Electric Cars vs.Gas Guzzlers

Something interesting while on the subject.
Go have a look at the new Lightning GT. Believe it to be British
Don't know exactly what is the battery tech yet, but it looks promising.
It has four in-wheel electric motors producing a massive 533kW, yep, that's right.
0-60mph in under 4 secs and a range of 290km.
They also are promising a recharge time of 10 minutes. Now that's interesting.
I have not yet gone to their website to see how they claim that.

But, you have to agree, very promising for EV's.
Looks rather good too.

audioguru said:

Turbos blow head gaskets.
Simply don't use a turbo and take it easy.

Click to expand...

I'm dead sure you cannot 100% link turbo's to blown head gaskets. Normally aspirated engines also blow head gaskets. But head gaskets are not the real problem, it's usually caused by something else being worn/failing.
I'm not saying turbo's cannot play a part, but is not solely responsible.
Besides, makers such as volvo and saab have been successfully force feeding their vehicles using turbo's for a heck of a long time, with no real impact on engine reliability because of the turbo.
ICE's fail because of its definition: An engine that's trying to rip itself apart.

TRexall said:

I would probably be using either hub-mounted motors or a main dc Powered motor with no head gaskets.(and one moving part)

Click to expand...

And LOT'S of highly expensive, and potentially unreliable, electronics for speed control

Electric cars are a long way from practical yet, it needs a massive leap in storage technology to make them so.

Here's another one.
Everyone knows tesla cars, one mag drove their vehicle.
Here are some specs, 0-100km/h is 5.7 sec (Funny, the prototype did it in 3.9 sec)
189kw and 286Nm @0rpm. Nice
It uses 6831-cells lithium-ion battery supply. Funny, they are talking around 350km range, heck that is almost similar to these big SUV's everyone is driving today.
It weighs 1223kg, so has lower power to weight ratio than the lotus exige s, but not by much.
It has a two gear gearbox, but this is already being replaced by a single gear system, better suited to the electric engines character apparently. People owning the original will be allowed for the free upgrade of certain new spec.
It's claimed to be roughly 1.5 times better than the pruis in terms of its green ability. So you get something in the middle here that looks like a good package.
Only problem, it will cost around R1.2milion over here.

As I said, EV's are catchin'on.

arrie said:

It's claimed to be roughly 1.5 times better than the pruis in terms of its green ability.

Click to expand...

I thought the Prius was pretty poor on fuel economy?, tests in the UK place it below modern diesels. Performance wise it's considered better than most push bikes, but not the best ones!

Again, the pruis can have both bad and good pointing to it.
It all depends how you drive, if really sedated and really relaxed on non-demanding roads, it shines.
But put it on a racetrack, and it's the worst thing on the planet, as you know black and white has another 254 shades of grey in between, so pick your driving style and pick your result.

Or something like that.
But yes, I also think the pruis is a marketing hype, and a total disaster.

Electric cars are a long way from practical yet, it needs a massive leap in storage technology to make them so.

Click to expand...

Well electric cars are nothing new anyhow,they were using them in the 1890s,and they actually had a fleet of functioning EV taxi cabs in New York City

Nigel Goodwin said:

I thought the Prius was pretty poor on fuel economy?, tests in the UK place it below modern diesels. Performance wise it's considered better than most push bikes, but not the best ones!

Click to expand...

Actually, of all cars currently on the SA market, the pruis has returned the best fuel consumption figure of all, note all cars are driven exactly the same way on exactly the same roads to perform the test, the weather can obviously not be controlled.
The prius returned 5.3l/100km and claims 123 gm/km CO2. Not bad.
But...
Keep in mind it's powered by a 1.5l engine - 57kW & 115Nm PLUS the 50kW 400Nm electric. Has a power to weight ration of 60. That tells me it's rather heavy.
Now look at this, the Citroen C1 has a 998cc 3 cyl. engine (petrol). 50kW 93 Nm.
It's slightly slower than the prius and returns 5.5l/100km with claimed 128gm/km.

If you take the technology that has gone into the prius and compare it to that of the C1 allong with the price difference between the two, I'd have to say the C1 has to get the "green" award, not the prius.
And to be honest, I'm not even a fan of french vehicles.
If you think the C1 might be a bit small, have a look at the other close rivals, Ford Ikon 1.4 tdci, biggest space and boot volume in the "green segment", very close to the above two along with the micra 1.5dCi
If that's not good enough for you, also check out the Fiest 1.6tdci, Hyundai Getz 1.5 crdi and clio 3 1.5 dci.

But whatever you do, stay away from these real small korean, indian and chinese offerings, they return horrible fuel figures and are far more polluting than much bigger engined vehicles.

Those tiny engines are used in lawnmowers and golf carts in North America.
There is a tiny electric car that is made in Canada but it is not allowed on the roads here.

Although the C1 has slightly better fuel economy, at 93 Nm it barely crawls away from the stop light. The Prius makes a small sacrifice in fuel economy to deliver 515 Nm.

What has made the Prius so popular here in the States is that it gets reasonable fuel economy while being quick enough so you're not ashamed to drive it in traffic.

But then again the prius manages 0-100km/h in 12.35 sec, the C1 in 14.5 sec.
The prius clocks out at 171km/h, the C1 at 165 km/h

Not much in it, with all that torque?
(With not much in it, I mean both are darn slow)
And with all that technology. I'm still wondering.
the prius must weigh twice the C1 if I look at the power to weight figures, but has four times the torque.

And as stated, then there is a mirage of little diesels chomping at the prius, and some of them even has more space and a bigger boot than the big prius.

I'm sure you can get where I'm going with this, except if you're a Toyota fan.

Heavy is bad...getting rid of the transmission and doing it electrically sounds better...plus the hub mounted motors.
I noticed some of the racing electrics use belt drives..seems like they would just snap from the torque.

Nigel Goodwin said:

I thought the Prius was pretty poor on fuel economy?, tests in the UK place it below modern diesels. Performance wise it's considered better than most push bikes, but not the best ones!

Click to expand...

I saw that Top Gear review. It was pretty cruel.

Actually Prius does NOT typically get as good a mpg as advertised. Typically quite a bit better that other cars but not quite as astronomical as initially advertised. Diesel fuel is 20% denser, thus creates 20% more CO2, starts with 20% more energy, and costs quite a bit more in the US. So if you're talking green or fuel cost either way you need to adjust the diesel mpg for those factors.

But, it's still good... in fact "hypermilers" who really, really get obsessive about their driving and pull a few tricks have supposedly driven it up almost the 100mpg range. One odd thing being that they accelerate hard because that's actually the most efficient type of loading for that engine, then turn off the engine entirely (no idling losses) and let it coast then restart, they call it "bumb and glide". I'm a little skeptical but I've seen enough details and evidence to think it's probably real.

They also pay a lot of attention to the type of tire, the exact part of the roadway to drive on, like they say the worn down "normal" part of the lane uses a bit more fuel and they call it "ridge riding" to offset the car from the worn tread marks from a centered vehicle. Might be true, might not, but it's minor and it can annoy other drivers. Actually it's true for sure during rain where the road surface is physically depressed into grooves from that, the deeper water will slow you down just not much.

One can debate the practical value of driving 75mph then coasting to 55mph then accelerating it back up to 75mph considering it could get you killed on an average highway. Also I mean if you can get 50 mpg with less radical driving then it's only saving you $8 on a 200 mile trip anyways. The big thing is getting away from the 20's or low 30's of mpg.

This guy say he got 59 mpg in an Accord by being king of technique, emptying out the trunk, etc.

As stated, you need to drive it really sedated.
I still believe it's an over-rated car, mostly because people are informed about vehicles and the science of vehicles.
Not that I know everything.

By the way, how much energy will go into producing the prius, compared to the C1 or the other tittle diesels that I've listed?

If the Prius got good mileage and range they probably would have towed them out to the desert and had them destroyed in secret

Electric cars are a long way from practical yet, it needs a massive leap in storage technology to make them so.

Click to expand...

Actually GM came very close to a useable EV with the EV1,it's too bad they put everyone on a waiting list before they could even use one.
Then eventually they had them all destroyed before anyone had a chance to really evaluate them.

Thinking aloud, and probably none to coherently at this time of night..

Why the obsession with storage capacity.. why not some form of induction coil buried in the road, charge as you go. Intel have been hyping this 'new' technology for domestic gadgets and wonder if it will scale up as they claim. I know what your thinking across the pond and down under, lots of places it's not going to work but for the average urban commuter the idea has some merit perhaps.

Efficiency of automobiles.. it's not the technology but the social engineering that is sadly in need of an overhaul. Any object that is not performing the function for which it was made for by definition is ineficient. Strange but true, these creations made for the road actually spend most of their lives stationary , quietly rusting.

For those of you that own a private car, please do chip in and tell us how many hours it is driven in a day/week or year.

The Mad Professor said:

For those of you that own a private car, please do chip in and tell us how many hours it is driven in a day/week or year.

Click to expand...

Isn't that somewhat like suggesting that a cell phone is inefficient, if you aren't talking on it constantly?

Seems to me that a good proportion of our population is trying to improve the efficiency of both.

John

Social Engineering?
I use my car whenever I want to go somewhere. I don't want to wait for a bus or a taxi cab. It doesn't matter how much I use it.
The Canadian government doesn't rip off drivers with extremely high gasoline taxes like other countries.

The Mad Professor said:

Strange but true, these creations made for the road actually spend most of their lives stationary , quietly rusting.

For those of you that own a private car, please do chip in and tell us how many hours it is driven in a day/week or year.

Click to expand...

This is a difficult one, although I like my cars sleeping in the garage most of the time, it's at the point when you need to get somewhere that is important.
I suppose some places lean towards you not having to own a vehicle, NY with its huge public transport system. I think Hong Kong the same.
But in some countries, you're close to being a tramp without one.

For example, I have to travel almost 25km to do decent monthly groceries shopping. A bus system would not do for me. I cannot walk to visit friends, they'll be asleep when I get there, or to go and buy a bread, the shop will either be closed when I get there, or the bread will be toast when I get back, never mind me.
Never mind the risk of being mugged along the way by some tsotsi's jumping from the bushes armed with okapi's or even an AK47.
Get my point.

Walking would be most fuel efficient, although it's still debatable what the additional contribution by the walker would be to greenhouse gasses.
Then again, if you look at the anatomy of man, you'll find this mammal was made for walking. Not running, flying, swimming or sitting on the couch.
So it boils down to geographic's and priorities.