--- Begin Message ---
I am considering using a Raptor 1200 recommended by Ken Koch of KTA.
Any opinions on reliability and performance?
Thanks;
Dennis
Elsberry, MO
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- *
* This post contains a forbidden message format *
* (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) *
* Lists at sjsu.edu only accept PLAIN TEXT *
* If your postings display this message your mail program *
* is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
------_=_NextPart_001_01C76498.93FFEBF6"
Subject: Raptor 1200
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 06:21:28 -0500
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Thread-Topic: Raptor 1200
Thread-Index: AcdkmJRNxPC+2UnvS+ig+mGAU8pUZg==
From: "Pestka, Dennis J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "EV Discussion Group--
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 06:02:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Update on CivicWIthACord
To: [email protected]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I don't know if my wife will go for that from a
cash-flow perspective. Also, that doesn't give me the
chance to test those new components, (stronger DCDC
and enjoy the 9" torque) (;-p
But you're right; that would be another way to go
about it...
--- Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bob Bath wrote:
> > I'm bummed when I think about the concept of
> selling
> > this ride, but I do enjoy the converting process
> > immensely, and I MISS IT!
>
>
> What if you keep your current vehicle and instead,
> sell the one you
> have yet to convert?
>
> Get a mint Honda and convert it so it looks OEM so
> that it will bring
> in what you have tied up into it money wise. Gas
> will likely be over
> $3/gal here again shortly in most places so people
> looking to buy an
> EV will be at a frenzy again.
>
>
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?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Bored stiff? Loosen up...
Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.
http://games.yahoo.com/games/front
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 5:29:46 -0800
From: Mark Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: EV Towing Damage. Motor and Transmission Help
Cc: Aaron Quinto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
It really depends on what vehicle you are talking about. Some are rated for
towing. A good example is my neighbor's Saturn that he tows behind his RV all
the time. It has been all over the country and has never had a problem. He
said he made sure it was towable before buying it. So it really depends on
your particular transmission.
My Saab has a 20 mile limit on 4 wheel towing, so I plan to machine some
external bolt-on hub/spindle units that will allow me to free-wheel for towing
longer distances. My grandfather used to do this with his racing vehicles
years ago and it worked well. With a jack and lug wrench they are off in 3
minutes.
Mark Ward
95 Saab 900 SE "Saabrina"
www.saabrina.blogspot.com
---- Aaron Quinto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I normally don't have much to say on the list, but I do have a
> comment about this. It doesn't help you with the motor and trans
> problem (sorry about that), but it's a note for anyone that tows this
> way in the future. If nothing else, it might be good information to
> keep in mind.
>
>
> A few months ago, I was talking with a co-worker about towing
> vehicles behind an RV (if I happened to get one at some point) and he
> said to tow a Jeep. That seemed like an odd choice to me so I asked
> him: why a Jeep?
>
> He explained that when someone is towing a vehicle behind an RV,
> typically all 4 wheels are on the ground and it's just rolling.
> Obviously, the transmission has to be in neutral, otherwise it
> wouldn't move at all. The problem is, even if a vehicle is in
> neutral, the output shaft of the transmission is still spinning when
> it's being towed. He stated that if the car is not running, the
> transmission fluid is not flowing, so the transmission (even though
> it's not in gear) is still spinning and heating up the same
> transmission fluid over and over. Eventually, something's going to go
> wrong with it.
>
> So, his point was that with a 4-wheel-drive Jeep, you can engage or
> disengage the front and rear axles with the secondary
> 4-wheel/low-gear shifter. Then, the output shaft of the transmission
> doesn't turn, only the differentials, but those don't need extra
> cooling anyway.
>
> When I read this message, it popped into my mind that the car was
> probably at an angle (dolly towing?) and the trans fluid wasn't
> completely covering the gears and he was probably traveling over 60
> mph for many miles before something got too hot in the transmission
> and finally broke apart.
>
>
> I just looked at Uhaul's website and found this on page 5 of the tow
> dolly user guide:
> http://www.uhaul.com/guide/userguide-towdolly.pdf
>
>
> TRANSMISSION DAMAGE TO
> YOUR VEHICLE-IN-TOW
> When towing a rear axle driven front engine vehicle, the drive shaft
> must be disconnected to prevent transmission damage. Simply placing
> the transmission in neutral is not sufficient and will not prevent
> damage due to a lack of internal lubrication. You must disconnect the
> drive shaft at the rear axle and tie or wire it up. The universal
> joint bearing caps must be taped on to prevent loss of the bearings.
> If you choose to remove the drive shaft entirely, it may be necessary
> to cap the transmission tail shaft to prevent fluid loss and possible
> future damage. Consult your vehicle owner's manual.
> U-Haul Centers and dealers are not required to remove or reinstall
> the drive shaft as part of the rental. However, some U-Haul Centers
> and dealers can do this for an additional fee.
> Front wheel drive vehicles need not have drive shafts disconnected
> because the drive wheels are loaded on the tow dolly.
> Many rear engine vehicle transaxles are damaged by towing. However
> the standard transmission Volkswagen Beetle may be towed when the
> shift lever is in neutral. Consult the owner's manual for tow suitability.
>
>
>
>
> At 03:28 PM 03/11/2007, you wrote:
> >Note: Nothing and no one was hurt except for my former
> >S-15 EV.
> > I sold my 86 Solar Car Corp S15 pickup yesterday. I
> >have been getting alot of use out of the pickup bed in
> >the last few weeks with landscaping so I really
> >regreted selling it. My new office was just too far
> >away to use it so I was hoping to get it to a good
> >home where it could get used everyday.
> > Kenneth showed up alot earlier then expected after
> >I had just driven it for a good 12-15 miles finding
> >the self serve carwash was closed. He test drove it
> >about 4-5 miles and went to get a uhaul dolly. It was
> >tow dollied from north texas in nuetral but about an
> >hour out of the final destination something went
> >really wrong. He was towing with a big dodge ram and
> >he felt a big lurch and then all was smooth again as
> >the motor and tranmission self destructed.
> > I don't have any images of it yet and from what he
> >told me the bolts holding the shifter were gone which
> >let the shifter just drop into gear. I hate to see an
> >working EV that could have lasted me possibly years to
> >come get sidelined. To fix it with new parts would
> >cost nearly the price he paid for the vehicle which
> >makes it even worse.
> >I think I know where to send him for the motor if it
> >is salvagable at all but any suggestions are welcome.
> >Besides just random pick and pulls does anyone have an
> >idea of somewhere in or near colorado to get a
> >transmission on the cheap for an S-15 pickup? or
> >Anyone happen to have one just sitting around.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Mark Hastings
>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 05:50:46 -0800
From: John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Raptor 1200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hello to Dennis and All,
Pestka, Dennis J wrote:
>I am considering using a Raptor 1200 recommended by Ken Koch of KTA.
>Any opinions on reliability and performance?
>
>
I ran one of the earliest versions of the Raptor 1200 in my Datsun
1200...always loved the name matching thing :-) It was a terrific
controller! I had zero problems with, it made BIG power, and the
throttle response was super smooth. Rich Rudman had a lot to do with the
design, so if you like his PFC chargers, you'll certainly like this
controller. I reluctantly sold my Raptor 1200, but the funds it
regenerated went into White Zombie...besides, I had a Zilla Z1K to
replace it with. Of course, I love the Zilla, but the Raptor 1200 will
always be a favorite controller. I'd say Ken's recommendation is a good one.
Dennis, because of all the motor loop current a Raptor 1200 makes (up to
1800 amps), you'll probably want to use some of the fat, bright orange
4/0 cable of yours! For those unaware, back in 2004 Dennis was kind
enough to ship free to me, a bunch of this high quality cable in both
4/0 and 2/0 sizes that went into White Zombie. Thanks again, Dennis.
See Ya....John Wayland
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 20:08:45 -0700
To: [email protected]
From: Bill Dube <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SCCA Problems with Electrics
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bromine, not benzine.
Bromine is really nasty toxic stuff. It is a step nastier than chlorine.
Bill Dube'
At 07:55 PM 3/11/2007, you wrote:
>Chip:
>
>I think it was a benzine based battery at Phoenix International in
>about 1994 during a SERA race. (Solar Electric Racing Association,
>no longer exists) Have heard of NO problems since then at all. We
>(Formula Lightning crashed (T-boned actually) two FL's with Optimas
>at Cleveland CART race venue. Trashed the side pod full of
>Optimas. NO problems at all really. diapered the cars and brought
>them in on hooks. Batteries lost next to no fluid at all. Set broken
>batteries in dish pans. Nothing at all ran out even then. I really
>thin the batteries could have been used except the plastic cases
>were broken away. :-)
>
>...Roy Nutter
>
>
> >>> Chip Gribben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 3/9/2007 2:15 PM >>>
>I wouldn't think floodeds would cause much damage to a race track
>unless it is made of cotton. Isn't most of it concentrated with water
>anyway? I haven't tried this or want to but I've read that it is
>actually safe to dip your finger in a cell, like a US Battery or
>Trojan flooded battery. It won't burn your skin off to the bone. Just
>make sure to rinse off afterwards. I'm sure I've got some spilled on
>my skin filling the batteries or cleaning them. I know it will eat up
>jeans. I have several pairs to prove it. But a track, I don't think
>it would eat it up if it was rinsed off thoroughly following a spill
>along with baking soda to neutralize the acid.
>
>Now I have noticed that when I left an old flooded battery on my
>garage floor for awhile it started eating away at the concrete. I
>didn't realize it had a small hole in it and was leaking. So yes I
>have seen the acid eat away at concrete. That was over period of a
>couple months. It ruined the surface of my garage floor where the
>battery sat.
>
>But in an accident if it was rinsed off a concrete or asphalt track
>immediately with water and baking soda to neutralize the acid it
>should be OK. It shouldn't cause permanent damage.
>
>I'm sure it's not as bad as spilling oil, gas or grease which
>requires chemicals or absorbant materials to get up. And a trace or
>stain would still be left behind. With spilling oil it gets all in
>the pores of the asphalt and resurfaces during a rainstorm and makes
>the road slippery. So there are long lasting effects with spilling oil.
>
>I wouldn't want to competitively race a vehicle in a slalom event
>anyway with floodeds. They are heavy and the water sloshing around
>inside the batteries would cause a car to roll more in the turns. But
>there are times when you don't have a choice. Like taking your
>commuter EV with floodeds for a fun jaunt in a slalom course. The
>slaloms are fun so I see no reason to ban floodeds if the cars pass a
>technical inspection and are held down and contained in the passenger
>compartment. The biggest thing is the hold downs. Cars using fabric
>hold down straps you get at Lowes wouldn't be safe. I can see SCCA
>banning floodeds since that is more competitive. But for our slalom
>events I would allow them if they are securely held down and don't
>pose a problem with the weight causing the vehicle to tip easily.
>NESEA would test the cars to see if they would roll too much before
>the Tour de Sol. You had to go around a corner at a set speed and
>judges would observe to see if the vehicles were safely cornering.
>Those vehicle that looked like they would tip too easily were pulled
>out.
>
>Now sulfur sodium and batteries that have high operating
>temperaturers, that is another story altogether. Li-Pos are dry so
>that wouldn't be a problem.
>
>I would like to know what battery chemistry was used on that Arizona
>track.
>
>Chip Gribben
>
>
>
>
>On Mar 9, 2007, at 11:38 AM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
>
> > From: "ProEV" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: March 9, 2007 11:38:08 AM EST
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Subject: Re: SCCA Problems with Electrics
> >
> >
> > David,
> >
> > Thanks for posting this link. It is a fun thread.
> >
> >> <http://sccaforums.com/forums/permalink/222005/221933/ >>
> ShowThread.aspx#221933>
> >> Quoted from http://www.sccaforums.com:
> >> Two years ago at the SCCA convention someone brought up the idea in
> >> the main Town Hall meeting about electric race cars. He basically
> >> sort of accused the SCCA of not bothering to care about electric race
> >> cars in general and said we needed to be exploring it. Then
> >> someone from Arizona (IIRC) said their region had several folks
> >> who had
> >> tried electric race cars but that they had several have battery
> >> meltdowns on track and they were banned from at least one track
> >> because
> >> of the damage and cleanup problems from this kind of failure. I
> >> can only imagine that even if you got the necessary monitoring
> >> down to
> >> prevent this that you'd still have to worry about the problems caused
> >> by wrecks.
> >
> > Let's see what the shared knowledge of the EV list can answer
> > whether battery powered cars are dangerous to track surfaces.
> >
> > The most obvious suspect is flooded lead acid batteries. I have not
> > worked with these much. I know not to get the acid in my eyes, on
> > my clothes, on my tender bits (and I do not think I want to know
> > how some one found that out<G>) but what about splashed on the
> > skin? Does it hurt? How quickly do you need to wash off the acid?
> > Will it kill me? Will water cure me?
> >
> > What about a spill on the track? Will it damage the pavement? Will
> > it discolor the pavement? How quickly? Will water get rid of the
> > problem?
> >
> > I know there are a number of Arizona list members. Have any of you
> > heard about battery powered cars damaging a race track?
> >
> > I have a vague recollection that at one of the APS EV races, there
> > was a sodium sulfur battery pack that cracked open. The sodium
> > sulfur battery had an operating range of 572 to 673 degrees F. If
> > the hot electrolyte spilled on the track, that might do some
> > serious damage. Where ever I heard the story mentioned a nice cloud
> > of toxic smoke. Anybody know the facts?
> >
> > Any other suspects? The only other battery that I can think of that
> > has enough liquid to spill is nickel-cadmium. Anyone using EV ni-
> > cads have answers about how dangerous to pavement or persons a
> > spill is?
> >
> > Cliff
> > www.ProEV.com
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 07:37:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Storm Connors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: GM Volt
To: List EV <[email protected]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
I thought you guys might enjoy this exchange I had with a GM executive. It's
Email so start at the bottom :-)
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "jchristopher
To: Storm Connors
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 9:29:01 AM
Subject: Re: Volt
Storm,
I think you'll see a Volt on the road by the end of 2010...even if the
batteries aren't optimal. As for the EV-1, clearly not our best moment as a
company. I'm not a lawyer, so I can't say what all the legal issues were,
suffice it to say the PR folks made clear the beating we were going to take
with negative publicity...but the lawyers prevailed. It's the last entrenched
part of the company where we act like the old GM. The good news is that I
truly think the company now "gets it" with the importance of fuel economy and
advanced technology vehicles. History has shown when GM gets focused on
something like this, great things can happen. The last thing we need right now
is to yet again let people down.
Best,
Chris
J. Christopher Preuss
Executive Director
Product and Brand Communications
Chris,
I want to thank you for taking the time to respond. I wonder how much easier
your job would be if GM had explained their rationale for crushing the EV1s
before they crushed them. That project didn't establish a lot of credibility
relative to GM's veracity. I expect that much of the problem could be explained
with an understanding of the competing faction's politics within GM and it
really isn't worth rehashing.
I have enthusiastically read all the Volt info I could get my hands on.
Sorry if I misquoted the range objective. My perception was that it was
inserted as a "straw man" for some political purpose, so 40, 60 or 100 would do
as long as it was currently unachievable.
My point is that if the battery range was only 10 miles it would be orders of
magnitude better than the Prius. I also said I would buy one. GM apparently
thinks that the electric car has to be capable of replacing the Buick before it
is viable. If the Volt was to be a niche vehicle, it would be many very large
niches. Think of the number of folks who would be interested in a US built
vehicle whose power wasn't just gasoline. There would be a lot of used Priuses
for sale!
I'm 67. I have a Suzuki Samurai that has been converted to battery power.
Living in Connecticut at the top of a very high hill it isn't the most
practical of vehicles. I'd like to see the Volt produced while I'm still able
to drive one. Perhaps that will help you understand why the bogus "we will
build it as soon as we get the battery breakthrough" is so frustrating. Build
it now and update it when you get more capable batteries. (Worth a footnote
that you had NiMH technology that worked in the EV1. More politics!)
You might enjoy this GM brochure from around 1998:
http://www.evchargernews.com/miscfiles/gmfun.pdf
Thanks again,
storm
----- Original Message ----
From: "jchristopher
To: Storm Connors
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2007 2:22:07 PM
Subject: Re: Volt
Storm,
(Forgive typos...I'm on the Blackberry at my son's basketball game)
We didn't say we couldn't build the Volt....in fact we said we could. So there
is no need to "prove the concept" of a series hybrid. And we never said 60
miles (did you even read the press material?). We said 40 miles is where
consumer feedback indicated most normal driving in a day would be satisfied.
The issue is proving a concept that would work in the mass market....that means
with advanced batteries. Selling a few hundred cars to ealy adopters is a role
for Tesla and ZAP and others. We need to sell these in the thosands to start
and the tens of thousands within a few years. This is the reality of our fixed
cost structure in the US.
And where in the world do you get the "extorting funds" from the government
bit? We haven't asked the government for a dime. We've stated that the US is
getting hammered by the Japanese on basic research in batteries and that to
stay in the hunt battery makers will need much more funding for basic research
long-term, but that is not money that GM would get or even directly ask for.
On the ICE generator, that is not out of the question, but the diesel is
vastly more expensive when making it BIN 5/Tier II compliant for emissions.
It's most likely a play for Europe.
We're going into production with the car...that's not a question right now.
The only thing we haven't confirmed is the production date. That should be
settled within the next year if all goes to plan. We are also doing a
production fuel cell variant that would follow within a year.
Finally, the response to Volt has been 99 percent very positive. As for the
one percent hanging on, might I suggest we could perfect the perpetual motion
machine for a lifetime of energy free driving and that remaining core of
critics would still be complaining. That's okay by us.
Best,
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: Storm Connors
Sent: 03/10/2007 01:22 PM
To: jchristopher
Subject: Volt
The reason GM is getting so much negative feedback from knowledgeable EVers is
that the line you are feeding- maybe being fed- doesn't make sense.You are
touting a series hybrid. When the plug in charge on the batteries is exhausted,
the ICE takes over. It really doesn't matter if the battery range is 60 miles
or 15 miles. You could prove the concept with readily available, inexpensive
SLA batteries. The people purchasing them would be the early adopters. When the
better batteries are developed they could be used, but the rest of the systems
would be well tested and proven.
This is why many of us feel that GM is using the Volt as a way to extort funds
from the government for "better battery technology". Building the Volt does not
require better battery technology. Build one with 20 mile range and I will buy
one tomorrow; and I haven't bought a new car since 1964.
The low weight, low emissions, high output battery charger is the only part
that really needs development. May I suggest that a diesel engine would be the
best choice? Hell, later you could jazz it up later with a turbine power plant.
To say you can't build it until you have batteries that will provide a 60 mile
range is so ludicrous as to be laughable- if the situation were not so serious.
The reality must be that GM really doesn't want to build the vehicle, but wants
to appear to be "doing something".
I'd suggest a reading of Clayton Christensen's "The Innovator's Dilemma"
because GM is going to be dead if they don't wake up to the reality they face.
Storm Connors
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 17:12:46 +0200
From: "Kaido Kert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: GM Volt
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Ok, i would ask him this:
They had a working series hybrid EV1 demoed in 1999, with a turbine
engine, no less. Why isnt the Volt prototype still running ? Or put it
more accurately, its running on a small DC motor capable of
approximately whopping 5mph.
/kert
On 3/12/07, Storm Connors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I thought you guys might enjoy this exchange I had with a GM executive. It's
> Email so start at the bottom :-)
>
>
> ----- Forwarded Message ----
>
> From: "jchristopher
>
> To: Storm Connors
> Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 9:29:01 AM
>
> Subject: Re: Volt
>
>
>
>
>
> Storm,
>
>
>
> I think you'll see a Volt on the road by the end of 2010...even if the
> batteries aren't optimal. As for the EV-1, clearly not our best moment as a
> company. I'm not a lawyer, so I can't say what all the legal issues were,
> suffice it to say the PR folks made clear the beating we were going to take
> with negative publicity...but the lawyers prevailed. It's the last
> entrenched part of the company where we act like the old GM. The good news
> is that I truly think the company now "gets it" with the importance of fuel
> economy and advanced technology vehicles. History has shown when GM gets
> focused on something like this, great things can happen. The last thing we
> need right now is to yet again let people down.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> J. Christopher Preuss
>
> Executive Director
>
> Product and Brand Communications
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Chris,
>
> I want to thank you for taking the time to respond. I wonder how much easier
> your job would be if GM had explained their rationale for crushing the EV1s
> before they crushed them. That project didn't establish a lot of credibility
> relative to GM's veracity. I expect that much of the problem could be
> explained with an understanding of the competing faction's politics within GM
> and it really isn't worth rehashing.
>
>
>
> I have enthusiastically read all the Volt info I could get my hands on.
> Sorry if I misquoted the range objective. My perception was that it was
> inserted as a "straw man" for some political purpose, so 40, 60 or 100 would
> do as long as it was currently unachievable.
>
>
>
> My point is that if the battery range was only 10 miles it would be orders
> of magnitude better than the Prius. I also said I would buy one. GM
> apparently thinks that the electric car has to be capable of replacing the
> Buick before it is viable. If the Volt was to be a niche vehicle, it would be
> many very large niches. Think of the number of folks who would be interested
> in a US built vehicle whose power wasn't just gasoline. There would be a lot
> of used Priuses for sale!
>
>
>
> I'm 67. I have a Suzuki Samurai that has been converted to battery power.
> Living in Connecticut at the top of a very high hill it isn't the most
> practical of vehicles. I'd like to see the Volt produced while I'm still able
> to drive one. Perhaps that will help you understand why the bogus "we will
> build it as soon as we get the battery breakthrough" is so frustrating. Build
> it now and update it when you get more capable batteries. (Worth a footnote
> that you had NiMH technology that worked in the EV1. More politics!)
>
>
>
> You might enjoy this GM brochure from around 1998:
>
> http://www.evchargernews.com/miscfiles/gmfun.pdf
>
>
>
> Thanks again,
>
> storm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
>
> From: "jchristopher
>
> To: Storm Connors
>
> Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2007 2:22:07 PM
>
> Subject: Re: Volt
>
>
>
> Storm,
>
> (Forgive typos...I'm on the Blackberry at my son's basketball game)
>
>
>
>
>
> We didn't say we couldn't build the Volt....in fact we said we could. So
> there is no need to "prove the concept" of a series hybrid. And we never said
> 60 miles (did you even read the press material?). We said 40 miles is where
> consumer feedback indicated most normal driving in a day would be satisfied.
> The issue is proving a concept that would work in the mass market....that
> means with advanced batteries. Selling a few hundred cars to ealy adopters
> is a role for Tesla and ZAP and others. We need to sell these in the thosands
> to start and the tens of thousands within a few years. This is the reality of
> our fixed cost structure in the US.
>
>
>
> And where in the world do you get the "extorting funds" from the government
> bit? We haven't asked the government for a dime. We've stated that the US is
> getting hammered by the Japanese on basic research in batteries and that to
> stay in the hunt battery makers will need much more funding for basic
> research long-term, but that is not money that GM would get or even directly
> ask for.
>
>
>
> On the ICE generator, that is not out of the question, but the diesel is
> vastly more expensive when making it BIN 5/Tier II compliant for emissions.
> It's most likely a play for Europe.
>
>
>
> We're going into production with the car...that's not a question right now.
> The only thing we haven't confirmed is the production date. That should be
> settled within the next year if all goes to plan. We are also doing a
> production fuel cell variant that would follow within a year.
>
>
>
> Finally, the response to Volt has been 99 percent very positive. As for the
> one percent hanging on, might I suggest we could perfect the perpetual motion
> machine for a lifetime of energy free driving and that remaining core of
> critics would still be complaining. That's okay by us.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Chris
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Storm Connors
>
> Sent: 03/10/2007 01:22 PM
>
> To: jchristopher
>
> Subject: Volt
>
>
>
> The reason GM is getting so much negative feedback from knowledgeable EVers
> is that the line you are feeding- maybe being fed- doesn't make sense.You are
> touting a series hybrid. When the plug in charge on the batteries is
> exhausted, the ICE takes over. It really doesn't matter if the battery range
> is 60 miles or 15 miles. You could prove the concept with readily available,
> inexpensive SLA batteries. The people purchasing them would be the early
> adopters. When the better batteries are developed they could be used, but the
> rest of the systems would be well tested and proven.
>
>
>
> This is why many of us feel that GM is using the Volt as a way to extort
> funds from the government for "better battery technology". Building the Volt
> does not require better battery technology. Build one with 20 mile range and
> I will buy one tomorrow; and I haven't bought a new car since 1964.
>
>
>
> The low weight, low emissions, high output battery charger is the only part
> that really needs development. May I suggest that a diesel engine would be
> the best choice? Hell, later you could jazz it up later with a turbine power
> plant.
>
>
>
> To say you can't build it until you have batteries that will provide a 60
> mile range is so ludicrous as to be laughable- if the situation were not so
> serious. The reality must be that GM really doesn't want to build the
> vehicle, but wants to appear to be "doing something".
>
>
>
> I'd suggest a reading of Clayton Christensen's "The Innovator's Dilemma"
> because GM is going to be dead if they don't wake up to the reality they face.
>
>
>
> Storm Connors
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:34:07 -0500
From: Eric Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: OT: All of original Tesla patents
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Open Office also writes (exports) to PDF.
http://www.openoffice.org
It's a larger download because it does a lot more. It's more of a
replacement for ms office.
Eric
Mike Willmon wrote:
> One free .pdf writer is CutePDF
> http://www.cutepdf.com/Products/CutePDF/writer.asp
>
>> more details ? url ?
>>
>> From: "Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>> There are at least 2 "Adobe Writers" on the I-net for free download.
>
>
>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: nikki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Report from Saturday.
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:24:33 +0000
To: [email protected]
Hi Everyone,
Well, after lots of organising, lots of stressing and about four days
solid on the telephone we finally got our electric vehicle charging
points all officially launched.
We had a fantastic turn out with two Vectrixes, two City Els, an
Elcat, Electric Smart (non OEM), Twike, Enfield, PHEV Prius, a
selection of E-bicycles and lots of interest. We think it was
probably one of the largest gatherings this side of the UK - so thank
you to everyone who took part!
Our 'celebrity' unveilers (Brigit and James Strawbridge from BBC's
"it's not easy being green" show) were absolutely fantastic and we
had a great time showing them all the EVs. James I think was
especially impressed and we leant him a few books to get him thinking
about building or converting a car for himself.
I thought those on the list may like to see the photographs that my
friend and fellow CIty El owner John took.
http://flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/sets/72157594584199738/
Enjoy!
Nikki.
_______________________________
Old car? New tricks?
Visit aminorjourney.com to see the transformation from Hebe to EV.
E-minor isn't just a key any more...
_______________________________
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 09:57:29 -0500
To: [email protected]
Subject: PHEV Prius a GM Killer? (was: GM Volt)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Interesting conversation.
I've been mulling over the idea for a couple weeks now that Toyota could eat
GM's lunch if they were to bring out a plug-in Prius. At least one company
is doing conversions now (costs something like $10k?) and I believe there
are a number of other one-off demos of the concept floating around. I think
Toyota could probably bring out a plug-in Prius for only a couple grand more
than the current model (economies of scale, etc). I assume their other
hybrids also use the same type of system, so could benefit from a similar
plug-in option.
--
Skip Montanaro - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.webfast.com/~skip/
"The hippies and the hipsters did some great stuff in the sixties,
but the geeks pulled their weight too." -- Billy Bragg
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Report from Saturday.
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 11:22:37 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Nikki an' John;
Thanks for sharing the pix with us. What a delightful, shiny , like new ,
collection of fun looking EV's Especially " Flying Banana!"EVerybody looked
in the Slideshow, to be having alota fun!
NOW, if we could get something like that on this side of the Pond, in the
Colonies<g>?
My two pixels worth.
Seeya
Bob
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 09:23:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: brian baumel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Lee's BMS?
To: [email protected]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
hello everyone,
is there an order in the process for some of Lee
Hart's BMS boards?? if so I'd be interested! I'll need
two relay boards (string of 10+1)and naturally the
control board. who do I make the check out to and for
how much? I may need a little help in the programming,
but I've done some PIC programming before...
Brian B.
81' Bradley GTII
--- Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > HI Lee I have sombody interested (as I am) in
> putting together one
> > of your bms's. I know you needed 10 orders to pay
> for the boards.
> > I could get 5 controller boards if this would help
> make an order.
>
> Yes, that would certainly push us "over the hump"! I
> still have your
> deposit check for one, but would probably replace it
> before actually
> ordering (it's probably not good any more).
>
> The Relay boards are done and ready to order. The
> Control board could be
> done if I quit tweaking it (time to shoot the
> engineer).
>
> So, let me know if this is a serious order for 5,
> and I'll proceed
> accordingly.
> --
> Ring the bells that still can ring
> Forget the perfect offering
> There is a crack in everything
> That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
> --
> Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377,
> leeahart_at_earthlink.net
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss an email again!
Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 12:37:32 -0400
From: "Chris Tromley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Kilovac EV-200 as safety disconnect?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Jeff Shanab wrote:
"160 VDC 250A. The time-amp chart made these the best choice for 1000
battery amp possibility for I think 10 seconds.
They look like these EBAY 190064944007 a pair of these for a lower
volt conversion may be perfect.
Wow, great price!
I think this is the exact model I have.
http://www.evparts.com/shopping/index.php?id=1113
http://www.evparts.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=1113&product_id=1451";
Hi Jeff,
I was tempted to use these, especially because they are so compact.
Space is at a premium in my EV. I didn't, for one important reason.
If you *ever* need to open these under load, you *must* throw them
away and install a new set. They're sealed. You can't tell what
condition the contacts are in. Allbrights are big, clunky and
expensive, but you can see the contacts. You can also replace only
the contacts if necessary.
Chris
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:21:22 -0600
From: Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: metro update
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
mike golub wrote:
> I plan on using the G29 and coupling directly.
> I wonder if anyone has the female adapter for the G29?
Is the G29 an aircraft starter/generator? If so, be sure there is a
bearing at the shaft end! Most of these have a floating shaft, and need
an external support bearing.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Hybrid Car Crash - Tacoma WA - 3/6/07
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:32:23 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Nick.. From enclosed E-mail...
AS to adding codes.... The codes we use come from this list and from
Hybridinterfaces.ca
This Wiki is written and supported by Ryan Fulcher of the Seattle SEVA and
Ryan is the one who dragged me into the PHEV efforts.
This is our site... and I spend time on it and have copies of it floating
around the inside of my Escape while I am driving it to ship PFC chargers
and other Ev/PHEV related products.
We shot a video of Ryan and I doing the CANview install on a Green cars
PiPrius kit that I am doing. Many hours of watching nothing, Then elbows and
Backs and flying tooks then Poof the Dash is scattered around.. then ZAP
it's all together and we are driving it. This is getting to be a well
tested stunt.
I am not sure how good the video is of us doing this.. most of the real
deatails are hidden from camera view.
So yea I know about the site....I have yet to write anything on it... I am
not WIKI compliant at the moment.
Hey gotta make more Green boxes.. and get the E-mail done for the day.
Rich Rudman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Manzanita Micro
360-297-7383,
Cell 360-620-6266
Production shop 360-297-1660
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick Austin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: Hybrid Car Crash - Tacoma WA - 3/6/07
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Subject: RE: Raptor 1200
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:46:23 -0700
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
John Wayland wrote:
> Of course, I love the Zilla, but the Raptor 1200 will
> always be a favorite controller. I'd say Ken's recommendation
> is a good one.
One word of caution here: John's experience is with the original Raptor
1200, designed, built and tested by Damon Crockett and Rich Rudman, a
couple of the most dedicated amp-heads you will ever meet. The Raptor
1200 you can buy new today, may be the same only in name. Damon and
Rich are no longer involved with it, and my understanding is that the
original design has been modified by the present owner of the Raptor
line, Peter Senkowsky.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
