I assume with circa 700HP a discussion of this car belongs in USA/Modern Muscle....mine will be delivered within the next week or so, stay tuned for review!

 

Interesting issue

1. Range
SLS AMG Coupe Electric Drive 751 hp, 737 ftlb
Battery 60 kWh, up to 160 miles
Jeremy Clarkson tested the SLS and found, he burned 44% of juice in 7 minutes. So the SLS may just manage 2 laps on Nürburgring Nordschleife.

The main problem of all electric vehicles is the 'Range vs Speed' problem. The range comes down to 20% at high speed.
Check the range/speed diagram here: Tesla Roadster Sport 2.5 : zero emission motoring

BMW i3 - 170 hp, 22 kWh Car Magazin test results.
BMW predicted range: 120 miles tested ECE 93/116/EG
Tested under more realistic “E-Car Cycle (TSECC)”: QMT Mobile
Range at 23°C --- 90 miles
Range at -7°C --- 77 miles
Range at average 120 km/h at 23°C --- 49 miles

Teslas Modes S85P predicted range at 70 miles/h highway speed, 0° deg, heated cabin: 185 miles.

So, driver of electric cars are compelled to take it easy, to manage an acceptable range.

2. Speed
Electric cars have max. power and average power. I can imagine that the copper cables are not thick enough, to manage the max. current for max. power and speed for a long time. It may need thicker expensive copper cables, more cooling, more weight.
So, electric cars can do a drag race only once, no racing because of limited max. speed. The max. speed can't hold for a long time. The speed will be quickly reduced. The weight is very high.

3. Verdict
In my opinion, " Perhaps, but ".
Electric cars are excellent comfortable one pedal use cars of tomorrow and today for urban and short-route drivers or in the region, where charging stations are being installed. When battery capacity doubles, it will results in a boom in sales.

But, muscle cars normally do not use the slipstream of fast trucks to reach their destination. They can go faster then 120, 120 for days and 170 over longer distances. Their drivers are not affected through range anxiety.
.

 

All true, but a Bugatti Veyron will run through a tank of gas in 12 minutes at full throttle.

I just received my Tesla yesterday. It is a BEAST from a dead stop. Apparently it does 0-24 mph in .83 seconds which equates to 1.25g's. Above that speed it is quick but nowhere near the realm of super car fast. I would guess that from a rolling 30 mph start a Mercedes S63 would eat its lunch.

The handling is absolutely phenomenal due to the low CG.

It is my "around town" car so usually not driving it more than 40-50 miles round trip before charging it in my garage again (which, with my 100 amp charger takes about 30 minutes to top off).

 

These types of cars like the Tesla seem very attractive to me except for range anxiety. Thus I conclude for me it would be an additional car for around town commuting. Taking it on long road trips would cause frustration of knowing that if I step on the go pedal my range will drop very quickly. But why would I spend this much on a car with that kind of performance if I am not able to use it.

 

I know a few people who use them for 200 mile road trips I.e. Dallas to Austin etc. Tesla has a supercharger station along that route that adds 170 miles of range in 30 minutes. The problem is when you get to your destination you need to find places to charge. Not really practical. You can use a 110 outlet if you have several days to charge it up, a 240 will give you 30 mile range per hour of charge.

hybrid systems are really the future until battery technology improves. the BMW I8 is on the right track with a higher revving internal combustion engine and an electric motor to torque fill at low RPM's.

 

Yes, hybrid systems are very highly regarded among automotive journalists and engineers they have made.
I'm not sure. Here are some hybrid test results of consumption of petrol investigation with comparable vehicles:

86.335 Euro Mercedes S400 Hybrid vs. 80.920 Euro Mercedes S350 Diesel
S400 Hybrid: MB predicted 39 mpg 95/gasoline ---> result 26 mpg
S350 Diesel: MB predicted 47 mpg diesel ---------> result 29 mpg

36.900 Euro Volkswagen Golf GTE Hybrid vs. 31.625 Euro Volkswagen Golf GTD
Golf GTE Hybrid: VW predicted 235 ! mpg 95/gasoline ---> result 39 mpg
Golf GTD: VW predicted 59 mpg diesel -----------------> result 34 mpg

- The hybrid cars are more expensive, but don't conserve fuel as predicted.
- There is a lot more technology has been built in.
- More technology, more complex systems, more parts can fail, reliability comes down.
- Analogue vehicles are simple, engine, gear box, cost of maintenance should be lower.
- Consumption of petrol not make a big difference.

126.000 Euro 362 hp BMW i8: BMW predicted 118 ! mpg 98/gasoline Plus ---> result 34 mpg
76.000 Euro 431 hp BMW M4: BMW predicted 29 mpg 98/gasoline Plus ---> result 21 mpg

Hockenheim
1:12.80 M4
1:15.00 i8

and, the 50.000 Euro price difference for gasoline will bring you to the moon!
.

 

Diesel only have amazing fuel on the highway. I had a new E350Bluetec benz and it got 800 miles to a tank if all I did was freeway. But city/hwy mix and it dropped to 650 to 700 miles to a tank. So I got 45mpg on freeway and 30 in city. It was a great car, I would take diesel over hybrid in most situations.

 

There is also no beneficial effect helping protect the environment. The energy input of a hybrid car during its total life cycle, starting with the manufacturing, over its service, until the disposal of the vehicle is identically with analogue vehicles.
Hybrid cars conserve fuel, but development, production and disposal of the additional electric technology destroys any total energy advantage and customers has to pay more for a new hybrid in stead of an analogue car.
With regard to the most important argument for any car drivers - reliability - means the simpler, the better.

That's a great fuel economy for an analogue car with 252 hp and 460 ftlb, 155 mph and 6,6 s.

 

Reliability is not the most important argument for me......

 

now try a turbo s