Right. You want to stop not every 250 miles, but every 150 miles and EAT? So you EAT every 2 hours you're on the road? (and since there's supposedly only 6 "free" stations, you must not go very far). Sorry, but I'm not buying it even with a family (and no I don't have kids). Now I don't know about you, but I can drive 250 miles in 3.5 hours and still go the speed limit in many states. And no, I don't have to pee every 3.5 hours. When I drive to Canada (and I go 1-3 times a year on average), I've got 5 hours of driving to do in each direction and I stop once, typically at 300-350 miles and that's it. I may or may not eat depending on if I plan on eating at my favorite pub in Niagara-On-The-Lake the same night or whatever, but I sure as hell don't stop every 150 miles (2 hours) and EAT every freaking 2 hours. At that rate, I'd have two meals done before lunch. I've driven to Florida plenty of times and that's a 1.5 day drive. I stop to eat ONCE, keep snacks cans of soda in the car for any passengers and use the restroom when I gas up unless someone has to go really bad. I'd never get there if I had to stop every 150 miles and "charge up" for 20-30 minutes. It'd take 3 days to drive 1000 miles. I'd have to spend a bare minimum of 2 hours and 15 minutes charging the car and not getting anywhere and I don't mean for one nice dinner break, but every 2 hours whether I like it or not and PRAY that the chargers aren't all already taken (heaven forbid there was a line of cars waiting to use the chargers; you could be stuck there for HOURS to just get charged up to drive another 2 hours and then do it all over again....
That's simply not acceptable in my book or anyone else's book I know except the few of you in this thread trying to sell me on Tesla electric cars at $70-90k each for what is actually a $20-34k Subaru equivalent save the drive train. I've heard of making lemons out of lemonade, but give it up. It's never going to work the way it is now except as a second (work) car and that's one hefty price to pay for a work car, IMO. Usually you get the sports car as the second car and keep a junker to just beat to death driving to work. Here you pay for a Porsche 911 and get a Subaru equivalent and have to drive it to death to try and get your money back except you CAN'T drive it to death because it can only go 150 miles before it's time for the 20 minute charge or 250 miles before it needs a full charge which I don't know how long it takes (I'm figuring an hour plus with a supercharger station and all night long for a normal household setup).
I can beat this dead horse all day long if you like. I don't see why you're trying to defend it as a daily driver. If you like it for a show off piece and have lots of cash you don't know what to do with, fine. But it's not going to save the world (again the pollution just moves to the power plant) and it's not very practical except as a daily commuter and it's a pretty damn expensive daily commuter, relegating it basically to people making $100k+ plus a year or so for the most part that don't know how else to spend their money. Personally, if I were going to spend ~$90k on a car, I'd get a Nissan GT-R. You can get the $90k Tesla equivalent acceleration in a $26k Subaru WRX or $38k Dodge Charger or Challenger no problem and have plenty of cash leftover to take it on a cross-country trip for the next 6 months.
I'm not "upset" about anything. I just gave my opinion that it's good that Apple didn't buy Tesla and I get attacked by a few fanatics that are trying to sell me swamp land in Florida, basically. I'm just making my points in response. I'm sure what Tesla is doing will eventually trickle down to something more affordable and useful, but it's a hobby/toy right now, IMO. The limitations don't justify the cost in my mind. If you want to buy one, go ahead. It's still a free country the last time I checked (other than the insane taxes that we supposedly fought against with Britain and now deliver in spades to ourselves anyway with very little "representation" for the average person).