EV Digest 5989
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: Pricing Lithium-ion Valence Group buy
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Pricing Lithium-ion Valence Group buy
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
3) Re: Pricing Lithium-ion Valence Group buy
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
4) RE: Pricing Lithium-ion Valence Group buy
by "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Remove me from list
by Allen DeWitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) CivicWithACord latest at 3,000 miles
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: $25,000 Performance Car?
by Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) D'Oh! Should be 3K mi/yr.!
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: CivicWithACord latest at 3,000 miles
by "Michael Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Florida Alternative Fuel Vehicle Day Odyssey -- Oct. 12
by "Charles Whalen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) RE: Pricing Lithium-ion Valence Group buy
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: $25,000 Performance Car?
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: $25,000 Performance Car?
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
14) RE: Pricing Lithium-ion Valence Group buy
by "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: $25,000 Performance Car?
by Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Community Blogging and Forum site?
by Jim Dempsey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Short Range Medium Performance Conversion of an 85 MR2
by "Kip C Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Short Range Medium Performance Conversion of an 85 MR2
by "Kip C Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: IB9000 batteries
by Bruce Weisenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Pricing Lithium-ion Valence Group buy ( Kokam Cycle life )
by "Dmitri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Got them from the Doctor about 4 months ago. He charged per cell then
adding shipping for 100 units. Did you specify a unit quantity to him?
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 John G. Lussmyer
Sent: October 8, 2006 4:14 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Pricing Lithium-ion Valence Group buy
At 03:40 PM 10/8/2006, Don Cameron wrote:
>Anyone thought of doing a group purchase on Kokam? Even at the single
>cell list cost (70Ah 3.7V is $300) a 312V pack would still be $10K
>**cheaper** than Valence.
Where are you getting those prices?
I talked to Kokam just a couple weeks ago. Low quantity pricing (say under
1000 units) was:
70AH $470
100AH $671
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Another way to think of the Kokam Verses Valence is miles.
If you have 500 charges with 75 miles your good for 37,500 miles
2,000 charges with 75 miles 150,000 miles.
Even if the Kokam was 300 dollars for a 100 Ah battery you would spend 68
cents for every mile you traveled just for the cost of the batteries.
The Valance at 1220 per 100 Ah battery your cost is .21 cents per mile. This
is three times less cost if you could buy the 100 Ah Kokam at the 70 Ah
price.
This still does not take into consideration you have a BMS and easy
charging. It is not so easy to create a BMS and charging system it would be an
expensive experiment to find out and you still don't beat the price anyway.
Don
In a message dated 10/8/2006 4:19:47 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 03:40 PM 10/8/2006, Don Cameron wrote:
>Anyone thought of doing a group purchase on Kokam? Even at the single cell
>list cost (70Ah 3.7V is $300) a 312V pack would still be $10K **cheaper**
>than Valence.
Where are you getting those prices?
I talked to Kokam just a couple weeks ago. Low quantity pricing (say
under 1000 units) was:
70AH $470
100AH $671
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
Compare the real price
A Kokam 70ah pack at 314.5 volts is 85 X 300 is 25,500
A Valence 100 Ah pack of 312 volts is 26 X 1220 = 31,720
For the above the Valence is 22,204 or really 3296 dollars less. Yes maybe
Kokam will give a discount for a large order as well but also consider this.
Kokam life cycles 500
Valence life cycles 2000
So the Kokam is really 4 times the above cost. The Kokam at 102,000
thousand
and the Valence is still 22,204 thousand.
Then factor what is a BMS worth on each battery? Being able to use charging
for lead acid?
Even if the Kokam was 25% of the cost it is not as good a value. The price
sounds great but really consider apples to apples. I looked at the Kokam
batteries and it was disappointing when I figured out their real cost.
Don
In a message dated 10/8/2006 3:44:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Anyone thought of doing a group purchase on Kokam? Even at the single cell
list cost (70Ah 3.7V is $300) a 312V pack would still be $10K **cheaper**
than Valence.
- purchasing in bulk might reduce this to being $15-20k cheaper than Valance
- they have 30% greater energy density than Valance
- with the money saved a BMS unit can be purchased from Victor or Jukka
- Kokam safety tests show just as good of a safety record as Valence
- Cliff has been putting these batteries through actual racing tests with
great results
Don Cameron
If anyone is really serious about doing this I thought they would have
looked at the Valence batteries
_http://www.valence.com/pdffiles/U-Charge%20RT%20DS%20Jan06.pdf_
(http://www.valence.com/pdffiles/U-Charge%20RT%20DS%20Jan06.pdf)
.
They are a very expensive battery but not as expensive as buying small
cheep
6000 single cells that will fail. Many of the other lithium batteries small
or large many have a cycle life that is about the same as an AGM battery.
Using the small cells has so many contact points BMS and charging issues.
I am trying to get these so more people can afford them including myself.
There are several Solectria owners who are using these batteries. Each
battery
has its own BMS and as I understand it can work with some existing lead acid
chargers. So yes they are expensive but with no added expense for a BMS and
able to use a lead acid charge algorithm they are ready to use now.
Current prices
U1= $860
U24= $2030
U27 = $2550
Marc's reply if we put together a 1000 battery order?
Hi Don,
U1=$515
U24=$1220
U27= $1530
UEV = $1160
U-BMS = $100
Thanks,
Marc
So if this was posted on all EV sites the 1000 total might be within reach.
Unless someone has a better legitimate battery I am considering buying 52
of
these myself so we only have 950 to go.
Don
In a message dated 10/7/2006 8:18:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, don't keep us in suspense, give us some specifics, like the pack
voltage/amps for a quantity of x would cost y $.
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 10:05 AM
Subject: Re: Lithium-ion batteries & Valence Group buy
>
> Hello Mike
>
> I have been talking to Marc at Valence for a long time about their
> batteries. They are all set up for an EV if we could get a serious group
buy going the
> prices would still be high but I believe better than anything else out
there
> for the money.
>
> Don
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Current single pricing was there these are the prices that I was given.
Don
Current prices
U1= $860
U24= $2030
U27 = $2550
In a message dated 10/8/2006 4:35:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 02:34 PM 10/8/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Marc's reply if we put together a 1000 battery order?
>
>Hi Don,
>U1=$515
>U24=$1220
>U27= $1530
>UEV = $1160
>U-BMS = $100
Hmm, that UEV looks interesting. 65AH at 19.2V, I'd only need 8 or 9
of them in a Sparrow. So around $10,000.
Hmm, wonder what the single unit pricing on those is...
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 04:36 PM 10/8/2006, Don Cameron wrote:
Got them from the Doctor about 4 months ago. He charged per cell then
adding shipping for 100 units. Did you specify a unit quantity to him?
Yup, and shipping was additional.
Prices may have gone up.
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Dear EV supporter,
Please remove me from the EV List. Thanks, Allen DeWitt
---------------------------------
Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small
Business.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Well I passed a major milestone in that CivicWithACord
passed the break-even point compared with gasoline. I
did some calculating, and with my 3,000 miles per
year, gas at 2.50/gal (overall for last 2 years) it
became financially beneficial to drive the EV instead
of gas. True, I compared it with my wife's Odyssey
(25 mpg), not my CIvic (32 mpg) as an ICE, but the
fact is significant. Batteries + electricity costs
less than ICE, as long as one is using floodies that
will yield more than 2 years life. Obviously if my
commuting needs were greater, it would be even more
worthwhile, and I'd have passed this point long ago.
Now every day that I continue to get use from the
floodies is money in the bank; money that gradually
pays back the cost of the conversion.
I'll grant that I can't put a $$ figure on peace
of mind knowing that half of our family's
transportation needs don't subsidize terror; they
don't subsidize subjugation of women; they don't
entail greenhouse gases. (yes, I've swapped my
provider for windpower).
(;-p
This is fun!
Bob & Kim Bath
541.472.1115
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 ---
I said "run on 480v and 360amps = 172Kw" not 320v.
John Wayland wrote:
Hello to All,
Oops...I made an error in my math when I wrote:
> Jack's NiMH pack at 360 amps X 320 volts now makes a realistic 115
kw, a far cry from his 172 kw. 115 kw pushed through the 90% efficient
power train is just 103 hp.
The actual hp comes out to 138, not 103. Still, the proposed performance
car would be slow. The figures I gave of 0-60 in ~ 16 seconds and the
1/4 mile ET in 20-22 seconds based on 103 hp, based on 138 hp would
improve to 0-60 in ~ 14 seconds and the 1/4 mile in maybe 19-20 seconds.
See Ya......John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
not 3K mi. The rig has 6,700 as an electric, 105,600 overall.
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 ---
Congrats, Bob. If I follow, you've been going 2 years on $600 worth of batts
and electric? Not bad at all.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Bath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 4:48 PM
Subject: CivicWithACord latest at 3,000 miles
> Well I passed a major milestone in that CivicWithACord
> passed the break-even point compared with gasoline. I
> did some calculating, and with my 3,000 miles per
> year, gas at 2.50/gal (overall for last 2 years) it
> became financially beneficial to drive the EV instead
> of gas. True, I compared it with my wife's Odyssey
> (25 mpg), not my CIvic (32 mpg) as an ICE, but the
> fact is significant. Batteries + electricity costs
> less than ICE, as long as one is using floodies that
> will yield more than 2 years life.
> This is fun!
> Bob & Kim Bath
> 541.472.1115
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The Florida EAA will be participating in and displaying EVs at the Florida
Alternative Fuel Vehicle Day Odyssey Workshop on Thursday, October 12 at
Westside Tech Vocational School, 955 East Story Road, in Winter Garden, just
northwest of Orlando. Florida EAA President Shawn Waggoner will give a
presentation on EVs and Plug-in Hybrids at 1:00pm.
The schedule of presentations is available at:
www.clean-cities.org/education/odyssey/odyssey.htm
There will be a Ride 'n Drive event with a Toyota RAV4-EV and a couple of
other EVs expected to be there. If you have an EV in Central Florida that
you can bring to the event, by all means please do so. All EVs and other
alternative fuel vehicles are welcome. Westside Tech has several 240V
outlets available for charging EVs, and I've got a complete set of 240V plug
adaptors should anyone need them for charging.
If you have any interest in getting together a group of EV drivers for
dinner on either Wednesday or Thursday evening, please contact me off-list.
One of those two evenings I'm going to try to hook up with Electric Vehicle
Association of Washington DC member and fellow RAV4-EV driver Bryan Murtha,
who will be in Orlando on business this week, so we'd be happy to expand our
get-together to include any EV drivers in Central Florida (or visiting
Central Florida) who can make it.
The Florida Alternative Fuel Vehicle Day Odyssey Workshop is open to the
public free of charge. All are welcome.
Hope to see you there.
Charles Whalen
Public Relations Director &
Director of Public Charging Infrastructure
Florida EAA (www.floridaeaa.org)
Delray Beach, FL
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I don't see valence as an option for me yet. If I replace my group 24's
I would need 29K to get same system voltage or 12k to get same voltage
and similar capacity.
But I would need 5 parallel banks to get enough amps! 80A max 30sec
pulse is Comical. That is not even 1C
Kokams would provide the amps, weight less and cost similar.
Ok, so the BMS is an issue. but not that big of an issue.
The other question I have is calender life. Reguarless of how many
miles, how many years will each of these technologies last. Kokam,
Valence , and A123? If I am gonna spend 15-25K on a pack, it needs to last.
Why not put 4 high 20 wide A123's in an old battery case with a few bms
boards. That would be 40ah by 13V and cost $1440 in cells at the retail
kit price so I am sure there would be some price break. It would be
capable of 1400 amps continuous if you could build the interconnects!
with 13 lbs of cells. And Regen currents wouldn't destroy them.
OR better
Why not ask Kokam about qty 1000 pricing, I have talked to Jeff Kostos
about other quantity pricing and I am sure he can provide a discount.
The Kokams don't have as much heating issue. 4 SLPB 100216216H cells
are 10 lbs of cells, can dish out 400amps peak and 200 continuous and
would take up 8.5 by 8.7 x .42. if we allow for some cooling like ProEV
did and call it 1/5 inch that is 40ah 12V in a 2" thick battery that is
shorter than group 24 and just a bit taller. I personally would be more
interested if we were grouping up for the 70 AH cells becuase they are
in the next series and can 350 continuous and 700 peak amps. (see
problem/soulution/idea) I believe QTY 1000 would be $1.1 per kwh but
that was an old conversation and my memory is faded. 4*3.7*40*1.1 =
$651/ module and only 4 cells to balance. that would be 15K to be the
same as my AGM's now except 40ah is really 40 ah and it would weight
around 300 lbs not 1000lbs. Solve the balanceing issue and my first pack
replacement may go lithium.
Problem/soulution/idea :They are 18" x 13" x 1/4" and bending them will
hurt them. Perhaps we mount them to a PC card that plugs into a
backplane with pass thru interconnects and on board balance circuitry.
Now you buy an EV with an empty card rack and plug in as many cards as
you can afford. Dual 40ah cards with side by side cells, 70 and 100ah
cards with 1 cell per card, and re-config for proper voltage. with
interconnects in back. Maybe the other idea is a standard size module
of 40ah by 185v. Establish this standard and people can buy from 1 to 4
units for there EV's. Ah...Enough dreaming for one night.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to Jack and All,
Sorry if this is a repeat, I've tried to send it two other times and it
never hits the EVDL. I sent a correction on my math about this post, and
two of them showed up, but for some reason, this original post has not
been getting to the list. This then, is the third try. I've corrected
the math to reflect the 138 hp figure:
Jack Murray wrote:
$25,000 Performance Car...Being the entrepeneur that I am, I'm always
interesting in creating solutions to problems and limitations, find
faster, easier, cheaper ways.
After reading through Jack's post, it seems his idea of what constitutes
a 'performance car' and mine are quite a bit different.
Based on Jack's formula of using a heavy '84 - '91 Corvette which in
glider form will weigh a porky 2700 lbs., when it's stuffed with 743
lbs. of NiMH batteries and another 250 lbs. of AC motor, transaxle &
inverter, the Corvette EV will weigh at a minimum, 3682 lbs. Jack
figured his battery pack at "480v and 360 amps = 172Kw" which is 230
'battery' hp, but he left out the sagged voltage of the pack under that
360 amp load. In addition, the AC power train isn't 100% efficient -
it's more like 90% at full throttle power. At 90% efficiency 'if' the
pack delivered that promised 172 kw of power (it can't), the
inverter/motor combo would turn it into 207 hp. The small D cell type
NiMH batteries are very impressive, and I am a fan of them (my Insight
runs on 120 D cell NiMH), but they do sag at high currents. At 90 amps
per small D cell their nominal 1.2V will sag to about .8V. Now, the 12V
based NiMH blocks Jack talks about are falling to just 8 volts. Jack's
480 volt pack just fell to 320 volts under load. Now redoing the math,
Jack's NiMH pack at 360 amps X 320 volts now makes a realistic 115 kw, a
far cry from his 172 kw. 115 kw pushed through the 90% efficient power
train is just 138 hp.
Stock Corvettes of this vintage weighed about 3300 lbs. and during the
period of '84 - '91 Vettes came with a 245 hp V8 and a torque
multiplying transmission that gave it mid 6's in the 0-60 and mid 14's
for the 1/4 mile, with only the '91 model able to crack into the 13's -
barely, with a 13.9. Yes, these specs qualify as a performance car,
though they're certainly not at the high end of this category...if
anything, they are at the low end. Today's hot import four cylinder
cars, quick BMW's, V8 muscle cars like the Mustang, and Matt Graham's
impressive electric 240SX run 0-60 in the low 5 second range and 1/4
mile ETs of mid to low 13's...all of which would cream any '84 thru '91
Vette!
Here's the reality... Jack's heavy 3700 lb. electric Vette with just 138
hp and no transmission to help multiply torque, would be a sad, slow
car, and it would be nothing close to a performance car. As a
comparison, let's look at a bland econocar '93 Ford Escort wagon. It
weighed 1200 pounds less than Jack's proposed electric Vette, at just
2451 lbs. and with 88 hp it ran 0-60 in a tepid 12.8 seconds and did a
s-l-o-w 19.1 second 1/4 mile ET. With just 50 extra ponies over a
mediocre Escort, no transmission, and a whopping 1200 extra lbs. to lug
around, Jack's proposed 'performance car' would struggle to run 0-60 in
14 seconds and the 1/4 mile would take an agonizing 19 seconds :-(
Does anyone think 0-60 in 14 seconds and a 19 second 1/4 mile ET equates
to a performance car? These figures aren't even in yesterday's let alone
today's economy car s' range! More importantly, with all that weight and
no tranny to help, pretty much all of those 138 horses would be used
just to move the thing around, let alone to accelerate hard, so the wear
and tear on those little D cells would be very high, and cycle life
would be very low.
I'm taking orders for all of you that say you'd buy it if you could,
and I'm not kidding one bit.
Let's see....performance far worse than an early 90's automatic econocar
wagon, from a car who's sporty swoopy shape 'promises' performance, a
gazillion NiMH cells being maxed out most of the time and not liking
being paralleled one bit, a BMS nightmare, and all this for 'just' $25,000?
Try this...reconfigure that NiMH pack to a 240V, 72 ahr pack with 720
amps discharge capability (still 115 kw), put it in a small sedan that
as a glider might weigh 1500 lbs., save thousands of dollars and use a
high torque DC motor, tranny, and a Z1K Zilla, and you'd have a fun
sedan capable of kicking butt on unsuspecting 'sporty looking' cars!
You'd get 0-60 in 7 seconds, a high 14 second 1/4 mile, and about 75
miles per charge for about $15,000....ten grand less, with real
performance! You'd still have a BMS nightmare to deal with, but the 0-60
blasts would be the only time where 90 amps would be pulled from the D
cells, and it would only be for 7 seconds or so. Cruise speeds would be
in the 5 amp per D cell range, and even hill pulling would only be in
the 30 amp per D cell range, so those D cells would be in a low stress
area most of the time. With NiMH the range per charge is about 2.5 times
that of lead acid, so 75 miles per charge is very realistic.
For many of us, it's a lot more fun to have an electric sedan that goes
like stink and surprises the unsuspecting, over a sporty-looking car
that's lethargic and embarrassingly s-l-o-w. Jack, considering your
proposed performance car and the battery pack you've outlined, with the
voltage sag under load, the power from the pack is just not high enough
to give any semblance of performance for a car this heavy.
See Ya....John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello John
What do you advise in this situation?
A 1300 pound glider into a performance car?
Range not as much an issue as regeneration. I get back about 20 percent
overall on the hills and stopping at intersections. With this in mind.
I considered a TransWarP 11 because it would be an easy install to replace
the transmission and to add an AC motor to it.
It would be about 150 pounds over the weight of having a single motor and
transmission with two motors and no transmission.
Don
In a message dated 10/8/2006 6:24:36 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello to Jack and All,
Sorry if this is a repeat, I've tried to send it two other times and it
never hits the EVDL. I sent a correction on my math about this post, and
two of them showed up, but for some reason, this original post has not
been getting to the list. This then, is the third try. I've corrected
the math to reflect the 138 hp figure:
Jack Murray wrote:
> $25,000 Performance Car...Being the entrepeneur that I am, I'm always
> interesting in creating solutions to problems and limitations, find
> faster, easier, cheaper ways.
After reading through Jack's post, it seems his idea of what constitutes
a 'performance car' and mine are quite a bit different.
Based on Jack's formula of using a heavy '84 - '91 Corvette which in
glider form will weigh a porky 2700 lbs., when it's stuffed with 743
lbs. of NiMH batteries and another 250 lbs. of AC motor, transaxle &
inverter, the Corvette EV will weigh at a minimum, 3682 lbs. Jack
figured his battery pack at "480v and 360 amps = 172Kw" which is 230
'battery' hp, but he left out the sagged voltage of the pack under that
360 amp load. In addition, the AC power train isn't 100% efficient -
it's more like 90% at full throttle power. At 90% efficiency 'if' the
pack delivered that promised 172 kw of power (it can't), the
inverter/motor combo would turn it into 207 hp. The small D cell type
NiMH batteries are very impressive, and I am a fan of them (my Insight
runs on 120 D cell NiMH), but they do sag at high currents. At 90 amps
per small D cell their nominal 1.2V will sag to about .8V. Now, the 12V
based NiMH blocks Jack talks about are falling to just 8 volts. Jack's
480 volt pack just fell to 320 volts under load. Now redoing the math,
Jack's NiMH pack at 360 amps X 320 volts now makes a realistic 115 kw, a
far cry from his 172 kw. 115 kw pushed through the 90% efficient power
train is just 138 hp.
Stock Corvettes of this vintage weighed about 3300 lbs. and during the
period of '84 - '91 Vettes came with a 245 hp V8 and a torque
multiplying transmission that gave it mid 6's in the 0-60 and mid 14's
for the 1/4 mile, with only the '91 model able to crack into the 13's -
barely, with a 13.9. Yes, these specs qualify as a performance car,
though they're certainly not at the high end of this category...if
anything, they are at the low end. Today's hot import four cylinder
cars, quick BMW's, V8 muscle cars like the Mustang, and Matt Graham's
impressive electric 240SX run 0-60 in the low 5 second range and 1/4
mile ETs of mid to low 13's...all of which would cream any '84 thru '91
Vette!
Here's the reality... Jack's heavy 3700 lb. electric Vette with just 138
hp and no transmission to help multiply torque, would be a sad, slow
car, and it would be nothing close to a performance car. As a
comparison, let's look at a bland econocar '93 Ford Escort wagon. It
weighed 1200 pounds less than Jack's proposed electric Vette, at just
2451 lbs. and with 88 hp it ran 0-60 in a tepid 12.8 seconds and did a
s-l-o-w 19.1 second 1/4 mile ET. With just 50 extra ponies over a
mediocre Escort, no transmission, and a whopping 1200 extra lbs. to lug
around, Jack's proposed 'performance car' would struggle to run 0-60 in
14 seconds and the 1/4 mile would take an agonizing 19 seconds :-(
Does anyone think 0-60 in 14 seconds and a 19 second 1/4 mile ET equates
to a performance car? These figures aren't even in yesterday's let alone
today's economy car s' range! More importantly, with all that weight and
no tranny to help, pretty much all of those 138 horses would be used
just to move the thing around, let alone to accelerate hard, so the wear
and tear on those little D cells would be very high, and cycle life
would be very low.
>
> I'm taking orders for all of you that say you'd buy it if you could,
> and I'm not kidding one bit.
Let's see....performance far worse than an early 90's automatic econocar
wagon, from a car who's sporty swoopy shape 'promises' performance, a
gazillion NiMH cells being maxed out most of the time and not liking
being paralleled one bit, a BMS nightmare, and all this for 'just' $25,000?
Try this...reconfigure that NiMH pack to a 240V, 72 ahr pack with 720
amps discharge capability (still 115 kw), put it in a small sedan that
as a glider might weigh 1500 lbs., save thousands of dollars and use a
high torque DC motor, tranny, and a Z1K Zilla, and you'd have a fun
sedan capable of kicking butt on unsuspecting 'sporty looking' cars!
You'd get 0-60 in 7 seconds, a high 14 second 1/4 mile, and about 75
miles per charge for about $15,000....ten grand less, with real
performance! You'd still have a BMS nightmare to deal with, but the 0-60
blasts would be the only time where 90 amps would be pulled from the D
cells, and it would only be for 7 seconds or so. Cruise speeds would be
in the 5 amp per D cell range, and even hill pulling would only be in
the 30 amp per D cell range, so those D cells would be in a low stress
area most of the time. With NiMH the range per charge is about 2.5 times
that of lead acid, so 75 miles per charge is very realistic.
For many of us, it's a lot more fun to have an electric sedan that goes
like stink and surprises the unsuspecting, over a sporty-looking car
that's lethargic and embarrassingly s-l-o-w. Jack, considering your
proposed performance car and the battery pack you've outlined, with the
voltage sag under load, the power from the pack is just not high enough
to give any semblance of performance for a car this heavy.
See Ya....John Wayland
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 06:05 PM 10/8/2006, Jeff Shanab wrote:
I don't see valence as an option for me yet. If I replace my group 24's
I would need 29K to get same system voltage or 12k to get same voltage
and similar capacity.
But I would need 5 parallel banks to get enough amps! 80A max 30sec
pulse is Comical. That is not even 1C
I think you made the same mistake that I did at first.
There are 2 data sheets, you used the "UCharge RT" sheet, you need to
use the "UCharge XP" sheet.
http://www.valence.com/pdffiles/U-Charge%20XP%20DS%20Jan06.pdf
(I really wish people wouldn't put spaces in file names!)
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
A 3300 vette has 700lbs of motor, another 300lbs of trans, and probably
another 200lbs to remove. So we add 250lb motor and 742lbs batteries,
the car goes back
to its original weight or even less. A car that runs circles around
other cars on the racetrack in stock form now has even less weight
and more low-end torque, and can do 60-0 braking better than most.
The spec sheet on the IB9000 show 1.15v sag after the first 30 seconds
at 90amp discharge, not .8v.
Has John run his car around a racetrack, other than just going straight?
Jack
John Wayland wrote:
Hello to Jack and All,
Sorry if this is a repeat, I've tried to send it two other times and it
never hits the EVDL. I sent a correction on my math about this post, and
two of them showed up, but for some reason, this original post has not
been getting to the list. This then, is the third try. I've corrected
the math to reflect the 138 hp figure:
Jack Murray wrote:
$25,000 Performance Car...Being the entrepeneur that I am, I'm always
interesting in creating solutions to problems and limitations, find
faster, easier, cheaper ways.
After reading through Jack's post, it seems his idea of what constitutes
a 'performance car' and mine are quite a bit different.
Based on Jack's formula of using a heavy '84 - '91 Corvette which in
glider form will weigh a porky 2700 lbs., when it's stuffed with 743
lbs. of NiMH batteries and another 250 lbs. of AC motor, transaxle &
inverter, the Corvette EV will weigh at a minimum, 3682 lbs. Jack
figured his battery pack at "480v and 360 amps = 172Kw" which is 230
'battery' hp, but he left out the sagged voltage of the pack under that
360 amp load. In addition, the AC power train isn't 100% efficient -
it's more like 90% at full throttle power. At 90% efficiency 'if' the
pack delivered that promised 172 kw of power (it can't), the
inverter/motor combo would turn it into 207 hp. The small D cell type
NiMH batteries are very impressive, and I am a fan of them (my Insight
runs on 120 D cell NiMH), but they do sag at high currents. At 90 amps
per small D cell their nominal 1.2V will sag to about .8V. Now, the 12V
based NiMH blocks Jack talks about are falling to just 8 volts. Jack's
480 volt pack just fell to 320 volts under load. Now redoing the math,
Jack's NiMH pack at 360 amps X 320 volts now makes a realistic 115 kw, a
far cry from his 172 kw. 115 kw pushed through the 90% efficient power
train is just 138 hp.
Stock Corvettes of this vintage weighed about 3300 lbs. and during the
period of '84 - '91 Vettes came with a 245 hp V8 and a torque
multiplying transmission that gave it mid 6's in the 0-60 and mid 14's
for the 1/4 mile, with only the '91 model able to crack into the 13's -
barely, with a 13.9. Yes, these specs qualify as a performance car,
though they're certainly not at the high end of this category...if
anything, they are at the low end. Today's hot import four cylinder
cars, quick BMW's, V8 muscle cars like the Mustang, and Matt Graham's
impressive electric 240SX run 0-60 in the low 5 second range and 1/4
mile ETs of mid to low 13's...all of which would cream any '84 thru '91
Vette!
Here's the reality... Jack's heavy 3700 lb. electric Vette with just 138
hp and no transmission to help multiply torque, would be a sad, slow
car, and it would be nothing close to a performance car. As a
comparison, let's look at a bland econocar '93 Ford Escort wagon. It
weighed 1200 pounds less than Jack's proposed electric Vette, at just
2451 lbs. and with 88 hp it ran 0-60 in a tepid 12.8 seconds and did a
s-l-o-w 19.1 second 1/4 mile ET. With just 50 extra ponies over a
mediocre Escort, no transmission, and a whopping 1200 extra lbs. to lug
around, Jack's proposed 'performance car' would struggle to run 0-60 in
14 seconds and the 1/4 mile would take an agonizing 19 seconds :-(
Does anyone think 0-60 in 14 seconds and a 19 second 1/4 mile ET equates
to a performance car? These figures aren't even in yesterday's let alone
today's economy car s' range! More importantly, with all that weight and
no tranny to help, pretty much all of those 138 horses would be used
just to move the thing around, let alone to accelerate hard, so the wear
and tear on those little D cells would be very high, and cycle life
would be very low.
I'm taking orders for all of you that say you'd buy it if you could,
and I'm not kidding one bit.
Let's see....performance far worse than an early 90's automatic econocar
wagon, from a car who's sporty swoopy shape 'promises' performance, a
gazillion NiMH cells being maxed out most of the time and not liking
being paralleled one bit, a BMS nightmare, and all this for 'just' $25,000?
Try this...reconfigure that NiMH pack to a 240V, 72 ahr pack with 720
amps discharge capability (still 115 kw), put it in a small sedan that
as a glider might weigh 1500 lbs., save thousands of dollars and use a
high torque DC motor, tranny, and a Z1K Zilla, and you'd have a fun
sedan capable of kicking butt on unsuspecting 'sporty looking' cars!
You'd get 0-60 in 7 seconds, a high 14 second 1/4 mile, and about 75
miles per charge for about $15,000....ten grand less, with real
performance! You'd still have a BMS nightmare to deal with, but the 0-60
blasts would be the only time where 90 amps would be pulled from the D
cells, and it would only be for 7 seconds or so. Cruise speeds would be
in the 5 amp per D cell range, and even hill pulling would only be in
the 30 amp per D cell range, so those D cells would be in a low stress
area most of the time. With NiMH the range per charge is about 2.5 times
that of lead acid, so 75 miles per charge is very realistic.
For many of us, it's a lot more fun to have an electric sedan that goes
like stink and surprises the unsuspecting, over a sporty-looking car
that's lethargic and embarrassingly s-l-o-w. Jack, considering your
proposed performance car and the battery pack you've outlined, with the
voltage sag under load, the power from the pack is just not high enough
to give any semblance of performance for a car this heavy.
See Ya....John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
All of this talk of moving the evdl is exciting, but one need not reinvent the
wheel. There are blog hosting sites that work well.
I've been using LiveJournal for some time now. One thing I really, *really*
like is the anonymity. Responses to my posts and replies are filtered through
the LJ machinery and sent directly to my main email. I don't have to use an
expendable address to avoid the spam plague.
LJ has html commands that can shorten long posts (Google the "lj cut")
No banner ads if the admin don't want them.
Problem posters can be banned easily by admin staff. I admin, and have used
this tidy authority. Inappropriate posts can be likewise deleted.
Posts only appear when browsing, with reply threads accessible. ***If a topic
doesn't interest you, you don't have to read the thread!!!***
LJ pages are bandwidth lean. Admin can specify that pictures be limited in
size or hidden behind cuts to speed browsing.
I'm not pressing for LJ exclusivity at all. I've seen a few horribly done blog
services, though, and like the simplicity of their design.
Just a thought.
Jim
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks for the insight.
It's my goal to plan for longevity of the pack, so my thought is to design
the pack with a 20% reserve on both power and energy beyond what I intend to
use. If I don't skimp on the initial configuration, hopefully that will be
a solid step toward not killing any of the batteries.
I'm still looking for a source and pricing though!
-
Kip
Eugene, OR
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven Ciciora" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: Short Range Medium Performance Conversion of an 85 MR2
I'm not sure I can answer your questions, but I think
I can provide a data point. I'll talk (from memory)
about Bill Dube's VW rabbit convertable, with an ADC
8" motor, 1200A grizburger controller, and (I believe)
144V of saft NiCds. He drives to work and back, runs
trips over lunch, 5 days a week, about 28 miles each
way. He used brand new Saft NiCds, the water cooled
kind designed for EV use. I think 100 Ah? I think
they cost about $10k? I think he has about 30k miles
and still going strong, even in the cold winter. It
is expected to get 100K miles out of the pack, if
stupid user mistakes don't kill them... The car
definetly has more power/acceleration than the stock
gas engine. I think he tells people it has 40 to 80
mile range, depending on driving style. This is in
colorado, and the big hills are not a problem. I
personally believe water cooled nicds are the way to
go; it helps keep them extreemly balanced. The cells
are always within a few milivolts of each other. But
water cooling is a pain; lots of connections that can
leak. These batteries also have an automatic
wattering system, where you put distilled water in one
end, and when a cell is "full", it bypasses the
incomming water to the next cell, as to not over
dilute that cell.
I will need a higher voltage for my AC drive than I
have room for to use these batteries. If they came in
1/3 the Ah and 1/3 the size, and 1/3 the price, I
would have bought a set myself.
- Steven Ciciora
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm fairly certain that the weights that site lists for the MR2 are shy by
at least a couple hundred pounds. Other owners of 85s are claiming actual
weights of around 2350lbs including spare.
If I had the budget for it, I would definately consider your truck as an
additional vehicle. Sadly however, my conversion will be paced by my budget
which I intend to keep on a cash-only basis, so if the car is done by this
time next year, it will be a good thing. ;)
-
Kip
Eugene, OR
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 12:46 PM
Subject: Re: Short Range Medium Performance Conversion of an 85 MR2
Hello Kip
You might be a little high on your starting weight. I have used this site
to
find vehicle information _http://www.carsplusplus.com/brands/index.php_
(http://www.carsplusplus.com/brands/index.php)
They have listed a 1984 at 2116 pounds and the 1986 supercharged at 2259
pounds.
I don't think you can use the PFC charger on NiCad batteries. If your
serious about that battery I do have a Brusa charger that is set up for
120 volt
SAFT batteries.
Since your in Oregon I will let you know I have a 1998 Factory EV Ranger
that has brand new 12 volt batteries that I would sell to you for 15,000
dollars. It has 7000 miles on it and 50 to 60 miles range. It is even in
your area
now check out this site _http://southtownelanes.com/electric_pickups.html_
(http://southtownelanes.com/electric_pickups.html)
The blue one in the picture looks just like the one I have for sale. You
could buy the whole vehicle for the price of just the SAFT batteries.
Don
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Finally found the company heres the link but no spec's listed for a New D cell
they just came out with. Sent an inquire which I will forward to anyone
interested.
//intellect-battery.com/
Lawrence Rhodes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://www.batterystore.com/Intellect/IntMain.htm I found this on Yahoo.
Lawrence Rhodes
----- Original Message -----
From: "John G. Lussmyer"
To:
Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 7:36 AM
Subject: IB9000 batteries
> At 01:13 AM 10/8/2006, Jack Murray wrote:
> >I think the short-term solution is NiMH batteries, and in particular
> >the ones I mentioned just recently, Intellect's new 9Ah D-cells.
> >Compare to a Optima Yellow Top, that is 24Ah C/1, at 50% dod just
> >12Ah, and weigh 20Kg, price is about $160.
> > 20 cells of IB9000 would be 18Ah, weigh 3.5Kg, and cost $120.
> >That is 1/5th the weight and even less cost!
>
> And Google can't find a mention of these anywhere except on this list...
>
> --
> John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream.... http://www.CasaDelGato.com
>
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Guys, you all need to look at the graphs here:
http://www.kokam.com/english/product/kokam_Lipo_01.html
'nuff said.
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 7:40 PM
Subject: Re: Pricing Lithium-ion Valence Group buy
Another way to think of the Kokam Verses Valence is miles.
If you have 500 charges with 75 miles your good for 37,500 miles
2,000 charges with 75 miles 150,000 miles.
Even if the Kokam was 300 dollars for a 100 Ah battery you would spend 68
cents for every mile you traveled just for the cost of the batteries.
The Valance at 1220 per 100 Ah battery your cost is .21 cents per mile.
This
is three times less cost if you could buy the 100 Ah Kokam at the 70 Ah
price.
This still does not take into consideration you have a BMS and easy
charging. It is not so easy to create a BMS and charging system it would
be an
expensive experiment to find out and you still don't beat the price
anyway.
Don
In a message dated 10/8/2006 4:19:47 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 03:40 PM 10/8/2006, Don Cameron wrote:
Anyone thought of doing a group purchase on Kokam? Even at the single
cell
list cost (70Ah 3.7V is $300) a 312V pack would still be $10K **cheaper**
than Valence.
Where are you getting those prices?
I talked to Kokam just a couple weeks ago. Low quantity pricing (say
under 1000 units) was:
70AH $470
100AH $671
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
Compare the real price
A Kokam 70ah pack at 314.5 volts is 85 X 300 is 25,500
A Valence 100 Ah pack of 312 volts is 26 X 1220 = 31,720
For the above the Valence is 22,204 or really 3296 dollars less. Yes
maybe
Kokam will give a discount for a large order as well but also consider
this.
Kokam life cycles 500
Valence life cycles 2000
So the Kokam is really 4 times the above cost. The Kokam at 102,000
thousand
and the Valence is still 22,204 thousand.
Then factor what is a BMS worth on each battery? Being able to use
charging
for lead acid?
Even if the Kokam was 25% of the cost it is not as good a value. The
price
sounds great but really consider apples to apples. I looked at the Kokam
batteries and it was disappointing when I figured out their real cost.
Don
In a message dated 10/8/2006 3:44:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Anyone thought of doing a group purchase on Kokam? Even at the single
cell
list cost (70Ah 3.7V is $300) a 312V pack would still be $10K
**cheaper**
than Valence.
- purchasing in bulk might reduce this to being $15-20k cheaper than
Valance
- they have 30% greater energy density than Valance
- with the money saved a BMS unit can be purchased from Victor or Jukka
- Kokam safety tests show just as good of a safety record as Valence
- Cliff has been putting these batteries through actual racing tests
with
great results
Don Cameron
If anyone is really serious about doing this I thought they would have
looked at the Valence batteries
_http://www.valence.com/pdffiles/U-Charge%20RT%20DS%20Jan06.pdf_
(http://www.valence.com/pdffiles/U-Charge%20RT%20DS%20Jan06.pdf)
.
They are a very expensive battery but not as expensive as buying small
cheep
6000 single cells that will fail. Many of the other lithium batteries
small
or large many have a cycle life that is about the same as an AGM
battery.
Using the small cells has so many contact points BMS and charging
issues.
I am trying to get these so more people can afford them including myself.
There are several Solectria owners who are using these batteries. Each
battery
has its own BMS and as I understand it can work with some existing lead
acid
chargers. So yes they are expensive but with no added expense for a BMS
and
able to use a lead acid charge algorithm they are ready to use now.
Current prices
U1= $860
U24= $2030
U27 = $2550
Marc's reply if we put together a 1000 battery order?
Hi Don,
U1=$515
U24=$1220
U27= $1530
UEV = $1160
U-BMS = $100
Thanks,
Marc
So if this was posted on all EV sites the 1000 total might be within
reach.
Unless someone has a better legitimate battery I am considering buying 52
of
these myself so we only have 950 to go.
Don
In a message dated 10/7/2006 8:18:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, don't keep us in suspense, give us some specifics, like the pack
voltage/amps for a quantity of x would cost y $.
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 10:05 AM
Subject: Re: Lithium-ion batteries & Valence Group buy
Hello Mike
I have been talking to Marc at Valence for a long time about their
batteries. They are all set up for an EV if we could get a serious
group
buy going the
prices would still be high but I believe better than anything else out
there
for the money.
Don
--- End Message ---
