Tesla Motors says its Roadster is not a converted Lotus Elise

Tesla Motors sure has been doing a lot of explaining about its all-electric Tesla Roadster since it first announced it way back when, and it's now aiming to clear up what it says is another common misconception about the car: that it's a converted Lotus Elise. According to Tesla's Darryl Siry, the total number of shared parts between the cars is actually "under 7%," and that "if you were to try to convert an Elise to a Tesla and started throwing away parts that aren't carried over what you would basically be left with a windshield, dashboard (complete with airbags!), front wishbones and a removable soft top." He does admit, however, that the remaining pieces (particularly the dashboard and steering wheel) are so noticeable that they give drivers the impression of an Elise, as we've seen in some of the road tests of the vehicle. If you're still not convinced, you can find Siry's full, lengthy explanation at the read link below.

[mr friggles @ Mar 4th 2008 2:28PM]

Hey enblahget, we're getting tired of all your biased coverage of anything non-GM approved.

stuff it and hire some real writers/editors already.

[CraigJ @ Mar 4th 2008 2:33PM]

WTF are you talking about? Did somebody shit in your Cheerios this morning?

[Michael LaFramboise @ Mar 4th 2008 2:49PM]

"Asshat: One who has their head up their ass. Thus wearing their ass as a hat."

[phanbouy @ Mar 4th 2008 2:54PM]

"your biased coverage of anything non-GM approved"

that doesn't even make sense, doucheface

[Abuzar @ Mar 4th 2008 3:21PM]

Micheal, Seether rocks!

[Reader @ Mar 4th 2008 3:26PM]

They should hire 'mr friggles'. Every other sentence would be "I hate my life".

[j_g_puff @ Mar 4th 2008 3:34PM]

Yeah Enblahget! We're ALL tired of you writing stuff that is non-Mr Friggles approved.

You're so biased towards the opinions of your writers/editors that it's tiring. For all of us.

[gordian @ Mar 4th 2008 7:07PM]

Hah, I agree. And while you're out there "probing" for tech news try finding some decent writers AND STOP USING STRIKETHROUGH FONT!

[mr friggles @ Mar 4th 2008 9:14PM]

Funny thing is, none of you punk asses can even figure out enblahget is probably getting paid by Generally-Malevolent to smear Tesla Motors. This is the second Tesla attack piece on this site in less than a week. But you geeks are too busy fingering yourselves to japanese beastiality porn to see that. I'd clean up you punks real nice.

[Abuzar @ Mar 4th 2008 9:24PM]

Japanese BESTIALITY porn? I don't think anybody gets off on that.

Also you would straighten people out that you have never met? They could kick your ass across the room, for all you know.

[Mr. Gremlin @ Mar 4th 2008 2:36PM]

Yeah... this cannot be good for their safety image

[Inside man @ Mar 4th 2008 2:44PM]

Who cares?

The tesla is an elise with a powerpack and some motors instead of an engine.
Why he attempts to make it sound like its a new car i do not know!!

The elise/vx220/speedster is a GREAT car!

Oh and it never had "power" brakes even in elise form.

EV's are useless in the USA none of you care about the enviroment!
Cheap petrol, stupid big cars and a 55mph speed limit.

Rubbish place to drive too, no bloody corners.

[CraigJ @ Mar 4th 2008 4:13PM]

@inside:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=ortega+highway&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=25.854318,58.007813&ie=UTF8&t=h&z=12&iwloc=addr

That is all.

[Pork Rind @ Mar 5th 2008 12:25AM]

"Oh and it never had "power" brakes even in elise form."

The Toyota-engined Elises introduced in late 2004 sure do have power brakes.

[Dan @ Mar 4th 2008 6:40PM]

"EV's are useless in the USA none of you care about the enviroment!
Cheap petrol, stupid big cars and a 55mph speed limit.

Rubbish place to drive too, no bloody corners."

To which I say:
-SOMEONE hasn't been driving in the US for very long...
-The speed limit is 65 on divided highways, not 55. Get your facts straight. (here in California, at least.)
-As for the environment, well, cry me a river.

[max andrews @ Mar 5th 2008 5:36AM]

I see your Ortega Highway, and I raise you Page Mill road, alpine road, and skyline road. Three of the best roads in california which the Tesla gets driven on regularly (their headquarters is about ten minutes away):

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=page+mill+road,+ca&sll=40.65667,-95.03282&sspn=0.009539,0.019226&ie=UTF8&ll=37.351192,-122.155266&spn=0.079965,0.153809&t=h&z=13

[max andrews @ Mar 5th 2008 5:50AM]

In fact, the Nurburgring has nothing on the page mill to pacific run, check this out! (Warning, this is a great drive, but drive it SLOW the first few times. There are some seriously tight bends that you literally have to take at 15mph, and you need to know when they are coming up.) The payoff ending up on the pacific is alway worth the hair raising drive out :)

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&hl=en&geocode=11765391013648551105,37.254458,-122.347254&saddr=page+mill+road,+ca&daddr=37.25356,-122.350616+to:cabrillo+highway+at+pescadero+creek+road,+ca&mra=dme&mrcr=0&mrsp=1&sz=12&via=1&sll=37.316387,-122.289505&sspn=0.160004,0.307617&ie=UTF8&ll=37.310926,-122.287445&spn=0.160016,0.307617&t=h&z=12

[MrEats @ Mar 4th 2008 2:45PM]

someone put cheerios in my shit this morning and I'm pissed!!

and is this really engadget news? maybe autoblog....

[KC @ Mar 4th 2008 2:53PM]

The Tesla Roadster is a battery powered toy after all, so why not cover it on Engadget?

[phanbouy @ Mar 4th 2008 2:55PM]

well i don't know about you, but i always say "Go Go Gadget Car!" before turning the key to my honda.

[Liam @ Mar 4th 2008 3:23PM]

It's a pioneering piece of TECHNOLOGY. Doesn't seem out of place on a tech blog.

[phanbouy @ Mar 4th 2008 3:41PM]

oh, and sorry to hear that someone put toasted oats in your bowl of feces

move over scientology, it's scatology hour!

[Alex R @ Mar 4th 2008 3:52PM]

Get it right! It's:
Who pissed in your Weetabix this morning?
But I don't really care for this article, because I find cars boring unless they have semi-naked grirls sprawled over them.

[Anthony @ Mar 4th 2008 2:52PM]

Who cares? The Elise is H O T. I say convert a Ferrari next time.

[bob sakamano @ Mar 4th 2008 3:04PM]

7% !??!?!

thats a little too specific for me, something is fishy here!

[iamsoinsane @ Mar 4th 2008 3:13PM]

Do you think they are counting the 3000+ parts that make up a piston engine as well? ^_^

[Kevin @ Mar 4th 2008 3:48PM]

good point, is it 7% by weight or by volume or by unit, etc...

[chris fredette @ Mar 4th 2008 3:08PM]

The real difference is that the Tesla weighs 50% more than a elise even with LI-ion batteries. Oh, and it cost's like 4 times as much and doesn't have enough juice to do a entire track weekend. I'm waiting to see someone run a extension out their hotel window to juice the car up. As far as I can tell it can just make it to the track in time to be trailered home.
I think people are buying this car as some kind of daily driver that is super efficient but I think 2 months in the super tiny car will get very old, just like the Elise.

[CraigJ @ Mar 4th 2008 4:09PM]

An Elise SC is $54,500 USD, a $59,290 with sport package, etc. Only an idiot would get an Elise with Traction Control. Curb weight: 1984. Source: lotuscars.com.

Tesla is $98,000 USD, Curb Weight: 2690 (706 LB more than the Elise) Source: teslamotors.com

So, A: Not 4 times as much, in fact not even twice as much., B: Not 50% more: 36% more.

Yes, you probably drive more than 170 miles combining on the track, and getting to and from the track. And yes, charging will be an issue for the foreseeable future. Since it takes over 3 hours to get a full charge, I don't think this car will be a good track car, at least not at tracks without a nice restaurant to relax in while your ride recharges for the 2nd half of the day, and again for the ride home...

I drive a 350z roadster, and while the Elise is less practical than that, the 350 is far from practical. It's fun, but not comfortable for long drives, and anyway, there is hardly any trunk space, so long trips are out anyway. A weekend trip to Vegas from Phoenix is about it. You're not going to buy a Tesla as your only car: probably for driving to work and for Sunday morning drives...

[chris fredette @ Mar 4th 2008 5:12PM]

I see, your point.
I've been looking for Elise's around Chicago and they are under $40k. I was thinking the Tesla was like $120 but Ok. I wasn't thinking of the SC which I assume is similar acceleration for a higher top speed. I also assume most of the electric numbers are made up and way off because EVERY time I look at real values for these things they are off by 30%+. Telsa has already backed off on max millage and increased the charge time...
So it's twice as much and 35.6% heavier. So it requires much more energy to produce and still gets most of the power from coal fired plants, albeit less.
All this for a car that can only get up to 125mph and will be driven in a low millage manor. e.g. a car that gets 4mpg only driven 1000 miles a year is virtually no threat to the environment.
My real point is this thing has everything going for it tech wise, light, small, best battery tech and it fails compared to gas cars and that is a inefficient waist of time. Until battery's quadruple in power/weight and charge times double that of li-ion, electric is going no where. The end.
Have you been in a Elise? It makes your 350Z seem like a Cadillac.

[eng177 @ Mar 4th 2008 5:48PM]

Even with those figures, you aren't at 4X. The internet is a bad place to hyperbole.

[bobartig @ Mar 4th 2008 7:34PM]

@Chris Fredette:

You have to start somewhere. Nobody's (nobody I know of) has made a serious, all electric, mass produced, commercially viable car.

Their first car involves a ton of brand-new engineering, and working around current technological limitations, so its going to be pretty expensive. Still, I think $100k for what they've done is remarkably affordable.

They want their next vehicle to be priced $30-35k. It's not cheap, but that puts an all-electric car into a lot more people's price ranges.

[CraigJ @ Mar 4th 2008 10:49PM]

@chris. Yep, I have. We spent about an hour with the Lotus guy at the 2005 LA car show, and There are plenty of them here in Scottsdale. It's at the top of my "stuff I have to get before i die" list and you're right, it does (make the 350 look like a caddy). That was my point: The 350 is uncomfortable for long trips, and not practical at all (not that that is a bad thing, mind you) The Elise (and I assume the Tesla as well) is even less so.

[Liam @ Mar 4th 2008 3:22PM]

It's prettier than an Elise, and more of a talking point to hide the fact that, as a person, you're not interesting... any other reason why people buy sports cars?

[phanbouy @ Mar 4th 2008 3:42PM]

not sure, but i've noticed a lot of them have tucked-in plaid shirts and cell phone holsters on their belts.

[Chris @ Mar 4th 2008 3:29PM]

I made the mistake of mentioning that it was "basically an Elise" at the Goodwood festival, only to have a Tesla representative jump down my throat and claim that they have improved in so many areas... then when asked about weight, I was told the car weighed 50KG without the batteries... yeah, 50KG, no matter how many times I explained myself and rephrased the question, it was still 50KG. I'll stick to my Elise then.

[L.Rawlins @ Mar 4th 2008 4:24PM]

The rep. in this article goes off on one about all of the inane reasons why it isn't an Elise, but the one thing he doesn't cover is the fact that it looks like one.

In profile, and in the rear.

'All along, Tesla was developing its own signature styling for the Roadster. Once completed, every single panel on the Roadster was unique. The only exterior parts that are carryover are the rear-view mirrors, which Tesla carried over to avoid expensive development and safety testing costs. The headlights and taillights were designed to be unique to Tesla as well because they are so important to the character of the car.'

Read as: 'We changed the eyes and arse to disguise the foundations of its form, but you all saw right through our elaborate rouse.'

Changing the headlights does not make it a new car. It makes it a special edition.

[bobartig @ Mar 4th 2008 7:38PM]

...

So hypothetically if they take the battery out, I can pick up the Tesla and carry it around? Yeah, I have issues with that on several levels.

Although, if its true, I'm totally going to their factory, find a model that somehow doesn't have the battery in it (even though its a structural element), picking it up, and putting a picture of it on teh webz.

[jake @ Mar 4th 2008 9:54PM]

@L.Rawlins
I'm sure you got it from the article that it is a different car, and that it only looks like the elise in profile. Well, the Europa S is similar in the changes since it is also "variations of the same bonded aluminum chassis" and I would think you wouldn't say it's the same car as the Elise. I mean just the EV drivetrain alone and the 1000lb battery pack should separate them. I'd like to see anyone try to build the same car starting out with an ICE based Elise. You'd probably break it by trying to somehow squeeze that 1000lb battery and the 4ft wide PEM in there. Even if you don't, the 1000lb battery will probably overwhelm it's payload. The Tesla's chassis was specifically designed to accomodate the battery and use it as a stressed member for better rigidity.

[jake @ Mar 4th 2008 10:00PM]

More in line of what you were asking I think the rep was probably talking/thinking about body panels, or he doesn't compute in metric (Plenty of people in the US just don't compute in metric). And BTW the Tesla Roadster is not "just an Elise" ;).

[JS @ Mar 4th 2008 3:34PM]

I don't understand why Tesla persists in trying to distance themselves from Lotus. From a engineering, handling, and performance perspective, Lotus is rather highly regarded. Their current product line (Elise, Exige, Europa) are known quantities in the sports car world. I would have thought that a new entrant would try to play up their association with Lotus instead of distance themselves at every turn. I wouldn't even consider an upstart such as Tesla without association with a significant manufacturer.

I'm not suggesting that everything Lotus touches is golden (see Delorean), but aside from a respectable stint as an F1 constructor, Lotus engineering is all over the place as a contractor, from the Corvette ZR1 engine, to the modern GM ecotec engines, to chassis and suspension development for nearly every manufacturer. Their in-house products may not appeal to most, but that's their forte... minimalist, lightweight, well-handling sports cars.

[Beau @ Mar 4th 2008 4:50PM]

Well for one, if people think it's little more than an elise converted to run off electricity for nearly 2x the coin, then the value proposition stinks. It's kinda like handing over your Viper over to Hennessey or whatnot... only for the hardcore Viper faithful, it's a very small niche thing. OTOH, if it's a fully engineered platform then there is enough differentiation there to not use an elise as a yardstick to make this comparison. It's just a high performance roadster running off a battery and one might be more inclined to compare it against other vehicles in its price bracket.

[dave @ Mar 4th 2008 4:00PM]

Uh, what? Are they counting "chassis" as 1-piece? Is that how they're getting the claimed number down to 7%?

[Parker @ Mar 4th 2008 5:27PM]

im pretty sure its based off the lotus elise frame? i might be wrong tho i know they did take several designs from lotus

[AlphaTeam @ Mar 4th 2008 5:46PM]

Time for a hybrid Lotus it would seem.

[matt byrne @ Mar 4th 2008 7:06PM]

It uses the chassis from the Elise, the dashboard, the windscreen and parts of the suspension. How is it not a converted Elise then if they've take the chassis and added a different powertrain and gave it new panels? Fools.

[jake @ Mar 4th 2008 9:38PM]

See this is why he made the article: "windshield, dashboard (complete with airbags!), front wishbones and a removable soft top" are the only things shared with the elise; NOT THE GOD DAMNED CHASSIS!!!!!! Ugh, All of you seemed to somehow have gathered this is a converted elise when this article was to prove it's not. Shows the reading ability of engadget's audience!
The CHASSIS is completely different:
"For starters, placing a 1,000 pound battery in the midsection of the car changes everything about the behavior of the structures that were originally engineered for the ICE powered Elise. In order to accommodate the added weight of the battery pack, the aluminum tub chassis had to be redesigned to a Tesla specification, increasing strength and using the battery pack as a stressed member to increase rigidity. Since we had decided to redesign the chassis, we also chose to redesign the side rails so that they would sit a few inches lower than those in the Elise, greatly improving ingress and egress. The chassis is produced for Tesla and does not start its life as an Elise chassis."
With emphasis on the part of how the Roadster's chassis does NOT start it's live as an Elise chassis. GOD DAMN IT PEOPLE!! READ!!!
Sorry man, I'm just pissed off at people who always come in and complain about the price of the Tesla Roadster and continually say it's just an electric Elise.

Number shared is 7% by parts count for all of you asking how they got the figure.

[matt byrne @ Mar 5th 2008 7:27PM]

OK, pedant, that chassis starts life as the modular extruded and bonded aluminium frame that is originally from the Elise and adapted to suit. It may not be the exact same as the Elise's chassis, but it started life as the chassis that is used in the Elise. It is also built at Hethel, so in essence, it's very much a development of the Elise.

[Alexander Novas @ Mar 4th 2008 7:16PM]

Does it really matter?

[techieguru16 @ Mar 4th 2008 8:50PM]

i love the debate/arguments that go on on engadget! ;)

my opinion (as worthless as it may be): i think it is a nice looking car....but kinda unpractical, as are all sports cars.