[MisterJJ]

like the Space Shuttle was a boondoggle

I wouldn't go that far. There was 135 space shuttle missions and they did a lot of things the average persons does not know about. While space exploration is inherently wasteful, it has driven technological innovation in many areas.

BTW, that Russian shuttle looks like it was made from cardboard. Does it even have black heat tiles or is that just paint?

 

[RacerX00]

I wouldn't go that far. There was 135 space shuttle missions and they did a lot of things the average persons does not know about. While space exploration is inherently wasteful, it has driven technological innovation in many areas.

BTW, that Russian shuttle looks like it was made from cardboard. Does it even have black heat tiles or is that just paint?

I would go further my friend. If you want to know a place where almost every American has the wrong idea, it's the space shuttle program. The only good thing about it is it worked. It's also easily the most unsafe thing astronauts had to fly in since before Apollo. It was just as expensive as going to the moon and it couldn't even get humans beyond earth and was never, ever, reusable with every space shuttle being completely torn down and rebuilt almost from scratch in between flights.

By contrast Soyuz is still flying astronauts to the ISS to this day and has virtually the opposite of every characteristic in price and safety.

Space shuttle was a waste of time, money and most importantly opportunity. It's a symbol of a lost era of space to which we're only now starting to pick back up the pieces.

 

[GJETSON]

China still does.

Do their car companies?

 

[AZBILL]

My experience is that the amount of times that you actually experience the difference between 25 minutes and 45 minutes is negligible. You really gotta be long hauling some major road trip because the reality of the situation is the charges ABRP or even you find yourself penciling out are more like the difference between 25 and 35 minutes because they try and don't always need to charge to 80%, and we're talking about the slowest charging car on the market vs. the fastest (not named Taycan).

I realized this when I was out a lot with my Kona EV and observed the newly arrived ID.4s and Mach-Es, not only was I at the stops for roughly the same time but I saw the same people at the same stations on my routes. It only has a 75KW charger!

Then consider that some of these stops on your road trip you're eating and not sitting at the wheel looking at the gauge going "cmon wtf!"

I do not doubt, and in fact have observed these higher peaked charging cars charge faster, I'm just saying that in reality it's not as night and day a difference as it appears and over the course of a 500 mile road trip only equates to 10-20 minutes more time spent. I need more time on the Bolt to confirm this is true but I'm expecting the real world difference between a 50KW charger and a 75 KW peak charger to be minimal.

I have done a trip in my Bolt from Phoenix to Newport Coast, CA. That is 350 miles. Per ABRP and my experience it is 2 charging stops in the Bolt, requiring 90 minutes total. My Mach E can make it in one stop and 30 minutes charging. Big difference in my opinion. I only need to eat once on that trip.

 

[George Knighton]

2016 Tesla Model S is 120 kW.

It would have been normal to suppose I was talking about the general availability of CCS/SAE charging stations and their rated speeds.

-_-