Is an electric Kawasaki Ninja coming out very soon? Leaked patent images surface

[choneofakind]

People suck at decisions??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_matrix
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualit...ion_deployment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision-matrix_method
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium

https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_gilber...ss?language=en

[InvisiBill]

Originally Posted by NevadaWolf

So, skimming through the rest of this thread, it's sounding like right now the hybrid is the best - advantages from both worlds. Later, full EV would be the way to go once the infrastructure was in place and battery size shrinks while range expands.

Hybrids also have disadvantages of both. Unlike a Tesla, my Volt still requires oil changes, spark plugs, air filters, etc. It also adds complexity (and therefore cost) to allow both systems to work seamlessly together. As stated above, the ICE is taking up space/cost that could've gone toward a bigger battery, and I'm hauling it around all the time whether I need it or not.

Even on the "38 mile" battery of the Volt, which is designed to use the ICE on a regular basis, this guy has over 81k miles with only 140 of those on gas. He's the ideal user for a pure BEV (but he likes other things about the Volt). Even on the 60-80mi battery of a regular BEV, a large number of people could cover their regular daily driving. Some people can't reasonably get by even with the hundreds of miles of range from a Model S. It really boils down to your driving patterns, like FrugalNinja250 said.

The Volt and i3 REx are in a bit of a niche in that they work as a pure EV most of the time, but are able to fall back to common gas-car mode when needed. Assuming you have pretty average driving patterns, they give you the EV experience for your regular driving, without having to deal with EV limitations for rare situations. A huge portion of the population could probably be served very well by one of these. I really do think the Volt is a great "gateway EV" and the i3 REx should be similar (just with more emphasis on the battery and less on the ICE).

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

One indicator of this fact is that the EV makers are selling every single car they make, and are sold out for months in advance. Want a Tesla? Get in line, you'll get yours in a year or two. But wait, you want to buy a used one? Get in line, they rarely come up for sale in most areas and when they do their resale value is very, very high. That's one thing about EVs (and to a lesser extent advanced hybrids like the Volt and Prius) that many people don't really know about, and that is they hold their value far better than a plain gas car.

The wait on the cheapest Model S is currently about 3 months ("late December" delivery). The higher end ones have priority ("December" delivery). Part of the reason EVs are harder to get is that manufacturers simply aren't making many of them. http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/ tracks monthly sales. The Model S and Leaf are the top two, with ~2,000 sales per month each, and the Volt is 3rd with ~1,000 sold per month. For comparison, they sell ~30k Civics and 15-20k Cruzes per month. For the non-Teslas, this is a bad time of year in general, simply because of the model year changeover. Production is down to avoid having "old" cars that don't sell, and people are waiting to purchase the new hotness that's about to come out.

The tax credits also skew the resale value. After figuring that in, the demo Volts (with a couple thousand miles on them) from the dealer where I got mine start at $22k. When you can get a titled-as-new one that cheap, it severely cuts into the value of a used one (which has a somewhat-unknown battery history).

[Somchai]

It's fun to follow this thread.

Facts for the years 2008/2009ff are - possible vehicle capacity in production worldwide about 95 million. From all those the real sold are only around 65 million. This is the first gap. Of those sold there's max one third actually paid, the rest is on leasing and credit. The second gap. More questions?

More facts are that 150 years of mobility has brought nothing new on its way. The railway still rattles on rails, the plane is still flying for hours from one continent to another with an absurd ratio of payload / weight and the cars still have 6 wheels. Stop - there are only 5, because the spare-wheel is missing now!

So for better understanding there is not many more, with what one could pull the money out of the pockets from the people who can afford more (like the 3rd car, the 4th refrigerator, the 5th girl-friend, the 6th tv, ect.), everybody is full already.
New borrowers are not to find any more or not that easy, so after gasoline, diesel and after then bringing all those little electronic helpers from which everybody thinks about they are needed and a car or motorcycle is not driveable without them anymore, now you're told that electricity is the future of driving - the lol can not be loud enough.
Go ahead with dreaming...

[VaFish]

Originally Posted by Somchai

It's fun to follow this thread.

Facts for the years 2008/2009ff are - possible vehicle capacity in production worldwide about 95 million. From all those the real sold are only around 65 million. This is the first gap. Of those sold there's max one third actually paid, the rest is on leasing and credit. The second gap. More questions?

More facts are that 150 years of mobility has brought nothing new on its way. The railway still rattles on rails, the plane is still flying for hours from one continent to another with an absurd ratio of payload / weight and the cars still have 6 wheels. Stop - there are only 5, because the spare-wheel is missing now!

So for better understanding there is not many more, with what one could pull the money out of the pockets from the people who can afford more (like the 3rd car, the 4th refrigerator, the 5th girl-friend, the 6th tv, ect.), everybody is full already.
New borrowers are not to find any more or not that easy, so after gasoline, diesel and after then bringing all those little electronic helpers from which everybody thinks about they are needed and a car or motorcycle is not driveable without them anymore, now you're told that electricity is the future of driving - the lol can not be loud enough.
Go ahead with dreaming...

Not all trains rattle on rails some are maglev and although they are not practical yet we do have Marty McFly hover boards.

[allanoue]

Originally Posted by Alex

Gasoline has 33.41 kwh/gal (link). 3 gallons of it will run you less than $9, and it will weigh about 20 pounds. You will have more energy than the latest $100K+ P90D Tesla (that 90 stands for the 90 kwh battery pack). That battery pack costs $20K-$30K, and weighs 1200 pounds.

This is a bad comparison liken to comparing the cost of a ICE to the cost of charging a battery. Yes Batteries are heaver then gas but to be fair you need to look at the whole system motor plus fuel. ICE do have an advantage but wait is not something I care about. What matters is cost of ownership and if Iran or Russia stops behaving themselves what happens to the cost of oil? Range and time to refill are the only issues now. Lets be honest the only real issue is time to refill.

[choneofakind]

An engine stores no power. He's comparing weight per kWh potential energy stored.

[allanoue]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

An engine stores no power. He's comparing weight per kWh potential energy stored.

he compared $9 of gas to a $20,000 battery

[choneofakind]

Originally Posted by allanoue

he compared $9 of gas to a $20,000 battery

Read the numbers in your own quote.

Gasoline has 33.41 kwh/gal (link). 3 gallons of it will run you less than $9, and it will weigh about 20 pounds. You will have more energy than the latest $100K+ P90D Tesla (that 90 stands for the 90 kwh battery pack). That battery pack costs $20K-$30K, and weighs 1200 pounds.

Both methods store roughly the same power, ~90kWh. That means that one can make a valid comparison of weight per kWh or price per kWh between a $20,000 battery and <$12 worth of gas.

Now, before you get all mad at me, let me say: and electric motor is much more efficient at turning that stored energy in to mechanical energy than an internal combustion engine, but the gasoline is so much cheaper, lighter, easier to transport, readily available that it wins that comparison every time.

Passion is good. Don't get so passionate that you blind yourself to reason. The only issue is time to refill? You yourself even mentioned the range. Don't just ignore things. There is no one-size-fits-all solution, as Frugal brought up. Some times, and electric would work for the majority of needs. But consumers typically want one vehicle for everything because costs go up big time with owning more vehicles. So that small amount of time when range is an issue is very important in the decision not to choose electric for many people, myself included.

[ninjamunky85]

Originally Posted by allanoue

he compared $9 of gas to a $20,000 battery

And it was a legitimate comparison in terms of energy storage per volume. Battery technology still has a ways to go before it can truly compete with gasoline.

[allanoue]

@ninjamunky85 @choneofakind
Lets compare apples to apples but also just as unfair. The cost of a recharge $0.10 and added weight 0.00001oz

[allanoue]

Originally Posted by ninjamunky85

And it was a legitimate comparison in terms of energy storage per volume. Battery technology still has a ways to go before it can truly compete with gasoline.

As I said weight is a not issue. What matters is performance and cost of ownership and right now it is close.

Remember resale.

[ninjamunky85]

Originally Posted by allanoue

@ninjamunky85 @choneofakind
Lets compare apples to apples but also just as unfair. The cost of a recharge $0.10 and added weight 0.00001oz

I think 10 cents is a little bit of an exaggeration. Electricity is cheap, but its not that cheap.

Originally Posted by allanoue

As I said weight is a not issue. What matters is performance and cost of ownership and right now it is close.

Remember resale.

How can you say weight is not an issue? Increased weight means deceased efficiency no matter whats powering it. As for cost of ownership how cheap is it gonna be when your battery needs replaced in eight years???

[allanoue]

Originally Posted by ninjamunky85

I think 10 cents is a little bit of an exaggeration. Electricity is cheap, but its not that cheap.
fair enough
ok .072 per KWH*33.41 = $2.34 My last bill

How can you say weight is not an issue? Increased weight means deceased efficiency no matter whats powering it. As for cost of ownership how cheap is it gonna be when your battery needs replaced in eight years???

By only looking at performance that is how.

battery swap is comparable to a engine swap

Zero battery is just over $2000

[Alex]

Originally Posted by allanoue

This is a bad comparison liken to comparing the cost of a ICE to the cost of charging a battery. Yes Batteries are heaver then gas but to be fair you need to look at the whole system motor plus fuel. ICE do have an advantage but wait is not something I care about. What matters is cost of ownership and if Iran or Russia stops behaving themselves what happens to the cost of oil? Range and time to refill are the only issues now. Lets be honest the only real issue is time to refill.

The problem with discounting weight and cost as problems, is that they are directly related to the problem that you don't discount, range. The reason one can't get reasonable range at reasonable cost is because batteries are crazy heavy and crazy expensive in comparison. If 1200 pounds and $20K of battery give the bare minimum of acceptable range, fixing the problem by putting in 2400 pounds of batteries isn't viable.

But even with that in mind, electric motors are now weightless in this comparison? To be fair one must be complete on both sides. They may be lighter than an ICE motor with all of its accessories, but nowhere near enough to make up for the difference in weights of their energy. Even with those comparatively light motors, electric vehicles of comparable performance are thousands of pounds heavier than comparable vehicles. You can also look at today's hybrids to see how it actually plays out. It turns out to be lighter, and cheaper, to include not only all of the electric propulsion components, but an additional ICE engine along with fuel, and the vehicle is still much lighter than a comparable BEV with any range at all.

I also don't think we'd need to remove the cost comparison of charging the battery as unfair. It does feel good to pay so little to refill, a few cents for an electric bike, a bit more for an electric car. But one would also have to include the few thousand extra it costs for the car option, and however much one wants to cost out the upgraded charging station in the garage. Include those and divide it over mileage, and even the "few cent" recharges can be seen as incremental charges on top of the significant one.

[allanoue]

@Alex

Originally Posted by allanoue

Time will tell. and not much time.

[Alex]

Of course - and what will happen over time will be bounded by physical and economic realities, not wishes.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by InvisiBill

Even on the "38 mile" battery of the Volt, which is designed to use the ICE on a regular basis, this guy has over 81k miles with only 140 of those on gas. He's the ideal user for a pure BEV (but he likes other things about the Volt).

Good link. I wondered what he did to keep the gas from going bad, and he says he keeps less than a gallon in there at all times. Would you know what material the gas tank is in a volt? (I have no idea in my own car, it's easier to tell on a motorcycle when it's sitting right in front of you). I know that it's generally recommended to not leave a metal tank mostly empty for long periods to delay any rusting, but don't know if that's a 1 or 2 year worry, or a 5 - 10 year worry.

[bdavison]

When they get 200 miles at 70+mph to a charge, and I can just pull into the nearest gas station and recharge it in 1 min or less. THEN, and ONLY then would I ever consider an electric bike.

Till then...no way.

[csmith12]

I am willing to hold out for a 15-20min charge time with a range of around 200 miles. Unless.... I am buying it for a commuting machine that fits the range/charge time limits.

[FrugalNinja250]

Originally Posted by Alex

I mostly agree with Frugal.

But when we are talking about physics, the needs become less malleable, and conclusions can be drawn. Those who ignore the inconvenient facts aren't more open-minded, they are just, well, wrong skipping over some important data. Batteries, even our most advanced, have a small fraction of the energy by weight compared to gas (or diesel, or CNG, etc.). If you want to have the same amount of energy in batteries that you have in fuel, you need to carry many, many times the weight, at many, many times the cost.

Gasoline has 33.41 kwh/gal (link). 3 gallons of it will run you less than $9, and it will weigh about 20 pounds. You will have more energy than the latest $100K+ P90D Tesla (that 90 stands for the 90 kwh battery pack). That battery pack costs $20K-$30K, and weighs 1200 pounds.

Those who believe that somehow those stark differences will get close to each other at a rapid pace are discounting both math and science. Now, they may be counting on external forces (political, scarcity, etc.) to more quickly tip the playing field, and that very well might turn out to be the case. But when compared to batteries, let alone just about any other source of stored energy, gas *is* better at energy per volume, per weight, and per cost. And will be for our lifetimes.

To the Wolf's point though, figuring out how to convert that gas into propulsion has some pretty good options at the moment. It may turn out that a hybrid is the best way to go (most efficient, most cost-effective) for quite some time, compared to a pure battery electric vehicle. Advantages of large range and cheap available energy in the onboard fuel, electric motors used to complement the efficiency of the gas engine. At some point that might transition over to pure BEV, but not in our lifetimes (or our grandkids lifetimes). And at that crossover point, it's unlikely to be due to batteries of today incrementally improving. It will either be some as yet unforeseen advance, or the cost of oil and/or synthetic hydrocarbon fuel getting so high as to make their physical property advantages no longer cost-effective.

The physics you mentioned are valid, but incomplete. You didn't consider that the pinnacle of technology for converting chemical energy of gasoline to motion is, at the very exotic best, barely over 30%. That means over 60% of the potential energy in gasoline is converted to just exhaust, radiator, and brake heat. It performs no useful function, and the brake heat cannot be recaptured for later use. That wasted energy is one of the most inconvenient facts about internal combustion, and there's no foreseeable way around it because that's the nature of the physics of internal combustion. IC engines are just terrible at efficiency, and always will be.

In our lifetimes we've seen lithium battery technology completely outpace lead-acid. Remember, lithium wasn't really explored from a pure R&D point of view until the 1970's, and wasn't commercially viable until the early 1990's. It is now a fairly stable technology that exceeds lead-acid in about every way except price, and that's is falling on a daily basis.

More importantly, our understanding of chemistry has increased exponentially and future battery technologies will perforce be developed faster. I see no reason why it can't roughly follow Moore's law in concept, but with somewhat slower timeframe.

Gasoline was a great way to store energy in the old days when there wasn't anything better, but that was then, and today there are much more efficient technologies out there. Within the next 20-40 years I see wholesale adoption of EV technology because of the efficiency, the ability to source electrons from anywhere including non-carbon sources, and because of the long-term reliability and durability that EV offers. Hybrids are a definite link in that transition, and will get people weened off of chemical fuels.

When (not if) gas hits $10 in today's dollars, a lot of folks invested in that 100 year old stagnant technology are going to be left red-faced and empty-handed.

[Hero Danny]

Originally Posted by Alex

Tesla is spending more than anyone else on the market in improving battery capacity and cost/capacity, and they've achieved a 60% capacity improvement since 2008. (source)

Hmm, that's all? I have a feeling that it will continue to exponentially get better though. Sales have been climbing pretty steadily over the last 3 years. As sales increase and Tesla becomes larger and larger we should see more funding going into batteries and improvements being made. I agree with you though, there's still a long way to go. But I think by 2020 we'll start seeing these electric cars more and more.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...by_quarter.png

Tesla actually is now bigger than Chrysler and Tesla has been around for a fraction of the amount of time Chrysler has.



^ This graph is 2 years old, but still shows a decent correlation between Tesla and other car companies.

I love my gasoline powered motors, and I love slamming through gears of my manual transmission, but I also welcome the change of electric vehicles.
Really the only thing stopping me from buying a Tesla is the cost.

[choneofakind]

I think the volt and similar plug in hybrids are a great solution that give us the benefits of EV's without sacrificing the convenience of gas.

At some point will EV be viable for a lot more people? Sure! But I think it's going to have to reducing charging time significantly and improve range without requiring supercharger stations and tons of new infrastructure. We're just not there yet.

Al, no offense, you're being a little close minded. I respect the passion for a cause and the interest in new tech. Really, that's something I admire because I nerd out on everything at times. I'm curious and I'd like to challenge you to a little though experiment: what's your reason for having the ninja 300 over a Zero? Think critically and tell me why. I think that will give you perspective on where we're coming from. Don't resort to emotionally charged blindness.

I want an EV. BUt it doesn't make sense to me yet. I've said that before and I'll say it again.

[FrugalNinja250]

Originally Posted by Alex

To be fair one must be complete on both sides. They may be lighter than an ICE motor with all of its accessories, but nowhere near enough to make up for the difference in weights of their energy. Even with those comparatively light motors, electric vehicles of comparable performance are thousands of pounds heavier than comparable vehicles.

Model S curb weight (depending on options) is 4,647 to 4,830 lbs.

BMW 750i is 4,225 lbs (or more, depending on options, BMW isn't clear on that)

Mercedes S550 is 4,773 lbs, heavier than a base model S.

Audi A8 is 4,464 to 4,806 lbs depending on options.

Maserati Quattroporte 4,101 to 4,189 lbs

So even taking in the most extreme comparison, the stripper Quattroporte vs the loaded Model S the weight difference is only 729 lbs, hardly the "thousands of pounds" in your post. I think you're confusing old lead-acid battery technology cars with modern lithium battery technology cars.

And the Model S is faster than every single one of those other comparable cars. In fact, since the Model S with the Ludicrous Speed option is one of the quickest cars sold in the world, finding "comparable" cars is going to be pretty difficult. Here's a list on wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...y_acceleration Note that none of the cars quicker than the Model S are really considered practical passenger cars. The Tesla can carry groceries and up to 7 passengers (depending on options)

Even the plain-Jane Model S is right up there in performance. Oh, and on the quarter mile list, the Model S P90D is in the 10s, still faster than comparable cars.

[allanoue]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

Al, no offense, you're being a little close minded. I respect the passion for a cause and the interest in new tech. Really, that's something I admire because I nerd out on everything at times. I'm curious and I'd like to challenge you to a little though experiment: what's your reason for having the ninja 300 over a Zero? Think critically and tell me why. I think that will give you perspective on where we're coming from. Don't resort to emotionally charged blindness.

I want an EV. BUt it doesn't make sense to me yet. I've said that before and I'll say it again.

No offence taken.

I do not have a Zero right now because of money. The 300 I payed cash for almost 3 years ago and I did not know about the Zero. I will buy an electric bike (likely a Zero) August 2017 when my car is payed off or I would have one now. I will have free plug-in at work.

edit: When I asked you to back off earlier I hoped you did not take me seriously and if you did

[InvisiBill]

Originally Posted by Alex

Good link. :thumbup: I wondered what he did to keep the gas from going bad, and he says he keeps less than a gallon in there at all times. Would you know what material the gas tank is in a volt? (I have no idea in my own car, it's easier to tell on a motorcycle when it's sitting right in front of you). I know that it's generally recommended to not leave a metal tank mostly empty for long periods to delay any rusting, but don't know if that's a 1 or 2 year worry, or a 5 - 10 year worry.

I'm not sure about the material, but the Volt's tank is sealed and pressurized to help preserve the gas, so I'm sure that helps avoid problems like rust too.

I don't know if the fact that PLUG1N only keeps a tiny amount of gas in the car bypasses the feature, but the computer will actually run the ICE some if it detects that it's been too long on the same tank. The manual recommends using the tank up within a year of filling it. My personal record is 73 days between fillups. The current tank is at 62 days. http://www.fuelly.com/car/chevrolet/...isiBill/318496

[Alex]

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

The physics you mentioned are valid, but incomplete. You didn't consider that the pinnacle of technology for converting chemical energy of gasoline to motion is, at the very exotic best, barely over 30%. That means over 60% of the potential energy in gasoline is converted to just exhaust, radiator, and brake heat. It performs no useful function, and the brake heat cannot be recaptured for later use. That wasted energy is one of the most inconvenient facts about internal combustion, and there's no foreseeable way around it because that's the nature of the physics of internal combustion. IC engines are just terrible at efficiency, and always will be.

Sure, but IC engines are a reasonably efficient way to get energy contained in the gasoline into propulsion. It's not as if there is a currently viable way to use that leftover energy. Wasted is one way to define it. Pouring it over an electric motor won't do much other than clean it.

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

More importantly, our understanding of chemistry has increased exponentially and future battery technologies will perforce be developed faster. I see no reason why it can't roughly follow Moore's law in concept, but with somewhat slower timeframe.

We might want to review the key point of Moore's law. What is interesting in it *is* the speed of advancement with electronic circuit density. It behaves like no other technology advance because of that speed. I'm not sure if it's fair to compare anything to Moore's law, but the pace of battery capacity enhancements wouldn't be anywhere near the pointy end. This article compares/contrasts Moore's law with where we've come in batteries:

http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/a...future_battery

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

Gasoline was a great way to store energy in the old days when there wasn't anything better, but that was then, and today there are much more efficient technologies out there.

Out there? As in available? Is now the old days, or will some point in the future be old days at a period of time sometime prior to the technology that we hope is coming?

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

Within the next 20-40 years I see wholesale adoption of EV technology because of the efficiency, the ability to source electrons from anywhere including non-carbon sources, and because of the long-term reliability and durability that EV offers. Hybrids are a definite link in that transition, and will get people weened off of chemical fuels.

When (not if) gas hits $10 in today's dollars, a lot of folks invested in that 100 year old stagnant technology are going to be left red-faced and empty-handed.

Certainly a possibility. It's just unlikely to happen due to battery advancements in that timeframe. Whether or not it does, we can count on any number of articles promising that it will happen. (example)

[allanoue]

rethinking my plans for 2017
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/...chevrolet-volt

[Alex]

These are good comparisons, wanted to credit you for looking up the details. In that heavyweight high-dollar category it's getting pretty close. The Tesla seems very heavy, but those 3 competitors are quite heavy as well. The traditionally-powered cars have significantly more range, but the Tesla has significantly better acceleration.

Scaled down a bit, it doesn't work out quite as well. The Leaf also weighs about the same as its competitors (3,300 lbs, give or take), but because of that has a range of well under 100 miles. Same with the Fiat 500e, electric spark, or essentially anything that Elon isn't selling to luxury buyers. You can't hide that much weight unless it already is a heavy car, or you choose to provide less of it to keep the weight reasonable. Many of the non-Teslas seem to have landed on a 24 kwh battery, not sure if there are tax, cost, or other parameters that point to that particular size.

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

Model S curb weight (depending on options) is 4,647 to 4,830 lbs.

BMW 750i is 4,225 lbs (or more, depending on options, BMW isn't clear on that)

Mercedes S550 is 4,773 lbs, heavier than a base model S.

Audi A8 is 4,464 to 4,806 lbs depending on options.

Maserati Quattroporte 4,101 to 4,189 lbs

So even taking in the most extreme comparison, the stripper Quattroporte vs the loaded Model S the weight difference is only 729 lbs, hardly the "thousands of pounds" in your post. I think you're confusing old lead-acid battery technology cars with modern lithium battery technology cars.

And the Model S is faster than every single one of those other comparable cars. In fact, since the Model S with the Ludicrous Speed option is one of the quickest cars sold in the world, finding "comparable" cars is going to be pretty difficult. Here's a list on wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...y_acceleration Note that none of the cars quicker than the Model S are really considered practical passenger cars. The Tesla can carry groceries and up to 7 passengers (depending on options)

Even the plain-Jane Model S is right up there in performance. Oh, and on the quarter mile list, the Model S P90D is in the 10s, still faster than comparable cars.

[InvisiBill]

Originally Posted by bdavison

When they get 200 miles at 70+mph to a charge, and I can just pull into the nearest gas station and recharge it in 1 min or less. THEN, and ONLY then would I ever consider an electric bike.

Till then...no way.

I get your point, but gas bikes now can't even do that - you're exaggerating a bit. Just pumping a few gallons of gas takes longer than a minute, not to mention the time needed for parking/dismounting, taking off any extra gear you need to, etc. I log my fillups in Fuelly and report gas prices, so I'm always futzing with my phone for a couple minutes too. Realistically, it's probably 5-10 minutes off the road for a full refueling stop. It's a little more boring when you're just waiting for electrons to flow through a wire instead of actually doing something (as much as standing around holding a gas pump handle is "doing something"), but a 10 minute recharge isn't a massive change from a gas fillup. Even a 20 minute recharge (after hundreds of miles on the road) isn't much longer than a "stretch your legs" break to refuel, go to the bathroom, grab a drink, etc. With recharging, you don't have to stand there and make sure nothing spills or overflows - you can just pull into a parking spot, plug in, and then go do all your break stuff for 15 minutes. Come back out and check your Facebook or something for 5 minutes, then you're ready to leave again.

Also remember that you can recharge just about anywhere, thanks to the ubiquity of electrical outlets (though not as fast as a dedicated charging station). For many people, you can charge at home while your car would normally just be sitting there anyway. Same for a lot of people at work. I tend to favor the theater/restaurant complex that has a couple charging stations, as an hour or two charging gives me a significant boost (even with the Volt's weak charger). As the infrastructure improves, you would ideally be able to plug in anywhere you park your vehicle. It won't give you a full charge, but adding a few miles at every stop can dramatically increase your total range, even if you have a relatively small battery. This article is about getting 190 electric miles out of a Volt (rated for a 35 mile range and 4 hour recharge time) in a single day with some clever charging.

Road trips and long pleasure rides on a bike are still the worst-case scenario for EVs needing to recharge though. I don't want to sit at a charging station for an hour for every 100 miles I ride either.

[InvisiBill]

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

The physics you mentioned are valid, but incomplete. You didn't consider that the pinnacle of technology for converting chemical energy of gasoline to motion is, at the very exotic best, barely over 30%. That means over 60% of the potential energy in gasoline is converted to just exhaust, radiator, and brake heat. It performs no useful function, and the brake heat cannot be recaptured for later use. That wasted energy is one of the most inconvenient facts about internal combustion, and there's no foreseeable way around it because that's the nature of the physics of internal combustion. IC engines are just terrible at efficiency, and always will be.

The thing with that is, even at 25% efficiency, you're still only at $40 and 80lb for 4x as much gas. If the price skyrockets to $10/gal, it's $120. That's still compared to the thousands of dollars and 1000+lb of an equivalent battery pack. With the current infrastructure and technology, even horrendously inefficient gasoline can still be cheaper and easier than BEV.

I love my Volt, but the deck is really stacked in favor of the ICE at this point.

[InvisiBill]

Originally Posted by Hero Danny

I love my gasoline powered motors, and I love slamming through gears of my manual transmission, but I also welcome the change of electric vehicles.
Really the only thing stopping me from buying a Tesla is the cost.

You know when you hit that sweet spot in the power curve and it just feels like it's pulling perfectly? Imagine that from 0-100mph, without ever having to worry about being in the wrong gear. I'm an enthusiast too - there are currently 4 vehicles in my garage that will do 0-60 in under 5 seconds, my EX500 being the slowest. I think we tend to average out the power curve of a typical ICE and/or think of golfcarts and PowerWheels when we imagine how an EV will perform. However, electric motors have very flat torque curves, meaning you get nearly peak power through the whole range. You don't miss those fun parts of driving as much when the car always responds to the "gas" pedal perfectly.


In case anyone hasn't seen it - What it's like to own a Tesla Model S - A cartoonist's review of his magical space car FYI, most of that stuff applies to my Volt too. The Tesla has a few extra features, but it should for 3x the price. The Model S has the highest customer satisfaction rating at Consumer Reports of any car, and the Volt is in second place. EVs inherently have some nice features that you don't even realize you dislike about ICE vehicles until they're gone. It's amazing how loud and vibrate-y regular cars feel to me now. Even when the Volt's ICE is running, it's not directly tied to wheelspeed or physically coupled to the driveline (usually), so the noise and vibration are a bit removed from the driving experience.

[InvisiBill]

Originally Posted by allanoue

rethinking my plans for 2017
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/...chevrolet-volt

For the rest of us who aren’t GM insiders, we’ll need to wait many years—likely more than a decade—for the sort of technology demonstrated there, unrestricted for real-world driving.

(Unless you're just referring to the standard Gen2 Volt info tacked on the end of the story.)

[InvisiBill]

Originally Posted by Alex

Many of the non-Teslas seem to have landed on a 24 kwh battery, not sure if there are tax, cost, or other parameters that point to that particular size.

Originally Posted by http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Qualified-Vehicles-Acquired-after-12-31-2009

For vehicles acquired after 12/31/2009, the credit is equal to $2,500 plus, for a vehicle which draws propulsion energy from a battery with at least 5 kilowatt hours of capacity, $417, plus an additional $417 for each kilowatt hour of battery capacity in excess of 5 kilowatt hours. The total amount of the credit allowed for a vehicle is limited to $7,500.

You basically need a 16kWh battery to get the full $7500 credit. The first 5kWh gets you $2917, then 11x$417 to hit the limit.

I assume the 24kWh is just a happy medium of performance, weight, and cost in the current environment.

[allanoue]

Originally Posted by InvisiBill

(Unless you're just referring to the standard Gen2 Volt info tacked on the end of the story.)

yea I saw so back to plan A

[xXecuterXx2]

Originally Posted by allanoue

Anyone have a beta-max video player?

WTF is a beta-max? Oh its that fluffy dude from Big Hero 6 aint it? Its all cool, you don't gotta be ashamed, he's the reason the movies famous

[Somchai]

Here's an older, but still valid, article http://www.science20.com/science_20/...ere_stay-91403
Sorry in english I didn't find a more actual one - in Germany there are many about it.
The magic word is

Energy Density

And like some here already said, actual an EV or Hybrid is a waste of money (but since it is not my money I don't care what others do with their own and if they throw it away).

[ninjamunky85]

Originally Posted by allanoue

rethinking my plans for 2017
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/...chevrolet-volt

I bet lawyers can't wait for autonomous vehicles to hit the streets. Every wreck will be a zillion dollar lawsuit against the manufacturers.

[allanoue]

Originally Posted by ninjamunky85

I bet lawyers can't wait for autonomous vehicles to hit the streets. Every wreck will be a zillion dollar lawsuit against the manufacturers.

Just like air bags saving way more deaths then they cause but who cares about facts like that when a buck can be made.

Google cars have logged 1.7 million miles with 11 crashes all human error. 8 are human rear ending the google car

[allanoue]

Sorry OP for going off topic.

I think I am going to have many choices in 2017 of e-bikes that will meet my needs for my 120 mile daily commute but Zero has a big lead and will win my cash.
Time will tell.

[choneofakind]

I dread autonomous vehicles. Might as well make it wipe your ass too.