Question - Any interest in bolt in Pre engineered Electric Drive Lines for FFR Kits? [Archive]

thebeerbaron

05-27-2011, 06:09 PM

I would love to run an electric 818. I've said it a few times on this forum, but the Tesla I drove was by far the most awesome experience I've had behind the wheel. The feeling you get from an electric motor is just amazing - no waiting, no shifting, just pure response.

That said, I think that packaging, weight, and pricing are going to be sticking points. The Tesla is no lightweight, its battery pack costs $36,000 (http://www.autoobserver.com/2009/02/tesla-battery-pack-replacement-would-be-36000-today-musk-says.html) ($12,000 if you prepay), and the batteries take up lots of space. Sure, Prius batteries cost less ($3,000 range), but their power density isn't as good.

So yes, if you could do what your source says, I'd be all over that. But my gut is that to meet the cost targets you outlined, the sacrifices in weight and performance (assuming no changes to the FFR packaging) are going to make it a no-go for me.

bromikl

05-28-2011, 08:05 AM

Electric drive is one of the reasons I first became interested in kit cars. I was surfing the web trying to get a feel for how much it would cost to convert a gas car to electric when I found the FFR website.

At first, I thought I'd build an electric GTM and then: FFR announced the 818 project. Now I intend to build two 818's - first one gasoline, second one electric.

I am very interested in the turbine generator electric drive someone has already done with the GTM. The engineering is far beyond me, but I'd love a chance to duplicate the concept. (BTW, I found very little info on the project. If anyone could point me toward a website or a blog about how they did it, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks.)

Gun Bunny

05-28-2011, 01:43 PM

Interest is hard to guage without performance specs (range, power, etc.). However, count me interested, at the very least. It's an idea worth exploring.

Flashburn

05-28-2011, 06:38 PM

I'm interested for sure.
As others have stated, it depends on how well engineered it is.
It would have to be better than something I can piece together myself.

If I pieced one myself, it would have 2 light duty motors at the front wheels and 2 powerful ones at the rear wheels. And the motors would be sprung weight.
One great advantage of an electric drivetrain is you can get AWD for cheap and efficiently.

Regen braking. It has to have regenerative braking and that has to be the major component of braking. If you can accelerate to the limits of wheel traction with the motors, you can brake to the limits of wheel traction and recover that energy. The only limits here should be #1 front motor capacity and #2 capacitor/ battery charge rates.

Range: with hardcore regen braking at 4 wheels and a lightweight car this should not be a problem. If modifications are needed to the body aerodynamics to increase range that's also a thought. At a minimum, underbody panels should be available.

Ks2

05-29-2011, 12:08 AM

Regenerative braking requires an AC drive system which requires additional electronic controls to convert the DC battery power to 3phase for the motors, as well as to control the motors themselves additionally the AC motors (for decent ones) typically are more expensive then a comparable DC alternative. One motor per tire will require additional controls to keep all of them running at the same speed and RPM, there is a reason the tesla has only one motor because one 15-20hp motor is all you really need, 4x5hp motors at each wheel gets complicated fast

personally one large AC 'squirrel cage' induction motor would offer the best benefits, tied to the existing transmission and drive train to save cost and to allow the maximum speed range throughout the useable RPM of the motor. additionally these motors are already offered with sealed and water/explosion proof outer casings for the industrial market. we converted a miata to electric power using this particular motor

looking at lead acid batteries you are adding around 700-900 pounds, (you can have around 500-600 with lithium ion). expect to pay in the 10-15,000$ range for a pack of lightweight lead acid that can power the car, though you will be replacing it in 6-9 years (estimated since it depends on alot of things)

since this setup wouldn't be much different from a converted miata, expect a range of around 20 miles (assuming 15hp AC motor, lead acid batteries, low rolling resistance tires, and around 2000lb GVW) mileages varies based on how hard you accelerate, hills, wind and how new the batteries are to name a few variables (having headlights/stereo/wipers or whatever on will reduce range and how much power you can put down to the ground as well)

it can be done, but at a significant cost (even for a simple setup) electric vehicles have a number of really significant faults to them. for a car like this i wouldn't personally run it on electric power, the additional wieght and different center of gravity/balance will make the 818 handle poorly, the electric motor will either not put enough power to the ground to compete and even if it can compete it wont have the electricity reserves to compete very long.

(SUMMARY) if you just need the car to drive to and from work (assuming you can charge it at work) then it is plausible, but for a high performance street/track car, you need alot of investment and performance wise you wont get much.

keys2heaven

05-29-2011, 12:22 PM

Batteries are what's holding me back. Too many, too heavy, too expensive. When battery tech evolves such that these are no longer a factor, then i'll be interested.

Slaughter

05-29-2011, 06:09 PM

If the price is right - does not add too much weight - and easy to charge im 100% interested! Keep me up to date!

kach22i

05-31-2011, 07:49 AM

I would love to have my next car to be all electric without having to turn engineer or succumb to some bland or ultra expensive offering by others.

bradley_norris

05-31-2011, 09:14 AM

Count me interested! 2000 lbs plus electric drive... that is a dream car.

What is the target cost? Drivetrain Vs. Batteries... your first response was vague as to what was included.
What is the target power HP/Torque?

What battery technology do you plan to include: lead? nickel? etc.?

What about Texas-required accessories such as AC or Montana-required heat? Will that be designed into the system from the beginning?

Thank you!

Bradley Norris

Justen

05-31-2011, 10:08 AM

Batteries are what's holding me back. Too many, too heavy, too expensive. When battery tech evolves such that these are no longer a factor, then i'll be interested.

ditto.
I was actively looking into what types of motors/ batteries would fit into the 818 already, but I found the batteries are either too big and heavy, or too expensive to be realistic.

package a motor and lithium batteries for a descent price and i'm in

mn_vette

05-31-2011, 10:29 AM

If you could do it for the same weight, cost, and performance as a gas engine I may consider it. If there was a system that wasn't all electric that I could still take on road trips, then I would be all over that. Something similar to that blackbird GTM would be great, but it would be expensive.

Ks2

05-31-2011, 02:47 PM

our electric miata cost about 11,000$ in parts (motor wiring controllers etc) another 16,000$ for a lithium battery back and has a range of upwards of 40 miles. the car itself was picked up for 2000$, we lightened it, new tires and whatnot and were able to sell off alot of the existing drive train components toward the cost of the build so we broke even on it (motor and trans alone covered most of it)

total investment around 28000 (plus a ton of other misc. bits and pieces that i haven't accounted for). don't get me wrong i love it, it's a great project, fun to drive and doesn't cost much in electricity. but it wouldn't last an entire track day, a few hours of abuse tops. even the tesla roadster cant handle more then a couple hours of hard driving (youtube top gear bbc when they test it). i say go for it if you have the time, money (and in our case about 15 engineering students, a case of beer and a couple weekends) but be REALISTIC about what you will get out of it for the money

to answer some of the above questions;
-expect about 10-15 horsepower with 3-4k typical running RPM (direct drive with 1 to 1.1 drive ratio in back axle), doesn't sound like much but it is an incredibly efficient engine with max torque at 0 RPM
-range with a nice (better then we have) lithium pack can be upwards of 60miles on a single charge, with lead acid maybe 20, (im spitballing here because range is dependent on how many KW your battery pack has, assuming watts = volts X amps our wattage is (12v*13batteries) * (our amperage draw say 600 amp) and we have roughly a 900kw (give or take) battery pack, the KW capacity (and thus range) is limited by the size of the battery back, a 13 battery lead acid pack is (assuming average 40lb battery) 520 pounds
- 0-60, it is no slouch... but about the same as the original NA 2.0l (i think) gas motor (i don't have times sorry) and that is considering that you don't have to shift the electric
-also it does have heat, courtesy of a electric toaster and a couple small fans, works well for such a small car, but for AC... well we chose a convertible for a reason

kach22i

05-31-2011, 04:54 PM

What about those zinc to air batteries Popular Mechanics and PS keeps bringing our attention to every five years?

The large radiator inlets on some of these designs could put that air flow to use.

Steve91T

05-31-2011, 05:10 PM

Give it another 5 or so years and you'll see more electric vehicles. There's a company that has a small homebuilt airplane kit that's electric powered that's ready to go, they are just waiting for battery technology to catch up.

Steve

keys2heaven

05-31-2011, 05:30 PM

Ks2

05-31-2011, 07:43 PM

At least that's my opinion. And, as we start to switch to electric, how will those oil baron's make their money? My guess...they'll control the battery technology.

My want list would include:

A vehicle that only takes a couple of hours to recharge.

A useful range of 1000 miles on a charge.

Today's batteries can't deliver.

close the limiting factor is the rarity of lithium, if it wasn't for government subsidies (no i am not making a political point just stating a fact) electric cars would be much more expensive. for everything else it will be several decades. even if these technologies existed the failing energy grid in the US couldn't support them and we would be burning more fossil fuels in power plants then we would have in the first place due to losses in power transmission

electric cars and hybrid cars failed in the late 1800's and early 20th century because of batteries

dhrivnak

06-04-2011, 04:21 PM

Please count me in and I would like to know more. I am thinking about an all electric version of the MK4 Roadster. It would be powered by a 28KW lithium pack that should weigh 620 lbs and the electric motor 200 lbs. But I would not need an engine, cooling system, exaust, and I think I can do away with the transmission. So weight should be about the same as most gas powered cars. That is enough power to go 100+ miles on a charge.

I have done 3 electric builds and I currently drive a Tesla that is wickedly fast and will do over 200 miles on less than $4 of electricity. I am convinced electric drive vehicles will be a large part of our transportation solution. The Tesla is definately the most fun and responsive car I have EVER driven.

PS TopGear was a bit of misinformation. When they claimed the Tesla was out of energy after 55 miles and pushed it off the track it still had 25% charge and the rep drove it back to the store with NO issues. Wit normal driving it still have 50 miles of charge. See an entertaining video of a rebuttle (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfTiRNzbSko&feature=player_embedded).

bromikl

06-07-2011, 08:32 AM

If available, I'd prefer a series hybrid electric. A super-efficient diesel generator recharging a relatively small battery pack, which powers a modestly powered AC motor good for about 5-10 miles on battery alone, and speeds up to 85 MPH. The generator should be sized to allow continuous travel at 75-80 MPH. As a diesel engine, it should also be able to run bio-diesel. I'll pass on gimmicks such as solar panels and whatnot.

Steve91T

06-07-2011, 09:04 AM

I don't get why people still want an electric car. Yes, in the near future, technology will catch up and I'm sure they will be far faster, cheaper, and cleaner than anything else. But for now, why don't you look into turbo diesel? I'm a huge diesel fan and for some reason, diesel technology was hardly advancing for many years, until recently. Look at the new 3/4 and 1 ton pick ups from the famous 3. 800 ft/lbs of tq from the factory! Look at BMW's new 335d. There are guys putting down 300 hp and 450 ft/lbs of tq to the wheels, with no injector noise, no smoke, 5000 RPM redlines, and still getting over 44 MPG on the highway. My "old school" 7.3L Powerstroke is making about 300 hp and 600 ft/lbs tq and even weighing in about 7300 lbs, I still get 20 MPG on the highway.

For me, hybrids are a gimmick. I hate them. Do you know why there are hybrids out there? Because the public don't want a diesel because they feel it's going to be like an old Mercedes. Loud, smokey, smelly, and won't be able to get out of it's own way, going down hill. I think this is all changing. Especially now that BMW is really taking the plunge. VW has the turbodiesel that gets nearly 50 MPG. Wait until the technology really takes off. There are already turbo diesel race cars, and they are doing really well. No smoke, sound like a "normal" engine except a little quieter, and get much better fuel economy than gas engines.

Alright, I'm done now.

Steve

thebeerbaron

06-07-2011, 09:27 AM

Pure electric drive is wildly different from turbo diesel, and for me at least, the emissions issue is secondary to the electric experience. That said, I think it will be a while before my desire for an electric sports car is realistic.

Fast818

06-07-2011, 10:16 AM

I would be interested as long as it was no more the an normal 818 price

Cooluser23

06-08-2011, 12:43 PM

Yes please. Electric drive would be great. The car should have a 100-200 mile range preferably. (for the naysayers, that's quite possible. The Tesla Roadster gets 245, and the sedan gets 300)

Ks2

06-08-2011, 06:54 PM

Yes please. Electric drive would be great. The car should have a 100-200 mile range preferably. (for the naysayers, that's quite possible. The Tesla Roadster gets 245, and the sedan gets 300)

and to get that performance and range it would cost roughly 7 times the 15k$ completed 818 with subaru running gear, even if you found a wrecked tesla and used it's drive train and batteries etc your still going to be paying alot for it... don't get me wrong if you have the money anything is possible (well almost anything) but the idea of building an all electric drive car for 25-30k (nearly twice the cost for the subaru drive train) and then expecting it to do what a roughly 110k tesla can do is likely not going to happen. our miata build was less then 30k$ (and we spent only 2k$ on the car mind you) and it does reasonably well, in a lighter frame like the 818 your sure to see more power and range but you cannot for 30k build a tesla... not even close (maybe one as fast but with a very short range or have the long range without the top speed... take your pick though)

the electric miata is alot of fun, really peppy and can charge with two standard 110v outlets (assuming you don't have any big appliances on the same circuit or it sometimes blows fuses and extension cords get really hot as well...) it is alot of fun to build if you enjoy car wiring more then anything else and is relatively maintenance and hassle free, for driving to and from work or to the grocery store or what have you it is dirt cheap to operate and great in city driving (it wastes nothing in traffic or sitting in a drive thru) but it is a LONG way from the tesla

if you have the money go for it i would love to see it and will offer what help i can... if you go with the wrecked/used tesla route i'm sure it can be had somewhere... (edmunds and autotrader are less then helpful). but for a DIY electric setup (assuming you get REALLY good deals on the components) you can often just call the manufacturer and have them ship you the parts (online stores that sell EV parts tend to mark them up alot since they don't exactly fly off the shelves...)

bromikl

06-08-2011, 09:46 PM

FFRWRX

06-09-2011, 07:04 AM

For me, hybrids are a gimmick. I hate them. Alright, I'm done now.

Steve

Well, I drive a hybrid (Prius) and really like it. In real daily driving I get 61 MPG (Canadian gallons) compared with 28 MPG I was getting in my PT Cruiser (or 27 in my C5 Vette), with absolutely no compromise or downside. What's not to like? It is not my performance, or fun, car (that's what my project cars are for). But for normal daily driving you can't beat it.

Rick

FFRWRX

06-09-2011, 07:13 AM

Price target is in the same range as you would expect to pay for a good old fashioned internal combustion drive line. Power and range are targeted to be what one would expect from a car with the looks of any of the FFR offerings.

Let me know your thoughts.

My thoughts are that this is absolute garbage. There is no way on earth it is going to meet the price/power/performance that you are stating. Please prove me wrong.

Rick

Fast818

06-09-2011, 10:26 AM

Hi Guys google Calmotors for all your EV needs (battery well that the big $$ question ?) see piucs of motors ,controls and ECM

kach22i

06-09-2011, 10:52 AM

Hi Guys google Calmotors
Impressive.

Did you really work on the eRuf?

The Fusion driveshaft motor for existing vehicles is unlike anything I have seen before. Not sure how it would be balanced or strain existing U-joints and adjacent parts, but it sure grabbed my imagination.

Now Bookmarked.

StatGSR

06-09-2011, 07:55 PM

Well, I drive a hybrid (Prius) and really like it. In real daily driving I get 61 MPG (Canadian gallons) compared with 28 MPG I was getting in my PT Cruiser

Rick

Yea, after that i sorta stopped caring about what you had to say..... sorry!

Ks2

06-10-2011, 05:46 PM

Ks2, I understand you're one of the few people on the forum who actually converted a car to electric drive. But please stop telling us what can't be done.

Nobody thinks an electric drive 818 will cost the same as a gas version. Range and price will depend on what they design. The pros use technology that few of us have access to. It will undoubtedly be an AC motor and use something other than lead-acid batteries. That stuff is for amateurs working in their garage 40 years ago. A wrecked Tesla? Come on. They will design something with NEW parts available off the shelf today. What would they do if TWO people wanted an electric 818?

I half-heatedly apologize for the rant, but why don't you let the experts put it together before you go on and on about how it won't work.

the reason i am coming across negative is (in reverse order):

The car should have a 100-200 mile range preferably

I would be interested as long as it was no more the an normal 818 price

If you could do it for the same weight, cost, and performance as a gas engine I may consider it

I'm not saying don't do it (though i am admittedly playing devils advocate). considering the 818 is a car that for 15k can do what a 60-70k lotus can do i think alot of people think the same can be true of an electric drivetrain that you can build one yourself and get tesla like performance/range which just isn't the case. I just want people to know going in what they will get out of it and how much they will be spending to get that. some have said they alread own teslas and if you have the money for that which could go into this car, i imagine you could do much better then our conversion, even better if companies like calmotors for example can provide 'turn key' * kits for a good price then yes it is entirely possible.

* by 'turn key' i mean pretty much everything is ready to bolt in using existing hard points and includes everything pre-wired and the only part(s) missing is the battery pack, since the battery pack is predominantly what determines range, available power and most importantly (to me atleast) cost.

bromikl

06-13-2011, 08:18 AM

It seems your critiques are directed to someone who intends to design and build their own unique electric conversion for the 818.

I don't know which company(s) are considering offering the kits, but the title of the thread is, "Question - Any interest in bolt in Pre engineered Electric Drive Lines for FFR Kits?"

Gollum

06-13-2011, 12:12 PM

I think the downfalls are well covered, but I'd like to point out that the statements by this company mentioned in the first post are probably impossible. And the idea of "range that you'd expect from a FFR" is kind of a joke. Even getting 10mpg a roadster will sill outrun any electric vehicle that's sub 3000 pounds. The battery technology just isn't there yet.

And doing it for "the price you'd pay for a normal carbed engine"... what does THAT mean? You can pay 2k for a decent engine, or 100k+ on a true race built engine. And even "normal" could be HP specific. A "normal", realistic 600hp motor will usually set you back about 10k. Is that the kind of money we're talking?

In an case, I'm betting people won't bite on it.... yet. Battery technology is slow coming, but it's moving none the less. So once it gets to the point that you can get 300 miles on a charge and it doesn't cost you six figures people might bite.

The big downfall is that I'm betting hydrogen will make it's debut before then, making batteries completely obsolete.

BipDBo

06-13-2011, 12:13 PM

The Leaf has a 24kw*hr battery pack which delivers around 100 miles, which in my opinion, is just about the minimal usefule range. I have doubts that a 24kw*hr kit can be made available for anywhere close to the cost of a gasoline drivetrain. A electric drivetrain in that price range would probably be lacking in both range and power.

What do you think about instead offering an adaptable plug-in hybrid kit? It could include hub motors and a much smaller battery pack, say 8 kw/hr. Hub motors would make it very adaptable. Such a system could be applied to the front wheels of any Factory five kit, with a standard ICE engine in the back. 8kW*hr could produce around 40 hp and about 20 miles of electric only range, and could be charged quickly with a standard outlet. When more power or range is needed, the gas engine is engaged. As long as the DIYer can find a place for the batteries and electronics, it could really be applied to any car turning a RWD or FWD car into AWD. A front wheel drive car would get the motors placed on the rear wheels, like the Saab concept. Such as system would not operate as seemleessly as a Volt, but would get the job done, and probably encourage some old fashioned garage innovation.

Ks2

06-13-2011, 02:43 PM

The big downfall is that I'm betting hydrogen will make it's debut before then, making batteries completely obsolete.

you might be right...

http://www.der-wankelmotor.de/wasserstoff.pdf (this is very interesting)

http://evtransportal.org/bmwhydrogen7.pdf (this isn't nearly as interesting)

though both are a ways off... however it may go the same way as supplementing gasoline with propane

also i have seen remarkably few complete conversion kits (sans batteries)... a company could come forward and make one (or with a bit of development F5 or a supporting business could offer one) but to convert a car you typically source the parts yourself, more often then not we bought our parts directly from the manufacturer at (atleast claimed) wholesale price. i imagine a business or person building a kit (assuming they got the same or lower prices on the parts) would cost about the same, any discount in parts is offset by the markups to make a profit or labor involved in assembly etc

however given the nightmare of wiring, multimeters, soldering and everything else involved in our conversion... the extra markup for a complete kit would be very appreciated by anyone thinking of it...

Cooluser23

06-13-2011, 03:44 PM

Sorry, I guess I had to qualify. I was hoping for the range of at least 100miles. I never assumed to get the performance of a Tesla Roadster. I'm okay if that car is a turd in the electric version.
I have a specific need for an electric car that would do a 45min-1hour commute from solar panel, to solar panel equipped household. It would dramatically lower the cost of that specific commute.

Gollum

06-14-2011, 12:36 AM

you might be right...

http://www.der-wankelmotor.de/wasserstoff.pdf (this is very interesting)

http://evtransportal.org/bmwhydrogen7.pdf (this isn't nearly as interesting)

though both are a ways off... however it may go the same way as supplementing gasoline with propane

also i have seen remarkably few complete conversion kits (sans batteries)... a company could come forward and make one (or with a bit of development F5 or a supporting business could offer one) but to convert a car you typically source the parts yourself, more often then not we bought our parts directly from the manufacturer at (atleast claimed) wholesale price. i imagine a business or person building a kit (assuming they got the same or lower prices on the parts) would cost about the same, any discount in parts is offset by the markups to make a profit or labor involved in assembly etc

however given the nightmare of wiring, multimeters, soldering and everything else involved in our conversion... the extra markup for a complete kit would be very appreciated by anyone thinking of it...

Those are both hydrogen COMBUSTION engines, not fuel cells which is what I was meaning. You can convert electricity to hydrogen at nearly a 90% efficiency, and convert it back at nearly the same rate. So for about a 20% energy loss you can store a LOT more electricity than you can in batteries, thus allowing you you to go a LOT farther, or make more power. The second upside is that hydrogen isn't nearly as heavy as batteries, even considering the more complicated tank requirements.

It's really sad to say for me, but just like cloud computing will take over the computer market, the hydrogen fuel cell electric will eventually take over the car market. It's really just a matter of time I think. It's painful to admit, but I think it's true. The main thing preventing it is that we're still getting the majority of our electricity from fossil fuels, and our model is already so well equipped for oil based products. Once we can move more of our energy sources to "green" sources we can use excess energy to create hydrogen, and then transport that to stations instead of refined petroleum.

For example, the honda FCX hydrogen fuel cell car makes over 100hp at will go just under 300 miles. What electric car can boast that? And it's not a hybrid, just a fuel cell, hydrogen tank, and electric motor. And the tank can be refilled in just minutes, not hours like batteries. And the technology is still getting better and better. It's going to be a hard battle for the gasoline powered vehicles to overcome.

bromikl

06-14-2011, 07:59 AM

For example, the honda FCX hydrogen fuel cell car makes over 100hp at will go just under 300 miles. What electric car can boast that? And it's not a hybrid, just a fuel cell, hydrogen tank, and electric motor. And the tank can be refilled in just minutes, not hours like batteries. And the technology is still getting better and better. It's going to be a hard battle for the gasoline powered vehicles to overcome.

Good point, Gollum. It's really difficult to duplicate the energy density of gasoline. That is the one and only thing going for it. Maybe one day someone will engineer an equivalent fuel from renewable energy (I'm preferential to Hot Dry Rock Geothermal and Thorium Reactors) and a carbon-free life cycle.

There are benefits to storing energy as a pressurized gas. I can tell you I love my new Propane string trimmer I bought this spring. Not because it's Propane - but because there's no mixing, no pouring, no priming, no carb adjustment, and I don't stink of burned oil when I'm done using it.

Gasoline or batteries is what we have today. And they are not equal. We've spent about 200 years advancing ICE design, while electric motors and battery technology have stagnated. As some home garage engineers have shown, the ICE is being shown the door.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=369h-SEBXd8

mikiec

06-14-2011, 08:54 AM

Sorry... No way.

Oppenheimer

06-14-2011, 10:18 AM

I think there is a lot of performance potential with electric. Either fuel cell, like Gollum describes, or if someone eventually creates a suitable lightweight, economical, environmentally friendly battery. OR both. There is room for cars built to be electric, but the power source, battery, fuel cell, ICE running a generator, some combination of these) varies based on vehicle target use.

Imagine an electric car, with individual motors for each wheel. Now you can use software to program in 'limited slip' or off-road 4x4 or something like the Honda SH stuff they did, where when cornering, the outside wheel was spun faster than the inside, to the point where less steering was required to maintain the cornering angle. All of these in the same vehicle.

Think of the stability control possibilites. The ability to program in how much to control things would be endless. You could have granny mode and hooligan mode and everything in between.

Today our motors are much the same inside as they were 75 years ago, its just that now computers control fuel delivery, spark timing, even cam profiles. What a difference that has made. I imagine a similar revolution once computers are easily able to completely control the power delivered individually to each wheel.

kach22i

06-14-2011, 11:20 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=369h-SEBXd8

Uploaded by tsport100 on Jan 25, 2009

Good video.

I saw this video a couple of years ago, thanks for posting it. I forgot all about it until they switched out the lead acid batteries, then I remembered it.

Ks2

06-16-2011, 02:16 AM

Those are both hydrogen COMBUSTION engines, not fuel cells which is what I was meaning. You can convert electricity to hydrogen at nearly a 90% efficiency, and convert it back at nearly the same rate. So for about a 20% energy loss you can store a LOT more electricity than you can in batteries, thus allowing you you to go a LOT farther, or make more power. The second upside is that hydrogen isn't nearly as heavy as batteries, even considering the more complicated tank requirements.

It's really sad to say for me, but just like cloud computing will take over the computer market, the hydrogen fuel cell electric will eventually take over the car market. It's really just a matter of time I think. It's painful to admit, but I think it's true. The main thing preventing it is that we're still getting the majority of our electricity from fossil fuels, and our model is already so well equipped for oil based products. Once we can move more of our energy sources to "green" sources we can use excess energy to create hydrogen, and then transport that to stations instead of refined petroleum.

For example, the honda FCX hydrogen fuel cell car makes over 100hp at will go just under 300 miles. What electric car can boast that? And it's not a hybrid, just a fuel cell, hydrogen tank, and electric motor. And the tank can be refilled in just minutes, not hours like batteries. And the technology is still getting better and better. It's going to be a hard battle for the gasoline powered vehicles to overcome.

my apologies i misread your post and i was under the impression that (combustion) was what you meant, the idea behind hydrogen combustion (as you are already aware i imagine) big picture is the theoretical "hydrogen economy", personally though i like it because the internal combustion engine (as horribly inefficient as it is) already has the infrastructure necessary (finding a mechanic or parts for alternative engines currently is a challenge) and you don't need clean hydrogen, for environmentalists burning hydrogen produces alot of energy with very few by-products and greenhouse gases, trouble is currently we refine it primarily from fossil fuels if i am not mistaken... that is besides the point, internal combustion is too inefficient with roughly 20-30% of fuel energy is converted to useable power the rest of the fuel is a waste though i imagine hydrogen in this application would be even less efficient, so yes your right fuel cells (unless something better comes along) and electric cars are the future...

speaking of fuel cells i love the technology but it may be as far away as the battery technology we need for the electric cars, i know the actual cell that does the converting has a limited useful life and must be replaced periodically though i don't know the MTBF... it is still at its base level an anode cathode reaction and oxidization would occur over time... running the purest possible hydrogen with as near to zero contaminants as possible would make the engine last much longer... but getting hydrogen that clean would be expensive. For a unit big enough for cars the membrane is currently very expensive (6 figures minimum last i saw but that was a while ago). if i had the money though... making a factory 5 fuel cell car would be very cool indeed...

...ICE running a generator...

maybe a Stirling or hot bulb style engine? that might be a fun one to try...

Today our motors are much the same inside as they were 75 years ago

interestingly fuel cells have been around since the 60's, electric cars since the mid 1800's (will be 2 centuries in 10 years!!!!) and hybrid cars in the early 1900's... have we really come that far?

it is now late and i am out of beer...

EDIT...
http://gas2.org/2008/12/05/revolutionary-wheel-for-electric-cars-puts-guts-inside-wheel/
with small cheap components inside the wheels that looks promising... cruising on the freeway you could cycle only 2 of these to pass the wind resistance to maximize range since the thing is so damn light i imagine... or run all four at 100%+ output levels for fast (10.6 0-60 is not really that fast) accelerations... weight is a huge factor as well as the drive shafts and everything (except the wheels themselves) that have a rotational inertia..

Gollum

06-17-2011, 02:48 AM

Ks2, no need to apologize really, I wasn't offended or anything. Just needed to clarify myself obviously as you showed me.

I do realize the problems facing hydrogen, but really it's the same problem facing humanity. As much as I think the "oil crisis" is just a governmental red herring, I do believe we need to find an energy source that just makes more sense than the oil process. In my humble opinion, the future is in Wave an Solar technology. But that's just my opinion. If you want to know why, I say that because if we could just capture a fraction of a percent of the energy beating on our coasts we'd be well set. And solar panels seem to be improving on a constant basis so they can't be ignored. The sun is a giant ball of energy. To dismiss it as a serious contender for our energy would be foolhardy.

The big reason I think this subject DOES apply to us car-folk here, is that electric motors are just plain BOMB! As much as I love a good loud engine (was just at the Sonoma Historics at Infeneon a few weekends ago) the instant torque of an electric motor is very appealing. Electric motors are already at an efficiency that reciprocating motors will NEVER reach. They provide nearly perfect efficiency across a HUGE operating range, and the BEST of all, is that even a 500+hp electric motor can still propel a car down the highway with nearly the same efficiency as a 50hp electric motor. They're absurdly scalable and when you consider the benefit of removing the transmission from the complexity of the drivetrain.... It's just a plain good motor option.

BipDBo

06-17-2011, 01:55 PM

[QUOTE=CdnCobraGuy;20790]
Price target is in the same range as you would expect to pay for a good old fashioned internal combustion drive line. Power and range are targeted to be what one would expect from a car with the looks of any of the FFR offerings.
QUOTE]

Question: Is this price (similar to internal combustion) not including the battery? If so, that sounds realistic. The battery would cost maybe another $12,000. The total cost would definately be higher than a typical ICE setup, but with such an blooming interest in EVs and battery technology gradually getting better and cheaper, I think that there would definately be a good market for such a product.

Ks2

06-17-2011, 06:29 PM

i see benefits more of wind then solar and wave (but then again i live in the midwest) hydrogen gas as a fuel is the best choice in the short term, we don't have to risk miners to dig it up or soldiers to fight over it, i believe internal combustion will be around for a long while (since every other technological option is decades away) it is just making internal combustion less wasteful while still retaining the qualities that have made it iconic...

however i agree electric motors are a blast and if we had a sufficient method of powering them they would be the future, the squirrel cage induction motor in particular is by far one of the most versatile in the industry since it can switch from motor to generator regardless of it's direction of rotation nearly instantly, and they make these motors capable of surviving just about anything since they are completely sealed in the casing, perfect for automotive use.. the controls for AC motors have come a long way.

but i have always been intrigued by DC shunt motors, you can 'reverse plug' the motor by effectively shorting the field current, the motors speed increases exponentially since the field current is near zero. adapting this you can for extremely short bursts have a 5 hp motor delivering speed and power equivalent to 3-400hp gasoline motor on methanol just by altering the field resistance (granted the motors speed is nearly uncontrollable and it's speed will at some point cause it to fail catastrophically... but that is what drag racing is about)

Nelff

06-19-2011, 11:31 AM

Yes!!! I am def interested!!! I was planning on trying it myself. But, if there is a plug and play I would be very interested. Like most in the Midwest my commute would require a range in the 75 mile round trip range. I personally think that carrying enough batteries for acceleration and having a small generator that keeps the charge up and allows highway driving is the best option. I know more engineering. I am very impressed that someone wants to electrify the 818.

Slaughter

06-25-2011, 07:26 AM

BUMP! Any progress when it comes to this motor? I'd love to have a green licence plate! What company will provide these kits?

ZeroDrift

06-25-2011, 08:47 AM

I would not be interested in an EV kit for any vehicle in the near future. Overall range and re-fueling (or re-charging) needs to be simple and fast. Waiting for batteries to charge would make long distance trips impossible, or even trips to nearby cities.

There is also something wonderfully gratifying about being able to shift and work within an engines power band that captivates me. With an EV, there is no shifting and that would make my experience with it very dull.

bromikl

06-27-2011, 08:10 AM

ZeroDrift, Electric isn't for everyone. But if you commute less than 30 miles a day or so (that's 80% of the country), and you could rent or borrow a ICE vehicle twice a year for longer trips, then electric would do you just fine. Yes, batteries are more expensive, but electric power is cheaper then gas. For performance, we're NOT talking about a golf cart with a 20 MPH top speed. Electrics could easily have quicker acceleration and higher top speed than gas. At this point, few cars exist that were designed to be electric. You wouldn't compare a Model T to a Porsche Boxter - we have only begun to develop the possibilities of electric.

You can still shift if you set it up that way. Most electric motors have a massive power band, so there's really no need for it. But several home built EV conversions use a DC motor from a forklift. You get maximum torque at zero RPM and decreasing as you get into the thousands. In this case they often leave the manual transmission in the donor vehicle.

You're absolutely right about EV not sounding like gas, and it wouldn't reek of fossil fuels, but you could always use 96 octane aftershave and put a speaker under the hood to go VROOM VROOM for you.

ZeroDrift

06-27-2011, 08:40 AM

Bromikl, I respect where you are coming from, but I think you misunderstand. Electric is ideal for commuting, but this kit car isn't exactly a commuter. Personally, should I decide to buy one, I'd like to enjoy day trips and take it to the track occasionally. Electric is not capable of this for the time being, due to the shortcomings of batteries. If you toss in a highly efficient generator that recharges the batteries, you'd peak my interest, but until then, a pure EV is just not cut out for a sports car. Now please don't misunderstand, I know full well the advantages that electric motors are capable of compared to combustion, but the shortcomings of re-charging are just too inconvenient for now.

As far as comparisons, EV has more potential for quicker acceleration; however top speed is restricted to the same laws of physics that a combustion engine is. Statements of top speed are vague at best.

bromikl

06-27-2011, 09:13 AM

Right. An electric racing a gas wouldn't be a fair fight; unless it's a short sprint.

Interest in EV's brought me to FFR just before they announced the 818. I've been here since.

Nelff

06-27-2011, 09:27 AM

ZeroDrift

06-27-2011, 09:41 AM

Zero / Brom... It looks like both of you are looking for a light, quick handling car that you can modify to suit your own needs. I'm enthused about this car and how it develops for the same reason. I know that one car can't be all things for all people. That's why I'm interested in this one. If I have to put the engine/motor in myself, I can choose what I want. The basic car is engineered with a great suspension, brakes, (I'm really hoping that it has a roof) and I can modify it the way that I want it...

The 818 is indeed ideal to alter as you have a potentially great foundation to start with, not to mention its a kit that you build. I already a pair of Impreza models in my household and would be planning to put my current engine in the 818, assuming I like the design of the final model. The roof topic will immediately decide if I pass on the car though (no roof means I won't buy it).

On the EV side of things I would be very keen to follow some build threads on the matter. Reading and watching someone build either an EV (or gas) kit car would be most interesting !

Flashburn

07-07-2011, 05:08 AM

You know what, I've changed my mind and I'd be delighted to see an electric drivetrain available and would consider it.
AC, DC doesn't matter as long as it is well done, well priced and fast as hell.
Obviously the engine, controllers and battery pack should be well suited to each other and performance goals.

Ibuildevs

07-10-2011, 01:18 AM

New here but I have been following Factory Five for a long time. Reason I'm chimming in on this thread is I work in the electric vehicle field and would be happy to shed some light on some of the issues that have been brought up. I don't want to come on and list all the cars, motorcycles ect that I have a hand in since listing them off will show who I work for unless it is ok.

Hate when people just spam a thread trying get business.

I will list the specs of one of the motorcyles I have been working on and you can judge if the power output is anywhere near where you would want your 818.

240 HP at the rear wheel (this motor and controller setup is pretty exspensive right now but we have been told that in volume the price for a single could go down below $6k or so)

Batteries 12kwh (fyi kw is a measure of power, kwh is a measure of capcity) with a weight of ~180 #. We have an electric Fiero that with 24kwh can cover a good 75-95 miles at freeway speeds. I'm not talking driving at 50 we cruise it at 65-70 with anything but ideal rubber on it. Batteries really are where your major funds are going to go. Big thing is to define what is your list of priorities. (Power, density, price and pick 2) If you tell me you want 300+hp and it to do 300+ miles and charge in 5 mins you better not say money is an issue. If on the other hand your happy with a car that will flat out stuff you back in the seat when you want to but still get you 75-100 miles, no problem.

The bike has topped out over 190mph and should be good for 215 or so.

Love seeing the great builds that people have done with the Factory Five cars and look forward to seeing these 818 when they are out.

Have a great day all,

kach22i

07-10-2011, 07:28 AM

FYI: I went to the Ann Arbor Rolling Sculpture Auto Show last Friday evening and spoke with a guy named Keith who has converted an X 1/9 to electric drive.

He gave me a couple of business cards including one with a link to this:
http://sites.google.com/site/michiganelectricautos/

He said it only cost him $2.00-$3.00 a day to drive to work (I recall it being a good hike too). I asked if his conversion cost around $7,000, he said yes but it could be less for others.

I told him if I ever blew up the engine in my 1977 911 I would go electric. He said using an old 911 body is a popular choice. I also told him about my friend John with a 1973 911T with a seized engine and that I would be contacting him with additional information.

Now the X 1/9.
http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/#!cpZZ2QQtppZZ20
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/DSCF2226.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/DSCF2229.jpg

http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/#!cpZZ3QQtppZZ20
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/DSCF2231.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/DSCF2232.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/DSCF2233.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/DSCF2234.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/DSCF2235.jpg

Keith is braking systems engineer and joked if we all went electric that he would still have a future because he installed regenerative braking on this vehicle and knows something about it.

kach22i

07-10-2011, 07:30 AM

A few more images:

http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/#!cpZZ8QQtppZZ20
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/DSCF2338.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/DSCF2339.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/DSCF2337.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/DSCF2336.jpg

http://s184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/#!cpZZ9QQtppZZ20
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/DSCF2227.jpg
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x295/kach22i/2011%20Rolling%20Sculpture%20-%20Ann%20Arbor/DSCF2228.jpg

EDIT: Most electric cars are DC, this one is AC.

riptide motorsport

07-10-2011, 08:12 AM

nice clean instalation......what i find interesting about this thread is that on both forums with the same threads in every catagory, we have not heard once back from the poster............Steven

crabbdaddy

07-10-2011, 09:54 AM

http://youtu.be/jWSgZc8cP8w lots of fun information here. great series with real world builds, problems, resolutions. enjoy!:)

crabbdaddy

07-10-2011, 11:30 AM

evtv.me (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlBW22SgNUM&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL) is building a cobra replica for another vendor, but for a FFR it would be great! starting at 0:50:20

kach22i

07-25-2011, 03:17 PM

I went to an electric car club meeting last Saturday for about 2-1/2 hours (missed the 2,000 person autoshow couple of weeks ago). It was a small meet up, sort of a round table discussion which I found very enjoyable. For example; a couple who owns a Chevy Volt was there, so we got to hear some interesting aspects and stories. GM is very big on collecting data, and the owners get text messages form their car, maybe too many from the sounds of it.

After the meeting in the library parking lot I got to see Keith's red Fiat X-1/9 again, two Volts, an 1989 electric Ranger pick up truck - rust free and low miles. This part was fun too, really looking and going over the cars/trucks with the owners.

If you are in Michigan, take advantage of the organization.

Michigan Electric Auto Association
http://sites.google.com/site/michiganelectricautos/

Here is a car I found in a link off the site, might be of special interest here.

ElectroLite Roadster
“EL-R”
http://www.evalbum.com/1479
3099

Yep, based on a RCR Superlite kit car...........10k, 20k and 40-50k packages depending on model. Looks to be competition for the 818 in some respects. However, I expect the 818 to be the value supreme king.

StatGSR

07-25-2011, 04:07 PM

^ i was actually in RCR's shop about 6 weeks ago when i was down by Detroit for work. I got to sit in the new "SL-Razor", the "SL-Nemesis", as well as the "SL-Coupe" very cool shop and they were very friendly and nice about showing me around.

I'm pretty sure they had the electric SLR sitting on the lift while i was there too.

It was all a pretty sweet experience as i have been following RCR since i first heard about the SLR a few years ago. If your in the Detroit area, i would say it is certainly worth a visit, Fran was a very nice guy.

Sadly the price point on the SLR and Nemesis is still a little steeper than what i would like to see, which is why I'm so excited about the 818.

I also wouldn't be shocked if you could find more info about the electrolite over at exocars.net

kach22i

07-25-2011, 04:30 PM

If your in the Detroit area, i would say it is certainly worth a visit, Fran was a very nice guy.

Ann Arbor to Clinton Township is a pretty good cruise. It takes family (wife's side) or special event to get me out that way. If they post an "open house" I'll have to consider it.

dbjr63

11-14-2011, 03:38 PM

i'm interested FFR 818. but what the cost?

BipDBo

11-14-2011, 04:27 PM

It's interesting that this thread got pulled out of the hole. I think that 818 just begs to be electrified. Unfortunately right now, the costs of all of the electrical components would exceed the cost of a new, complete Nissan Leaf. Maybe this will be a great EV one day when batteries have gotten a bit cheaper and have a higher energy density.

vozproto

11-14-2011, 05:16 PM

I would def. have some interest.

The question is would it be indipendant eDrive hubs or would it be a bolt up system to say the subaru running gear?

I think the main concern of course is cost.

Fast818

11-14-2011, 08:04 PM

I am still interested. Not just battery also solar, hydrogen, wind and regen braking to recharge the battery packs

bromikl

11-14-2011, 10:55 PM

I am still interested. Not just battery also solar, hydrogen, wind and regen braking to recharge the battery packs

You're not going to get much energy from solar or wind. (Solar is cost prohibitive for the tiny amount of power generated.) Wind is for homes. Pushing a turbine through the air will never recover the energy lost to drag. Hydrogen fuel cells are ungodly expensive, high maintenance items. They do generate electricity, but not enough to drive in traffic. Regen works, but it only increases efficiency - doesn't generate power. You should plan on charging your batteries from the grid each night.

You can get away with fewer batteries if you have an onboard diesel generator (constant speed, highly efficient), and charge as you drive (called series hybrid.)

Someone else mentioned a through-the-road hybrid. (Gas engine moves the car, front wheels regenerative-brake while driving to charge the batteries.) Allows you to shut off the gas engine sometimes. I haven't investigated that; not sure how it would work. On first glance, it seems to be a very complicated waste of energy. And it could also make driving very dangerous.

olpro

11-14-2011, 11:05 PM

bromikl

11-14-2011, 11:40 PM

I don't think that any of the currently feasible batteries can take a charge fast enough for regenerative braking to be anything more than a bogus fantasy. You would have to banks of capacitors to really do anything with that idea.

Somebody smarter than me is gonna have to make that call. I once tried to calculate the amount of kinetic energy converted to heat when stopping a car, and tried to relate that to a capacitor size. I got lost in the units and never came to a conclusive answer.

BipDBo

11-15-2011, 06:42 AM

Someone else mentioned a through-the-road hybrid. (Gas engine moves the car, front wheels regenerative-brake while driving to charge the batteries.) Allows you to shut off the gas engine sometimes. I haven't investigated that; not sure how it would work. On first glance, it seems to be a very complicated waste of energy. And it could also make driving very dangerous.

This through the road hybrid design is how the West Philly car works to get up to 160 mpg with pretty good performance.

DrieStone

11-15-2011, 08:19 AM

BipDBo

11-15-2011, 12:38 PM

I don't think that any of the currently feasible batteries can take a charge fast enough for regenerative braking to be anything more than a bogus fantasy. You would have to banks of capacitors to really do anything with that idea.

Current hybrids absorb about an average of 20% of the kinetic energy in braking to recharge the batteries. The other 80% is lost to heat through the conventional friction brakes and a little bit through the electrical components. The biggest limitation to how much deceleration power can be absorbed to recharge the batteries in regenerative braking is the size of the battery. The standard Prius battery, for example, is only around 2 kw*hr, with a rated output of 21 kw. An EV will have a much large battery than a hybrid and therefore be able to absorb much more regenerative braking. The Leaf, for example has a 24 kw*hr battery pack, rated at 80 kw output. It stands to reason, that it can absorb 4 times as much regenerative braking power as a Prius battery, which would probably work out to be most of the braking energy in daily driving. If you're building a race car, though, you're probably best off recapturing that energy with a different system like a flywheel KERS.

olpro

11-15-2011, 12:54 PM

BipDBo

11-15-2011, 01:29 PM

I would like to see the sources for your information. I do not think that batteries can be charged at too high a rate or their life span is seriously degraded. The EV companies' PR departments will make all kinds of CLAIMS but that doesn't equate to the real world.

I don't really know of any advertized manufacturer specs for regenerative braking wattage. What I stated was just standard storage capacity specs, and used those to make some educated guesses. Here's another way to look at it: See how fast a charger station can put energy into a battery. The Ford Focus EV, like the Leaf, will have a 24 kw*hr battery. Ford claims that their level 3 quick charger will bring the battery from depleted to full charge in less than 30 minutes. 19.2 kw*hr in 30 minutes comes to an average energy absorbtion rate of 38.4 kw, or 51.5 hp. You can decelerate a car fairly quickly at 51 hp.

http://www.gizmag.com/ford-home-focus-electric-charging-station/17601/

drgrieve

11-17-2011, 06:53 AM

I think this is a smart idea, especially considering the $2-$5k investment for a WRX. If someone had an 818 kit that included everything else that was needed to build the 818 as an electric for $7-$8k I think it would sell well. When you consider production electric vehicles being in the $30k+ range for something like the Leaf or the Focus Electric $18k looks pretty good.

Obviously this would fit well into the "green" model, but I assume we're 2-3 years away from seeing that, as I am imagining that that will be last of the three models completed.

Even putting this into the performance car would be pretty sweet. If we could get 50-60 miles of range at highway speeds and a top speed above 100 it would hit the spot (maybe a 0-60 in the mid 5 seconds)? Maybe I'm just crazy, but I could see myself building a second 818 as an electric.

Thought I'd add some figures to this thread so you know what is currently possible on a reasonable budget. In a years time there would be more options of course. Maybe cheaper, lighter, more powerful batteries as well.

First up DC gives you loads more bang for buck at the moment, if you are wanting AC and 0-60 < 6 seconds forget it on sensible money.

Given that here's some numbers for two builds aiming for performance for value.

Build 1
Motor - Kostov 9" 220v (45kg) $1750
Controller - Soliton Junior (?kg) $1800
batteries - 80*100ah Calb (200kg) $5500 (heavy for ah, but good peak power, easy to put together)
= $9050

torque from motor - 0 to 4000 rpm - 105 ft lbs
peak battery input to motor 135 kW (180hp)

Difficult for me to give accurate range but would fall between 60-80 miles depending on speed/aero

Build 2
Motor - Kostov 11" 250v (81kg) $2500
Controller - Soliton 1 (?kg) $2800
batteries - 720 10ah headways (216kg) $8650 (excellent peak power, hard to put together)
= $13950

torque from motor - 0 to 3500 rpm - 210 ft lbs
peak battery input to motor 250 kW (335hp)

Range 90 to 120 miles.

0-60 times would depend on gearing and traction but I'd aim for 4.5 or better for build 2. Maybe in the 3's.

Now I could do a build 3 for $5k more and give 25% more power using different components. Definately in the 3's

And you could go nuts and spend around triple but you'd double to 500kw and actually weigh less than above. You'd need to be an expert to build it as well. But you'd be in the 2's.

The first three builds are possible by a DIYer.

Kalstar

11-17-2011, 08:02 AM

At 10k for the kit, 1k for a non turbo Impreza, and 14k for the electric stuff. After selling the donor parts, the total investment should be in the low 20's. I would be in with both feet, and I am a die hard fossil burner type guy.

Government tax credits anyone?

What about retrofitting using a crashed Insite or Other hybrid, they have been out for nearly 10 years now.

bromikl

11-17-2011, 08:52 AM

Thought I'd add some figures to this thread so you know what is currently possible on a reasonable budget.

Thanks, drgrieve. It's good to have an expert on this thread. I was wondering if you have an EV dyno to show us; as I know ICE HP /= EV HP. Though 180 HP is enough to burn rubber all day long, to get equivalent 1/4 mile times from an ICE, you'd need closer to (my guess) 220 Hp. Is that right?

Oppenheimer

11-17-2011, 02:54 PM

drgrieve, about how much would those batteries and motor, etc, for each of those examples, weigh? I would be interested in comparing the performance potential of these setups with the TDi option FFR intends to offer (and comparing the weight to TDi).

While I am interested in electric drive, and its certainly a space where there is still room to pioneer things, the economics are difficult to surmount. Even if the weight of the TDi drivetrain (motors, trans, fuel, etc) were equivalent to electric drivetrain (motor, batteries, etc), and if the power were similar, the difference in cost of $14K electric vs cost of a TDi drivetrain, would buy a whole lot of fuel. The ROI would be a really long time. Then factor in range for each solution...

kach22i

11-17-2011, 03:08 PM

An electric FFR-818 would be grand, however I've started to play with a different idea lately. Take 3 or 4, 20 hp -26 hp peak pancake motors to drive a 3-wheeled or 4-wheeled car (drive each wheel independently). Right now I'm looking at tandem seating, open narrow wheels with guards, and a teardrop shaped body or pod in the middle. Very different than any of the entries, and I'm fitting the FFR template more or less, but did move the driver up a bit.

My 1986 Diesel VW Golf had 80 hp, the design I'm working on will scream with similar hp (not as safe - not the way I would drive it).

The best electric car design will be a clean sheet design, just say'n.

drgrieve

11-17-2011, 05:26 PM

Thanks, drgrieve. It's good to have an expert on this thread. I was wondering if you have an EV dyno to show us; as I know ICE HP /= EV HP. Though 180 HP is enough to burn rubber all day long, to get equivalent 1/4 mile times from an ICE, you'd need closer to (my guess) 220 Hp. Is that right?

I'm actually not an expert at all, just a fan of electric drive.

It's hard to compare EV vs ICE HP as the torque curves are different. An EV will be better 0-60 with the immense starting torque. ICE engines will rev higher and produce torque in a narrow band, but if you keep the revs up via gearing gives you incredible power.

I've shown weight - I think the options would be 50 to 100 kg above stock weight when fully fuelled.

You can of course go cheaper if you'll willing to invest your time. Take a 9 or 11 inch forklift motor for $500 and run it at 144v. Build your own controller from a kit for $600. You'd still need $5k of batteries and you'd get a bit less performance compared to option 1.

Xusia

11-17-2011, 05:48 PM

You can of course go cheaper if you'll willing to invest your time. Take a 9 or 11 inch forklift motor for $500 and run it at 144v. Build your own controller from a kit for $600. You'd still need $5k of batteries and you'd get a bit less performance compared to option 1.

Instead of $5k worth of batteries, what about a smaller batter pack, and an on-board generator? This has been mentioned elsewhere on the forum and to me seems like a good way to get:
1)Better efficiency--the generator doesn't have to be sized to provide full power to the motor(s) (that's what the small battery pack is for), because at least in normal driving you aren't stomping the pedal all the time. Also, a generator can be made more efficient because it doesn't need to provide power over a broad RPM range.

2)Increased range--because you aren't 100% reliant on the batteries. As long as the car can do a reasonable speed like 70mph on the generator alone it should have the range of a conventional gas-driven car.

3)Decreased cost--Generators don't cost a lot (especially compared to batteries), and are typically much easier to maintain than many traditional automotive engines.

So why don't we see more of this type of car? To me, it seems like the perfect bridge between conventional gas-driven cars, and all-electric vehicles, until the battery technology reaches a point where an all-electric vehicle is more practical.

drgrieve

11-17-2011, 06:36 PM

Instead of $5k worth of batteries, what about a smaller batter pack, and an on-board generator?

Problem is to power the electric motor you need a certain base amount of batteries to produce an acceptable amount of grunt.

I'd expect that anyone looking at this car wouldn't want a to build a slug.

So I've shown the bare minimum number of batteries to give bang for buck - they will be stressed under high load, but will be fine when cruising.

Now if you want to extend the range then you'd need to add a generator on top or add more batteries.

Another approach is to use a fast charger to give you back 15 miles per 10 minutes charging.

So things aren't ideal but certainty possible and definitely able to produce an exciting ride.

Also it would help the builder if the chassis was designed for electric drive from the get go instead of a retrofit - but that is R&D time and money. I'm sure if you talked to the right people they'd come up with reasonable ideas - ie belly pan battery pack for extremely low centre of gravity (aka Tesla roadster).

DrieStone

11-17-2011, 07:26 PM

Instead of $5k worth of batteries, what about a smaller batter pack, and an on-board generator?

I am not a believer in hybrids (or at least gas/electric hybrids), regardless of their setup. I question the logic of adding two power plants and two power/fuel supplies. You're carrying around a 200lb insurance policy against running out of charge. I sort of question the logic of the whole thing, especially when a good diesel will perform better in many cases (and for less of a premium).

I feel like pure electric cars are a slightly different animal. Especially if the premium for going electric could be narrowed to say within $2k of building a gasoline version it really makes sense. It doesn't sound like its quite there though if we're looking at $9k + whatever non-powertrain parts that we'd still need from the Impreza.

I think I'll build the gasoline powered "fun" 818, and if that goes well, I'd consider the "green" 818 and going electric instead of diesel with it.

Oppenheimer

11-17-2011, 07:46 PM

Instead of $5k worth of batteries, what about a smaller batter pack, and an on-board generator? This has been mentioned elsewhere on the forum and to me seems like a good way to get:
1)Better efficiency--the generator doesn't have to be sized to provide full power to the motor(s) (that's what the small battery pack is for), because at least in normal driving you aren't stomping the pedal all the time. Also, a generator can be made more efficient because it doesn't need to provide power over a broad RPM range.

2)Increased range--because you aren't 100% reliant on the batteries. As long as the car can do a reasonable speed like 70mph on the generator alone it should have the range of a conventional gas-driven car.

3)Decreased cost--Generators don't cost a lot (especially compared to batteries), and are typically much easier to maintain than many traditional automotive engines.

So why don't we see more of this type of car? To me, it seems like the perfect bridge between conventional gas-driven cars, and all-electric vehicles, until the battery technology reaches a point where an all-electric vehicle is more practical.

Why indeed. Here is my series hybrid idea (not for 818, for a production car). Its basically your idea above, but with two ICE generators. One just powerful enough to cruise all day long at like 75 mph. The other larger, for use when demand increases beyond that. These ICE's would incorporate the 'instant start' technology that is being used in some hybrids. They would also be stratified charge (regular gas, but diesel ignition), which gets way better mileage, but can currently only be made to operate effeciently in a tight rpm range (but that is fine for a generator).

You have some batteries, but mostly as a buffer to store some charge to cover the hole when you floor it and the second generator hasn't kicked in yet. You also add a zillion capacitors, which you squirel away in every nook and cranny, for the same buffer effect.

Your range is unlimited (just fill up again). Your highway mileage is out of this world (keep it legal and you are only running a very small generator optmized for the rpm & load). Come to hill, the batteries and capacitors fill the gap, until the ECU realizes its not going to be enough, so it fires up the the second generator. You want to do triple digit speeds for extended periods? We got that covered, but its going to cost you fuel running that second gerator for extended periods. But you can do it all day long.

Around town you've got the small generator keeping the batteries and caps charged at the light, which are sized enough to get you back up to speed without needing the second generator. You get up to 30, the small generator has enough to keep you going plus some left over to keep the batts & caps good. You want to floor it off the line? No problem, second generator again.

You have all the range of a normal ICE vehicle (more, the mileage is so good), all the performance (more, you've got all that electric torque off the line). You've got unbelievable hwy mileage, and pretty decent city, too. Yes, you are carrying the weight of second generator around when you don't use it much, but does it weigh more than a full bank of batteries in a 'normal' hybrid? You've also got extra complexity, but is it more complex than all those batteries?

The caps might be enough, might not need batteries at all. That would eliminate the huge batt cost, not to mention cost to replace them, how to recycle them, not to mention their weight.

Since its all electric power, you could drive all 4 wheels (AWD), stuff like torque vectoring, traction control, launch control, etc, is all just lines of software code.

Yes, two generators would be costly, but compared to batteries? heavy, but compared to batteries? Complex, but compared to batteries? This idea gives you all the advantages of ICE, plus all of the advantages of a hybrid, with few of the drawbacks of either.

I'm sure there are things I'm not considering. So if you know why this idea won't work, plus speak up.

Xusia

11-17-2011, 07:46 PM

Xusia

11-17-2011, 07:52 PM

Oppenheimer,

I thought about that too. But I reasoned (perhaps incorrectly) that a single, higher capacity generator would be nearly as efficient if only run when the batteries were low, and that the overall weight of a single generator with a small battery pack would be less than 2 generators. Also, without relying somewhat on batteries, technology development in that area could stagnate.

I want to emphasize, to me this isn't a long term solution. It's a stop gap / transitionary measure. Ultimately, I would hope we would develop the battery technology - or alternative power generation technology - to replace the gas or diesel generator.

BipDBo

11-18-2011, 09:29 AM

How about this for a hybrid setup. One car in you driveway runs on gas, the other electric. Use the electric when you know you're driving 80 miles or less.

bromikl

11-18-2011, 09:33 AM

Opp, capacitors are many times more expensive than chemical batteries of the same capacity. For quicker charging (i.e, braking) one could charge them in parallel, then switch to series (higher voltage) for driving the wheels.

LiOh technology is used in the quick-charge batteries you'll find in power tools. High current capacity, and keeps the same voltage through 80% of the discharge cycle. Also good power density for batteries, but nowhere near the power density of gas or diesel.

Oppenheimer

11-18-2011, 10:35 AM

Its that power density that I generally dislike about electric vehicles, or hybrids with batteries. Its their weight (plus environmental impact of manufacture, and disposing when they are used up). That plus 'fill up'. With batteries that is a long charge cycle (even quick charge is way longer than a fuel fill-up).

So while we're waiting for electric storage mediums to catch up, my thought was to use a multi-staged Series Hybrid approach. Its kinda the same concept as those vehicles that can shut down cylinders when not needed. But it tries to leverage the capability of hyper efficient ICE technologies. Many of these limit the rpm power range, but that is fine for a generator. Instead of shutting down cylinders (which still has most of the same friction losses), multiple stages of generators are used.

Since level, steady-state hwy cruising requires only a fraction of the capacity of a vehicle, down sizing a power source optimised for that load should be very efficient. There just needs to be some sort of reserve capacity for all the other times that more power is needed. That need is very unpredictable, so ideally that reserve needs to not be duration limited.

DrieStone

11-18-2011, 10:49 AM

Driestone,

I don't know that I agree with that assessment. As I see it, the main issue with all electric vehicles at the moment is range (because of the poor energy density of batteries), and until that problem is solved, all electric vehicles will never be a primary mode of transportation for most people (keep in mind a lot of people can't afford multiple vehicles...). To get any kind of decent range, you need a larger, heavier battery pack. Even then, it's often hours to restore full range. That just doesn't cut it in the real world for most people (at least in my opinion).

In the scenario I mentioned above, the battery pack is much smaller - sized to function more like a capacitor in order to provide short range, power to the vehicle when stopped, and deliver a surge of power when needed (more than the generator would be capable of), but not sustain it for long (because how often do you really drive with the accelerator floored all the time?). Yes, the weight of the battery pack would be replaced by a generator and fuel, but what you get in return is both range and self sufficiency (because if you have an on board generator, you don't need a charging station).

Also, there is a very large difference in design, and therefore efficiency (among other things), between an engine that is intended to power a car's drive-train, and an engine that's intended to function as a generator. Oh, and I didn't mention it, but I think the ideal generator *IS* diesel powered, not gas. And of course, the generator would only function when necessary. Admittedly, this would likely be at least 50% of the time, probably more

Such a design allows us to continue the development and improvement of all electric drive-trains and battery technology, while being able to utilize our existing [gas station] infrastructure and removing the range problem. (Making it a potentially more fitting choice for the masses)

Obviously hybrids are here to stay, but I seriously question their long-term environmental effect (what's the impact of manufacturing the extra components, plus the disposal)? From a cost-savings stand-point it makes no sense. My father in-law recently bought a Camry hybrid (I despise Toyotas by the way). It has a $8k premium above the 4cylinder, only gets about 6-8MPG better milage, has a bit more horsepower (but I bet performance is comparable). By my calculations, gasoline would have to top $10/gal, and you'd have to drive more than 100k miles in the car before it started to save you money. I just don't understand why anyone buys these things.

There's no question that the big problem with electric only vehicles is that you can run out of charge somewhere that you can't recharge (or that you don't have time to recharge). We're years away from some kind of a solution that is as easy as "topping off the tank" in 5 minutes. Yes, hybrid is a reasonable stop-gap for some people, but it's an idea based on laziness (I want electric, I want to be efficient, but I'm used to the way my gasoline car goes and I don't want to change).

The Volt gets what, 40 miles on a charge? I wonder what the cost of carrying around the fuel, engine, etc. is to the car. Could it drive 50 miles if it didn't have the gasoline setup? How many people only need the gasoline engine to make it 45 miles? Maybe there are people who buy the Volt and drive 100 miles between charges. I'm sure they get good milage if you average their trip out, but I might suggest that the Volt was the wrong car to buy for them.

I realize this is all my own opinion, and I'd even admit that it's a little crazy that I seem to dislike hybrids, but I'm excited about all-electric. Chalk it up to my little insanity (and the fact that "hybrid" seems to be a status symbol).

As an aside, speaking of gimmicks, our fuel economy would go up if we'd stop shoving Ethanol into our cars. I think we're up to 10% now, and they're talking about 15%.

bromikl

11-18-2011, 11:43 AM

Opp, I'm advocating for a small battery pack with enough power to go 5 or 10 miles (approx. 1/8 of the Chevy Volt's battery capacity.) For most of the trips I take, I'd never even have to start up the generator.

At highway speeds, the generator would supply all the power needed. Ideally, the battery would be on a slow charge at the same time. If I decide to take it up to 100 MPH, I could do so for short distances on reserve battery power.

I suspect such a small battery pack would weigh less than another generator, and be much less complicated to build. In other words, all the abilities of your suggestion - and a couple more - with fewer drawbacks.

Oppenheimer

11-18-2011, 12:08 PM

DrieStone, you're not crazy (or we both are). I feel pretty much the same way about dual drivetrain hybrids (when did 'Hybrid' morph from meaning dual-drivetrain to anything that uses electric drive but not exclusively batteries to supply the electricity?)

bromikl, I think your post demonstrates why we need more than one solution. Few of the trips I take in a week are just 5 - 10 miles. Your solution would work great for you, but for me I'd use up the batteries in short order, then waste a bunch of gas hauling around their dead weight the rest of the trip. It seems like the solution really needs to be several solutions, to meet the varying needs we all have.

I think a lot of the downside with all electric is what happens when you 'run out of gas'. Every trip you take you have to be planning how long you can stay out, how you will get back home to recharge. Every drive is like a SCUBA dive, you have to have a plan how long you'll stay down, how much air you'll use, your safety margin, your decompression time, etc. People want to be able to hop in and drive. I think this is what Chevy had in mind with the Volt. You can just fill up with gas and keep going as far as you like.

If there were an electric 'fueling station' infrastructure, as many as there are gas stations, where you could pull up, and swap out your dead batteries for charged ones (like you can with your gas grill propane tank), I think people would be OK with the limited range of electric (well, once it gets closer to how far you can go on a full tank of gas). There would have to be a battery standard, there would have to robot arms that did the heavy lifting to swap them out, but until we have something like that, people are not going to be so willing to make the switch (charging stations aren't enough, too long to recharge).

We have public transportation now that people don't use. Why? What if I get to work, then find out I need to make a 100 mile trip, right NOW? What if I'm at work, and find I need to run an errand nearby? (In my area, people typically live 30+ miles from work). With my car, I hop in and go. Public transport imposes limits that many are not willing to accept. All electric (no matter the range) imposes its own limits. Yes, some people DO take public transport every day. Some pople WILL drive all electric cars. But not everyone will until they solve, not just the range, but the 'refill' issue.

Xusia

11-18-2011, 12:44 PM

Exactly!

opp, i'm advocating for a small battery pack with enough power to go 5 or 10 miles (approx. 1/8 of the chevy volt's battery capacity.) for most of the trips i take, i'd never even have to start up the generator.

At highway speeds, the generator would supply all the power needed. Ideally, the battery would be on a slow charge at the same time. If i decide to take it up to 100 mph, i could do so for short distances on reserve battery power.

I suspect such a small battery pack would weigh less than another generator, and be much less complicated to build. In other words, all the abilities of your suggestion - and a couple more - with fewer drawbacks.

Xusia

11-18-2011, 12:51 PM

bromikl

11-18-2011, 01:37 PM

The word 'hybrid' today means any vehicle which stores energy as gas and electric. Sorry the word got redefined on you. But why does dual fuel have to mean dual drive train?

I understand 5 miles isn't enough for most people - the design I propose would have unlimited mileage by refilling with diesel fuel. And if you charge up whenever you're parked, the first five miles *of every trip* are free. (O.K. - almost free - the electricity would cost a few cents - though much less than the equivalent energy as liquid fuel.) After that, the batteries would recover some of the kinetic energy when stopping, and continuously recharge while the generator is running (unless accelerating or traveling at 80+ MPH.) When the battery is full, the driver may decide shut down the generator for a few miles, avoiding the frictional losses of the ICE.

bromikl

11-18-2011, 01:49 PM

... We're years away from some kind of a solution that is as easy as "topping off the tank" in 5 minutes.

We're not; really: http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/37982/ Israel is the first to get it, from a company in California!

"...battery swap stations, where an automated system switches out a depleted battery for a fully-charged one in less than five minutes. Instead of owning the batteries, the car owners buy subscriptions for a certain number of kilometers of driving per year.

...the company has 20,000 individual customers on a waiting list to buy the cars, and 70,000 tentative orders from fleet customers. "That's nearly half the car market for Israel,"

olpro

11-18-2011, 02:49 PM

To make a swappable battery pack, you have just added about 100 pounds to the structure of the vehicle.

olpro

11-18-2011, 03:02 PM

Electric power has revolutionized radio control airplanes in the last several years. The new technology, in this case primarily Li-poly, nonetheless has a serious safety problem and many RC flyers have paid with their lack of care in charging and maintaining these things by losing their cars and even their homes. Because of these problems, the casing on the battery pack becomes a major issue and it is not likely to be light weight.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-AoAYrEy-o
The safety issues of electric power is largely ignored by the "green" press. The recycling and REPLACEMENT issues are also largely ignored and this makes a huge difference in the equation of whether this technology delivers any actual financial advantages.

bromikl

11-18-2011, 03:39 PM

The safety issues of electric power is largely ignored by the "green" press. The recycling and REPLACEMENT issues are also largely ignored and this makes a huge difference in the equation of whether this technology is worth messing with.

It's a developing science. In the days of the Model T, there were safety issues too. That's where we are with EV's right now.

Not to nit-pick, but the cost, health, and safety issues of the oil industry are almost always overlooked. The true costs are shifted through tax giveaways, health care costs, and the price we pay for our military to protect our oil supply chain.

DrieStone

11-18-2011, 03:45 PM

DrieStone, hybrids aren't here to stay - they are a stop gap measure. Like you, I don't know why anyone would buy a Camry Hybrid based on the information you've supplied (I didn't check it, but I assume it's accurate). However, what I'm talking about ISN'T a hybrid. A hybrid, by definition, has 2 drive-trains: Gas (or diesel) and electric. The Volt isn't a hybrid because it only has 1 drive-train: Electric. It also happens to have an onboard generator, and that generator happens to be powered by gas, but that doesn't make it a hybrid. Don't let the fact that the generator is powered by gas fool you. If the Volt had a different type of electrical generation, like solar or hydrogen power cell, calling it a hybrid wouldn't even enter your mind.

The difference between what I proposed and the Volt, is as bromikl stated: A much smaller battery pack. I have no idea how efficient the generator on a Volt is, but such a car should have a highly efficient one - probably diesel powered.

I really think this would work!

My concept is simila

Actually I was very disappointed in Chevy. If you do a little research, the Volt is no different than the Prius (in as far as the wheels can be powered by both the electric or the gasoline power plant). The gasoline engine is not disconnected from the driveline (http://www.insideline.com/chevrolet/volt/2011/gm-lied-chevy-volt-is-not-a-true-ev.html), so that's a failure on GM's part (honestly I was very disappointed in the Volt in general, at least it's a little sexier than the Prius).

I have to assume that the change of direction was based on some kind of engineering research that probably proved that it was more efficient to have the gasoline engine directly power the wheels where needed. It makes sense. I don't know what the losses are from engine -> generator -> batteries, but I wouldn't be surprised if you lose 20% in that transition.

I'm really not trying to be the crazy here (really). Its not that I don't see that there could be some value to a hybrid, but even in a mass-production car I question its value. I can't imagine the expense and the effort to build a DIY hybrid. That said, I encourage any of you to give it a try (and no, that's not sarcasm).

DrieStone

11-18-2011, 03:49 PM

The safety issues of electric power is largely ignored by the "green" press. The recycling and REPLACEMENT issues are also largely ignored and this makes a huge difference in the equation of whether this technology delivers any actual financial advantages.

This is what concerns me about Hybrids and why I think the positive environmental impact of hybrids is a load of crap. Ironically it doesn't bother me as much about all-electric... but then again apparently I'm a little batty.

olpro

11-18-2011, 04:19 PM

In spite of the fact that I might appear negative to electric, I would seriously consider a nice two-place electric 'city car' with a 40-50 mile range. That would suit 90% of my needs.

Xusia

11-18-2011, 04:35 PM

I too, am for all electric vehicles. I just also realize that at least for me, given the current technology / offerings, an all electric vehicle just isn't a viable option (for several reasons). I wish it was.

Xusia

11-18-2011, 04:36 PM

In spite of the fact that I might appear negative to electric, I would seriously consider a nice two-place electric 'city car' with a 40-50 mile range. That would suit 90% of my needs.

Agreed. For me - as long as it was cost effective (meaning it can't be a $40,000 affair). I'm thinking $10k or less...

Tpa65cpe

11-18-2011, 06:36 PM

Gentelmen; I totally agree with you that "Hybrids" are a stop gap measure and one thing to consider is the fact that all electric is also because approx 90% of the power grid is generated by fossil fuels. Until we as a "People" meaning the entire planet stop relying on fossil fuels we are headed on a course of no return!! As a side note Gollum mentioned Hydrogen as a possible source and I remember somwhere that there was a person in the Clearwater-Largo (Tampa Bay area) that was working on a system that converted water to Hydrogen for fuel and he has already done this for Welding equipment (MIG and Plasma),this was shown to me by a friend about 2YRS ago. His next step was to apply this TECH to the AUTO industry as a retrofit kit for your car. I think this will be the greatest idea if possible so far because you do not have the "charge time" or the extra weight of Batteries, you dont have to redesign the Auto industry and "Water is cheap" also the most abundant ATOM in the Universe is HYDROGEN !!! Sorry for the Hi-Jack just another NUT-JOB sounding off. P.S. hope that I didnt offend anyone!

Xusia

11-18-2011, 06:55 PM

I'm TOTALLY offended!!! :D

bromikl

11-18-2011, 07:06 PM

[thread hijack in progress]

I like hydrogen for energy storage, but it has to be produced somewhere using electricity. There is no naturally occurring hydrogen; as all of it is combined with other elements.

My vote for alternative fuels is nuclear - and before you start, there's a way to do nuclear that has all the benefits with few drawbacks. It's called LFTR (pronounced lifter) and uses thorium as the energy source. A reactor using this technology was operated for years at ORNL in the 60's. They failed to follow through with this technology for political reasons. Now, India and China are spending billions to develop the technology for commercial reactors.

For more info: http://energyfromthorium.com/

[/thread hijack]

DrieStone

11-18-2011, 09:06 PM

I like hydrogen for energy storage, but it has to be produced somewhere using electricity. There is no naturally occurring hydrogen; as all of it is combined with other elements.

The problem with hydrogen is that (outside of the cost of creating it), is that hydrogen has to be under a signifiant amount of pressure in order to carry it around in a vehicle. This means that the containment vessel has to be pretty significant. Also, although we can get fires and what I'd call minor explosions (potentially) from gasoline or batteries, hydrogen is a different animal.

My vote for alternative fuels is nuclear - and before you start, there's a way to do nuclear that has all the benefits with few drawbacks. It's called LFTR (pronounced lifter) and uses thorium as the energy source. A reactor using this technology was operated for years at ORNL in the 60's. They failed to follow through with this technology for political reasons. Now, India and China are spending billions to develop the technology for commercial reactors.

Of course as soon as you mention nuclear, it sort of becomes a non-starter. You'd have serious cultural fight. That's not to say it can't happen. Look what happened in Japan, the whole country is running scared from nuclear. Obviously there are some serious concerns about any nuclear technology, but as far as global impact its better than fossil fuels.

Gentelmen; I totally agree with you that "Hybrids" are a stop gap measure and one thing to consider is the fact that all electric is also because approx 90% of the power grid is generated by fossil fuels. Until we as a "People" meaning the entire planet stop relying on fossil fuels we are headed on a course of no return!!

I don't disagree with you there (although 90% of the US power grid is fossil fuels, other countries are different). I don't have any facts, but I have to believe that the environmental impact of even mining coal, processing it, burning it to create electricity, and charging your EV has to be less than the environmental impact of drilling for oil, processing it, and burning it to make your car go (of course I have no facts to back that up).

I do have to say that with an EV, you don't have to be reliant on the power grid. You can also opt (in many areas of the country) to choose where your electricity comes from.

Of course I'm the type of person who pays a little extra to try to get his power from wind, and I pay for carbon offsets for my house and cars. Its not much, but I really worry about the state of humanity for the next 100 years.

That said... I want a fast car!

Xusia

11-18-2011, 10:27 PM

There are also nuclear batteries being developed that are totally safe. They are still several years away, but they already have working proof of concepts. They predict a battery the size of a quarter could power a mobile phone for years. I don't recall reading if the technology was suitable for cars or not.

Psay

11-19-2011, 04:27 AM

RM1SepEx

11-19-2011, 08:47 PM

I built an 1100 lb reverse trike. It's registered and insured but I don't like the basic fiberglass body so I'm redoing it in .050 aluminum. I can bolt any motorcycle chassis to it at the bulkhead behind the seats.

84 volts 425 amps, 185 amp hr batteries (lead acid) I've cruised at 55 mph and it will do abut 45 miles on a charge. I used a D&D ES-32A-50 Sep-ex and a PowerpaK SEM 80 controller. It has regenerative braking. I can cruise at 55 using about 175 amps so you could do a serial hybrid with a small 16 HP generator using a brushless dc motor and blocking diodes.

This means that basically you can have unlimited range if you run the generator... you drain the battery charge to accelerate and it recharges if you are going slower than 55 , down hill or during braking.

I'm planning on using a small trailer for the generator, I have a 16 HP vanguard vtwin from a household generator.

Now the reality of the situation: A plug in hybrid makes no financial or environmental sense

1, the electrical energy stored in ANY existing battery chemistry is not dense enough. It cost more for storage and charging than the comparable gas use ( the 7500 energy credit would buy enough gas for an economy car to go 75,000 miles!)

2, in most areas the electricity used to charge EV's INCREASES the overall load on the "grid" by definition the last sources used on the grid are the least effecient and dirtiest. Where I live, I can see the smokestack of a bunker C oil fired plant, it's dirtier than any car made over the last 20 years thanks to stupid energy pollution trades of "credits" from cleaner sources

3 I could and will power this same chassis setup with a motorcycle engine. It will out perform the electric by a mile at lower cost.

4 the electric could preform better IF I spent an order of magnatude more for lighter, higher technology batteries.... It would take 200,000 miles of driving to offset the battery cost vs fuel use...

5 why did I build it? because I could, and have wanted to since I graduated from college UMO, BSME, 1981

Think 1 inch square tube space frame with bonded and riveted .050 aluminum panels. You sit beside a central tunnel that houses a full row of the big lead acid batteries.

It's un-nerving to drive, the sound of rocks and sand bouncing off the aluminum and hum of the motor is all that you hear.

Thankfully man made global warming is a fallacy. The earth has never been in a steady state condition and historical records show both warmer and cooler periods without man's influences. The models used by the IPCC have been proven to be faulty and a couple of their basic assumptions are just stupid. (ignoring cloud effects and not assuming increased heat loss to space , at absolute zero when / if the earth's temperature increases)

Should we use less oil, absolutely. The best way to do that... DUH drive lighter cars!

RM1SepEx

11-19-2011, 08:51 PM

PS

A bit less than 50% of the US power grid is fossil fuels, not 90%

themrcul

11-19-2011, 08:59 PM

I believe you have a very valid point regarding the generation of electricity for the national grid, at leasst if what I was told below is correct.

I have recently been in a presentation regarding the new Euro6 emission standards that come into effect shortly for all road going vehicles here in Europe. We were shown two identical looking vehicles one was all electric while the other had the Euro6 engine. The statement that was made was and I quote "the total emissions created by a Euro6 car will be less than the electric vehicle assuming that the electric comes from a coal powered power station" (the emissions they were talking about is the fuel been used and not the production of the vehicle). That seems to be a very bold statement but that is what was said.

Now I am not claiming that we should not continue developing electric vehicles. I just thought it would be interesting to you guys on the forum. I cannot claim it is true or otherwise, however, it is a claim made by a large car manufacturer and one that already has a complete electric vehicle on sale.

The Euro6 engine itself may be producing less emissions than the entire electric car system (which in their calculation would include producing electricity from fossil fuels, mined, packaged, shipped, burnt, electricity produced, etc).
But that may not be taking into account the *entire petrol producing system* which includes mining, packaging, shipping, transporting, etc). Essentially, not comparing apples to apples. If both systems are compared fairly, the electric car system blows the petrol one out of the water in terms of emissions created. On top of that, electric car systems have the ability to run completely *emissions free* if the electricity is generated from solar, wind or water turbine.
If you want a better/more interesting explanation please see this video about the comparison: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfTiRNzbSko

Tpa65cpe

11-19-2011, 10:23 PM

Thanks for the clarification RM1SeptX I was not sure about that % but that is a good thing !! I am for a regeneration type of energy source that is clean and not against electric just the disposal problem of the batteries. As to the hydrogen from what I remember the gentelman was proposing that the unit would not use high pressure storage but supply it on demand from water and if he can do this he will be a billionare!! We as a economy will not have to retrofit an entire auto and power industry. Also the way I remember it when you burn hydrogen you get water. But enough of the ECO-babble, electric power is a good idea when the batteries catch up!! P.S. Xusiua I am offended that you are offended!! (just kidding)

Xusia

11-20-2011, 02:40 AM

Lol

DrieStone

11-20-2011, 10:18 AM

PS

A bit less than 50% of the US power grid is fossil fuels, not 90%

According to Wolfram Alpha (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=energy+generation+in+us), 77% of US energy comes from fossil fuels (crude oil, natural gas, and coal). Coal is 1/3 of energy production. Renewable is only about 6% of US production.

DrieStone

11-20-2011, 10:29 AM

So if we make everything equal (from an environmental point of view), burning gasoline has an impact far beyond the actual burning of the gasoline. For instance:

What's the cost of extracting the oil, transporting the oil, refining it into gasoline, shipping it to the gas station? How many gallons of oil are consumed, how many kWh are exhausted producing the one gallon of gas that moves you 40 miles (if you're lucky).

Obviously electric for your EV also costs us. I read that it takes 7.5kWh to refine one gallon of gasoline how far would that 7.5kWh get us if we charged up batteries for travel?

I guess my point is that even if we're using coal, which is very bad for the environment, I bet that even charging your EV with that coal produced electricity gets you further than the same electricity used to refine and transport gasoline.

I'll admit that there are too many variables to make a truly valid argument, but its worth considering.

Xusia

11-20-2011, 12:38 PM

I actually hadn't considered that. Too many variables for me as well, but it's an interesting point!

RM1SepEx

11-20-2011, 04:57 PM

According to Wolfram Alpha (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=energy+generation+in+us), 77% of US energy comes from fossil fuels (crude oil, natural gas, and coal). Coal is 1/3 of energy production. Renewable is only about 6% of US production.

Note: That is based on 2007 data, Obama's department of energy has already started shutting down fossil fuel based, esp coal, plants through regulation. I got the 50% number from a recent Democratic Senate speech... can't remember who

just went searching.... check out http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec2_13.pdf

government data... 2010 68% fossil fuel so far 2011 66%... fossil fuel

DrieStone

11-20-2011, 06:52 PM

Note: That is based on 2007 data, Obama's department of energy has already started shutting down fossil fuel based, esp coal, plants through regulation. I got the 50% number from a recent Democratic Senate speech... can't remember who

just went searching.... check out http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec2_13.pdf

government data... 2010 68% fossil fuel so far 2011 66%... fossil fuel

So here's where it's interesting. http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/showtext.cfm?t=ptb0102 (same website) shows 78% for 2010. The difference is my numbers are "production" yours are "consumption". I'm guessing that the consumption numbers are for residential electricity use? Notice that my numbers are Quadrillion BTUs yours are Trillion BTUs.

Either way, still a significant amount of energy produced by fossil fuels.

gwader

12-15-2011, 05:59 PM

BipDBo

02-20-2012, 03:13 PM

This Stuntbusters clip may inspire some interest:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhABHId42Kw&feature=player_embedded

BipDBo

02-20-2012, 03:13 PM

Here's some more info on the FactoryFive electric coupe:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WQfjhZ8eV4

Ibuildevs

02-20-2012, 04:25 PM

Here's some more info on the FactoryFive electric coupe:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WQfjhZ8eV4

We are the ones that build the motor contorller in that SSI type 65. Until you feel all that torque it is hard to understand what the big deal is with electric.

RM1SepEx

02-20-2012, 07:33 PM

Would a EV FF be eligible for these "NEW" car programs? Lets say FF sets up with a shop that finishes turnkey cars within a year. So i gets registered as a 2012 etc. Wouldn't that work?

It would be totally cool to get government help to offset the cost of the tech that is holding up most on this forum.

"New plug-in electric vehicles

As defined by the 2009 ACES Act, a PEV is a vehicle which draws propulsion energy from a traction battery with at least 5 kwh of capacity and uses an offboard source of energy to recharge such battery.[54] The tax credit for new plug-in electric vehicles is worth $2,500 plus $417 for each kilowatt-hour of battery capacity over 5 kwh, and the portion of the credit determined by battery capacity cannot exceed $5,000. Therefore, the total amount of the credit allowed for a new PEV is $7,500.[54]

The new qualified plug-in electric vehicle credit phases out for a PEV manufacturer over the one-year period beginning with the second calendar quarter after the calendar quarter in which at least 200,000 qualifying vehicles from that manufacturer have been sold for use in the United States. For this purpose cumulative sales are accounted after December 31, 2009. Qualifying PEVs are eligible for 50% of the credit if acquired in the first two quarters of the phase-out period, and 25% of the credit if bought in the third or fourth quarter of the phase-out period.[54] Both the Nissan Leaf electric vehicle and the Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid, launched in December 2010, are eligible for the maximum $7,500 tax credit.[56] The Toyota Prius Plug-in Hybrid, scheduled for 2012, is eligible for a $2,500 tax credit due to its smaller battery capacity of 5.2 kWh."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_incentives_for_plug-in_electric_vehicles

Right, let's find 7500 people to each pay $1 so that we can drive an electric vehicle... subsidizing someone who can buy a Tesla at over $100,000 or a leaf... an economy car could go how far on $7500? Subsidies just transfer $ from one to another don't seem fair to me... and the government has some cost associated with managing these programs so the actual cost is closer to $10,000 to help pay for your battery packs...

Bottom line, the energy density isn't there... you pay big bucks up front and trickle in energy to refill the electrons. increasing the load on an electric power generation grid that is probably less "clean" emmissions wise than a new SLEV car. It takes 200,000 miles to break even for additional costs with a prius, about the same with a high mileage turbo diesel (TDI jetta) the economics just can't beat the enrgy density and effeciency of a gasoline engine..

And remember I have a plug in EV, my electric trike and I did it because

I could, not for emmissions (driven by the global warming hoax) or economy (I don';t put enough miles on any one vehicle)

So if you want an electric for whatever reason, go for it but please don't make me pay for it!

olpro

02-20-2012, 08:25 PM

Maybe I will challenge that Tesla and the SSI Racing Type 65 coupe to a little drag race against my stock Scion xB.
Since I don’t want to get caught by the law doing this, let’s meet for breakfast here in San Diego then drive out I-8 for a ways where there are some nice lonely desert roads - out near El Centro - for the actual contest. Then we can drive back into the city and the loser buys lunch.
Sounds crazy??

Nelff

02-21-2012, 12:03 AM

yes, gasoline has a higher energy density. yes, gasoline will get a person down the road a bit farther. big deal...

to say that driving out of the range of an electric to race is an effective way to snub electric is idiotic. Fine lets drive from one coast till we both run out of fuel/energy and then race sitting at a dead stop with nothing in the tank. really? that's supposed to prove something?

to say that the tech isn't there for electric when design has only just begun is narrow minded as well.

I don't want to pay for gasoline companies to line their pockets, or for our country to be beholden to foreign nations that do not have my best interest at heart. Having a well designed car that uses electric for propulsion and gas/diesel/natural-gas/soy-bean whatever for it's 'density' is the most efficient, simple solution. If someone made a car that had no axles/transmission (using hub motors), packaged a battery pack that could sustain several stops/starts (so it's not huge and heavy) and used a micro turbine (way more fuel efficient than a conventional gas/diesel engine) that only produces around 20hp to re-charge the batteries and provide energy to travel down the highway, THEN I'll race your whoopde do Scion and not have to gouge anyone else's pocket.

So sit on your hands and when I blow past you and your fuel sipping old tech I'll have a smile on my face ;)

olpro

02-21-2012, 12:16 AM

"....WHEN i blow past you...."

Until then, the smile is mine :) :) :)

Flashburn

02-21-2012, 02:11 AM

So if you want an electric for whatever reason, go for it but please don't make me pay for it!

You're not paying for anything. People who use the 7.5k tax rebate get to keep their own hard earned cash.

Silvertop

02-21-2012, 09:18 AM

You're not paying for anything. People who use the 7.5k tax rebate get to keep their own hard earned cash.

Well, sure. Right up to the point where the 7.5k used for the rebate gets spent somewhere else as well, generating either additional federal debt or additional taxes for someone else. Which means either the rest of us pay for it, or our children do.

BipDBo

02-21-2012, 10:55 AM

There's an interesting thing I learned about the $7500 tax credit. You are only eligible for as much as you pay in federal taxes. Therefore, If you fill out the form (almost all the way to the bottom, there's acouple of cedits still remaining after) and find that you owe $5000, you can only get $5000 for the EV credit. If you don't pay any federal taxes, you can't get any EVtax credit. It's therefore not so much that other tax payers are paying for your EV, but that you have the opportunity to use your tax dollars on youe EV rather than contributing to the federal tax revenue.

The philosophy behind this is that its for the greater good of the country to jump start a technology and get it into larger economies of scale where it can eventually be marketable on its own. It would do the US economy wonders to significantly reduce oil importation, and it's much better to spend a dollar on R&D than to spend it on gasoline. Although, I see this as a worthy purpose, I also see waiting lists for the Leaf and Volt, so its my opinion that the credits should be phased out sooner rather than later. The president has recently proposed the opposite, to expand the credit to $10,000. In this current debt crisis, I see this as a bad idea, but I'm an engineer, not an economist.

I'm not sure if this credit applies to conversion kits. Does anyone know this?

What I find intriging about the possibility of electrification and Factory Five is the possibility of a seasoned kit enthusiast getting into something entirely new, and tinkering with a technology with so many options and so much potential for improvement and garage innovation. I'd like to see someone build an 818 hybrid much like the GTM that entered into the X-pirze that had an engine in the back and electric motorsin the front.

keys2heaven

02-21-2012, 10:55 AM

If this were offered for the 818 with Whetstone's body, then I'd buy in a heartbeat.

Silvertop

02-21-2012, 11:58 AM

............ It's therefore not so much that other tax payers are paying for your EV, but that you have the opportunity to use your tax dollars on youe EV rather than contributing to the federal tax revenue.

The philosophy behind this is that its for the greater good of the country to jump start a technology and get it into larger economies of scale where it can eventually be marketable on its own.

The concept sounds appealing. I like the idea of directing where my tax dollars go. But the reality is that the government is unlikely to reduce spending somewhere else by the same amount to mitigate the cost of an EV rebate, which ultimately means that the taxpayer IS footing the bill for the rebate, even though it may seem otherwise on the surface.

Given that most electric vehicles are ultimately consuming fossil fuels (the coal, gas, and oil that the power plant burns) the amount of "public good" generated by the federal rebate programs may be debatable.

I'm not at all against electric vehicles. They have a role to play, and as the technologies improve, that role will increase. I would just prefer that the role be driven by the marketplace rather than by a federal government that already does not have sufficient resources to operate itself.

mekeys

02-21-2012, 02:56 PM

Batteries cost too much.you want get paid back in your lifetime.

Mel :)

Xusia

02-21-2012, 02:58 PM

I would just prefer that the role be driven by the marketplace rather than by a federal government that already does not have sufficient resources to operate itself.

The problem with letting the market dictate is that the market doesn't have a conscience and doesn't know what's best for country. Without a financial incentive (by which the market is driven) - whether that incentive be a rebate, subsidy, research grant, etc. - it's very difficult to direct progress in the right direction.

BipDBo

02-21-2012, 03:23 PM

Batteries cost too much.you want get paid back in your lifetime.

Mel :)

Gas costs a lot too. At todays prices, a car that gets 30 mpg average will go through $15,000 in gas in 120,000 miles. Battery prices are steadily dropping, and even by the time people are building 818 kits, they will be much cheaper than they currently are. It won't be very long before you'll be able to get a 24kwhr pack for less than $10,000.

RM1SepEx

02-21-2012, 03:24 PM

You're not paying for anything. People who use the 7.5k tax rebate get to keep their own hard earned cash.

semantics, everyone pays a share of the cost of society, you get to forgo your share, that means someone else is paying for share, wasting it on stupid programs, subsidizing ethanol thast takes more oil to distill than the energy it provides, etc... we need to stop the shell game of who's pocket or what pocket the cash comes from.

Even after the tax credit etc... you don't get any sort of payback for your investment and you increase load on a grid that adds power that is most expensive and dirtiest by design. (Powerplant, electrical grid design, best course I ever took in College)

As far as what is good for us or the environment... get real the global warming cool aid doesn't go down well. The data doesn't support such claims and growth of economies does more to improve the lives of everyone on the earth, no real problems have been the result of an actual increase of temperature measured in tenths of degree celcius. (never mind the increase and decrease of temps due to the complexities of a system that is NEVER in a static condition)

Making decisions based on such fallicies has virtually destroyed our economic system as political forces rarely understand the true results of any program. The only people who win are politicians or the special interest groups who benefit from OUR $$$$

and yup if you are limited to $7500 because that's what you pay in taxes, that just means we are subsidizing someone who makes $120,000 or more a year... In my book they don't need subsidies if they want an electric car, for whatever reason.

You want to jumpstart a technology... The government shouldn't be picking winners and losers, it ends up being driven by "bribes" couched as campaign contributions... perhaps the government should be limited to basic research in universities

ClemsonS197

02-21-2012, 03:47 PM

There's an interesting thing I learned about the $7500 tax credit. You are only eligible for as much as you pay in federal taxes.

The Federal tax credit is non-refundable. Many states have EV credits that are also non-refundable, but you can carry the balance over from 3-5 years. GA has $5k tax credit that I can carry over for up to 5 years. So as long as my state tax liability is $5k over 5 years, I can max out the tax benefit.

I also see waiting lists for the Leaf and Volt, so its my opinion that the credits should be phased out sooner rather than later. The president has recently proposed the opposite, to expand the credit to $10,000. In this current debt crisis, I see this as a bad idea, but I'm an engineer, not an economist.

There is no waiting list for the Volt. Most dealers are turning them away. They cost too much and take too long to sell. The Leaf, being thousands cheaper and a true EV, appeals to the greenies more than the Volt with a combustion engine.

The $7500 tax credit is currently phased out after a manufacturer produces 200,000 eligible cars. GM has the Volt, and GE pledged to buy 50,000 of them. Ford has the Focus EV and later Fusion Energi which should both be eligible.

When Ford and GM sell their 200,000 each, taxpayers will have paid up to $3 Billion.

RM1SepEx

02-21-2012, 04:56 PM

When Ford and GM sell their 200,000 each, taxpayers will have paid up to $3 Billion.

OUCH! so 1.5 BILLION per MFG...

BipDBo

02-21-2012, 05:22 PM

OUCH! so 1.5 BILLION per MFG...

I'm not a big fan of the EV credit because the most important thing the federal government can do right now is balance its budget. With that being said, I'll play the devil's advocate by trying to put that cost into perspective. The pentagon paid bought 187 F-22 jets from Lockheed Martin that have never seen combat and have now been permanently grounded. The cost was $77.4 billion.

Energy independence is the new space race.

Flashburn

02-21-2012, 05:47 PM

You guys have this back asswards.

1. It is not semantics. Keeping your hard earned money IS very different to not earning money and having the government cut a check from other hard working people who have had their money taken by force.

2. The problem is not that someone else got to keep their hard earned money and you're jealous, the problem is that the government is many times over larger and spendier than it should be.

Oppenheimer

02-21-2012, 05:55 PM

The thread is dangerously close to becoming a political flame war. Can we get back to topic at hand, feasibility of electric drive 818?

Flashburn

02-21-2012, 07:56 PM

The thread is dangerously close to becoming a political flame war. Can we get back to topic at hand, feasibility of electric drive 818?

Exactly, well said.

Sailor

02-21-2012, 09:51 PM

I think some peope are forgetting when they say that the electricity for the EV is coming from a dirty source, coal, oil etc, that there is an economy of scale. Yes, the electricity may come from a coal plant but the emissions required to produce the electric power for say 10 000 EVs is much less than what 10 000 Internal combustion engines would produce. They operate on a whole different scale than our car engines do. And if one had a wind or solar array to charge from, then clearly it's a moot point as to what's cleaner.
Electric 818? I'd love to do an electric car. Not sure it would be an 818 though. That Coupe was pretty sexy though......

GPZ10

02-21-2012, 10:26 PM

Wow. I'm glad I never noticed this thread before. I hate reading through arguments such as this. Anyways, on to what I came in to say:

1) I'm graduating in May with my Electrical Engineering degree, and am very interested in building an EV. I personally like the idea of having my own fuel source at home, ready to go - especially when gas prices spike, and my solar array and home scale home-made wind turbine are producing. :-) (yes, I'm an energy geek. My emphasis is in Power Engineering, but I've taken extra classes beyond the required tech electives, with classes like ME-492 - Renewable Energy Systems, and EE-436 - Fundamentals of PV Systems) I've taken a couple extra motor drive/theory courses as well, so matching the produced electricity to the grids frequency/votlage/etc shouldn't be a problem. Like I said, energy geek.

2) While I am interested in building an EV, I don't want to use batteries. They're heavy and don't have the energy density that I like for the price; they also need to be replaced after a number of charge/discharge cycles. After planning with a grad student here on campus, I plan on building a hydrogen production/storage system along with using it to power my vehicle. His family is running a company on this concept, so I may work with them on a beta testing type situation. In the 818, I don't see a battery system working very well. The car is built to be small and light, and batteries ruin that concept. Don't get me wrong, it can be done, just not without ruining my baseline requirements for the car. I think the GTM would have more room for the batteries, and better suit this type of system. I'm not sure, though.

MurrayT

02-22-2012, 01:07 AM

As a consumer that has a Nissan LEAF EV you guys seem to be overlooking the elephant in the room.

EVs are CHEAP to operate! Extremely cheap! I don't mean that the only scheduled maintenance is to check the air in the tires, I mean fuel costs are cheap.

I have asked myself this question. IF my Electric Vehicle produced the same amount of pollution that a compatible gas car produced, which would I drive? The EV because with today's gas prices, I am saving about 90% of what I would be paying for gasoline. With my electric rates I pay about 1.7 cents per mile to power my EV. The cost for gasoline just jumped 25 cents a gallon here. The news last night stated we should expect to pay over $5 a gallon for gas before summer.

All it takes is for a Camel to burp in the dessert to cause the price of gas to jump, yet my Electric company has not raised the price of electricity in years. Electricity prices are stable, even in an unstable world.

Please stop debating about if people should get tax credits or incentives, or if EVs really pollute just as much as gas. Look at YOUR own bank account. Doesn't it make more sense to drastically reduce your monthly automobile fuel cost by using cheap electricity? Use that money you are NOT spending on gas to pay your mortgage, food, clothes, utilities, or entertainment.

The bottom line is that if an EV fits your situation, EVs will work for about 85% of households, you should get one. Buy a LEAF, or Volt, or maybe build one of your own.

You don't know how wonderful it is to go month after month without buying gas. It can change your life.

Nelff

02-22-2012, 01:08 AM

GPV10, that's the attitude that will develop new tech. And from what I've seen, we all could use some new tech around the US....

j33ptj

02-22-2012, 01:25 AM

Yes, I would.

As long as it in the 33 coupe and with those performance ratings!! 600ft.lb torque WOW!!

And I would not have to pay the same again I would put in the car for taxes in Netherlands!! for a V8 the cost of the vehicle DOUBLES!! With E-Driveline==> NO TAX!!

PhyrraM

02-22-2012, 03:15 AM

...EVs are CHEAP to operate! ...... With my electric rates I pay about 1.7 cents per mile to power my EV. ........my Electric company has not raised the price of electricity in years. Electricity prices are stable, even in an unstable world.......

This is true now, for the early adopters. Will it be true later, when a much larger percentage of transportation energy is electricity from the grid?

Either way my 818 will most certainly not be electric because it will be 1800 pounds or less. And @ 70+ miles a day, my daily driver will not be electric until 300 mile range (on an overnight charge) can be had for less than $25,000 commuter car prices.

GPZ10

02-22-2012, 03:28 AM

GPV10, that's the attitude that will develop new tech. And from what I've seen, we all could use some new tech around the US....
Thanks for the complement. We'll have to see if it all works in the end. IF it does, you can bet there will be pictures of it. And I agree whole heartedly with you about needing new technology. I think the lack thereof should put a lot of the blame on society and our sub par educational system. If you want to really be depressed for a night or two, watch 2 documentaries - "Waiting for Superman" and "College Conspiracy". Both give a good look I think at how the system is failing us, and give many reasons why it is. Good ones to watch, IMHO.

Xusia

02-22-2012, 03:36 AM

EVs are cheap to operate, but you pay more up front. Comparing a Leaf to a Yaris:
Leaf Yaris
Cost $28,000 $15,000
MPG 40
Gas $5
Cost/mile 0.017 0.125
100k miles $29,700 $27,500
120k miles $30,040 $30,000

This is kinda worst case, since gas doesn't $5/gallon at the moment (and that's only a prediction), and doesn't factor in a lot of things like maintenance (engine or batteries, which I'm fairly certain won't make it to 120k miles), the type of driving (EVs are more cost effective around town, gas more so on the highway), range, etc. Still, it does demonstrate that until the price of EV technology comes down, there are other solutions to cost savings if that's your only goal. (And therein lies the problem, but that's another topic...)

GPZ10

02-22-2012, 10:25 AM

This is kinda worst case, since gas doesn't $5/gallon at the moment (and that's only a prediction), and doesn't factor in a lot of things like maintenance (engine or batteries, which I'm fairly certain won't make it to 120k miles), the type of driving (EVs are more cost effective around town, gas more so on the highway), range, etc. Still, it does demonstrate that until the price of EV technology comes down, there are other solutions to cost savings if that's your only goal. (And therein lies the problem, but that's another topic...)

As an electrician/future electrical engineer in a few months, from all the lab work as the enineering student and work as an electrician, electric motors are much more "maintenance free" than ICEs. It seems like you're leaning he other way, and I'm not sure why.

Oppenheimer

02-22-2012, 10:40 AM

As an electrician/future electrical engineer in a few months, from all the lab work as the enineering student and work as an electrician, electric motors are much more "maintenance free" than ICEs. It seems like you're leaning he other way, and I'm not sure why.

I think he just means the batteries. Like you yourself said, "...I don't want to use batteries. They're heavy and don't have the energy density that I like for the price; they also need to be replaced after a number of charge/discharge cycles."

When Xusia said "...won't make it to 120K miles", I believe he was just talking about the batteries. I think Xusia would agree that maintenance wise, electric motors are less trouble than ICE, its just the batteries that are suspect.

Myself I like the idea of electrically driven vehicles. Its just the batteries I don't like, for the very reasons you state, plus cost, environmental (manufacture and disposal), and it takes a long time to charge them. They will get better over time, and eventually be very viable. In the meantime, I like the idea of onboard ICE driven generator, turbine, fuel cell, etc. Seems like a good way to refine the whole electric drivetrain concept while we wait for batteries to catch up to point where they can be mainstream.

bbatts

02-22-2012, 11:00 AM

As gasoline keeps going up in price, it sounds like and interesting option. I don't believe I can really get there, although I have never driven a Tesla. For my nearby commuting I'll just keep the golf cart.

BBatts
Nashville, TN

olpro

02-22-2012, 11:57 AM

>>>
2) While I am interested in building an EV, I don't want to use batteries. They're heavy and don't have the energy density that I like for the price; they also need to be replaced after a number of charge/discharge cycles. After planning with a grad student here on campus, I plan on building a hydrogen production/storage system along with using it to power my vehicle. His family is running a company on this concept, so I may work with them on a beta testing type situation. In the 818, I don't see a battery system working very well. The car is built to be small and light, and batteries ruin that concept. Don't get me wrong, it can be done, just not without ruining my baseline requirements for the car. I think the GTM would have more room for the batteries, and better suit this type of system. I'm not sure, though.

You wrote about making an EV (electric vehicle) powered by hydrogen. Is this going to be powered by burning the H2 in an internal combusion engine?
- In which case it isn't electric -
Or you are planning on making a fuel cell to produce the electricity, which has been tried by a number of huge companies and is an enormously expensive proposition. You think that you will succeed where they have failed?
It doesn't sound like you have thought this through.

GPZ10

02-22-2012, 12:41 PM

I think he just means the batteries. Like you yourself said, "...I don't want to use batteries. They're heavy and don't have the energy density that I like for the price; they also need to be replaced after a number of charge/discharge cycles."

When Xusia said "...won't make it to 120K miles", I believe he was just talking about the batteries. I think Xusia would agree that maintenance wise, electric motors are less trouble than ICE, its just the batteries that are suspect.

Myself I like the idea of electrically driven vehicles. Its just the batteries I don't like, for the very reasons you state, plus cost, environmental (manufacture and disposal), and it takes a long time to charge them. They will get better over time, and eventually be very viable. In the meantime, I like the idea of onboard ICE driven generator, turbine, fuel cell, etc. Seems like a good way to refine the whole electric drivetrain concept while we wait for batteries to catch up to point where they can be mainstream.That would make more sense, wouldn't it? :-)

I really don't think we'll be getting to a point where we don't have to sacrifice quite a bit with the batteries. I think fuel cells such as hydrogen are the way to go at this point. Who knows though, I could be wrong. People have been saying for years that Moore's Law would fail, and it hasn't yet.

You wrote about making an EV (electric vehicle) powered by hydrogen. Is this going to be powered by burning the H2 in an internal combusion engine?
- In which case it isn't electric -
Or you are planning on making a fuel cell to produce the electricity, which has been tried by a number of huge companies and is an enormously expensive proposition. You think that you will succeed where they have failed?
It doesn't sound like you have thought this through.electric motor/fuel cell combo.
Actually, it has been thought through, very thoroughly. The grad student I mentioned has been working on this concept for a few years with his father's company. His senior design project involved using solar panels and wind turbines to convert purified water to hydrogen/oxygen with electrolysis when the turbines/panels were producing energy in excess of that needed in the home at the time. The one drawback is this system doesn't compress the hydrogen, as it is very energy intensive to do so. This limits the range of any vehicle using the system somewhat, but it's a valid concept. Besides, the more you compress hydrogen, the more it will leak through any container's membrane. This system is at 500 psi. Honda's program didn't fail, their hydrogen test program in CA seems to be going just fine.

Another point that irks me a bit is saying "If one company didn't succeed, why try?" This is how innovation comes to be. You take mistakes that have been made, and evolve concepts. In all honesty, a car like this may not be for everyone, but I think it can work for a large amount of people. I guess either way, we'll see in the next few years when everything plays out.

olpro

02-22-2012, 02:22 PM

GPZ10

02-22-2012, 03:05 PM

Of course there is nothing wrong with challenging the technology, that is how progress is made. On the other hand you might consider the fact that most people in the know consider fuel cells a wonderful invention for: A. Moon buggies & space satellites and B. The PR departments of a few big auto companies.
The cost of a feasible system is just outlandish. It is an entirely different thing to cobble up some test lab thingy at a college. Of course on the science channel this seems all so real.

Within the context of this thread (…. Pre-engineered Electric Drive Lines for FFR Kits) it sounded like to me like you were going to put something together pretty soon, not launch into this hypothetical quest – so please don’t be “irked” by my natural skepticism.

The idea of applying Moore’s law to batteries (and solar cells, etc.) is NOT valid and such optimistic thinking is misleading to the max.I think that's the problem in itself - People need to change their thinking of considering it just "PR material". The cost of this system is actually quite cheap. Less than $10k, and it provide energy for autos and your house. In addition, fuel cell vehicles and systems made by college students aren't just "test lab thingys". Case in point - this senior design group a few years ago the built a hydrogen fuel cell motorcycle - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1z6jcsSUc5M
When these senior design projects are built, they are done so on severely limited budgets. So, if a bit more money is spent on the concepts, they would be feasible for most of the population.

This plan is something that has been in the planning for a few years now, and is now going into the "beta testing" type phase, so it's been studied pretty extensively.

I wasn't applying Moore's law to battery technology, merely making the case that people's expectations of new technology seem to be exceeded rather regularly.

olpro

02-22-2012, 03:30 PM

Are you seriously suggesting that the video of a college project motorcycle tooling by the camera at three mph is proof of your point?? To me it pretty much defines the idea of a "test lab thingy". If there was a better video you should have linked to it.
I wish you all the luck on your project but, if you don't mind, I will reserve judgment based on a little more info - based on verifiable results, not academic speculation.

Xusia

02-22-2012, 04:28 PM

Relative to my post, yes I was referring to the batteries. Op pretty much nailed it (Thanks, Op!). My point was that there are many factors to consider when making an analysis based on cost/money. I am all in favor of an electric drive train, and would actually prefer it, but like GPZ10 mentioned the batteries aren't where I'd like them to be.

Oppenheimer

02-22-2012, 04:52 PM

The idea of applying Moore’s law to batteries (and solar cells, etc.) is NOT valid and such optimistic thinking is misleading to the max.

True, but I don't think he did that. I think he was just making a comparison. If Moores law could go on this long, then other hurdles in other industries might equally be surmountable.

RM1SepEx

02-22-2012, 07:14 PM

let's benchmark today's technology:

Go to www.thunderstruckmotors.com and piece together a system Their prices are representative of the current market.

$4300 for a 50 HP AC motor and controller
$600 to adapt to a transaxle
$ 15 per cell for battery management $500
108+ volt setup 3.3 v nominal per cell 33 cells
400ah cells $563 ea $18580
200AH cells $ 283 ea $ 9339
misc wiring adaptors etc... $1000
battery mounting... better if originally designed for them... $1000
12 volt inverter for 12 volt lights etc... $160

I'd guess range based on my 1100 lb 84 volt reverse trike with 185 amp hr cells (45 miles)

400AH cells 120
200 amp hr cells 60

performance would be brisk

add charger, the faster you charge, the more it cost. Low end, overnight $600 very rapid charger $3000+

so lowest cost option with "fun" motor $17500
you could save 1000 or so... with a smaller motor. Lithium batteries are a big cost!
want 120-130 range, spend $26750
for the electric 818 you need $1000 Subaru investment for chassis parts
$9995 for the kit
Approx $38000 for 120 mile range perhaps .04 per mile to charge???

or you can build an 818 with a 50,000 mile WRX drivetrain and invest $5000 or less
$9995 for the kit
Approx $15,000 and .16 per mile for gas at $4.00 gallon and 25 miles per gallon

That's a lot of gas....

just a ballpark reference. don't forget a bunch of custom fabrication to mount batteries, run high voltage cables (BIG cables, 108 volts at 500 amps or more!) transaxle development (Tesla went to a single speed, you should be able to shift with this off the shelf motor setup without exploding a transaxle) decide clutch or no clutch etc...

PS forgot contactor add $200 or more

GPZ10

02-22-2012, 11:01 PM

True, but I don't think he did that. I think he was just making a comparison. If Moores law could go on this long, then other hurdles in other industries might equally be surmountable.

Exactly. I like using the reference, as I've heard/watched so many people say over time that we would not be able to continue the way we had in past years, just to see them proven wrong time and time again.

GPZ10

02-22-2012, 11:08 PM

let's benchmark today's technology:

Those prices are right, an illustrate the amount needed to possibly consider an EV project. However, the EV segment can relate very well to the kit car segment, in that a large amount of the electronic parts can be built by someone with a bit of electric circuit know-how just as some mechanical pieces that would costs someone a good bit of money on a FFR Roadster can be built by someone with a bit of mechanical know-how. A bit of googling can find schematics for a large amount of the parts, and some ingenuity can add some extra functionality. Granted, it's a new concept for some, but it seems to be the way things are going, in that circuit analysis is a large part of repairing anything any more.

RM1SepEx

02-23-2012, 08:21 AM

Exactly. I like using the reference, as I've heard/watched so many people say over time that we would not be able to continue the way we had in past years, just to see them proven wrong time and time again.

Moores law has been proven true for decades, battery density is exactly the opposite, a daunting, uncracked nut!

and yes GPZ10, the E crowd does translate to the kit industry, AND the 818 would be a much better chassis donor for an E car due to its weight but it's relatively costly vs using a discarded chassis as a base (Suzuki, Geo, etc... for light weight)

It all comes down to energy density and cost, until we see a working fusion unit as installed on our favorite DeLorean that runs on bannana peels and metal scraps petroleum based fuels or other combustables are hard to beat.

Oppenheimer

02-23-2012, 10:20 AM

Approx $38000 for 120 mile range perhaps .04 per mile to charge???

or you can build an 818 with a 50,000 mile WRX drivetrain and invest $5000 or less
$9995 for the kit
Approx $15,000 and .16 per mile for gas at $4.00 gallon and 25 miles per gallon

That's a lot of gas....

or go with the TDi drivetrain, base impreza donor, donor VW engine/trans (& ECU?), probably still ~$15K as built, still light, fast, and fun, probably >65 mpg.

That's even more gas (um, fuel)...

Its difficult to consider an electric 818 on economics. It'll be cool to see them built, and the publicity that will generate. Not to mention the satisfaciton of building it. But if you are looking to save $, Dave's high MPG concept is the way to go (thanks West Philly High!) Plus you'll have unlimited range.

RM1SepEx

02-23-2012, 10:45 AM

EXACTLY!

I have an electric reverse trike just because I wanted one, it was a "dream/desire" since my college days, the finances just can't work

\BTW I've always wanted to make a submarine too, how practical is that one!

keys2heaven

02-23-2012, 11:12 AM

I guess this topic is much larger than a yes/no answer?

Shame. I wouldn't mind electrifying a SW1 design.

BipDBo

02-23-2012, 11:34 AM

Its difficult to consider an electric 818 on economics. It'll be cool to see them built, and the publicity that will generate. Not to mention the satisfaciton of building it. But if you are looking to save $, Dave's high MPG concept is the way to go (thanks West Philly High!) Plus you'll have unlimited range.

I don't think anyone builds a kitcar out of practicality.

GPZ10

02-23-2012, 12:51 PM

I don't think anyone builds a kitcar out of practicality.

Ha. This is true. I want to build a variant of the XR-3 from R.Q. Riley when he getsthe kit ready to go, but I'm still not sure I could argue against your statement. :-)

Xusia

02-23-2012, 02:40 PM

I don't think anyone builds a kitcar out of practicality.

I will be. The cheapest cars I can think of (new) are around $14k USD. For an extra $1k USD and some of my time, I get a sports car that will outperform probably every mass produced sports car (Miata, S2000, Supra, 911, Corvette, etc.). And if I spend just a few more dollars, it could easily be in true supercar terrritory. To me, it's the ultimate in practicality: value!

Oppenheimer

02-23-2012, 03:53 PM

I will be. The cheapest cars I can think of (new) are around $14k USD. For an extra $1k USD and some of my time, I get a sports car that will outperform probably every mass produced sports car (Miata, S2000, Supra, 911, Corvette, etc.). And if I spend just a few more dollars, it could easily be in true supercar terrritory. To me, it's the ultimate in practicality: value!

I'm on the same page. Plus it'll get nearly the fuel mileage of that $14K USD new car (when you drive it like a normal car).

Xusia

02-23-2012, 04:39 PM

...when you drive it like a normal car.

Which will be approximately 1% of the time! LOL

(OK, realistically maybe like 20%...)

JLee

02-24-2012, 09:24 AM

Which will be approximately 1% of the time! LOL

(OK, realistically maybe like 20%...)

I babied my CTS-V to see how high I could get my average MPG...

...for about an eighth of a tank. Then I was allll done with that. :p

It still shouldn't be bad, though - I have a Subaru that gets ~19mpg mixed, 22mpg highway with the 2.5l turbo motor and 3200lb-ish, so I wouldn't be surprised to easily see 20's in town.

Jodie

12-14-2012, 03:30 AM

For those interested in an AC system
On ebay item number 261141303324.
I have pre-ordered an 818 and own one of these drivelines.

check out EVTV.ME

RM1SepEx

12-14-2012, 08:16 AM

Jodie, voltage and max current?

tirod

12-14-2012, 09:25 AM

The reality is that electric drive is in it's infancy. Speculate all we want, the tech isn't there, and neither is the infrastructure.

Just based on a power to weight ratio, plus range per dollar expense, petroleum fueled cars have most of the advantages. Let's consider what is the largest group of electric cars in the nation being currently used on a very successful basis:

Golf carts.

Nothing wrong with them, and frankly, most commuters could use one. It would be about all they need for 95% of what they do. Yet, we don't even try. We buy a car - because we want to have MORE than the next guy. And guys like us build kit cars because we want even MORE than that.

So proposing draping a voluptuous kit car body over what is essential golf cart technology - even on steroids - doesn't deliver what we want.

Plenty of rationalizing and pie in the sky intellectualizing going on in the thread, but how many take a trip to the Grand Canyon with their electric ONLY cars? The infrastructure barely exists, and the range of the cars is prohibitively expensive. Most of the demo drives to do that are set up logistically weeks in advance with a great deal of preplanning.

Road trips with the family are sufficiently difficult to organize as it is. We were fortunate to be on one recently, and there is no way an electric would haul 4 people, luggage, and camping gear for two nights on a five day road trip. Those aren't unusual conditions.

There's the allied difficulty that almost nobody is familiar with electric tech, there are no competing systems to drive down costs, and as I said, the infrastructure is almost non existent. Consider the reality that someone can figure out how to install an LS1 or Coyote in a roadster - the mechanics of assembly exist, parts can be bought, and price can be held down by using any one of thousands of motors from a donor.

There are no donors in the electric field. And certainly no reason to install a different make drivetrain into a competing makes chassis as a performance improvement. Like, dropping a Caddy engine into a '63 Falcon.

Sure, all that could change in just a few short periods of time, but name the unit. No, not months. Years, sure. More like DECADES of development. I'm still waiting for hovercraft, multi level monorail mass transit, or for crying out loud, a car that actually gets 100mpg. THAT'S never happened yet.

But the electric fans all keep chanting just wait, just wait. I'm certainly not. Having lived more than half my life expectancy, I don't have the time to waste, unlike the dreamers blessed with copious amounts of youth. There's a finite window of opportunity to build a kit, I've got a clock ticking, and when you look at the demographics of the market, that describes about 85% of who is buying them. Electric is not an option.

That is not to deny you the opportunity, but I wish you luck. You're getting into a drivetrain system that looks like the Model T - compared to a transcontinental steam locomotive. Yes, things do change, and the Model T led to better cars than that. But the locomotive also led to jet aircraft. The rest of life is still a moving target of improvement, too.

Will physically transporting yourself about town even be necessary if you work in an interactive virtual holodeck? Hmmmm. I can dream your electric car into a frivolous retro toy celebrating a past time, too.

But, I will wave as I pass.

BipDBo

12-14-2012, 11:03 AM

The reality is that electric drive is in it's infancy. Speculate all we want, the tech isn't there, and neither is the infrastructure.

I agree that it's in it's infancy, but the tech is certainly there. I just hope it soon becomes available to builders. Check out the latest Motor Trend's pick for Car of the Year. First, they said that this year had the most competitive field of high quality vehicles in the 64 years of Motor Trend. The judges, surprisingly picked a surprising car. It was buitlt not by a large Japanese or German company, but rather by a small start-up company in the US, in fact the first model from that company that was fully designed and built from scratch. It was picked because it was the best car in its field, out performing other cars even more expensive. It was the all electric Tesla S. Motor Trend made it clear that even leaving aside the revolutionary electric drive, it earned "car of the year", because it really is that good of a car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPzna3p3P5s&feature=player_embedded

Xusia

12-14-2012, 01:35 PM

Seems like you are down on electric vehicles. You have some valid points, but they seem to all revolve around a few areas of focus: Cost, performance, and a lack of infrastructure (which I assume means charging stations). There's no arguing cost or infrastructure issues, but depending on the performance aspect, valid arguments could be made. For instance, currently probably not a good use for endurance racing, but electric vehicles have been very successful in drag racing (I personally wouldn't use electric for any race only vehicle, but that's me). I would also add that infrastructure issues can be circumvented by on board electrical generation (which does NOT necessarily make the car a hybrid!). Regardless, I think you misunderstand 2 very important things:

Why people want an electric vehicle
Their use case for an electric vehicle

Even though I'm a fan of electric vehicles, I'll be the first to say if you want to save money, you are better off buying a low cost, high fuel efficiency gas engine sub-compact car. In my experience, though, most people who want an electric vehicle aren't in it for the cost savings. So any arguments as to cost or economics are irrelevant. Motivations range from wanting something different, to wanting to do the right thing environmentally, to simpler maintenance, to lower cost per mile (despite high initial cost).

As for use case, I don't know anyone who has or wants an electric vehicle that is expecting to take a family road trip in it. There are other vehicles more suited to that. Duh. So let's consider the statistics of the MAJORITY of driving actually done (at least in the U.S.A): 1)Single occupancy; 2)Very few miles (I don't recall the exact numbers, but it's like 40-50, not like 100). Mostly this is commuting to work and running errands around town. This is easily within range for an EV, and generally wouldn't require a large or heavy battery pack. It could be done with the weight equivalency of a gas engine, perhaps even less (depending on how much "performance" is desired). In these use cases, EVs make a LOT of sense. I'm not saying they cost less. What I'm saying is that cost aside, a gas powered vehicle holds no inherent advantage in these use cases.

Considering my future 818, if I had more budget and more skill, I could see going electric with on board electrical generation. I already know I could get better performance than a stock WRX engine, in a package that is smaller and requires less maintenance. Up front costs would be higher, but ongoing operational costs would be much lower (in the end, it would probably be a wash). It would probably weigh more, but because the "batteries" are actually packs made from much smaller batteries you can package/arrange them in ways that fit into parts of the car where a traditional engine & transmission can't. This gives great flexibility in placement which you can use to achieve any number of other goals: Lower center of gravity (if you placed the batteries low and wide), more trunk/storage space (if you placed the batteries to allow for a larger chunk of space for storage), etc. There really is no limit to what you could do - it all depends on what your goals are.

So in closing, whether or not going EV makes sense all depends on your goals. It's neither fair nor accurate to dismiss the idea based on cost, performance, lack of infrastructure, or your personal assessment as to the maturity of the technology used, because depending on the goals, those things may or may not be relevant.

HelluvaEngineer

12-14-2012, 08:22 PM

No interest at all.

But I will probably make a high compression NA engine designed for great MPG. But the car is so light it should still be fun to drive.

bromikl

12-14-2012, 11:28 PM

themrcul

12-14-2012, 11:30 PM

The reality is that electric drive is in it's infancy. Speculate all we want, the tech isn't there, and neither is the infrastructure.

Just based on a power to weight ratio, plus range per dollar expense, petroleum fueled cars have most of the advantages. Let's consider what is the largest group of electric cars in the nation being currently used on a very successful basis:

Golf carts.

Nothing wrong with them, and frankly, most commuters could use one. It would be about all they need for 95% of what they do. Yet, we don't even try. We buy a car - because we want to have MORE than the next guy. And guys like us build kit cars because we want even MORE than that.

So proposing draping a voluptuous kit car body over what is essential golf cart technology - even on steroids - doesn't deliver what we want.

Plenty of rationalizing and pie in the sky intellectualizing going on in the thread, but how many take a trip to the Grand Canyon with their electric ONLY cars? The infrastructure barely exists, and the range of the cars is prohibitively expensive. Most of the demo drives to do that are set up logistically weeks in advance with a great deal of preplanning.

Road trips with the family are sufficiently difficult to organize as it is. We were fortunate to be on one recently, and there is no way an electric would haul 4 people, luggage, and camping gear for two nights on a five day road trip. Those aren't unusual conditions.

It's silly to compare current gen electric car technology to golf cart tech. Sure, 10 years ago some people were building cars based on that tech but serious electric cars have gone well beyond it (see anything by Tesla).

There is a range of tech available NOW that will get you great performance (particularly mated to a lightweight car like the 818) for a range of up to 100 miles before you need to charge.
That's mid-range tech. I'm talking something like a Soliton1 controller, CALB CA batteries and a Warp 11" HV or Kostov 11" Alpha motor.
Higher range (but still available) would be something like an AC Propulsion unit, but that runs at a higher price obviously.

The fact is, as Xusia said, the average distance people travel in cars is less than 50 miles per day. That distance suits something in the range of 95% of people 95% of the time.
For all the other trips, perhaps a petrol car could be hired.
Most people don't need 300 miles on a single charge. The needed "infrastructure" you mention need not even exist. Most people do around 30-50 miles per day and could charge the car at home, ready for the next day.

That's the way I see my 818 build going - electric with a range of ~100 miles and I would be happy.
For all other trips (that I'd make possibly 1-2 times a year), I'm happy to hire a car for the day.
In fact, ever since the announcement of the car I decided that was how I was going to build it. Parts have only gotten better since then! (Arrival of the Kostov 11" Alpha, CALB CA batteries, Pulsar charger, etc).

It will be a couple of years before I see myself being able to do an 818 build (I'm 27 and don't have my own home yet).
I could start one now if given the finances and life situation - the parts for the most part are good enough as I see it.
As it stands it will be very exciting to see where the tech is when I can start my build!

themrcul

12-14-2012, 11:31 PM

bromikl

12-15-2012, 12:04 AM

Let it go. Haters gonna hate. When electric cars start winning races, they'll change their tune.

Jodie

12-15-2012, 01:14 AM

Jodie, voltage and max current?

The BorgWarner has a peak torque of 300Nm.
The inverter can take 400v but at 300v and 400A thats where it hits the limit for the drive line at 300Nm
Motor is wound for 215V nominal.

Until we put it all togeather, its all just numbers.

More info at:
http://blog.evtv.me/store/products.php?cat=11

HelluvaEngineer

12-15-2012, 11:33 PM

Hey, if electric isn't your thing, why bother posting? One of my main reasons I discovered FFR and the 818 is because I was looking to do an electric conversion. At first I thought I'd rip apart a car with a dead engine and then I decided it would be so much easier to start with a clean slate. Now I want to build one of each. First a 2.5 NA and then a series hybrid.

I don't think Dave will mind if one of my cars is electric, as long as he's selling kits!

Sorry, I usually think of electrics as being high efficiency. I think it is MGP-e. So I thought a really high MPG gas car would be in the same vein as an electric car thread and my post would not come across as a hater. I am far from a hater. A little disappointed at the reaction. Electrics are the future. I just want it here now (By now I mean economically comparable). From a high level I dont like all of the subsidies that electric cars are getting as I don't believe the battery technology has reached a cost point to be economically viable for the masses. I think they should have used all that money for battery R&D. My sons friend has just completed an old Ferrari Kit car into full electric. Cool car.

Nelff

12-16-2012, 01:17 AM

bromikl

12-16-2012, 09:11 AM

A friend of mine recently shared with me a technology I didn't know existed. It converts hydrocarbons directly into electricity at 80% efficiency, similar top a Bloom Box but more efficient, and without exotic materials. The small experimental device operates at high temperatures, and requires about 1 m^2 surface area per Kw. I could easily see these miniaturized to eventually replace the heavy diesel-generator I was planning to install in my series hybrid.

https://www.llnl.gov/str/June01/Cooper.html

HelluvaEngineer

12-16-2012, 10:03 AM

One of the reasons that I was interested in the 818 was the opportunity to start with a 'clean slate' chassis, incorporate the electric drive with batteries that would provide enough power for several initial accelerations. After that the batteries would be charged by the on board (gas/propane/CNG) electric generation pack. It only takes 20hp or so to propel a full size car down the highway. Having an on board generator humming along at peak efficiency doing double duty charging the batteries or providing the power to drive down the highway was my goal. Sitting at a traffic light, its charging. Batteries full, on board power generation system shuts down. Driving down the highway at 85 mph, most of the on board power generation goes to propelling the car. Back off to 60, now your batteries are being charged again.

My base idea, use the electric drive for the torque to accelerate. Need power to drive down the highway for 300 miles and stop at a gas station, yep, there's a nice little electric generating efficient 10hp gas engine is sitting in the back doing what it's supposed to do.

Yes, it would be nice if I could go down to WalMart and pick up a nice little gas turbine power pack and some high current LiPo batteries. No, the tech is not there yet. If it was, then Chevy, Ford, Toyota and Honda would already be producing vehicles with a drive train like I'm describing. Well then, I can go out and get the best parts I can and frigging build it myself. Someone doesn't like the idea that my 'electric' vehicle can go about 5 miles on battery, I really don't care what they think.

Every time I have raised this idea or posted on a like idea, it gets flamed. I really don't care that it's cost effective for the masses. I'm not building a car for the masses, or as a cost comparison, range equivalent, I'll beat you in a race across country or at the stoplight, it doesn't sound right, blah, blah, blah... I'm building it for me. I think that it's a good idea. That's enough for me.

Ask yourself, when Dave started building cars, were they cost effective or perfect for every situation? Well shoot, it's just an old car that Shelby couldn't sell in the first place. Dang, it doesn't even have a roof. What happens when it snows. Seriously...

I think your idea makes perfect sense. By having a short range you minimize the extra battery weight and since your gas engine is not connected to the wheels mechanically, then you can have the engine run at its peak efficiency. Plus a small 20-30HP gas engine will be very light. I think your idea is extremely cost effective for the masses.

We are all going to build a car for ourselves and they will each be very unique. Just because someone else is building a car I would not have any interest in building for myself, does mean that I (or anyone else) will not enjoy the crap out of a build thread and if the car was fairly close I would love to meetup and see the car in person.

The 818 is a unique kit car and it will bring in a lot of unique and interesting people. I think we all need to get used to it and simple enjoy all the different, crazy and wonderful cars that is going to come out of this group.

A great example of this is on the legacygt.com site this guy Frankster (I think) took his Legacy GT and replaced the motor with a Buick Grand National Turbo V6. He kept the 4 wheel drive and integrated it with the existing Subaru electronic system. Then after he got all of the kinks worked out, he got board and decided to convert the V6 so it can run on natural gas or regular gas with a flip of a switch while the car is still running. While I don't have any interest in doing a car like that for myself, that thread is one of the best in the history of all car builds.

RM1SepEx

12-16-2012, 10:54 AM

The chassis should be designed around the drivetrain... the 818 isn't battery placement is key

my first 818 will be driven by my 70k mile wrx parts

I'm working to put together a team to do a second that is electric... the key is software to maximize the use of the serial, on board charging system... enter car, load gps with plans for travel. Car calculates how to maximize on board charge. On board charging capacity is limited to steady state current at 65 mph. Start with an overnight charge.. drain as you accellerate, recharge as you decellerate. If the trip demands it, the car provides steady state current for 65 mph. Any load over that (hills, accelerate, speeding?) battery charge goes down. Any load under that it get's replenished. GPS interface is Q and A... hopefully in a sexy voice ha ha... onboard overnight range only 45 miles or so. It can determine amps needed due to route and knowledge of charging capabilities (charge at destination, like work? for example) most people could use it to commute with virtually no gas or diesel use... longer trip, no problem you burn fuel as well as overnight electrions. Best of both worlds...
hoping to prototype the technology with my existing reverse trike...

ncmcn

12-16-2012, 03:35 PM

It would really depend on range...

THE ITALIAN

12-16-2012, 06:36 PM

First off ,the "Carbon thing" from what I have studied is BS, so I'm still a Gasser.
Solar still doesn't pencil for my home.
My neighbor has a Volt and he has NEVER parked it in his garage ,so to get inexpensive insurance (like Infinity) you have to park your car in the garage (and with a roadster?)
AND to comply with some home insurance , they won't let you park your Volt in the garage !
There have been fires with this new Volt.
Distance is still an issue and what about the weight distribution that FFR has worked into the design ? where would all this weight be VS the Subaru motor?
Have you already changed the handling?
I think we need to wait for the final car to come out before we start going far beyond what FFR has done.

Xusia

12-18-2012, 08:08 PM

The chassis should be designed around the drivetrain... the 818 isn't battery placement is key

I don't think that's universally true. The size/bulk and weight of gas engines have probably made that a good design philosophy, but electric motors and batteries are far more flexible and can be manufactured in a wide array of sizes and shapes. This makes designing the chassis around an electric drive train less important in [I would ague] most - if not all - non-race vehicles.

I also don't think battery placement is key to the vehicle's success as an electric vehicle. For certain performance criteria, perhaps, but the flexibility of batterysize and placement makes this a non-issue in my mind when compared the concentrated location of weight that is a gas engine & transmission (which is most definitely NOT ideal). In fact, I would say the various possibilities for battery shape, size, and therefore placement give an electric vehicle a huge potential advantage.

Solar still doesn't pencil for my home.

Say what??

where would all this weight be VS the Subaru motor?

Could be anywhere (and that's the point). Could be in the same location. Could be down low, all around the engine bay. Some could even be up front.

Have you already changed the handling?

Most likely, but no more negatively than adding a passenger does (vs. driver only), and there is potential for improvement,

Turboguy

12-18-2012, 08:28 PM

Question - Any interest in bolt in Pre engineered Electric Drive Lines for FFR Kits?

NO.

BipDBo

12-19-2012, 11:41 AM

"Solar still does not pencil for my home."
Say what??

Solar generation through photovoltaic (PV) cells doesn't pencil out economically for anyone in the US. The cost of the entire system does not pay for itself over the life of the system, at least at today's energy rates. It's not even close, especially when you consider the costs of financing the high up front costs. The only times that they can be somewhat affordable is if governmental incentives pay for a large part of the system.

I've performed these economic studies as a professional engineer as part of design and LEED certification for commercial buildings. PV cells sound great when you refer to the sun as "free energy" but the systems are much more expensive and generate much less energy than people realize.

With the increases of natural gas generation in the US, electricity rates are not likely to see any long term balloning in price for a long time.

Xusia

12-20-2012, 09:14 AM

I didn't understand the terminology, but i get it now. Perhaps you are right, but right now "incentives" are rampant and paid for nearly all of my system. After incentive from the local utility, federal government, and state government, I paid about $100 - YES, just $100 (approximately) - of my own money for my [well sized] PV system. And it's covered under warranty for 15 years! You're right; they don't generate as much as you'd probably think, and my local utility doesn't exactly give me top dollar for my excess energy, but considering what I paid, I'm VERY happy!

Plus, EVERY little bit helps! :)

BipDBo

12-20-2012, 09:24 AM

Xusia

12-20-2012, 09:38 AM

Yep. Here's a pic.

14118

bromikl

12-22-2012, 09:31 AM

Renewable, sustainable, environmentally benign and fiscally responsible energy is a bit of a passion for me. Solar has to be the most expensive energy on the planet. Germany spent about 120 billion dollars on solar, and generated as much energy as a 3 GW reactor facility. That's 40 billion dollars per gigawatt, or about four times the cost of the most expensive nuclear plant.

Here's the calculation from my mathematician friend:
When you look at the current year, total capacity factor was 31GW BUT, total generation was only 25 TWh. What does this mean? Well, 25TWh is 25000GWh. Divide by hours per year (8766) and you get 2.9GW capacity factor actually realized. This means capacity factor is meaningless, as actual output is less than 10% capacity factor. This means you payed hundreds of billions (120 billion or thereabouts) on 2.9 GW, about the typical 2 reactor nuclear generator facility...and they cost around 11 billion on the worst case. So it isn't a left wing conspiracy, it is just a terrible waste of money...currently.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Germany

Xusia

12-23-2012, 02:00 AM

Personally, I'm on board with nuclear energy. It's very cost effective, and safe when cared for properly. But clean it is not. Every energy source has it's down side. For solar it's cost. For nuclear it's waste.

But this thread isn't about what's cost effective. And as I ALREADY stated, people who employ such technologies often do not care about the cost - they have other goals in mind. If it's not your thing, that's cool. There are other threads.

So...

Can we please stop bashing solar power for being expensive and get back to topic at hand: Electric drive for the 818.

Thanks! :)

flynntuna

12-23-2012, 12:53 PM

I read A story in kit car mag some time back where a school built a car using the k1 attack as a platform. From what I remember they used a VW TDI to power the rear wheels and an electric motor for the front wheels. They claimed sub 4sec. 0-60 and 50 mpg.

RM1SepEx

12-23-2012, 02:01 PM

Yep. Here's a pic.

14118

Boy has this thread gone off topic! :-) I have no problem with you choosing to go solar... BUT let's be real here, you have a nice house and don't need others to pay for your electricity. $100 out of pocket and you get that array on your roof! We obviously have a socio/political problem. Should we subsiding a relatively affluent individual? If you work the numbers for that system with you paying for all of it, it may break even over the 25 life of the system... Here in Maine my payback is about 23 years...

Now saying that I have a super insulated passive solar home that my wife and I designed and built in 1985 and I designed and built my own plug in electric reverse trike "just for fun"

Nuul

12-24-2012, 08:21 AM

Xusia

12-24-2012, 11:19 PM

Boy has this thread gone off topic! :-) I have no problem with you choosing to go solar... BUT let's be real here, you have a nice house and don't need others to pay for your electricity. $100 out of pocket and you get that array on your roof! We obviously have a socio/political problem. Should we subsiding a relatively affluent individual? If you work the numbers for that system with you paying for all of it, it may break even over the 25 life of the system... Here in Maine my payback is about 23 years...

Now saying that I have a super insulated passive solar home that my wife and I designed and built in 1985 and I designed and built my own plug in electric reverse trike "just for fun"

There is so much off base in this post I don't know where to start. Thank you for the compliment about my house. That said, you are making a great many incorrect assumptions, and have stated opinions seemingly based solely on first-hand, but casual, observation only. I am insulted by the assertion about others paying for my electricity (NOT the case, for the record). You really should get the facts - which I would have been happy to provide if asked - before making such an overtly scathing post.

bromikl

12-25-2012, 09:17 AM

+1. Waste may not even be an issue if TerraPower's reactor works as advertised.

MSR's are the way to go. They're low pressure (safer,) simpler (cheaper) than PWR's and without liquid sodium for coolant (much, much safer.)

A chloride reactor (one version of a fast spectrum MSR) can burn nuclear waste or U-238 and produce electricity at the same time, making it inert in about 300 years. TerraPower's reactor (also low pressure) is a fast spectrum solid fuel reactor which breeds U-238 into Pu-239. Fast spectrum reactors are very tricky to control, and use liquid sodium for coolant. The amount of fuel needed for criticality is 10-20x that of a MSR. In addition, the fuel rods will need reprocessing and disposal at the end of core life. I have lived 100 yards from an operating reactor, but I would never live within 100 miles of a fast spectrum reactor.

Check out FLiBe's design. It breeds Th-232 into U-233 at low pressure in the thermal spectrum, and burns ~100% of the thorium. The fuel is better than free (the waste is more valuable than the raw materials,) never needs enrichment, no fuel rods to manufacture, continuous refueling and reprocessing, and there's enough thorium to power the planet for over a million years.

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/15726934/THORIUM_AND_LFTR_TOP_TEN.pdf