It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Will smaller electric cars with limited speed and range catch on?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:09 AM
link   

Will smaller electric cars with limited speed and range catch on?


www.msnbc.msn.com

NEVs are silent, have no tailpipe emissions (or tailpipes, for that matter) and plug into electrical outlets like vacuum cleaners. They come in two varieties: Low-Speed Electric Vehicles, which have a top speed of about 25 miles per hour and are restricted to roads where the speed limit is 35 miles per hour or less; and Medium-Speed Electric Vehicles, which reach 35 mph and are allowed on roads with a posted speed of up to 45 mph.
They're exempt from federal safety regulations that mandate
impact-absorbing bumpers and airbags. But to be street legal, NEVs must have three-point seat belts, windshields with wipers, headlights, brake lights, rearview mirrors and turn signals. Doors are optional.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:09 AM
link   
This kind of car does me know good. I travel to work morethan the charge can hold.

How about the rest of you?

Do you live in big, congested city's where the cars top speed of 25mph would be ok?

I think that these little guys are nothing more than over sized go carts, but it is a good, continuing project for zero emmissions, including noise.

www.msnbc.msn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by wolf241e


This kind of car does me know good. I travel to work morethan the charge can hold.


www.msnbc.msn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)




And there might be the problem... americans and people in general might have to make some decisions..

work where you live, live where you work.

if you have to drive more than the charge, it might be time to change things.... would be one step in fighting the oil addiction.

and yes, I live in a congested city and people are starting to use cars like this.

so will it catch on? only if people want it too (or are told to by the tv).



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:23 AM
link   
what Id like to know is why are these crummy electric cars theyre rolling out inferior to the EV1 car from 8 years ago


That car had a range of 150 miles and was rumored theyd get that to 300 with lithium battery technology. And its top speed was 80mph

Its almost as if theyre making electric cars suck on purpose



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:31 AM
link   
The real scam is that we should have to give up generally useful transportation for this kind of tripe when options exist to build much more fuel-efficient vehicles or even high-performance ZEV's.

Even direct-injected gasoline engine had been developed over twenty years ago that increased fuel mileage significantly and they're only now appearing in production vehicles (I think Audi is using it now). How do I know? We made the bloody parts for them, that's how.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by admriker444
what Id like to know is why are these crummy electric cars theyre rolling out inferior to the EV1 car from 8 years ago


That car had a range of 150 miles and was rumored theyd get that to 300 with lithium battery technology. And its top speed was 80mph

Its almost as if theyre making electric cars suck on purpose


Great catch, Admriker!!

i remember that car now that you said it. It was touted to be the next great thing for the auto industry.

I also remember that it's huge price tag was it's doom. Who would pay $40,000 for a car they had to refill so much, espspecially will no infastructure in place for it.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by admriker444
what Id like to know is why are these crummy electric cars theyre rolling out inferior to the EV1 car from 8 years ago


That car had a range of 150 miles and was rumored theyd get that to 300 with lithium battery technology. And its top speed was 80mph

Its almost as if theyre making electric cars suck on purpose


Yes, they make them suck on purpose to only appeal to the hardcore. The terrifyingly hideous appearance is one of those phychological barriers put in place. Creating a strong sense of tradeoff is another. An electric Corvette that beats the pants off a petroleum-fueled one would give such an alternative vehicle massmarket appeal.

Thankfully Lexus, BMW and perhaps others have shown it's possible to move in the right direction with nice automobiles after coming out with some beasty hybrids.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 02:00 AM
link   
Nope - the golf cart electric cars are only useful to city folks who live in the city or country folks to run around the farm or go to the market. The majority of car use in America is for commuting from the suburbs to the city. They need to go 70mph and have a range of 80 miles. Now if people can plug in while at work while charging a 60 mile range would be adequate for most.

It's only a matter of time before we have electric cars with 300 mile battery range and plenty of power. If the big car companies don't do it somebody else will. Eventually rest stops, motels & truck stops will install charging stations and instead of 15 minutes you might have to catch a nap or bite to eat waiting for an hour or 2 charge.

The Aptera would make a great commuter car.


The air car would make a good commuter car as well and maybe even a good utility vehicle.


Both the cars I posted will do nearly 90 mph and have a great range and that will be enhanced by getting models with on board generators to extend the range.





[edit on 16-8-2008 by verylowfrequency]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 02:44 AM
link   
My wife brought up the subject of electric power bicycles just this morning but unless it could be re charged at her job the added weight and pedaling resistance would demand more physically than a good quality bicycle. There is a nice electric vehicle in the town that I live near and it is pretty cool. My wife was walking in parking lot and thought it was nice that the driver pleasantly wished her a good morning at the very instant that it caught her eye instead of honking a warning. The thing is stealthy quiet. It does seem that the cars of today are much heavier than the older cars of the same engine displacement and proportion. The cars on the U.S. market are so laden with safety devices that there is a 20% increase in weight over a similar Euro or Asian subcompact model of the same make. I had an 82 VW Rabbit diesel that consistently topped 52mpg. My 2007 Honda Fit is gasoline powered weighs 550lbs more and only gets 33 to 38.7 mpg. The safety features are to blame for a great deal of the poor mileage returns.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 06:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by hypervigilant
I had an 82 VW Rabbit diesel that consistently topped 52mpg. My 2007 Honda Fit is gasoline powered weighs 550lbs more and only gets 33 to 38.7 mpg. The safety features are to blame for a great deal of the poor mileage returns.


Hey there HV, thanks for the reply.

I hear you about the fact that we had cars in the past that got better mileage then the cars of today. It's almost like the auto makers were forced to make a few models that we really great in the MPG arena. Then they make the car go away.
I really don't get it.

I'm really interested in your statement about the safety devices.Do they really add that much more weight as to affect gas mileage?? I've never heard that.
I'm not a huge supporter of the whole safety device thing. I remember as a kid, safety devices we not conceived as of yet. We rode in the back of pickups and station wagons, sat 3 across in the front bench seat or in my mom's lap and most of us grew up just fine.
I'm not saying that accidents didn't happen back then and that they were as ugly as today's are. But the world has gone "safe mad". Especially the auto industry.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by hypervigilant
I had an 82 VW Rabbit diesel that consistently topped 52mpg. My 2007 Honda Fit is gasoline powered weighs 550lbs more and only gets 33 to 38.7 mpg. The safety features are to blame for a great deal of the poor mileage returns.


Diesel engines have a much higher compression ratio (22:1 or more compared to 9:1 or 10:1 for gasoline engines) and that is the reason for their higher fuel mileage. The peak combustion temperatures are higher compared to the final temperature after work has been done on the cylinder resulting in higher efficiency.

You could see similar or better mileage than 52 MPG from the same car with a Diesel powerplant.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 05:22 PM
link   
I think they will catch on, but in very limited areas. So these tiny electrics will not make much of an impact on the oil usage by themselves.

What they will do is start the change from gasoline stations to recharge stations, as localized demand grows. That will pave the way for higher-range vehicles. So while this is definitely a good thing, it is only the first step in making electric cars a reality.

There are still technical problems to be overcome, but with high fuel prices and squeezed budgets, demand will steadily rise. And supply will follow.

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 08:33 PM
link   
Hi wolfie. The Asian Euro market Honda Fits way around 300 pounds less and have higher overall gearing. Where the U.S. market car gets about 33 to 39mpg the others have averages in the area of 44 to 48 mpg and the performance is about the same acceleration wise but have a higher top end speed. Anti lock brakes weigh an additional 150 lbs. or so. The wider tires helps in cornering and braking but combined with wider taller wheels they can add close to 40 lbs. of rotating mass that then require heavier suspension components. and take mor time in the lower gears to accelerate. Adding traction and stability control, is another area that is going on even subcompacts. The new electric power steering systems are great but there is still a power loss through the alternator. The old sub 200olb. cars with smaller cross section tires didn't need power steering.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 08:53 PM
link   
I rember seeing a electric car that beat a ferrari off the line. It was on one of the science based channels.
And there is alot more to lithum batteries than there telling us. I have a small hand held drill that I can use all week on one charge.
Just put it on the stand over the weekend and it stays with me in the tool pouch during the week.

Also I rember in the later 70's, their was supposed to be a carbourator(pardon my spelling), that got well over 100mpg.
Oddly enough thats about the time the auto makers came out with fuel injection.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by EnlightenUp
 

You are right about the Compression ratio, but it was just a 2 valve per cylinder 1600 cc displacement engine without the benefit of modern engine management technology and aerodynamic efficiency. The national speed limit also was 55 mph. and instead of 5 w 20 oil it used 10 w 50. The engine was great for its time. The fit in non U.S. trim weighs about 250 to 300 lbs less due to less demanding safety requirements and have taller gearing. They perform better and get 44to 48 mpg out of 1500ccs. Thinking about it now, I'm wondering if the old diesel would as well as the Fit at 75 and 80 mph. Wow am I ever off topic.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by only onus
 


Here you go.

Electric vs. Corvette

Electric vs. Viper



[edit on 17-8-2008 by verylowfrequency]



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by wolf241e
 


We did a whole show on this:

www.evcast.com...



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join