Do you now of a primer on the web or a book that explains battery characteristics on a layman's level?
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.
When an electric car is coasting down hill is it charging the batteries at the same rate as it uses the battery going up the hill?
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.
I've got to question those RAV4 EV acceleration numbers. Everything that I've read stated that the EV was slightly faster than the ICE, putting it right around 10 secs. Now the initial RAV4 EV had the option of a lead acid battery pack. Possibly that is where the 17 second 0-60 time came from.
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.
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.
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 like it. Simple elegance. To bad they are a couple years away. That is something I would not mind having. I am still not convinced they have overcome some of the inherent problems with Li-Ion batteries.
since it might be lighter than 4 of the same aggregate output, even with a differential and axles. but even if there is no reduction in total mass, there will be a substantial reduction in unsprung mass and probably rotating mass as well. unsrung mass, and particularly rotating unsprung mass, is the bane of suspension design.
Might not be a strictly what is best design decision. The ability to make a standard model and modify it for ev, makes it a more practical on the manufacturing distribution side...less risky.
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.
"Nope its a Federal law. I think Bush sign it into law back in '03."
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....
I kind of like it. There are so few new cars that really look great. Maybe the E or S class Mercedes or 760 BMW. New Toyotas and Hondas are sad for looks. Nothing in the Lexus line I would consider. Face it all the great car designers are dead. We are stuck with computer generated designs. And that is exactly what they look like. I'm only going to drive an EV to the store, so looks are not too important.
"This vehicle currently exists in Japan as an ICE."
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?
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.
I don't think they plan on competing with the Camry or Accord in sales volume. Isn't the Prius on pace to sell 100,000 units this year? IMO, that car is hardly a head turner, at least not in a positive way. Obviously you're not too enthusiastic about this vehicle but there will be enough of a market to get them on the road and generate some real world feedback on their capabilities and limitations. The styling will be the easiest obstacle to overcome.
It probably would not be. My point is that most of the new cars are goofy looking. Why pick on the only cars that are making a serious attempt at cutting our dependence on foreign oil? I cannot think of a vehicle in the Toyota line up that is not goofy looking for 2007. Two of them are the top selling cars. So I don't think looks will have anything to do with selling the EV once they are even available. So far there are none for sale in San Diego.
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.
Gary, where did you see the 72 MPG spec? According to this page, the Smart diesel gets around 50 MPG:
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.
The advertising in Canada said 72 MPG which would be Imperial gallons. According to the following article it gets a combined 3.5L per 100 kilometers which is 67 MPG US combined putting the highway mileage well over 72 MPG. I talked to one owner in a parking lot that told me he was getting close to 90 MPG which again would be Imperial. That is about 75 MPG US. And it is a simple little car with out a lot to go wrong. Same reason I like the idea of an Electric vehicle. One motor and a battery. Little else to have break.
The fuel consumption is crazy-good: The combined rating is 3.5 litres per 100 kilometres, or 80 miles per gallon.
There are a lot of modified Smart cars. I imagine all in the EU. As you pointed out two cars being sold that are ugly. I think the Yaris and Fit are in their also. With cars on the road like the Aztek most anything looks better. Would I take such a small vehicle out on a freeway even if it was capable. NOT likely! Anything smaller than our LS400 is too small for me. I don't feel real comfortable down low in the Lexus. In Hawaii maybe. Problem there is electricity costs an arm and a leg.
I don't feel comfortable sitting high. The further above the pitch and roll axis, the more the translational motions of the body and consequently higher accelerations, particularly of the upper body. If you've ever had a herniated disc, you'll understand.
You're right different strokes. I rather have a high seat than a low seat. My sons Saturn has very low seating and I feel like I am sinking in the car. Plus the fact that I have to practically climb out of the car is very difficult.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Oh we agree there. It tweaks my back getting out of my wife's Lexus. A PU or Suburban is so much easier on my back. I have noticed the electric golf cart vehicles on the road are upright seating that I like.
"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.
Are they Lithium Ion batteries? This statement sounds like it is some new technology.
This represents a significant improvement over conventional, commercially available rechargeable battery technologies such as lithium ion, nickel metal hydride and nickel cadmium.
The do not seem to be Ion's...some sort of ceramic nano-technology....
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 agree that the statement leads you to believe otherwise but I think that they are still essentially Li-ion batteries. The chemistry and/or components are modified in ways beyond my understanding to overcome some of traditional Li-ion battery deficiencies. Unlike other press releases these batteries do exist and are currently powering some vehicles that are making their rounds at the alternative energy expos.
It would be good to have a US company solve the issues with Li-Ion batteries. The big one is price. The fellow that built the Tesla should be gaining some good knowledge. I got my pennies saved up for the right EV.
I don't think this company has the capability of manufacturing these batteries at an attractive price. I think they are looking for partners that can help them along these lines. They have licensed some of their patents to a Chinese battery manufacturer called Advanced Battery Technologies. It will be interesting to see what comes of that.
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.
Once, while associated with Honeywell, years ago, I attended a demonstration of an air conditioning unit that chilled as low as the best conventional units, but had double the energy efficiency, and used 30% less electricity. I mean it worked well!
The guys at Tesla do say that they will adopt better technology once it becomes available. I would imagine though that it's too late to change from their current Li-ion battery packs to the newer one's, however that doesn't mean that once it's time to replace their battery packs that the new ones won't be utilizing better batteries.
Let's hope that the White Star (next Tesla vehicle) will make use of better battery technology.
The stock was up today, but not massively. Tells me that there are more hurdles ahead
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.
there is no free lunch! Even if all of the claims are true, the improvements are to the power density, lifetime and safety of lithium batteries at the EXPENSE of energy density, which has heretofore been the greatest advantage of lithium batteries.
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.
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.
Yes, range would be reduced (for a given battery mass) as you surmise. Power would increase only if the battery is the limiting factor and in any case does not linearly relate to acceleration time.
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.
The Tesla Roadster has a 50 kWh battery pack that weighs 1,000 lbs. Altairnano's batterie's have an energy density of approximately 1 kWh per 10 kilograms. So a 50 kWh Altairnano pack would weigh a little over 1,100 lbs, 100 lbs more than the Tesla. However, the Altairnano batteries have a greater power density. Meaning that they can produce more power quickly. So the acceleration figures should be better.
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.
is always an issue. It is anathema to vehicular performance.
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.
Yes, energy density appears to be reduced in the newer battery designs, when compared to the Ii-Ion batteries used by Tesla, however; it would seem that until this problem is overcome, we do have a solution that would appear to work very well in a plug-in vehicle.
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.
According to Altair's published literature (document #ALTI0609191B), the new design has an energy density of ~90wh/kg suggesting that a 50kwh battery will be 1222lbm.
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.