EV Digest 5504
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: $67K for a RAV4 EV?!
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: cost of conversion
by David Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Question about NIMH patent(s)
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Aerodynamics
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: NiMH working but Unavailable
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: $67K for a RAV4 EV?!
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: NiMH working but Unavailable
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Fw: Vectrix - Now Belt verses Chain verses Shaft drive types
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
9) RE: Three-wheel Go-cart
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Aerodynamics
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Steam-powered trailer power supply
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
12) Re: cost of conversion
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: EV digest 5503
by Reverend Gadget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Fans in parallel
by Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Madman Does DC
by "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: $67K for a RAV4 EV?!
by "ProEV" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: NiMH working but Unavailable
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: $67K for a RAV4 EV?!
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Question about NIMH patent(s)
by Tom Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: $67K for a RAV4 EV?!
by Marc Geller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Question about NIMH patent(s)
by "Andre' Blanchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: $67K for a RAV4 EV?!
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Bill Moore on NPR NOW!
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: Question about NIMH patent(s)
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) Re: Question about NIMH patent(s)
by "Andre' Blanchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) Re: Source for NiFe batteries (Was: Question about NIMH patent(s))
by Chet Fields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27) Re: bifilar windings
by [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brad Baylor)
28) Re: 200 miles highway range on flooded lead acid: Is it possible?
by [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brad Baylor)
29) Re: Question about NIMH patent(s)
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
30) RE: Aerodynamics
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
I am sure that there would be plenty of service requirements. Don't kid
yourself, you still have wear items, and things still break. If they
don't., then they have lower warranty cost.
Try taking a 25 to 40 year old gas vehicle out of storage and get it
running. I've done it twice with electrics and both are still running.on
the orginal parts. Just not possible with your average ICE. Yes they break
just not as easily. Lawrence Rhodes.....
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
John Westlund wrote
> Last time I checked, the Orbitals were $96 each. This was
> Summer 2005. It may have changed.
My battery rep. says lead has gone way up (though he didn't quantify
it), and fuel prices increase the cost as well, since they have to be
delivered somewhere. (It was a total of only $90 to have them deliver
to my door instead of the warehouse 100 miles away, so I went with
that.) I believe other purchasing batteries at this time have seen
similar increases. The orbitals will undoubtedly go up as well.
> Look around. Cars like such have been sold on Ebay for that
> price, among other places. Recently, a Datsun 1200 EV
> conversion with flooded batteries sold for $3,000 IIRC,
> maybe less.
OK, point taken, after all, I got mine on ebay for $2680. However, I'd
been searching regularly for datsun 1200's for several months, and
nothing appeared. The rarity shows.
> Eliminating the
> internal combustion engine eliminates most of the work and
> parts that go along with restoration, a nice bonus.
Definitely, as long as there isn't major rust to deal with, you're
pretty much down to just elbow grease. However, the older or rarer the
car, the more likely you'll have to do a restoration as well as a
conversion. Without the ICE it's mostly labor, cleaning things up, but
it does add cost.
> My conversion will cost about $12k when completed and would
> be roughly the setup you outline. 300V nominal with 25 Exide
> Orbitals, 9 motor, Zilla 1k, PFC charger, regs.
>
> But mine's not going to start that way initially. It might
> be there in a few years. Given my current available income,
> I'm starting it as cheap as possible, for about
> $1,500-2,500. This means surplus aircraft starter generator,
> flooded batteries, homemade charger, homemade DC-DC
> converter, adapter plate made using my university's machine
> shop.
Are you planning on tracking cumulative cost as you go along? It seems
like converting, then reconverting several times would wind up being
more expensive overall. It would be nice to know, since I don't know
of any data regarding such a project.
> Considering you're using a high power controller and AGMs,
> yours isn't a typical conversion.
People have called me a lot of things but 'typical' has certainly never
been one of them. "eccentric," certainly, and definitely "Weird.":-)
So I'll grant you that, but it's a lot more middle of the road than the
usual extremes you see. I really think this is the direction most
conversions will go in the future. The Zilla has become almost a given
as the basic controller of choice, and as far as batteries, I chose AGM
because I've done my time with floodies, and the Fiero frame has enough
rust difficulties in the factory configuration without throwing
floodeds in there, too.
By the way, the PS batteries are fairly low power. They are rated for
cyclic use, but lose capacity a lot faster than say an orbital when
discharged quickly. (But with the Zilla, I can limit their discharge
rate!) I chose them to give me enough range for my commute. If I move
later, orbitals will be my next battery.
> If you look on Austinev.org, typical is still a Curtis
> controller, 8 or 9 motor, Zivan, Lester, or Rusco
> charger, and a pack of flooded batteries, in a small donor
> car like a VW Rabbit, Geo Metro, or Chevy S10, often with no
> DC-DC converter.
I agree, but these are mostly older conversions. for some reason, I
haven't seen a lot of new full sized vehicle conversion appear there,
although we hear them being discussed on the list.
> My impression is that PFC chargers, Zillas, AGMs, and such
> are usually considered premium items as far as the EV
> community is concerned. AC drives, li ions and such are even
> a step above that.
I think the Zilla is a lot closer to "mainstream" then premium, but
I'll agree with that on those other items.
> Actually, prices on EV components don't appear to have
> changed much from the 90s. Adjusted for inflation, they've
> probably gotten cheaper, aside from batteries.
Yes, but we should adjust our quote for a typical conversion for
inflation, too. Back when I bought my old escort, in 2000, the quote
was already $6-8K, and those were posted on older websites. It doesn't
seem to have moved much between then and now.
> A typical conversion would look something like this:
>
> -WarP 9'' series DC motor x1 $1,575 (Netgain)
> -Trojan T105 flooded lead acid battery x16 $1,360 (New
> England Solar)
> -Curtis Controller(72-120V DC, 400 amp max) x1 $995 (EV
> Parts)
> -Zivan NG3 Charger x1 $849 (EV Parts)
> -Miscellaneous components(Heat shrink tubing, tools, adaptor
> plate, fuses, ect.) $2,000
> -Components Shipping(Estimated) $1,000
>
> Total: $7,779 + donor vehicle
I think that may be a point I missed in the original thread. You
weren't including the donor.
> Often, the person seeking to convert a car already has a
> donor chassis.
They don't usually have an *appropriate* donor (light, strong, manual
tranny), though. However, they are readily available at low cost at
used car lots. We just bought a Saturn wagon with a stickshift for my
wife and kids to drive into town in for $3100. There were three other
vehicles there at that time that would have been good EV donors.
> It is possible to go much cheaper, with a cheaper motor,
> cheap US Batteries, homemade charger, and it is possible to
> go much more expensive, with AGM batteries, Zilla
> controller, ect. $10,000-12,000 gets you either Blue Meanie
> like performance or Red Beastie like range with many
> luxuries thrown in. $6,000-8,000 gets you Jet Electra type
> range and performance, without much luxuries, or with the
> right cherry picking of parts, could get a vehicle with Red
> Beastie range. This is more typical, at least checking the
> entries at Austinev. $2,000 can still get a highway capable
> conversion, but like a $12,000 tire roaster, it is a
> relative extreme among Evs that have been built.
Agreed. It's possible but if you go on the cheap side, it's much more
difficult finding parts, and it takes longer tracking things down.
Usually if you are on a budget, the tradin' post is the place to go.
You can usually pick up a Lectric Leopard or a Jet for $4-6K already
converted. It's a great way to get your feet wet in EV's.
David Brandt
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I do believe Jay Leno still has the original set in his 1909
Baker Electric.
Nickel batteries last fuckin' forever!
Mike Phillips wrote:
>Are there any of Edisons old batterys around? It would
>be great to check one out.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Not a bad idea. It would grant numbers more embedded in
reality instead of theory, even if the margin of error may
only be within 10%.
However, the effects aerodynamics have on required
horsepower to maintain a speed is quite profound and proven.
If you actually run through the equations that determine
horsepower versus speed given a set of constraints, at
highway speeds you will find aerodynamic drag requires the
largest portion of the horsepower needed to maintain that
speed.
If you were to graph rolling resistance force versus
aerodynamic drag force, they crisscross at between 30 and 40
mph on most cars. Aerodynamic drag varies as a square of
your velocity.
Aerodynamic drag is the single largest force to overcome at
highway speeds, and lowering it is where the largest
increases in vehicle efficiency can be made.
As for empiracle data, there's plenty of that to go around
with the help of a search engine. But it's within the realm
of gas powered automobiles, not EVs. The effect of reduced
drag will be more profound on EVs due to the efficiency
characteristics of electric motors. There is reason the GM
EV1 could get 100 miles highway range on 1,300 pounds of
lead acid batteries, but that same weight of batteries in a
conversion of a VW Rabbit would only get it 60 miles highway
range.
The EV1, weighing in at 3,000 pounds, only needed 160
wh/mile to maintain 60 mph. Most conversions with roughly
the same frontal area weigh less and require 250-300
wh/mile. Turns out the EV1 has a .19 drag coefficient. Makes
all the difference in the world...
Mike Philips wrote:
>I'm sure every little bit helps. But what I think
>would tell me just how much aero resistance is
>costing, is to put a vehicle on a chassis
>dyno and use the onboard Emeter to see what the
>WH/mile is without wind as a factor. Then drive it on
>the road at the same speed. The difference would be
>mostly due to aero resistance. Then do the same
>thing with aero "improvements". This may generate more
>facts than lore ;)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Chet Fields wrote:
>How quickly can these batteries be charged?
Depends on the charger you're using. They can be fast
charged as far as I know. Don't take what I say as gospel,
but I remember aerovironment repeatedly being able to charge
NiMH packs from 0-80% in 20 minutes. But that last 20% will
take many hours.
>Sooo, EVs *are* practical with *today's* technology.
That's what the scientists and the University types appear
to have been saying since the 1990s.
>Are individuals or small businesses impeded by the
>patents in creating their own battery packs from the
>smaller individual modules?
This is my opinion here: sort of. Since they aren't licensed
to manufacture these batteries, they have to pay a premium
price for the ones offered. On top of that, with the
monopoly hold on the patent, the company which holds the
patent can keep charging $1,000+/kWh. That is in fact what
these batteries cost for today's hybrids.
Further, creating larger capacity battery packs from these
smaller ones is a nightmare when it comes to proper
regulation. Try figuring out how to string multiple Prius
packs into something usable for a pure EV and get back to
me. I don't know many people that can do it. In fact, I only
am aware of one successful attempt!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I drive 35-40 year old cars. They are like EV's, they are just not
that hard to get running. But that's just me ;)
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I am sure that there would be plenty of service requirements. Don't kid
> yourself, you still have wear items, and things still break. If they
> don't., then they have lower warranty cost.
>
>
> Try taking a 25 to 40 year old gas vehicle out of storage and get it
> running. I've done it twice with electrics and both are still
running.on
> the orginal parts. Just not possible with your average ICE. Yes
they break
> just not as easily. Lawrence Rhodes.....
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Who has strung multiple Prius batts together for a BEV? Carlton
perhaps? He has about 4 1/2 in his car.
I'm putting in Prius packs as we speak. I will be getting back to you ;)
Mike
>
> Further, creating larger capacity battery packs from these
> smaller ones is a nightmare when it comes to proper
> regulation. Try figuring out how to string multiple Prius
> packs into something usable for a pure EV and get back to
> me. I don't know many people that can do it. In fact, I only
> am aware of one successful attempt!
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This note is primarily a response to Mike Phillips question related to drive
types for a donor EV motorcycle. Most of the posts here have hit well on the
characteristics of belt or chain or shaft type final drives for 2 wheeled
applications. I just wanted to touch on some of the other points in a bit more
comprehensive evaluation.
Efficiency in order best to worst
1) chain
2) belt (in this case I am referring to a toothed synchronous type like
Gates Poly Chain GT2)
3) shaft
Please note that drive chains come in two basic types, industrial and
"O-Ring". Modern motorcycle applications all use the o-ring type that seals a
small
reserve of oil to allow a longer wearing chain with less attention to
maintenance. O-Ring types do reduce efficiency compared to industrial types.
Over
the past few years manufacturers have created things like X-Rings to address
the efficiency loss issue.
Weight in order lightest to heaviest
1) belt (aluminum cogged pulleys, kevlar fiber reinforced toothed belt)
2) chain
3) shaft
Most people do not realize that in a typical motorcycle application the
chain and sprockets are fairly heavy. This is why you see aluminum sprockets
and
slotted chain side plates used in racing applications. On my 750cc Suzuki ICE
street bike (all steel) a 14t front sprocket, 41t rear, and 96 links of #630
chain weigh ~12 pounds.
Noise in order of quietest to noisiest
1) belt
2) shaft
3) chain
My Kawasaki Ninja EV uses a std. motorcycle type #525 chain drive. Once the
ICE is gone the noise of the drive chain is really LOUD. This is true on
every EV motorcycle I have ridden. The noise is enough to be really annoying
even
when wearing a full coverage helmet. Of course this helps in parking lots as
people can hear me coming and I don't scare my neighbors. I have to admit
that I lust after a quiet belt drive.
Handling
Note that the shaft drive has an unusual behavior under hard acceleration
like exiting a corner. I think of the shaft drive as much like the ring and
pinion gears in the rear end of a rear drive car. This may not be completely
accurate for a motorcycle, but bear with me. When accelerating hard the ring
gear attempts to climb the pinion causing the rear seat of the motorcycle to
rise instead of the expected squatting behavior. This feels funny to most
riders
the first time they are on a shaft drive bike. The short story is that you
get used to it and modern motorcycles have attempted to minimize this
behavior.
Durability most to least
1) shaft
2) chain
3) Belt
The average well maintained O-Ring type chain should last well over 15,000
miles which might be 8 to 10 years on the average EV motorcycle. The downside
is that periodic adjustments ~ every 1,000 miles are required to accommodate
for the chain stretching and of course there is some throw off of the oil used
to lubricate the chain. The oil throw off on my rear wheel and electric
motor really offends my EV sensibility.
Also note that riders may want to factor in their riding conditions before
choosing a belt drive. Small rocks form dirt, gravel, or even a freshly coated
blacktop rock chip type surface can tear the crap out of belt quickly
causing complete failure while driving.
Cost cheapest to most expensive
1) chain
2) belt
3) shaft
A good chain set up costs $150 to $200 including replacing the sprockets.
Conclusions
- I really don't mind the maint. associated with a chain drive, but the
weight, noise and mess are unpleasant. Cost and availability of modular
replacement parts is also an advantage.
- I recognize that a shaft drive does offer quiet operation with no mess,
little maint. and great durability at the expense of weight and handling.
- However I believe that the ideal drive for an EV motorcycle is a
synchronous belt drive. The benefits are no messy oil, light weight and quiet
operation. The downside is cost, potential durability issues and maintenance
to
adjust for belt stretch.
Mike Bachand
DEVC
Colorado
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
> Hmm, I've seen a number of them with a single rear axle, but
> the driven wheel rides on the bearings over the axle.
> In fact most of the ones I've seen have the rear axle welded
> to the frame.
I rather suspect we are discussing completely different types of karts.
The ones I am familiar with are the track karts, and they do run a solid
rear axle that has either one or two 1/4" keyways cut along their entire
length. They are supported near each end by a flanged bearing that
attaches to the kart chassis, so that the entire axle is free to rotate.
The sprocket and single brake disc attach to this axle and are
positively secured to it using the keyway(s), as are the wheels/hubs
that attach to each end.
If you do a quick online search for kart chassis or parts suppliers, you
will see what I mean. Every rental kart and every electric kart I've
seen have used this drive configuration. This leaves me with the
impression that they are more common than the other drivetrain
configurations that might be more popular for specialised applications
(such as off-road/dirt tracks). That virtually every supplier of kart
parts that turns up in an online search supplies components exclusively
for the solid, both wheels driven rear axle configuration tends to
support my personal experience, and at the very least should serve to
confirm that the solid axle, both driven drive configuration certainly
must represent far more than 10% of the karts out there and therefore
90%+ of karts cannot possibly use the single driven wheel configuration
as you stated.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I get that ICE vehicles have some data showing that aerodynamics
matter. But with most ev's, they are short range and low speed. ACP's
rule of thumb is that going from 45 to 60 mph increase consumption
30%. So aero drag is real. My quest is to see if I am above 45mph long
enough for aerodynamics to affect my range significantly. That's where
empirical testing rules. If my truck could go 60+mph for 100 miles I'd
address it's aero deficiencies. But for how it can be driven right
now, I don't know that aero drag matters more than a couple percent.
This needs to be proven. Since the onboard cpu can spew lots of
relavent data into my laptop I can graph the entire drive cycle on the
road in various configurations and on a dyno. I've already graphed and
post this in my USE group for short drives to the gf's house and back.
I need to map out a local "Pomona Loop" so I can standardize as much
of this testing as possible.
My new pack will have the same ah's as the old one but weigh 400 lbs
less. This will help at all speeds.
The other variable missing on a dyno is that the front wheels are not
turning unless its a 4 wheel dyno. This could make aero drag look even
worse. Hmmm.
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Not a bad idea. It would grant numbers more embedded in
> reality instead of theory, even if the margin of error may
> only be within 10%.
>
> However, the effects aerodynamics have on required
> horsepower to maintain a speed is quite profound and proven.
> If you actually run through the equations that determine
> horsepower versus speed given a set of constraints, at
> highway speeds you will find aerodynamic drag requires the
> largest portion of the horsepower needed to maintain that
> speed.
>
> If you were to graph rolling resistance force versus
> aerodynamic drag force, they crisscross at between 30 and 40
> mph on most cars. Aerodynamic drag varies as a square of
> your velocity.
>
> Aerodynamic drag is the single largest force to overcome at
> highway speeds, and lowering it is where the largest
> increases in vehicle efficiency can be made.
>
> As for empiracle data, there's plenty of that to go around
> with the help of a search engine. But it's within the realm
> of gas powered automobiles, not EVs. The effect of reduced
> drag will be more profound on EVs due to the efficiency
> characteristics of electric motors. There is reason the GM
> EV1 could get 100 miles highway range on 1,300 pounds of
> lead acid batteries, but that same weight of batteries in a
> conversion of a VW Rabbit would only get it 60 miles highway
> range.
>
> The EV1, weighing in at 3,000 pounds, only needed 160
> wh/mile to maintain 60 mph. Most conversions with roughly
> the same frontal area weigh less and require 250-300
> wh/mile. Turns out the EV1 has a .19 drag coefficient. Makes
> all the difference in the world...
>
>
>
> Mike Philips wrote:
>
> >I'm sure every little bit helps. But what I think
> >would tell me just how much aero resistance is
> >costing, is to put a vehicle on a chassis
> >dyno and use the onboard Emeter to see what the
> >WH/mile is without wind as a factor. Then drive it on
> >the road at the same speed. The difference would be
> >mostly due to aero resistance. Then do the same
> >thing with aero "improvements". This may generate more
> >facts than lore ;)
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
You should start by talking with Rod Muller of Strath Steam in Goolwa,
Australia.
If he can't help you I'm sure he knows who can.
-Myles Twete
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "David Sharpe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Yesterday I returned from Sydney (I live in Melbourne) in my Diesel Peugeot
> (2000kms on 90litres of distillate) and followed a main railway line. There
> was much broken up sleepers and remnant tree debris visible. When things get
> grim we could return to the technology of yesterday for energy- a steamer.
> Any manufacturers of small steam reciprocating engines plant in the US? We
> have a 10 hp manufacturer in Australia but it is too small I think. My idea
> would be a horizontal boiler and induced draft to keep it all low profile.
> You would need a closed cycle. Every hour or so you would stop to put in
> another log, but having batteries it would not be critical to stop
> immediately boiler pressure fell.. No problems getting hot water for tea or
> coffee. David
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David Brandt wrote:
>Are you planning on tracking cumulative cost as you go
>along? It seems like converting, then reconverting
>several times would wind up being more expensive
>overall. It would be nice to know, since I don't know
>of any data regarding such a project.
Yes.
But I also will tally each 'reconversion' seperate. So when
I have my final conversion, it may have cost me $18,000 or
so total, but someone could duplicate my final conversion
right off the bat for $12,000 if they had the money.
I don't, so I'm starting with a cheap conversion. I don't
intend to keep it that way, and I will thus keep upgrading
as the money is gathered. These gas prices are taking most
of my disposable income. The higher they go, the less money
for my EV. The irony kills me.
The $12k conversion is calculated to achieve 100 miles range
at 60 mph, 0-60 mph in ~5.5-6 seconds, 140+ mph top speed.
This would be with significant aerodynamic modifications and
only needing 25 amps to cruise at 60-65 mph.
I can't wait to see what it really does though. In reality,
it may only get 40 miles range. All depends on execution and
driving style.
I may not even go with that setup a few years from now. I
have considered a Siemens AC setup, but it just doesn't have
the performance I want. I'm waiting for something in the
120-150 kW range to come out, not 78 kW.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Or you could take the EPA estimate for highway, and
take the difference of your actual highway miles
before conversion, that number should be the aero
losses. (he types with a chuckle...)
Gadget
> > Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 08:25:33 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Aerodynamics
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
>
> I'm sure every little bit helps. But what I think
> would tell me just
> how much aero resistance is costing, is to put a
> vehicle on a chassis
> dyno and use the onboard Emeter to see what the
> WH/mile is without wind
> as a factor. Then drive it on the road at the same
> speed. The
> difference would be mostly due to aero resistance.
> Then do the same
> thing with aero "improvements". This may generate
> more facts than lore
> ;)
>
> Mike
>
>
visit my websites at www.reverendgadget.com, gadgetsworld.org,
leftcoastconversions.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
So if 5 fans of 30cfm each are in aerodynamic parallel, so they add up
to 150 cfm total? In other words, if 5 fans were connected to the same
box, can they push 150 cfm thru it? I bet not, but wanted to see if
someone has been there and done that.
Mike
Here's to the crazy ones.
The misfits.
The rebels.
The troublemakers.
The round pegs in the square holes.
The ones who see things differently
The ones that change the world!!
www.RotorDesign.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
OK List I am back...
Let the E-mail fly... I have 761 E-mails from the last week I will try to get
to the Orders first, then the stories...
I have a Wallet full of Congressmen's cards....Lots of Ideas... and Hope for
all Prius owners that want to Plug in.
We can do IT!!!
Oh yea ... and Madman... Well you all named me that for a good reason...
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
Home of the simple Pirus Plug in Kit.
I just have to build it first.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
A high ranking VP at Toyota spoke at EVS20 in Long Beach and stated that
EV technology could not deliver a 100 mile range, and could not recharge
in a reasonable amount of time, all the while the T-zero was parked
outside with a 100+ mile range and a one hour charge capacity.
Hi All,
This reminds me of one of my favorite ICE car company PR moments. It was at
EVS 17 in Toronto. A high Exec from Toyota was delivering his speech (could
it be the same Toyota VP?). One of his pie charts was comparing the number
of sales of Toyota natural gas, to Hybrids, to EVs. The EV's were just a
tiny
slice of the pie.
"Look", he said, "the market has spoken, everybody bought hybrids rather
than the RAV4 EV."
Then, I think it was Greg Hanson, noted EV1 driver, who stood up and asked,
"Was the RAV4 EV ever offer for sale to the public?"
The Toyota Executive looked all grumpy and conferred with his translator.
"No." he said.
Cliff
www.ProEV.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I don't remember the guy's name, but he had a Lotus 7
replica that used mutliple Prius packs. I think it had about
12 miles range, or something absurdely low like that.
Mike Philips wrote:
>Who has strung multiple Prius batts together for a BEV?
>Carlton perhaps? He has about 4 1/2 in his car.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Dealers make a LOT of money on repair and service of the very complex ICE
> designs. The designs are getting more and more complex, requiring more
> expensive repairs and greater profitability on parts and service for
> both the automaker and the dealers, not to mention the sheer complexity
> and the sheer number of parts means that there are many more
> opportunities to sell upgrade and aftermarket components.
Sorry but I don't buy it, not with modern cars.
Many cars today come with 7 to 10 year warranties. That means the dealer
doesn't make squat on repairs until the car is quite old, at which point
it will be worth so little that many people will simply junk it rather
than pay for an expensive repair.
In the town I live in, most of the dealers offer FREE lifetime oil and
filter changes, so they don't even make money on servicing it. About the
only money they make is on periodic maintenance/check ups and they don't
make much on that.
The auto makers probably don't make squat off maintenance/check ups so
they are probably making the bulk of their money off the original sales.
Where dealers make the bulk of their money is selling used cars. Used EVs
would be no different.
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ok it is 20yrs for a us patent ... now when was this patent filed?
anybody?
t
------snip----
Provisional Application for Patent
Since June 8, 1995, the United States Patent and Trademark Office
(USPTO) has offered inventors the option of filing a provisional
application for patent which was designed to provide a lower-cost
first patent filing in the United States. Applicants are entitled to
claim the benefit of a provisional application in a corresponding
non-provisional application filed not later than 12 months after the
provisional application filing date. Under the provisions of 35
U.S.C. § 119(e), the corresponding non-provisional application would
benefit in three ways: (1) patentability would be evaluated as though
filed on the earlier provisional application filing date, (2) the
resulting publication or patent would be treated as a reference under
35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as of the earlier provisional application filing
date, and
(3) the twenty-year patent term would be measured from the later
non-provisional application filing date.
Thus, domestic applicants are placed on equal footing with foreign
applicants with respect to the patent term. Inventors may file U.S.
provisional applications regardless of citizenship. Note that
provisional applications cannot claim the benefit of a previously
filed application, either foreign or domestic. Note also that 35
U.S.C. § 112 must be complied with as discussed in the paragraph
below in order to receive the benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e).
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The automaker offers the warranty, and the dealer gets compensated
for any service and repair by the automaker. The dealer makes money
whether it's a warranty repair or not.
On May 19, 2006, at 11:20 AM, Peter VanDerWal wrote:
Dealers make a LOT of money on repair and service of the very
complex ICE
designs. The designs are getting more and more complex, requiring
more
expensive repairs and greater profitability on parts and service for
both the automaker and the dealers, not to mention the sheer
complexity
and the sheer number of parts means that there are many more
opportunities to sell upgrade and aftermarket components.
Sorry but I don't buy it, not with modern cars.
Many cars today come with 7 to 10 year warranties. That means the
dealer
doesn't make squat on repairs until the car is quite old, at which
point
it will be worth so little that many people will simply junk it rather
than pay for an expensive repair.
In the town I live in, most of the dealers offer FREE lifetime oil and
filter changes, so they don't even make money on servicing it.
About the
only money they make is on periodic maintenance/check ups and they
don't
make much on that.
The auto makers probably don't make squat off maintenance/check ups so
they are probably making the bulk of their money off the original
sales.
Where dealers make the bulk of their money is selling used cars.
Used EVs
would be no different.
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do
whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your
long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 11:14 AM 5/19/2006, you wrote:
Are there any of Edisons old batterys around? It would be great to
check one out.
Mike
They turn up now and then.
http://www.smokstak.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17205&highlight=Edison+battery
You may check this out.
http://home.cybertron.com/~edurand/Otherstuff/Edison.html
__________
Andre' B. Clear Lake, Wi.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Actually, half of dealer profit margins and 30% of OEM
profit margins comes from parts and services, if the
following article is to be believed.
www.sdcexec.com/article_arch.asp?article_id=4829
"In the automotive space, service parts management can be
critical to the bottom line at both OEMs and dealers.
Industry data show that service parts can drive up to 10
percent of OEM revenues and 30 percent of profits, while at
the average dealership, parts and service accounts for 12
percent of the revenue and 48 percent of profits."
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
>The auto makers probably don't make squat off
>maintenance/check ups so they are probably making the
>bulk of their money off the original sales.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lawrence Rhodes
Bassoon/Contrabassoon
Reedmaker
Book 4/5 doubler
Electric Vehicle & Solar Power Advocate
Vegetable Oil Car.
415-821-3519
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
So why are they not being made anymore? They sure have great specs.
Thanks for the links!
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Andre' Blanchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> At 11:14 AM 5/19/2006, you wrote:
> >Are there any of Edisons old batterys around? It would be great to
> >check one out.
> >
> >Mike
>
> They turn up now and then.
>
http://www.smokstak.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17205&highlight=Edison+battery
>
> You may check this out.
> http://home.cybertron.com/~edurand/Otherstuff/Edison.html
>
>
> __________
> Andre' B. Clear Lake, Wi.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
They are still being made in, you guessed it China.
http://www.beutilityfree.com/batteryNiFe/nife_batteries.html
I am needing a house pack for my PV and wind system, I sure would like a
set of these. I choke up when I look at the price, but have to remember
that I would likely never have to replace them.
At 01:14 PM 5/19/2006, you wrote:
So why are they not being made anymore? They sure have great specs.
Thanks for the links!
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Andre' Blanchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> At 11:14 AM 5/19/2006, you wrote:
> >Are there any of Edisons old batterys around? It would be great to
> >check one out.
> >
> >Mike
>
> They turn up now and then.
>
http://www.smokstak.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17205&highlight=Edison+battery
>
> You may check this out.
> http://home.cybertron.com/~edurand/Otherstuff/Edison.html
>
>
> __________
> Andre' B. Clear Lake, Wi.
>
__________
Andre' B. Clear Lake, Wi.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Here is one source.
http://www.beutilityfree.com/batteryNiFe/FAQNIFE.html
I think a few of the drawbacks are initial cost, low efficiency, high self
discharge and low current. But they do last nearly forever.
Chet
--- Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So why are they not being made anymore? They sure have great specs.
> Thanks for the links!
>
> Mike
>
> --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Andre' Blanchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > At 11:14 AM 5/19/2006, you wrote:
> > >Are there any of Edisons old batterys around? It would be great to
> > >check one out.
> > >
> > >Mike
> >
> > They turn up now and then.
> >
> http://www.smokstak.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17205&highlight=Edison+battery
> >
> > You may check this out.
> > http://home.cybertron.com/~edurand/Otherstuff/Edison.html
> >
> >
> > __________
> > Andre' B. Clear Lake, Wi.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If's just a term for describing two windings with the wires side by
side on a transformer, motor, etc.
Pretty decent writeup on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bifilar
Brad Baylor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>So, what do you think of this idea? Criticisms? Suggestions?
Great analysis! Looks good assuming the truck can handle the weight.
Start saving and build it! :)
For the DC-DC, consider the Meanwell supplies here:
http://jameco.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&productId=202121&pa=202121PS
Much less expensive than the Vicor you mentioned, more power, and
nicely built (I bought one for testing, and plan to use 3 or 4 in my
conversion (4 ganged together puts out 1400 to 2000 watts for $626 +
shipping).
Brad Baylor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'd love to disect an original Edison battery. I think they were in
metal cans?
It's clear that the energy density is not as good as lead acid, but
then again, maybe that can be changed.
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Andre' Blanchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> They are still being made in, you guessed it China.
> http://www.beutilityfree.com/batteryNiFe/nife_batteries.html
>
> I am needing a house pack for my PV and wind system, I sure would
like a
> set of these. I choke up when I look at the price, but have to
remember
> that I would likely never have to replace them.
>
>
>
> At 01:14 PM 5/19/2006, you wrote:
> >So why are they not being made anymore? They sure have great specs.
> >Thanks for the links!
> >
> >Mike
> >
> >--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Andre' Blanchard" <ev@> wrote:
> > >
> > > At 11:14 AM 5/19/2006, you wrote:
> > > >Are there any of Edisons old batterys around? It would be great to
> > > >check one out.
> > > >
> > > >Mike
> > >
> > > They turn up now and then.
> > >
>
>http://www.smokstak.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17205&highlight=Edison+battery
> > >
> > > You may check this out.
> > > http://home.cybertron.com/~edurand/Otherstuff/Edison.html
> > >
> > >
> > > __________
> > > Andre' B. Clear Lake, Wi.
> > >
>
> __________
> Andre' B. Clear Lake, Wi.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Search the net for a "coast down" test. This will help you determine
aerodynamic efficiency without having a dyno. You can also use 3" tufts of
yarn placed all over the car, and then video tape it to see areas of
turbulence.
If the car isn't driven much over 50kmh (30mph) aero improvements probably
won't make much difference.
Don
Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
see the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Phillips
Sent: May 19, 2006 8:26 AM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Aerodynamics
I'm sure every little bit helps. But what I think would tell me just how
much aero resistance is costing, is to put a vehicle on a chassis dyno and
use the onboard Emeter to see what the WH/mile is without wind as a factor.
Then drive it on the road at the same speed. The difference would be mostly
due to aero resistance. Then do the same thing with aero "improvements".
This may generate more facts than lore
;)
Mike
--- End Message ---
