Wow, he isn’t as articulate as I would have expected - don’t put him in charge of sales. He is talking aobut a subject he knows intimately and can barely get across his point.
For all the money he has, he really should hire a translator. I don’t have a clue as to what the hell he is saying. He should at least define what he means by an EV so one has a base to understand his argument.
He was saying that a plug in hybrid is a weak compromise which is neither an outstanding gasoline powered or an outstanding electric powered car. Where he may have lost you was his explanation of why this is so. Having two complete power systems is heavy and counter productive to economy which leads to the compromises. The compromises, he says, cause a car which will not please the driver.
If he is correct, we will all understand this when we get a chance to drive them.
I disagree with Tesla comment. The plug in hybird is more advance than Ev. They are game changers It transmission system, is more efferent than pure gas system. The generator and elector motors replace a transmission.the drive train is much less and lighter. The plug in hybird give the flexible that ev does not have. yes the battery pack is smaller and batteries have to made different. Capacitors could sever storage buffer and more able to release charge at high power rates, so batteries do not have to work as hard power demand from batteries is more even.
His point is simple. If you want the same performance from a hybrid, you can’t just scale down the battery pack based on the ratios of all electric range. Because of this (whether you use boost caps or batteries), you don’t get all the savings in weight and volume that simple mileage math would indicate. This is all true.
What he doesn’t say is that the benefits from an all electric are “paid for” with longer charge times and limits on total range (even if there were charge stations all over, going on a 1000 mile trip with an all electric would require a lot of charge time!).
The case he is making will create a better driving experience for those that want performance and don’t need the benefits of a hybrid drivetrain. Some of the market will want this capability, just like some of the market won’t.
And what many forget is that this isn’t about what technology will replace the entire light vehicle fleet, but rather how does one commercialize one of the many evolutioinary (or revolutionary) technologies that fill the needs of part of the market space and make them commercially viable.
My mom never drives a long distance, and a full electric would be perfect for her. My wife and I (and our two kids) make a couple 1000+ mile trips a year, and a full electric wouldn’t be the ideal vehicle for us. And that’s OK…..
He really needs to learn not to repeat the first 2 words of each sentence three times. I couldn’t even understand what he was trying to say, I was too distracted by his stuttering.
As the owner of three cars, a ZENN EV, a Prius hybrid and a Volvo CrossCountry, I view Mr Musk as an advocate for his choice of vehicle since that is what he has chosen to build. His point of view is interesting as a result. For those who have yet to experience these vehicles to speculate is to a significant extent, well, speculation.
The temptation is to assume that future vehicles must surpass present vehicles in ALL respects. This is simply not realistic nor helpful. For general use, my Prius is far the preferred vehicle. But it can’t do the heavy work that the Volvo does. For comfort, the Volvo is hard to beat. But for the frequent short trips which happen, the ZENN is just fine and does not require a trip which is long enough to get the engine warm. I understand the frustration of trying to build the advantages of these vehicles all into one car.
I don’t think Mr. Musk understands the Volt. The Volt is not a hybrid because the gas engine does not power the wheels. The gas engine only charges the batteries which powers the wheels. It’s no different from the Tesla’s batteries being charged by any carbon-burning electrical source. In the Volt’s case, the batteries can be charged by a gas engine. So his analogy of a lawn mower engine powering a sedan is quite incorrect and grossly misleading.
In addition, I really hope that GM goes bankrupt and is wiped off the face of the Earth. They are an evil company that had a viable and very successful electric car (GM EV1) but refused to allow the leasing customers to keep the cars even when those same customers offered to pay huge premiums for it. I guess Big Oil and GM had some sort of agreement to screw the consumer and the environment.
Look who’s laughing now? Big Oil is still making billions while GM and their fat cat union employees will disappear like the dodo bird.
Gas 2.0 digs into the viscous world of biofuels and the fast-paced transit arena, exploring the technologies and substances that are the future of transportation.
Wow, he isn’t as articulate as I would have expected - don’t put him in charge of sales. He is talking aobut a subject he knows intimately and can barely get across his point.
For all the money he has, he really should hire a translator. I don’t have a clue as to what the hell he is saying. He should at least define what he means by an EV so one has a base to understand his argument.
His blabbering makes impossible to understand. If his production as good as his ability to speak, then his production is in trouble.
What he said was clear to me.
He was saying that a plug in hybrid is a weak compromise which is neither an outstanding gasoline powered or an outstanding electric powered car. Where he may have lost you was his explanation of why this is so. Having two complete power systems is heavy and counter productive to economy which leads to the compromises. The compromises, he says, cause a car which will not please the driver.
If he is correct, we will all understand this when we get a chance to drive them.
I disagree with Tesla comment. The plug in hybird is more advance than Ev. They are game changers It transmission system, is more efferent than pure gas system. The generator and elector motors replace a transmission.the drive train is much less and lighter. The plug in hybird give the flexible that ev does not have. yes the battery pack is smaller and batteries have to made different. Capacitors could sever storage buffer and more able to release charge at high power rates, so batteries do not have to work as hard power demand from batteries is more even.
His point is simple. If you want the same performance from a hybrid, you can’t just scale down the battery pack based on the ratios of all electric range. Because of this (whether you use boost caps or batteries), you don’t get all the savings in weight and volume that simple mileage math would indicate. This is all true.
What he doesn’t say is that the benefits from an all electric are “paid for” with longer charge times and limits on total range (even if there were charge stations all over, going on a 1000 mile trip with an all electric would require a lot of charge time!).
The case he is making will create a better driving experience for those that want performance and don’t need the benefits of a hybrid drivetrain. Some of the market will want this capability, just like some of the market won’t.
And what many forget is that this isn’t about what technology will replace the entire light vehicle fleet, but rather how does one commercialize one of the many evolutioinary (or revolutionary) technologies that fill the needs of part of the market space and make them commercially viable.
My mom never drives a long distance, and a full electric would be perfect for her. My wife and I (and our two kids) make a couple 1000+ mile trips a year, and a full electric wouldn’t be the ideal vehicle for us. And that’s OK…..
He really needs to learn not to repeat the first 2 words of each sentence three times. I couldn’t even understand what he was trying to say, I was too distracted by his stuttering.
Well said Matt
Clearly this is about who to believe.
As the owner of three cars, a ZENN EV, a Prius hybrid and a Volvo CrossCountry, I view Mr Musk as an advocate for his choice of vehicle since that is what he has chosen to build. His point of view is interesting as a result. For those who have yet to experience these vehicles to speculate is to a significant extent, well, speculation.
The temptation is to assume that future vehicles must surpass present vehicles in ALL respects. This is simply not realistic nor helpful. For general use, my Prius is far the preferred vehicle. But it can’t do the heavy work that the Volvo does. For comfort, the Volvo is hard to beat. But for the frequent short trips which happen, the ZENN is just fine and does not require a trip which is long enough to get the engine warm. I understand the frustration of trying to build the advantages of these vehicles all into one car.
I don’t think Mr. Musk understands the Volt. The Volt is not a hybrid because the gas engine does not power the wheels. The gas engine only charges the batteries which powers the wheels. It’s no different from the Tesla’s batteries being charged by any carbon-burning electrical source. In the Volt’s case, the batteries can be charged by a gas engine. So his analogy of a lawn mower engine powering a sedan is quite incorrect and grossly misleading.
In addition, I really hope that GM goes bankrupt and is wiped off the face of the Earth. They are an evil company that had a viable and very successful electric car (GM EV1) but refused to allow the leasing customers to keep the cars even when those same customers offered to pay huge premiums for it. I guess Big Oil and GM had some sort of agreement to screw the consumer and the environment.
Look who’s laughing now? Big Oil is still making billions while GM and their fat cat union employees will disappear like the dodo bird.