EV Digest 5830
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Cuirb weights. Lets start a list.
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) RE: Creation of EVCC, aka the Electric Vehicle Certification Committee
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: SMARTcar on eBay
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: SMARTcar on eBay
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Elektro Transporter on eBay, Forgetaboutit!
by Doug Weathers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Elektro Transporter on eBay, Forgetaboutit!
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Valence Batteries
by Ralph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Please remove me from the list I need a break
by "Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Another range question
by Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE: Creation of EVCC, aka the Electric Vehicle Certification Committee
by "J. Lashley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Creation of EVCC, aka the Electric Vehicle Certification
Committee
by Electro Automotive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Trike "motorcycle"
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) RE: Valence Batteries
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Trike "motorcycle"
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
15) ADC Motor Question on EBay
by "Jeff Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Creation of EVCC, aka the Electric Vehicle Certification Committee
by "J. Lashley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Another range question
by Patrick Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Yep. A very convertable vehicle. Lawrence Rhodes.....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pestka, Dennis J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 1:04 PM
Subject: RE: Cuirb weights. Lets start a list.
1965 Datsun N320 Pickup.
2180 Curb; w/large step bumper.
3963 GVWR
Dennis
Elsberry, MO
-----Original Message-----
From: Lawrence Rhodes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 1:41 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Cuirb weights. Lets start a list.
2108 for the HB. LR.......
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2006 4:25 PM
Subject: Re: Cuirb weights. Lets start a list.
> Consumer Guide rates them @ 2200 lbs before stripping them down... if
I'm
> reading this correctly.
>
>
http://auto.consumerguide.com/Auto/Used/reviews/full/index.cfm/id/2049/A
ct/usedcarreviewspecs/
>
> (That's a good spot to find specs on many cars.)
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <"Undisclosed-Recipient:;"@efn.org>
> > Cc: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Friday, September 01, 2006 11:59 PM
> > Subject: Re: Cuirb weights. Lets start a list.
> >
> >
> > > Man I'm confused. I thought that Honda weighed around that as
Curb
> > weight.
> > > How did you get that info? Lawrence Rhodes.......
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Bob Bath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: <[email protected]>
> > > Sent: Friday, September 01, 2006 3:09 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Cuirb weights. Lets start a list.
> > >
> > >
> > > > 92 Honda Civic DX weighs 2220 stripped of AC, motor,
> > > > radiator, etc.
> > >
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
A few things:
I think your premise that mainstream public avoids EVs because no standards
exist, is faulty. The general public avoids EVs because there are no EVs
easily available that suit their lifestyle, are cost competitive, and well
marketed. If Solectria built the Sunrise, had $60m marketing budget, CARB
was in place and sold it for $15k a shot, it would be successful -
regardless of standards.
Standards are in place for other reasons, some of which are:
- safety
- compatibility between components (electrical, mechanical, communication)
- maintainability
- scalability (to make something smaller bigger)
- upgradeability
- durability
In any case, standards are a good thing, as long as they are **enabling**
versus **constricting**. E.g. having a standard battery voltage based on
12V may be fine for PbA, but what about Lithium or other chemistries?
Having a 192V standard is not very useful for people who wanting to build
312V systems. What is the purpose of a battery voltage standard? Does it
truly have benefit?
It would best to leverage existing standards, where the exist. Check with
the SAE and you will find many standards which either can be applied to
electric vehicles or are actually designed to be electric vehicle standards
(e.g. SAE J305). It would be good to work within the SAE for new EV
standards, but I suspect that you might find this to difficult and not quick
enough to put into place.
There are also some pseudo standards you may want to research. The EVILBus
protocol comes to mind.
You may also want to start off small, without the unreasonable deadlines you
suggest (45 days for 5 standards from 5 volunteers is quite difficult). For
example, Lee and crew worked on the EVILBus spec for a couple of months. I
am not sure if they have arrived at a conclusion or this is still work in
progress.
Don
Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
see the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jay
Sent: September 5, 2006 1:25 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Creation of EVCC, aka the Electric Vehicle Certification Committee
Creation of EVCC, aka the Electric Vehicle Certification Committee:
The current EV industry is primarily limited to engineers, dreamers, early
adopters, environmentalists, garage mechanics, racers, a few rich groups,
and projects pre-planned for fringe sales. The EV industry does not cater
to the specifications of the middle class.
It lacks direction and is fragmented without standards, has no
infrastructure, has confusing technologies, has none of the primary
automakers offering major production, lacks friendly laws, lacks funded
lobbyists, and has no mainstream public acceptance.
We must remember members of the EV community are NOT the majority.
The mainstream public avoids EV solutions because they have "standards" they
insist on maintaining that eliminates their consideration of an EV. We all
know that they want range, power, low weight, safety, simplicity, fast and
easy power refresh, easy anywhere repairs, and price affordability. We have
also heard "pick any three" and live with the limitations of the other
"wants".
We all know the big car companies want to buy time to continue with their
investments and gas related patents, and the oil companies want to maintain
their monopoly. They are afraid of change and are ripe for a recession
similar to when the imports eliminated dominance by Detroit. They have
always tried to destroy mass transportation and avoid alternatives to old
technology.
Until the EV industry delivers what the mainstream public wants and demands,
mainstream sales will never happen. The fact that they do not "need" what
they demand has little to do with what they demand.
They "think" they need range of at least 100 miles. We know how false that
is, but no one has the money to pay for an education campaign that will
modify their beliefs. Fortunately, range is now attainable, as are almost
all other demands of the majority.
Gas enthusiasts (the 90% of the population we will call the
mainstream) are determined to maintain the illusion of gassers as "normal",
with minimum range of 100 miles, with 10 minute refueling available within
40 miles in any direction, with certified repairs and parts available
nationwide.
They don't believe you need to be a mechanic to drive the vehicle.
Computers became mainstream when cryptic commands were replaced with
clickable buttons.
One of the biggest problems is EV industry standards. We believe the
fastest way to mainstream EVs is to replicate the success of the "small
block Chevy" type standardization. The ability to mix & match all ranges of
price and performance from vast numbers of suppliers by any type of user is
the historic model that is adaptable to an EV success model and difficult
for critics to destroy.
We think certain things are basically required and solvable:
1) Range = now available with super batteries
2) Power = now available with super batteries
3) Low weight = now available with super batteries
4) Safety = super batteries, safety switches, automatic electronics, design
5) Simplicity = Standard sizes, designs, components, connectors
6) Easy Power Refresh = Universal swap-out battery modules that can be
grouped series or parallel for a variety of standard applications.
7) Easy anywhere repairs = Standard components that allow certified repair
centers, perhaps train some national chain that services motorhomes
(generators), or national air conditioning franchise holders, or the
electrical union members association.
8) Price affordability = High now, available only to high income but
becoming more affordable as battery prices come down and volume production
(of standard components) increases. Supply and demand.
Seven of the above eight items are attainable now, even more so than when
cars were first invented. The innovators and pioneers of the 1890s were
mostly inventors, racers, and self funded garage mechanics. Eventually,
they were forced to standardize on tires, rims, steering wheels, axels,
width of vehicles, street lights, rules of the road, headlights, turn
signals, fuel, oil, service, pumps, and all without computers.
Modern advances of instant communications, electronics, materials, testing,
historic analyzing and performance reports change the whole picture. We can
deliver most acceptable (and similar to gassers) vehicle types now with the
exception of low initial purchase cost.
Yet, we can claim lower overall usage and long term affordability, in many
cases better than gassers.
We believe a standards committee would advance the EV cause in months
instead of years and decades. The standards would also eliminate most of
the barriers our opponents and the oil companies can create. Without
standards, we continue to flounder. We propose an odd numbered committee of
the EV list pioneers (like 7 or 9) that have the expertise, experience, and
respect to create some very basic standards. We all know who would best fit
on this committee.
Immediate basic standards need to be agreed upon such as:
1. Preferred volt levels like 48, 96, or 192 eliminating odd numbers.
2. Controller approved levels associated with those voltages.
3. Minimum Guages.
4. Standard grounding techniques, shielding.
5. Standard Connectors.
6. Minimum Electrical Safety switches.
7. Minimum Fire Safety Systems.
8. Diagnostic Methods, Reports & Equipment.
9. Adoption of Certifications and Seal of Compliance.
These standards could have the same effect as "Plug & Play" or Underwriting
Lab acceptance and set the stage for national service tech certification and
parts availability. The standards would not prevent use of other
specifications, or restrict innovation. It would give manufacturers and
EVers a method to supply stockable parts inventory, certified service and
repair centers, safety features, and eventual popularity. It would allow
buyers, sellers, dealers, the DMV, insurers, and purchasers of pre-owned
vehicles to review compliance, compare, and verify value.
I suggest that the 1st Standards Committee consist of only 5 members and be
called the EVCC, short for the Electric Vehicle Certification Committee.
Their purpose to set 5 basic standards from the above list within 45 days of
formation, then to set 5 future goals to be met within 90 days. Members to
serve until they wish to retire, replacements to be selected by the same
group of five.
We nominate Roger, Otmar, Wayland, Rich, Ken, Dennis, Rod, Roland, Lee Hart,
Lawrence, Phillipe, Bill Dube, and Jim H. We suggest that the first five
that accept from this group serve as the 1st Standards Committee, paving the
way for future standards and goals.
We suggest a "UL LAB" style seal be awarded to vehicles, systems, products;
and "Good Wrench" style approval certificate to service centers and techs.
For our part, we are trying to produce a swappable battery module (with BMS
& case) that will be interchangeable battery modules that can be serial or
parallel grouped to achieve standard voltages. We hope to create (or find)
(or assist in a standard) of swap-out
service centers near EV buyer locations. We currently have plans
to supply Michelin tire dealers with pre-charged swap-out packs. We cannot
do this alone. It will not happen very soon without standards, agreements,
and other infrastructure improvements.
We would be happy to comply with EVCC standards and modify any of our
products to promote their standards. Any standard that is created will be
interchangeable between brands like battery posts and USB ports.
We ask all EV board members to reply certifying acceptance of the EVCC and
all to recognize the standards they determine.
Jay, Ryan, John, Randy, Lou, Gary, Betty, Bill, Alex, Vic, & Kray
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If you really want a smart car, come and get one from Canada. Here is BC,
used ones are selling from $20-$28k CAD, that's about $18-16K USD
For example:
http://www.buysell.com/search/resultsvr2.aspx?pshcat=keyword&id=2102&qu=smar
t%20car
Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
see the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Death to All Spammers
Sent: September 5, 2006 12:02 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: SMARTcar on eBay
The auction ended with the bid at $21.7K and not up to the reserve - how
much *is* a SMARTcar worth?!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Don Cameron wrote:
> If you really want a smart car, come and get one from Canada.
> Here is BC, used ones are selling from $20-$28k CAD, that's
> about $18-16K USD
Minor typo, CAD$20-28k is USD$18-25k (that $16k value looked too good to
be true, and it was ;^)
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have to agree - it's not worth much to me either.
However, there are people who are complete VW maniacs who would love to
have this extremely rare VW-built van. Maybe the $15,000 price isn't
out of line for them.
I guess we'll see what happens.
On Sep 5, 2006, at 8:55 AM, Bob Rice wrote:
Hi EVerybody;
I didn't look too closly at this, glad SOMEBODY did! I would say
it's
junk! He'd have to PAY somebody to haul it away!!! Save yur money, stay
tuned and look for the good stuff. We'll critique it right here!
Usually
vehicles come WITH a motor, that, new, would be MORE than the asking
price
of the wreck.Throw in a controller, MAYBE working charger? And you may
have
something worth while?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark McCurdy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 1:09 AM
Subject: Re: Elektro Transporter on eBay
sooo much wrong with this sale, 2 controllers but neither are in
working
condition
no motor??
no batteries? or special, slidein battery tray
brake lines unhooked? why?
missing shocks? why?
missing charger
no windshield?
what DOES come with the vehicle?
Probably lots of RUST??
4 main parts make an electric vehicle,
motor (missing)
controller (not working)
batteries (missing)
charger (missing)
sheesh, it's like they stripped the vehicle
and are now trying to sell it for (more than) new price?
and that $15,000 is just the starting bid, there's a reserve too,
which
$15,000 doesn't cover?
As PT Barnum once said" There is a sucker born EVery minute" Or was it
Henry Ford?
Seeya
Bob>
There's no way this EV is worth $15,000 (or more!) for something in
this
shape:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?
ViewItem&item=320023139995
--
--
Doug Weathers
Las Cruces, NM, USA
<http://learn-something.blogsite.org/>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
But without being an EV enthusiast this hypothetical VW maniac won't be
able to get it to run. And it's hardly in showroom shape here either.
It would take a LOT of work before the VW maniac would have it in a
aesthetic condition he would value.
Danny
Doug Weathers wrote:
I have to agree - it's not worth much to me either.
However, there are people who are complete VW maniacs who would love
to have this extremely rare VW-built van. Maybe the $15,000 price
isn't out of line for them.
I guess we'll see what happens.
On Sep 5, 2006, at 8:55 AM, Bob Rice wrote:
Hi EVerybody;
I didn't look too closly at this, glad SOMEBODY did! I would say
it's
junk! He'd have to PAY somebody to haul it away!!! Save yur money, stay
tuned and look for the good stuff. We'll critique it right here!
Usually
vehicles come WITH a motor, that, new, would be MORE than the asking
price
of the wreck.Throw in a controller, MAYBE working charger? And you
may have
something worth while?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark McCurdy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 1:09 AM
Subject: Re: Elektro Transporter on eBay
sooo much wrong with this sale, 2 controllers but neither are in
working
condition
no motor??
no batteries? or special, slidein battery tray
brake lines unhooked? why?
missing shocks? why?
missing charger
no windshield?
what DOES come with the vehicle?
Probably lots of RUST??
4 main parts make an electric vehicle,
motor (missing)
controller (not working)
batteries (missing)
charger (missing)
sheesh, it's like they stripped the vehicle
and are now trying to sell it for (more than) new price?
and that $15,000 is just the starting bid, there's a reserve too,
which
$15,000 doesn't cover?
As PT Barnum once said" There is a sucker born EVery minute" Or was it
Henry Ford?
Seeya
Bob>
There's no way this EV is worth $15,000 (or more!) for something
in this
shape:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?
ViewItem&item=320023139995
--
--
Doug Weathers
Las Cruces, NM, USA
<http://learn-something.blogsite.org/>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I was recently on the Valence website and they have some pdf files of their
EV-style batteries. I have to admit that they seem attractive, but one thing
I've run accross continually is that there is a lot of rumour out there on the
web.
They claim that the batteries are cheaper than lead-acid. I suspect that may be
true over time. I read a 2003 study of NiMH batteries that claimed they were
good for 10 years/150,000 miles. If so they are only 2X the cost over the same
time/distance for lead-acid, not 15X as they seem to appear.
So- does anyone have experience with either the RT or XP batteries in the nice
automotive packages? The idea of 2/3 the weight and 3 times the output is
attractive... but how long do they last (is there a history yet) and what would
be the approximate increase in range if you switched over from lead-acid (or
the reduction in weight if you only had enough to get the same range?
-Ralph
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Please remove me from the list I need a break
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
How often are you using brakes on a mostly freeway run and still get
more than 10% regen, if you get 22% on stop-n-go traffic.
That doesn't make sense to me.
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
Last time I drove ACRX to the PIR I spent 8.5Ah and it's 17.5 miles
away from me (one way). Works out to 0.485Ah/mile with ~330V pack.
I thought it is too good to be true, and may be an effect of going
toward lower elevation overall. So I logged the numbers until
got back to the starting point. 19.8Ah and 34 miles. That's
0.582 Ah/mile. The ride is mostly a freeway, I was doing
55 to 60 mph, driving normally conservatively (no needless
passing, but never holding traffic either).
Ah counter also recorded: 7352Wh out of, and 928Wh in the battery
(due to regen). So actual drive consumption is 7352/34=216Wh/mile,
but regen apparently makes it (7352-928)/34=188.94Wh/mile overall.
Which I think is impressive for my [wrong] regular
bridgestone 36psi tires (pumped to 42psi each) and known dragging
rear brake shoe. Well, I have a belly pan... Still I was
surprised.
Anyway, the point I was going to make - for a passenger car with
no regen normal power consumption should be from 200Wh/mile
(very good) to 250Wh/mile (so-so). If it is more, and it
ain't a brick aero, there is likely something wrong with it.
The max Wh return from regen (in stop and go city driving)
I had was 18%. But even during this freeway ride it did
~12%. In fact I only used brake to hold it on red light
where power consumption is zero anyway.
One disadvantage of having regen - disks and drums become
rusty quickly...
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
Bob Bath wrote:
I will respond again on this, based on what I've read
for 8 years:
330 Wh/mi. is about average.
If you are under that, especially as low as 200-250,
CONGRATULATIONS. You have an aerodynamically slippery
car, a light foot, or both.
peace,
--- Chris & Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Jim Coate rearranged random electrons to form the
words:
Your 250 whrs/mile is near the top end of what I'd
expect.
So while not a ridiculous number, it might be
worth checking
wheel alignment, dragging brakes, etc.
Thank you - will look into this. Did I misunderstand
the previous post that
suggested I had a light foot?
I take it Solectria's were pro-converted Geo Metros?
Generically speaking would expect a Force range of
30 or 40 miles,
depending of course on pack age and driving
conditions, so your 36 miles
could make sense.
I'm concerned about how far I can push this pack. It
has occurred to me it's
probably not safe to go by Amp or Watt hrs used, as
that does not take the
starting condition of the pack into account.
Should I be looking at the voltage rather than
measures of work to determine
DoD? If so, what's the best way to do this - sitting
still or under load,
and if the latter what *kind* of load?
FWIW, I've been charging up to an emeter reading of
148-150V. When I turn
off the charger, the reading is about 130V give or
take a couple volts.
After our longest days driving (low 20s miles so
far), the resting pack
voltage has been ~122V (although accelerating say,
up a hill it has briefly
been <100V). Can someone give a newbie a voltage-sag
explanation, what to
expect and what to beware of?
Can someone explain to me how I can determine where
my DoD lies on a 120V
pack of AGMs? I really want to treat them right!
Thanks a bunch!
Converting a gen. 5 Honda Civic? My $20 video/DVD
has my '92 sedan, as well as a del Sol and hatch too! Learn more at:
www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html
____ __/__|__\ __
=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!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The standards that the EV committee approved would be their own, specifically
NOT from government, or homeowners, or the ICE industry, for exactly the
reasons you stated. The idea that "if" someone built is back to chicken and
egg. Which will (eventually) come first? Should prospective EV users wait
more (years?).
The choices of which standards to focus on (and which ones first) would be
self decided and so easy to agree upon. It seems pretty reasonable that
version one of standards could be almost instantaneous. Adopting some of the
existing SAE standards might be first order of discussion of the committee.
There is no reason to be "constraining" as the standards are only seals of
approval and encourage everyone to share parts, services, and solutions.
One round of certified standards could also be versions that are already in
place in general industry like electrical safety and fire safety. How many
list owners even know what class/type of fire fighting to use against
electrical or various battery type fires? Do we all have to research
everything individually? Most will learn fire safety AFTER the disaster. Then
EVs might take more public relations pain.
The thing here is to have a committee of EV pioneers take the horn of the
bull before vice versa, or wandering and wondering as presently seems to be the
case.
Jay
Don Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A few things:
I think your premise that mainstream public avoids EVs because no standards
exist, is faulty. The general public avoids EVs because there are no EVs easily
available that suit their lifestyle, are cost competitive, and well
marketed. If Solectria built the Sunrise, had $60m marketing budget, CARB
was in place and sold it for $15k a shot, it would be successful -
regardless of standards.
Standards are in place for other reasons, some of which are:
- safety
- compatibility between components (electrical, mechanical, communication)
- maintainability
- scalability (to make something smaller bigger)
- upgradeability
- durability
In any case, standards are a good thing, as long as they are **enabling**
versus **constricting**. E.g. having a standard battery voltage based on
12V may be fine for PbA, but what about Lithium or other chemistries?
Having a 192V standard is not very useful for people who wanting to build
312V systems. What is the purpose of a battery voltage standard? Does it
truly have benefit? It would best to leverage existing standards, where the
exist. Check with the SAE and you will find many standards which either can be
applied to electric vehicles or are actually designed to be electric vehicle
standards (e.g. SAE J305). It would be good to work within the SAE for new EV
standards, but I suspect that you might find this to difficult and not quick
enough to put into place. There are also some pseudo standards you may want to
research. The EVILBus protocol comes to mind. You may also want to start off
small, without the unreasonable deadlines you suggest (45 days for 5 standards
from 5 volunteers is quite difficult). For example, Lee and crew worked on the
EVILBus spec for a couple of months. I am not sure if they have arrived at a
conclusion or this is still work in
progress.
Don
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates
starting at 1¢/min.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Having been in this business since 1979, I think we qualify as
pioneers, so I'll put in my two cents here.
First, consensus is very difficult to achieve. Several years ago, we
were involved in the founding of the Electric Vehicle Industry
Association. Ever heard of it? It died at a young age. One of the
things we attempted was setting standards, but even among a handful
of people, we could not reach consensus. Look at the recurring
threads on this list that are never resolved. Just say, "Crimp or
solder?" and see what you get.
Second, you talk about making the cars "mainstream" and "affordable"
while at the same time basing all your hopes on "super
batteries". Those are mutally incompatible. If you are talking
about lithium or NiMH, I have seen enough on this list that I will
NOT recommend those for conversions for Joe Citizen. They are NOT
plug and play at this time, and they are NOT affordable for most
people. The people who are using those batteries are early adopters
and tech/auto geeks who are happy to spend a lot of their time and
energy thinking about their car, monitoring it, and tweaking it.
Third, your certification needs clout to make it worth
anything. This means a massive public education program. The
mainstream doesn't know the difference between Wilderness EV and AC
Propulsion, and a nice seal on the web site will not make a whole lot
of difference unless they know what it means. Most eyeballs will
slide right past it without registering it. You can lead a viewer to
a FAQ, but you can't make them read.
Fourth, you want to have certified service centers. Great idea! We
ran a program for years called the Pro-Mech Program. For a fee, we
put professional mechanics through a training program, which included
follow-up tech support, sales referrals, and discounts on
parts. Having been in the automotive service trade for years, we
knew the channels of communication. We did booths and seminars at
trade shows, we advertised in trade publications and association
publications, we worked our butts off trying to recruit a network of
professional mechanics who could do conversions and service the
cars. We did get a couple dozen people over the years who took the
training. NOT ONE OF THEM built more than a single car for
themselves, or stayed with the program. We finally shut it down for
lack of interest.
I would LOVE to see a set of standards and some kind of certification
and a service and conversion infrastructure. But I'm not holding my breath.
Shari Prange
Electro Automotive POB 1113 Felton CA 95018-1113 Telephone 831-429-1989
http://www.electroauto.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Electric Car Conversion Kits * Components * Books * Videos * Since 1979
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
G'day All
After a work job yesterday at the local Harley Davidson workshop (diagnose
a fault on a dyno) discussion turned to an EV trike, fully custom built
chassis (here in Aus, trikes can be ridden with a car license).
How practical this is remains to be seen, but so far the discussion has run
along as far as:
Independant rear suspension and wheels/etc from a Subaru or similar,
narrowed down/shorten the axles (don't know if that's possible yet).
Set up two small motors (say 6" diameter, 10" long 24V ex forklift motors)
in a similar way to Gone Postals' rear end, except using belts and putting
the motors on top of the axle assembly.
Batteries along the bottom of a custom chassis, from just in front of the
back axle through to as close to the front wheel, side by side, all in a
single block. maybe 72V.
Front wheel, forks, steering, brakes etc from a larger bike, Kawasaki, BMW,
whatever. grafted onto the custom chassis.
Control gear in the vicinity of the motors, in front or behind. Charger
where a petrol tank would usually reside, probably with a cover made from
an old petrol tank.
Body styling perhaps reminiscent of the Harley Davidson Servi-car or
similar trike of pre or post WW2 era.
Comments, abuse, flames all welcome
regards
[Technik] James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ralph wrote:
> So- does anyone have experience with either the RT or XP
> batteries in the nice automotive packages? The idea of 2/3
> the weight and 3 times the output is attractive... but how
> long do they last (is there a history yet) and what would be
> the approximate increase in range if you switched over from
> lead-acid (or the reduction in weight if you only had enough
> to get the same range?
I don't know that anyone has been using them long enough to answer the
life question, but here is a firsthand account of the performance/range
differences with respect to PbA.
The Dynasty IT is normally fitted with a 72V pack of Group 31 gels (DEKA
8G31), which are rated 64.5Ah C/1 (85.2Ah C/6) and weigh in at 71.7lbs
each for a 428lb pack.
The 72V pack of Valence Group 27s that replaced them is rated at 130Ah
C/5, and weighs 245lbs.
> Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 21:26:04 -0700
> From: "John Foster"
> Subject: Valence test in Dynasty
>
> Hi all,
>
> Thought you might be interested- I finally did a range test
> with Valence group 27 size LiIon batteries in a Dynasty. I
> went 66miles, saw more countryside than I ever thought I
> would in an IT. I'll work up some sort of story & photo for
> the newsletter. This was in a 1244 DC drive car, the AC
> 1238 is a little more efficient, and would go farther. Not
> exactly Tesla performance, but we got a little of our own
> LiIon sparkle!
Extracted from John's newsletter article are the following details:
"The voltage stays perkiliy up at 78V for a loooooong time.
Charged to 86V and swooped down in the first mile. Tromp
the pedal and it does dip to 69V with 300A for a second, not
as stiff as the E-moli cells, but stiffer than flooded."
[...]
"A sunny day. Nice day to push a car... now at twice
our previous record mileage, voltage finally beginning to
drop below 77V."
So, looks like at least a 2x range increase over the PbA pack with
improved performance (less sag) and just over 40% less weight.
To achieve the same pack weight as the PbA pack would require a double
string of the U24s, for 200Ah C/5 and a still slightly lower 414lb pack
weight. This would give at least 3x the PbA range (extrapolating from
the 130Ah pack data), and should be even stiffer since each string of
the U24s is good for the same 300A peak as the single string of U27s.
In an full-size car application, I think the approach would be to use a
higher voltage string of the modules to get the required/desired peak
power capability; for instance, a 240V nominal string would sag to
11.5V/module at 300A for 69kW or ~92HP peak output. Using the U24s this
would be a 690lb, ~25kWh pack... about 100mi range @ 250Wh/mi.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In a message dated 9/5/06 3:16:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Subj: Trike "motorcycle"
Date: 9/5/06 3:16:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (James Massey)
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-to: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
G'day All
After a work job yesterday at the local Harley Davidson workshop (diagnose
a fault on a dyno) discussion turned to an EV trike, fully custom built
chassis (here in Aus, trikes can be ridden with a car license).
How practical this is remains to be seen, but so far the discussion has run
along as far as:
Independant rear suspension and wheels/etc from a Subaru or similar,
narrowed down/shorten the axles (don't know if that's possible yet).
Set up two small motors (say 6" diameter, 10" long 24V ex forklift motors)
in a similar way to Gone Postals' rear end, except using belts and putting
the motors on top of the axle assembly.
Batteries along the bottom of a custom chassis, from just in front of the
back axle through to as close to the front wheel, side by side, all in a
single block. maybe 72V.
Front wheel, forks, steering, brakes etc from a larger bike, Kawasaki, BMW,
whatever. grafted onto the custom chassis.
Control gear in the vicinity of the motors, in front or behind. Charger
where a petrol tank would usually reside, probably with a cover made from
an old petrol tank.
Body styling perhaps reminiscent of the Harley Davidson Servi-car or
similar trike of pre or post WW2 era.
Comments, abuse, flames all welcome
regards
[Technik] James >>
*** Harley just annonced they will be building a trike soon. Dennis Berube
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Here is an ADC motor on EBay. The specs say it is an F80-4001. I've never
heard of that motor. Is it any good for an EV? Here is the EBay listing
number: 220023067694
Jeff Wilson
E-10
www.austinev.org/evalbum/669
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I agree with almost everything you say. Maybe the industry was not ready then.
Hopefully, now with the surge in news, pressure for alternatives, concern for
the environment, and larger interest in EVs, things can be different now.
The television industry took many years to become marketable. The auto
industry was laughed at by everyone. The Panama Canal failed at first too.
The Ford T-Bird had poor sales until it became a four seater. The first
(large) 25 inch TV failed when rumors of eventual color TVs spread. American
tire makers said for 13 years that "radials" could not work on American cars,
then built millions of substandard tires (many failed or were recalled) while
they learned how to build them.
With a small group of pioneers defining basic standards, EVs can sooner
become mainstream. I hope we are not all waiting for others to lead the way
and do nothing.
The standards mean something if we adopt them and use them.
The "training" program may not be very feasible, but a national chain of
electrical suppliers (with service techs) could be acceptably certified and
exchange info without much "training".
Whether we are willing to pay for them or not, super batteries are here now,
probably with considerable improvements to come. The promise that prices will
come down is pretty much accepted as fact. Will gas prices lower over time?
Will hydrogen become low cost? Will hybrid (2 drive systems) eventually become
cheaper than one? Yes, battery prices are high, but safety has increased and
electronics can solve much of the babysitting and mainenance required in the
past. Many feel that ICE vehicles need much more monitoring and service than
EVs already. I'm happy to eliminate catalytic converters, explosive fumes,
complex ignitions, thousands of moving parts, and emission control devices that
only allow government selected pounds of chemicals and pollution per mile.
Jay
Electro Automotive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Having been in this business since 1979, I think we qualify as
pioneers, so I'll put in my two cents here.
First, consensus is very difficult to achieve. Several years ago, we
were involved in the founding of the Electric Vehicle Industry
Association. Ever heard of it? It died at a young age. One of the
things we attempted was setting standards, but even among a handful
of people, we could not reach consensus. Look at the recurring
threads on this list that are never resolved. Just say, "Crimp or
solder?" and see what you get.
Second, you talk about making the cars "mainstream" and "affordable"
while at the same time basing all your hopes on "super
batteries". Those are mutally incompatible. If you are talking
about lithium or NiMH, I have seen enough on this list that I will
NOT recommend those for conversions for Joe Citizen. They are NOT
plug and play at this time, and they are NOT affordable for most
people. The people who are using those batteries are early adopters
and tech/auto geeks who are happy to spend a lot of their time and
energy thinking about their car, monitoring it, and tweaking it.
Third, your certification needs clout to make it worth
anything. This means a massive public education program. The
mainstream doesn't know the difference between Wilderness EV and AC
Propulsion, and a nice seal on the web site will not make a whole lot
of difference unless they know what it means. Most eyeballs will
slide right past it without registering it. You can lead a viewer to
a FAQ, but you can't make them read.
Fourth, you want to have certified service centers. Great idea! We
ran a program for years called the Pro-Mech Program. For a fee, we
put professional mechanics through a training program, which included
follow-up tech support, sales referrals, and discounts on
parts. Having been in the automotive service trade for years, we
knew the channels of communication. We did booths and seminars at
trade shows, we advertised in trade publications and association
publications, we worked our butts off trying to recruit a network of
professional mechanics who could do conversions and service the
cars. We did get a couple dozen people over the years who took the
training. NOT ONE OF THEM built more than a single car for
themselves, or stayed with the program. We finally shut it down for
lack of interest.
I would LOVE to see a set of standards and some kind of certification
and a service and conversion infrastructure. But I'm not holding my breath.
Shari Prange
Electro Automotive POB 1113 Felton CA 95018-1113 Phone 831-429-1989
http://www.electroauto.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Electric Car Conversion Kits * Components * Books * Videos * Since 1979
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+
countries) for 2¢/min or less.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor wrote:
Anyway, the point I was going to make - for a passenger car with
no regen normal power consumption should be from 200Wh/mile
(very good) to 250Wh/mile (so-so). If it is more, and it
ain't a brick aero, there is likely something wrong with it.
----------
Gotch'a - Geo Metros look better than a brick to me, so I'll be checking
the brakes and alignment. I wonder too if it's weight might be reducing
efficiency with 10 of these honking big AGMs... (although I love not
having to deal with watering batteries).
We're still in the first 500 miles or so of driving it, nearly all
in-city driving, probably <10 miles total on the highway so far. We're
still getting used to it (no regen, unfortunately), and have lots of
little things I want to address. Is there typically much of a
city/highway differential, similar to an ICE vehicle?
Steve Clunn wrote:
First thing to get some kind of
bearings I pick a fixed amp load , like what I normal cruse at , yours may
be 75 amp for a 120v system . Now while pulling 75 amp check the voltage ,
it will be between 12 and 10.5 , the 10.5 will be dead , the battery won't
really be all the way dead but close , you'll be able to let up on the go
peddle and the voltage will come up but your in the danger zone .
--------
Tried this during this mornings commute, but was not very successful.
Seattle roads are neither very flat, nor sparsely populated. I had a
difficult time cruising at ANY specific amperage for more than a split
second! I'm guessing it's important to note the voltage at the same
relative point in time at a specific amperage, right? But what would
that be? Voltage after X seconds at Y amps? I suspect this will be a
trick for me to do and I won't be very satisfied as to it's accuracy..
:-P
One thought I had that might help - what about driving steadily up the
same hill at the end of my commute that I started on, and noting the
voltage? Compare reading taken from beginning and end of commute. (Is 75
amps a load picked for this specific purpose, or just arbitrarily, btw?)
Alternatively, could I use some kind of battery tester to put a
specified load on my pack before and after to more accurately measure
things?
And the importatnt question is, to what end? How do I *apply* this data?
If 130V (at rest, post charging) is full, and 105V is dead, then would
50% DoD be at 117-118V (also with no load)? Remembering that the 130V is
with no load, how do I interpret the voltage sag?
The
voltage also starts to drop fast as you get close to empty so you want to
know when this starts happening . From 11v to 10.5 is where things start
falling fast . Another thing that happens , if you pull allot of amps out
fast the voltage will sage but will come back when the heavy load is
lifted.
------
We definitely see this. Pulling 200-300 amps going up hills, we see the
voltage drop, but don't know when to start worrying - what's ok, and
what's more problematic. It's scary to see the voltage drop below 100V
or even 90V (once, after ~20 miles, going up a hill we briefly saw it in
the 80s!) - but at the top of the hill, it goes right back up!
How do you correlate what the voltage sags *to* under load with what the
voltage is with NO load?
> Can someone explain to me how I can determine where my DoD lies on a 120V
> pack of AGMs? I really want to treat them right!
>
allot of people on the list say " a newbe will kill his first pack " but
what I've found is that if your interested enough to ask about battery care
, then your half way there.
------
I want to get the rest of the way! :-)
I understand that the packs state of charge is multivariable; I'm just
having a hard time pinning it down enough to make sure I'm not
inadvertently abusing my batteries. I want to figure out my real-world
range. I'll be as careful as I need to be, if I can figure out how to do it!
Thanks for the help!
- Patrick
--- End Message ---
