Tesla Model S Gets Highest Safety Rating

The similar scenario happened between a Volt and an Accord with the same unfortunate outcome.

Three Killed When Driver Crashes Into Oncoming Vehicle in Granada Hills | NBC Southern California

 

Tesla Model S had minimal damage, but totaled a BMW M5.
Traffic Collision: E60 M5 with a Tesla Model S - BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums

2013 Teslive Event - YouTube

 

That wasn't a late model Accord. I believe it was a 92 or 93. No front airbags. They could have died in a head on collision with a coyote.
I am very sorry anyone died, but you can't compare current safety ratings against the safety of a 20 year old car.

 

Those in GM (or formerly in GM) who killed the EV1 should read this story . . .

Bob Wilson

 

Partially correct, the 93' Accord had a single driver's airbag. My apologies for the mistake, I thought it had none.

Honda Accord Compare - Safety and Reliability - MSN Autos

I agree the heavier weight puts a lighter car at more risk. As soon as someone builds a smaller car (EV) with a 160 mile range I expect to switch to it.

That said, if there is an off center crash between a 93 Accord and a 2013 Accord, or a 2013 Prius for that matter, I wouldn't want to be the driver, much less the passenger in the Accord.

 

Either way its a tragedy. Did they ever get to the bottom of why the tesla crashed into the honda on that dangerous road. I just read some articles, and said there was a mercedes that may have been distracting it (racing, cup, etc). Those poor people in the honda and there families.

I don't think Tesla really wants to go there, I don't think they want to sell based on safety. Mercedes and Volvo were the leaders in safety though, and crash tests seem to have crowned the tesla model S the new leader. That should help get rid of the FUD that BEVs are not as safe as normal cars. Even the tesla roadster driver survived when a prius and toureg tried to kill him.
Tesla Totaled In Colossal Collision | Autopia | Wired.com

 

I am also in for the Tesla "Model E" Will Tesla's 2017 3rd-Generation Car Be Called The Model E?

If the smaller vehicle is made with the same materials, aluminun etc.. and quality of the Model S, 200 mile-range will probably cost a lot more! 50K?

Awesome!

 

Aren't modern front engine cars made so the engine submarines under the passenger compartment in a crash allowing a crumple zone back to the firewall?

I recall a 300Z crash that happened near my house where the car ran off the road, over-corrected, rode up the opposite bank and hit a tree about 8 feet above the road surface by the scar and then launched itself over a fire hydrant coming down after a 270 on the road. The two kids who were test driving it walked away. The engine was lying separate on the ground. I watched this one as it happened. Only to be followed 2 years later within 50 feet by a similar 300Z t-boneing a truck. The Z's engine lay under the chassis. Again survivors. I only heard the second accident but I saw the results from 5 feet away.

 

I would guess if the blue star is bmw 3 sized it would be a model C, not E. This goes with the S and X naming conventions. I am not that fond of the Germanic naming conventions though, and perhaps it will get a name instead of just a letter followed by a battery pack size.

I would think the only way blue star would approach $50K is if you loaded it up with options. Tesla should be able to drop the price of battery packs by at least 20%. We can guess at a break down current prices of the 60kwh model S as $24,000 in battery costs, $18,000 in margin, which leaves about $30,000 for the rest of the car. Say the battery becomes slightly smaller and costs $18,000 at the start and we target $37,500 before tax credit (which will run out in later years). You can spend $11,000 on a higher volume possibly steel plus aluminum body and still have $8500 in margin on the blue star. Cost cutting won't be easy but that is definitely doable.

 

The Model S "refused" to roll over and it "broke the testing machine". What a beast! I really like this car!

 

I agree, I would prefer Model "C" instead of "E", starting at $37,500 to loaded for about 50K would be nice.
I would drop the word "Model" altogether for a simple model & trim designation;

Model S = Tesla S60, S85, S85P

Model X = Tesla X60, X85, X85P

Model C = Tesla C60, C85, C85P

 

NHTSA Rebukes Tesla Over Non-Existent "5.4-Star" Safety Rating

 

The Oldsmobile Aurora had a similar roof crush test result way back in the day:

Oldsmobile Aurora - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I personally find the Models "S" "E" "X" more amusing.

That said, I your cost analysis is ignoring the fact that Tesla receives money for carbon offsets for each of their cars. Part of their margin is the 15-20k (as I've heard) they get from other manufacturer without EVs or alternative energy cars.

 

You can forget about those ZEV credits by the time the blue star comes out. This last quarter there was already a drop in revenue. Most of those were earned on roadsters and sold to honda.

Tesla ZEV credit changes will alter profit picture, but Musk still confident

It was actually profitable last quarter on a non-GAP basis with the diminished credits.

 

On a non-GAAP basis, I'm a billionaire. Non-GAAP lets you pull numbers out of the air.

 

You can decide yourself if you like or dislike their accounting, they included both sets of numbers. The main extraordinary item was accounting for leases. They took all the revenue at the inception date, and did not account for possible costs of buy back after leases.

The key here is the zev credits are extraordinary items that tesla expects to mainly dry up by the end of the year. They should not be included in accounting for future projects. I did not use them in my analysis.

 

Anyone hear of the term from Model S owner(s) coined for Prius?

Pre-S