NYT pulls a Top Gear with the Tesla S

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2013/02/tesla-logs-nytimes/

Why do so many automotive journalists really, really want their electric cars to run out of juice on them?

That's kind of funny. deliberatly not fully charging it, lying about charge times etc. I wonder if there's a denial response to the response coming.

Off topic rant, why does a site like Wired, a magaine and site supposed to be reflecting new technology and the cutting edge have such a totaly crappy, slow to load glitchy webste?

Their site seems OK to me, not too slow (although it's certainly complicated and JS-heavy and could bog down a slow PC or slow browser like IE ), and I don't see it as crappy.

It's actually Wordpress-based, which at this level is the website equivalent of building a Civic to compete with supercars.

You can cut to the chase and read Musk's blog post here (loads fine for me)

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive

I'm popping some popcorn and waiting for the NYT response. This one could be epic.

If that particular Model S battery has an average lifespan after all that abuse, it will be impressive. Looks like about 5 quick charges in one day, high-speed driving with the heat cranked way up, and then running at super low charge...ouch.

Shame to all those who defame the "old gray lady".

Then again, the "newspaper of record" has been printed on used TP since Pinch took control.

They still print newspapers? Why?

pinchvalve wrote: They still print newspapers? Why?

Because plenty of people still read print publications.....even newspapers.

NYT has published fiction before. But then, so have carmakers.

pinchvalve wrote: They still print newspapers? Why?

Because the homeless people in NYC need someplace to E36 M3 too....

pinchvalve wrote: They still print newspapers? Why?

Because I'm not taking my phone/pad/laptop into the E36 M3ter.

peter wrote: You can cut to the chase and read Musk's blog post here (loads fine for me) http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive I'm popping some popcorn and waiting for the NYT response. This one could be epic.

Long read, but Damn. Broder needs to start working on his resume.

That's really scuzzy. I hope Broder has another career path where he can happily not be a weasel.

There are enough real questions about electric cars without this bullE36 M3.

Wow. The original article is potentially devastating forTesla and this response is not good news for the writer. The "Times" has a regular "Readers Advocate" column which addresses things like this. This fight will damage both contestants but Tesla has more to lose. What a mess.

why is this the guy they chose to review it anyway? they should have used their car guy, not someone obviously aiming all his stories at the glory of oil.

The plot sickens: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2013/02/elon-musks-data-doesnt-back-his-claims-new-york-times-fakery/62149/

The article said: When Broder decided to turn the car off, which was a mistake, the parking brake (operated by the 12V battery) was rendered unusable.

And yet anybody saying that cars should have a mechanical parking brake is called a Luddite and openly mocked in this of all forums...

I know I never said electric parking brakes weren't stupid...

Tom Suddard wrote: The plot sickens: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2013/02/elon-musks-data-doesnt-back-his-claims-new-york-times-fakery/62149/

And now the Times rebuttal (I have not read it yet)

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/14/that-tesla-data-what-it-says-and-what-it-doesnt

Analysis:

The Times reporter did some stupid, lacks-common-sense things on his test drive.

Elon Musk's blog statements are those of someone glancing at the data, saying "ah HA!" and crying foul without really analyzing it. Especially the bit about the "circles in a parking lot".

The Tesla representatives that the reporter spoke with gave answers that assumed too much about the reporter's knowledge and common sense.

The real issue here is that the two sides aren't in agreement on what they were testing. NYT says they were testing real-world performance, but Tesla seems to think they were testing strict Supercharger-to-Supercharger performance. Or maybe I have that backwards. This is the problem: if this was clear, it'd be easy to assign blame. But since Musk, the reporter, and the support personnel weren't on the same page, it's all berkeleyed up.

Electric car companies really fail in the PR department. Even if its something that isn't their fault, they do a terrible job of making people hear their side of the story.

Update: CNN took the same route and arrived with 96 miles of range to spare:

http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/15/autos/tesla-model-s/

He didn't entirely follow the guidelines either and did some high-speed driving near the end.

Travis_K wrote: Electric car companies really fail in the PR department. Even if its something that isn't their fault, they do a terrible job of making people hear their side of the story.

It's pretty easy to come off as defensive when you're constantly being attacked. I'm not saying they do everything right, but when so mush of the media is openly hostile to you it's hard to win.

jg

JG Pasterjak wrote:

Travis_K wrote: Electric car companies really fail in the PR department. Even if its something that isn't their fault, they do a terrible job of making people hear their side of the story.

It's pretty easy to come off as defensive when you're constantly being attacked. I'm not saying they do everything right, but when so mush of the media is openly hostile to you it's hard to win. jg

I am with this guy.

NOW, Musk asked for it. He openly berated existing OEMs and made himself a huge target. Making a car is REALLY hard and profit margins are super thin. it's a terrible business to be in, and we went in full Sergio-style "I can fix anything, just listen to me tell you how easy it is going to be while you give me cash" and it has not proven that easy.

I'll bet the car was abused and that reduced its range.

I'll bet the car does pretty badly as compared to expected when cold weather is at play.

I still think it's a neat, overpriced, bad for the environment, toy for celebrities who need to look 'green', but if I was asked to review it, I would be honest. It's just too bad we can't expect 'honest' out of the mainstream media anymore.

tuna55 wrote:

JG Pasterjak wrote:

Travis_K wrote: Electric car companies really fail in the PR department. Even if its something that isn't their fault, they do a terrible job of making people hear their side of the story.

It's pretty easy to come off as defensive when you're constantly being attacked. I'm not saying they do everything right, but when so mush of the media is openly hostile to you it's hard to win. jg

I am with this guy. NOW, Musk asked for it. He openly berated existing OEMs and made himself a huge target. Making a car is REALLY hard and profit margins are super thin. it's a terrible business to be in, and we went in full Sergio-style "I can fix anything, just listen to me tell you how easy it is going to be while you give me cash" and it has not proven that easy. I'll bet the car was abused and that reduced its range. I'll bet the car does pretty badly as compared to expected when cold weather is at play. I still think it's a neat, overpriced, bad for the environment, toy for celebrities who need to look 'green', but if I was asked to review it, I would be honest. It's just too bad we can't expect 'honest' out of the mainstream media anymore.

And, yes, Musk has a bit of the douche in him as well. Sadly I think that comes with the territory. Humility and a self-deprecating sense of humor are not usually traits one finds in high-end venture capitalists.

As for "bad for the environment," I think that's an unfair statement. No transportation device will ever have zero environmental impact. Electric cars certainly have an impact, but what they've shown us is that we can shift that impact to other less sensitive areas, or defer the impact for a greater period of time. It's hard to say they have more or less impact that conventional ICE cars because their impact is felt in different areas.

My dream, both as a consumer and a car-industry person, is that alternative drivetrains become precisely that—alternatives to each other. I'd love to see gas, diesel, electric, hybrid, fuel cell, all participating in the marketplace and vying for consumers based on doing what they do best.

jg