> "accuracy of the "rated range" readout--also called the Guess-O-Meter"

The article might leave some readers thinking that the "rated range" readout would be meant to be the expected range under given driving conditions. That is not the case. It shows range under (fixed) official EPA test conditions. So to speak, when the car is turned on in the garage, and doesn't know yet how fast you will drive, or about the future temperature outside.

I also haven't heard the term "Guess-O-Meter"... except for the Leaf, which is different. In the Model S, that's more the "projected range", which can be displayed on the center console, for example based on the actual consumption during the last 30 miles of actual driving.

The data from Tesla shows that with a max range charge at each Supercharger, the Model S would have:
1. made the trip without problem,
2. the detour to the Level 2 charger would not have been necessary,
3. the trip could have been made at a nice speed,
4. and at a comfy temerature

Compare this to the impression Broder's article will give to the unprepared reader.

Given that several articles (including one at Greencarreports) mentioned that the Roadster battery cells (not the Model S) have a similar basic chemistry, Tesla couldn't remain simply silent. So I think Elon's offer, to help Boing in determining the cause, was a very constructive way to participate in the discussion. As I see it it, after Boing apparently declined, he had to speak from a general point of view, given available information, and point out the factors he could identify from his position. Which turned out to be noteworthy.

Prof. Donald Sadoway is well-known for his research in the field of new battery technologies, and indeed not one to make such statements lightly.

"..., the buying public's choices of battery pack sizes--and hence electric ranges--will really only become apparent this year, ..."

I don't think that statistic, without qualification, will say much. Otherwise you could already predict the outcome: most car buyers will choose an ICE with zero battery size.

In the future, both gasoline and battery prices will change, as well as the consideration for avoiding gasoline consumption and tailpipe exhaust.

Eventually, of course, we'll run out of gasoline, if not earlier, out of tolerance for CO2 (and smog).

If $-costs were the only consideration, I doubt the whole EV thing would have happened in the first place.

@John Voelcker

According to the following article, Elon Musk recently said Tesla has reached its target production rate of 20,000 per year. Some of which are sold in Canada, but (currently) almost all in the US. Caveat: Sometimes such indirect quotes are not precise, and I'm not aware of a more official source.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/14/autoshow-tesla-profit-idUSL2N0AJ0GX20130114

P.S.: This excludes so-called "conversions", non-production EVs, or actually not even EVs originally, but converted ICEs (gasoline cars). Those did have a number of fires (for various reasons).

The electric isn't dead (anymore), but it isn't alive either (yet): No info that any of them are already produced with a sufficient profit margin.

Re: "But the Volt, the Leaf, the ELR, and other plug-in cars are still at the very earliest stages of adoption, purchased by a variety of early adopters with varying motivations."

Shouldn't this sentence mention the Model S instead of the ELR? The Model S is now being produce in similar numbers (20k per year), while the ELR is not yet i production.

Bob Lutz isn't the only one thinking in this direction. See Toyota RAV4 (small SUV) and Tesla Model X (larger SUV, not yet in production, but in the plans for quite some time).