I test drove a Tesla??

[evboy]

I test drove a tesla model s to see how it compares to the sparke. I really didnt like it. it was like driving a tank it was so big. it sounds crazy, but i like the sparke much more. the sparke is more nimble in and out of traffic and just a hell of alot more fun and the pick up was the same to me. i know the zero to 60 times are faster on the tesla, but it was so big and heavy it didnt feel that much faster the the spake. anyone else drive both. What did u think? chevy needs to make more smaller electric sports cars. 2 seater would be great with about 150 mile range. it would sell like hotcakes.

 

[nikwax]

Horses for courses, as the Brits say. Two very different cars that happen to be electrically propelled. Spark is a great city car, maybe not so great for a cross country trip with four passengers and luggage.

 

[SparkevBlogspot]

2 seater will not get 150 miles range. Shorter cars tend to have worse aerodynamics. This is why Smart cars are so awful (relatively speaking) in efficiency. 2 seater like motorcycle could have better aero efficiency, but people generally don't buy such thin cars.

Better for GM is to make lower priced (ie, less battery) streamlined version of Bolt with AWD option and towing ability. Maybe they can call it SparkEV 2.0, but I doubt that will happen, the car or the name. Tesla 3 is going to be that car, though pricing is still too high.

But if you must keep a gasser as second car for long distance / hauling 12 people and cargo, SparkEV makes the best primary vehicle with combination of low price, fun, efficiency, and quickest charging car in the world.

 

[evboy]

2 seater will not get 150 miles range. Shorter cars tend to have worse aerodynamics. This is why Smart cars are so awful (relatively speaking) in efficiency. 2 seater like motorcycle could have better aero efficiency, but people generally don't buy such thin cars.

Better for GM is to make lower priced (ie, less battery) streamlined version of Bolt with AWD option and towing ability. Maybe they can call it SparkEV 2.0, but I doubt that will happen, the car or the name. Tesla 3 is going to be that car, though pricing is still too high.

But if you must keep a gasser as second car for long distance / hauling 12 people and cargo, SparkEV makes the best primary vehicle with combination of low price, fun, efficiency, and quickest charging car in the world.

You are mistaken. The GM EV1 car had a drag coefficient of .19. It was a 2 seater and looks pretty nice even today. it looks nothing like that piece of **** on 4 wheels you call a smart car. gm would have to use a bigger battery to get the 150 but no need to have one as big as the bolt. dont need 238 miles of range. it would add to the price. 150 is the sweet spot.
http://www.businessinsider.com/gm-ev1-history-2016-3/#heres-a-closer-look-at-that-frame-6

 

[SparkevBlogspot]

Sure, if you make the 2 seater just as long as a 4 seater, you could get better aero. But you said smaller electric car. EV1 is 170 inches long while SparkEV is 146 inches long, almost 2 ft shorter than EV1.

Even if SparkEV has Cd of 0.15, it would only get about 130 miles range. Cd of 0.15 will be extremely difficult to make it practical. At Cd of 0.22 about that of Tesla 3, SparkEV would get about 106 miles (vs 82). This is all assuming same everything except Cd. See this link and scroll down to "Hoping for SparkEV 2.0" and look at 55 MPH range. That speed is closest to EPA rated range with current setup.

http://sparkev.blogspot.com/2016/01/sparkev-range.html

Actually, the range numbers I have for lower Cd are very optimistic since EPA test involve a lot of braking and Aero takes smaller portion than my calculation.

 

[evboy]

sorry for confusion. when i said smaller i didnt mean shrink it down to the size of my thumb. make a 2 seater sports car like the miata but longer. I dont want it that small. longer is good but concentrate on a low drag ratio and make the battery big enough to hold a 150 mile charge.

u said if gm could get .15 on the ratio they could get 130 miles with the same size battery that the spark ev has now. if thats possible now, why wouldnt they make a car with a .15 drag ratio. they wouldnt have to buy a bigger battery which would make the car profitable. a sports car with 130 mile range would sell well in my opinion.

 

[SparkevBlogspot]

I absolutely agree that 130 miles range EV would sell well at decent price point. Not sure if I said it in this forum, but if Bolt battery is halved, it would get about 130 miles range (more than half of Bolt since fewer battery=lighter). Pricing would decrease by about $5K, so post tax credit would be $25K, or $22.5K in CA. In addition, it would be quicker due to lighter weight, maybe even sub 6 seconds for 0-60 MPH if the weight distribution favors front (rear batteries removed). That could make it the quickest car in the world at $25K.

GM already has "sports EV" of 130 miles range if they simply remove 1/2 the battery from Bolt, no need for extra sheet metal work. But they won't do it.

 

[evboy]

I absolutely agree that 130 miles range EV would sell well at decent price point. Not sure if I said it in this forum, but if Bolt battery is halved, it would get about 130 miles range (more than half of Bolt since fewer battery=lighter). Pricing would decrease by about $5K, so post tax credit would be $25K, or $22.5K in CA. In addition, it would be quicker due to lighter weight, maybe even sub 6 seconds for 0-60 MPH if the weight distribution favors front (rear batteries removed). That could make it the quickest car in the world at $25K.

GM already has "sports EV" of 130 miles range if they simply remove 1/2 the battery from Bolt, no need for extra sheet metal work. But they won't do it.

The bolt is still a passenger car that seats 5. I wouldnt cut that battery in half. it appeals to a mass audience that wants over 200 range and can be used like a suv. you have to have a bolt to replace the gas car for good.

Why not make a 2 seater sports car that looks like the old 240sx fastback, ev1 or honda s2000 without the convertible. to me a honda s2000 non convertible 150 mile range car would sell in big numbers for the non bolt ev crowd.

 

[14Volt]

Which battery and motor(s) were on the Model S you drove? We have an 85D as our family mover, and the difference in performance and ride quality is very noticeable. Put the pedal to the ground in the S and all four wheels propel it to 60 in 4 seconds without a chirp. Do the same in the Spark, and I'm grinning all the way to 60 because the stock Ecopia front tires struggle to stick. :lol: Both are fun to drive in very different ways. Spark is definitely more nimble - I've done a U-turn on my gated driveway in it. S feels more planted at speed, with longer wheelbase and weight - 5,000lbs vs 2,600lbs.
For daily commuting in traffic, the Spark is a great value and does the job very well. More range would be nice, but it's enough for my needs. With the Model S, <100 miles range means it's time to plug in. Getting used to that and then getting into the Spark which shows double digits when full provokes some anxiety.

A fun 2-seater EV that gets over 150 miles? Tesla made something like that in the early days . One of the few cars that makes the Spark feel big!

 

[EldRitch]

A lot of people think the model 3 will sell like crazy as a mid-size car at a moderate price.
However, the model S is a Huge car, and the 3 is only 12" shorter. It's still a big car, and a lot of people (like me) don't like driving a big boat.

 

[sequestrian]

My wife drives a Model S 85, so I've had a lot of experience driving both Spark and S. I also wonder if you test drove the 60kwh battery model. The difference in acceleration and overall stability (not just high speeds) is very noticeable. I greatly prefer a subcompact, but the quality difference between our two cars is so great that a month after buying it, we reserved a Tesla Model 3. I've found maneuverability in the Model S exceptional, especially for such a large vehicle. I was very hesitant when I first looked into getting an S because of its size and rear viewing angles, but I think it feels smaller when you're in it and driving because of the precision acceleration and braking. Even parking isn't an issue because of the back-up camera and track width overlay. I actually prefer backing into a parking spot because of it. Honestly, lately I've been considering canceling our reservation and when the Model 3 is released, picking up an early model P85 or 85D used on the cheap (for a Model S). They're that good. Yes, I am now a fanboy.

 

[SparkE]

"A fun 2-seater EV that gets over 150 miles? Tesla made something like that in the early days ."

Tesla *sold* something like that - Lotus made most of it. It *was* a super fun car to drive, though!

 

[14Volt]

"A fun 2-seater EV that gets over 150 miles? Tesla made something like that in the early days ."

Tesla *sold* something like that - Lotus made most of it. It *was* a super fun car to drive, though!

Yes, Lotus made the chassis and body of the Roadster to Tesla engineering's specs. Final assembly was by Tesla with their own electronics and drivetrain. Lots of interesting history behind it! https://www.tesla.com/blog/lotus-position

 

[PhilPen]

"A fun 2-seater EV that gets over 150 miles? Tesla made something like that in the early days ."

Tesla *sold* something like that - Lotus made most of it. It *was* a super fun car to drive, though!

Tesla is now offering an upgrade for $29,000 to the original Roadster that surprisingly uses LG Chem cells like the later Spark EVs. This new pack bumps up the range by about 50% to around 400 miles per charge! Making it possibly the longest range EV out there! Tesla normally goes for small cylindrical cells because of their superior cooling but made a switch for this upgrade.

 

[14Volt]

Tesla is now offering an upgrade for $29,000 to the original Roadster that surprisingly uses LG Chem cells like the later Spark EVs. This new pack bumps up the range by about 50% to around 400 miles per charge! Making it possibly the longest range EV out there! Tesla normally goes for small cylindrical cells because of their superior cooling but made a switch for this upgrade.

Yep, it's awesome that they're still supporting an out of production model like this. The "3.0" upgrade is done at cost, and the wait time is reflective. Some getting it are reporting a 15-month wait after a $5K deposit to get in line. The original battery pack is taken out and replaced with an upgraded one, then the core is upgraded to be put into the next car, and so on. My original 8-year-old pack is still holding strong and charges to 215 miles at 100% *knocking furiously on wood*. Hopefully they'll still be offering the upgrade if/when I need it.

 

[evboy]

what do you guys think of the nissan esflow all electric. it looks great. https://www.nissanusa.com/future-and-concept-vehicles/esflow
why wouldnt honda make a car like that.

 

[NORTON]

what do you guys think of the nissan esflow all electric. it looks great. https://www.nissanusa.com/future-and-concept-vehicles/esflow
why wouldnt honda make a car like that.

Interesting car !
Only I'll bet the styling dept rushed this add to print before the busy engineering dept could approve it.

2 things on that charge port arrangement:
>"Blue front lights" are not legal in the USA. Blue is for emergency vehicles.

> Why would you ever place a J1772 charge port vertically like that? 1. Do they have rain in Japan? 2. The cord now has to do a big curve to reach the ground. 3. Every time you open that goofy charge port there are thick wires being moved/cycled, unless they have some even goofier high power 'slip-ring' system.

 

[SparkE]

Concept car.

('concept' == 'marketing bullshite')