Audi 250 mi e-tron, Tesla competition?

I'll take the Tesla. Besides Tesla being right around the corner from where I work, it's not a VW product.

 

Audi had invested some effort into E-tron concepts and test fleets previously. Good to see they aren't abandoning it. I just won't hold my breath for a rotary powered PHV yet.

 

Nice competition--for the Roadster. It will be interesting to see the specs, the length of the production run, and the price. Competition is good as it keeps everyone sharp. Yellow warning stickers & big white roundels probably aren't going to be good selling features.

 

Roadster has been discontinued...so will this R8 challenge Tesla??

 

Surely you jest? Combined, they add 40 bhp, 50 lbs torque and 60 mph to top speed....

 

I've seen a couple similary styled Audi's roaming around our area, though I never paid close enough attention to say how exact they looked to this one. They do look pretty slick. And don't call me Surely.

.

 

Yes, the conventional R8 has been around for half a decade. They not only look slick, they are slick.

 

Yep. And they sold less than 900 a year last year and this. Its not a tesla competitor, but it is a welcome development. The VW group has the porsche 918 and not this audi etron, hopefully they will trickle to other cars. IIRC this is going to be priced around a quarter of a million dollars. Perhaps phev versions of the audi S4 and S6 will follow in 5 years.

 

I'll take two of each.

 

I thought a S3 PHEV already staled to come in 2015.

 

It is an a3.
Audi Announces Early 2015 Launch of A3 Sportback E-tron Plug-In Hybrid in US
S is the performance orietnted audis.

A 60 mile range S6 would be a competitor to a tesla S. If the battery tech in this R8 as well as the what they learn in the golf and a3 phevs works out, this could be a plan for sport luxuries. According to UCS 42% of americans drive during the week less than 60 miles a day, have a place to plug in, don't need room more than 4 adults, do no towing or hauling. I would guess it is even higher for the S6 and tesla. An S6 phev would likely have the 4cyl turbo ice and a large battery pack, making it price competitive in 5 years when fuel costs are included with the v8 s6, while having superior performance.

 

Too bad the CARB rules prevent players like the BMW i3 from turning on their 600 cc engine from 80% SOC. That seems to make perfect sense how an EV/big battery PHEV should be used. Yet CARB will only allow SOC at/below 20% before the ICE can be used. Too stupid for my taste. Otherwise, I would consider something like that... not that I want the i3 looks though.

 

IMHO CARBs rules are really there to help the fuel cell lobby, not air quality or any real goal they were set up to administer. It is government out of control.

Now if the state of california wants to subsidize their fuel cell cars by taxes and keeping phevs out of the car pool lane, that is within their states rights. I really think the loophole bmw i3 drove through, was set up to cause failure of such cars. Therefore bmw took the bait from carb and the fuel cell lobby, but... it shows how hypocritical mary nichols is. She doesn't want a level playing field, she wants a maise of regulations.

The good news is that the biggest fuel cell subsidies in california, extra zev credits ends in 2018. At that time I expect car makers to throw a fit and phevs with long range given more credit.

This is really at the level of a Tesla S, S6, and M5. IMHO in 10 years these will all be electrofied, as the tech just makes sense. BMW is doing its experiments with the i8, audi with the R8. Both these cars are more expensive, but they need to add phev tech to their sport luxury sedans to be competitive in the future. For reference the S6 starts at $73K, the tesla S is close to that price after tax credits.

 

BMW's offering is puny ... while Audi's offering is likely to be ridiculously overpriced. On the other hand Tesla is about to WOW the public again, with a $40K/200 mile EV:
LA Times

I'm thinking that Tesla,s competition is falling more and more behind

.

 

Hill that link is talking about blue star, which isn't about to wow the public again, its been fairly well publicized, and the headline is quite misleading.

I hope the car will still be priced in the 30s as previously anounced and not $40K.

Also this tidbit from the article may not be correct.

Tesla can operate that factory profitable for the S and X. It may be much more profitable for tesla to build the bluestar in a right to work state with less expensive green energy.

Absolutely tesla should not be bothered by thi group realizes the performance segment is aided by big batteries.

 

If this price is correct, then it is really no competitor to Tesla at all, it is a show car for a tiny elite.
Ironic that a 'mainstream' car company is now coming out with exotic EV's, while an 'exotic' company like Tesla is going mainstream and aiming for mass production.

I'm betting you are thinking of Texas?
Well, it's not a bad idea having factories built in a centrally-located state and run during the night, absorbing surplus wind energy. So, TX is the logical choice.....other right-to-work states - the entire south, in particular - are very poor in renewable energy resources.

It would also be nice if the EPA actually did a dust-to-dust study of a car's impact, including factors other than air pollution.

Someone mentioned above that the Tesla is built locally for them; these types of issues that should play a more prominent role in deciding which EV is really 'green'.
No Audis are built in the U.S. -to my knowledge- so they would have to be shipped all the way from Europe, increasing the environmental impact.

 

Doubt Tesla will open a plant in Texas while Texas is not allowing Tesla to do business there;-P

 

Yah, that is a good point.
Although, I think Musk believes dangling the idea may be just what he needs to get TX to allow him to sell cars his way there:
Elon Musk hints a Texas plant could build Tesla pickup

 

Texas is one choice, toyota seems to be much more profitable building their trucks here, versus building the same trucks at the NUMMI factory. There is a major port and rail lines for parts, an educated labor force. It has cheap wind, and although solar is not nearly as productive as in california, it is more heavily subsidized. Below is the roof of a whole foods that is under construction in north austin, IIRC between federal, state, and local credits, a company only pays 35% of the costs of solar pannels and installation.



But labor is not as cheap as some other states, and other states may have more of a supplier infrastructure.

Tesla does a lot of business here, but buyers have to jump through hoops. You can test drive the car at the tesla store, but they can't call it a test drive or tell you the price. They have a service facility right by me, but they can't advertise its a service facility. All the communications and sale have to be done in california, and tesla can't finance the car in texas, its chicago IIRC, or through a thrid party institution. The car dealers spent a couple of million on the legislature to keep tesla from being a regular dealer in the last term. If telsa builds a plant here its much more than the dealers will be willing to spend. Its all rather sad.