By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
17 seconds was the reported 0-60 on a rav ev. that is pretty slow. ICE rav was around 11 seconds. I wonder if a capacitor could be added to act like a kind of turbo boost for times when acceleration is more desirable than charge longevity? Or perhaps a dual Li-ion and other battery combined. just thinking outloud. probably too complicated to be useful.
I think the slow times for the RAV4-EV had to be the size of the motor. The EV-1 was pretty darn quick.
The EV1 could accelerate from 0-60mph in the 8 second range. Top speed was limited to 80 MPH, though the EV1's propulsion system and aerodynamic shape were theoretically capable of 190 MPH with modified gearing.
Even though a lot of people question this as a source of information I personally find it pretty straight forward and relatively unbiased. Again, that's my opinion and others disagree.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_electric_vehicle
Above is where the 0-60 came from. If that is incorrect and it is quicker, great! I looked at a couple other sites that gave it a much quicker time. Even with the limited range, a car like that with a battery that lasts "a long long time" becomes more desirable. I believe they said the battery is able to accept fast charges.
I like wiki generally. It is best to do a little cross checking if you can for QC purposes. Thanks for the link.
http://www.wicn.org/programs/thisnewcar/schedule.htm
And latest schedule for new editions:
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2006/10/20/025683.html
One motor better than 4?
Initially, the Japanese carmaker said the car would use four in-wheel motors. Its latest test cars, though, have abandoned that approach. Instead, they use a single electric motor to power the rear two wheels.
I want his first car to be an EV.
Coincidentally, my first car was a 1974 Dodge Colt (built by Mitsubishi) so if he gets a Mitsu EV then that will be a cool family synergy. :shades:
Hopefully battery technology will be a LOT better by 2013.
In terms of looks..when viewed next to the yaris, it doesn't seem THAT weird looking. I didn't see specs on the actual size.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Ahhhhhh, that's the best evidence that I've seen yet that he's in the pocket of the oil lobby. What better way for Big Oil to ensure a continued lack of EV's than to ensure they look like something a teletubby would drive....
http://teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1
soon keen gut seedan. mo bettah fo u.
So what? If they simply grabbed an existing ICE design to convert to an EV configuration, why chose such an goofy design? I know Mitsu has much more attactive ICE designs in their stable; AGAIN, is there some strange NEED to use the most oddball designs for EV vehicles?
Nice.
Okay, let me see if I've got this straight: I've got my choice of a bubblecar that Woody Allen in 'Sleeper' might look comfortable in (the Mitsu example) OR I can drop $100k on a 2-seater EV that actually looks decent.
EV's need a better image to attract the general American public. That includes reasonable range, reasonable performance, and reasonable STYLING. As long as the manufacturer's continue to put out goofy designs like the Mitsu example (and I don't give a rat's about whether the original was ICE or not, that's not the point) then the general American public will NEVER consider an EV.
Is there any other kind? I'm honestly not sure; perhaps I need to ask an ignorance expert.....
I think performance and range will limit sales more than looks. An example is the Smart car being sold in Canada. It gets an honest 72+ MPG on diesel. They cannot keep them in stock at the store I visited in Victoria BC. I would buy one if offered here. Looks like goofy works for this guy.
Our chartreuse Canadian test car was powered by a tiny 3-cylinder turbo-diesel making about 40-hp and 74 lb.-ft. of torque. That little powerplant was plenty strong enough to get the Smart Car down the road expeditiously and still get in the neighborhood of 50 mpg. We had more fun in that little car in three days than nearly anything we’ve driven lately.
Smart Car story
There is a page on Greencarcongress.com which says the Smart diesel get 62 MPG USA.
The fuel consumption is crazy-good: The combined rating is 3.5 litres per 100 kilometres, or 80 miles per gallon.
Smart Car
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I only have for a defense, that I have been reading too much Pearls Before Swine.
http://www.comics.com/comics/pearls/archive/images/pearls2002714660927.gif
"OR I can drop $100k on a 2-seater EV that actually looks decent."
You can get one for $80k...and think of all the money you'll save on gas!
"EV's need a better image to attract the general American public. That includes reasonable range, reasonable performance, and reasonable STYLING."
I do agree. For now though, that styling could produce a lot of buyers. The Yaris and Fit which are very similar in style are selling quite well...though they are not for everybody, there are enough people interested to make them a substantial market. Personally, I like the Yaris style, and this one would be ok for me too, and I am not a kid. Toyota seems to be more interested in hybrids or plug in hybrids or they might resurect the RAV EV. Who knows what technology will eventually win. Anything that gets out there that is a useable car...-read: not a golf cart- is a step in the right direction. Tesla aside, since a 100 mile range makes the car for many a second vehicle option, it kind of makes sense to go with lower cost cars at this point.
The tests don't demonstrate whether or not these batteries are susceptible to aging but the results are still impressive.
This represents a significant improvement over conventional, commercially available rechargeable battery technologies such as lithium ion, nickel metal hydride and nickel cadmium.
ABOUT ALTAIR NANOTECHNOLOGIES INC.
Altairnano is an innovator and supplier of advanced novel, ceramic nanomaterials. Altairnano’s leading edge scientists are complemented by a seasoned management team with substantial experience in commercializing innovative, disruptive technologies. The company has developed nanomaterials for the alternative energy, life sciences and performance materials markets based on its proprietary manufacturing process. This process also provides the foundation for its innovative AHP pigment process. For more information visit altairnano.com.
I believe the people running Tesla are pretty savvy. If I'm aware of something they probably knew about it 6 months ago.
Whether or not this pans out I am excited by all the news of breakthrough energy storage devices coming out. They can't all be bogus and its an indication of where American entrepreneurs, inventors and innovators are focusing attention. That's when we excel and its got to give you reason to be optimistic.
http://www.altairnano.com/documents/NanoSafeBackgrounder060920.pdf
Company:
http://www.altairnano.com/
The stock was up today, but not massively. Tells me that there are more hurdles ahead.
Nothing ever came of it, however.....
Let's hope that the White Star (next Tesla vehicle) will make use of better battery technology.
I think the biggest hurdle is manufacturing capability. In addition, there is competition out there. A123 Systems has a new Li-ion battery with almost identical specs. Its already hit the market in smaller sizes, notably Dewalt power tools. I believe they've also installed it in at least one Plug-in hybrid (PHEV) that is currently being tested. That's good. The consumer will be the beneficiary of this competition. The other thing that's good is its making all these NiMH patents that Cobasys was/is sitting on worthless.
Altair's promotional liturature shows the energy density of the new battery to be ~75% of that of "conventional" Li-ion, similar to the energy density of NiMH.
Put this battery in the Tesla and it can only go
250 x .75 = 187.5 max range?
4.6 seconds x 1.25 = 5.75 seconds, zero to 60?
These are honest questions..I really don't know since I am not an engineer. If these simple calcualtions hold up and the batteries can be produced at a reasonable cost, the longevity and quick charging would seem to make them pretty desirable. Plus, you could probably do away with the liquid cooling system tesla uses for additional savings.
I'm not suggesting that this is not an improvement in Li-ion battery design, only that it is a trade-off. To make li-ion technology practical and safe for large scale applications would be a breakthrough and the increase in life could lower lifecycle cost if first cost does not increase too much.
Unfortunately, energy density has been and remains the achilles heel of EV design and energy density is the greatest advantage of conventional Li-ion batteries. The Altair design appears to give up most of that advantage.
Whether or not energy density is an Achilles heal depends on the individual user. For some people's driving habits it would be a non-issue. They would be far more concerned with how long the batteries last before they needed replacement and the ability to provide decent acceleration.
And acceleration will only improve IF the battery is currently the limiting factor in the design. That would presume that Tesla installed a higher output motor and controller than they were able to utilize with the original battery design.
The plug-in vehicle could easily be limited to 50-75 miles on electric only, with a small biodiesel (or even gas in the short term) engine for longer road trips.
Seems that this option will be a tremendous way to keep the pressure on building better batteries without keeping us from beginning to wean ourselves from our oil dependence.