Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 11:35 pm Post subject: Re: Tesla Electric Car
yesplease wrote:
A metro (2200lb EV/same aero) requires roughly 7kW at the batteries over the old EPA highway cycle (what the XFI was tested with) for 60 miles of highway range assuming a dozen t-105s.
okay there's a problem. the trojan T-105 is a 6Volt battery. so 12x6v = a 72volt system.
I assume were talking about a DC conversion here. Yes a 72v DC conversion kit can be done but it takes a 144volt system to get freeway speeds. 12 batteries at 12volt each should do the trick, but you'll take a massive reduction in range. I think it's unfair to compare a freeway capable car to one that is NOT freeway capable.
yesplease wrote:
Trojan t-105s cost ~$140/battery, probably less if we're thrifty, or more if we like paying out the nose. They'll last 500 cycles at 50% dod, longer if we don't mind capacity degradation.
These specs look about right. Personally I was thinking of an AGM battery instead. It's more $$$ but less maintenance then the flooded lead acids.
yesplease wrote:
Since city cycle requires far less average power the EPA equivalent combined range would be ~100 miles combined. Half of that is 50 miles, for ~25k miles over the life of the battery assuming we ditch them as the degrade significantly. Pack costs would be ~$1680 every ~25k miles or ~6.6cents/mile. I'm interested in seeing what assumptions you used.
I disagree with the range. but at this point it's a mute issue. Joe Sixpack is not going to replace his ICE car for an EV car that cannot go on the freeways. You'll have to choose a 12V battery and redo the calculations. It's a guarantee that you won't get ~6.6cents/mile.
12V battery = higher performance + less range
6V battery = lower performance + more range
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 12:06 am Post subject: Re: Tesla Electric Car
cube wrote:
Electric_Economy_2025 wrote:
.....
WTF would you even compare the metro to and small EV ?
....
you got any better ideas? What do you want me to do, compare the energy efficiency of an SUV to a small EV car? Hows that suppose to be "fair"?
To compare a EV with a ICE is pointless, besides we already had GM come out with a EV that would have done just fine if not great had they really wanted to sell EV's, but we all know what they did and how they did it to kill their own car, just think how far the EV1 would have been infront of everyone right now and how GM would have been in the driver seat in terms of EV's. Lets take the Volt as and example they still want to have a car with and ICE in it they are hopless and will lose to the Asian auto makers.
cube wrote:
Electric_Economy_2025 wrote:
.....
First off people that want and ev will spend 10 to 20 thousand for one that gets them from point A to point B
....
Please point me to an EV car company selling cars within that price range.
I site I gave a link to are selling their EV's at 12 to 15 thousand
cube wrote:
Electric_Economy_2025 wrote:
.....
all the other dumbasses that have a 5000 pound suv to move 200 pounds of person will either change or take public transportation.
....
they will buy smaller cars
Yes thats my point exactly they will goto smaller cars and the ones now in smaller cars will goto EV's. If you are driving a compact now and paying $4 a gallon to drive to work 40 to 60 miles around trip and can I a car that will get you there for less money you will change or go broke. something like 75% of all cars commuting for work have one person in them, you would have to be either crazy or just dumb not to look for something better.
cube wrote:
Electric_Economy_2025 wrote:
.....
I know plenty of people that want to switch they just don't have anything to switch to, I think you will be surprized on how fast people change their habbits, but then again your a DOOMER with no hope or vision so I doubt you will see the change.
please point me too an EV car company selling a car with these specs:
1) $20,000
2) 300 mile range
3) hold 5 people total
4) freeway capable
and I will be happy to buy an EV car
1) that price is already there.
2) why ? the last time I drove over 300 miles was a trip to vegas we don't need a mass produced EV right now that gets more then 150 or even 100 miles per charge. Most of the driving going on is single person 30 to 80 miles around trip commuters.
3) onces again why 5 people, EV's right now should mostly appeal only to single person commuters.
4) freeway capable so what your really saying a car that can go 65mph ? would'nt it be better to just lower the speed limit?
If people are'nt willing to change or sacrifice not only for themselfs but for their children and their follow man then I say they can either get out of the way or just put a bullet in their head and save us all some trouble.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 12:24 am Post subject: Re: Tesla Electric Car
cube wrote:
yesplease wrote:
A metro (2200lb EV/same aero) requires roughly 7kW at the batteries over the old EPA highway cycle (what the XFI was tested with) for 60 miles of highway range assuming a dozen t-105s.
okay there's a problem. the trojan T-105 is a 6Volt battery. so 12x6v = a 72volt system.
I assume were talking about a DC conversion here. Yes a 72v DC conversion kit can be done but it takes a 144volt system to get freeway speeds.
Only direct drive AFAIK. I don't see why it couldn't be geared, although that would drop efficiency a few percent. It's what is used with gasoline engines that make poor torque off the line.
cube wrote:
yesplease wrote:
Since city cycle requires far less average power the EPA equivalent combined range would be ~100 miles combined. Half of that is 50 miles, for ~25k miles over the life of the battery assuming we ditch them as the degrade significantly. Pack costs would be ~$1680 every ~25k miles or ~6.6cents/mile. I'm interested in seeing what assumptions you used.
I disagree with the range. but at this point it's a mute issue.
How so? The power requirements, even braking every half mile, are far less during the EPA's old city cycle, something like 60% of what's required highway IIRC. In any event, I'm still interested in seeing your assumptions so we can compare data.
cube wrote:
Joe Sixpack is not going to replace his ICE car for an EV car that cannot go on the freeways. You'll have to choose a 12V battery and redo the calculations. It's a guarantee that you won't get ~6.6cents/mile.
It could with gearing, although hills with higher grades would be a problem, but that's true of all low output/high weight vehicles. That being said, 30xhs' would only be ~7.8cents/mile. The XFI is ~7.2cents/mile combined cycle, and I imagine the ~.7-1.4cents/mile (10-20cents/kwh) in electricity costs would be eaten up quickly by the increased maintenance costs of the XFI. Shoot, oil changes alone are .3-.6cents/mile depending on paying someone/DIY, smog is nearly .2cents/mile assuming 13k miles per year, and since the only similarity between upkeep costs of an EV and conventional auto below 100-200k miles would be tires at ~.3cent/mile IIRC, that's still a ~4cent/mile difference according to AAA in upkeep. Even with a pack built off of 12V batteries, the XFI is still a couple cents behind the EV in the same platform. Not counting used batteries of course. Unfortunately I can't find any used gasoline for $2-3/gallon.
cube wrote:
12V battery = higher performance + less range
6V battery = lower performance + more range
Depends on the driver really. Give it to grandma and it'll be fine. The selling point of EVs isn't performance, it's cost per mile, although that's marginal atm, only ~3-5cents/mile at most, and security against further gasoline price increases. If oil spikes to $250/bbl, all of a sudden, the trade-off between cost and power doesn't seem so bad. _________________
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 1:14 am Post subject: Re: Tesla Electric Car
Electric_Economy_2025 wrote:
To compare a EV with a ICE is pointless,
You want to have a "serious" discussion about the feasibility of EV cars and you don't want to make comparisons like price and performance?
Electric_Economy_2025 wrote:
I site I gave a link to are selling their EV's at 12 to 15 thousand
Joe Sixpack is not going to drop $15K for something the size of a golf cart. And if by some amazing chance that people do drive something that small why bother making it electric? My gosh an ICE car that size would get 100 mpg. With efficiency like that it won't matter if oil was $300/barrel it would still be cheaper to burn gasoline.
Electric_Economy_2025 wrote:
Yes thats my point exactly they will goto smaller cars and the ones now in smaller cars will goto EV's.
I disagree. Those idiots out there who now drive SUV's will go to smaller cars. And the people who currently drive a small car will go into an even smaller car. There's no need for EV's.
Electric_Economy_2025 wrote:
1) that price is already there.
2) why ? the last time I drove over 300 miles was a trip to vegas we don't need a mass produced EV right now that gets more then 150 or even 100 miles per charge. Most of the driving going on is single person 30 to 80 miles around trip commuters.
3) onces again why 5 people, EV's right now should mostly appeal only to single person commuters.
4) freeway capable so what your really saying a car that can go 65mph ? would'nt it be better to just lower the speed limit?
If people are'nt willing to change or sacrifice not only for themselfs but for their children and their follow man then I say they can either get out of the way or just put a bullet in their head and save us all some trouble.
In that case the future will be war, and not EV cars.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 1:35 am Post subject: Re: Tesla Electric Car
yesplease wrote:
cube wrote:
yesplease wrote:
A metro (2200lb EV/same aero) requires roughly 7kW at the batteries over the old EPA highway cycle (what the XFI was tested with) for 60 miles of highway range assuming a dozen t-105s.
okay there's a problem. the trojan T-105 is a 6Volt battery. so 12x6v = a 72volt system.
I assume were talking about a DC conversion here. Yes a 72v DC conversion kit can be done but it takes a 144volt system to get freeway speeds.
Only direct drive AFAIK. I don't see why it couldn't be geared, although that would drop efficiency a few percent. It's what is used with gasoline engines that make poor torque off the line.
What you just described is unrealistic.--->but I would be more than happy to be proved wrong if you can show me a real car with the tech specs you've just described.
talk to the_toecutter if you don't believe me....he's the most staunchest supporter of EV cars this site has ever known and he would not make such a claim and btw that's not direct drive, that's connected to the transmission.
Joined: Mar 29, 2008 Posts: 70 Location: Ashland,OR
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 10:05 am Post subject: Re: Tesla Electric Car
Hey, yesplease, It is OK to admit that battery driven vehicles are a tough nut to crack. It is, anybody that says it is easy is usualy trying to fool investors.
Ten years ago we were wait for liion, going 'wow check the numbers on that crap' we get them, and want to go back to lead?
The batt is still the problem, Thats all. We gotta change, but we don't have to change now. There is some time.
Cubes right, $18K for something like the 'Reva' or other teeny-tiny ultra econo car ain't gonna fly in the states. They have tried importing the 'Smart' a couple times, ICE driven, no dice.
The way I look at it, there are four ways to make torque, internal combustion, external combustion, electrons, sweat.
Anybody that thinks only one approch will work has the blinders on;)
Joined: Feb 20, 2005 Posts: 2791 Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 10:44 am Post subject: Re: Tesla Electric Car
cube wrote:
Starvid wrote:
...
What new car sells for $12k? Sure, stuff like the Logan which is for third world countries with crappy currencies, but in a developed country you can't get a new car for under $25k.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 12:07 pm Post subject: Re: Tesla Electric Car
cube wrote:
Electric_Economy_2025 wrote:
To compare a EV with a ICE is pointless,
You want to have a "serious" discussion about the feasibility of EV cars and you don't want to make comparisons like price and performance?
The feasibility of EV's is just fine the problem are the poeple who think we can keep using ICE. Like I said to compare the two is pointless but the problem is'nt how much greater the ICE is over current EV's but the fact people have to change.
cube wrote:
Electric_Economy_2025 wrote:
I site I gave a link to are selling their EV's at 12 to 15 thousand
Joe Sixpack is not going to drop $15K for something the size of a golf cart. And if by some amazing chance that people do drive something that small why bother making it electric? My gosh an ICE car that size would get 100 mpg. With efficiency like that it won't matter if oil was $300/barrel it would still be cheaper to burn gasoline.
At $15 thousand for a golf cart as you put it is'nt a bad price but start to mass produce them and the price will drop in half. These car's would be for people right now who really can't afford to drive a car even at $2 a gallon. The more expensive EV's that will be in the $20 to $30 thousand range will have just about what your looking for when you compare, We will see when Nissan comes out with its EV in 2010. Btw did the metro get 100mpg ? I didnt think so. J6P will either change or die out.
cube wrote:
Electric_Economy_2025 wrote:
Yes thats my point exactly they will goto smaller cars and the ones now in smaller cars will goto EV's.
I disagree. Those idiots out there who now drive SUV's will go to smaller cars. And the people who currently drive a small car will go into an even smaller car. There's no need for EV's.
An what even smaller cars out there are going to give them cheaper gas prices ? Gas is going to stay high ( I hope) people that need to get to work will buy a small EV and save money.
cube wrote:
Electric_Economy_2025 wrote:
1) that price is already there.
2) why ? the last time I drove over 300 miles was a trip to vegas we don't need a mass produced EV right now that gets more then 150 or even 100 miles per charge. Most of the driving going on is single person 30 to 80 miles around trip commuters.
3) onces again why 5 people, EV's right now should mostly appeal only to single person commuters.
4) freeway capable so what your really saying a car that can go 65mph ? would'nt it be better to just lower the speed limit?
If people are'nt willing to change or sacrifice not only for themselfs but for their children and their follow man then I say they can either get out of the way or just put a bullet in their head and save us all some trouble.
In that case the future will be war, and not EV cars.
LOL facts are the facts and atleast 75% of all commuter drive alone and under 50 miles they don't need a car to get 300 miles per charge. If there is war then knowone will be driving because oil will be to much money and the wars will only be to get oil to continue the wars.
But I don't see this happening perhaps you do because your a DOOMER.
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 1:37 am Post subject: Re: Tesla Electric Car
cube wrote:
yesplease wrote:
cube wrote:
yesplease wrote:
A metro (2200lb EV/same aero) requires roughly 7kW at the batteries over the old EPA highway cycle (what the XFI was tested with) for 60 miles of highway range assuming a dozen t-105s.
okay there's a problem. the trojan T-105 is a 6Volt battery. so 12x6v = a 72volt system.
I assume were talking about a DC conversion here. Yes a 72v DC conversion kit can be done but it takes a 144volt system to get freeway speeds.
Only direct drive AFAIK. I don't see why it couldn't be geared, although that would drop efficiency a few percent. It's what is used with gasoline engines that make poor torque off the line.
What you just described is unrealistic.
Check out this. Use a geo Metro with a couple hundred pounds pulled, the FB-2001A, t-105s, zilla 1k controller, and under adjustments set the voltage to 72V, 200lbs of misc added weight for just the driver, 0 incline, rolling resistance of .008 for LRR tires, and 0 for brake/steer resistance associated with no toe-in/out alignment. Gets ~300miles of FTP 72 range with ~75miles of HWFET range, for a combined range of around ~95 miles equivalent.
cube wrote:
--->but I would be more than happy to be proved wrong if you can show me a real car with the tech specs you've just described.
~53mph on 48V. With LRR tires, a decent alignment, and more batteries I imagine it could go much farther/faster.
cube wrote:
talk to the_toecutter if you don't believe me....he's the most staunchest supporter of EV cars this site has ever known and he would not make such a claim
Shoot, we can PM 'em and he should pop in but he's been a bit busy recently AFAIK.
cube wrote:
and btw that's not direct drive, that's connected to the transmission.
I only said direct drive w/ my initial estimate. In case you didn't notice I suggested a five speed if the driver wants better top speed.
Only if ya wanna go fast and/or have some steep hills, but in those cases the individual in question probably shouldn't go for an EV in the first place. The advantages of an EV come from using 'em in high traffic density areas at lower speeds, ie a commute in LA.
That being said, going all aero, be in it a DIY illustrated by basjoos' Civic, or prefeshunal, would double highway range in the example Metro above with over 150miles highway being doable. The problem with doing the same to a conventional auto is that the engine would operate relatively inefficiently due to lower loads, and the gain in mileage wouldn't be as large. Having read what Toe wrote, you should already know this.
The_Toecutter wrote:
Look at the GM Precept hybrid. 0.16 drag coefficient, 2,600 lbs weight. Imagine using that as a glider for a pure EV; we could have an electric car using lead acid batteries that does 120+ miles range at 70 mph. Clean aerodynamics can get good highway range even with old battery technology.
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 1:39 am Post subject: Re: Tesla Electric Car
Vegas wrote:
Hey, yesplease, It is OK to admit that battery driven vehicles are a tough nut to crack. It is, anybody that says it is easy is usualy trying to fool investors.
Ten years ago we were wait for liion, going 'wow check the numbers on that crap' we get them, and want to go back to lead?
The batt is still the problem, Thats all. We gotta change, but we don't have to change now. There is some time.
We only need li-ion to move 4,000+ barn doors through the air. I mean seriously, if worse comes to worse with oil, what's easier? Build low drag autos, that have been on the drawing boards for decades, and use time tested lower cost batteries, or shove expensive batteries in rolling barn doors?
The batteries we have are only problems because automobiles are so ungodly wasteful, moreso than anything in society AFAIK. It's kinda like everyone in America buying a six bedroom house then complaining it costs too much to maintain with different energy sources.
Vegas wrote:
Cubes right, $18K for something like the 'Reva' or other teeny-tiny ultra econo car ain't gonna fly in the states. They have tried importing the 'Smart' a couple times, ICE driven, no dice.
That's true, but that's as much a problem with lack of market leverage and compensation of externalized costs as it is a problem with EVs as vehicles. Sure, they ain't for everyone everywhere, but they would go a long way for costs/pollution/fuel consumption in crowded places. Where people buzz along at a 60-70mph average will probably be the domain of the conventional auto for some time, but crappy small companies who can't do much and large companies who have conflicting interests aren't exactly a decent argument for why EVs can't do well. _________________
Joined: Aug 03, 2007 Posts: 3748 Location: Boston Suburbs
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 2:20 am Post subject: Re: Tesla Electric Car
cube wrote:
Clean aerodynamics can get good highway range even with old battery technology.
With lead you have to look at the BIG picture. It's cheap, but it wears out FAST, gives worse performance in cold temperatures, is easy to destroy if abused, needs watering (and ventilation to get rid of the hydrogen outgassing), and has the dreaded peukert effect. Lead has been dead technology for commercial EVs as soon as they switched to NIMH 10 years ago. The people who agree to tolerate lead doing conversions are a rare breed. Those who ADVOCATE it are rarer still. J6P will NOT deal with the hassles. Don't look at the world with tunnel vision. The consumer is FICKLE.
Lead acid is done. Stick a fork in it. Over, kaput, the way of the dodo. Even people who bought Zap Xebras are convertng their vehicles to lithium packs because they are getting such piss poor performance from lead, and Xebras are as light as a feather.
It's used for EV conversions out of desperation, not out of choice.
I expect within a year or two that most people doing EV conversions will have switched to lithium because the cost per mile will actually be better than lead, since lithium iron phosphate can last 4x as long.
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 3:19 am Post subject: Re: Tesla Electric Car
yesplease wrote:
Use a geo Metro with a couple hundred pounds pulled, the FB-2001A, t-105s, zilla 1k controller, and under adjustments set the voltage to 72V, 200lbs of misc added weight for just the driver, 0 incline, rolling resistance of .008 for LRR tires, and 0 for brake/steer resistance associated with no toe-in/out alignment. Gets ~300miles of FTP 72 range with ~75miles of HWFET range, for a combined range of around ~95 miles equivalent.
Lets set aside the EV car range debate. I went through a multi-page debate with others before just on that 1 topic. If you want to do some major calcs here's a good page Battery Life Calculator
There's more to measuring battery capacity then just volts, depth of discharge, and amp-hours.
The Peukert Number is VERY important......the lower the better. (too bad most retailers do not list this spec )
*Getting back to freeway speeds*
here's a bunch of EV conversions using Trojan batteries.
http://www.evalbum.com/battb/TROJ
There is NO such thing as a freeway capable EV converted car using a 72 volt system.
Even a 96volt system can't do it. (top speed 63 MPH and this car looks very sporty with good aerodynamics)
http://www.evalbum.com/1583
120 volts seems to be the minimum required to reach freeway speeds.
yesplease wrote:
~53mph on 48V. With LRR tires, a decent alignment, and more batteries I imagine it could go much farther/faster.
Only if ya wanna go fast and/or have some steep hills, but in those cases the individual in question probably shouldn't go for an EV in the first place. The advantages of an EV come from using 'em in high traffic density areas at lower speeds, ie a commute in LA.
Maybe I should clarify my position. when I said "performance" I didn't mean the fast and the furious....in fact I'm not even talking about normal cars today. When I said "performance" I meant like "Geo-metro performance". Something that is freeway capable.
Why am I stressing freeway capable EV cars and "brushing aside" the slower ones? B/c NOBODY is going to buy a car (regardless of what type it is) unless it can safely go on the freeways. There is literally no market demand for a non-freeway cars.
///
Freeway capable EV converted car ---> $16,000
no thanks.
I'd rather just pay for the gas. It's cheaper and at least I wouldn't be limited to a 25 mile radius.
Last edited by cube on Sat May 17, 2008 8:03 am; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 7:58 am Post subject: Re: Tesla Electric Car
mos6507 wrote:
cube wrote:
Clean aerodynamics can get good highway range even with old battery technology.
Hey I didn't say that! There must be a mix up!
I'm not advocating EV cars.
I still stand by my original position that ICE cars are still cheaper even if gasoline shoots up to $10 / gallon!
however......
If somebody pointed a gun to my head and said: "cube you must drive an electric car!"
I would choose lead acids.
Li-ion are too $$$. For example it would take about $40,000 worth of Li-ion batteries to get a 200 mile range car. who can afford that?
*IMHO*
Li-ion has no serious future with the exception of providing expensive toys for liberal yuppies.
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
)