PDA

View Full Version : electric car ideas



mikem
04-23-2005, 01:27 PM
My friend has a Volkswagon Beetle that he converted to electric propulsion. It used 12 six volt lead acid batteries and ran about 40 miles around town before needing recharging. The batteries went bad on him so now it sits in his garage.

I have been bitten by the electric car bug and just read a book that says conversion of a gas burner is the way to go. The volkswagon weighed out at 2000 pounds before conversion and 2500 after. I was thinking that building my own chassis and body would be a better way to go--less weight and wasted space. Maybe something that looks like my old Jeep CJ2A, but lighter and maybe with foam filled cavities for extra crash protection, since its light weight would be dangerous when mixed with all the SUV's on the roads.

Anybody have any good advice?

[This message has been edited by mikem (edited 04-23-2005).]

Evan
04-23-2005, 01:34 PM
Wait for better batteries, like these:

Click here (http://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press/2005_03/pr2901.htm)

ibewgypsie
04-23-2005, 02:15 PM
I like the ideal of a small efficient gas motor, a rack of short term batteries. A modified golf cart is the ticket. I sold one here a month or three back.

Spurts of speed are needed in traffic to avoid being a nuisance to others.

(how much money you got to spend?) I got a real good ideal for you, email me if you like.

David

darryl
04-23-2005, 03:42 PM
I've always liked the idea of an electric vehicle, and the problem has always been the battery. If the new battery has the capability of high peak currents without the penalty of shorter life under those typical use conditions, then possibly the electric vehicle is finally coming of age. One thing will never change, however, and that is you're going to pay for it, one way or another. There's no way that the 'industry' is going to let you off the hook with your transportation costs. One way or another, you'll pay as much, and probably more, for your miles. I see no reason why it shouldn't be considerably cheaper to own and operate an electric vehicle, but that's obviously not the case, even considering just the initial purchase. Don't even mention replacing the battery pack after each three year period.
What are we going to end up with here, garages full of electrics with shot battery packs, and no money to replace them?

In general, we don't save money ahead of time for such large expenses, as we mostly seem to live day to day with monies that we get, so how are we going to pay for that new pack? Borrow? Don't forget to include finance costs in your cost per mile.

In any event, I'd love to have one of those new battery packs in my three-wheeler (whenever I get finished building it). I'm hoping to be able to make up some kind of load levelling system to help it out.

Evan
04-23-2005, 04:20 PM
That new battery has pretty amazing specs, perfect for an electric car. Super quick recharge limited only by your power supply. Only 1% degradation after 1000 charge cycles, 80% of full performance at -40. I do think it will make electric cars practical. It will be able to make full use of regenerative braking because of its unlimited charging rate. I'm betting that in ten years many or even most major cities will ban IC engines from downtown.

J. R. Williams
04-23-2005, 04:50 PM
Check out the newer Capacitor developments. A capacitor can take a charge in a hurry and deliver it fast and not be degraded by charge/discharge cycles. Lead/Acid batteries are way to heavy for vehicle use except in equipment like fork trucks and there you can use the battery for ballast. Then comes the disposal problem with large batteries. Go diesel

JRW

mikem
04-23-2005, 04:52 PM
Shell Valley Motors here in Nebraska makes kit Shelby Cobra replica cars and finished cars for the lazy car buffs with too much money. These cars have huge horsepower to weight ratios. They make the frames and bodies and buy the motors and transmissions.

I thought that they should start making electric kits since they are already in the homemade car business, but electric cars don't fit their High Performance modus operandi.

Fred White
04-23-2005, 06:59 PM
Unfortunately the cost per mile of operation still favors the internal combustion engine.

If you own one of these new hybrid vehicles, better set up a fund that you contribute to at each "fillup" so as to pay for a replacement set of batteries in the future!

Finally, if this idea really starts taking hold, the government will put its "fuel tax" on the electrics somehow.



[This message has been edited by Fred White (edited 04-23-2005).]

Dave Opincarne
04-23-2005, 07:16 PM
I think hybreds are the most viable option in the near term. Use a small engine that matches the average HP requierments when running at maximum effiecency to drive a genarator. When greater HP is required draw from the batteries, when less then the batteries are charged. This reduces the need to lug around extra batteries or engine than required plus the IC is always working at it's most efficient.

CCWKen
04-23-2005, 07:43 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Finally, if this idea really starts taking hold, the government will put its "fuel tax" on the electrics somehow. </font>

It's already started. Some states are looking at taxing by the mile traveled instead of a per gallon gas tax. I'm sure the Feds will follow as gasoline declines as a major fuel source.

charlie coghill
04-23-2005, 08:52 PM
Oregon is already taxing the hibreds. The license plates on a hibred is more. The theory is, you still drive as many miles but are not using as much gas so are not paying as much in gas tax.

Evan
04-23-2005, 10:17 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I thought that they should start making electric kits since they are already in the homemade car business, but electric cars don't fit their High Performance modus operandi.</font>

What? Electrics are currently equal to or even beating IC engines.



<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">The Silent Supercar
Is a low-volume electric supercar on the horizon? Yes, if there's sufficient demand for the car, says U.K.-based Zytek Automotive Ltd., which has developed an attention-grabbing electric Lotus Elise prototype with support from Group Lotus Ltd.
Both gas and electric versions of the Elise boast a featherweight 155-pound extruded aluminum space frame and lightweight composite body shell. Curb weight is just 1,930 pounds, including batteries -- a full 1,000 pounds lighter than GM's EV1.
Its supercar-like acceleration is estimated at 0 to 90 mph in just 11.2 seconds, quicker than the standard Elise. </font>

http://www.econogics.com/ev/evperf.htm

Stanko
04-23-2005, 11:54 PM
Here is a pretty high performance EV
0-60 in around 4.5 sec

http://www.acpropulsion.com/tzero_pages/tzero_home.htm

BillJ
04-24-2005, 12:08 AM
Nothing wrong with wanting to build an elecric car, or a steam car for that matter. Doing either for reasons of efficiency or environment might be impractical, but Mikem just said he wanted to build one.

I've always thought electric cars to be an environmental disaster. The idea that they're pollution free is right up there with a comment I heard at a local event, when a Stanley Steamer went by: "Look at that, the exhaust is pure water! Zero pollution!"

( IMIO* hybrids are great, because of the recapture of the energy of deceleration.)

*In My Iggorant Opinion

3 Phase Lightbulb
04-24-2005, 12:12 AM
Don't be fooled.. The Power to weight of electric is no match for the power to weight of IC.

Electric cars need to be extreamly light and use expensive light weight materials in order to keep the weight low enough to compete with a "regular" IC car.

-Adrian

Evan
04-24-2005, 12:14 AM
Yeah, you must factor in all the elements. How much pollution is produced manufacturing the batteries? How much pollution is produced disposing of the batteries?

But then, how much pollution is produced burning fossil fuel? How much contaminated engine oil waste is produced per mile with an IC?

The equation isn't simple and other factors enter into it. Even if electric doesn't have a net pollution savings it can make cities more livable.

mikem
04-24-2005, 12:34 AM
The website for the kit cars is www.shellvalley.com (http://www.shellvalley.com) The usual disclaimers apply--I know the guy but have no interest in the company. Their cars, even with a big block engine, only weigh about 2400 pounds--no electric car even if powered by nuclear fission could beat that! I am going out to the golf course tomorrow to check out the golf carts and see if I can learn something. Thanks--Mike.

[This message has been edited by mikem (edited 04-24-2005).]

[This message has been edited by mikem (edited 04-24-2005).]

Evan
04-24-2005, 12:38 AM
Uh, Mike, the TZero does 0 to 60 in 4.1 seconds. That's faster than a Ferrari. It's also faster than the old 427 Cobra.



[This message has been edited by Evan (edited 04-24-2005).]

mikem
04-24-2005, 12:42 AM
Arguing with Evan is usually a losing battle but I'll find out what the Shelby quarter mile time is tomorrow and report back. Thanks--Mike.

AZSORT
04-24-2005, 12:49 AM
Everything there is know about EV's and energy issues in general can be found at: www.evworld.com (http://www.evworld.com)

Greg C.

Evan
04-24-2005, 12:52 AM
The 427 Shelby Cobra did 0 to 60 in 4.2 seconds. The TZero does it in 4.07

3 Phase Lightbulb
04-24-2005, 01:03 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Evan:
The 427 Shelby Cobra did 0 to 60 in 4.2 seconds. The TZero does it in 4.07</font>


Then that clearly states the Cobra is much faster since it's dry weight is a lot more than the TZero.

If you're not going to take into consideration a little factor called "power to weight", then I'll throw in my pointless statement too: My IC powered motorcycle runs 0-60 in under 3.0 seconds in 1ST GEAR, and there are 5 more gears to go...

Do your famous google search, and find a motorcycle that weighs 350lbs or less that is powered by batteries that has better performance over 250 mile range.

It's all about power to weight (And common sense).

-Adrian

Evan
04-24-2005, 01:47 AM
Do you mind explaining how being faster is actually being slower?

ibewgypsie
04-24-2005, 02:08 AM
The way the old cammer ford motor sucked gas, I am not sure which would run out of steam first.. I think the cobra would be miles ahead in top speed and overall performance thou. Remember it was set up as a short wide all around performance chassis, not a drag car. Most people who bought the 427 to drive on the street didn't live to make the first payment. Insurances dropped them like hot potatoes.

Want heartbreak? drive a short wheelbase high power car on the dragstrip. They change directions rapidly.

My old factory racer? a 68 dodge dart gts with 383 4 speed, no radio, heater would get 4 mpg. It'd do gallons of adrenalin per mile thou. (and smiles) It had easy to clean naugahyde ulpholstery. Ohh, I pissed that one away...

The local buses run with a turbine-generator-flywheel-battery composite system and work well. I think it takes a bus sized vehicle to house all the controls thou.

3 Phase Lightbulb
04-24-2005, 02:22 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Evan:
Do you mind explaining how being faster is actually being slower?</font>

I just did, but I'll elaborate.

It's called the power to weight ratio.

If you want to claim one engine has more power output than another, then you can mesaure that power output of each engine on a dynamometer. The dynamometer doesn't care how heavy batteries are, or how much fuel weighs.

If you want to claim one engine is "faster" then another engine, then you need to run both engines in the same chassis and compare how each engine performs based on moving the chasis's weight along with the power plants own weight (Batteries + speed controller + transmission + engine(s)) vs (fuel + transmission + IC engine).

-Adrian

Tuckerfan
04-24-2005, 02:37 AM
A good discussion on electric cars can be found here: http://65.69.77.33/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12194

There's calculations discussion what you'd need to do to be able to recharge the things with a fast battery. It even includes the formulas for battery size, HP, etc. The short answer is, that even with a fast charging battery, we're going to need other technological breakthroughs before electrics become practical for most folks. Still, if you want one, I say go ahead an build it.

Yankee1
04-24-2005, 02:39 AM
Hi
The electric vehicles that I've worked on
used a SCR that received a gate signal that was biased by a potentiometer controled by the accelerator pedal. The actual signal was generated by a quartz crystle. The SCR maximum duty cycle was 50 % on. But could be controled like 10%on 90%off or 20%on and
80%off all the way up to 50%on and 50% off.
Max accceleration bypassed The SCR and gave straight battery power by use of a contactor relay.When deaccelerating the motor became a generator and charged the batteries.The controls are made by General Electric.This system greatly extends the range that the vehicle can go.The batteries were 6 12 volt deep cycle batteries.

Stanko
04-24-2005, 06:30 AM
I was thinking about EVs the other day, I had just seen one of those recumbant cycles and thougth it would be good to pedal a generator to charge a 12v battery All the pedaling would just top off the battery . You could just ride to work on the battery, but it would be healthier to pedal a bit. Good speed acceleration ,give you a bit of a chance against the traffic. I know its not quite what you guys were thinking but in 20 years they might be looking for threads like this to help with some problems.

JCHannum
04-24-2005, 07:54 AM
0-60 times and comparison of speeds and acceleration of current "production" cars to 60's muscle cars can be very misleading. Put the rubber available today on one of those beasts, and the numbers will change very quickly until something in the driveline breaks.

If you want to look at a production car with performance, try the 2006 Corvette Z06. 0-60 under 4 seconds, sub 11 second quarter, 200 mph top speed. It will also stop and turn a corner.

The current Lingenfelter 402 Corvette, which is probably as close to a production car as either the Shelby 427 or the TZero does 0-60 in 3.7 sec, 0-100 in 8.5, 11.9 quarter mile

A flash speed such as the TZero's 0-60 speed does not tell the whole story. What are the 0-100 and 1/4 mile times, and how far will it go on a charge?

I just looked at the TZero site, 1/4 time is 13.2, good, but not inspiring, and it goes a whole 100 miles at 60mph before needing a recharge. Double wow on that. I also don't see how many have been produced and sold at a price "between a Porsche and a Ferrari". They haven't yet set the automotive world on it's ear.



[This message has been edited by JCHannum (edited 04-24-2005).]

Your Old Dog
04-24-2005, 08:01 AM
Until Congress gets around to re-writing the laws of physics that new lithium battery might just be a pipe dream where conservation of energy or pollution is concerned.

I'm not a scientist but I thought with the possible exception of nuclear weapons, you can't get more out of something than what you put into it. And I mean all the manufacturing processes and effort that generate the final product.

I wouldn't mind driving an electric car. I'd enter the aftermarket selling "billeted" performance goodies and car stereos that sound like Ford Cobras, big Hemis and the like http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net//biggrin.gif Suppose they could get the tranny to whine like the 56 Chevy's did in the 60's?

BTW Evan, two things. When you get to the end of the web, will you tell me what's there? And, how did you cough up that website? I'm an inquireing mindless and would like to know http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net//wink.gif

Ray.......


[This message has been edited by Your Old Dog (edited 04-24-2005).]

mikem
04-24-2005, 08:06 AM
Last week the local tech college hosted its annual electric car races and I got to wave the green flag to start the races. Our local electric utilities sponsor the races for college and high school industrial tech classes and provide the same motor and controller for everyone. They were really just like electric three wheeled go carts with two lead acid 12 volt batteries for power. There is no gross weight limit, but the driver has to be 180 lbs or more. No gear changes are allowed during the race--most had chain sprocket drive. They race in a big circle around the outside of the parking lot in heats, based on whether they are first year contestants or experienced racers. They can reach speeds of 60 miles per hour and in an hour's time the fastest cars did about 70 laps on the course (about a half mile). Even in an hour the fast cars didn't seem to lose speed. There were two crashes--one axle broke and one steering arm bent. Only their pride was hurt, and their car's bottom side got a little road rash. Lots of fun to watch. thanks--Mike.

J Tiers
04-24-2005, 10:14 AM
3phase:
Last time I checked, first one across the finish won....weight or no weight.

The probable best vehicle for electric conversion is an S10 or similar small truck. Light, but able to carry battery weight easily.

If you can put in an engine/generator combo, you can take out some batteries and swap their weight for engine weight. Problem with home-built hybrid conversions is that the motors you can get are not as nice as the ones for the hybrids. Straight electric you can get nice Dc traction motors for. Maybe 3phase motors if you are a VF drive engineer.

Evn the hybrids vary. The bigger Honda is a "fake" hybrid. I don't know about the little "eco car", I mean teh sedan. The engine never stops, it just gets a boost from the tiny 10 HP electric motor.

The Prius is a "real" hybrid....about equal power in engine and motor, 40 or 50hp each. At a stop, the engine stops. You accelerate with the motor, and then the engine starts if you excedd speed/time parameters.

Ryobiguy
04-24-2005, 12:11 PM
Something I didn't see mentioned in the overall environmental efficiency rating was the generation of the electricity required to charge the pure electrics. While it's kind of silly, image a coal power plant providing the power for all the, uhm, "clean" electrics. The power comes from somewhere, and it seems to be a (probably valid) assumption that the electrical plants are going to be overall more efficient than the IC cars that someday electrics might replace.

Overall cost - how much does it take to bully the world into letting us obtain enough petroleum? How much does it cost to distribute electricity vs. liquid fuel? What is the impact of being manipulated and controlled by "big oil"? (BTW, what ever happened to alcohol power that was supposedly a cheap byproduct and burned cleanly? Too utopian for big oil to let us have?)

While an electric high performance car is a facinating niche, I don't think that's the point of electric vehicle power. Lately I've been disgusted with those esuvee monsters that keep getting bigger and heavier, and now have the 1" rubber band around the 30" rims - obviously the extra weight/fuel deficiency from the heavy off-road suspension/ruggedness is completely wasted. So disgusting, sometimes I think we should draft gas guzzlers for our next conquer-the-oilfields colonization war.
Until we can produce more than we consume, petroleum consumption has got to decrease.

Wirecutter
04-24-2005, 01:05 PM
I think Ryobiguy's got the right idea. Electric and hydrogen powered cars are no cleaner than the energy source used to get the "fuel" to begin with. What *might* make it cheaper to run an electric car is simply the economy of scale in making the power. Your local electric company can generate power for a lot less per kilowatt-hour than you can. (Go ahead - get yourself a generator and try it.)
With the possible exception of nuclear (sorry Mr Bush - Nookyoolur) energy, all energy sources on the planet can be traced directly back to the sun. Storing, extracting, transmitting, etc are done in a zillion different ways. Electricity is a lousy and lossy way to move energy. Petroleum is a great way to store and move energy, but making it from all that dead organic stuff is *way* too expensive and takes far too long, so we just find what's already around. IC engines give up (waste) something like 80% of the fuel energy as *heat*, but that's been improving over the years. Sure, alcohol is a great fuel, but beer doesn't burn so well, so ya gotta distill it. And where's the energy for the still coming from?
We're making progress in some areas with efficiency, losing ground in others. My '97 Ford had a 2.5L V6 that produced nearly as much horsepower as the 5.0L V8 in my parent's '68 Chevy wagon, and it did it more cleanly, with less fuel, and much less weight. But now everyone wants to drive a pavement-pounding 8000 lb SUV that gets about 3 gallons to the mile. We all get what we "pay for". Sure, technology moves us forward, but I really doubt we're going to find a "magic bullet" for our energy needs. The "magic" of cold fusion, for example, eventually boiled down to either downright fraud, or a couple of guys who couldn't measure the results of their experiments correctly, depending on who you choose to believe.
You can safely bet that there will *always* be money in energy, and the riches go to the person/company/entity that can find/produce/steal it the cheapest. Those who use the least will have less trouble paying for it. (Ok, well if you *steal* it, that's an exception, unless you're caught)

As for me, I'm working on a car that will burn "billet" (sorry Forrest - "bull****") I've got to hurry up and get it out there before Big Oil finds out, steals it, discredits me, ruins my life, and hides it away forever.

mikem
04-24-2005, 01:26 PM
Two dollar gas is still too cheap to make any difference in the way people drive. My guess is that it would take somewhere between $1 and $2 of extra gas tax to boost the retail gas price into the $3 to $4 a gallon range to really make a difference in consumption. Be careful what you wish for. You might not like it after you get it. How much is gasoline in the UK, EU or Australia?

[This message has been edited by mikem (edited 04-24-2005).]

Evan
04-24-2005, 02:39 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Evan:
Do you mind explaining how being faster is actually being slower?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I just did, but I'll elaborate.

It's called the power to weight ratio.

If you want to claim one engine has more power output than another, then you can mesaure that power output of each engine on a dynamometer. The dynamometer doesn't care how heavy batteries are, or how much fuel weighs.

If you want to claim one engine is "faster" then another engine, then you need to run both engines in the same chassis and compare how each engine performs based on moving the chasis's weight along with the power plants own weight (Batteries + speed controller + transmission + engine(s)) vs (fuel + transmission + IC engine).

-Adrian</font>

The Elise does exactly that. The electric is faster.

JCHannum
04-24-2005, 03:33 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Evan:
The Elise does exactly that. The electric is faster.</font>

Since the base Elise has something like 146 HP vs 200 HP for the electric version, that information is hardly astounding.

Paul Alciatore
04-24-2005, 04:10 PM
I hate to bring up details but there is more to a practical electric car than light weight, better motors, and better batteries. Most cars are used by families; wives, mothers in law, little old ladies from you know where, etc. etc. Until you can make one with all the extras like air conditioning, they just aren't going to sell.

Perhaps what we need is a new approach to accomplishing everything that a modern car does.

Paul A.

Stanko
04-24-2005, 05:39 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Your Old Dog:

BTW Evan, two things. When you get to the end of the web, will you tell me what's there? And, how did you cough up that website? I'm an inquireing mindless and would like to know http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net//wink.gif

Ray.......


Ray try here http://home.att.net/~cecw/lastpage.htm


[This message has been edited by Your Old Dog (edited 04-24-2005).]</font>

J Tiers
04-24-2005, 09:52 PM
The deal about electric being generated so what about pollution....

Its a matter of where, and how much. First, the electric plant is FAR more efficient than any automobile.

Second, the pollution from the auto is right there in your face, damaging you daily. The pollution from electric plants is less per power unit produced, although different in character, and it isn't blowing in your face direct from the next jerk's tailpipe. Big difference.

Evan
04-25-2005, 02:13 AM
The single biggest problem with an all electric vehicle isn't air conditioning, it is heating. There is no way that an electric vehicle will be able to provide cabin comfort at -40 no matter how good the batteries are. For that single reason electric and even fuel cells have no future in cold climates.

barts
04-25-2005, 11:26 PM
Back in grad school, I built a hydraulic/gas
hybrid... the mechanical stuff worked well,
but the computer controls needed more work.

Today (20+ years later) we enjoy our new Prius
hybrid, which gets actual 45 mpg all the
time (city, 75 mph on the freeway, etc).


With projections indicating $300+/bbl oil
prices in 10 years, thinking about fuel
efficiency is back in vogue.

Since I live only a few miles from work,
I think an electric motorcycle is in my
future. Should be a fun project, and
be just right for zipping around town.

- Bart

J Tiers
04-25-2005, 11:39 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Evan:
The single biggest problem with an all electric vehicle isn't air conditioning, it is heating. There is no way that an electric vehicle will be able to provide cabin comfort at -40 no matter how good the batteries are. For that single reason electric and even fuel cells have no future in cold climates.</font>

Fuel cells at least have the ability to gnereate heating power. Once you get them to operating temps.

The very inefficiency of the gas motor helps in that special case. if it weren't so inefficient, it wouldn't have spare thrown-away heat to use for "non-essentials" like heating the cabin....

I only lived in a -34 climate, not -40, but it was still plenty cold enough.

I think you will be forced to burn extra fuel to get cabin heat to taste in the 8 months of heating season. Still may be well ahead of regular IC systems.

The same separate heating can be done with electric, of course, and the heating requires relatively little fuel. Exhaust heat from the cabin can warm the batteries and get extra mileage out of them.

There is some excess heat from fuel cell systems....usable to warm the cabin.

And, of course, the amount of extra fuel used in a separate heater depends entirely on the users.....unlike the IC system where you are only diverting energy that would be lost in any case.




[This message has been edited by J Tiers (edited 04-25-2005).]

Evan
04-26-2005, 02:03 AM
A pure electric or even fuel cell vehicle will definitely need an auxillary heater unit just like aircraft use in very cold climates. It could be fueled with alcohol or biodiesel which would be much more efficient than trying to capture waste heat since there isn't much to capture from electric systems. The amount of heating required at -30 or -40 is in the multi kilowatts. It isn't really optional except on very short drives, something we don't have a lot in rural Canada. My mailbox is a 4 km round trip from my house.

AZSORT
04-26-2005, 09:37 AM
To answer the power/weight issue. Here is a new startup with an advanced motor. Of course it doesn't include battery weight, but that is changing too. The electric motor as tesla designed it has served us well for the last century, but these new complicated hi-tech motors will blow your doors off. (And not waste a bunch of power as noise) Get the rest of the story from evworld.

Raser Technologies' Symetron(TM) is just such an electric motor. While it uses virtually the same materials found in the common DC or AC motor, how those components are arranged and controlled results in a motor that is dramatically more efficient and has a higher power density. The Symetron motor in the Formula Lightning race car the company modified develops an amazing 420 foot-pounds of torque.

To give you a clearer sense of what that means. The new A35 V-8 engine in an Infiniti Pro-series Indy Car, which is about the same size as the Formula Lightning -- generates 385 foot-pounds a 8,000 rpm. That engine weighs 325 pounds. The Symetron weighs just 147 pounds (66.6 kg) and measures a mere 11 inches in diameter and is just 8.5 inches thick.

What's the magic? I asked Higginson.

"The eleven herbs and spices, if you will, are a combination of how the rotor and stator and windings are [arranged], as well as a control strategy that's different than standard control strategies that are out there today," he replied cryptically, adding that the companies they are licensing the technology to want to keep the technology a secret for obvious competitive reasons.

The company is publicly traded over-the-counter under the symbol of RSTG and has a current market cap of nearly $1.4 billion dollars.

3 Phase Lightbulb
04-26-2005, 12:23 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by AZSORT:
To answer the power/weight issue. Here is a new startup with an advanced motor. Of course it doesn't include battery weight, but that is changing too.</font>

How can you "answer the power/weight issue" without the weight of the batteries? That's the whole argument! No batteries = 0 RPM, and 0 HP. Not very impressive!

Some people clearly don't understand how an IC engine and an electric motor work.

Take the TZero for instance... It's tuned for power/performance so it gets a whopping 200HP for around 100miles... This setup is a high-current/high-performance configuration.

Take the Cobra's 427 for instance. It's highly tuned for ECONOMY and NOT performance. If this engine was tuned for performance, you
would be running a low compression engine, with a super charger force feeding massive amounts of fuel and air significantly increasing the power/weight ratio. In this performance configuration, you're more in line with the Tzero at 100 miles per tank of fuel.

It's funny how you never see a super high-current high-power AMP guzzling electric motor compared with the equivalent alcohol blown performance tuned 3000 HP++ IC engine. Why not? They both weight around the same.. They both consume their energy source at the same rate...

It's always a high performance electric motor, compared with a non-high performance economy tuned IC engine.

-Adrian

Rustybolt
04-26-2005, 12:45 PM
Evan. With alchahol and Bdiesel you run into the same technological and economic problems as with petroleum. How much energy does it take to produce each as opposed to petroleum? What type of infrastructure is going to be needed to supply both on a greater scale? You just can't take an existing petroleum refinery and convert it to producing Bdiesel.

There is a company here in the midwest somewhere that is using animal offal as it's feedstock and converting it into usable fuel for trucks and busses. They claim that their refinig process uses half the energy as a refinery would.

Evan
04-26-2005, 12:59 PM
"With alchahol and Bdiesel you run into the same technological and economic problems as with petroleum"

Well, to some degree. You aren't going to need nearly as much to just heat the cabin of an electric car. Without cabin heat you simply don't have a useable product where I live. The cabin heater can be some sort of external combustion system. That is far cleaner than an IC engine such as found in a hybrid.

Wirecutter
04-26-2005, 05:03 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by J Tiers:
The deal about electric being generated so what about pollution....

Its a matter of where, and how much. First, the electric plant is FAR more efficient than any automobile.

Second, the pollution from the auto is right there in your face, damaging you daily. The pollution from electric plants is less per power unit produced, although different in character, and it isn't blowing in your face direct from the next jerk's tailpipe. Big difference.</font>

Touche' This is true, and this is probably the primary method by which electric cars can be more efficient. So yes, economies of scale apply not just to cost, but to environmental impact, for similar reasons. This is less true, however, for hydrogen cars, since it takes a lot of juice (or natural gas) to produce hydrogen.

-M

mayfieldtm
04-26-2005, 06:16 PM
I want a car that runs on SEX!
(or meatloaf).

Tom M.