Clueless NYT reporter manages to get stranded in Model S

He had to slow down and turn down the cabin heat; AND drain the battery to reach Milford. Note that I (somewhat) specified parameters in my earlier post when I said the 'S' is not a 200 mile / charge car.

I cannot help but imagine an advert spoof along these lines:

• All EV
• All the time !
• Anywhere you want to go!
• Some restrictions apply*

*Average speed 25 mph for 6 hours a day of drivng and/or charging.

 

I find that statement very curious, as he successfully made that leg of the journey.
The biggest criticism I have of the reporter is not the missed opportunities, it is his misinformation.
For example, he wrote that he limped along at 45 mph, when logs show that was not true.
He stated he set the cruise control at 54mph, a very specific number. But the logs show cruise control set between 60-65.
Stating these things as hard fact (no adjectives like 'about', 'in the range of', etc) when they are not brings into question what other embellishments there were.

 

For the umpteenth time ...

He made it by 1, draining the battery; 2, driving well below the speed limit; and 3, by turning down the cabin heat to a level he found uncomfortable.

You know, a Prius can drive about 1400 miles on one tank of fuel. The thing is, you have to travel about 25 mph and not let the car cool down, so Toyota is not fool enough to use that range success as a marketing tool. Tesla apparently is willing to advertise ranges per charge that are not reliably acheived by pretty reasonable drivers.

 

I define well as a speed rarely driven by US drivers on highways unless congestion slows them down. Hell, even *I* drive faster than the speeds the reporter had to drop down to.

You are confused -- I do not 'keep bringing up this 300 number.' I cannot even remember mentioning it once. I read yesterday that a driver managed 436 miles on a charge. So Tesla can change their advert now to "up to 436 Miles a charge!!" I'd say the marketing is ill advised though.

Petrol cars do not mention range for a good reason: within the lower 48 states it is probably unlimited with the proviso of a couple minute fuel stops every 300-500 miles.

I'm tired of arguing with you fan boys, so I'll just state the obvious one last time: The 85 khw Tesla 'S' is not a reliable 200 mile/charge car in the winter when driven at highway speed limits and cabin heat is used.

 

I repost the first couple sentences of the NYT article for your edification. Bolding is mine.

This is the crux of the article, and the only point the reporter really cared to write about. It also just so happens to be true. This does not make the Tesla 'S' a bad car in any way (except for the price,) it just means the car has a limit that Tesla is being less than upfront in acknowledging.

 

If that's the point of your argument, you are right. But you haven't fully defined your terms. On Tesla's website, you can play with the numbers. Highway driving at 65 mph, with ambient temperatures at 32 deg and the heat on, Tesla claims a maximum range of 218 miles on the 85 kwh Tesla S.

Broder only charged to 90% SOC. Whether he knows how to use the car or not is irrelevant. The vehicle is not at full charge. The car can only go 196.2 miles by Tesla's claims. He also drives at speeds upwards of 81 mph. He then decides to take a couple hours detour through Manhattan. Granted it's only 2 miles out of the way but city driving is not highway driving and a gasoline car would have its fuel economy decimated by that detour. Ditto for the Tesla with the heat on. That he made it the Milford Supercharger is a feat of engineering.

Now, I define a fully charged up car to show 100% SOC. I define highway speeds at 65 mph. I also would like some heat. The Tesla S delivers as evidenced by the CNN test drive. If you define a fully charged Tesla as Broder then the Tesla S is not 200 mile/charge vehicle.

*Edit* Oh, on the Tesla website, you can define the wheel size to 21" size. This further decreases range. 19" wheels actually helped Broder go further.

 

Musk did the right thing because the much bigger story was "Tesla logs prove NY Times reporter lied" gleefully carried by NYTimes media competitors.

 

Tesla Motors Pours Cold Data on New York Times ‘Model S’ Review | TIME.com

Other journalists have looked at Brody's article and Tesla's response and side with the EV. I find the defense of this journalist in this thread surprising. The data logs showed that he mislead about temperature and speed. On its own that suffices to discredit the whole article. That's not to say that Tesla's claims are all true.

 

Very true, and I don't see that as a spoof, but as the real marketing approach of the future. But this is how everything is marketed in life. Also, as well as marketing lies, there are reporting lies. The reporter's "discovery" that lack of common sense mixed with a lack of physics knowledge can be reported as a faulty car is the issue here.

 

I say Broder violated the Ethics of his Profession and should be held accountable.

 

If he was testing the capability of the supercharger network, then why did he purposefully neglect to fully charge each time?

It's like flying a plane from NY to LA and only putting in just enough fuel, then having some headwinds, landing in LV and because your running late only getting a few gallons to get to LA.

 

Interesting that the NY Times tweeted out today that consumers perception of journalistic ethics is at a all time low.
How Much Do You Trust Journalists? - NYTimes.com

 

reposted in EV section

 

Why people do not trust mainstream media. - YouTube

 

I think that would be a great discussion to have in another thread so as to not take this one off topic.

 

Completely false.
Tesla has far more range estimates and tools for both owners and prospective buyers than any other car company.
The fact that cold limits range is well known.
The stated focus of the NYT'S article was a test of the supercharger system which is in the early stages of being built. The reporter failed to use the superchargers to fully fill the tank (he didn't even fill to the full standard charge setting at the second stop).
It would be as if a reporter didn't fill the Prius tank and then complained when the tank of the Prius only delivered 200 miles.
And yes, there is no question that filling the 'tank' of an EV takes more time than filling a gas car. But that wasn't the point, was it.

 

Hey this NYTimes article reminds me the EV point I have been trying to make all along: that is Broder was probably putting out more CO2 and other emissions in his trip compared to a Prius. He had to dump quite a few electrons in that Model S, to make that winter trip. Can you imagine CO2 if he drove like everyone else on the NJ Turnpike: min 75 MPH with heat on?