved a belief that blacks were less capable. It's instructive to discover that the lynchings and other violence was most often perpetrated on 'uppity blacks' who managed, despite the disadvantages, to develop a middle class income and lifestyle, because the appearance of a successful black person violated the sacred belief system and proved them wrong. Being wealthy was accepted in some places and not others - there are many cases of rich blacks being accepted in one town, but getting off the train in another town and being beaten and/or lynched. (It's worth noting that the railroads resisted segregated facilities for a long time, because it was more expensive.) The idea of the book is that these blacks were violating the most sacred Southern belief of all, which was that blacks could not succeed without whites to guide and help them. (This is my take on the book, which I read about six years ago, so if it's not a good reflection of the book, it's my fault.)
Re:Still A Toy (Score:5, Informative)
However, at a price point of $80 - 100K, it's going to remain a playtoy for people with money, not become the OMG super-car replacement for mom's $30K Volvo.
True, but it is the norm for the expensive, novel safety features of today's luxury cars to become standard on econoboxes a few years down the road. Airbags (front, then side), antilock brakes, traction control, etc. have all migrated down the market. You can bet that - particularly among carmakers whose reputations rely on safety as a marketing tool, like Volvo - there will be engineers very closely scrutinizing this car for design features that can be adapted or stolen.
More important, some of the safety benefits are pretty much inherent to the electric design. Not needing to allow for a big, solid metal engine block means that the front crumple zone can be engineered more effectively. Having heavy battery packs under the floor of the vehicle makes rollovers much more difficult. These types of benefits will be accessible to any electric design, not just the $80,000 ones.
Re: (Score:3)
$60,000.
As for it being a playtoy for people with money, I supposed that'd be just like Audi, BMW, Aston Martin, Jaguar, Porsche, Shelby, and everyone else who aims for that higher end of the market.
Per Forbes, the average price of a new car is over $30,000 (http://www.forbes.com/sites/moneybuilder/2012/05/10/average-price-of-a-new-car/). Considering the number of cars selling for $12,000 - $15,000 new, that average is factoring in a lot of cars well over $30,000.
This isn't a toy for the rich and it isn't a
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, if you had taken that $30k for the Volvo and instead invested in Tesla stock, you could now afford a Tesla and keep your original $30k investment.
It's amusing to think about: By letting Tesla borrow $30k for a few months, they reward you with one of their cars.
Which happens to also (statisitically speaking) increase your lifespan by reducing the odds that you'll die in a car accident.
Re:Still A Toy (Score:4, Informative)
Don't get me wrong, the numbers are quite impressive - especially the following passage from TFA:
However, at a price point of $80 - 100K, it's going to remain a playtoy for people with money, not become the OMG super-car replacement for mom's $30K Volvo.
$30k Volvo? Have you priced new cars in the last ten years? The cheapest bottom-of-the-line Volvo lists at $32k, and they skyrocket from there.
Inflation has been a bitch with most car lines. A roughly comparably priced Volvo (S80) with "normal" options is $50k, and is vastly less well equipped.
The car Mitt Romney derided... (Score:4, Interesting)
During one of the presidential debates, Mitt Romney named Tesla a failure, and claimed that the loan given to Tesla by the DOE was a waste of taxpayer money. This drove the stock down to $25 per share. I wish I'd bought then, because that stock is now around $140 per share, and climbing.
Re:The car Mitt Romney derided... (Score:5, Insightful)
I wish I'd bought then, because that stock is now around $140 per share, and climbing.
Anyone else wondering how many Romney nabbed?
4 Cars? (Score:5, Funny)
"And just how strong is the Model S roof, which is secured with aerospace-grade bolts? It broke a testing machine that was pushing down on the roof with the equivalent of the weight of four cars."
Four cars? Pshaw. Forty years ago my Volvo could bench press 6.
http://imgur.com/kmdoVYR [imgur.com]
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Informative)
Or you could read the article and see that in the areas considered for the tests, many of the common safety tests wouldn't even work, they couldn't roll the car over with standard techniques, they couldn't crush the passenger compartment with a standard crusher, and they had a HUGE crumple zone.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Informative)
Or you could read the article and see that in the areas considered for the tests, many of the common safety tests wouldn't even work, they couldn't roll the car over with standard techniques, they couldn't crush the passenger compartment with a standard crusher, and they had a HUGE crumple zone.
Also, for the roof crush test the crushing machine broke before the roof did.
The Tesla Model S is an extremely well-engineered machine. It's expensive, yes, but in most respects it's simply superior to equivalently-priced luxury cars. I'm really looking forward to their next generation, which is intended to be priced more mid-market (probably in the 30s).
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:4, Funny)
When you roll the thing over, you want it to be rigid so that it doesn't bend to intersect with your empty skull.
Re: (Score:3)
unless your brain is resting against the roof/ceiling of the car, the energy isn't going to be transferred from the roof to your brain.
which is precisely why you want the roof and its support pillars to be rigid enough that it wont crush your head.
stupid AC.
Re: (Score:3)
You know, people like the IIHS, NHTSA, certification groups for all the major motorsports. Who knew rollbars weren't necessary!?
You realize the rollbars are there to prevent the roof from being crushed into the passenger, right? They are there to provide stiffness, so the roof doesn't come crashing on the driver. That's not really backing up the AC.
You want to dissipate the energy with crumpling, but you don't want to crumple into the driver or passengers. That means that at some point it needs to get really rigid. Deform by a certain amount, but never deform beyond a particular point. Considering the NHTSA gave the vehicle 5 s
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No idiot, he's right, you're wrong. Cars typically don't take impact on the roof, and there are only a few inches of room to crush before your spine starts to get crushed. Race cars use solid-as-fuck roll cages to keep the roof from absorbing any energy, it seems to work well.
In fact most purpose-built race cars have a space frame that is EXTREMELY rigid with carbon fiber/aluminum honeycomb "crash boxes" stuck to the front and rear bumpers that act as crumple zones.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm no car safety engineer, but I suspect that's nonsense. If I understand modern car cabin safety engineering correctly, the whole point is to make the cabin itself very rigid, but it is surrounded by energy-absorbing crumple zones outside of it to absorb impacts. That's accomplished by having the front, end, and sides of the cars deformable. By contrast it's not exactly normal for roofs (or for that matter, the bottom of a car) to be subjected to head-on collisions. Typically roofs need to support the weight of a car if it flips over, and in that case roof deformation is *not* desirable because any reduction in the size of the cabin would lead to compression of the passengers.
Re: (Score:3)
in what way does the roof ever need to absorb energy?? the only time the roof needs to do anything is when the car rolls over, in which case its now supporting the weight of the car.
having even a little bit of give means crushing your empty AC skull.
so no, the roof absolutely does NOT need to absorb any energy.
in fact, if you look, the majority of the passenger compartment is designed to be fairly rigid.
all the crumple zones and energy absorbtion engineering is placed outside the passenger compartment.
stupi
Re: (Score:3)
You might want to measure how much of a crumple zone a roof might have. My car has about 2" before it's impacting my head. Sides have 4-6", and then it's impacting my arm.
Or you could keep calling people names. Since you probably aren't old enough to drive a car.
Re: (Score:3)
Wasn't the next tesla vehicle going to compete against the $50k luxury SUV's?
In this case, this is the "next" vehicle that you heard about. You were either reading an old article, or read an article before the introduction of the model S.
Re: (Score:3)
The Model X [teslamotors.com].
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:4, Informative)
While the pictures may not show it, I saw a Model X in person at the Tesla factory. It is nearly the size of an Expedition so I think it will fill the role nicely as either since it can comfortably seat 7 adults with extra storage under the frunk.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Informative)
Why?
Most of these scores are not based on just the cost. But on the novel design approaches. Elon Musk is building Tesla's like space ships. Using more advanced design techniques. Most automobiles are 30 year old engineering. And you may pay $100,000 for a BMW. But it's really not that much more advanced in construction than a Chevy.
Tesla went and said, let's design from the ground up and use all ideas. And that's why they did things differently. The cheaper vehicles will likely be cheaper because of performance grade of the motors will be gone, less refinement and comforts, and namely, the R&D expenditure will be re-couped.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Funny)
Gasoline engines are well noted for their ability to work underwater.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Funny)
I am taking that as sarcasm. However it is tough to tell with these posts, you could just be wrong.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Insightful)
You say that as if the engine fan would keep working, spark plugs can keep firing, the engine doesn't flood(through, say, the tailpipe, or oil system), or a ton of other basic risks. All an electric motor needs to keep working is insulation to prevent shorts. Which it SHOULD have anyways.
Re: (Score:3)
You say that as if the engine fan would keep working, spark plugs can keep firing, the engine doesn't flood(through, say, the tailpipe, or oil system), or a ton of other basic risks. All an electric motor needs to keep working is insulation to prevent shorts. Which it SHOULD have anyways.
... this is why engineers sometimes annoy me.
"It doesn't fit the model, therefore it can't work!"
Well, Skippy, I hate to break it to ya, but gasoline engines very much DO operate underwater, presuming dry airflow to the intake (and from the exhaust) is maintained. Just plug something like "Jeep drives under water" into Youtube for examples.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:4, Informative)
Diesel engines, on the other hand, do not use spark plugs or electrical components (other than for starting the motor), so all you need is a snorkel. Those Humvees and Land-Rovers you see crossing rivers and streams with the snorkels all have diesel engines.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Informative)
Gasoline engines do not work when submerged. They require high voltage electrical sparks to ignite the fuel. Being submerged robs them of the spark they need to run. You would have to do special waterproofing of all of the engine's electrical works before it can run submerged.
Growing up as a 'river rat,' partying with crazed rednecks and their beater 4x4s on the river beds has imparted me with the knowledge that what you say here is decidedly not true. Theoretically, you're right, but practical observation defies that theory. Hell, the most I've ever seen anyone do as far as waterproofing was to RTV their distributor shut, and even that was considered overkill.
Diesel engines, on the other hand, do not use spark plugs or electrical components (other than for starting the motor), so all you need is a snorkel. Those Humvees and Land-Rovers you see crossing rivers and streams with the snorkels all have diesel engines.
Bullshit - I've seen far, far more 6-cylinder gasoline Jeeps successfully taking a swim than anything else, save maybe Chenowth dune buggies powered by 50-year-old VW engines.
Re: (Score:3)
Yep, lots of guys put snorkel air intakes on their jeeps and go through rivers, without a PCV system the only other place for water to enter a running engine is through the gas cap which can't be water/air tight because you'd cause a vacuum that your fuel pump could never pull against.
Re: (Score:3)
Ridiculous. Because the gov't want to promote electric cars, will we now see artificially high safety ratings on electric cars to promote sales? Since when did the gov't get into the marketing business?
Did you get served the secret version of the articles, the one that revealed that conspiracy? The only mention of electricalness contributing to the safety rating was the speculation that the freedom of layout afforded by not having a conventional engine block allowed them to build more crumple zone into the design.
(As for governments in the marketing business, that's actually a core function: states have been asserting the legitimacy of their power through marketing since that marketing involved allegin
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you have any evidence whatsoever that the score is undeserved?
In this case being electric helped with not having to turn off the ignition to prevent fire, have more flexibility in the positioning of elements so that more protection is added for the passenger and having so low a center of mass that they had to design a special test in order to make the car rollover since it would not do it in the normal one. Also, using spaceworthy components helped, I guess...
Put up or shut up (Score:3)
Because the gov't want to promote electric cars, will we now see artificially high safety ratings on electric cars to promote sales?
Wow, cynical much? Maybe, just maybe, the engineers at Tesla actually did a really good job. If the vehicle is subjected to the same tests and scores higher then what possible problem could you have with that? If you have evidence that the government somehow held Tesla to a different standard then by all means please share with the rest of the class. But if you are just being snarky then shut up.
Re: (Score:3)
Because the gov't want to promote electric cars?
I thought the government wanted to feed the oil industry? I am confused oh too many conspiracies.
They are promoting the electric car so I think it is part of the conspiracy so I will get a gas car just to show them, then that will feed into the oil industry conspiracy.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:4, Funny)
Just find some old Pintos and have every bad guy drive those.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Funny)
What I'm afraid is that there will no longer be explosions when a car barely collides in movies [U+2e2e]
[Unless it is a documentary about 'accidents' like Michael Hastings'...]
Don't worry, movie producers will rig the cars with Tesla Coils and there will be an impressive array of electrical discharge arcs emanating from the car, incinerating everything in the vicinity.
Re: (Score:3)
That at least might be realistic when compared to a half empty 15 gallon gas tank creating a blast the size of a house or two.
Re: (Score:3)
You know it's a violation of law to remove your bumper dynamite and zero G sensor?
Re: (Score:3)
Just require that all of the wiring be made of conductive thermite. Then, if a wire gets too hot, WHOOSH!! Perfectly adequate fireball, with the added bonus of being impossible to extinguish. Magnesium wiring would do, but it's possible to put a magnesium fire out. One might also make the body out of rocket fuel [unmuseum.org].
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Interesting)
How is a big crumple zone bad? (Score:5, Insightful)
Without a large motor in the way Tesla is able to use the whole front compartment as a crumple zone as opposed to most combustion vehicles that primary use the sides as a crumple zone. While I don't think the ratings were manipulated they are artificially high because the Tesla design is able to game the system.
Explain to me exactly how having an enormous crumple zone in front of the driver is somehow a bad thing. Would you rather have an engine pushed into your lap from a frontal collision? Their is no evidence I've seen that their ratings are "artificially high". The results are what they are.
Re:How is a big crumple zone bad? (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think having a large crumple zone is bad (it's great, actually), but if you use a large percentage of it during a relatively low speed crash so there is no large deceleration detected (aka: gaming the test), then when you have a real crash at a higher speed then the occupants of the vehicle will experience a large sudden deceleration when they run out of crumple zone (aka: they're screwed). It seems that the Tesla has a longer crumple zone than conventional cars, but since most conventional cars are designed to have the engine drop down during a frontal collision, potentially freeing up more distance for crumpling, I'm not sure if it's as much longer as the gp is assuming. I don't think the gp's claim about the results being 'artificially high' are correct. They may or may not correlate with the results of other types of tests.
While the gp has an excellent point about the offset testing, I don't know if his theory about loss of crumple zone is accurate. He seems to assume that the Tesla structural members are evenly distributed across the width of the car, almost in a continuum, rather than concentrated along the sides as in a conventional car. I doubt this is the case, but I am interested in seeing the IIHS testing.
Re:How is a big crumple zone bad? (Score:4, Insightful)
Crumple zones don't work like that. As they crumple they get stiffer and provide greater energy absorption. They act like springs, the force exerted being proportional to the compression.
Considering how much effort has gone into making this car safe I'd be amazed if they somehow overlooked offset head-on collisions. Your speculation about structural members being at the sides is almost certainly correct because in the centre there is a large boot space (or trunk as Americans call it).
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Insightful)
Um, who cares....it's not gaming the system if it in FACT keeps the passengers safer.
Re: (Score:3)
If they gamed the system, passengers will be safer in accidents similar to the test, but potentially less safe in other accidents.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Insightful)
im not sure i would call taking advantage of engine placement choice "gaming the system". that makes it sound like cheating, which it isnt. its simply smart engineering.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Insightful)
also your numbers seem somewhat made up.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Insightful)
While I don't think the ratings were manipulated they are artificially high because the Tesla design is able to game the system.
Designing the car with safety in mind is not "gaming the system". The ratings are not "artificially high", they are "actually high". Obviously safety was a major design concern for Tesla, and this is the result. There is nothing artificial nor "cheating" about it. They specifically designed the car with a huge front crumple zone.
Saying that Tesla's ratings are artificially high is about the same as saying a combustion engine car has artificially low ratings because of a huge engine block in the front that does not crumple. The ratings are not artificial, they are what they are because of how the car is designed.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Bullshit. NO one buys electric cars because they uniformly suck and this is clearly just the fucking government trying to push them on us. But why am I arguing with dumbass statists on Slashdot AGAIN?
I see them on a near-daily basis. When you say "NO one" what you really mean is only people who can afford to spend $70K on a car. Granted that's not a lot of people, but in order for costs to be driven down we need those early adopters with deep pockets.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Name one besides the 911?
Rear/mid engine cars:
Pontiac Fiero
Porsche Boxster
Acura NSX
Toyota MR2
Smart Fourtwo
Ford GT40
Many different designs and price points.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Funny)
Not artificially high? How come North American cars don't have amber turn signals then?
They are amber, you just can't tell because nobody uses them. They just give you a gentle nudge to tell you they are changing lanes.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Informative)
Because US regulations don't require them while other markets do. The Europeans and Japanese just don't bother to make market-specific taillights, they just follow the Euro regs which also meet US regs.
Re:NHTSA pushed a 5 star rating (Score:5, Funny)
If the color of turn signals is the main plank of your safety argument, you've failed.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Model S vs Hummer (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, don't expect safety in any vehicle above 60mph. Drive safely instead of relying on technical means to buffer a crash.
Re:Model S vs Hummer (Score:5, Informative)
Numbers!
Tesls S: 4647
Base 4x2 F150:4685
base 4x4 F150 5000
The 5th Gen Camero weight about 3700
BWM 5 series 3700.
The ford focus 2960 pounds
Just for some idea of how much cars weigh.
Re:Model S vs Hummer (Score:5, Interesting)
In a head-on collision with another vehicle, yes weight makes a big difference. However you seem to think that headons are the only type of accidents that exist. into. But actually true headons are quite rare and make up a small percentage of accidents. (which is why NHTSA started testing offset headons and side impacts and so on because they're much more common).
Anyways there are accidents where weight hurts you rather than help you. Would you rather crash into the side of a mountain at 60mph in a M-1 Abrams tank, Humvee, or a Tesla S? How about a rollover?
Re:Model S vs Hummer (Score:5, Insightful)
Weight has nothing to do with it. Realize that a hard ridged vehicle, if not designed properly, would transfer all the energy to the passenger which would kill you due to internal injuries. Even a light car with the proper design of crumple zones can be safer than a large heavy vehicle.
Don't start quoting physics when you clearly don't understand how car frame design works.
Re: Model S vs Hummer (Score:3)
Ask the entire question (Score:3)
Wrong question; what you should be asking is, "why spend 100K, when I can buy a car with an almost equivalent safety rating for leas than half that price?
You can buy a car with a 5 star safety rating AND which performs like a Tesla for half the money? Where can I find this incredible vehicle?
Nobody buys a car just for the safety rating. Your argument is a strawman.