EV Digest 2469

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Zinc air Scooters
        by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  2) Fw: Zinc air Scooters
        by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  3) RE: Less green for more green
        by "George Tylinski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  4) RE: [EV1-CLUB] UNpopular Science
        by "George Tylinski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  5) Re: Amps, Volts, AC, DC, ...
        by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  6) Re: Perfect High-Dollar EV
        by "Thomas Shay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  7) Re: Perfect High-Dollar EV
        by "Jon \"Sheer\" Pullen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  8) RE: Less green for more green
        by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  9) Re: Perfect High-Dollar EV
        by Otmar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 10) Re: Amps, Volts, AC, DC, ...
        by Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 11) Re: Perfect High-Dollar EV
        by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 12) Re: Amps, Volts, AC, DC, ...
        by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
I am thinking four of these units (24v) would be perfect in a Lynch powered
motorcycle.  Lawrence Rhodes.........
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Oops .  Forgot the link.  http://www.powerzinc.com/en/index-2-c3.html
Lawrence Rhodes...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 11:59 AM
Subject: Zinc air Scooters


> I am thinking four of these units (24v) would be perfect in a Lynch
powered
> motorcycle.  Lawrence Rhodes.........
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I "understand" why they're not marketing them - to do so would reflect
very poorly on their ICE products (and everyone else's, but that may not
matter to them). But I don't understand why they highlight 'that you
never need to plug in' as a feature... How are they going to live that
down when they go to sell real Evs?? I guess they assume the public
won't remember.

The fuel cell PR irritates me as well, particularly that which has come
from the federal government. It sends a very strong message that you are
to have faith and be patient and continue as you were until such time as
the Gov't (i.e., oil/auto industry) says they have developed an
appropriate alternative. This will happen at roughly the same time as
all of the evildoers have been vanquished.

- GT

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce EVangel Parmenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 1:21 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Less green for more green
> 
> 
> Wasn't it the Honda Insight ads that said you never need to 
> plug it in?
> 
> I just saw a Toyota Prius TV ad that stated, 'that you never 
> need to plug in' ...
> 
> At least they used the right words to call the Prius a 
> gasoline-electric hybrid, and did not call it an Electric 
> car (I see way too many media pieces that call hybrids, an 
> Electric car. This just leads to more public confusion.).
> 
> But why having I seen a RAV4 EV tv ad?
> It has much more 'green' to tout than an EV wannabe:
> You never have to 'tune it up', change the oil, clean the 
> Valdez effect off the driveway, keep up with the rising 
> fuel costs, get smog it, etc.
> 
> But the fast paced TV ad has you hopping and bopping with the 
> background music, with the Prius quickly turning tight turns, 
> and ends with the statement, 'more green for less green'.
> 
> Referencing to a end of the year sale, meaning less green
> US dollars for less pollution. But they did not mention the 
> hybrids cost a little more than a comparable ICE. Truth be 
> told, it really is 'less green for more green' (when 
> compared to an EV). But no one compares to an EV on the TV.
> 
> ...
> I am just bent out of shape because anything that uses fuel 
> gets marketed and (full-size) EVs don't. 
> 
> I have a folder that is chocked full of fcv newswires, 
> another that parades hybrids, but I have scour the net to 
> get a handful of EV items (most of those are sub-highway 
> vehicles). Full-size EVs are not marketed (compared to ICE).
> 
> And I can see it coming. Toyota will say to CARB ...
> we stopped because no one wants them.  :-(
> 
> 
> 
> =====
> ' ____
> ~/__|o\__
> '@----- @'---(=
> . http://geocities.com/brucedp/
> . EV List Editor & RE newswires
> . (originator of the above EV ascci art)
> =====
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. 
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
> 
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
"Show me a doomsayer, and I'll show you a manipulative coveter of
unearned power."

I cut that out of a magazine 15 years ago and it seems to fit this case
(the e-mailer).

Thanks for the numbers, its' as close to apples/apples as I've seen.

- GT

> -----Original Message-----
> From: William Korthof [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 7:48 PM
> To: Michael J. Kobb
> Cc: ev1-club; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [EV1-CLUB] UNpopular Science
> 
> 
> At 11:43 AM 12/8/02 -0800, you wrote:
> >[Somebody feel free to forward to the RAV-4 club, since I m still 
> >banned ...] Despite their reputation, electric cars are 
> almost never as 
> >fuel efficient as gasoline cars. The reason is that the 
> energy consumed 
> >by a car is a function of the mass multiplied by 
> acceleration; electric 
> >cars have heavy batteries, and hence they almost always consume more 
> >energy than an equivalent gas car. On the emission side, if the 
> >electricity powering the car came from a coal burning plant, it can 
> >mean that the car is responsible for higher total emission 
> levels than 
> >a gasoline powered car.
> 
> Where do they come up with this bogus garbage!?!
> 
> Electric cars are THE MOST ENERGY EFFICIENT VEHICLES
> on the road, period. When you compare the vehicle efficiency 
> of every single electric-powered vehicle to comparable 
> combustion engine vehicles, the electric vehicle is more 
> efficient in every case.
> 
> Sorry for the English units, but here's my quickest 
> conversion: AC Proproplusion Tzero: 819 BTU/mile EV1 PbA: 853 
> BTU/mile energy use RAV4 EV: 887 BTU/mile Nissan Altra EV: 
> 989 BTU/mile EV1 NiMH: 1263 BTU/mile energy use EV Plus: 1433 
> BTU/mile Ford Ranger EV: 1672 BTU/mile Chrysler EV minivan: 
> 2047 BTU/mile Ford Postal EV: 2389 BTU/mile
> 
> CNG Civic: 3485 BTU/mile
> 
> Toyota Prius hybrid: 2250 BTU/mile
> Honda Civic: 3150 BTU/mile
> Toyota Camry: 4107 BTU/mile
> RAV4 ICE vehicle: 4423 BTU/mile
> Ford Ranger 2WD: 4790 BTU/mile
> Chrysler ICE minivan: 6052 BTU/mile
> Postal ICE vehicle: 7187 BTU/mile
> Lamborghinni (vs Tzero): 14375 BTU/mile
> 
> Note the BEST ICE-powered vehicle shown
> (Civic) uses 32% MORE energy than the
> biggest energy pig in the electric category.
> In comparing vehicle-over-vehicle energy
> use, the gasoline vehicles typically use
> FOUR TIMES AS MUCH energy!!!!
> The Tzero is over FIFTEENFOLD more efficient
> than Lamborghini, yet still accelerates faster!!
> 
> 
> Now when you add in the total fuel cycle with
> upstream emissions, the EV generally has a
> lower overall efficiency advantage, but offers
> huge advantages in energy diversification,
> lower overall emissions, and emissions controls
> that are 100% reliable.  Show me the ICE car
> that can run off renewable solar or wind power...
> 
>  >The thing is, Popular Science is just about one half step 
> removed from 
> the supermarket tabloids.  Their reporting is >credulous and 
> poor on many 
> subjects.  Sadly, they re read by a lot of people.
> 
> Apparently!!
> 
> /wk
> 
>   
> 
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Paul G wrote:
> 
> >Paul G wrote:
> >>  But
> >>  its really hard to beat a $2500 Raptor1200 and a $1600 ADC 9 inch
> >>  motor when you want to rapidly depart.
> 
> Victor wrote:
> >Paul, I hear you. Rapidly depart where? Is it critical to outrun
> >everyone?
> 
> That is perfectly fair question. I'm going exactly where I am going,
> fast or slow - but clearly that's not an answer. I have no tickets on
> my record (2 speeding tickets ever, last one over 10 years ago), so I
> don't *drive* fast. But I do tend to leave a light pretty quick. When
> my (now electric) Buggy was gas powered I could accelerate from 0-25
> getting across an intersection (with great care, I could also get
> tyre smoke or a wheelstand if I wasn't spot on the throttle and
> clutch).

I can slip front tires as well, especially in the rain, but not
really interested doing that. Instead of satisfaction as many may feel
I feel that I'm wearing off tries and stressing tranny which will 
lead to premature maintenance needed. But that's just me.
> 
> >Can you define "rapidly" please? If you're 1/3 seconds slower on
> >your way to run errands than 1200A Raptor and 9" give you, can you
> >still survive? :-).
...

> Roughly, I define worse
> than 15kg per kilowatt as unacceptable performance for custom
> vehicles and worse than 20kg per kilowatt as unacceptable when I'm
> driving some generic stock vehicle that doesn't get me attention (so
> a stock Geo Metro is right at the point of touching "not acceptable",
> IMHO). So, I will look at the
> numbers. If I understand the excellent Siemens offerings you have
> available its supposed to be limited to 280 amps at up to 360 volts.

To make this clear, motor current 280A RMS, which is 400A peak.
Battery current is not limited to 280ADC, it just practically 
impossible to exceed it even if you want to, because battery current
is always less than motor current.

And, when I describe the system, it's not for marketing intent;
it's to give the info what it can do and what its limitations are.
List knows about this offer very well, and there is no point to
brag about systems: who wanted them - got them already, and who
doesn't want them - will pass on no matter what I say.

> So, I see this as viable for a vehicle up to about 1500kg (if I'm
> taking the time to tear a vehicle apart and put it back together I'm
> not leaving it so stock in appearance as to not be noticed).

ACRX weighs 1536 kg which is 15.36 kg/battery kw or 19.69 kg/motor kW
but outruns practically every ICE from the stop at the traffic light.
0-60 mph is about 11s, and I rarely really test it.
A bit more about it: 
http://www.metricmind.com/ac_honda/simulations.htm
 
> On this note, and how easy it would be to hide 26ah Genesis batteries
> around my Buggy, I've thought about going with an AC system. You have
> a little motor that if mounted upside down (water in and out on
> bottom) could look real good out back (with a little paint and polish
> detail)...

This is how the motor you're talking about installed in OEM VW -
up side down and at the angle: http://www.metricmind.com/images/vw.jpg
Really any position is fine, just keep the water flowing.
 
> >Many people on the list are performance oriented and common
> >sense standards no longer apply to them, 100 kW does not excite them
> >anymore. Nothing wrong with that, and perfectly OK with me.
> 
> Well then I think you do understand, even if you haven't realized it
> yet. Very few new cars have less than 100kw in the USA. If I spending
> my time customizing a car (and how can you not, when your building an
> EV) I don't want to be outrun by a new Ford Focus or Dodge Neon. I
> *want* to be able to take it up a notch, and since the common public
> perception is that EVs are slow - it *does* makes sense to be able to
> dispel that myth.

Totally agree. And you do realize that electric 100 kW is far
more than ICE 100 kW. I should let you drive ACRX some time.
125 MPH speedo pegged one time. Other than few potential customers,
Rich Rudman is the only one who tried it one time. Of course,
he's hard core racing fan, but I don't believe he got impression
that ACRX was marginal on I205 in Portland =:O 
> 
> >There is a word "Reasonable", but by definition it does not apply
> >to sport, where everything must be extreme and for show off.
> >And I have no problem with that either, enjoy Woodburn every year!
> 
> Now I *know* you are understanding the EV sport :-) I guess I'm neck
> deep in custom autos since I was 15 years old, but its a sport with a
> practical outcome - you drive the results to the same places you
> would drive any other car. But you do it with a fun flair, people
> notice and show thumbs up, or wave, or just stare and smile. It may
> be still just getting from point A to point B, but its making the
> drive a positive part of the trip - instead of time wasted in traffic
> trying to get where you need to go.

They show thumbs up every time they know I'll notice! Of course,
on the road they don't know and don't care if this is AC or DC.
And I can assure you I have no less fun and just as wide ev grin
as you driving your way cool buggy!
 
> Neon
 
> P.S. - hopefully I did well with my metric conversions. I generally
> work in pounds and horsepower, but do respect the fact that you
> prefer to work in kilograms and kilowatts.

You did perfect. I try not to use household units for engineering
purposes, but talking to others have to balance it - if insisting 
too much, people don't bother to go through mental exercise of
conversions and walk away as from someone speaking foreign language.

I think they are missing out more than I.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I enjoyed reading John Wayland's rebuttal of the idea that a good
EV has to be designed from the ground up as an EV and that the
Solectrica Sunrise was a shining example of such a car.
John and others have amply proved that ICE powered cars can
be made into very good EVs.  Whatever the Sunrise was, it most
certainly was not what the subject title says--"perfect high-dollar EV"

An individual or a small company simply cannot make an automobile
from the ground up that will be better than a good converted ICE.  
It might be theoretically possible but I don't think it's ever been done.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "jerry dycus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: Perfect High-Dollar EV


>        Dear John,
> --- John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hello to all,
>  
> > Lee Hart wrote:
> > 
> > > To perform really well as an EV, the vehicle
> > really needs to be designed
> > > from the ground up to be an EV.
> > 
> > Oh come on, Lee! 'Needs' to be?
>         John, John, John, Do you really believe that?
>  The abililty for weight loss alone makes better
> performance possible. Am I wrong?
>       A good ground up EV will have a 25% weight
> advantage meaning about 25% less battery, 25% faster 
> acceleration for less $, same or more range. Is this
> wrong?
>   > 
> > First, let's determine what 'perform' means. To get
> > the ultimate in range per charge
> > 'performance'...maybe. If you only consider range
> > per charge as the primary performance
> > parameter, well, I guess we could all be driving
> > CommutaCars stuffed with a gazzilion
> > oozing, acid-spitting golf car batteries.
> 
>       Range, speed, handling, braking, comfort, looks
> all go into performance. With a ground up EV, these
> can be 
> increased over a conversion by a lot. See above.
> > 
> > To get the ultimate in customer acceptance type of
> > 'performance', no way! I'm talking
> > 'quality of appearance performance' ....I'm talking
> > about a car that has the look and feel
> > of a high quality factory car, like a Honda, a
> > Toyota, etc. That means body panels that
> > fit with tidy seams that don't waver and vary, that
> > means body panel materials that don't
> > have sand marks, grooves, wavy and warped expanses,
> > or god forbid, a Coleman ice cooler
> > texture!
>     It was a prototype John. Probably the stripped out
> one for the race, 373 mile max range test.
>     I have a good size picture of a very good looking
> Sunrise that the composite company built. It was shot
> with the light running down the side which would show
> bad finish and looked good. 
>     Your description of the surface shows that it was
> not the mold finish as a production composite part
> would not have been sanded, painted.
>     Probably why they sent it to a composite company
> for the other one.
>     But even if it was the mold, it can be refinished
> for excellent part quality or new molds built. The
> composite company with the molds now do some of the
> best work of any company. It has been building
> composites since 1957.
>       
> > 
> > To get the ultimate in acceleration 'performance',
> > again, it most certainly does not have
> > to be a 'ground up' EV. We have way too many
> > examples of killer EV acceleration from
> > converted gas cars to demonstrate this.
>       You are wrong here. Any EV with 25% less weight
> will beat a heavier conversion. Are you smoking
>  again?  Or did you just want to debate Lee?
> 
> > 
> > To get the ultimate in handling 'performance',  it
> > also, most certainly does not have to
> > be a 'ground up' EV. We have way too many examples
> > of killer EV handling performance from
> > converted gas cars to demonstrate this. The
> > converted '65 Mustang I helped design and
> > build back in '95, had a perfect 50/50 weight
> > distribution and a very low CG...it would
> > toast most any hopped up gasser Mustang in a slalom
> > contest. I rode in a lowered,
> > radically tricked out Fiesta EV with Optima's
> > stuffed way low in the body cavities and a
> > powerful EV power train... amazing, pull the skin
> > off your cheeks cornering!
>      My example would be the T-Zero. Beat that while
> keeping it's range? Can You? Not with a conversion.
>      Again the lower weight advantage of ground-up
> EV's with the same power, $ will beat new conversions.
> 
>      How much better can you get in CG height, batt
> placement than with the batts low in the center tunnel
> with batts as 50% EV weight as the Sunrise? 
>     Better CG, lower weight and polar moment which
> makes all the difference. Every good road racer knows
> that. You can't get that in a conversion.
>     Drag racing is power/weight ratio  which the G-up
> EV will win from lighter weight compared to a
> conversion. Do you disagree?
>     Do any of your Fast EV's have any range?
>     I don't consider 25 mile or much less range viable
> in a production EV. Do you?
> > 
> > For a long time, I've held my breath every time
> > someone, including Lee, raves about the
> > Solectria Sunrise, all because it ran so far on a
> > charge using hand selected,
> > cherry-picked, hand built NiMH Ovonics' best
> > batteries. It's really interesting, that I
>     Let you breath out, you need the O2!!!
>     But even with stock ni-cads we will use it will
> get 150+ mile range and a 10-25 year battery pack
> life.
>     With Lithium batts coming up, range would be 300+.
> Ni-MH is a non starter from cost, ect.
> 
> > started to write this rebuttal post yesterday,
> > Sunday, including comments about the
> > Sunrise, 
> > and as I am finishing it up today, Monday, the whole
> > Sunrise salivation thing has once again,
> > popped up, right on cue for this.
>         You just can't stand 'slow' EV's, can you?
>      I agree and would put a bigger AC drive in it for
> EV-1 level performance.  
>         
> 
> > 
> > >From Jerry Dycus:
> > 
> > >Of all the EV's built the Sunrise seems to be the
> > best one if it can be put into
> > >production.
> > 
> > What on earth, makes it 'the best'? Other than an
> > impressive range per charge, and that's
> > only because of it's enormous ahr capacity from
> > 'unobtantium' Ovonics hand-selected
> > batteries, this car does not excel at
> > 'anything'...in fact, it is inferior to even
> > marginal vehicles. 
>      The original was built as a mileage racer with
> the compromises that it needed.
>      Aerodynamics is 1 way it is the best except for
> the EV-1.
>      Weight is another.
>      And since the Sunrise weights only 2/3rds of an
> EV-1 it makes up for slightly better aero at less
> money.
>      As I stated in the post, it will use ni-cads so
> your arguement on batts is ? 
>      Range is #3. With ni-cads it will outrange, batts
> out live any other production EV. With Lithium it will
> double that range.
>      4 Seats!!!
>      Is that enough John??
> > 
> > I saw the Sunrise in person, when it was just a mold
> > sitting upside down in the backyard
> > of the Solectria brick building years ago when I was
> > back east. I saw it again at EVS 14
> > back in '97 in Orlando...sat in it, checked it out
> > from top to bottom, and drove it. Even
> > back then, Lee was going on about this 'car'. Gotta
> > tell ya folks....it looks like a 5
> > year old built this! It had a poor quality (at best)
> > composite body that makes a
> > Corvette's wavy fiberglass panels look straight.
>       I can fix any finish problems if they are any
> from the molds but the pics I have show they have
> already fixed it. 
>       It's a prototype you saw John.     
> > The interior can't save it, either...home-made
> > looking is an understatement!
>        Almost all cars have bad interiors. I'll use
> Recaro Seats, wood trim, leather, ect to make it top
> notch. 
> 
> >  Their AC drive system
> > is about as wimpy as they come, and
> > the transmitted
> > noise inside the car made you think you were driving
> > a thrashing machine. Driving it was a
> > depressing experience, with the word 'acceleration'
> > seemingly unsuitable to use as a term.
>      A larger Ev drive will be used. Better, quieter
> tires and get rid of the power brakes, ect will quiet
> things down. Another is to put one of your sound
> systems in it.
>     As you know without the noise of an ICE all the
> other noises seem louder. There are ways to take care
> of that. Tires make most of the noise.
> 
> > 
> > >From David Roden:
> > 
> > >The Sunrise is a remarkable EV,  in many ways a
> > much more sophisticated 
> > >design than the EV-1. 
> > 
> > (finger in mouth, gaggg) Better than an EV-1?
> > Somebody call a doctor, I'm getting sick! 
>      Is there a doctor in the house ;-0 ?  
>      Quick, someone get John into the Blue Meanie so
> he can get his fix of tire smoke to make him well!!
> 
> > OK, I agree, it 'will be' ...after the EV-1's get
> > crushed!
>     It's better because it weighs only 2/3rds of an 
> EV-1 that needs only 2/3rds the power for the same
> acceleration, that's better. 
>     You can get it fixed and parts for it, that's
> better.
>     You will be able to buy it.
>     Costs less.
>     Range is better.
>     Seats 4 people.
>     Faster charging.
>     Better hot weather performance, longer batt life
> with ni-cads.  
>     Conductive charging.
>     Ect. 
> > 
> > Let's see...Sunrise, 0-60 in an agonizing 17
> > seconds...EV-1, 0-60 in 7.6 seconds (Road &
> > track tested).
> >   Sunrise, wavy, ill-fitting body panels...EV-1,
> > the look, fit, and feel of a quality import.
> >   Sunrise, creaking body, tacky interior...EV-1,
> > solid body, nicely assembled interior.
>      Your talking a production Ev worth $100,000+ with
> a billion $ start-up verses a prototype, John.
>      With the same drive the Sunrise would beat the
> pants off the EV-1. And a larger EV drive is planned
> for it.
> 
> > >It shows what can be done when smart engineers who 
> > >understand electric vehicle design are given an
> > appropriate environment and 
> > >sufficient resources.
> > 
> > The Sunrise for me, is the ultimate example of what
> > can happen when 'engineers' go
> > unchecked by 'normal' people. Sunrise, brought to
> > you by the same 'smart engineers' who
> > brought us the $40k Geo Metro!!! Yup, you just have
> > to use 'smart engineers who understand
> > electric vehicle design' to come up with a Geo Metro
> > that has truly awful acceleration, a
> > severely limited top speed, mediocre hill pulling
> > ability,
> > and has the same range as a backyard, $8k DC powered
> > EV conversion, all for just $40k!!
>      See what I mean about conversions? That's why it
> needs to be EV from the ground up. The Force is a good
> example of this. Thanks.
>       The DC comment applies to the EV-1 too and any
> AC EV.
>      If I can get the molds for a kit car, a DC
> version  will be built.  
>      So do you plan on bringing a production EV to
> market? How would you do it better? 
>     It's easy to put something down by picking at it
> and putting it in the worse light. But this doesn't
> help get EV's into production. 
>     If you think you can do better in a production EV
> with good range, please do it. 
>             Yours Always,
>                     Jerry Dycus    
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
> 
> 
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Thomas Shay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 1:35 PM
Subject: Re: Perfect High-Dollar EV


> I enjoyed reading John Wayland's rebuttal of the idea that a good
> EV has to be designed from the ground up as an EV and that the
> Solectrica Sunrise was a shining example of such a car.
> John and others have amply proved that ICE powered cars can
> be made into very good EVs.  Whatever the Sunrise was, it most
> certainly was not what the subject title says--"perfect high-dollar EV"
> 
> An individual or a small company simply cannot make an automobile
> from the ground up that will be better than a good converted ICE.  
> It might be theoretically possible but I don't think it's ever been done.

One word for you: Tango.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
But I don't understand why they highlight 'that you
never need to plug in' as a feature...
They market this way because it is what their marketing research showed would work, and being an owner of one of these 'never have to plug it in' cars, I'm not sure that from a purely marketing strategy it isn't a good one. I have been asked the "do you have to plug it in" question many times and people generally see not having to plug it in as a pleasant surprise. I then have to try to convince them how much nicer it would be to have a plug-in hybrid. This is usually when their eyes start to gloss over and they start to have a hard time comprehending. Perhaps it is all the gas fumes they have inhaled over the years. I tend to think it is just the fact that for all their lives they have been going to the gas station and can't comprehend something else.

Warning... only OT content below this line ...

There are lots of things in our society this way and it takes a huge effort to overcome them. For instance, I don't drink coffee and always chuckle when I meet someone at work in the morning who just can't get going yet because they haven't had their coffee. Could you imagine if I came into the office and couldn't perform because I hadn't had my cocaine yet? One stimulant is engrained in out society the other is out their on the fringes still. BTW - I don't use cocaine either :-)

Just for fun, and to take this even further OT (bad Damon). If I were going to wage a war against America or some other western civiliation I would find a way to destroy their coffee supply first. Imagine the headaches and infighting that this would create.

damon

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 3:08 PM -0800 12/10/02, Jon \"Sheer\" Pullen wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Shay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
........
> An individual or a small company simply cannot make an automobile
> from the ground up that will be better than a good converted ICE.
> It might be theoretically possible but I don't think it's ever been done.

One word for you: Tango.
I was going to say the same.

My only two reservations with the Tango are that they are not yet available, and in low production volumes the cost is rather high for the average individual. This, I belive, is unavoidable at this early stage of any new car development by a small company.

I am very excited to see the Tango proceed as a super EV that is not controlled by the whim of some chief auto executive. Having worked with Rick and Brian of Commutercars, I am impressed with the attention to detail they have for every subsystem of the Tango.

And I'm not just saying this because the Tango uses my controller, though I am proud that Commutercars has chosen to use the Zilla. :-)

-Otmar-

http://www.CafeElectric.com/ Zilla "Got Amps" Shirts now available online.
http://www.evcl.com/914 My electric 914
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> 


> 
> Totally agree. And you do realize that electric 100 kW is far
> more than ICE 100 kW. I should let you drive ACRX some time.
> 125 MPH speedo pegged one time. Other than few potential customers,
> Rich Rudman is the only one who tried it one time. Of course,
> he's hard core racing fan, but I don't believe he got impression
> that ACRX was marginal on I205 in Portland =:O
> >
Victor.... Let's try that again with a sticky clutch , and some good
rubber. In the Dry and in the Daylight might help me feel a bit more
comfortable with maintaining my "Madman" image.
        Then again you hanging onto the panic strap while sitting on 28 Yts
with no seatbelt, and just some pink poly insulation under your Butt
While I have the Tach over 8000 and still in first DOES qualify you for
some kinda Certification....

I look forward to Wayland's Blue Meany with a real clutch....It's been a
while since I broke it.

-- 
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
www.manzanitamicro.com
1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to All,

jerry dycus wrote:


>  John, John, John, Do you really believe that? The abililty for weight loss alone 
>makes
> better
> performance possible. Am I wrong?

Yes, you are. Perhaps you didn't fully read what I wrote? Re-read my definitions of
'performance'.

>
>       A good ground up EV will have a 25% weight
> advantage meaning about 25% less battery, 25% faster
> acceleration for less $, same or more range. Is this
> wrong?

Well, other than your obvious typing mishap (I assume you meant 25% 'more' battery), 
and
totally ignoring all that I wrote (you seem to have completely missed my point), yes, 
in
your narrow view of how a publicly acceptable EV should be, you are right, Jerry!

>
>       Range, speed, handling, braking, comfort, looks
> all go into performance. With a ground up EV, these
> can be increased over a conversion by a lot. See above.

I agree, when 'properly' done, such as in the EV-1....again, you seem to have 
completely
'not got it'. Your example of the poorly made, over-priced, weirdo Sunrise 'project' 
does
not in any way, fit the criteria I had specified (sighh) ....if only you had grasped 
what
I had written.

>     It was a prototype John. Probably the stripped out
> one for the race, 373 mile max range test.

NO, wrong again. It had the full interior, was certainly not stripped out, and was in
fact, their best effort at that time, for a high visibility car show. The only thing I
will say, is that the young Solectria representative dude with the car, was embarrassed
when he could see that I could see, all of the flaws and poorly executed work...he even
said as much to me...seems he'd seen pictures of Blue Meanie is the stereo rag it was 
in.
On the test drive, he was constantly apologizing for the car's performance that was on 
par
with a 96V Ford Escort with 1400 lbs. of batteries on board.

> I have a good size picture of a very good looking
> Sunrise that the composite company built. It was shot
> with the light running down the side which would show
> bad finish and looked good.

It's entirely possible that there's another Sunrise with more effort put into it, that 
I
have not seen...man, it would take a whole lot of effort to even be 'average'.

>
>     Your description of the surface shows that it was
> not the mold finish as a production composite part
> would not have been sanded, painted.Probably why they sent it to a composite company 
>for
> the other one.

That's encouraging. Going to someone other than 'them', is a step in the right 
direction.

>     But even if it was the mold, it can be refinished
> for excellent part quality or new molds built. The
> composite company with the molds now do some of the
> best work of any company. It has been building
> composites since 1957.

Again, this is encouraging, but now you've changed the tune of my whole post, and are
talking about a car not built by Solectria.

>  Any EV with 25% less weight
> will beat a heavier conversion.

Again, you missed my point. Lee said , and I quote exactly, "To perform really well as 
an
EV, the vehicle really needs to be designed
from the ground up to be an EV." My conversion EV runs 0-60 in ~ 6 seconds. No matter 
how
you slice it, that's performing really well as an EV!

Yes, the car being 25% lighter with all other things the same, would accelerate even
better, but having the car look like a Sunrise, would be a giant step backwards! The 
point
of this portion of my rebuttal, was that Lee's sweeping statement (very un-engineer of
him) with his generic 'performance' was flatly, wrong. Yes, a lighter car with all the
quality of a production machine, is something we would all welcome...that sadly, is and
has never been, anything from Solectria...especially their Sunrise, the subject of the
post....it was however, what the EV-1 was.

> Are you smoking again?

Just tires!

>      My example would be the T-Zero. Beat that while
> keeping it's range? Can You? Not with a conversion.

Jerry, you are so knee deep in your composite world, you set yourself up as an easy
target. It's very hard to debate like this over the email thing, without sounding like 
one
is trashing someone's work, but, since you opened this up too, here goes.

I'm glad you mentioned tZero, because like the Sunrise, it reeks of a one-off, ground 
up
design...for god's sake, it doesn't even have functioning doors, or a roof, or 
windows!!
It's bodywork and assembly are close to the 'homemade' look. It sounds like a child's
Radio Flyer pull wagon as it rolls over rough pavement....fit and finish are horrible. 
The
tZero is a hoot, but it's about as far away from a real car, as it can get. What it 
is, is
a fiberglass curiosity kit car, stuffed full of batteries and fitted with a powerful
mondo-expensive AC motor-controller package. Take the same 'car' (if you want to call 
it
that) and using the same 28 Optimas, fit it with a new 'Zilla and either a single big 
DC
motor, or a pair of smaller ones, and it would annihilate the AC version in 0-60
performance, annihilate it in top speed performance, and still come within a few miles 
in
range performance....but, it would still be a weirdo, highly dysfunctional car that is
only appropriate for sunny climate well-healed motorists who wish to terrorize
unsuspecting Vette drivers.

Let's turn it around here and get back to the real world of production quality, 
production
functionality cars....let's see the TZero, remade into a four passenger car with a real
roof, real windows, real doors, real crash protection, real quality, etc., ect., etc.
...the same range vs performance it now enjoys has evaporated, and minus the strong
powertrain it presently has...well, now it's just another hokey-looking Sunrise 
project.

>Again the lower weight advantage of ground-up EV's with the same power, $ will beat 
>new
conversions.

Again...man, this is getting old....you've missed the point of pretty much all that 
I've
said. Using 'your' yardstick (the Sunrise), this statement would be true only in motion
oriented performance parameters...it would still be poorly made, home made looking, and
lacking all of the normally expected 'performance'. In trying so hard to argue with me,
Jerry, you've painted yourself into a corner here. You have now changed your tune about
the Sunrise, for it's somehow, now turned into a car 'with the same power' as one of 
our
lowly conversions...how can that be with their mighty 58 HP AC power train?   :-)

>     Drag racing is power/weight ratio  which the G-up
> EV will win from lighter weight compared to a
> conversion. Do you disagree?

uh hmmm....you ARE talking to the guy with the world's quickest accelerating 'street
legal' EV...are you nuts?

At the race track, some racers send what you advocate, a ground up EV down the track.
These are fragile machines made with composites, orange board, duct tape, whatever it
takes to be light (and barely pass NEDRA's safety rules), and yes, they are pretty 
quick.
Even though they are quicker than my steel bodied, factory Datsun, when the day is 
done,
no one remembers the odd looking creature car that ran a 12 second ET...they are all
talking about that little 'recognizable' Datsun that ran a 13 second run and flew down 
the
1/4 mile faster than a stock Corvette! People want well made, factory like cars, not
fiberglass curiosities that reek of home made-ness. Again, the whole subject line of 
the
original thread, was 'Solectria's Sunrise', and you in particular, put it up on a 
pedestal
as being representative of the 'best'. You have now reduced the discussion to any
ground-up vehicle.

>
> Do any of your Fast EV's have any range?
> I don't consider 25 mile or much less range viable
> in a production EV. Do you?

Geesh, you make arguing so fun and easy! First, it's well documented that I have said 
over
and over, that the 25 mile limited range of my fun car, Blue Meanie, is not for 
everyone
and that most folks would want and or need more range. However.... I could put enough
batteries in Blue Meanie to easily get 70 miles of range, and still have enough
acceleration to suck the flimsy fiberglass doors off a Sunrise! A 2600-2700 lb. 
version of
Blue Meanie with a 70 mile range, could run 0-100 and back to a complete stop, by the 
time
the Sunrise had wheezed up to 80 mph (if it can even get up to that speed).

>
>     Let you breath out, you need the O2!!!

Hey, is it possible you have a sense of humor? Oh, I forgot, you have to have one if 
you
consider the Sunrise as a pinnacle of design.

>
>     But even with stock ni-cads we will use it will
> get 150+ mile range and a 10-25 year battery pack
> life.

This is so much fun....Put the same pack into a light weight conversion, or a ground-up
vehicle that can match it in every aspect (this just disqualified the Sunrise) and you
might get 20 miles less range, but the buying public will flock to the well made 
factory
built car that does everything else better.

> You just can't stand 'slow' EV's, can you?
> I agree and would put a bigger AC drive in it for
> EV-1 level performance.

Again, to stay with me here, Jerry, you've now moved towards most of what I was saying.
This one change makes it no longer a Sunrise. Keep thinking in this way, Jerry, and we
might end up agreeing on this...but then again, it makes your original stance about the
Sunrise being 'the best' look bad.

>      The original was built as a mileage racer with
> the compromises that it needed.

The original one was built strictly by the out-of-touch Solectria
'engineers'...compromises are part of their whole concept, they can't help it, they 
have
no clue to real people want and expect a car to be....a $40K Metro? Give me a break!

>
>      Aerodynamics is 1 way it is the best except for
> the EV-1. Weight is another.
>

Do it all, with 'quality' and pride in workmanship, with tight fitting seams, 
ripple-free
body panels, an interior that matches the Japanese and German cars, real acceleration
performance, etc., etc., and you no longer have the Sunrise...you've changed your 
argument
to the extreme.

>
>      As I stated in the post, it will use ni-cads so
> your arguement on batts is ?

You've never heard me bad mouth NiCads, other than their cost.

>        Almost all cars have bad interiors. I'll use
> Recaro Seats, wood trim, leather, ect to make it top
> notch.
>      A larger Ev drive will be used. Better, quieter
> tires and get rid of the power brakes, ect will quiet
> things down.

Jerry, Jerry, Jerry...it's no longer a Sunrise. Thanks for making it over to my side!

> Another is to put one of your sound
> systems in it.
>

>From what I saw of Solectria's work, a Wayland sound system would blow it to pieces!

>
>      Is there a doctor in the house ;-0 ?
>      Quick, someone get John into the Blue Meanie so
> he can get his fix of tire smoke to make him well!!

Stop it Jerry, I'm starting to like you.

>      Your talking a production Ev worth $100,000+ with
> a billion $ start-up verses a prototype, John.

Hey, I didn't say the Sunrise was better than an EV-1, David Roden said that!

>
> > EV conversion, all for just $40k!!
>      See what I mean about conversions? That's why it
> needs to be EV from the ground up. The Force is a good
> example of this. Thanks.

You missed it again, Jerry...the $40k Metro was used as an example of how 'out there'
Solectria is in what they do. No one else on the planet racks up a $40k price tag on a
Metro conversion! Yes, the Force IS a good example...a good example of how to date,
anything 'Solectria' has missed the mark.

>
>       The DC comment applies to the EV-1 too and any
> AC EV.
>      If I can get the molds for a kit car, a DC
> version  will be built.

Good, it will out -sell the more expensive AC version, hands down...and done right, it
will also outperform the AC version, hands down.

>
>      So do you plan on bringing a production EV to
> market?

Nope. But my hat's off to those who try. I'll stick to doing what I have always done
within my resources. If I did though, it would 'never' be based on something as ill
conceived, and poorly executed as a Sunrise!

> How would you do it better?

I'd start, by making sure each and every engineer's concepts, design, and 
construction, be
closely monitored by a non engineer type, someone with, god forbid, common 
sense...someone
who had the position to oversee everything the engineers tired to push through, someone
who is in touch with aesthetics, a sense of style, a sense of art, a sense of
practicality, a sense of value, a sense of the competitive spirit, and a feel for what
everyday folks want and appreciate. I'd probably keep the engineers in small guarded 
rooms
with a slot in the locked door where food goes in and designs come out, and never, 
ever,
let them roam with a free reign...never let them talk to the public :-)

I'd also not try to build a car, when I'm not a car maker...I'd leave that up to the
experts, the huge factories that have bene making quality car bodies, suspensions,
steering systems, safety packages, etc, for years and years...Like Toyota, Honda, 
Nissan,
Ford, GM, etc. I'd avoid composite construction (with its more often than not inferior
quality control and higher labor costs) like the plague and stick with either steel or
aluminum in a welded, strong unibody design, unless it was a pickup  (body on frame). 
I'd
choose a vehicle already popular and sought after that was light and roomy, yet had 
room
for an advanced battery pack...heck, I found room in a little Datsun 1200 for 
batteries,
and didn't loose one spec of passneger or storage space. Of sourse, the stuff dreams 
are
made of, it would be cooler to have them build a unique model just for the EV project.
With NiZN batteries, it would be easy to build a 120-140 mile range EV. With LiON a
200-250 mile car could be built. It would also be nice to offer this same EV, but with
affordable stuff inside, like advanced lead Acid batteries and a DC power train.

> It's easy to put something down by picking at it and putting it in the worse light. 
>But
> this doesn't help get EV's into production.

Is that what you think I've done? That sounds very emotional and narrow minded to me.

What I did, and what I always try to do, is correct misinformation when I see it, plain
and simple. Misinformation gone unchallenged, becomes fact. Had I not responded to the
flurry of accolades heaped on the Sunrise by you and others, we'd have everyone 
believing
what a stunning car the Sunrise is, when in reality, it is anything but.

As it has turned out, by challenging you, it's made you come back with a lot more info,
and though you still seem to think you're at the same place you were 'before' my post,
you've on many occasions in your response, made excuses for the Sunrise, switched to
another car that looks better for an argument, switched the argument from the Sunrise 
to
any ground-up vehicle, or completely changed your view:

(1) It was a prototype John. Probably the stripped out one for the race
(2) a very good looking Sunrise that the composite company built.
(3)  it was not the mold finish as a production composite part....why they sent it to a
composite company
(4) My example would be the T-Zero. Beat that while keeping it's range? Can You?
(5) Drag racing...the G-up EV will win from lighter weight compared to a conversion.
(6) I agree and would put a bigger AC drive in it for EV-1 level performance.
(7) Almost all cars have bad interiors. I'll use Recaro Seats, wood trim, leather, ect 
to
make it top notch.
(8) The original was built as a mileage racer with the compromises that it needed.
(9)  If I can get the molds for a kit car, a DC version  will be built.

Jerry, read the above 9 items that came from you, then re-read what I originally
wrote...scary, isn't it?

> If you think you can do better in a production EV
> with good range, please do it.

There's absolutely no doubt in my mind, there are many, including me, who can do a far
more creative, a far better thought out, a far better designed, a far better assembled,
and a far better presented EV than Solectria has done....a $40k Metro....were they
serious?

I believe that with advanced batteries, any well designed light weight production car
(made by a real car company), can be made into a beautiful, fun and fast EV with 
150-200
miles of range, and it can be done without resorting to the kit car world of flimsy, 
ill
fitting bodywork.

Jerry, set your sights higher than a Solectria product, use those better ideas where 
you
agree with me (and most other EVers), and go get 'em.

See Ya......John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Rich Rudman wrote:
> 
>         Then again you hanging onto the panic strap while sitting on 28 Yts
> with no seatbelt, and just some pink poly insulation under your Butt
> While I have the Tach over 8000 and still in first DOES qualify you for
> some kinda Certification....
> 
> I look forward to Wayland's Blue Meany with a real clutch....It's been a
> while since I broke it.

Hmmm, may be I should reconsider my certification...

My racing clutch with double spring pressure plate will be OK, but
CVs will probably go...
--- End Message ---

Reply via email to