It's supposed to be a sports car. They advertise it as a sports car always followed by what the 0-60 times are. The 60 mile range came from top gears test on the track when driven like the sports car it is advertised as.
The Ford GT did 4mpg on Top Gear's test track. It has a fuel capacity of 17.5 US gallons giving it a theoretical range under such conditions of... 70 miles.... Oh, and it costs more than $100,000.
My point, though, is that this is example is pretty much irrelevant.
If 500 people want to buy something like the Tesla Roadster... so be it. If those 500 people want a similar vehicle not sold by Tesla who do they go with? Hmmm...
The Tesla Roadster has the capability of delivering close to 250 miles per charge which would be an equivalent (in today's economy) of 100+ mpg. The Ford GT will never be able to deliver that, driven like a Granny or otherwise. A $10,000-25,000 economy car can't even do that.
But even that's irrelevant. Don't buy a sports car if you're concerned about high MPG figures. And don't by a vehicle that gets high MPG if you're concerned about sportiness.
The Roadster seems to get attacked from all sides. It's not sporty enough. It's too expensive. It's not frugal enough. It's not a magic car! It's not a magic bullet. It doesn't do it all! I don't care what the marketing people say. If you damn a product because of its marketing, so be it. But the product shouldn't be a reflection of its marketing.
There are plenty of $100,000+ sports cars from boutique manufacturers out there that aren't "worth the money". But that's not why they are sold and why people buy them.
Comparing the "worth" of the Roadster against a Lotus doesn't even make much sense considering the Elise/Exige are price/performance bargains... until you consider a modified EVO or Miata or something. It's all relative.
If people don't like what Tesla does, they're welcome to start their own high performance EV company. Good luck with that... I'm not going to damn a company because it's mouthed by a [email protected]
There are plenty of major, and good, companies that fall under that category.
It remains to be seen how Tesla does... or what it does... for the industry in general. I hear people lamenting the dot.com era even though some really good ideas came out of it. Cuz certainly it makes sense to build a car company like everyone else in the world.
Wasn't it Gordon Murray who wanted to design and offer engineering advice to build cars, but sub the work out to other companies? What does he know? I mean that facetiously and seriously. He may be on to something, but I don't know. After all, he hasn't done it yet.
If Tesla fails to repay the loans, complain away. Until then, if the gov't is so eager to print money and give it away... why aren't we lot taking advantage?