+- babyRR.com - The Range Rover Evoque Forum (https://babyrr.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Range Rover Evoque Discussions (/Forum-Range-Rover-Evoque-Discussions)
+--- Forum: General (/Forum-General)
+--- Thread: Car of the Year 2013 (/Thread-Car-of-the-Year-2013)
Car of the Year 2013 - jitenc - 18-01-2014 07:41pm
I was at the WESTFIELD SHOPPING CENTRE in London where the Tesla showroom caught my eye. I was hooked on it when i saw it in flesh.
Silly enough to ask the sales rep how many MPG it gave? He looked at me and asked me what I drove? My answer was an Evoque giving me 27.9 MPG! His answer was, it did not use fuel, no gears, no congestion charges.....
Res_ipsa_loquitur... Tesla speaks for itself.
Since then,I have been hooked on finding more about the Tesla and what it stands for. Got to know more about Elon Musk, the co-founder.
Car of the Year 2013.....
http://www.motortrend.com/oftheyear/car/1301_2013_motor_trend_car_of_the_year_tesla_model_s/
Guess what my next car would be ..... Wouldn't be a exaggerated 27.9 mpg diesel .... If I can afford it!
RE: Car of the Year 2013 - flibberflops - 18-01-2014 09:32pm
I personally have an issue with the way Electric cars are sold and advertised.
No Fuel... Zero MPG (or 97mpg on a hybrid) are a complete distortion of the truth which government rules and car magazines have not caught up with.
The whole point of a MPG figure was to give an indication of how many miles you could go on a defined amount of energy. Yes, Electric use no Fuel directly and Hybrids use less fuel directly but they all have a daily energy cost to the owner... which for some reason doesn't seem to have to be declared in advertisements and magazines!
In my book, when a car is electric or hybrid it should be clearly specified the KW/h per mile it costs to run.
As for the "No Fuel", I would ask the Tesla salesman if it does indeed use no fuel then the car came with a guarantee that all the electric going to your house is generated by natural means... and not a bloody huge Coal powered power station?
RE: Car of the Year 2013 - fedup - 19-01-2014 10:10am
(18-01-2014 07:41pm)jitenc Wrote: Guess what my next car would be ..... Wouldn't be a exaggerated 27.9 mpg diesel .... If I can afford it!
Electric cars are no more environmentally friendly than petrol cars. The problem is the batteries - the production process is terrible for the environment and they don't last the life of the car, so each car requires several batteries to be produced/disposed of. An electric car needs to do something like 100,000 miles of being charged on wind/solar/nuclear ONLY to become better than a standard car. Considering most of our electricity comes from gas/coal means its impact is actually worse.
Cheaper MPG? With the purchase price and battery cost/rental being so high, are the running costs really less than a standard car? I wouldn't think so.
It really annoys me that people buy electric/hybrid cars and think they're changing the world. What's the point in buying a Honda hybrid and then bombing down the motorway at 90mph? Keep your petrol car and change your driving habits.
If your concern is the environment, keep the Evoque, but have the dog put down - his environmental impact is much, much greater. Have the cat put down and your wife can keep the Ford Focus, too.
Become vegetarian - your carbon footprint will reduce dramatically.
And best of all, don't have kids. That way your tiny environmental impact stops with you rather than increasing exponentially for the rest of time.
RE: Car of the Year 2013 - KaDargo - 19-01-2014 10:42am
Post of the week !
RE: Car of the Year 2013 - jitenc - 19-01-2014 10:47pm
Hi Fedup.
I hope you weren't having a go at me for my naivity, if that's what you mean.
The fact that my driving habits in city gives me an uneconomical method of transport, I may be better of using an electric version regardless of environmental impact I am causing. I haven't done my maths yet!
And also the fact that the Tesla is well advanced interms of ride quality, noise reduction, advanced Sat Nav, is something which needs to be appreciated.
The Tesla may have an exaggerated price, but so does the Evoque. I would say the Evoque is £5000 dearer than it should be!
Fed up, you would be much suited a politician, rather than a lecturer....
Tesla is making an affordable version, but let's see if it stands above the rest of the cars in the price range.
RE: Car of the Year 2013 - speary - 21-01-2014 09:44am
(19-01-2014 10:47pm)jitenc Wrote: Hi Fedup.Hi Jitenc. I don't think Fedup was having a go at you but just pointing out that the public seem to think that electric/hybrid cars are much better for the environment than petrol/diesel fuelled cars. At the end of the day it takes the same amount of energy to move a 1.5 tonne vehicle over a distance no matter what the fuel. There needs to be more honesty and clarity in the advertising of such vehicles. The figures quoted should be a combination of the petrol/diesel plus the cost of generating the electricity
I hope you weren't having a go at me for my naivity, if that's what you mean.
The fact that my driving habits in city gives me an uneconomical method of transport, I may be better of using an electric version regardless of environmental impact I am causing. I haven't done my maths yet!
And also the fact that the Tesla is well advanced interms of ride quality, noise reduction, advanced Sat Nav, is something which needs to be appreciated.
The Tesla may have an exaggerated price, but so does the Evoque. I would say the Evoque is £5000 dearer than it should be!
Fed up, you would be much suited a politician, rather than a lecturer....
Tesla is making an affordable version, but let's see if it stands above the rest of the cars in the price range.
Porsche Panamera hybrid at near 2 tonnes doing 90 odd mpg. Get real, they should be reported to the advertising authority under the total bu!1sh!t rule