EV Digest 4218
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: Selectria Sunrise as replacement for EV-1--let's go to the next step
by "Ivo Jara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) RE: Selectria Sunrise as replacement for EV-1--let's go to the next step
by "Ivo Jara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: American Buisness model is wrong...
by "Ivo Jara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: Getting more EV's on the road
by "Ivo Jara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Selectria Sunrise as replacement for EV-1 and Re: Rabbit replacement
by "David Roden (Akron OH USA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Let's cut each other some slack, OK?
by "David Roden (Akron OH USA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Headlight Questions
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: American business model
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Tax Credit
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Selectria Sunrise as replacement for EV-1
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) test, please ignore
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Selectria Sunrise as replacement for EV-1 and Re: Rabbit replacement
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Rangers not wanted? Hah...
by Christopher Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Yahoo EVList
by bruce parmenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: American business model
by Tim Clevenger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Intellectual property
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Interesting 49kw, 100-330vDC motor controller
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) FW: You have been unsubscribed from the EVChargerNews mailing list
by "EV Chargernews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: American business model
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Selectria Sunrise as replacement for EV-1--let's go to the next step
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Selectria Sunrise as replacement for EV-1 and Re: Rabbit replacement
by Tim Clevenger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Selectria Sunrise as replacement for EV-1--let's go to the next step
by "Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
You're right, but don't forget there is nothing impressive in the tango,
execpt the battery / body weight ratio, it may work, but it's not a
practical vehicle, it just seats two and in tandem, and the
motor/batteries/controller are nothing special, just a very small car on top
of what anybody would use for a conversion.
But lt them be, it's their market, maybe they'll find another actor to buy
one.
Ivo.
-----Mensaje original-----
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
nombre de Doug Weathers
Enviado el: martes, 22 de marzo de 2005 9:23
Para: [email protected]
Asunto: Re: Selectria Sunrise as replacement for EV-1--let's go to the
next step
On Mar 21, 2005, at 9:10 AM, Rush wrote:
> I don't know how many of you are on the EVList from yahoo, but a
> perfect example of fragmentation that undermines the EV concept has,
> in my opinion, just appeared there.
Hmmm... comments below.
>
> George Clooney has ordered a Tango T600, or at least wants one
> quickly....
>
<snip>
>
>
> Anybody care to contact him to let him know that there is a group of
> EV experts that want to start producing a new, viable, EV? In fact
> does somebody want to propose to him that for $85K, a group of us
> experts (not me for sure) will produce a special EV for him that will
> go 100 MPH, have a 150 Mile trip, (just pulling numbers out of the
> air) and have it ready in the time frame he wants?
Commuter Cars has already beat us to this market. Let them have this
sale - they worked for it, and they've got a product already. The
project we're discussing here is in a different price bracket anyway,
right? We're looking at mass-market (means affordable) EVs, not a
top-of-the-line-no-compromises-leather-interior-$4000-dashboard-vehicle
such as the Tango.
IMO, making a suggestion like this to George Clooney would be a
"perfect example of fragmentation" of the EV market. We've got a
company that's designed an excellent EV from scratch, and they've sold
one! And you're proposing to call up the guy who ordered it and say
"Don't buy that one, buy this other one we haven't designed yet"?
As far as I know, the only company making a custom-designed EV for sale
is Commuter Cars. They're the entire market right now! Maybe I'm
misunderstanding you, but it seems to me like we all ought to support
Commuter Cars and not try to fragment this market by trying to compete
with them just yet. Let's at least wait until we've got a product :)
>
> Just a thought, but an exciting one. Feasible? I don't know, but I
> would surely think it might be worth it, both financially and PR wise.
> It would have to be a 'I gotta drop everything to build an EV for
> George Clooney for $85K' type effort.
I don't see this as buying us anything worthwhile. He needs his car
NOW, and I don't see how we can build him one that can be trusted to
perform well in such a short time. We need to design it, build one,
test the snot out of it, redesign it, build another one, etc. until
we've got something someone might want to buy. Throwing together
something and giving it to a movie star is far more likely to hurt the
EV cause than help it. Remember the actress whose electric car burned
down her house and killed her dog?
I think before we try to get money from anyone, we'll need a convincing
business plan. We could do the design first (might make the business
plan stronger), but without a business plan we get no money and can't
build anything anyway.
>
>
> Rush
>
>
--
Doug Weathers
Bend, OR, USA
http://learn-something.blogsite.org
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.4 - Release Date: 18/03/2005
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ok, will someone start drafting something ? I don't know, a constitution,
agreement or whatever you guys want to call it.
I think we need to define the vehicle and it's charcteristics.
let's start with a 2+2 (2 adults 2 kids)
4 and 2 door (coupe and sedan), same body just different door arangement
(learn from gm)
I'd say platform frame (to stuff the batts in there with a removable tray on
rollers or barings) it removes to the side.
Tubular structure over the hollow platform, reinforced poliester / carbon
fibre body.
Rear axle, Solid leaf springs no independent suspension.
Mcpherson struts up front
Range 70 - 100 miles (depends on the drivers foot and the grades).
Voltage 120 or 240 dc (24 volts for the accesories)
well, that's for the car, also a mini cargo van would not be a bad idea,
here in satiago, cocacola uses EV's to deliver the bottles to the stores
downtoen, they look a bit bigger than gof carts, and are the only vehicles
allowed in the pedestrian streets. This is the kind of street I'm talking
about.
http://www.lclark.edu/~woodrich/PaseoAhumada.jpg
Ivo
-----Mensaje original-----
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
nombre de jerry dycus
Enviado el: lunes, 21 de marzo de 2005 22:17
Para: [email protected]
Asunto: Re: Selectria Sunrise as replacement for EV-1--let's go to the
next step
Hi Lee, Rush and All,
--- Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rush wrote:
> > I agree with the great posts, but not at all with
> the take it off
> > list attitude. I may not participate much in this
> discussion, but
> > I would like to participate in the company, or
> what ever it might
> > be called.
But once we get into the details most of it would
be glider parts, details, financing, organizing which
are OT on the list as it should be and no one would be
left out as all they would have to do is join the new
list.
>
> Frankly, I think we *have* to take it off list (and
> probably off email
> as well) if we ever expect to get anything done. Too
> many times, reading
> and writing email replaces "real work". It's so easy
> to just sit there,
> staring at the screen. It's seductive; it feels like
> you're getting
> things done. But all that is happening is that the
> time keeps slipping
> away...
The only problem with your way Lee is we could
never get together for such a conference. And there
would have to be many conferences. We are just too
spread out.
Also we will need a lot of votes to decide things
and should restrict those votes to those who are
actually going to pay in and do the work.
We could do a lot with dues lower than EAA
ones!!!!
If we do it like a club, corp just that it's
online where we elect a board and assign tasks to
willing members to get things done. If a member
doesn't complete their task then it's given to someone
else or farmed out.
This would also give people like Leno, EV-1
listee's, ect and other people with money a place to
see what's going on and maybe help is a big reason for
a seperate list. They haven't come to this list so far
for many reasons so we need to do something different.
As I see it we should start with the EV most would
want or easiest to do by vote. Then appoint some or
someone to design it, then go about sourcing all the
parts needed. This could go on for several different
EV's at once if the group wants.
Once all the facts, costs are in we could see how
many want to order one and start a payment schedule to
pay for the parts, work needed with parts, work being
done before the next step is taken.
Or someone could offer an EV design up they would
like to do and see if there is enough support to go
for it. If so then the board would pay for the work to
be done for start-up from the people who want one
overseeing it so the work gets done on time, price.
Those who sign up with deposits first would get the
first ones.
I'd go for 3 EV's.
First because it's cheaper, easier to do, legal,
would be a 3 wheeler ;-))
But not just because it's what I want to do but
because it is the most likely to succeed because it's
more simple to do and give experience to do the rest
on. Also due to it's lightweight will have great
performance as an EV. And can be profitable in under 5
units.
And anyone could offer a design, work. Fiberfab
wants to do one too so would be interested probably or
at least the glider part.
And I have had a lot of interest where I know
enough people would want one to make it profitable if
built.
Next would be either a Sunrise or Sunrise type 4
seater style. This would fit many more people as the
Insight shows that 2 seaters don't sell that well
here. It could be done as all the units in econo, long
range and sporty. By shipping batts, motor seperate
you could get away with calling it a kit for the first
few hundred as any other 4 wheelers we do.
After that or as the second one an EV Matrix/ Vibe
take-off that could be built as an SUV, mini-van,
station wagon, work van or pick-up off the same base
vehicle.
Any of these could have an optional generator so to
have unlimited range so people wouldn't need a second
car.
They could have common suspensions, steering, EV
drive train, ect so that work, parts would be cheaper
as longer production runs, orders would be possible.
>
> Ladies and gentlemen, it's time to DO something!
> Detroit won't save us.
> The government won't save us. They are part of the
> problem, not the
> solution!
I couldn't agree more! We have wasted too much
time already.
Lets start this and elect board member to get it
going.
>
> What I propose is a conference; a convention. We
> agree to get together
> physically, somewhere, somehow, to start seriously
> discussing what to
> do. Form an organization to start DOING what needs
> to be done!
I agree but because of distance we will have to do
much of this online if it ever will be done.
So lets start!!!!
Jerry Dycus
> --
> If you would not be forgotten
> When your body's dead and rotten
> Then write of great deeds worth the reading
> Or do the great deeds worth repeating
> -- Ben Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanac
> --
> Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377
> leeahart_at_earthlink.net
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.4 - Release Date: 18/03/2005
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I work with Linux, and the open source model makes a lot of sense to me, I
live on it... http://www.awss.cl
Sounds good, see which motors around the worls could fit a given car weight
and number of batts, then a kit couild be for:
Rabbit/Jetta/Vento/Ibiza/Accord, with DC8",GE,Siemens etc. and with three
options of batts.
I still would like an EV built to be an EV, maybe with a replaceable battery
pack, but anyway...
Why not start a website: (I can offer the hosting for free), then we publish
the best solution we can reach for a given problem.
EG, Battery tray (I've seen everything on the web, steel, aluminum,
plastic), so let's reach a consensus in which we can make a standard
removable battery tray and publish the plans for:
Same with just about everything, this is just for parts that can be made
locallly, for things such as controller, we can make another thing:
We can make something like a club, and someone can make an agreement of a
discount on parts for memebers, (i've seen that for mobile phone customers
with doscoteques or department stores)
Then if the customer gives the manufacturer a code, it's pre agreed tha he
should get a 20% discount, I still think it's smarter to have a central
purchasing office though.
Ivo
a) Everyone in the world to see.
b) registerd users to see.
c) just a few people have the web adress and can see.
-----Mensaje original-----
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
nombre de Jeff Shanab
Enviado el: lunes, 21 de marzo de 2005 20:18
Para: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Asunto: Re: American Buisness model is wrong...
I think you are correct about the difference betwen converting one
car and productionizing the parts, I have worked in production for over
20 years but I think we can actually do the specialization discussed,
precisely because open source means we don't work in isolation. I send
you a drawing, heck I send you an adapter if you send me a battery box.
If I am new and want to add to the kit I download the specs(drawings and
measurements) or buy whats avail and a donar and model it that way. I
am worried more about the lack of integration if we don't establish some
standards. If done correctly I don't see why we can't have motor
adapters that adapt many differnt motors to the transmission adapter
plate DC8",DC9"/AC Siemans/MEA etc.
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.4 - Release Date: 18/03/2005
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
too expensive, i still vouch for the chinese cars hahahahaha.
a 15 grand used neon does not make sense, and it's not the cost of the car,
it's the cost of all the hardware, i understand, we all understand, but the
guy in the street does not, he needs to purchase a new vehicle for 15 grand,
even if it's a jailing.
ivo.
-----Mensaje original-----
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
nombre de Ryan Stotts
Enviado el: lunes, 21 de marzo de 2005 21:28
Para: [email protected]
Asunto: Re: Getting more EV's on the road
Just fielding this out and getting a rough idea here in an attempt to
see if this is even feasible.
Example:
Right now on Ebay is a 1999, 5 speed, 2 door Neon for $2200.
ADC or WarP 8" for $1200 (9" for $1400)
1k Zilla - $1975
PFC20 - $1500
144volts - 12 Orbitals $100 each / $1200 total (voltage completely
subject to change. 192 volts for example.)
$280 for a 40amp DC/DC? http://www.powerstream.com/DC-HV.htm
So what has this $2200 Neon suddenly turned into? Looks like $8355.
Still have materials cost for the battery racks and all the needed
cable, wire, and lugs. What's a ballpark figure for that stuff? What
gauge cable would you use for battery interconnects, and for
connection to the charger, controller, and motor? Anyone got a line
on a proper state of charge gauge and an ammeter(link to / price)?
Let's say this vehicle ends up costing $12,000 or $14,000. Sure I
could put it up for sale at that, but would anyone ever buy it for
that amount? It would have all the receipts so it would add up to
whatever amount.
I'm not looking to turn a profit on it, I just don't want to take a
loss on it(can't afford too). After it is sold, I'd like to build
another, and another.. Not just Neons either. For me, the fun is in
building them. I will eventually build one(or more..) for myself as
money allows(in the process of getting a "real job" right now, (A&P
license) ).
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.4 - Release Date: 18/03/2005
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 22 Mar 2005 at 11:26, Charles Whalen wrote:
> 3-wheeled vehicle ...
This dodges the regulatory issues, which can really help with the startup
costs for an EV manufacturing concern.
But realize that you are limiting your potential market drastically. The
Sparrow's sales notwithstanding, I suspect that a 3-wheeler is just too weird
for most people. Our correspondents in England can address this matter,
since a few ICE 3-wheelers used to be on the market there, and I think I can
argue that US auto buyers are as a rule more averse to unusual vehicles than
Europeans.
Besides, if you gain real success, you can reasonably expect an attempt to
iintroduce legislation extending full FMVSS to 3-wheelers, and possibly even
to limited production vehicles, homebuilts, and kits. That would be very bad
news for the EV conversion movement.
Someone here said that GM can't afford legal action, but I'm afraid that's
probably wishful thinking. In spite of recent problems, GM is far from being
on the ropes. They are one of the largest businesses in the world and have
huge credit reserves. Remember, in recent years they've been able to gobble
up many other automakers around the world (Saab and Daewoo, to name
just two).
Regardless of this year's sales, the mainstream US carmakers as a genre
have deep pockets and very, very good lobbyists. Don't kid yourself. They
will defend their profit, market share, and intellectual property ferociously.
All that said, a small EV manufacturer has a delicate balancing act. They
must build a product that has enough appeal to score sufficient sales, while
staying under Detroit's radar. As much as I'd like to see a Sunrise or similar
vehicle get into production, and as much as I think it really has the appeal
for
the masses, you have to be careful not to compete with GM and Ford (and
maybe Toyota).
So far the big guys have shown almost no interest in the scooter / E-bike
market. For that reason and many others, I think that moving upward from
that genre is probably the path most likely to lead us to capable road EVs.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This is one of those posts I hate making.
I'm soliciting comments from the EV list membership on John De Armond's
overall value to this list. Is his presence here a net positive? Please mail
your comments to
e v d l at d r m m period n e t
My comments on this particular post, which reflect my concerns only and are
NOT intended to influence your opinion in this matter, appear below. You'll
also find further discussion of this rather unscientific survey which I'm
undertaking.
On 22 Mar 2005 at 13:52, Neon John wrote:
> Arguing with a person of his caliber is pitching pearls before swine.
>
> fruitcake cause
>
> fruity left coast granola eating tree hugging nutcake
>
> Every time I hear the term "movement" what pops immediately to mind is
> "bowel". I bet I'm not the only one.
>
> My comments DO reflect the facts.
>
I know this is going to sound kinda precious, and I don't mean it that way.
But as the administrating participant of this list, I sort of have to bring it
up.
(Guess I'm just one of those fruity granola-eating nutcakes that John talks
about - come to that, I do kinda like granola. ;-)
Thing is, I'm not fully convinced that this list really needs someone who
consistently expresses himself in such a manner as the stuff you see above.
To me, that's just infantile.
John De Armond seems to have trouble restraining his inclination to treat
anyone with whom he disagrees with complete disdain. No, scratch that; it's
not that he has trouble. He doesn't even try. Respect for others' opinions
doesn't seem to be part of his repertoire. His posts are rife with name-
calling, stereotyping, and withering sarcasm.
> I cut out that article in the paper about the BoobWatch gal, blew it up
> on the copy machine and used it to stimulate several conversations
> among customers. "Shoot 'em
> where they sit" and "run 'em over" weren't uncommon comments.
>
There is nothing good-natured about this. John isn't kidding. If the label
"environmentalist" or "liberal" or perhaps even "democrat" even partially fits
you, he literally hates you, and isn't shy about saying so. If some of what he
writes is to be believed, you might want to stay well away from his home and
place of business, as it appears that he might not hesitate to incite others to
violence against you.
> I don't engage in internet flaming. I got that out of
> my system decades ago. I know some people don't like my posting
> style. That's OK. I promise not to care if they don't.
>
On the contrary, it appears that quite a bit of what John De Armond posts is
flame bait. What else do you call it when he writes something that's clearly
designed to have a potent emotional effect on many members of the list?
Whether he does it deliberately just to cause anger (trolling), or because (as
he says) he just doesn't care whether he causes an angry reaction, the effect
is the same.
In private email, I've asked him to be more thoughtful and considerate of
others' views. It's had no effect that I can see. He no longer responds to my
messages, so presumably he now has me filtered too.
> My mom taught me that there are two things one never discusses in
> polite company. Politics and religion. EV and enviro-zealotry
> contain elements of both. Why don't we all be polite and just not
> discuss things that involve either or both? Simple as that.
>
John has posted several messages which invoke partisan politics, and not
always as a response to others' political posts.
I'm waiting for him to set the example for "Why don't we all be polite," but
I'm
not holding my breath.
> This IS one of the worst lists
> I'm on, both in terms of off-charter rants and the frequency of the
> pure clueless. I feel lucky if I can get one bit of useful
> information a week.
>
I don't know about anyone else, but I've learned a great deal from this list
over
the years, and continue to do so. It's an invaluable resource for anyone
involved with EVs.
However, I have to admit that I'd be somewhat relieved if John acted on this
assessment of its value to him and unsubscribed from the list.
John De Armond DOES contribute useful information to the list. It's just that
his unrelenting negativity and sarcasm, open hatred of those with whom he
disagrees, and apparent opposition to the fundamental mission of this list -
promoting road EVs - are distracting and wearying. Certainly they have that
effect on me, and on some others who have emailed me privately about the
matter.
I'm not the list owner, and I don't have any capacity to remove him or anyone
else. I serve only as an interface to the actual list owners, who do. To
date,
other than creating a "virtual paper trail," I haven't made any effort to have
John De Armond either warned or removed.
So - should I? I'm asking for your thoughts on this. A few people have
recently said "no," but I'd like to find out whether the membership as a whole
considers Neon John a welcome list participant or not. Please let me know
what you think. Thanks.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In short, no it does not. Depends how you install them.
Inatall DOT approved headlights facing back to punish
tailgaters (or similar odd locations), and you get BIG
ticket at very least.
Eric Poulsen wrote:
When purchasing headlights, if it says it "Meets DOT requirements," does
that mean that it's road legal?
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ivo Jara wrote:
They run in china, there was an experience here with soviert lada, ugly,
unconfotable, outdated, but reliable, still running after 20 years.
I suppose you know that those first ugly uncomfortable soviet ladas
were copies of 1962 Fiats designed by ItalDesign - top style design
firm all lamborghini's and such come from.
Having owned one it is far more comfortable than today's Escort or
similar.
Of course boxy as everything in 60's (BMWs, Volvos, etc) and ugly only
by today's half-a century standards, but what else do you expect?
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lookes at this site.
Funny, a motorcycle (or any less than four wheels
vehicle for that matter) is not a motor vehicle at all
by IRS definition of "motor vehicle".
Wonder if Sparrow is legal motorcycle but neither
is a motor vehicle, what IRS thinks the fuel for
a non-motor vehicle is for??
Victor
Bob Bath wrote:
Oregon's is 750 for car; 750 for charger. You didn't
mention what state you were from. Basically, it's 25%
of the cost of each, but the state actually called me
up and told me the car was showing up as too
expensive. EVentually, we decided to put my batteries
and DCDC converter under "charger", (after all, it
does charge a battery), and everyone was happy.
SAVE ALL OF YOUR RECEIPTS!!!
Go to
http://www.irs.gov/publications/p535/ch12.html#d0e10778
and you will see that one can write off the charger
without bending/breaking any rules.
If this isn't satisfactory, purchase a 10,000 lb. SUV
(gas burner) and get most of it written off as a
"bid'ness expense". Sheesh.
(:-<
Hope that helps.
--- Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have heard a few mention tax credits. Are those
limited to some states
only, I couldn't find one for california and the
federal law specifcly
excludes conversions or BEV's
'92 Honda Civic sedan, 144V
____
__/__|__\ __
=D-------/ - - \
'O'-----'O'-'
Would you still drive your car if the tailpipe came out of the steering wheel? Are you saving any gas for your kids?
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Andrea Bachus Kohler wrote:
...
> The list is made up of quite a mixed bunch, so I thought
it would be a good sampling. Some wanted sexy like the EV1, while
others wanted ultra utilitarian 5 passenger do everything SUV. I
expected that.
...
At one time, I had posed the question as to what people would think
about just buying it as a glider and adding their own guts, kind of like
an open architecture EV platform, but surprisingly didn't get much
response.
Marc Kohler
Mark,
As I read about attempts of very sharp and dedicated people to
offer a vehicle for others in general (EV in particular),
unless you are resourceful enough to offer selection of several
classes at once (at least sports, utilitarian sedan, and truck/van),
it doesn't seem possible to sustain business just doing what you
believe is right choice for majority of potential customers.
That majority always happen to be handful dedicated fans
with cost being lower priority than satisfaction of having
different kind of vehicle, but kind "imposed" on them by you.
That lasts only for so long as takes to feed the most hungry ones.
Given ICE choices people become accustom to be picky to the point
that if a cup holder is in the wrong spot, they are not buying
the car, no matter what your arguments are, you know.
Face it - everyone is different and a car [type] is more often
than not is seen as extension (expression) of the personality.
Do you know why women's football is not popular?
They have very hard time to find 11 women agreed to get dressed
the same way.
I may drive Sunrise because of what it is.
My wife won't because if she's seen in something "weird",
she perceives as she is seen just as "weird", else she'd
buy a "normal" car. (even personal aesthetics aside).
IMHO, you will succeed *now* (and thus have resources to
do what *you* believe is right for others) only if you offer
vehicle styles already accepted by large enough amount of
buying public. Toyota would never have such a great success
with Priuses if they would be shaped as Tangos, no matter
how much superior Tango is technically. Toyota had right
sense of *current* market in that respect (of course aside
success just because big known name).
My point - offer at least 3 styles at once and you *may*
increase survival chance 9 times.
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
test,
please ignore
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David Roden wrote:
> Someone here said that GM can't afford legal action, but I'm afraid that's
> probably wishful thinking. In spite of recent problems, GM is far from being
> on the ropes. They are one of the largest businesses in the world and have
> huge credit reserves.
GM is $300 billion in debt:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=GM
"GM is headed towards bankruptcy":
http://www.howestreet.com/mainartcl.php?ArticleId=1046
Thanks for the links whoever posted that earlier.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Just talked to my local Ford rep. He called the person in charge of the
Ranger program, and apparently she has been swamped with requests. Not
much chance to get one, since the lease people are buying them.
And there are now "hundreds" of people on the list.
Hm. You would think that people didn't want electric cars according to
GM. But according to Ford, people do. Go figure.
Maybe someone should bring this up to the local newspaper and get a
story made out of it.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
There are links to other EV List archives, plus discussion group
nEV, EV, hybrid, fcv, AE links on
http://geocities.com/ev_list/
Bruce {EVangel} Parmenter
' ____
~/__|o\__
'@----- @'---(=
. http://geocities.com/brucedp/
. EV List Editor, RE & AFV newswires
. (originator of the above ASCII art)
===== Undo Petroleum Everywhere
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> > From: Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: American business model
> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:24:04 -0500
>
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:22:21 -0800 (PST), Tim Clevenger
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Seems to me like the way to start out with two strikes against you (EV
> being one) is to start out with a third world brand. Regardless of
> how good they are (I've been impressed with the Hyundai one of my
> employees has) the public perception is not good.
>
> Seems to me the way to go is to select a brand name car destined to
> have a long production run, say, a Honda or Saturn, then negotiate a
> fleet deal. Buy the complete cars, then part out the conventional
> engine parts and sell them. Given the price of replacement parts,
> particularly OEM parts, I just bet this would be the cheaper way.
I only mention Hyundai because they have cleaned up their act quite a
bit, and are generally getting good press in the auto magazines.
As I've mentioned before, as an '04 Ion owner, I would agree that the
Saturn would make a good glider. The dash is pretty chintzy looking,
but it already has lots of room, electric steering and is light weight
and cheap. The engines are used in a couple of other GM models, so
it's not a "resale dud" like a Hyundai or Kia motor. The transmission is
fully synchronized in all gears and reverse. In that case, however, you
might have to fly under GM's radar and make a deal with a fleet dealer
directly.
Tim
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Steve Gaarder wrote:
>
> All this discussion of the rights to the EV-1 design leaves me with a
> question. As I understand it, there are two ways to protect intellectual
> property: patent and copyright. Patents protect an idea regarless of
> expression, i.e. if you patent a particular aspect of an inverter design,
> no-one can sell an inverter incorporating that design trick without your
> OK. A copyright, OTOH, protects the *expression* of an idea, such as the
> text of a book on how to design inverters. So where do the "rights to a
> design" fit in? If GM has some patents on various aspects of the EV-1,
> then we need their consent to sell any EV that uses these bits of
> technology. I'm sure all the design drawings etc are copyrighted, so we
> would need their OK to get copies of those. But otherwise I see nothing
> in either patent or copyright law that makes it illegal to look at a
> product, figure out how it's made, and make one like it. Or am I missing
> something?
I think you have it exactly. I know there are lots of GM patents
involving the EV1, but I don't know of any of them that actually matter
to anyone building a "clone" of it.
--
"The two most common elements in the universe
are hydrogen and stupidity." -- Harlan Ellison
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Evan Tuer wrote:
> "This item is a Copley Controls 265P high power amplifier, designed
> for servo systems, NMR and audio. The amplifier bandwidth is D.C -
> 5KHz, and peak output power an almost unbelievable 49,000 Watts"
>
> Blimey. Now where would I find a bass speaker to go with that?
5000 watts RMS, 10,000 peak:
http://www.kicker.com/05/05kicker.html
Check out the 5000 watt amp...
http://www.audiobahn.com/products/2005Products/amps/amps.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Just in case there is interest. I'm not intending to reply to Debby
myself.
Tom Dowling
-----Original Message-----
From: Debby Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 10:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: You have been unsubscribed from the EVChargerNews mailing
list
My original intent in joining the mailing list was to identify
opportunities to introduce AccelRate's battery charging technology to
the newsgroup. The posts, however, are primarily focused on new
charging stations and/or issues related to those.
FYI, following is a list of just a few of the benefits to using
AccelRate's battery charging technology:
o Charges batteries 5 TIMES FASTER than conventional chargers.
o The ONLY charger to return a discharged battery to a FULL STATE
OF
CHARGE in less than 2 HOURS.
o Perfectly suited to "Top Up Anytime" opportunity charging, as
well
as "full state of charge" recharging.
o Requires no modifications to the battery.
o Generates no more heat in the battery than a conventional
charger.
o Does the work of FIVE conventional chargers in 10 PERCENT of
the
space.
If you have another format for introducing our technology, I would be
most pleased to hear your recommendations.
Sincerely,
Debby Harris
Vice President - Corporate and Market Development AccelRate Power
Systems Inc.
1370 -1140 West Pender St.
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6E 4G1
Tel: (604) 688-8656
Cell: (778) 386-4333
Fax: (604) 688-8654
Toll Free: 888-866-9395
http://www.AccelRate.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 9:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: You have been unsubscribed from the EVChargerNews mailing list
If you wish to explain your reasons for leaving the EVChargerNews
mailing list, please send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tim Clevenger wrote:
> Kia and Hyundai might be options, since they've never experimented
> with EV's, and probably don't have the R&D budget that Honda, GM,
> etc. have to go to fuel cells as quickly. They might be more
> amenable to getting a "clean" message out there -- even if only 50
> cars are made. Try them; they might be able to commit to, say, 50
> gliders of one of their sportier cars (Tiburon?) at an "at-cost"
> price, with credit for turning in the engine, to be converted and sold.
The Korean businessmen I've met are interesting people. They have a
sense of long-term planning, and value personal relationships and
integrity to a high degree, reminiscent of US corporate CEOs of 50-100
years ago. It may indeed be possible to interest them in a plan to buy
gliders and convert them to EVs in the USA.
The challenge is that their style of business would require that they
deal with a very well known and respected businessman. Lee Iacocca or
Roger Stempel could do it, for example.
> Is the Tango considered so unfeasible that we're considering
> dumping money into yet another EV startup?
No, the Tango is not at all out of the question. Rick Woodbury is
pursuing it with all possible haste. But, he's still at the stage of low
production hand-made luxury cars. He has plans to produce a lower-cost
mass-produced "Foxtrot" version, but the design isn't even off the
drawing board. The advantage of "cloning" the Sunrise or EV1 is that
there is already a working design to begin with.
Now, if we could raise enough money, we could *finance* Rick Woodbury so
he *could* pursue the Foxtrot more actively.
--
"The two most common elements in the universe
are hydrogen and stupidity." -- Harlan Ellison
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ivo Jara wrote:
> You're right, but don't forget there is nothing impressive in the
> tango, execpt the battery / body weight ratio, it may work, but
> it's not a practical vehicle, it just seats two and in tandem,
> and the motor/batteries/controller are nothing special, just a
> very small car on top of what anybody would use for a conversion.
I respectfully disagree. The Tango was designed from the ground up to be
an electric car. Thus, it has much higher performance than an equivalent
ICE conversion would have.
I've driven the Tango, and it does seem to work. The motors, batteries,
and controller *are* pretty special. It is probably the highest-powered
EV on the road today, and is optimized for maximum cost-is-no-object
accelleration.
A two-seater is an improvement over one-seaters like the Sparrow.
Basically, the Tango is a flashy high-performance sports car. All
automakers have flashy sports car models. It happens to be the first
model Commutercars is building, but they have plans for others.
They are calling their planned 2-seat economy version the "Foxtrot".
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!" -- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The EV1 was a great innovation for its time, and especially great considering
the
source (General Motors.) But let's face it. Handpicked batteries that
required their
own cooling system? Two seats so you could cram the batteries in? Vastly
inferior charging system? The Sunrise, after some refinement, and with some
better batteries, can be the "EV1 of the new millenium."
The best thing about the Sunrise is that it's not just "a Metro with batteries"
or
"a Ranger with batteries." If you have nothing to compare it to, it tends to
sell
in a class by itself. (Example: the new Prius. Since it's no longer "just a
$23,000
Echo", it really has come into its own, and the waiting lists are still long.)
Tim
--------
> > From: "Charles Whalen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Selectria Sunrise as replacement for EV-1 and Re: Rabbit
> replacement
> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:26:46 -0500
>
> But why on earth are you worried about such an irrelevant, spent-force
> dinosaur like GM? With the sole exception of John Wayland, who seems to be
> out of step with almost everyone else on this list, unless I myself have
> missed something in following this thread, I thought the general consensus
> was that the Sunrise would make a much better candidate for this project
> (taking a mold, reverse engineering, and going into small-scale serial
> production) than the EV1, not the least of which reason being the Sunrise's
> much greater utility as a 5-seat car as opposed to the 2-seat EV1.
> Furthermore, I think Wayland's comments about the Sunrise's wavy panels and
> what he claims was a 17-second 0-to-60 time were taken out of the context of
> the very first prototype, which itself was in a very preliminary state,
> having been rushed out to a show before it was even ready. I would take as
> more reliable the comments of someone who worked at Solectria and knew the
> car well, such as Seth Allen, who I think said he was seeing something like
> an 11-second 0-to-60 time for a later, more refined Sunrise. I have seen
> some high-resolution, close-up pics of the Sunrise that just sold on eBay,
> and from what I could tell, its fit, trim, and finish look as good as any
> production vehicle I've ever seen.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Does anyone have a matrix created that shows the cost vs: different
componants? For instance, using Li Ion vs: NiCadvs acid etc.
Dave
Some call it retirement, some call it a second career... I just call it
adding 5ive days to the weekend!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Weathers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 5:23 AM
Subject: Re: Selectria Sunrise as replacement for EV-1--let's go to the next
step
On Mar 21, 2005, at 9:10 AM, Rush wrote:
I don't know how many of you are on the EVList from yahoo, but a perfect
example of fragmentation that undermines the EV concept has, in my
opinion, just appeared there.
Hmmm... comments below.
George Clooney has ordered a Tango T600, or at least wants one
quickly....
<snip>
Anybody care to contact him to let him know that there is a group of EV
experts that want to start producing a new, viable, EV? In fact does
somebody want to propose to him that for $85K, a group of us experts (not
me for sure) will produce a special EV for him that will go 100 MPH, have
a 150 Mile trip, (just pulling numbers out of the air) and have it ready
in the time frame he wants?
Commuter Cars has already beat us to this market. Let them have this
sale - they worked for it, and they've got a product already. The project
we're discussing here is in a different price bracket anyway, right?
We're looking at mass-market (means affordable) EVs, not a
top-of-the-line-no-compromises-leather-interior-$4000-dashboard-vehicle
such as the Tango.
IMO, making a suggestion like this to George Clooney would be a "perfect
example of fragmentation" of the EV market. We've got a company that's
designed an excellent EV from scratch, and they've sold one! And you're
proposing to call up the guy who ordered it and say "Don't buy that one,
buy this other one we haven't designed yet"?
As far as I know, the only company making a custom-designed EV for sale is
Commuter Cars. They're the entire market right now! Maybe I'm
misunderstanding you, but it seems to me like we all ought to support
Commuter Cars and not try to fragment this market by trying to compete
with them just yet. Let's at least wait until we've got a product :)
Just a thought, but an exciting one. Feasible? I don't know, but I would
surely think it might be worth it, both financially and PR wise. It would
have to be a 'I gotta drop everything to build an EV for George Clooney
for $85K' type effort.
I don't see this as buying us anything worthwhile. He needs his car NOW,
and I don't see how we can build him one that can be trusted to perform
well in such a short time. We need to design it, build one, test the snot
out of it, redesign it, build another one, etc. until we've got something
someone might want to buy. Throwing together something and giving it to a
movie star is far more likely to hurt the EV cause than help it. Remember
the actress whose electric car burned down her house and killed her dog?
I think before we try to get money from anyone, we'll need a convincing
business plan. We could do the design first (might make the business plan
stronger), but without a business plan we get no money and can't build
anything anyway.
Rush
--
Doug Weathers
Bend, OR, USA
http://learn-something.blogsite.org
--- End Message ---
