2020 Tesla Model 3 Standard Range Plus Sedan 4d on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Tesla news roundup: Supportive bill proposed in NJ; NHTSA ends investigation

The ongoing dealer fight against Tesla Motors in a number of states continues to evolve, with two bits of news out of Ohio and New Jersey this week. There is good news and, well, good news. And then there's lots more news. In Ohio, the automaker won a compromise bill that won't exactly let Tesla to do whatever it wants, but it will let the company's two existing stores stay open and a third to come online. Tesla sent AutoblogGreen a statement from Diarmuid O'Connell, VP of corporate and business development, on the situation there: We're pleased with the compromise reached in the Senate Committee to amend SB 260 to allow Ohio residents to continue to purchase electric vehicles directly from Tesla at our two existing stores and one additional location in Ohio. Tesla stores are essential to educating customers about electric vehicle technology and building a mass market for EVs. We look forward to continuing to provide our Ohio customers with the full Tesla experience and to further investing in the state by employing Ohioans both directly at our stores and service centers, and through our Ohio-based suppliers of parts and components. Meanwhile, over in New Jersey, Assemblyman Tim Eustace introduced legislation that would reverse the ban on Tesla stores in that state. On Facebook, the EV-driving Assemblyman wrote, "We need to attract companies that will create jobs and promote economic growth. If the governor is unwilling, then the Legislature will get it done." You can read the proposed bill here. Also, coinciding with the announcement of the new titanium underbody shields for the Model S, the NHTSA said it has closed its investigation into three Model S fires and said that, "A defect trend has not been identified." With the political landscape constantly changing, lots of editorial voices are joining the discussion. As The New York Times editorial board says, "the fight with Tesla is not really about this niche company" and basically comes to the same conclusion we did the other day: "Instead of fighting Tesla, dealers should be improving customer service." Possible 2016 presidential candidate Marco Rubio (R-FL) also jumped into the fray, saying on CNBC that he has no problem with Tesla's business model. You can see a clip of that below as well as a short video of a Model S delivery staging area in Europe. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. This content is hosted by a third party.

Elon Musk likens NJ vote to mafia tactics

When the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission decided on Tuesday to block Tesla Motors from selling cars from its stores in the Garden State, it may have inadvertently kicked a hornet's nest. Perhaps they thought no one was looking. Maybe they imagined no one would really care. If so, they were wrong. People do care, and there's some stinging criticism going on. One individual in particular cares an awful lot. As co-founder and CEO of Tesla, Elon Musk takes extreme umbrage when his baby is subject to what he feels is unfair treatment. Whether it be from the media or from politically-manipulative foes like automobile dealer's associations. Never one to hold back, the entrepreneur has penned a piece directly to the people of New Jersey, making his case for manufacturer-to-consumer sales. It also explains how the company will operate there as of April 1st when the new rules take effect. He also pointedly questions the dealers association's reasoning for asking for the change. And we quote, The rationale given for the regulation change that requires auto companies to sell through dealers is that it ensures "consumer protection". If you believe this, Gov. Christie has a bridge closure he wants to sell you! Unless they are referring to the mafia version of "protection", this is obviously untrue. The uproar is not limited to Tesla insiders, or even the automaker's many fans. Apparently, people still care whether or not their government reeks of corruption, and in this case the smell wafting from New Jersey has attracted a lot of people's attention. A White House petition asking the Obama administration to "Inform New Jersey that markets should be free for Tesla Motors and for everyone" has attracted the attention of over 97,000 signatures 2,615 signatures in a few short days. The petition, though not legally binding, and the outrage in comments following articles on the issue ought to be a warning bell to politicians who trumpet the importance of the free market (or environmental concerns, as the case may be), and then act seemingly contrary to those convictions. For now, Tesla is said to be mulling a legal remedy, but we would not be surprised to see a Political Action Committee (PAC) arise in the future that could take the company's concerns directly to voters. You can read Musk's letter, "To the People of New Jersey" here. If you're so inclined, you can add your name to the petition here. As always, feel free to let us know your take in the Comments.

In hindsight, Musk wouldn't use Lotus for Tesla Roadster

The world will be a different place after Elon Musk builds a time traveling device (don't ask us how we know that will happen). For one thing, the Tesla Roadster of the rewritten future will not have been built using the chassis of the Lotus Elise. Also, verb tenses will be becoming even more confusing and, possibly, awkward. "We ended up changing most of the damn car" – Elon Musk We know about the not-using-the-Lotus thing because the Tesla Motors CEO said as much yesterday at the World Energy Innovation Forum at the Tesla Factory in Fremont. The two-day event, which also offers Model S test rides and a factory tour for attendees, featured a fireside chat with the electric automaker's CEO and Ira Ehrenpreis. During the discussion, Musk revealed that if he had to do it over again, he would have built the Roadster from the ground up instead of using the Lotus Elise chassis. "We ended up changing most of the damn car, so we thought later, why did we do that," he said. Another problem with the original idea for the car was the drivetrain. At first, Tesla had meant to use the motor and other propulsive bits from AC Propulsion, only to find that powertrain didn't work well in a commercial application. Instead Tesla only licensed the reductive charging patent, which allowed some integration of the inverter and charger. Besides knocking Tesla's own early efforts, the outspoken entrepreneur took a couple swings at other technologies with quotable quotes such as: "The internal combustion engine is a ridiculous thing!" and "Current lithium ion technology is better than theoretical fuel cell limits. So, game over. Why bother with fuel cells?" Looks like there are some things Musk is not interested in going back in time and changing.