Tesla Supercar - Elon wants one!

Tesla Supercar - Elon wants one!

Hi guys,
Just saw this online:

I posted a topic about a Tesla Supercar a few months back and thought it would be a really good idea for the company's brand.

When you ask most people about Tesla they don't know anything about the company, certainly outside of the USA anyway.
However if you ask the average person if they have ever heard of Bugatti many will reply "Yes they make the fastest car on the road, right?"
Therefore I think Tesla should produce a car that beats the Bugatti in the 0-60 mph or 0-100 mph categories. We all know this is the real thrill in a Supercar, as how often does one do 250+mph (or even 150+ mph) without running the risk of being thrown in jail!
I suggested producing a special edition roadster (this would be faster and less expensive than designing a whole new car) and most tech savvy people here on the forum agreed that it could be possible to do this with modified aerodynamics, a more powerful motor, reinforced chassis, and using the new model S battery cells for an upgraded roadster pack. The Roadster "Supersport" perhaps?

Because people always seem to know what is the fastest thing out there on the market.
If Tesla were to do this the car would be splashed all over the front of every car magazine out there (and who doesn't glance at the cover of those, or stop to read an article or two, when passing by?)
The brand exposure for Tesla would be huge.
Little boys would take down their Ferrari posters and put up a Tesla one because everyone would now know that Tesla makes the fastest car out there.
More importantly however it would let the world know that electric cars are the fastest accelerating cars on the

I think for the EV industry as a whole an electric Supercar that out accelerates the fastest gas guzzler on the market would serve as a massive psychological jolt for the world to finally wake up to the potential of the electric car!

And here's the best part...I think Tesla could build this special edition roadster for a fraction of the price of a Bugatti (currently starting at $1.7 million!)
What would the automotive world say if Tesla could make a Bugatti beater for 1/5 of the price or lower!?
Might also be a nice little money maker for Tesla as well...but it's the brand exposure for Tesla and EV's that would pay off big here.

I think Tesla needs this kind of exposure to get their name out there as the world's pinnacle electric car manufacturer. They need to do this if they want their name to survive long term because let's face it, if the big auto makers want to get serious about electric cars they could produce cheaper vehicles that people would be more likely to buy, as they will tend to trust big brand names like "Toyota, Nissan, etc." They know that these companies are likely to still be around for the next 10-15 years over the life of their vehicle so that spare parts, etc will be readily available. This is something people will be apprehensive about when looking at buying a Tesla - it's a new brand that might not make it.

However as I said by making the worlds fastest car and getting the Tesla name on the tips of everybody's tongues, that fear of an unknown brand will quickly fade away.
Telsa need not build a huge amount of these "supersports" either...Bugatti only makes a hundred or so cars every year. Just enough to take the title of fastest accelerating production vehicle will be enough.

I'm with Elon...Tesla should build an electric Supercar but the Roadster is so close to that already...just up the it a ton of money...and reap the brand awareness much more quickly!


teddyg | 15. September 2012

Pretty sad to get no response to this idea on the Tesla forum.

I really think this is the best, easiest, and least expensive way for Tesla to put its brand on the map (startle the automotive world by producing the fastest accellerating car on the market)...they will need this brand awareness if they are to compete with the big boys once they decide to get serious about EV's.

jerry3 | 15. September 2012

My opinion is that the best way for Tesla to get recognition is to have the Model S (and X) out there, working well, and have the owners talk about them and show them.

Most people just don't care about fastest accelerating car when they will never be able to have one themselves They'll just think "Oh, another impractical and dangerous car for the very wealthy". Or they think "My Maserati goes 185, I lost my license, now I can't drive" and wonder how people can be dumb enough to buy one of those things. Either way the result is that they will mentally tune out anytime that the Tesla brand is mentioned. That's not to say that Tesla shouldn't make a new Roadster somewhere down the line, because there is a small market for that kind of car, but it's should be way down on the priority list.

A pizza bet says that 80% of random people on the street can't name the fastest accelerating car.

Mark E | 15. September 2012

A Bugatti Veyron at max speed runs out of fuel in about 12 minutes and 50 miles. The fuel tank is 100 litres.

You'd need a *big* battery...

Tesla already built a sports car to get people's attention, now they need to deliver the model s.

Personally, I'd prefer that they built a larger, slightly more practical sports car than the Roadster. The model S will be the first sedan that I have ever purchased - I've always driven performance cars.

teddyg | 15. September 2012

I would like some of the more technical guys on the forum to weigh in on what they think it would take to get a Roadster Sport to do 0-60mph in less than 2.4 secs? Also how much battery drain would this require (remember I am talking about an upgraded battery pack using new Model S cells).
Of course Model S is their focus and flagship model and we all want it to do well. However very few people outside the US have even heard of Tesla. They need to make a big splash to develope some brand awareness.
Jerry3 I think you underestimate the value of building the world's fastest accellerating car for Tesla. People stop and take note of anything that is #1 in the world. Why? Because it takes an incredible amount of engineering and skill to produce anything that is #1...people respect #1, even if they aren't all that interested in the particular product.
Think of the magazine headlines..."Fastest car in the world, oh and by the way IT'S ELECTRIC!"
Do you really think that this wouldn't massively move the EV market forward by getting the average petrol-head to wake up to the potenital of EV's? Not to mention get nearly everyone reading that particular magazine to check out the Tesla website and have a look at their other more affordable models? This may actually drive more Model S and X sales.

This is about getting the Tesla name out there as fast as possible because if they don't when the big boys like Toyota decide to get serious about EV's what do you think the average person is likely to go for? A Toyota EV or the unknown Tesla EV brand which may or may not be around in 10 years?

I just think this would be a cheap way for Tesla to take a big title away from the gas guzzlers and create a massive amount of publicity for the brand.
I am sure Lotus could whip off a hundred or so more chassis to make a few of these "Supersports"...all the hard work has already been done, they don't need to make a whole new car, just up the Roadster specs and get it done...why wait?

p.s. not to mention the fact that the Tesla Bugatti beater would probably cost 1/5 of the Veyron! Would love to hear Clarkson choke on those words!

olanmills | 15. September 2012

"Because people always seem to know what is the fastest thing out there on the market."

I guess it depends on what you mean by "on the market". Most average folks don't know what a Pagani, McLaren, or even Bugatti is.

I guess most people do know about Ferraris and Lamborghinis, but I honestly think that Tesla spending the time to make a supercar right now would kind of throw them off track.

It wouldn't be enough for Tesla to just make a really fast car. People looking to buy a supercar, or heck, even just journalists wanting to write about a supercar, expectvehicles in this category to be engineered to the highest degree of sophistication for performance. That's the whole point of a supercar. I think it would take a lot of time and effort.

If Tesla did it, I think normal people will care about it as much as they do a Bugatti or Lamborghini, which is not really very much at all. Only some enthusiasts will care.

Some day, it may be interesting for Tesla to work on a supercar.

However, for a sports car, the Roadster 2.0 makes more sense, and I want to see the X, a $30,000 car, a minivan, and hopefully a ~$20,000 compact car from Tesla before they ever start working on a supercar.

olanmills | 15. September 2012


"I really think this is the best, easiest, and least expensive way for Tesla to put its brand on the map"

Really? That this would be the "best" way is at least debateable, but easiest or cheapest? I really doubt that.

Brian H | 16. September 2012

Mark E, jerrye, olanmills +1, +1, +1
teddyg -1

"Petrolheads" are a minute and unimportant market factor, despite their own opinion of the importance of their opinions.

Elon has also said it was a mistake to build an electric version of an ICE car. The Elise version of the Roadster is history.

The next will be on the GenIII platform, and will not have all the kluges and compromises of the Roadster 1.0-2.5 .

Wait for it.

Mark E | 16. September 2012

Oh, I forgot the other thing about a Veyron.

They cost $1.6 M each.

Joshua Burstyn | 16. September 2012

I agree 100% with Brian H.

Elon's motivation is to demonstrate that electric vehicles are the way of the future for the masses. There's nothing to be gained by creating a supercar when most people are best serviced by the S and X. The Gen III will continue the trend in lowering the cost of mass market electric-only vehicles with no compromises.

Brian H | 16. September 2012

I meant tho' that the next Roadster/supercar will be on the next (smaller skateboard?) platform, from the GenIII. It will be designed "from the ground up". I wonder if it will resemble the current Roadster!?

Timo | 16. September 2012

I think Tesla could build this special edition roadster for a fraction of the price of a Bugatti (currently starting at $1.7 million!)

I don't. In order to beat Veyron for top speed and acceleration you would need huge battery which would increase cost and weight of the car in unbearable figures. I actually don't think it would be possible to do that using Panasonic batteries that are in use in Model S (too low power density). Add batteries - add weight - add more batteries - add more weight etc. a=F/m so increased mass affects directly to acceleration. Car would need to be practically filled with batteries.

You could do a short range Veyron-beater using other kind of batteries with higher power densities, but that would also increase price even further.

Possible in future, but not using current Tesla drivetrain design.

olanmills | 17. September 2012

I think Tesla could build this special edition roadster for a fraction of the price of a Bugatti (currently starting at $1.7 million!)

Well if we're talking about the retail price, Timo, I disagree, but I don't really have any facts or analysis to back it up. It's just that $1.7 million is a rediculous price for a car. I think the Bugatti is way overpriced and is only so expensive because of its purposeful exclusivity and tiny market of people with for whom the ~$100,000 tire change makes them yawn.

I'm sure if Tesla, or any other manufacturer, wanted to build a car that met or exceeded the Veyron's performance, they could if they wanted to, sell it for much less and still be profitable, assuming the demand was there.

So in that sense, I think teddyg's right.

However, if you take this statement another way

(I think Tesla could build this special edition roadster for a fraction of the price of a Bugatti (currently starting at $1.7 million!))

and consider Tesla's R&D cost to develop such a car, I don't know whether it would be more or less than what Bugatti/VW spends, but I highly doubt it would be an amount that you would call a small "fraction of the price of [either Bugatti R&D cost or a Veyron's retail price]"

olanmills | 17. September 2012

And to make it clear, yes, I understand that the italicized text is a quote from teddyg, not Timo.

Timo | 18. September 2012

Problem I see is that you can do one, beat it in 0-60 acceleration or in top speed, but not both. Not easily anyway. Veyron is ICE car, so it has benefit of multiple gears. To build a car that does both using single gear would require huge torque at the motor, or multiple motors with low reduction gear (motor and tire torques would need to be much closer to each other than in Model S)

There is a small company doing the multiple motor approach: Rimac (, but even that doesn't beat the Veyrons top speed. 400+km/h, 0-60 in 2.5secs is tough combo to beat.

Price, of course, is kind of artificial concept, once you have designed the car, manufacturing one would not cost that much. Only really expensive part of the car would be the battery. If we assume something like continuous 10C batteries (like Rimac), 1100kW power (about 1500HP, might need more than that though) would require at least 110kWh batteries. At $1000/kWh (a bit more expensive than Panasonic batteries required) batteries alone would be $110k. Rest of the car, motors, wiring, etc. would put price quite high. Less than Veyron, I suppose, but not 1/5 of the price unless you make it really ascetic. 100kWh of batteries would weight around 500kg (high power, low capacity).

I believe building one that beats Veyron will be easy in near future, but not quite yet.

Brian H | 18. September 2012

("100kWh of batteries would weight around 500kg" -- would weigh around

Use "weight" as a verb only to refer to adding weight to something.)

I wonder if a buffer of supercaps would help in the design ...

DanD | 19. September 2012

Great classic marketing idea. Supercar is one idea. Nascar competitor is another (have no idea if the rules would allow it)

These are projects that raise profile and allow technical experimentation.

teddyg | 20. September 2012

Thanks DanD...finally someone thinking on my wavelength!
It's not that I think there is this huge market out there for Veyron beaters. I was only ever talking about a run of maybe 100 cars max. And yes I was only ever talking about 0-60 or 0-100mph acceleration times, not top speed (which you would have got if you read my original post).
This is all simply about making a splash and getting a Tesla (more importantly an EV) on top of the charts in terms of production car performance levels, and the marketing value this would have for the Tesla brand and EV's in general. I really think the publicity would drive people to the Tesla website and result in higher model S and X reservations.
I don't think just petrol heads would stop and take notice if a magazine/news article/TV program headlined with "The fastest car in the world... is now electric!"
My point in thinking that this could be done "relatively" cheaply and quickly was that they would use 90% of the current Roadster's components. Perhaps only needing to re-enforce the chassis to handle the increased torque, drop in a more powerful motor, and an upgraded battery pack (using new model S cells) and the work would be done (obviously I am greatly over-simplifying here but you get my drift). No billions of dollars on R&D, crash testing, etc (as would be needed with a brand new car) but just a higher spec Roadster model (like the "sport" version they already released) but called the "SuperSport" this time around.

What I was hoping for was some more tech savvy people to delve into the numbers to see if this would even be possible? I take the point that the battery may have to be so big that the weight of it would prohibit a 0-60 time of less than 2.4 secs but how do you know this? Surely there must be some pretty smart engineers here on the forum? Educate me please!
Maybe a current roadster owner can tell me how much of their battery % is left after doing a 0-60mph flat out run in the claimed 3.7 secs? Real actual data would be great!
Look at this as a fun excercise in the potential of electric cars. I have no illusions that Tesla will actually do this but the thought of a suped-up Roadster beating a Veyron at maybe a quarter of the price is pretty cool you must admit and would certainly generate a lot of positive buzz for Tesla and all EV's in general.


Timo | 20. September 2012

What I was hoping for was some more tech savvy people to delve into the numbers to see if this would even be possible? I take the point that the battery may have to be so big that the weight of it would prohibit a 0-60 time of less than 2.4 secs but how do you know this? Surely there must be some pretty smart engineers here on the forum? Educate me please!

It's definitely possible if you abandon Panasonic batteries and use other kind of batteries. Check that Rimac Concept One link I gave couple of messages up.

Maybe a current roadster owner can tell me how much of their battery % is left after doing a 0-60mph flat out run in the claimed 3.7 secs?

0-60 goes for 3.7 secs, motor power about 230kW, one hour is 3600 secs so roughly 230Wh. IOW about 1/200 of the capacity. You don't even notice that unless you do a lot of those.

teddyg | 22. September 2012

So it sounds like a flat out 0-60mph run in the current roadster takes up only a very small amount of the overall battery capacity to do.
How much more power to you think we would require (assuming a more powerful motor would have to be installed) to get a 0-60mph in less than 2.4 secs? Any idea math wizards?

Brian H | 23. September 2012

The energy (kWh) required to get to a particular speed is more or less fixed. When you specify time (how long does it take), you are adding the power requirement (energy/time). Assuming a fixed 'efficiency' (% wasted), the power required should be inversely proportional to the change in time. (EVs are much better at getting that 'fixed efficiency', which is their advantage.)

So compared to a 4 sec. 0-60, a 2.4 sec. would require 4/2.4 = 1/.6 = 1.67 times as much power (applied for .6 as much time).

Timo | 24. September 2012

It is a matter of torque curve, aerodynamics and mass of the car. Tesla Roadster is heavy, it's torque curve is made for very fast 0-50mph, but it slows down that already at 60mph, and it has aerodynamics of smooth brick. If you cut down battery size (IOW sacrifice range), use a lot higher power density batteries and strip down all the unnecessary weight you can get a really fast BEV relatively cheaply.

Check "White zombie":

There are over 50C batteries (meaning 50 x Energy in kWh). If you need, lets say 700kW, you would need only 14kWh battery to create that using those 50C batteries. That 14kWh can't weigh much, assumption: 100Wh/kg: 140kg (Roadster battery pack 450kg). That's only battery weight, but with less weight also structural stress is less. That's continuous 50C BTW, over 100C in short bursts for best of them, so you can have 1400kW out of that in short burst. That's twice the power Bugatti Veyron creates.

Make it a lot more aerodynamic than Roadster and you have a really fast short range BEV.

teddyg | 24. September 2012

Great work Timo...that's the kind of analysis I was hoping for!
So it certainly would be possible for Tesla to modify the current roadster to do a sub 2.4 sec 0-60mph then?
Would a bigger motor need to be installed to do this or just the higher density batteries?
What sort of range would be left over after two or three 0-60 sub 2.4 sec runs do you think?
This is all most people want to do anyway...a few blasts to 60mph to thrill their friends and then return to driving like a sane person. Would be good if they could still make it home after a few of these bursts though!

The White Zombie claims a 0-60 of 1.8 secs and doesn't appear to look very aerodynamic at all so I wonder just how much Tesla would even have to modify the body panels on the current Roadster to achieve sub 2.4?
If it was only a matter of creating a few special battery packs for a run of say 50-100 "super sports" I would think this could be done very inexpensively indeed...allowing Tesla to generate a lot of buzz for very little investment...which has been my point here all along.
Would just love to see a Tesla cream all of the most expensive gas guzzlers on the market (for a fraction of the price)...forcing people to finally admit that electrics are #1 in every category and the shift to a fully electric transportation future is truely only a matter of time now.

Timo | 25. September 2012

The White Zombie claims a 0-60 of 1.8 secs and doesn't appear to look very aerodynamic at all so I wonder just how much Tesla would even have to modify the body panels on the current Roadster to achieve sub 2.4?

0-60 at sub 2secs is for wimps at stoplights. If you want real thrill do the 60-120 at the same time. That scares people. You need speed, not only acceleration.

You would need to rebuild entire Roadster drivetrain to do that, so you could as well start from scratch. I think next GenIII-based roadster will be the supercar you want. Probably double-engine AWD with a lot more power than this first "practicing vehicle". Batteries however will probably not be those insane 50+C batteries (Panasonic simply doesn't manufacture those AFAIK), so I expect just long range very powerful car. Not Veyron-beater, but much more impressive than current Roadster. Probably better looking car also (IMO Roadster is kind of ugly).

Just in case you don't know this, Roadster chassis was build by Lotus, it wasn't pure Tesla design. As such it has inherited a lot of bad ICE influences in its design and is far from perfect BEV. AFAIK Lotus doesn't do those gliders anymore, so your hope for Tesla Roadster supercar is kind of pointless.

Brian H | 25. September 2012

Elon has said that working from an ICE design turned out to be a mistake, like renovating a house and ending up with one basement wall of original structure. A white sheet would have been cheaper and better.

Todd R. Lockwood | 11. Oktober 2012

I'm not convinced that a car in Veyron territory would do all that much for Tesla's brand. Remember when Chrysler owned Lamborghini? The rationale was that the association with Lamborghini would make people view Chrysler's cars differently. I don't think they ever achieved that goal. Tesla should just keep making amazingly fast, beautiful, useable cars that blow away gas powered cars in the same price/performance category. (The recent Model S/M5 drag race video by Automobile speaks volumes.)

If Tesla aims for too high of a price point, they run the risk of a disconnect with the buying public. Sure, there are plenty of 20-something motorheads who will focus on the world's fastest car, but I'm not sure that the trickle-down effect is really there.

The difference between Tesla and a typical car maker, is that Tesla already has extraordinary engineering in their regular product line. They don't need to build a "Veyron" to make their other cars appear more impressive. Instead, they might consider building a gorgeous 2-seat sports car that gives you Ferrari 458 performance, handling and looks at one-third the price. That would get people's attention.

One thing I find interesting... when I introduce someone to the Model S, a person who previously knew nothing about it, after seeing photos and learning of its capabilities, they often assume that the Model S must be priced in Ferrari territory. $200-250K. That's the value/performance perception buyers currently have. When they learn that the base price is under $60K, their jaws drop. Tesla has created a new value/performance paradigm. They should continue running with it.

Timo | 12. Oktober 2012

I think Tesla could do Veyron-beater for acceleration quite easily already. I mean F=ma == a=F/m. Keep F constant and just drop the m to half and you have twice as good acceleration (until air drag starts to slow you down). Model S Performance weights huge 4600+ lbs and has 0-60 acceleration of 4.4s. Double the motors (like in Model X), use a bit higher power density batteries, lighter and smaller chassis and you get Veyron figures quite easily. (read: low price for high performance).

Problem with beating Veyron isn't the low speed acceleration though (there are several not-so-expensive ICE cars that already do that), it is the insane top speed it has. With single gear that is difficult to get, and I'm not sure we would even want that (it's just not practical).

That's the beauty of the electric drivetrain, more punch in smaller package with very simple mechanical parts. Only real limiting part is the battery, and that limit is going away in a hurry.

jerry3 | 12. Oktober 2012

Other than a few motorheads, who would care? The average person on the street has never even heard of Veyron. Actually, there's a better chance they've heard of Tesla.

Timo | 13. Oktober 2012

My point is that eventually you get that even without trying much. Labs are constantly improving the power and energy densities of batteries (I have seen figures like 1000C and 1kWh/kg in lab results) and in electric motors efficiency actually improves with size, so with that in mind I think they need to actually artificially limit the power for ordinary family cars in order to keep them safe. No more golf carts.

Making an absolute insane BEV racing car will not be tough job in the (near) future. Like for World Rally Championship where the distances driven in each section of the race are small. I think if someone would seriously try they could make BEV to beat all ICE competition in those right now if the regulations could allow that.

Teslation | 21. Oktober 2012

A supercar with google self drive mode would really get some attention and publicity for Tesla as the world's first self driving car. Google could even afford to ante a 100 million or so to Tesla for the development as its good publicity for Google also. It would add lots of cost, but it's going to be an insanely expensive car anyway, and every car collector would want one.

SSL161 | 21. Oktober 2012

Signe me up for one!

--- Cherif

Tiebreaker | 22. Oktober 2012

Then Google will monitor your driving habits and routes, your browser searches, sell them to advertisers, and Google self drive will take you seventeen times a day to the highest paying advertiser's store.

Teslation | 23. Oktober 2012

Now if Elon could produce just 20,000 Google self driving supercars per year at $250,000. 00 each that should bring him 5 billion a year in cash flow. If his margin is 30% then thats 1 1/2 billion net income per year which would help fund other models.

To get the same numbers from a mass market, gen 3 Tesla selling for $ 25,000.00, well he'd have to sell ten times as many or, 200,000 $25,000 dollar cars a year. Now to make this just as profitable, I believe Elon will develops lots of must have monthly/ yearly subscription services/apps for the car like cable tv in the back section of the car etc.

Teslation | 23. Oktober 2012

If Elon could produce 20,000 google self driving optional supercars per year, I believe that would create about 5 billion a year cash flow, and 1 & 1/2 billion net ebita income at 30% margins. To get the same results selling a mass market Gen III auto, at $ 25,000 dollars each he would have to sell ten times as many cars. A lot more work and materials, and that would fill his one auto plant to capacity.

But it could potentially be even more profitable if he could develops cool must have subscription/app services that would generate lots of recurring monthly/yearly income like cable TV screens in the back of the car, etc.

TV | 06. Januar 2013

Positives for Tesla: 1) They now understand how to build a symphony of AC + Distance + Speed at a nice price point (comparatively speaking). If he builds a High Performance Supercar, the orders will make the company "the rave". he does this, it would be pandemonium.
2) Elon's Supercharging sites are "Gen-1" (plug-in). Gen-2 Supercharging sites would be able to send AC over the electromagnetic spectrum. Truth: Nicola Tesla did it over 100 years ago...but the rest of that story is that JP Morgan shut him down when he realized his knowledge-base would cripple traditional revenue-models. And therein lies the lesson. The technology is TRULY already here, but the elite will roadblock that idea via their control over the FCC, which regulates the airwaves. So, shelve Gen-2 sites for now. But TRUTH: If Gen-2 Supercharging sites WERE BUILT, THERE WOULD BE UNLIMITED DISTANCE, with NO FILLUPS, because as Elon says "The future lies in Capacitors, not batteries."
The Strategic Play is to build a fast "SS" SuperSport/High Performance AWD Luxo-Rocket that can be driven DAILY. Forget Bugatti. Bugatti is like Coke. People with too much money and no brains use it. Bugatti is a "missed target". BEAT THE NEW CORVETTE and do it with AC. "Pump up" a Model S with a 125 kWH liquid-cooled (aka A123 Systems) next generation battery setup, and make it go 0-60 under 3 seconds, with a top speed of 160, and a range of 400 miles. Sell 100 to customers who will DRIVE THEM. If those customers are chosen WISELY, GAME OVER FOR GAS. I'll buy one IMMEDIATELY. And I will never sell it. AND I will DRIVE IT. Oh, yes, I will drive it. Every damned day with a big GRIN on my face. Thank you for making dreams come true Elon. Ask Mitchell Baker for my phone number, I am ready.

TV | 06. Januar 2013

Once Tesla has TRULY won over the mainstream and is really selling cars as the "talk of the automotive world", then gain FCC approval, then announce "retro-fitting" of all Teslas for $15,000 per to an AC Broadcast network. You tune in your car like a radio, and that settles that. But Tesla has to get to "mainstream" first. The slippery slope is attracting the America's FULL attention to their superior power platform (AC) properly. Timing is Everything. In the meantime, Big Kudos to you: Elon Musk, because you are a Modern American Hero. You think big, swing hard, and WE NEED THIS!

brian.robards | 07. Januar 2013

IMHO the original Tesla business model of selling progressively less expensive cars at a lower price point is the best way for them to remain competitive in the automotive marketplace. A supercar would only take up a large amount of their R&D budget, and not offer much return. We also need to remember that Tesla is yet to show a quarterly profit, so their shareholders probably wouldnt like a sudden business model change at this point in development.

For me personally I would never buy an electric supercar. I am an engine guy, so if I wanted something to be fast I would either build one or drive one of my other cars. I bought a Tesla because of its practicality and style.