backtop

Print 69 comment(s) - last by Spuke.. on Jul 29 at 2:14 PM

Nissan's new EV, the Nissan EV-11, hits the streets.  (Source: AutoBlogGreen)

A press shot of the prototype shows off its roomy hatchback design.  (Source: AutoBlogGreen)

The vehicle features a front-facing plug design.  (Source: AutoBlogGreen)
Vehicle has range of approximately 93 miles, advanced driver interface

What's Japanese, gets zero emissions, and is brimming with sporty hatchback character?  The answer is Nissan's newly unveiled EV-11 prototype, based on the roomy Versa/Tiida.  Not to be left out of the electric vehicle (EV) love with all the American automakers preparing electric offerings, most notably GM's 2011 Chevy Volt, Nissan is looking to beat the Yankees to the EV market for an entry of its own.

In lieu of its market entry it has unveiled another new EV prototype with some impressive features.  The new prototype, the EV-11, supports a 150 km (appr. 93 mile) range via a Automotive Energy Supply Corp. 24 kWh battery pack.  This modest range is aided by an advanced navigation system that continuously updates the users on how far they will be able to go on the remaining charge, to help prevent them from getting stranded on longer trips.  Users can input destinations and the system will let them know if they have enough juice to get there, or make a round trip.

The battery pack sits under the floor.  It's connected to a motor attached to the front wheels which drives the car with 108 hp / 206 lb-ft of torque.  The car features peppy acceleration and steering, true to its slightly sportier look.  It also features regenerative braking.  Additional frames around the battery pack and extra dampening both make for an ultra-quiet ride and for a longer vehicle life.

The car is also packed with other innovative technologies such as wireless technology that communicates with your cell phone to help you keep track of the vehicle's charging status.

Nissan plans on debuting a mass-production electric vehicle next year.  If it can meet this release schedule it will be the first major automaker to produce a modern EV in volume, beating even GM to the market.  Given the short window before production starts, the production model will likely closely resemble the EV-11 in terms of key technologies, though not in appearance. 

The production EV will have a brand new body, which Nissan is currently working on, according to the company.  It should be interesting to see how the final stylings stack up to the Chevy Volt and other American competitors.

While Nissan is convinced that the time for electric vehicles is now, other Japanese automakers aren't as convinced.  A Toyota executive recently went on record to call plug-in vehicles "not plausible".  Both Toyota and Honda favor fuel cell vehicles as the eventual successor to gas, diesel, and mild hybrid vehicles.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
More competition....
By SirKronan on 7/27/2009 11:58:21 AM , Rating: 3
More competition can only end up making these things cheaper and better. This is innovation if you ask me.

And if it makes the streets quieter, I'm all for it. I know people are worried about blind people not hearing hybrids - and I doubt these will be much louder than hybrids - but if all the vehicles were quieter, than individual ones would be easier to hear approaching again.

All in all, go Nissan. Funny that they would beat GM with one to the market. I wonder what it will cost.




RE: More competition....
By FITCamaro on 7/27/09, Rating: 0
RE: More competition....
By Lord 666 on 7/27/09, Rating: 0
RE: More competition....
By Spivonious on 7/27/2009 12:41:46 PM , Rating: 5
So you're racist and a jerk?


RE: More competition....
By Lord 666 on 7/27/2009 2:14:32 PM , Rating: 3
Nope, I am the furthest thing from being racist. However, there are laws and we should not lower our standards by not enforcing those laws. Round them up and ship anyone breaking immigration laws out of our country.

Anyone who is walking on a 50mph major road in my area is an undocumented type. There is a whole town (Red Bank) full of them that just stand around certain hours of the day. These people have no regard for our laws and drive around without licenses and insurance. Read in the local paper all of the time of them creating car accidents. That is not racist nor sterotyping. Is a law abiding American a sterotype too?


RE: More competition....
By Spivonious on 7/27/2009 3:03:13 PM , Rating: 5
You're assuming they're illegal immigrants based on their race and being a jerk by showering them with muddy water. Then you gloat about it on DT to make yourself feel all big and powerful.

I do agree with you that they should be rounded up and deported. They just make it harder for those that are trying to immigrate the legal way. But driving through puddles next to a group of Mexicans is not the way to get that to happen.


RE: More competition....
By ebakke on 7/27/2009 3:43:31 PM , Rating: 3
People from all nations come to the US illegally - you are the one assuming he was referring to Mexicans (and only Mexicans).


RE: More competition....
By Spivonious on 7/27/2009 3:47:01 PM , Rating: 2
Mexicans are the focus of most immigrant attacks, so yes, I assumed he was talking about Mexicans.

Assuming he meant Red Bank, NJ, then perhaps he's talking about Indians/Pakistanis. Either way, splashing mud on them is not the way to deal with the situation.


RE: More competition....
By Lord 666 on 7/27/2009 4:50:19 PM , Rating: 2
RE: More competition....
By ebakke on 7/27/2009 5:32:37 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not condoning the behavior. (Frankly, I find it despicable.) I just think racism is something you inferred, and that accusation wasn't necessarily warranted.


RE: More competition....
By ClownPuncher on 7/27/2009 3:37:07 PM , Rating: 2
You drench some folks with muddy water then preach about not lowering our standards? That screams "Mullet Irony".


RE: More competition....
By ebakke on 7/27/2009 3:40:27 PM , Rating: 2
What race was mentioned?


RE: More competition....
By ClownPuncher on 7/27/2009 3:48:03 PM , Rating: 2
Homo Sapiens


RE: More competition....
By ksherman on 7/27/2009 12:43:16 PM , Rating: 3
Really, you can tell one's immigration status by looking at them? Huh.


RE: More competition....
By Jeffk464 on 7/27/2009 12:58:18 PM , Rating: 2
Nope you have to see what they look like and then hear them speak.


RE: More competition....
By FITCamaro on 7/27/2009 1:56:25 PM , Rating: 3
Yeah I really don't think any of the over 100 hispanic people standing alongside a certain road here in the morning from 5-9 am are just doing it for fun....


RE: More competition....
By 67STANG on 7/27/2009 6:45:03 PM , Rating: 2
They are just looking for a "yob".

Seriously though, we are lucky to have Hispanics. Especially in California where I live. They do most of the grunt work that Caucasians don't want to do. Our economy would literally collapse in this state without them. Most notably, the Ag industry.

Everyone says to build a border wall, but I don't see the logic.... we jacked them and kicked them off their land-- then didn't let them build a single casino.


RE: More competition....
By ClownPuncher on 7/27/2009 7:42:46 PM , Rating: 2
A wall worked great in Berlin, didn't it?


RE: More competition....
By FITCamaro on 7/27/2009 9:56:45 PM , Rating: 2
Plenty of people would love to do the work. They just can't afford to do it for a $1 an hour.


RE: More competition....
By Shuri on 7/28/2009 1:11:20 AM , Rating: 2
If that was all they were earning, they'd be better off in mexico. I'd say most illegal immigrants from mexico earn minimum wage here. They put in an ungodly amount of hours, but don't get paid extra for overtime.

I know this because I am Mexican and I know how things really work.


RE: More competition....
By Spuke on 7/28/2009 11:34:51 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'd say most illegal immigrants from mexico earn minimum wage here.
WRONG!!!! They're hired because they're cheap labor, period!! The employers avoid paying minimum wage and workers compensation by hiring illegals. You say CA would collapse without them, huh? Do you remember the mass demonstration a couple of years ago? Collapsed the CA economy? HA!!!! I know one thing, the freeways were clear and traffic free that day. It was quite awesome and I think they should demonstrate EVERY day.


RE: More competition....
By Starcub on 7/29/2009 11:44:02 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'd say most illegal immigrants from mexico earn minimum wage here.

Somehow I doubt that. I know that many illegal immigrants submit false information in order to obtain a social security card so they can avoid being deported. Furthermore, they often stand around in pools waiting for someone to offer them a job, and since it's so easy to find such people, employers can and do drive around in trucks looking for such people whom they don't have to sign on in any official capacity. Such illegal workers probably don't make minimum wage.

Because many illegals know they hold bogus citizenship ID, those who do find steady employment also know they are paying taxes into a system they won't be collecting from. So there is an unholy alliance between business interests and govt. to take advantage of a situation that they (through various 'free trade' agreements and collusion with corrupt foreign govt.'s) are partly responsible for to begin with. So people who would otherwise command a living wage are deemed personna non-grata and that's why American citizens are angry with illegals, and their govt. which refuses to do anything about the situation.


RE: More competition....
By BansheeX on 7/27/2009 1:04:54 PM , Rating: 2
You are the product of immigrants, many generations removed. Sad that you don't realize that.

Don't blame immigrants, blame policy. If the only incentive to come here to produce and keep more of what you earn like it was a century ago, immigration wouldn't be a problem. It's only a problem because of welfare. Now people also come to be subsidized by others through mass redistribution systems and services. It's a hell of a good deal to instantly enjoy government money, structures, and services that exist because someone else paid their whole life into financing them. But how is that their fault? It's our retarded socialist system that's impossible to police.


RE: More competition....
By FITCamaro on 7/27/2009 1:19:09 PM , Rating: 2
This argument is as tired as Hugh Hefners d*ck.


RE: More competition....
By adiposity on 7/27/2009 4:32:44 PM , Rating: 3
Which is to say, it's been around a long time, but it keeps on getting the freshest p*ssies?

-Dan


RE: More competition....
By ebakke on 7/27/2009 3:46:00 PM , Rating: 2
Bah! It's the dream/prospect of a better life, and the relative ease with which you can skirt across the border into a sanctuary city.


RE: More competition....
By Spuke on 7/28/2009 11:40:37 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You are the product of immigrants, many generations removed. Sad that you don't realize that.
ILLEGAL immigrants not ALL immigrants. Sad that YOU don't realize that!


RE: More competition....
By MrBlastman on 7/27/2009 12:43:04 PM , Rating: 1
At least they can hear you coming before you score some extra points. ;)

The elderly are worth 10
The kids are worth 5
Babies are worth 50
Construction workers are worth 20
Fat People dent your hoods so they are -5
Activists are worth 30

You get the idea... :)


RE: More competition....
By MrFord on 7/27/2009 1:02:26 PM , Rating: 1
Normal people 250
Eldery 500
Zombies 750
Then you can add 2x Style Bonus and 2000 point if you manage to jam them between your car and a wall while landing in reverse from a high speed jump.


RE: More competition....
By Spivonious on 7/27/2009 3:53:30 PM , Rating: 2
Carmageddon was a lot of fun, wasn't it? :)


RE: More competition....
By MrFord on 7/28/2009 9:42:37 AM , Rating: 2
A Classic :)


RE: More competition....
By FITCamaro on 7/27/2009 1:18:21 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't mean me hitting people. I meant my car will make it so that the blind people can't hear the hybrids.

Jesus people need to learn to take a joke.


RE: More competition....
By andrinoaa on 7/28/2009 5:04:37 AM , Rating: 2
see what happens when you play chicken little, no one takes you seroiusly anymore. it was on a level with fart jokes anyway.


RE: More competition....
By Brutus1234 on 7/27/2009 12:14:59 PM , Rating: 2
Not really an apples to apples comparison. This vehicle appears to be fully electric.

The Volt will have a 40 mile ( 64km )range but will then default to a conventional gas engine and function as a hybrid like the current Prius. Depending on what gas tank they eventually settle on, it should have approx 400 mile range.

I do like the charge port in the front grill though - that's a good idea. Most people who park in their garage are likely to have an electrical socket on the front wall. That looks more convenient for the owner than the images I've seen of the Volt charging at the rear


RE: More competition....
By Spivonious on 7/27/2009 12:42:36 PM , Rating: 2
That's not true. After 40 miles, a gas engine acts as a battery charger. The car is always running on the electric motor.


RE: More competition....
By adiposity on 7/27/2009 4:37:12 PM , Rating: 2
I heard the volt's gas engine could provide engine power, as well.

But regardless, after 40 miles, you have to start burning fuel to run, just like a prius that runs down its battery. The actual process by which each powers the drive train doesn't change that.

-Dan


RE: More competition....
By Keeir on 7/27/2009 5:31:48 PM , Rating: 2
I think the main concept difference is that in a Prius the battery "assists" the Main ICE engine

Where-as in the Volt, the ICE engine "assists" the battery.

This is a fundamentally different concept as there will be -no- mechanical connection between the Wheels and ICE engine. Of course, if your not a mechanical engineer, an electric engineer, or a gearhead, its not really important to the overall running of the car, and GM is supposedly working hard so the driver won't get all sorts of fuel-improving "funny" behaviour, such as charging the battery with the ICE when stopped at a stop light.


RE: More competition....
By Starcub on 7/29/2009 12:03:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Of course, if your not a mechanical engineer, an electric engineer, or a gearhead, its not really important to the overall running of the car,

Not true. Using an ICE to charge a battery to run a car is in overly inefficient process. They should go all electric with the Volt. I'm still wondering why they chose to implement the system they did. My guess is that this is intended as some sort of interim change over to eventual full electric capacity vehicles. Maybe the people (chief investors) who control GM also hold a large stake in the oil industry. Or perhaps, the supply of battery material from nations the US is on good terms with is very limited.

Actually I think a 94 mile range is a little on the high side for an all electric car like this. I don't think it would be practical to use this car on an interstate trip; it's use would be confined to daily commuting, and therefore in the interests of efficiency, I would think you would want to limit battery capacity to about 70 miles or so. This is effectively a second car tech, though all-electric cars could be used as single vehicles as Tesla is close to demonstrating with their general consumer version roadster.


RE: More competition....
By TheEinstein on 7/27/2009 12:18:33 PM , Rating: 1
As a truck driver I will be laughing as the perfect storm rolls in...

1) Carbon Tax on coal = shutting down most coal fired plants. Result = 30% less energy available.

2) Volts, EV's, et al nearly double electrical energy consumption.

3) Overloaded local grids come crashing down

4) The national grid shunts energy to area's losing huge volumes of energy, based upon the so called smart grid technology, further enhancing the shortages.


RE: More competition....
By namechamps on 7/27/2009 12:34:48 PM , Rating: 2
Or not. Your "scenario" makes about as much sense as the day after tomorrow did regarding weather.

1) Carbon tax is actually a C&T with initial credits given free and then slowly reduced. The full pain won't be felt for decades, long enough time for utilities to switch to non taxed sources like nuclear.

2) While replacing every single vehicle w/ plug in hybrids, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, and EV would triple the power grid it will take a lifetime to replace every single vehicle. Power demand would grow at a more modest 3% annually.


RE: More competition....
By FITCamaro on 7/27/2009 1:58:38 PM , Rating: 2
The issue is that if companies don't stay within their allotted credits, they have to buy credits or be heavily fined. Neither will be cheap. And the cost will be passed on to us.


RE: More competition....
By FITCamaro on 7/27/2009 2:00:32 PM , Rating: 2
And you're not going to offset the losses in power generation from switching from coal to wind or solar and still maintain a 3% increase in power generation capacity annually. You need thousands of acres to generate the amount of power a single coal plant can. And then its a variable source of power. So you still need another source of power which has to be paid for and maintained further adding to the cost.


RE: More competition....
By mofo3k on 7/27/2009 2:14:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You need thousands of acres to generate the amount of power a single coal plant can


Well I live in the Midwest and trust me, we have the space. Miles of it.


RE: More competition....
By Lord 666 on 7/27/2009 3:06:53 PM , Rating: 5
Sure beats using the space for meth labs.


RE: More competition....
By TheEinstein on 7/27/2009 3:47:19 PM , Rating: 2
The Government based demand is growing faster than the ability to supply it. A modest 3% annual indeed, I lol'ed.

How about that Stimulus bill which had billions in it for low emission US made vehicles?

Or Al Gore's 50% in 4 years plan?

Cash for clunkers?


RE: More competition....
By Keeir on 7/28/2009 3:40:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
2) While replacing every single vehicle w/ plug in hybrids, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, and EV would triple the power grid it will take a lifetime to replace every single vehicle. Power demand would grow at a more modest 3% annually.


No No No No No.

Replacing all forms of transportation with electricity including all ships, trains, and aeroplanes would barely double the current electricity requires. The US currenly uses 4100 Million MegaWatt Hours per year. Assuming 15,000 miles at 4 miles per kWh for 3.75 MegaWatt Hours per Car/Year, doubling current grid can support up to 1.1 Billion Cars.

Not convinced? How about that for each and every person in the United States, currently 13,500 kWh + per year. A 4 seat sedan electric car would consumer ~4,000 kWh per year. Increasing the power grid by ~30% would result in each and every person being allowed to charge a Volt.

Focusing only on replacing large segments of Light duty cars would not be a strain that couldn't be handled using Nuclear or Natural Gas plants. (Natural Gas --> Electricity --> Car is more efficient than Natural Gas --> Car which is more efficient than Oil --> Refinery --> Car)


RE: More competition....
By Spuke on 7/28/2009 5:34:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Increasing the power grid by ~30% would result in each and every person being allowed to charge a Volt.
Except in California where we don't have enough capacity for running the A/C in the summer. Or are your figure only focusing on off peak usage?


RE: More competition....
By Keeir on 7/28/2009 7:02:05 PM , Rating: 2
I was speaking as to the average state. Even in California, significant Off-Peak capacity exists currently to charge cars.

California's energy woes in 2001 stem from not building new power plants in the 90s.

The Current Grid can not support large amounts of plug-ins without more capacity! Yet every state should be able to build Nuclear, Natural Gas, Wind/Solar, etc power options. Each of these is a better end cost/mile choice than gasoline at 30 mpg. Nuclear, Natural Gas, Coal, and some others are even better than 50 mpg. (IE its cheaper for society to build a Nuclear Plant and have electric cars than to maintain the Oil infrastructure and use Priuses)


RE: More competition....
By Starcub on 7/29/2009 12:16:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Nuclear, Natural Gas, Coal, and some others are even better than 50 mpg.

I'm surprized you included nuclear in that line-up. Are you discounting life-cycle costs and including subsidies? Despite the claims of many nuclear advocates, the nuke plants that companies like GM are proposing to build are not the new generation super-efficient, low waste plants that people on these forums like to talk about, they are simply slightly more efficient versions of the plants they've already built.


RE: More competition....
By cyclosarin on 7/27/2009 12:35:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And if it makes the streets quieter, I'm all for it. I know people are worried about blind people not hearing hybrids - and I doubt these will be much louder than hybrids - but if all the vehicles were quieter, than individual ones would be easier to hear approaching again.


Most noise pollution from vehicles is actually the tires on the pavement and the sound of the air being forced out of the path of the tires.


RE: More competition....
By FITCamaro on 7/27/2009 2:01:25 PM , Rating: 2
Perhaps on your car. ;)

LTs and Corsa Sport FTW.


Maybe a little more evaluation
By Keeir on 7/27/2009 1:37:19 PM , Rating: 2
I know your mainly quoting other sources, but it might be nice to see a little more evaluation in the article or a reigning in of some of the more glitz marketing terms?

Like

"The car features peppy acceleration and steering, true to its slightly sportier look."

Its hard to see how a 3,500 lb plus car (24kWh of Lithium is like 600+ lbs) with a ~100 hp motor will have "peppy" acceleration. The Torque will help, but I bet this will be more in the Prius class rather than the Mazda3 class.

"The answer is Nissan's newly unveiled EV-11 prototype, based on the roomy Versa/Tiida."

Roomy? No word or description of how much space the battery pack takes up? 24kWh lof lithium fits fairly tighly... maybe it fits all in the hood? The Mini-E was became of two seat version with a similar range...

Also, would be nice to know the 93 miles of range is the the US City EPA cycle...




RE: Maybe a little more evaluation
By FITCamaro on 7/27/2009 2:02:31 PM , Rating: 2
Well to be fair a Mazda3 isn't much less than 3500 pounds and doesn't have 200 lb ft of torque. The issue will more be passing power assuming the thing can even achieve highway speed.


RE: Maybe a little more evaluation
By Keeir on 7/27/2009 2:21:13 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Well to be fair a Mazda3 isn't much less than 3500 pounds and doesn't have 200 lb ft of torque.


Well, Mazda3 wieghs only around 3,000 empty (the 3,500 number is just a guess based on Tesla and Volt numbers for battery packs and electric conversion). Thats quite a bit lighter. And the Torque goes to 165+, which is significantly less, but... Electric Cars rarely have different gears. And thier torque typically starts falling off at around 50% of thier top speed (in other EV motors).
I think the combination of the very small motor, the lack of gearing, high wieght of the car, and the typically speeds of 60 mph+ on the highway will make the Nissan pretty loggy on the highway. It might be able to match the Mazda3 0-30 range.... but 30-90 will probably belong to the Mazda3.


RE: Maybe a little more evaluation
By PrinceGaz on 7/27/2009 9:39:00 PM , Rating: 2
With the motor maximum torque and power figures given (280N.m and 80KW once they are converted into proper units), the motor is able to deliver maximum power once it is running at over about 2700rpm (286 rad/sec). For the sake of simplicity, I'll assume the car has a top-speed of 100mph and the motor is designed to spin at up to 10000rpm (both reasonable guesstimates) and has a fixed-ratio transmission (single-speed).

That means that excluding rolling-resistance and drag and whatnot, it could accelerate with roughly constant acceleration limited by torque up to about 27mph, then is power instead of torque limited up to its top speed.

Assuming it weighs 1600Kg (3500lb) which does seem rather a lot for a car like that even with the battery-pack, when you consider what it doesn't have, like the ICE, fuel-tank, etc, a few quick calculations suggest:

0-30mph in 3.6 secs, 30-62mph in 5.9 secs
so a 0-62mph of 9.5 secs (probably more like 11 secs in the real world once other factors are included)

also a 50-70mph in 4.8 secs (lets say 6-7 secs in the real world)

Those acceleration figures aren't bad, and they are assuming the car weighs 3500lb (over a ton and a half) which I doubt it does. If it only weighs around a ton, then that raw 0-62mph of 9.5 secs becomes 6.2 secs instead (about 8 secs in the real world) which would be very respectable for that class of car.


RE: Maybe a little more evaluation
By Spuke on 7/28/2009 11:49:47 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Those acceleration figures aren't bad, and they are assuming the car weighs 3500lb
The gas Versa weighs ~2700 lbs (assuming they would use this car although they're not). I think the weight would be around 3200 lbs with batteries. Then again, if you look at the Tesla it weighs 1000 lbs more than the Elise it's based on. The Nissan EV could indeed weigh 3500 lbs or more.


RE: Maybe a little more evaluation
By Starcub on 7/29/2009 12:22:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Then again, if you look at the Tesla it weighs 1000 lbs more than the Elise it's based on.

The Tesla also more than double the battery capacity of this nissan EV.


RE: Maybe a little more evaluation
By Spuke on 7/29/2009 2:14:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Tesla also more than double the battery capacity of this nissan EV.
Good point.


RE: Maybe a little more evaluation
By Keeir on 7/28/2009 2:08:39 PM , Rating: 2
Okay... lets test some of those assumptions

#1. Wieght
The Electric Mini Wieghs around 3,300 lbs
Normal Base Mini wieghs in at 2,600 lbs.

Therefore, I think 3,500 for the electric Versa compared with ~2,800 for the gasoline power hatchback is reasonable.

#2. Maximum Speed
I find the idea of a 100 mph top speed hard to swallow. A Tesla Roadster with 185 kW motor tops out at 125 mph. A Mini E with 150 kW tops out at 95 mph. More realistic is ~85 mph.

So I think even 11 sec for 0-62 mph and 6 seconds for 50-70mph are optomistic. And in the United States, this puts the car at the bottom rung of cars in general, IE not something that one would call "peppy".


RE: Maybe a little more evaluation
By mofo3k on 7/27/2009 2:07:25 PM , Rating: 2
I can understand the desire for a more thorough evaluation of the vehicle, but keep in mind that this is a prototype vehicle and Nissan isn't exactly handing these out for inspection by 3rd parties. Again, I'd like more info too, but I'll take what I can get as this is still an interesting product.

I'm not sure why you're concerned about the space the battery pack takes up when the article says it's under the floorboard and therefore not taking up space in the engine compartment, trunk, or the cab.


RE: Maybe a little more evaluation
By Keeir on 7/27/2009 2:12:15 PM , Rating: 2
Thats what they claim... but it doesn't really seem physically possible and maintain clearence standards. Currenly, there is really not much space under the floorboards of most cars, a few inchs at the most. Haven't seen an electric car with more than 10 kWh battery that doesn't require a special place. Heck, even the tiny battery in a hybrid (in comparison) requires a modification of the interior volume. Its just no negative...


RE: Maybe a little more evaluation
By mofo3k on 7/27/2009 2:18:55 PM , Rating: 2
Well it is a prototype vehicle. It's probably only running on a totally flat surface so clearance isn't a likely concern at the moment. Plus, wherever they have it now will likely not be where it ends up. Although, this not having a gas engine probably adds space where other hybrids would not.


RE: Maybe a little more evaluation
By knutjb on 7/27/2009 3:22:57 PM , Rating: 2
The biggest item missing with discourse on electric vehicles is that the most capable batteries are Lithium and they permanently degrade in temps above 104. This is a serious problem across most of the US in summer time. One really hot day and the car no go. Which is why Fuel Cell tech is being used by Honda over over Lithium batteries alone. All current batteries have serious issues at temperature extremes. While cold can be addressed with battery heaters, high heat poses a significant hurdle, not to mention the serious grid issues as well.


RE: Maybe a little more evaluation
By Keeir on 7/27/2009 5:57:57 PM , Rating: 2
#1. Batteries lose permanent capacity at all temperatures. The question is how much... The 104 number is mainly for the very common Lithium batteries currently used in laptops, cell phones, etc. This is one reason real EV projects like the Volt, i-Miev, and probably this Nissan cost so much. Special advanced chemisty is used that are much more tolerant to temperature

For example, A123 (Lithium Iron Phospate chemsity I believe)

http://www.a123systems.com/technology/life

Has much better temperature resistance and cycle resistance. Even temperatures of 140 F isn't a serious problem unless its sustained for long-long periods of time.

#2. Grid Issues. There are 200+ million cars in the United States. Assuming each and every one is driven 40 miles a day, every day at around 8 kWh per day thats... 600 x 10^9 kWh or 600 Million Megawatt Hours.

Each year, the US produces more than 4,100 Million Megawatt Hours. http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epate...

Even if 100% of the light duty autos were electric, its only 15% of the total we produce now. Yes, its significant, but no, its overcomable. Since we would be roughly saving 57 billion gallons of gasoline a year (200 x 10^6 * 40/50 * 356) over even a Prius, I think that building a few Nuclear Plants is possible... (Even if we value gasoline saved at a single dollar, thats 57 billion a year for 40 years of Nuclear... heck we can afford to build ~100 Nuclear Plants easy)


at what price?
By gfredsen on 7/27/2009 4:42:50 PM , Rating: 2
boy, there sure are a lot of negative people on this forum. Leave to some of you and nothing would ever get done.
I would consider buying one of these cars. But I generate my own electricity from hydro and solar. Often times when you start to pencil it out you find that the premium they charge for something like this makes it cheaper to buy a conventional gasoline car. My friends Toyota Corolla gets at least 44 mpg. It gets more than that when his 58 year old wife is putzing around in it, but you wouldn't believe me if I told you so I won't. So I won't buy one of these if they sell them for US$20,000 or more. And they are likely to price them in that range. I guess they have to, but I don't have to buy it when I can get a gasoline Corolla for two-thirds of that. The only thing is that with the electric car I would (will) be able to motor if (when)there is a Middle Eastern war.
Ok, I guess I am one of the negative people, too.




RE: at what price?
By andrinoaa on 7/28/2009 4:59:40 AM , Rating: 2
at least you acknowledge your dilema. Fit still has issues with his manhood, ha ha ha. I bet Fit has callaouses on his knuckles too, lol.


RE: at what price?
By Spuke on 7/28/2009 11:52:08 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Fit still has issues with his manhood, ha ha ha. I bet Fit has callaouses on his knuckles too, lol.
I like FIT, he's not a sheep.


RE: at what price?
By andrinoaa on 7/28/2009 5:12:42 PM , Rating: 2
Well , he's pulled the wool over your eyes! ( its a yoke!)


sporty?
By jlips6 on 7/28/2009 1:12:36 PM , Rating: 2
It looks like an albino raccoon. Maybe if they named the raccoon sporty...




"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki