Tesla Roadster gets reviewed and road-tested

While they didn't put it though quite the same rigorous tests that the feds did, our pals at AutoblogGreen did recently get to spend a fair bit of time being the wheel of Tesla's much-hyped Roadster, and they've now thankfully churned out a fairly thorough review to make us all a little jealous. As you might expect, they readily admit that the car is "not for everyone" (even among those that can afford it), but for those that know what they're getting into, they say you can expect a "hard-edged sports car that fits like a pair of good leather driving gloves." That extends in no small part to the car's Lotus roots, which AutoblogGreen found evident in everything from the car's "cozy" interior to its non-boosted steering system, which they say provides "amazing feedback to the driver." If that's not enough to convince you, you can hit up the link below for the complete review and, of course, plenty of pictures.

[Harry @ Jan 28th 2008 4:49PM]

I'd totally volunteer to "review" this car...

It looks amazing and I bet I can never afford it.

[ErikLindemann @ Jan 28th 2008 5:31PM]

At a $98,000 base price, you'd need to start saving soon.

[max andrews @ Jan 28th 2008 5:47PM]

Don't be to bummed, the price for this thing will be cut as soon as they ramp up production and batteries continue to drop in price and weight, not to mention increase in capacity (Fewer batteries needed = less expensive). Probably by 2012 something similar to this model will be available for around $60k (new), still not cheap but affordable, and if you wait a few more years pick up a used one for $40k and replace the battery pack so it's good as new. The monthly payment difference between a $30k car and a $45k car is not all that huge considering how much money we spend on other pointless crap; if you give up your cable subscription it will probably cover the difference.

Plus, never buy a first gen product, silly! :)

[V3LOCIP3D3 @ Jan 28th 2008 9:14PM]

@ max
I wouldn't count on the price dropping that much. This is supposed to be a battery-powered car with the performance of a ferrari and it's pretty luxurious besides. It has a 4 second 0-60, which is amazing even for a ferrari, and it looks like a lotus elise but even better. As an addicted car enthusiast, this is a really impressive sports car. It has a top speed of 125mph, which is only because the motor is air-cooled. Because of this, I imagine the price will only be going up if anything, when they produce a model that's liquid cooled with a radiator.

Prices on cars hardly ever fluctuate much from the original (obviously in the case of inflation they do). This is a genuine sports car and they are going to price it as such.

[retro77 @ Jan 28th 2008 4:53PM]

So sweet! I am still looking for 3 other people to go in on one of these beauties.

[aguiluz @ Jan 28th 2008 4:54PM]

"non-boosted steering system"

Ugh! You mean a car this expensive has no power assisted steering like the rusty old 1995 GMC we use? Sorry, we NEED power assisted steering.

On second thought though, manual steering can be so hard to turn you can give yourself a workout while driving to work! Talk about multitasking!

Errr... On third thought I won't want to work out while driving to work. Shame to have sweaty underarms. Ewww!

[David Piatek @ Jan 28th 2008 4:59PM]

Nancy...

[broli @ Jan 28th 2008 5:10PM]

Indeed! And this reviewer is even making light of... Maybe he didn't try parking this car a few times a day, his biceps will explode.

[retro77 @ Jan 28th 2008 5:15PM]

True muscle cars dont have power steering. Thats why they are called "muscle cars". Flimsy @#$^&'s like you shouldn't have a car like this. Keep driving your Toyota!

[Jeff @ Jan 28th 2008 5:21PM]

"You mean a car this expensive has no power assisted steering like the rusty old 1995 GMC we use?"

Seriously, and I'll bet it's got less than 2,000 lbs. of towing capability too!

[kojo87 @ Jan 28th 2008 5:26PM]

this obviously is not the car for you then. if you are the kind of guy who works up a sweat without power steering you probably wont even fit in the car. you probably have an automatic transmission and ABS too.

its called driving buddy. too many people are just passengers in the driver's seat and it sounds like you're one of them.

[retro77 @ Jan 28th 2008 5:30PM]

Plus power steering robs precious horse power!

[Brandon @ Jan 28th 2008 5:42PM]

Most sports car enthusiasts will tell you that having power steering takes away from the driving experience by robbing the driver of the "feel" of the road. Having manual steering also gives the advantage of much more accurate and precise steering maneuvers. I drove around a 1974 subaru for several months without power steering, and while parallel parking was a royal B**** I really enjoyed the brute strength aspect of muscling it around.

[aguiluz @ Jan 28th 2008 5:52PM]

@retro77

Hey, I driven an unassisted Jeep and an unassisted Lancer. It was ok when I was at speed but U-Turns, Parallel Parking and navigating in parking lots were hell.

And when did I say I drive a Toyota? We have a GMC!

[Anthony @ Jan 28th 2008 5:54PM]

Rack & pinion is common for non-power too. I don't know if that's what we've got here, but I had a sports car w/o it & it really wasn't that bad. They generally weigh so little you don't really suffer too much.

1995 GMC? Well, it's probably 2k more than this one.

Too bad my company will only pay for "practical" cars (through 4 doors can get pretty sporty these days.)

[Joe Anstine @ Jan 28th 2008 6:39PM]

this car is for sports car enthusiasts. its not a luxury car in any sense. if your expecting a POS Beamer M3 that has leather and climate control and can go "fast" then go buy a Beamer. Don't whine about a car that was produced to be a real sports car. I mean, you could grow some balls and realize that this car is brutal (in a good way).

[Josh @ Jan 28th 2008 7:25PM]

While power steering can be helpful for some things, if you buy this car, you are probably getting it as a weekend car, not a car that you would ever be parallel parking. This car is meant to be driven, not parked.

Personally, i would absolutely love one just for the experience of that massive amount of torque available from the start and just to see what is in store for the rest of us once cars go electric. It is the future boys, better hold on tight or the torque might bight you.

[nebulus @ Jan 28th 2008 8:16PM]

funny watching americans talking about cars... sorry had to giggle.. (hey cornering anyone?)

[CraigJ @ Jan 28th 2008 8:54PM]

clueless.

[GKA @ Jan 28th 2008 9:10PM]

Whats wrong with ABS?
Do you enjoy longer stopping distances?

[V3LOCIP3D3 @ Jan 28th 2008 9:29PM]

Hmm, I'm pretty sure when they say it's not 'power assisted' they mean it's rack and pinion. Almost all sports cars have R&P, and while I love american muscle, they only dominate in drags, unless you love to use the ebrake.

@ joe antstine
M3s are pretty badass machines. I guess you must drive F430s or 911 GT3s, cuz besides that there aren't too many barebone, highend sportscars anymore . . and even those have ABS, climate control and assisted steering. Why? because it's better technology, it makes it perform better, they aren't idiots. If you wanna go retro ride a horse.

[Reid @ Jan 29th 2008 2:02AM]

Hey Gomer,

Did you ever consider that maybe, just maybe, this car weighs less than your 1995 GMC truck? And maybe the steering ratio is different? Perhaps it does not need power steering where a truck does.

I drove an Elise and never noticed anything too heavy about the steering. I didn't even realize it had no assist.

[V3LOCIP3D3 @ Jan 29th 2008 11:06AM]

This has rack-and-pinion steering!

http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/car/2840/Tesla-Roadster.html

[wootman @ Jan 28th 2008 5:12PM]

you know it is a sport car, which means it can inherently defy all rules of making sense for the sake of awesome, right?

[whatishalo? @ Jan 29th 2008 12:27AM]

Right on Captain Awesome!

[Andrew @ Jan 28th 2008 5:14PM]

Are those black lines really gaps in the paneling joins? That's terrible!

[retro77 @ Jan 28th 2008 5:18PM]

Thats why you buy it in black

[Flashpoint @ Jan 28th 2008 5:16PM]

Its too small and it doesn't look that great.

The CHEVY VOLT and the CTS COUPE Concepts look better.

[max andrews @ Jan 28th 2008 5:51PM]

Newsflash - concept cars from American manufacturers never actually look like that when they go into production.

That said, the tesla looks a lot better in black.

[Mke @ Jan 28th 2008 5:16PM]

Do I speak for myself when I say:

Lotus chassis. No gasoline. Driver-loving steering. 14,000 RPM. Dreamy.

[kojo87 @ Jan 28th 2008 5:22PM]

im with you big time. now if we could just work on that price tag...

[L.Rawlins @ Jan 28th 2008 5:28PM]

I was just thinking 'Lotus' myself. Good call.

[Matt @ Jan 28th 2008 5:44PM]

Meh, I'd rather just spend my money on a Exige GT3 and have an overall much quicker car while still getting 40MPG in mixed driving.

[Sim @ Jan 29th 2008 12:20PM]

How often will you really be using that extra top speed (given this has comparable if not better acceleration)?

In a few years, for the same price, this beats any true lotus on the market...

[Matt @ Jan 29th 2008 2:16PM]

The Exige GT3 has much better acceleration than the Tesla, because it has more power, and it weighs 700lbs less. Oh, and a Exige GT3 is $30,000 less. And it STILL has amazing fuel economy due to it's small displacement engine and extreme light weight.

And you don't have to worry about taking it on a trip to the beach and running out of juice half way.

And you don't have to worry about replacing the batteries in a few years which will be no doubt a very costly event.

EV is cool, but not very practical now, especially for a sports car. Especially when 70% of this country's electrical power still comes from coal, suddenly your EV isn't so green compared to a highly fuel efficient yet still very quick, balanced, and fun car like the Exige.

[jake @ Jan 30th 2008 5:05AM]

The Tesla was tested with a 3.7 sec 0-60 in its 2 speed, 3.9 sec in worser conditions. So the Exige gt3 isn't really faster in acceleration. Remember this is an EV motor with all the torque avaliable at 0rpm, a gas engine can't compare even with heavier weight in the Tesla (you can see this already with it being 2700lbs and only 250hp w/ 0-60 in 4 secs, try naming another car at 2700lbs with only 250hp that can go 0-60 in less than 4 secs). The tesla roadster can increase power just by raising voltage (and they are planning to do so after the first batch of roadsters, using a liquid cooled motor, new pem, upping the voltage to raise power so it can get 0-60 in 4 secs and still get to 125mph in 1 gear). Your 70% figure for coal generation is wrong, as the place that uses the most coal is only 73% (west virginia) and the number for the US is 49.7%. Not to mention offpeak electricity and that fact that most of the people who can afford this car can afford solar panels or at least selectively buying electricity from renewable sources (there are specific programs for this). Many states in the US use much less coal too, like California (where the headquarters is located and most likely where the most people would drive this roadster) which uses 16% coal. I've talked about this before, but even using 100% coal generation, factoring all manufacturing, including battery, an EV still pollutes less than a gas car (though only marginally); with other forms of generation, pollution is decreased dramatically:
http://www.ilea.org/lcas/taharaetal2001.html

Many people just pull in the automatic assumption that because of coal and the battery, EVs MUST be worse than gas cars, but that is not true. While it is important to consider that as a factor, just try not to make too many assumptions.
The roadster is just a first step in to the EV sportscar market, close to the first of it's kind (behind the $300k fetish). Your Exige GT3 came from a long process of refinement, and though the roadster inherits much of that, it also has many new things. The gasoline engine has pretty much evolved as far as it can go, but the EV drivetrain still has a long way to go (esp the battery tech), and considering that it can already reach comparable performance as gasoline cars today, its only going to get better.

[Flashpoint @ Jan 28th 2008 6:12PM]

....so do I

[Mathieu D @ Jan 28th 2008 6:14PM]

Nice article.

Next time you should proof read before posting though.

[S @ Jan 28th 2008 8:25PM]

This IS a freakin Lotus Elise with high power electric replacing the engine. Of course it will handle great, what I want is a direct, side by side review comparing it directly with the gas Elise, by a competent enthusiast magazine, or better yet, fifth gear!

[charliex @ Jan 28th 2008 9:05PM]

its a derivative of the elise chassis, extended for the extra weight.

as for power steering if its kept any of the heritage you'd hardly notice.

[roz @ Jan 28th 2008 9:09PM]

my fiat was manual steering - it was great - and yes it did work your muscles a little.

but you all can use your power assist and escalators on your way to the gym.

[Ayle @ Jan 28th 2008 9:35PM]

Now I really have to win the lottery....

[Xee @ Jan 29th 2008 12:17AM]

Too bad they didn't test the car's supposed ability to get 250 miles on a charge.

[Special_K_Ninja @ Jan 29th 2008 1:28PM]

This car is pointless. For a 100 grand I could a ferrari that blows this car out the water, has luggage had actual heat, and can move the seat to fit my needs. Just cause it's electric who cares. Different doesn't mean better. Ya it looks nice though.

[happy_penguin @ Jan 29th 2008 11:36PM]

It'll make a great collectors car when they go belly up after only selling a few hundred units.

[Shon S. @ Jan 30th 2008 12:56AM]

that would be cool if this car made it into gt5

[s. tate @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:41PM]

man, this does remind me of the lotus

[Jon @ Jan 28th 2008 7:28PM]

I'm waiting for the hybrid of this and a Lotus Elise. Think regular Lotus engine for cruising and then add an electric motor + 5 seconds of batteries or super capacitors for additional HP on those 0-60 runs.

Electric may be the supercharger of the future.