EV Digest 2618
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: EV on EBAY
by "David Roden (Akron OH USA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Waterproffing and insulating regulators and such.
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: EV1 help line
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) EV PC (was: EV1s waiting,rant, an' stuff)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: BMS cost (was Re: LIN bus link)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Inspired Corporation's Product - Part 2 (long, but please read!)
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: What to look for in a battery charger?
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Q for Mark Farver
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Inspired Corporation's Product - Part 2 (long, but please read!)
by Peter VanDerWal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: BMS cost (was Re: LIN bus link)
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) RE: Battery Review [in light of recent discussion]
by "Walker, Lesley R" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Money philosophy (was Re: BMS cost)
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) RE: EVI ICS 200-B charging unit
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
14) Re: Standard Public Charging Station
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: EV1s waiting,rant, an' stuff
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: BMS cost (was Re: LIN bus link)
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Chinese EV Not As Pictured
by "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Inspired Corporation's Product - Part 2 (long, but please read!)
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: BMS cost (was Re: LIN bus link)
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Chinese EV Not As Pictured
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Even Energy Policy Makers are Clueless
by "Roy LeMeur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Gliders (part 3)
by Sam Harper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: BMS cost (was Re: LIN bus link)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: EV PC
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) Science News Toyota advertisement.
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) Re: EV PC long
by "Christian T. Kocmick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27) Re: EV PC
by "Christian T. Kocmick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28) Re: EV PC
by Lonnie Borntreger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
On 25 Feb 2003 at 15:09, Trotman Simpson wrote:
> 1993 Kewet El-Jet ....45 mph 2 seater
> This one is too small for me but someone may like it.
>
> cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2405165126&category=6
> 472
These are what the Citicar should have been. If the range and speed suit
your needs, it wouild be worth looking into. However, AFAIK they were never
officially imported, so parts availability may be a problem unless you have
a contact in Denmark.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation, or
switch to digest mode? See http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
1991 Solectria Force 144vac
1991 Ford Escort Green/EV 128vdc
1970 GE Elec-trak E15 36vdc
1974 Avco New Idea rider 36vdc
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Thou shalt not send me any thing which says unto thee, "send this to all
thou knowest." Neither shalt thou send me any spam, lest I smite thee.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
LOL. Very funny Rich. I actully blow them mostly by brushing the contacts
against another battery or such. If I have to service them move them around
or take them off to replace a battey I get into trouble with the 16 gauge
wire flopping around and hitting something. Yes I do ride a bike with the
mark ones but not in the rain and only one of those ever went bad. I did
inherit a bunch of old mark ones when I got a bunch of Delphi batteries used
and free thanks to the others that used the batteries and giving up first.
As I blew the Mark IIs I replaced them with the used Mark ones. They had
about 3 years on their batteries before I even started to use mine.
Lawrence Rhodes....Lectra with 6 Delphi and the Ford Aspire with 30 Delphi
and a hell of a lot of Rudman regs. With the regs in it really balances the
batteries nicely. I can even safely leave off one reg if I have one battery
that laggs a bit. Right now it is a bit of babysitting........
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 10:52 AM
Subject: Re: Waterproffing and insulating regulators and such.
> Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
> >
> > I've had more trouble just brushing contacts on the thirty regulators I
use
> > to keep my pack balanced. It has destroyed a lot of regs. I was
wondering
> > if it might be a good idea to use some of that paint on insulation on
the
> > component leads of my regulators. It would be some work and you would
have
> > to keep it off anything that got really hot but I was thinking it would
> > water proof and insulate the connections for better dependabilty.
Anyone
> > done this on bare boards? Just a thought. Lawrence Rhodes.....
>
>
> Yea clean them with hot soapy water Blow dry them with compressed air,
> air dry with about 150 Deg air flow. Let cool and conformal coat them.
>
> You are the King Reg Killer. That you still have MK1s says you have had
> them for years!!
>
> Let me guess, you run them in a Ev bike on the street without any
> protection??? All weather, every day.
>
>
> --
> Rich Rudman
> Manzanita Micro
> www.manzanitamicro.com
> 1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I called and they said to contact:
Donation Action Council
MD371-999-B20
100 Saturn Parkway
Spring Hill, TN 37174
Just submit your proposal and they will respond. Lawrence Rhodes.......
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 11:38 AM
Subject: EV1 help line
> Still trying to figure out how to rescue or at least get some parts from
the GA EV1s, I happened across the General Motors EV1 website at
www.gmev.com It was last updated in 2001. There is a lot of promotional
information on the EV1 and how technologically advanced it is. There was
also a phone number 1-800-25-Electric
> I decided to call to ask how I could purchase a car and see what
information I could glean.
>
> The woman I spoke with took my name and address - we'll see what they mail
me. Hopefully no letter bombs. When I told her I saw the website, it
looked like a great car and I wanted to buy one, she said the phone number
was to provide support for those with leased vehicles, that production
halted in 2000, and there was no way to get one. I told her that I had
heard that the leases were ending and the cars were being returned to GM. I
asked what would happen to them. She said they were being donated to
schools. I said I worked with schools in Georgia and what would I have to
do to get one. She said that she would have to check. (Long hold, elevator
music...) She came back to the line and said the cars were only leased in
California and Arizona, all of them had been returned and donated to
schools. There were none left. I told her I knew that maybe 2 dozen were
just returned in GA and could I get one of those and save the shipping?
(Long hold, elevator music...) She s!
> aid she didn't know about those vehicles and said that some Gen 2 cars
were going to NY and MA. I said the GA cars were Gen 1s. I asked how many
schools were on her list that received donated cars. She said 16. Hmmm, I
puzzled out loud. GM built a couple hundred at least, 16 went to schools,
there are about 24 Gen 1s in GA and only a few Gen 2s are going to NY and
MA... Where are the missing cars? She didn't know and could not suggest
who to talk with. Her supervisor had told her everything. It's not her
fault, she just answers the phone.
>
> I was reminded of the end of Arlo Guthrie's "Alice's Restaurant" song
where he encouraged people to walk in to a "shrink" sign a bar of his song
and walk out. He was hoping to start a movement. I don't know how many
members there are of the EVDL. I wonder what would happen if everyone
called the 800 number and asked similar questions? Probably nothing.
>
> Enjoy the EVs you have.
>
> -Alan
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
EV built like a PC...
>> - Chassis designed to allow rapid replacement of virtually any part.
>> (motor, batteries, controller, etc. as easy to swap as a hard drive,
>> memory, video card).
>>
>> - Cheap, throwaway design. Nothing built to last. Only intended to
>> work a few years and then get replaced.
Chris Tromley wrote:
> As usual, intriguing and provocative thoughts from Lee. I'll take
> minor issue with one of the above. The way I see it, the first one
> means you don't have to do the second.
The two *are* related, Chris, in a way that's common in PCs but almost
unheard of in cars. For cars:
- If you want a CHEAP car, then it is built from cheap parts. The
parts are custom-designed for that one make/model, and NOT user
replaceable. You drive it until something serious goes wrong.
Then you junk it, because you just can't get parts and it costs
too much to fix.
- If you want a LONG-LIFE car, then it is built from expensive parts.
It costs more to begin with, because the parts are higher quality.
Because it is expected to last, parts are more generic and easier
to replace when they do fail. Thus you can keep it running (almost)
forever.
PCs don't take either of these approaches. They are built with CHEAP
parts, but they are also EASY to replace. If your monitor fails, or your
keyboard wears out, or you want a bigger hard drive, you can find dozens
of interchangeable replacements. It doesn't matter if it's from the same
make or model year.
> A good example is dash instruments. They can be all the same
> instrument that gets plugged into a dash location that tells it
> what its function is. Fixing a failed instrument takes maybe five
> minutes. What would it
My idea is to carry this one step further. There *IS* no gas guage!
Instead, you have a single VGA monitor that is used to display your fuel
gauge, speedometer, radio dial settings -- in fact, it displays
EVERYTHING!
The "gas guage" only exists as a software program that takes information
like battery type, number, voltage, current in/out, etc. and computes a
state of charge, which is displayed on the screen.
> A 100k mile life is an unfounded worry with an EV. So why adopt the
> second item above? Build it to last forever. Even if it becomes
> obsolete, it's not an environmental burden like an old ICE would be.
Two reasons. First, because designing it to last means the parts are
more expensive. It's cheaper to have inexpensive throwaway modules that
can be used up, and then recycled.
Second, because the technology is changing so fast. In a few years,
something better will come along, and you wouldn't WANT to replace the
original. If the hard drive failed in my PC, would I *want* to replace
it with the same small size? No; I'd replace it with a bigger one (which
costs less than the OEM part anyway).
--
Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
>> remember this was proposed as an el-cheapo balancing system. Not
>> the best, but one that could be cheap enough so people would
>> actually buy and install it.
Rich Rudman wrote:
> Yes, it is exactly what I am trying to build. The entry level that
> gets the job done. Problem is it's a moving target! And it's still
> not really clear what is really needed. I THINK, I have understood.
> But new wrinkles show up every day. As alway, I will try.
I thought you were moving away from the simple Mk1 type regulators, to a
much more feature-laden but expensive Mk3 type.
To me, there are only two features needed.
1. Limit max battery voltage (with a resistor).
2. Indicate when the regulator is limiting, so the charger can be
turned down or shut off.
All it really takes to do this is a light bulb and a zener. If the
battery box is enclosed, a phototransistor tells you when the first one
starts to conduct.
Everything else is fluff (nice to have, but not necessary :-)
--
Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sure. If you will go to the burnt car dumpster, you can honestly
report that 100% of cars you saw were burned in fire. So?
I'm not saying having a fire extinguisher in a car is a bad idea.
You don't look for unrelated ICE car fire statistics, you should look
for how many *more* (percentage) cars equipped with LiIons burn up
than regular cars. I bet it's less (because of no gasoline), but
neither you or I or perhaps anyone have statistics on that.
Victor
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2003-02-24 at 17:17, Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> > Lock Hughes wrote:
> > >
> > > > > -Lithium-Ion pack, say around 22kw capacity
> > >
> > > Fire supression system?
> > >
> > > Lock
> >
> > I thought gasoline burns far easier than batteries, yet don't
> > see many fire extinguishers in ICEs. Wonder why.
> >
>
> Really? Huh... I always keep at least one fire extinguisher in my
> cars. I guess you must be right though, when I was going to the
> insurance auctions about 5% of the cars there were "total burn", nothing
> left but burned up, rusty metal.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lesley Walker wrote:
> The rules say you have to use lead-acid. Plus, how much would it cost
> to do that? This is a high school team I'm working with.
Aha! Then use starting batteries. They have a very short cycle life, but
will give you more amphours per pound. For example, Optima Red Tops, or
whatever you can get there as a "premium" starting battery.
--
Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jim,
The owner of this truck lives in Waco Texas, he's probably better
source for such info. I can supply you his email if Mark haven't
done so.
Victor
Jim Coate wrote:
>
> You've probably said this before, but... what type/quantity of batteries
> are you using and what type of range are you getting with your truck?
>
> [I tried writing off-list but kept bouncing]
>
> Mark Farver wrote:
> > Metricmind/Seimens AC drive Ranger
>
> _________
> Jim Coate
> 1992 Chevy S10
> 1970's Elec-Trak
> http://www.eeevee.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
<sigh> never mind Victor.
Just out of curiosity, exactly which cars ARE "equipped with LiIons"?
On Tue, 2003-02-25 at 15:19, Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> Sure. If you will go to the burnt car dumpster, you can honestly
> report that 100% of cars you saw were burned in fire. So?
>
> I'm not saying having a fire extinguisher in a car is a bad idea.
>
> You don't look for unrelated ICE car fire statistics, you should look
> for how many *more* (percentage) cars equipped with LiIons burn up
> than regular cars. I bet it's less (because of no gasoline), but
> neither you or I or perhaps anyone have statistics on that.
>
> Victor
>
> Peter VanDerWal wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2003-02-24 at 17:17, Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> > > Lock Hughes wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > -Lithium-Ion pack, say around 22kw capacity
> > > >
> > > > Fire supression system?
> > > >
> > > > Lock
> > >
> > > I thought gasoline burns far easier than batteries, yet don't
> > > see many fire extinguishers in ICEs. Wonder why.
> > >
> >
> > Really? Huh... I always keep at least one fire extinguisher in my
> > cars. I guess you must be right though, when I was going to the
> > insurance auctions about 5% of the cars there were "total burn", nothing
> > left but burned up, rusty metal.
>
--
EVDL
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes, I understand that. THe issue discussed was the means of isolation,
and HF transformer does it by its nature. BTW, LEDs also need a driver,
may be not as expensive though.
Victor
Lee Hart wrote:
>
> Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> > A proven HF transformer on a small toroid core, while not as sexy
> > as fiber, does isolation nicely. You only need 5-6 turns on the
> > primary and secondary, such a transformer is cheaper than IR
> > optocoupler, and has a benefit of being bidirectional. Done right,
> > practically nothing to fail. Just something to consider.
>
> Magnetic coupling works fine. But when the cost of the driver circuit
> for it is included, opto usually wins on cost. Magnetics work best when
> the signal to be coupled is already AC, or where power needs to be
> transferred, or for other special case applications.
> --
> Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
> 814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
> Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
> leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David Roden wrote:
> Here's part of a post from 1997 which describes the
> then-current state of things in batteries.
Is this in the FAQ? (I just tried to check, couldn't
get to the FAQ - have sent email to EV Parts about it).
--
Lesley Walker
LRW_at_clear.net.nz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] until 17 March
"[Hybrid electric vehicles] are self-sustaining,
as long as you keep putting gas in the tank."
--- James R. Healey, USA Today
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I keep forgetting that my money philosophy probably little different
than for most. I don't make things more expensive than they have to
be, but designing for myself don't put money on top of priority list
or set fixed budget.
I define what do I want (reasonably) with *all* desirable features,
and *then* look if I can afford it, just like the most people.
The difference I think comes later: if I cannot afford it, I don't
start throwing features out until it's affordable; while it still
may get me from A to B, it's no longer something I wanted in a first
place, so why bother?. I look for alternatives to accomplish the same
thing.
I know that many define fixed budget first before even knowing
exactly what for in particular, and *then* try different things
if they fit in this budget. And, once it fits, very last thing is
decision if this is something they really may like or wouldn't mind.
Makes little sense to me, but this is just me.
Victor
Lee Hart wrote:
>
> >> The purpose of the switchable loads is not to balance during driving;
> >> it is to balance during charging, when AC power in being supplied.
>
> Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> > Yes, I know how it functions and also not suggesting to balance
> > while charging. But to burn energy from 89 bypass resistors for
> > several hours waiting for one cell to come in balance seem a waste,
> > whether comes from the mains or not. Boosting one (or few) cells
> > *while* charging adds some complexity, but one just makes a decision.
>
> Yes, it is a waste. But it's the same waste you get when balancing by
> deliberate overcharging. But with bypass resistors, at least the
> batteries are spared the heating and gassing, so you extend battery
> life.
>
> Also, remember this was proposed as an el-cheapo balancing system. Not
> the best, but one that could be cheap enough so people would actually
> buy and install it.
> --
> Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
> 814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
> Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
> leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Oops, correction.
If Bruce's information was based on a (1) PowerPak WITH Pedestal, then
that's $950 (close to $1000). But according to their pricing, a Dual
Pedestal and a single PowerPak, purchased individually, comes to $875 ($380
+ $495). Might be more cost effective to have electrician create the
pedestal during the wire pulling and just mount the PowerPak.
More information at www.avconev.com ore email [EMAIL PROTECTED] or call
877-423-8725 / 800-433-7642.
-Ed Thorpe
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 11:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: EVI ICS 200-B charging unit
Bruce,
I don't know where you get some of your information, but I just called Avcon
Corp/Meltric (http://www.evavcon.com/) a few minutes ago and talked with
Jodi (800-433-7642). Current pricing for their PowerPak, with anywhere from
12' to 21' cable, is $380 plus freight. Significantly less than $1000.
They will also fax quotes and specs on request.
-Ed Thorpe
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce EVangel Parmenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 11:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: EVI ICS 200-B charging unit
It seems this self promotion was sent out to other
email addresses besides Will's. The beginning bid
is $1200. The buy it now is set for $1500. There
is a 800# encase his unit needs repairs.
A new AVCON powerpak is about $1000
(but I hear they are raising their prices)
http://geocities.com/evcharging/images/avconpowerpak.jpg
An evi DS-50 is $1800 if you buy it from SMUD. More
if you buy it outside of SMUD's realm (through Georgia
Power)
http://www.geocities.com/evcharging/images/ds-50.jpg
...
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Edward Ang wrote:
>
> We were just discussing about this last Saturday in EBEAA meeting. But, we
> did not come to a consensus. I am summarizing what I got from the meeting.
>
> 1) NEMA 14-50 is the most preferred setup. But, no one in the meeting knew
> if it met the electrical codes to put it in public and expose it to weather.
Then how do they manage 240V on the public camp grounds / RV parks??
Without compliance they wouldn't be allowed. Just find what the code
was, may be it will apply to 14-50 as well.
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Chris Tromley wrote:
>
> Lee Hart wrote:
>
> > - Cheap, throwaway design. Nothing built to last. Only
> > intended to work
> > a few years and then get replaced.
Sorry, I wouldn't drive such a car.
>
...
>
> Most long-time car guys know you can easily get way over 200k miles out
> of a car with proper care.
> ...
> They last so long because they are easily serviced and parts
> are swapped out as necessary.
If you swap out all the parts except the body, you don't really have
the *same* car anymore.
Good concept but if the a steering wheel last 3,000,000,000 miles
and you attach piece by piece another car *to* it, you don't say
you have the same car.
Of course, this extreme is just to illustrate my point.
In industry if unibody is the same, legally it's the same car.
Make unibody with composite fiber (like boat) and you can claim
that your car lasts many millions of miles (after swapping entire
chassy/drive train many times over, but this is "minor" detail :-) ).
Another issue - who'd want to drive the same car for whole life?
Working truck is different, you often don't even get to choose.
It must work, not to please you or be a status/image.
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Rich Rudman wrote:
>
> Yes, it is exactly what I am trying to build. The entry level that gets
> the job done. Problem is it's a moving target!!
> And it's still not really clear what is really needed. I THINK, I have
> understood. But new wrinkles show up every day.
> As alway, I will try.
One thing is you design for yourself, and if someone happen to like it,
you sell. Then you design as good as you can within your hobby budget.
Other thing is to design for sale. To make living. Then you design
as cheap as you can that still does the job, like Christmas lights.
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: Electro Automotive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:22 PM
Subject: Chinese EV Not As Pictured
> It has recently been brought to my attention that there is a web site
> purporting to carry a news story about a high performance EV under
> development in China. The site in question is:
>
> http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200112/17/eng20011217_86842.shtml
>
> As you may recognize, the photo at the top of the story, although badly
> distorted, is the electric Aztec built by Electro Automotive. This photo
> was stolen from our web site and used without permission. Electro
> Automotive and this car have absolutely no connection with any Chinese EV
> project.
>
> I have written to the web site via their contact form and requested that
> they remove the photo, but they have not done so, nor have they
> responded. Since this site seems to be getting picked up and referenced
by
> other web sites (including one in the UK), my only recourse is to try to
> spread the information that this photo is being used without permission,
> and that there is no connection whatsoever between the our company and car
> and the Chinese project. If you come across any other links to this site,
> please inform me so that I can try to correct the information.
>
> Thank you.
> Shari Prange
Not only are you being infringed on, the bottom of the Web site home page
has other "borrowed" images that would lead one to conclude that GM, The EV
Hisotry On-line Museum and Didik Enterprises were also involved with this
project. I smell something brewing. Not sure if it's a fat copyright case,
liable, or potential scam game to try to bilk investment monies.
Good luck Shari!
Regards,
Rick
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
>
> <sigh> never mind Victor.
>
> Just out of curiosity, exactly which cars ARE "equipped with LiIons"?
That's my point. Practically none, yet you're saying you saw
5% of auction cars were destroyed in a fire.
Obviously, it's has nothing to do with LiIon dangers then.
I know, you're smarter than that Peter. Can't believe
you don't get my point.
Indeed, never mind. Let's drop it, shell we?
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
>
...
>
> Everything else is fluff (nice to have, but not necessary :-)
Then, everyone would drive city cars :-)
When was last time you saw a person who does only
what's necessary, not what he/she wants?
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have an issue of Chinese electric vehicle magazine (I let John
Wayland have it) which features photos taken at OMSI lot in Portland
during EV awareness day and placed on private web sites by owners of
the pictures. Overall lot is visible, close up photo of John's Heavy
Metal garden tractor and other people I personally know. So this stuff
gets in print and published, not only appears on the web site.
If they remove it quickly, you no longer have bases to complain.
Then they snag someone else's picture.
With hard copy issues it's impossible to recall and one may have
better case.
But, this is China, I doubt you can enforce anything. Copyrights
are laughed at, much less respected. Remember $10 best Microsoft
and Adobe software from China?
Rick wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Electro Automotive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:22 PM
> Subject: Chinese EV Not As Pictured
>
> > It has recently been brought to my attention that there is a web site
> > purporting to carry a news story about a high performance EV under
> > development in China. The site in question is:
> >
> > http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200112/17/eng20011217_86842.shtml
> >
> > As you may recognize, the photo at the top of the story, although badly
> > distorted, is the electric Aztec built by Electro Automotive. This photo
> > was stolen from our web site and used without permission. Electro
> > Automotive and this car have absolutely no connection with any Chinese EV
> > project.
> >
> > I have written to the web site via their contact form and requested that
> > they remove the photo, but they have not done so, nor have they
> > responded. Since this site seems to be getting picked up and referenced
> by
> > other web sites (including one in the UK), my only recourse is to try to
> > spread the information that this photo is being used without permission,
> > and that there is no connection whatsoever between the our company and car
> > and the Chinese project. If you come across any other links to this site,
> > please inform me so that I can try to correct the information.
> >
> > Thank you.
> > Shari Prange
>
> Not only are you being infringed on, the bottom of the Web site home page
> has other "borrowed" images that would lead one to conclude that GM, The EV
> Hisotry On-line Museum and Didik Enterprises were also involved with this
> project. I smell something brewing. Not sure if it's a fat copyright case,
> liable, or potential scam game to try to bilk investment monies.
>
> Good luck Shari!
>
> Regards,
>
> Rick
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello All
I think this is more on topic than off.
This is an exerpt from a article titled:
"A Hydrogen Economy Is a Bad Idea"
Complete story here:
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=15239
The author is David Morris, vice-president of the Institute for Local
Self-Reliance. www.ilsr.org
At first, he seems somewhat educated about hydrogen production, then this:
"Currently, a Toyota Prius may get 5 percent of its overall energy from its
batteries and could only go a mile or so as a zero emission vehicle. A
second generation Prius might get 10 percent of its energy from batteries
and might have a range of 2-3 miles. Why not encourage Toyota and Honda and
others to increase the proportion of the energy they use from the
batteries?"
As we know, the available hybrids do not get _any_ of their "energy" _from_
the batteries. Duh! "You never have to plug it in"
Toyota says the Prius won't run at all without gas, though an EV lister
recently posted that he was indeed able to drive about 2 miles after running
out of fuel. (up to 50 mph, with warnings blinking, bleeping, and flashing
then the batteries were recharged with gasoline)
Of course we can expect this kind of thing from a hack auto journalist, but
from someone involved in energy policy? Go figure...
Roy LeMeur Seattle WA
My Electric Vehicle Pages:
http://www.angelfire.com/ca4/renewables/evpage.html
Informational Electric Vehicle Links:
http://www.angelfire.com/ca4/renewables/evlinks.html
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
As I continue my train of thought, I've begun to agree that Li-Ions
will not do for a first commercial EV. I have begun talking with the
guys over at Marathon in reference to their NiCads, and I'll give SAFT
a call tomorrow (though I know I'll hear "expensive" and "quantity). I
still believe that an AC drive system will perform better, but this
goes back to the personal opinion. I've been looking around at
kit-cars and can't find one that appeases me, although I like the idea
of doing a batch of EV shelby cobra 427s :) Now on to the topic at
hand, gliders. What are the chances that a modern day car manufacturer
will sell rolling gliders? I can understand why little old Geo sold
units to Solectria, but since the consolidation, I cant see a Honda or
a GM releasing cars when they know they're going to be sold as EVs and
directly compete. I can really only see buying a batch of used
vehicles (fleet? wholesale with a dealers license?) and selling off
the ICE components. An interesting idea might be to buy something like
an Acura RSX Type-S (Wholesale used around between $14k-$16k) and sell
the Type-S engines to the import tuner crowd. They go for about $6k
right now (I have a Civic, I wanted to do a swap for the longest time).
This way you can get a sporty rolling-chassis for just under $10k that
would be ready for conversion. As for new, what can we do? Until
established I can't see going off and pulling a Tango or a Sparrow,
because the R&D cost is so phenomenal. Comments? Recommendations?
-Sam Harper
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
>> Everything else is fluff (nice to have, but not necessary :-)
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> Then, everyone would drive city cars :-)
>
> When was last time you saw a person who does only
> what's necessary, not what he/she wants?
If we are talking about a BMS (Battery Management System), then the fact
is that 90% of EVs have none at all. For whatever reason, their owners
have decided that all of the available options are too expensive.
So, I was simply speculating on just how inexpensively a BMS could be
made. It seems to me that one could get 90% of the benefit for about 10%
of the cost. All it has to do is a) limit maximum battery voltage, and
b) tell the charger to turn itself down or off when the first battery
hits its limiting voltage.
Such a BMS wouldn't appeal to you or me; we're engineers, and inclined
to go perhaps a bit overboard on technology. But, it might to large
numbers of other EVers who have nothing at all right now.
--
Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
>> - Cheap, throwaway design. Nothing built to last. Only
>> intended to work a few years and then get replaced.
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> Sorry, I wouldn't drive such a car.
(Neither would I :-) And yet, this it exactly what the bottom end of
the car market consists of. For many people, a car is just a way to get
from one place to another, and the less they spend on it, the better.
> If you swap out all the parts except the body, you don't really have
> the *same* car anymore.
True. But from a legal perspective, you can replace just about anything
but the bit the VIN is mounted on, and still pretend it's the same car.
> In industry if unibody is the same, legally it's the same car.
> Make unibody with composite fiber (like boat) and you can claim
> that your car lasts many millions of miles (after swapping entire
> chassis/drive train many times over, but this is "minor" detail :-) ).
Yes, exactly!
The concept of a "PC EV" is that the outer box is really unimportant.
Just decorative trim panels. The "guts" of the vehicle (the batteries,
motor, controller, etc.) are all interchangeable parts. They might be
brand new, or ancient.
> Another issue - who'd want to drive the same car for whole life?
Well, some people live in the same house their entire life. Some people
*would* drive the same car their whole life, except that no car has been
durable enough.
--
Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
There was a back page ad in Science News Showing the Rav4, Ecom and the
Prius. 50 car test program was being touted. Seems they want to be the
green car company. Sorry 50 cars won't do it. Lawrence Rhodes........
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I work in auto sales, and believe me, most people want a new car every 3-5
years, as something in their life changes.
People get married, get kids, kids grow up, want something smaller, larger,
etc. "New and Improved" are exploited here as well as on the supermarket
shelf. I think the GM's skateboard concept is practical in that it allows
everything except the chassis to be interchangeable. Just snap the body on,
and when you want something new, swap out the parts. It would be kind of
like my PC. The case is about 5 years old, sound card about 3, hard drive
2yrs, and the motherboard & cpu are 1 yr old. We could be like linux, in
that we can create a somewhat universal platform where components are
swappable, with a stable, upgradeable underbody that many people can create
and modify. Sort of like Legos on wheels. If you follow some of what the
sport tuners are doing, they are putting on nose kits, changing spoilers,
swapping engines, and we can provide the same platfor for experimentation
and the expression of individuality.
Christian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 12:17 AM
Subject: Re: EV PC
> Lee Hart wrote:
> >> - Cheap, throwaway design. Nothing built to last. Only
> >> intended to work a few years and then get replaced.
>
> Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> > Sorry, I wouldn't drive such a car.
>
> (Neither would I :-) And yet, this it exactly what the bottom end of
> the car market consists of. For many people, a car is just a way to get
> from one place to another, and the less they spend on it, the better.
>
> > If you swap out all the parts except the body, you don't really have
> > the *same* car anymore.
>
> True. But from a legal perspective, you can replace just about anything
> but the bit the VIN is mounted on, and still pretend it's the same car.
>
> > In industry if unibody is the same, legally it's the same car.
> > Make unibody with composite fiber (like boat) and you can claim
> > that your car lasts many millions of miles (after swapping entire
> > chassis/drive train many times over, but this is "minor" detail :-) ).
>
> Yes, exactly!
>
> The concept of a "PC EV" is that the outer box is really unimportant.
> Just decorative trim panels. The "guts" of the vehicle (the batteries,
> motor, controller, etc.) are all interchangeable parts. They might be
> brand new, or ancient.
>
> > Another issue - who'd want to drive the same car for whole life?
>
> Well, some people live in the same house their entire life. Some people
> *would* drive the same car their whole life, except that no car has been
> durable enough.
> --
> Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
> 814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
> Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
> leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
For some really good ideas about how one platform can be many things, check
out: http://www.jimmyjammz.com/
These are all golf carts! I talked to the owner, and yes, he can get the
EV's up to 55 mph.
Christian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 12:17 AM
Subject: Re: EV PC
> Lee Hart wrote:
> >> - Cheap, throwaway design. Nothing built to last. Only
> >> intended to work a few years and then get replaced.
>
> Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> > Sorry, I wouldn't drive such a car.
>
> (Neither would I :-) And yet, this it exactly what the bottom end of
> the car market consists of. For many people, a car is just a way to get
> from one place to another, and the less they spend on it, the better.
>
> > If you swap out all the parts except the body, you don't really have
> > the *same* car anymore.
>
> True. But from a legal perspective, you can replace just about anything
> but the bit the VIN is mounted on, and still pretend it's the same car.
>
> > In industry if unibody is the same, legally it's the same car.
> > Make unibody with composite fiber (like boat) and you can claim
> > that your car lasts many millions of miles (after swapping entire
> > chassis/drive train many times over, but this is "minor" detail :-) ).
>
> Yes, exactly!
>
> The concept of a "PC EV" is that the outer box is really unimportant.
> Just decorative trim panels. The "guts" of the vehicle (the batteries,
> motor, controller, etc.) are all interchangeable parts. They might be
> brand new, or ancient.
>
> > Another issue - who'd want to drive the same car for whole life?
>
> Well, some people live in the same house their entire life. Some people
> *would* drive the same car their whole life, except that no car has been
> durable enough.
> --
> Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
> 814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
> Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
> leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Some liberal snipping of the message.......
On Tue, 2003-02-25 at 23:17, Lee Hart wrote:
> Lee Hart wrote:
> >> - Cheap, throwaway design. Nothing built to last. Only
> >> intended to work a few years and then get replaced.
>
> Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> > In industry if unibody is the same, legally it's the same car.
> > Make unibody with composite fiber (like boat) and you can claim
> > that your car lasts many millions of miles (after swapping entire
> > chassis/drive train many times over, but this is "minor" detail :-) ).
>
> Yes, exactly!
>
> The concept of a "PC EV" is that the outer box is really unimportant.
> Just decorative trim panels. The "guts" of the vehicle (the batteries,
> motor, controller, etc.) are all interchangeable parts. They might be
> brand new, or ancient.
>
> > Another issue - who'd want to drive the same car for whole life?
>
> Well, some people live in the same house their entire life. Some people
> *would* drive the same car their whole life, except that no car has been
> durable enough.
Here is the cool part. So you have a rolling chassis/box/frame. This
can have all the "guts" interchanged. Nice so far. Take it to the next
logical step of having interchangeable body parts also. Then you can
change the body to a newer style, without updating anything else. Or go
to the next level like GM did with the Hy-Wire and have a rolling
platform with the ability to swap the entire body cage (interior
included). Then you wouldn't be driving "the same car for whole life".
You could have a truck, minivan, car, or whatever you're in the mood for
on any given day.
Lonnie
--- End Message ---
