Who Killed The Electric Car?

FYI:

The EV1 had a range of less than 20 miles under a worst-case scenario - a typical northeastern winter weather at night. This is why it was only leased in two warm southwestern states.

GM lost a shitload of money on each one it built - think how long a car company will stay in business if it lost,say, $50,000 per car. GM actually lost more than $500,000 per EV1 built. Even given a wider market and much greater sales that did not exist at the time, GM still would have lost money on it.

When the EV1 came out in 1997-98 , California gas (always among the most expensive in the US) averaged $1.16-1.33/gallon. Most of the population really didn't give a shit about mileage and wouldn't spend the same money on an EV1 that you could get a Cadillac for.

This is not to say the EV1 wasn't a technological tour de force. It was, incorporating more advanced controls, design and production techniques than were found on any production passenger car before or since, to my knowlege. It was an answer to a state mandate, and one that was not and could not be economically viable at the time. It went away when the mandate went away.

Wikipedia has a good, mostly accurate page on the EV1.


PS - I have an automotive sciences degree through GM and did much research (including driving one and speaking extensively with vehicle engineers) on the EV1 while at Saturn Service Technical Training at the Spring Hill, TN plant in 1996. The EV1 was leased and serviced exclusively through Saturn dealers in California and Arizona.

The Stonecutters did, they even admit to it.

My brother-in-law drives an electric Renault (in Europe); it's two years old. He gets about 50 miles before having to recharge, IIRC. (It might be 80; that 1.6 factor is the miles-to-km conversion, so I'm being cautious.) That's plenty for his needs - lives less than 10 miles from work, et cetera. Cost him a little more than a standard model; and he had to wait for it, demand exceeds supply there.

I want this from Tesla Motors.
Highlights
0 to 60 in 4 seconds
135 mpg (equivalent)
200 miles between charges
cost per mile $0.02
Top Speed 130 mph +

The cost is a bit high $92,000 to $98,000

BTW, wherever you got that stat - (50 miles) it's complete nonsense.

maybe for the generation one batteries, but modern electric car batteries would give the EV1 a range of 300 miles. Even cars like the zebra and the Gwiz go over 100 miles.

And remember kids, average total driving length is 30 miles a day for suburban driving. even in southern california.

Don't believe silly car company misinformation - they are paying folks to post this crap on blogs!

Bite me. I said where and when I got the information, and I'll trust a smart and enthusiastic automotive engineer who was actually involved in the car in question before I'll take your word for it. It was a 1st gen car. Nobody's paying me to post anything anywhere, and I haven't worked for anyone but myself from 1998 to last year. I am no longer in the automotive field.


I drove one a bunch. Did you?

Yeah I heard at night with all its lights on and when it was wet you got like 30 miles out of one charge ...no very practical. I think it electric cars would be fesiable when industry and Government invest in long term + quick charge storage devices, then some infrustructure to back it up and from what I have read it can already be done but Governments aren't willing to take a lead on this.

We complain about environmental problems today, I cant wait till when China starts driving on a similar scale that the West does now, talk to me about air quality and oil prices then.

You might be right, you might be wrong about the particular point in question, but you're dead wrong if you think Stiles is a shill for anybody or doesn't know his shit when it comes to cars. I've personally pestered him several times with questions about my cars over the last five years. He's always been right.

We have discussions about this sort of thing at work, and each and every time, without fail, the following two subjects are brought up by one of our engineers: 1) What happened to the mileage that the VW Rabbit saw back in the 70s/80s? He claims 40-50mpg, and calls bullshit on current technology not being able to achieve that kind of mileage. 2) He's astounded that people don't put an alternator with high amps/volts connected to each wheel to charge up electrical car batteries on the fly, making fuel totally unnecessary.

I haven't done the research...legitimate points or complete conspiracy theory B.S.?

As far as I know the best mileage came from the Geo Metro in the early 90's.The reason it's not being achieved now? Added safety features and creature comforts have increased the wieght of cars today. Heavier cars require more energy to make them move.

Ahh, the perpetual motion machine. This might work in a perfectly frictionless environment where 100% of the electrically energy stored in the batteries is converted into motion. The Law of Conservation of Energy shows us that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. It can only be converted from one form to another. Unfortunately, much of the energy in an electric car is used to overcome friction, and is then converted into heat energy. The heat energy is transferred to the surrounding atmosphere and cannot be recovered. Please also consult this helpful video brought to you by the fine folks at Fox.

D-day covered the major points. I can add this:

I have owned the following high-mileage cars of the sort you mention above:

1981 VW rabbit diesel (43 real-world MPG hwy)
1991 Honda CRX HF (46 real world MPG hwy)
1988 Chevy Sprint turbo (43 real-world MPG hwy,)


All had a measly 60-70hp total
None weighed more than 2,000 lbs
None had power steering, air bags, ABS, effective air conditioning or any sort of measurable passing acceleration by modern standards. In fact, by modern standards of comfort, performance and safety all of these cars are pretty pathetic exept for the posted mileage figures.

You cannot build a dirt-cheap and reliable car that gets this kind of mileage and meets current Federal safety and emissions standards while including the content that the market demands. The current bottom of the line subcompact in the US is the Chevy Aveo, built in Korea. For about $12,000 it returns a fairly mediocre 26 mpg or so and weighs 2,400lbs by comparison to the 1,700-1,800 lbs the Sprint and VW weigh. 600 extra pounds dosen't sound like a lot until you realize it's a 30% weight gain...

You can, however, get this kind of mileage in a non-hybrid for a reasonable amount of money:

The 2006 VW Golf TDI cost about $20K and got about 42 mpg hwy.
The Prius returns similar mileage in the same price range.

As for the alternator on each wheel idea, heat and frictional losses cause efficiency to drop, and the extra weight, complexity and drag make such an arrangement less desireable than the current Toyota Hybrid setup. As noted, there is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine on Earth.

PS - I didn't forget about the upcoming 2008 Smart car. For $14K it makes 68hp and posts poor performance numbers (but good mileage) while losing Mercedes money on every unit built IIRC. It is utterly impractical in the US market exept for L.A. and Manhattan and the same money can buy a less-cute but infinitely more useful korean subcompact.

Assuming the USA Smart survives the sale of Chrysler to Cerberus (and that's a big "if"), and if the Smart ever turns a profit for Mercedes (it hasn't for years so far), then I may change my mind.

The Tesla Motors sportscar still baffles me. Do they really expect to sell all that many when for the same price the person could be getting a Porsche or two BMWs?

Besides, we all know half the fun of owning a sportscar is the sound of it and... The Tesla is just a little bit lacking in that area.

His example is the alternator in one of the other guy's trucks; it's an F350 super-ultra-jumbo-extended-everything-motherfucker. He said the alternator on that monster puts out 200 amps or volts, I don't remember which. He figures that if you put one of those on each wheel, it could effectively charge up the car's batteries while in motion.

What bean said, plus:


Alternators must be driven by something - usually by the engine via a belt. Alternators also take horsepower to drive, and waste some of the input power as heat, frictional losses (bearings, cooling fan) and resistance. They are not nearly 100% efficient.

If the kind of electrical perpetual motion you're thinking of was possible, the Prius would get far better mileage than it does.

I'll bring that up the next time he starts on a rant about gas mileage.

He is a man of a million stories - I just wish he'd remember that he's told several of them about a billion times already.

I drive a 12-year-old Vauxhall Corsa. I have no idea what power it delivers, and I don't care. It does (as of yesterday) do 52 mpg, Imperial; better than 40 mpg American, IIUC.

Fuck! I heard the same thing too about the alternators ( I work in Logistics) then again I heard it from a truckie who was so pilled up I thought he was retarded when I first meet him.

Thanks for the info boys

Though it's definitely meant for urban living, I wouldn't say it's only practical in NY and LA. In fact, I'd say it's probably impractical for LA. I've mentioned before that I've seen several in Portland; one parks in the same lot where I park my 100 mpg motorcycle.

I've also seen several electric conversions around town, my friend Zane is looking into doing one with an old Volvo and it's not going to cost him more than a couple thousand. You may not be able to get an EV1 or afford a Tesla, but you can still get a decent, safe eletric car for relatively cheap.