EV's beat hydrogen cars hands down when you look at the full life cycle. Hydrogen is fool's gold.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Said to Have Made 'Serious Bid' of ~$240 Per Share to Acquire Tesla Around 2013
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
EV's beat hydrogen cars hands down when you look at the full life cycle. Hydrogen is fool's gold.
I don’t like not being able to test drive a car before I buy, and being able to drive it for a week or 1000 miles isn’t a direct replacement as far as I am concerned but overall I would consider buying a Tesla as a second car. I live in a state that doesn’t have a lot of charging stations for anyone’s electric car and once you leave interstate 80 there probably aren’t more than 1 dozen chargers to cover 500 mile long by 175 mile wide state. But 250-300 miles would easily cover me around town and for relatively short trips of 100 miles or less. 100 miles because I still need to drive back. If I can drive most of the way on an interstate or if I travel east almost anywhere then charging stations become more like gas stations, there will be another one a few miles away.
The ability to repair problems myself is a big concern with any car and having no Tesla dealers in Nebraska and relying on traveling maintenance vans for service makes Tesla a no go as a primary car, and the cost makes it hard to justify as a secondary car.
I think it's very fortunate that Tesla was not bought by Apple. The analysts here simply don't get the real strengths of Tesla and what the goals and the big vision of the company actually is in terms of autonomous driving. If it's true that Apple is pursuing LIDAR like everyone else, then they would have derailed Tesla's innovative sensor suite and software/hardware cycle that is now years ahead of the rest of the pack.
and this story and particularly the video in it aged fast, Tesla stock has already rebounded today to 208. So much for the sky is falling scenario.
From my armchair here, I get the feeling that Tesla is really a Musk-company, just like Apple was a Jobs-company.
Tesla did get where they are now because of Musk and despite Musk, at the same time.
In theory, bringing in Apple and letting Musk run one of his side-businesses would be a good idea - but there's a reason Apple rarely acquires big companies. You need to integrate them, you might need to run their product-pipeline dry and you need to adapt their supply chain. It worked fairly well for Beats, so far, and also relatively quickly.
But Beats was actually profitable, IIRC, when it was acquired - and much, much smaller.
Tesla is a tire-fire. They're burning through billions per year at this point. Apple shareholders wouldn't be too thrilled with the idea of writing of 30b and a large chunk of the dividend for the foreseeable future.
The cars do seem nice - but I'm asking myself, if and how electric cars can actually be built at a price-point even well-off people can afford them and still turn a profit for the manufacturer. Tesla, so much seems clear, can't.
That said, I wish Tesla every success they deserve. None of the other manufacturers was able to come up with what they have done. And that's a shame.
Tesla did get where they are now because of Musk and despite Musk, at the same time.
In theory, bringing in Apple and letting Musk run one of his side-businesses would be a good idea - but there's a reason Apple rarely acquires big companies. You need to integrate them, you might need to run their product-pipeline dry and you need to adapt their supply chain. It worked fairly well for Beats, so far, and also relatively quickly.
But Beats was actually profitable, IIRC, when it was acquired - and much, much smaller.
Tesla is a tire-fire. They're burning through billions per year at this point. Apple shareholders wouldn't be too thrilled with the idea of writing of 30b and a large chunk of the dividend for the foreseeable future.
The cars do seem nice - but I'm asking myself, if and how electric cars can actually be built at a price-point even well-off people can afford them and still turn a profit for the manufacturer. Tesla, so much seems clear, can't.
That said, I wish Tesla every success they deserve. None of the other manufacturers was able to come up with what they have done. And that's a shame.
Sketchy rumor, mostly because Tesla’s build quality is even worse than GM. You’d have to go back to the Yugo to find an example of a car with worse fitting panels, paint, trim issues, and cheaper materials.
Not to mention the fact that Tesla is a money losing pit, that has been largely unable to execute.
Not to mention the fact that Tesla is a money losing pit, that has been largely unable to execute.
I don’t drive 120 mph either, as it’s just unsafe and against the law. My point was, that EV vehicles can only distribute so much power in short bursts before needing a recharge.
My EV is also quicker than your Mustang GT, even if my grandma was driving it.
Bragging about your electric vehicle being faster than a Mustang GT is like bragging about a four-cylinder sounding just as good as a V-8, which is not really mutually exclusive.
But there’s nothing wrong being proud of your battery powered go-cart, we all have our tendencies of what we appreciate and what we invest our interests in.
I don’t drive 120 mph either, as it’s just unsafe and against the law. My point was, that EV vehicles can only distribute so much power in short bursts before needing a recharge.
Bragging about your electric vehicle being faster than a Mustang GT is like bragging about a four-cylinder sounding just as good as a V-8, which is not really mutually exclusive.
Don't get me started on my naturally aspirated 2.0L Honda Civic engine. I got 43mpg combined on my trip to New Orleans from California. I get (combined) 37mpg on my trip to work up a mountain and 47-50mpg down (combined).
My boss has a Tesla P90 and it is fun to ride in - faster than sin. My friend has a CLK 63 AMG and several M3s. Nothing like the sound of a V8. It's just beautiful. Some of the best sounding cars I've ever heard come from a group of Corvette Z06s that used to drive around Santa Clarita when I was a kid.
My V8 AMG could only distribute so much power in short bursts before it needed a costly refuel. I only got about 200 miles per tank in that car and it was slower. Our Tesla leaves home with a ~300 mile charge everyday and has much more power, almost 560 kw/over 700 hp. You also don't have the penalty of low MPG of a big gas engine when you are not diving fast.
That’s outstanding with that type of fuel range, and in relation to EV, I totally get where the fuel savings is, coupled with the performance factor. And if you’re someone that commutes long distances or drives extensively for work, there’s nothing more fuel-efficient than what you’re driving or even a Tesla or another electric vehicle.
Yup, I got to drive the Tesla P 85D last summer, (my neighbor has a white one and it was an amazing experience). I’ve never felt torque the way I did in that vehicle, and The regenerative braking really is a fascinating feature that is unique in its own.
For me, I’ve always had performance cars with the V8’s over the years, and you can’t replace the sound/exhaust note a V8 emanates, I mean, it’s worth the price tag alone to hear/experience the 5.0 Coyote or 6.2 L SRT V8 from the Charger. The V8 is a dying breed of cars, but there’s a very strong following that will always support the likes of the Mustangs/Camaros/Chargers/Corvettes, etc.
Last edited:
Yep. That's what I like about them.
AFAIK, Audi's e-Tron is even heavier than a Model X, while having a slightly smaller battery, less storage and is thus less efficient.
I would really like to see how much of the inefficiency is from the weight - and how much of the weight is from noise-insulation.
Tesla has no doubt very interesting concepts and great potential - but obviously they'd need a strong backer that could fund them for a couple of more years, to the tune of multiple billions per year.
There aren't many left of these in this part of the galaxy, I'm afraid.
It's really a shame because the cars look to fresh and so promising....
You've missed the point. There's a reason why you never see lap times for a Tesla. It's because when you race them at high speeds, the car will go into limp mode when the temps get too high.
A Tesla can't beat a Chevy Suburban around a lap at Lime Rock.
If you don't care about putting your cars through it's paces, them fine, the Tesla is a great car.
@Relentless Power was just pointing out that he likes to race around a track, so therefore, the Tesla isn't for him.
But Hydrogen cars are right around the corner! I remember all sorts of technocrats and politicians saying so back in the early 70’s during the oil crisis!! Any minute now!
And I’m serious about people saying that. They really did.
[doublepost=1558472836][/doublepost]My opinion, and since I don’t know the man personally but base that opinion on second hand news accounts is that Elon is bat sh*t crazy but extremely driven and smart. Looking at what Tesla and SpaceX have done you can’t say he doesn’t eventually get where he says, he just doesn’t get there as fast as he said he would.
But on the other hand, he’s gotten there before anyone else has.
Jobs was famous for micromanaging. Read his bios.
Musk isn't interested enough in design and Apples core businesses which is a shame as if you were looking for another Jobs he's the closest fit.
I take some comfort that, if in the event of Tesla going bankrupt, Apple might very well rescue them.
The EV cannot be allowed to die. Too many want to keep the combustion engine status quo and are keen to see Tesla fail.
Tesla’s problem is not performance; it’s the horrible build quality and cheap materials. You can compare panels on the same car and the gaps will be off almost 1/4”. Leather stitching is uneven, interior plastic looks cheap, and the paint has the worse orange peel I’ve ever seen on a production car. Looks like a Maaco paint job.
Some people don’t notice or care about those things, but they’re there.
Yep, just wait until gas goes over $5/gallon and more
[doublepost=1558475905][/doublepost]
Did you just pulled that out of your butt? Plenty of Model 3's do racing, battery tech is changing by the months, not decades, like ICE.
https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-mod...se-version-beats-ferrari-closed-circuit-test/
https://electrek.co/2019/04/09/tesla-model-3-performance-nurburgring-race-track/
I love the fact I’m not a guinea pig beta tester for someone’s self driving program.
"Apple buying Tesla" would necessitate "buying out Musk." No fit required.
[doublepost=1558477785][/doublepost]
If Tesla is losing money, how would Musk be making billions? Those concepts are mutually contradictory-- unless he is stealing Tesla money to line his own pockets (which I don't believe he is).
[doublepost=1558477922][/doublepost]
Everyone would be better off if Tim Cook replaced Elon Musk. What Tesla could use more than anything right now is a level-headed businessman, not a sociopath such as Musk is.
[doublepost=1558478529][/doublepost]
It closed at 205, and is at 201 after hours. But last week it was at 230, so that's a pretty big drop. So much for that "rebound".
Elon Musk is certainly a polarizing figure, but I have to give him credits where it's due. He's a fantastic engineer with a tenacity to start and realize his lofty visions. Starting a car company, let alone an electric one, is a near impossible feat. What he was able to accomplish with Tesla is a staggering achievement.
But I don't think he's the right leader when a company as big as Tesla enters the stage it is in right now. As polarizing figure as Steve Jobs was, he knew how to play the press and investors. Elon is the polar opposite -- he and the press (and investors) just don't seem to get along.