Miles Electric's totally electric family sedan one step closer to existence
By Laura June 
posted May 5th 2009 11:29AM
posted May 5th 2009 11:29AM
posted May 5th 2009 11:29AM
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Or I can get a Tesla Model S for $49,000 and it can do 130 mph and get up to 300 miles on a charge.
agreed.... im actually going to be very interested in the model S when it finally does arrive. Thats about the time I will be ready to buy a new car (have a 2001 silverado currently which has served me well). Not ever having to pay for gas is a big reason I am interested in the tesla.
Amartins02,
not exactly, the base Model S will be that $49,900K AFTER the goverment tax break of $7,500, so out of pocket will be over $57K, and for that you get the base battery of 160 miles per charge...it will cost quite a bit more to upgrade to the 300 mile battery.
That said, i'd still rather get the base model S.
Of course, the Tesla Model S is only a prototype at the moment, without a factory or production schedule.
Not for 49 grand you. The base model has lesser range then the 300 miles claimed. Also if you take the same tax credit this car will be 38 grand
Ya, enjoy your vapor ware. Laws of physics be damned.
$45,000 huh, well lets see, that's a Honda Civic (est $20,000) and a Toyota Rav-4 ($25,000). I think I'll pass on this one.
Ricky
Why do people always sign their comments when their name is already there as their user name? Is it just in case someone missed the in your face blue font?
How do you spell useless? Apparently M I L E S
L-I-O-N E-L-E-C-T-R-I-C C-A-R
I thought it was G M
$5000 more and you've got the beautiful Tesla sedan.
Or save $8000-$15000 after federal rebates for a Chevy Volt and although you're only getting 40miles per charge, but your car is still functional when the battery runs out.
My money is on the Aptera.
That's expensive, but if you compare it to other 'early adopter' pricing for new technologies, it really isn't that bad. The people who've just got to have it are willing to pay the premium to say they own an all electric vehicle, and if there are enough of them, then the manufacturers will improve the tech, produce more, and lower the average selling price for the next round of buyers. Just like $12,000 (or was it more like $20,000?) was way more than most people would have considered reasonable for the first flat panel TVs. But they still sold some, and look where we are now. That's the problem with many arguments against new 'green' tech. You can say it is too expensive, or not as cost effective as the non-green technology it is trying to replace. But that misses the point. When the tech is fully developed, it won't cost as much as it does today. I'm not saying that anything labeled as 'green' is automatically good. Far from it. But arguments that ignore the future potential of new tech are short sighted.
I'd rather buy a used Sky and have it converted to electric for about the same price.
I just drove to Michigan this weekend. 1200 miles round trip it took me a total of 20 hours. In this car it would take 135+ hours to do the same trip if I traveled at top speed. Over Two days to arrive and over two to come home... Remind me how electric is an alternative...
Go algae oil!
Joe K.
Electric cars are not ment for long distance driving, except for the Volt or others with range extention. Electric cars are ment for people who drive to and from work on a daily basis. The average commuter lives within 20 miles roundtrip of there work. So the GM Volt or this Miles sedan would get these people to and from work with out using a drop of gasoline and that is the ALTERNATIVE!! These are the same people who will be charging their car over night. The sole act of charging a plug-in vehicle overnight helps make the powerplants more efficient and gives us a place to store Wind energy that peeks in the evening. And yes before anyone says it, a coal burning power plant is cleaner and has less emissions than your gasoline ICE.
Well, clearly this car isn't for you. Don't buy it.
I'll save up a bit of extra cash and get the Model S, thanks.
Or a lot extra and get the Roadster...
soon in AAA offer we will see: "free road assistance if your battery dies" :)
They have offered "dead battery" service for years...
http://www.aaacarolinas.com/Membership/batteryservice.htm
This is the most ludicrous thing I have ever seen. The charge time is unacceptable, a 100mile range is laughable, and the price is completely unreasonable. I do not understand this automakers and these small companies that are planning to release vehicles that are clearly out of date already. GM is gonna release the Volt in what 2011? That's stupid, by then Tesla will have something that will easily put its current model S to shame. This isn't even news worthy, this would be like engadget reporting a laptop with a 30GB hardrive and 25minutes of battery life that was retailing for $2000. Higher efficiency gasoline engines and hydrogen fuel cells are going to out pace and out produce electric vehicles. The future is not this crap.
Uhm, the Tesla Model S is supposed to arrive in 2012.
Ok, sorry, Wikipedia can't agree on this... either 2011 or 2012. Nevertheless, this is at least a year after the Miles Electric car is supposed to arrive. Still, that car appears to be a bit pointless...
"The future is not this crap"
I agree, but try explaining that to the current administration and the leaders of congress.
That's what they're going to push.
At least Ed Begley Jr. will buy one. And Al Gore. So there are at least two sold.
Al Gore wont buy one, he is the biggest consumer of energy where he lives, he is cocksmoker who wants everyone else to sacrifice while he reaps the benefit, his wife is the same way.
they went from forcing musicians to put advisory's on their albums to having those "bad lyricists" playing for Earth Day fundraisers and shit, he can just go die
Sorry I just hate the kind of hypocrisy he spews
This car will be very funny when it's battery runs out like a bad cellphone battery. You've charged it all night for 12+ hours, the meter shows full, you get in it, start driving and after 15 minutes you're on critically low levels and one minute later it's dead.
No manual transmission, no sale for me.
Because electric motors produce maximum torque at 0 rpm, there is no need for multiple gears - so a manual transmission would be pointless.
The Tesla Roadster only has one forward gear.
I guess you'll never buy an electric car :P soon we'll have stick shift == obsolete
Umm, the reason the Telsa Roadster only has one forward gear is because they were too stupid to be able to get their two speed transmission to work without shattering, so now the car is stuck with pathetic 125mph top speed. Aparently Tesla has not heard about this new innovation called a clutch....
Looks like Kia... ew
It's going to take 5-7 years for all electric vehicles to become competitive with gas only and hybrid vehicles in terms of price. Until then, sit and wait!
An all electric car is worthless. I freak out when my phone has to sit on the charger if it needs to be charged in the middle of the day. Imagine if I couldn't go BACK out after work or whatever because my car had to charge! F.. THAT!!! Give me a full size luxury American hybrid.
better not leave your phone charging in your Miles, you might find them both dead when you exit from work at the end of the day.
You want a full-size American luxury hybrid? Check out the Fisker Karma.
http://karma.fiskerautomotive.com/
Bob
Electric Cars don't need a transmission. Electric cars have 100% of their torque at 0 rpm, meaning that all the torque is ready to go as soon as you press the petal. Electric cars can smoke ICE cars off the line and typically have a high end speed. So they have natural performance without the need to change gears!!
Electric cars are NOT the future! We need to keep developing something cleaner, and more efficient. DIESEL is the way for the next 50 years, Clean, Power and Fuel efficient...
Until then stay away from the lies of ethanol and electric cars.
It's a big enough planet to support a variety of technologies.
Ethanol is not a "lie". It's a valid alternative, as long as you stay away from the corn-based stuff. Brazil was the wildly-successful test case, and they're driving on sugar cane.
Electric is also perfectly valid. Are there drawbacks? Sure. Battery technology still has a ways to go. Additional burdens will be placed on our current generating capacity, including coal-fired plants. But you know what? Even when an electric is fueled ENTIRELY BY COAL-GENERATED ELECTRICITY, the overall CO2 is a fraction of that of an ICE car's.
Diesel's a favorite of mine. We're seeing some very cool possibilities with bio-fuels (including algae), and, yes, they are remarkably efficient and reliable. I have no doubt that diesel engines will be crucial in applications where range and overall grunt are needed. But it doesn't have to be the ONLY solution.
I don't understand why people are surprised that the first slew of medium-sized highway-capable EV's are pricey and do not go as far as a traditional ICE. Invest now in the companies, if you can, and you can expect better EV's in the future.
Are you sure it's electric?
It's not ugly.
I think of the poor range & long recharge time for this car is the same weird quirks & crudeness the first gasoline-powered cars had. Hopefully it will get better.
Anything is better than the choices we have today.
I think it's the life style of Americans that really restricts the adoption of full electric cars.
Even though many people do not need to drive far for daily commute, they do have the need to drive much further in the weekends, holidays, and for some occasional events. I bet they do not like to rent cars so often.
I can see the future of hybrid cars. But full electric cars still need battery technology breakthroughs to make it mainstream.
i just wish companies would quit wasting time and resources on developing plug-in electric cars. beyond the 'wow factor', they're as undesirable as a third armpit, tits on a bull, or a macbook tablet.
why?
it only makes sense as a second or third car, to be used ONLY as a local commuter. current and future battery tech as well as infrastructure ensures you'll never be able to take it on a road trip without a dino-juice sucking support truck/trailer. and seriously, what percentage of americans can afford/justify having a second, single purpose car for each driver?
quit wasting our tax funded bailout on a vehicle that's not viable; at the very least it needs to be a hybrid. take the money we gave you, automakers, lobby the oil companies you're sleeping with for the other 75%, and start building hydrogen cars and fueling stations. anything short of that is a joke.
and to the public: quit crying "Hindenburg" every time an engineer says "hydrogen". the technology to store hydrogen in cars safely is already here. quit ALLOWING oil companies to screw you. you're not getting "raped at the pump" if you're a willing partner.
hydrogen is not at all viable, the cheapest way to extract it is from methane gas, not electrolysis. Might as well use CNG like all of asia instead of hydrogen. if hydrogen was to be extracted by electrolysis then it would be an overall loss (water to hydrogen then back to water) and every expensive.
very*
sorry for the spelling mistake
Test. Sorry :(
80mph and 100 miles per charge is fine for most commuters, but you can't sell a car for $45k if it looks like $15k.