Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations

qbrozen

abacomike said:

I have an interesting dilemma for all of you to consider and respond to:

"Driver A is in the right turn lane of a 3 lane road stopped at a red light facing east.  Driver B is in the cross-traffic left lane (left turn lane) facing north also waiting for his left turn light to turn green.  Driver A begins to make a right turn on "red", which is allowed at the same time Driver B begins to make a "U-Turn" after his left turn arrow lights up.  Both cars collide in the intersection."

Who is the driver at fault?  Driver A or Driver B, and why?

Is a U-turn legal there? I would think the U-turner has to yield no matter what, though. I also gotta wonder how the hell 2 cars that were at a complete stop just seconds before couldn't avoid hitting each other. That's incredible negligence times 2.

stickguy

My guess is the right on red guy will always be at fault, because you can only do that if no one with right of way is there.

qbrozen

but does the u-turner have right of way? That's still my question. Most places set up like that in NJ also have a no U-turn sign, for example. I'd also argue, even if not illegal to U-turn in that intersection, the left-turn arrow is for turning left, hence the arrow pointing left. So making a Uey is still not the "right of way." I'm not saying I'm right, just saying how I'd argue it.

Mr_Shiftright

Driver A would be at fault, especially if Driver B had a green arrow to turn left and if a U turn was not specified as illegal by signage. Right-turn-on-red is very much like a Yield sign in all directions.

I bet I know what happened. Driver A was looking left as he/she was turning right on red, and did not expect to see anything on his right. Driver B had a green arrow, which says "go for it". I'll bet A struck B, not vice-versa.

Mr_Shiftright

That article wasn't very rational from the get-go. Once he started off on a tirade of government funding of new technology I knew we were off to a bad start with a red herring as the lead paragraph. I mean, the government is supposed to invest in new tech. Some of it pays off, some doesn't, and some doesn't and THEN does. All world governments do this. New tech is full of rapid change, failure. When the private investor buys stock A start-up, and it fails, he's a dope. When another investor buys Tesla, he's a genius.

Can we really fault San Diego for funding an expensive water desalination plant years ago that soon went inactive? Now, with a California draught, doesn't San Diego suddenly look very smart? You know, you never know.

EVs will become very popular when they can do the same thing a $20,000 gas car can do, and sell for $20,000.

driver100 said:

stever said:

driver100 said:

if everyone on a street plugged their car in at the same time the electric power system couldn't handle it....there would be a blackout.

Ah, I see what you are saying - the powers that be are thinking the "smart grid" will solve that issue. Rolling brownouts, if you will. (earthtechling.com)

I'd rather go the Fezo route, assuming my collectors would dump into my spare (Tesla/Nevada made) battery in the garage, and I'd swap packs out if I need to drive in the evening after zapping my range all day, like EV forklifts have been doing for years.

The Prius gets all the glam but perhaps isn't the best example here since it's not a pure EV, and Toyota is supposedly going hydrogen.

Batteries don't always work very well. Snow storm hits Washington, traffic is tied up for two hours, all the Battery Electic cars have to be towed away....can't just buy a can of gas.......they take 4 to 8 hours to charge up.
WHY BATTERY CARS AREN"T A GREAT IDEA

The problem with the electric grid is more like this:

However, in the process, all these electric and hybrid cars may dramatically increase our reliance on another fuel source -- a stable electric grid. And the power grid, as it exists today, may not quite be ready to handle this new surge in load.

In a new analysis out of the University of Chicago and Argonne National Laboratory, Les Poch and Matt Mahalik of Argonne’s Center for Energy, Environmental, and Economic Systems Analysis (CEEESA) says if demand for plug-ins skyrockets, a flood of new electric cars could strain America’s power networks to the limit.

“Depending on what Americans do with their new cars, energy suppliers could be overwhelmed—or they could stand to gain a lot,” Poch says.

Mahalik adds that "until now, the pattern of power use in the U.S. has been relatively stable and predictable for the past 30 years,” says Mahalik. “The last major bump was probably the widespread adoption of air conditioning.”

Electric vehicles stand poised to throw off that stable pattern. At this point, the researchers say, "No one knows how quickly electric cars will catch on, in what areas they’ll be most popular, or when everyone will choose to plug in their cars."

Full article

stever

One storage breakthrough and ExxonMobile stock will crash through the basement, as will the value of utility companies. I can't see charging stations for EVs being more than a mere placeholder. Makes more sense to me to do a 30 second automated battery swap (see my battery fork lift reference again; drive to the space and it's mostly automatic for those gizmos already). The propane tank swap model has been a big success; who cares if you don't drive around with your OEM traction battery?

abacomike

qbrozen said:

I have an interesting dilemma for all of you to consider and respond to:

"Driver A is in the right turn lane of a 3 lane road stopped at a red light facing east.  Driver B is in the cross-traffic left lane (left turn lane) facing north also waiting for his left turn light to turn green.  Driver A begins to make a right turn on "red", which is allowed at the same time Driver B begins to make a "U-Turn" after his left turn arrow lights up.  Both cars collide in the intersection."

Who is the driver at fault?  Driver A or Driver B, and why?

Is a U-turn legal there? I would think the U-turner has to yield no matter what, though. I also gotta wonder how the hell 2 cars that were at a complete stop just seconds before couldn't avoid hitting each other. That's incredible negligence times 2.

Yes, U-Turns are legal at all intersections in Florida unless there is a "no U-Turn allowed" sign.

Mr_Shiftright

Never discount the ability of major established corporations to destroy their competition. That's what cartels do. They don't merely price-fix, hey annihilate. You only need to look at the automobile industry from 1946 to 1956 to see that.

abacomike

By the way, this happened this morning right in front of me.  I was behind Driver A trying to make her right turn on red.  She made a complete stop and was looking to her left as she pulled into the cross street's right lane.  Both cars hit each other simultaneously.  Driver A was hit on her left front and Driver B got hit on her right front. Both streets are multi-lane streets with left and right turn lanes going in all directions.

I hope this clears up any confusion from my original post.

There is an "at-fault" driver here.  Both drivers must "yield" to oncoming traffic.  

So perhaps you can re-assess your opinions or stick with your original thoughts.  There is a specific reason why one of the drivers was at fault.  Can you figure it out?

Mr_Shiftright

But Driver A is not "oncoming traffic", so A has to yield to B. Driver A has no rights until her light turns green. Turn on red is a yield to her left.

fezo

The changing out battery packs is interesting (in much the same was people want to treat 40 pound propane tanks. The problem that needs to be overcome is standardizing battery packs or at very least bringing them down to a few choices. I don't think any of the current batteries are designed for this quick in and out. When this is all settled out and we've got electricity readily available don't be surprised that the guy with the finger in the pie doing the trades is Elon Musk.

I'm hoping he holds off on his $35K Tesla until I've gotten my GTI fix. I'm giving him a long time.

abacomike

Mr_Shiftright said:

But Driver A is not "oncoming traffic", so A has to yield to B. Driver A has no rights until her light turns green. Turn on red is a yield to her left.

Good rationale - but incorrect.

Driver A was hit on her left front and Driver B was hit on her "right" front.  Driver A made a legal right turn on red and was in the far right lane.  Driver B made a U-Turn but did not stay in the left lane upon making her turn but hit Driver A who was in the far right lane.  Thus, Driver B drove across two lanes and entered a third lane Where Driver a was completing her right turn.  Remember, if Driver B hit the left front of Driver A's car with her "right front end, who was in the intersection first?

Driver's are required to yield to "all" traffic upon making a u-turn and cannot cross over into a lane occupied by another car.  The police cited Driver B for not yielding.

I was a witness to the accident and was questioned by police.  They wanted to know who was in the intersection first.  I responded that it was Driver A.  Driver B made a wide u-turn and could have completed her u-turn without hitting Driver A by ending up in the center lane rather than the far right lane.  The police told me that a u-turn requires yielding to "everything" while a right turn on red requires yielding to traffic coming from the left or traffic making legal left turns from the opposite direction toward you.

I think both were at fault - neither yielded - which is what I said to the police.  He told me that in cases like this, the courts will decide it if Driver B fights the ticket "failure to Yield" in traffic court.  But he insisted that the u-turner is required to yield to "all" traffic.

Interesting situation, isn't it?

robr2

More interesting, the drivers were both women correct? If so, what were they doing with cars in the kitchen?

Robr2 runs and ducks after telling misogynist joke!!!

abacomike

robr2 said:

More interesting, the drivers were both women correct? If so, what were they doing with cars in the kitchen? Robr2 runs and ducks after telling misogynist joke!!!

Ouch!!!  A bit sexist?  No, a lot sexist!  

stever

Cops aren't always right and the traffic regs can vary. But you can always believe a TV reporter on the internets (and random forum posters).

"That car making the legal u-turn on the green arrow has the right of way over the car turning right on red."

Driving You Crazy: Right of Way on U-Turns (8newsnow.com)

@Fezo, figuring out how much a "40 pound" propane tank is a whole 'nother discussion. :-)

oldfarmer50

abacomike said:

I have an interesting dilemma for all of you to consider and respond to:

"Driver A is in the right turn lane of a 3 lane road stopped at a red light facing east.  Driver B is in the cross-traffic left lane (left turn lane) facing north also waiting for his left turn light to turn green.  Driver A begins to make a right turn on "red", which is allowed at the same time Driver B begins to make a "U-Turn" after his left turn arrow lights up.  Both cars collide in the intersection."

Who is the driver at fault?  Driver A or Driver B, and why?

Off the top of my head I would say Driver B because making a U turn in an intersection isn't legal or safe. Unless Florida has special provisions for such turns.. Driver A is required to yield to cross traffic and pedestrians but not to someone making illegal moves.

Edit: saw your later post and Florida is sure different than NY. When in Tampa I saw many people making U turns from the left turn cut in the raised median. I seem to remember a local telling me that was illegal. I would neve consider making a U turn in an intersection.

abacomike

stever said:

Cops aren't always right and the traffic regs can vary. But you can always believe a TV reporter on the internets (and random forum posters). "That car making the legal u-turn on the green arrow has the right of way over the car turning right on red." Driving You Crazy: Right of Way on U-Turns (8newsnow.com) @Fezo, figuring out how much a "40 pound" propane tank is a whole 'nother discussion. :-)

I think the facts were important here.  When the police asked me who was in the intersection first (Driver A in this case), that determined who he was going to ticket.

robr2

abacomike said:

robr2 said:

More interesting, the drivers were both women correct? If so, what were they doing with cars in the kitchen?

Robr2 runs and ducks after telling misogynist joke!!!

Ouch!!!  A bit sexist?  No, a lot sexist!  

Yes, it was sexist. And it was a joke as I noted. Trust me, I don't think women belong in the kitchen.

My wife has had one accident in all the time I've known her. In that same time, I've had at least 8. But as fezo will attest, they're never my fault.

stever

It would be easier if the U-turner had the green. The right turner can't proceed unless traffic is clear. You could argue that it wasn't so the right turner gets the tix. But they both entered the intersection "at the same time".

I'd claim a bee distracted me. My Garmin is always telling me to make a U-turn - that's probably the guilty party here as well.

Another link if you are so inclined. (officer.com)

houdini1

driver100 said:

While I am trying to fix my phone, the other thing that happened....things always breakdown when we are away from home for any length of time....was the remote control on the bedroom TV wouldn't work. It wouldn't turn the TV on or change channels (I did get it on using the TV remote, not the cable remote).

I remembered a trick my IT guy told me to try and that got it working again. Take a headphone jack and jam it in and out of the headphone socket a few times. That fixed it quickly. My IT guy said it resets the connection. Much better than calling "The Guy".

Why would a tv remote have a headphone jack socket?

stickguy

Not the remote. The TV.

abacomike

houdini1 said:

While I am trying to fix my phone, the other thing that happened....things always breakdown when we are away from home for any length of time....was the remote control on the bedroom TV wouldn't work. It wouldn't turn the TV on or change channels (I did get it on using the TV remote, not the cable remote). I remembered a trick my IT guy told me to try and that got it working again. Take a headphone jack and jam it in and out of the headphone socket a few times. That fixed it quickly. My IT guy said it resets the connection. Much better than calling "The Guy".

Why would a tv remote have a headphone jack socket?

The TV, not the remote.  As to why it works, I think because it changes the system's settings for not only the TV's speakers, but perhaps a total reset.

houdini1

stickguy said:

Not the remote. The TV.

Ahhh, OK.

robr2

abacomike said:

houdini1 said:

driver100 said:

While I am trying to fix my phone, the other thing that happened....things always breakdown when we are away from home for any length of time....was the remote control on the bedroom TV wouldn't work. It wouldn't turn the TV on or change channels (I did get it on using the TV remote, not the cable remote).

I remembered a trick my IT guy told me to try and that got it working again. Take a headphone jack and jam it in and out of the headphone socket a few times. That fixed it quickly. My IT guy said it resets the connection. Much better than calling "The Guy".

Why would a tv remote have a headphone jack socket?

The TV, not the remote.  As to why it works, I think because it changes the system's settings for not only the TV's speakers, but perhaps a total reset.

I have not seen a headphone jack in TV in years. I presume it's an older CRT TV.

abacomike

Robr2, this is driver's TV, remember?  Connect that to a Radio Shack type cell phone with a 8-10 hour battery life and what do you envision?

houdini1

stever said:

It would be easier if the U-turner had the green. The right turner can't proceed unless traffic is clear. You could argue that it wasn't so the right turner gets the tix. But they both entered the intersection "at the same time".

I'd claim a bee distracted me. My Garmin is always telling me to make a U-turn - that's probably the guilty party here as well.

Another link if you are so inclined. (officer.com)

If you are in the left lane and making a u-turn, it would be almost impossible to turn into the left lane. You would almost have to go to, at least, the center lane.

Mr_Shiftright

I'm sticking with putting Driver A in prison for life.

Besides, NO FAIR (waaa!) You didn't say that Driver B crossed 3 lanes of traffic during the U-Turn. No matter, I still think A is wrong because here in California at least the right-turn-on-red driver has to yield to EVERYbody--cars, bikes, pedestrians. Besides, it's hard to stay in lane on a U-turn unless you're on a moped or something.

But you're right, the insurance company might call it a jump ball and double-fault it.

houdini1

Mr_Shiftright said:

I'm sticking with putting Driver A in prison for life.

Besides, NO FAIR (waaa!) You didn't say that Driver B crossed 3 lanes of traffic during the U-Turn. No matter, I still think A is wrong because here in California at least the right-turn-on-red driver has to yield to EVERYbody--cars, bikes, pedestrians. Besides, it's hard to stay in lane on a U-turn unless you're on a moped or something.

But you're right, the insurance company might call it a jump ball and double-fault it.

I agree. Driver B had the light, so driver A's at fault....but obviously neither one was paying attention.

abacomike

Like I said to the police, both were at fault. but driver A was in the intersection first because she had to travel less distance to enter the intersection.

Definitely, the judge should throw them both in jail and throw away the key.

robr2

abacomike said:

Robr2, this is driver's TV, remember?  Connect that to a Radio Shack type cell phone with a 8-10 hour battery life and what do you envision?

LOL!!

I wonder if driver has foil on the rabbit ears as well?

abacomike

robr2 said:

Robr2, this is driver's TV, remember?  Connect that to a Radio Shack type cell phone with a 8-10 hour battery life and what do you envision?

LOL!! I wonder if driver has foil on the rabbit ears as well?

No, he has rabbits as pets for that very purpose!!!

stever

Boy, first you pick on his U Turns and now you're dumping on his pet bunnies and TVs.

(You did mean our Canadian friend Driver when you said Driver A, right? Do I need to spell out "eh"?)

abacomike

stever said:

Boy, first you pick on his U Turns and now you're dumping on his pet bunnies and TVs. (You did mean our Canadian friend Driver when you said Driver A, right? Do I need to spell out "eh"?)

Now THAT IS FUNNY!!!

imidazol97

Back to Driver100's cellphone battery. I have a laCrosse Technology battery charger
for AA and AAA batteries. It has a conditioning setting where it charges the battery
fully and discharges it to see the mAh of life. Then it recharges and discharges again,
determining if the mAh life increased beyond a nominal amount. It continues the
charge/discharge cycles until the battery has been reconditioned to its maximum
storage amount.

This conditioning process sometimes takes more than two cycles. I'd just keep discharging the
cellphone battery until you don't see a noticeable improvement in the storage capacity
shown as the discharge time.

If you like the phone you might get a replacement battery on Ebay or Amazon.
I bought cheap broken phones to get a replacement battery for my flip phone,
a Motorola 260G Tracfone.

abacomike

imidazol97 said:

Back to Driver100's cellphone battery. I have a laCrosse Technology battery charger for AA and AAA batteries. It has a conditioning setting where it charges the battery fully and discharges it to see the mAh of life. Then it recharges and discharges again, determining if the mAh life increased beyond a nominal amount. It continues the charge/discharge cycles until the battery has been reconditioned to its maximum storage amount. This conditioning process sometimes takes more than two cycles. I'd just keep discharging the cellphone battery until you don't see a noticeable improvement in the storage capacity shown as the discharge time. If you like the phone you might get a replacement battery on Ebay or Amazon. I bought cheap broken phones to get a replacement battery for my flip phone, a Motorola 260G Tracfone.

The older rechargeable batteries improved battery performance the more you charged it from almost drained.  The law of diminishing returns would eventually kick in.  So you are correct when it comes to the old batteries.  Today's batteries supposedly last for 10,000+ charges with little if any improvement in battery usage range the more drained the battery is ewhen you charge it.

I charge my phone at least once a day - it usually is at a 35% charge level when I plug it in at around 9:00 PM.  I usually leave it plugged in until midnight or so.  The charge lasts all day and I use the phone as a computer 95% of the time (WiFi, data, etc.).  If I had one of my old batteries from my Razor from 2006, I would run out of power after a few hours.

That's why I extended my warranty to 2 years because the one thing that tends to go on these iPhones is the battery.

driver100

abacomike said:

Robr2, this is driver's TV, remember?  Connect that to a Radio Shack type cell phone with a 8-10 hour battery life and what do you envision?

I have read all 58 posts today but there was too much to comment on. Just a few words of wisdom.

The TV in question is a 55" LG flatscreen TV. It has a jack in the back (for some unknown reason) where you insert the headphone jack. You do it several times. My IT guy thinks it resets it...like reboots it, this method is also given on google if you look up, getting a frozen remote control to work.

U-turns in Florida are insane. I hate them, for one thing 3 or 4 cars could make a left turn in the time it takes a person to swing their car around. If you are driver A you have to watch for the B's making U-turns, they always go 2 or 3 lanes over, and they don't consider someone could be turning right. If I was the cop, driver B would get the ticket. A right turn has precedence over cars turning left. Driver A has done her due dilageance by making sure the road is clear. She can't possibly know driver B is going to make an idiotic U-Turn without taking proper care, no matter what lane he ends up in. I am always extremely careful when turning right on a red light...because the ones doing U turns never consider someone might be going right...but, no matter how careful you are, the maniacs can still hit you when they make their Uey.

About the power stations every 75 miles from Toronto to Rochester. He actually thought he might make it to Rochester, wasn't sure he would find a place to plug in the Tesla. Also, wouldn't want to stop and wait 4 hours while his car charges up.

[Deleted User]

Regarding power and utilities, since the installation of our home solar system in September our most expensive monthly electrical consumption was a grand total $.10 in February. March, with longer days and fewer storms, we produced 233% of our consumption. For some situations like ours, solar just makes sense, financial and environmental. We planned to have net zero year over year, meaning we produce as much as we consume, but at this rate we just may produce more than needed. In July we'll see how much the AC draws.

Regarding headphones and TV, my Roku system actually does have a jack in the controller. I love it. If I want to watch a program and my daughter is asleep or studying, I can do just that without disturbing her, and the controller is mobile so I can move about with chores and whatnot.

abacomike

Driver, don't go back to your clam shell phone.  Buy a decent smart phone and catch up to the rest of the world.  The rest of the world is fast passing you by.  Move out of the 20th century and join the rest of us here in the 21st century!  It's time to exercise the gray matter and learn what the rest of us are doing with technology.

stever

tyguy said:

We planned to have net zero year over year, meaning we produce as much as we consume, but at this rate we just may produce more than needed. In July we'll see how much the AC draws.

We kind of think both the solar quotes we've gotten have oversized the system for our needs (~20 panels vs 15). The net metering is .02 cents and will likely go away at the end of the year (vs .12 back in the glory days). I don't want to "give" the utility any more "free" power than I have to. No AC use here yet either - barely has touched on the 80s so far, although my wife did go swimming in an outdoor pool today.

driver100

abacomike said:

Driver, don't go back to your clam shell phone.  Buy a decent smart phone and catch up to the rest of the world.  The rest of the world is fast passing you by.  Move out of the 20th century and join the rest of us here in the 21st century!  It's time to exercise the gray matter and learn what the rest of us are doing with technology.

I am not sure whether Smart phones are good for your brain or bad for your brain. The other day I saw a man and a woman at a restaurant - each talking on their cell phones, to other people.

I don't know when I would have time to play with it anyway..I have enough time getting everything done...thank goodness I don't have to work, don't know how I ever had time for that.

I am going to call Virgin telephone tomorrow and see what they think. Hopefully I don't have to go back to Radio Shack and watch the sales guy roll his eyes when I walk in.

abacomike

Driver, if you can use a computer/laptop, you can easily use a smartphone.  It's not a matter of having enough time to use your smartphone, it's about being "smart" enough when and when not to use it!!!!!!!

fezo

TY - how did you do solar? Everyone wants to put solar on my roof for nothing then lease them to me. I wonder what the real cost would be to own them? Get one of Elon Musk's upcoming house battery and you could have no electric bill - just the electric company having to pay you. It you try Solar City or the other gaggle of companies out there there's a flat monthly lease payments which then start to go up.

The idea really appeals to me and the house is close to a perfect due south.

venture

abacomike said:

Like I said to the police, both were at fault. but driver A was in the intersection first because she had to travel less distance to enter the intersection.

Definitely, the judge should throw them both in jail and throw away the key.

The Florida law is short and to the point. The driver making the U turn is at fault.

316.1515 Limitations on turning around.—The driver of any vehicle shall not turn the vehicle so as to proceed in the opposite direction upon any street unless such movement can be made in safety and without interfering with other traffic and unless such movement is not prohibited by posted traffic control signs. A violation of this section is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a moving violation as provided in chapter 318.

nelsonf

I read somewhere, Car and Driver maybe, that Tesla was going to put automated battery changing stations across the country for their cars.

You would drive up on a ramp, and a robot would unbolt your battery pack from the bottom, install a fresh one, and off you would go, all in about the same time as filling your gas tank would take.

You would lease the batteries whether you leased or bought your Tesla.

It would go far to relieve "range anxiety" if enough of those stations were out there.

Interesting stuff.

stever

I'd forgotten about (or overlooked) that. CNN has a 2013 story about it. $50 for 300 miles of range is a bit too much though compared to a fill-up with regular gas. And then you have to return for your original battery? Something doesn't add up - guess that's why we haven't seen them yet.

Ah, that fire caused by hitting road debris and subsequent shielding mod must have delayed the rollout. (Tesla)

driver100

So You Think You Want Drive A Rally Car

Hi-Lites of Rally Driving - 8 minutes but I was mezmerized

driver100

abacomike said:

Driver, if you can use a computer/laptop, you can easily use a smartphone.  It's not a matter of having enough time to use your smartphone, it's about being "smart" enough when and when not to use it!!!!!!!

Mike, I will consider it but first I have to get out of this phone before it causes me serious mental issues. Keep in mind, I am here for 7 months of the year...resent paying monthly when I am not here.

With a Pre-Paid phone I pay $100 a year for 100 minutes.....rate 30 cents a minute. I probably use in a high useage month 10 or 12 minutes. I am home a lot so have computers to use. Phone is basically to call home and say I will be late, or to use if I were stranded somewhere.

Most of my friends have real cell phones and they can see what the stock market is doing or can settle an arguement by looking something up. I'll do some mulling, but first I have to see how you get out of this...I'll call the phone company first and see what they say.

driver100

I just called Virgin Mobile. I do like their customer friendly way.....Just hang in there while we transfer your call, and for example in the user guide they say "Here is all the boring legal stuff".

Got through pretty quickly and the nice young lady said I can take the phone back within 7 days and pick up a new one if it doesn't hold a charge (mine was for just 6 hours). Today is day 7, friendly Radio Shack didn't mention if I had a problem bring it back within 7 days. They made it sound like I am the moron because their stupid phone doesn't work.

We'll see what happens....this salesguy who spends most of his time rolling his eyes and yawning won't be too happy to see me again............

driver100

nelsonf said:

I read somewhere, Car and Driver maybe, that Tesla was going to put automated battery changing stations across the country for their cars.

You would drive up on a ramp, and a robot would unbolt your battery pack from the bottom, install a fresh one, and off you would go, all in about the same time as filling your gas tank would take.

You would lease the batteries whether you leased or bought your Tesla.

It would go far to relieve "range anxiety" if enough of those stations were out there.

Interesting stuff.

Tesla Battery Swap...takes about 2 minutes.
TESLA BATTERY SWAP

It is getting the network going that could take time...and who is going to invest when the technology could change so rapidly.

thebean

driver100 said:

...We'll see what happens....this salesguy who spends most of his time rolling his eyes and yawning won't be too happy to see me again............

Just remind him who's the customer and who's the schlub working at Radio Shack making minimum wage & still living with his parents.