RE: Electrified son-of-Elise now testing on road
Discussion
DonkeyApple said:
Panamax said:
DonkeyApple said:
the battery pack just needs to last as long as the car does, be cheap to buy, safer to use etc.
"just"I guess the bottom line is that if it was easy everybody would be doing it, including Elon Musk whose resources must far outstrip most other contenders.
. It ultimately has nothing to with it being easy. It is an event that is going to happen and all that is up for discussion is when and how. Will it be achieved via traditional wet cells or solid, and what specific chemistry is used and it's material costs.
What's interesting currently is that for the last 5 years we have all mostly been assuming that the eventual big step change in charge times and energy densities would be delivered by the hugely more expensive solid state solution but as that avenue has repeatedly failed to deliver on time the wet cell market has just been steadily creeping up and last years' cell from BYD surpassed everything that we thought was achievable from old laptop cells just 5 years ago.
The CATL announcement re their blended Na/Li cells is actually immense if true as they deliver near solid state robustness and densities but for less cost than the cheapest automotive Li cells.
We have batteries and BMS lasting at least ten years now while retaining at least 70-80% of capacity so given the typical car lasts under 20 years we are potentially not too many years away from battery pack usable lifetimes being a match.
It seems fair to envisage that by 2030 we will potentially be at a tipping point in multiple areas for EVs as the 100+ years of motor hobbling by utterly rubbish battery technology finally improves to the point that a battery can actually be better than the insane workaround of digging up fossil fuels, shipping them round the world to refine then transporting them back around the world to be burned in the most comically complicated contraption just to get a car to move forward because since the 1860s the rechargeable battery has been a festering pile of dung that has comprehensively failed to technologically advance at anywhere near the rate the rest of mankind's creations have.
But the real question once we do crack efficient energy storage in transportable cells for all our normal cars, just what kind of monster wants an electric sports car!!!!! And what kind of other serious risks do these mentalists pose?
And your tipping point discussion? Let me put it this way; the battery is now lasting as long as, if not longer, than other components in many cars. Look at your typical ICE vehicle. How many years do the engine / gearbox / transmission last in big horsepower applications? I would bet good money that looking at a car that has done maybe 150,000 miles at that power level, more often than not, there would have been huge bills down to borkage. And yet, an EV has only one moving part in its motor by comparison. The reliability aspect isnt even close.
The monster bit is just trolling. And I'm too tired to feed the troll.
I'm an optimist. I suspect that as soon as any big manufacturer produces a decent EV sports car at the right price it will sell like hot cakes. It'll need to be a big manufacturer simply because of the huge development cost of any proper new car.
I'm quite sure that back in the late 1980s people would have fallen about laughing at any suggestion Mazda was about to start building a sports car that would go on to become one of the most successful of all time. And "only a 4-pot" at that.
The world moves on. Some people move with it while others try to cling on to a bygone era.
Build it, and they will come.
I'm quite sure that back in the late 1980s people would have fallen about laughing at any suggestion Mazda was about to start building a sports car that would go on to become one of the most successful of all time. And "only a 4-pot" at that.
The world moves on. Some people move with it while others try to cling on to a bygone era.
Build it, and they will come.
otolith said:
Setting aside the research nature of this particular project, the question really for sports car manufacturers is how they are going to make compelling cars once they have to be electrified. I don’t believe that the end of the ICE will mean people only want dull SUV utility boxes. And nor do I believe that sports cars will necessarily have to be 2 ton behemoths because some abstract notion of the freedom of driving from central London to the alps requires enormous range. For GTs, for sure, but that’s not really what people buy Elises or Caterhams for, or really what they use the more long range tolerable cars for.
I think it'll be quite easy to make some great EV sports cars. We just have to wait a while as the current EV solution of half a tonne of Victorian chemical bricks buried under the floor is a pants solution for that particular type of car. Ken_Code said:
I wonder if super / ultra capacitors will ever form a significant part of cars’ energy storage needs.
You could use them as a form of buffer store alongside a battery. Being able to be filled much quicker would maximise regen scavenging in high performance use and then being able to discharge quicker would mean they could be used for big bursts of performance but I think you'd still need a conventional type of battery alongside it. I guess in theory you could also use a capacitor to fill up in an instant and then drive off with the capacitor then discharging into the battery?
I think VW have done something with capacitors used as per the first example in a Lambo but it he second example probably doesn't work or someone would have done it by now?
The long and the short is that we don't really need ultra fast recharging for normal road EVs. It's something that would be nice if cheap enough but it's not an essential solution. The most critical advance for batteries used in generic private transport is cost really. Once batteries are cheap enough then humans will just adapt around their pros and cons and easily make them work for them. People really aren't going to care whether a fast charge takes 15 minutes or 30 compared to caring whether the car costs £10k less or £10k more to buy.
DonkeyApple said:
People really aren't going to care whether a fast charge takes 15 minutes or 30 compared to caring whether the car costs £10k less or £10k more to buy.
Two significant issues. Cities are full of people who have to park on the street, not at home, and long motorway journeys will definitely need a re-charge.Imagine the practicality and economics of operating a petrol station or service area where the pumps run so slow it takes 15 or 30 minutes to fill your tank. It wouldn't stack up for petrol so can't stack up for electric.
Some form of fast charging looks highly desirable which is presumably how the likes of Nyobolt are able to get financial backing. I'm sure somebody will crack it and make a fortune but until then it all looks very high financial risk.
Panamax said:
DonkeyApple said:
People really aren't going to care whether a fast charge takes 15 minutes or 30 compared to caring whether the car costs £10k less or £10k more to buy.
Two significant issues. Cities are full of people who have to park on the street, not at home, and long motorway journeys will definitely need a re-charge.Imagine the practicality and economics of operating a petrol station or service area where the pumps run so slow it takes 15 or 30 minutes to fill your tank. It wouldn't stack up for petrol so can't stack up for electric.
Some form of fast charging looks highly desirable which is presumably how the likes of Nyobolt are able to get financial backing. I'm sure somebody will crack it and make a fortune but until then it all looks very high financial risk.
Just consider the typical economic dynamics of the bulk of that consumer segment. They haven't the purchasing power for high end battery tech or for the most expensive form of charging. The way such users will be operating is to purchase the cheapest plausible car for their usage needs and to then recharge it the cheapest way which will be to park it at a slow, cheap charger for long enough each week to fill it up for that week's useage etc.
We have to be honest and practical in this regard. People who cannot afford offstreet parking will not suddenly be able to afford the most costly battery tech nor the most costly way to recharge.
It's also important to recognise that the petrol station forecourt concept is a product of the requirements of petrol. Not electricity. So for example, if petrol had never existed and it has always been EV then petrol forecourts wouldn't have ever existed. These are two manifestly different fuels that are delivered in a wholly separate way. They are distributed in completely different ways and will be purchased completely differently. There will be overlaps in infrastructure but those will honestly be accidental. There will be fast recharging hubs where specific locations have sufficient electricity flowing to them but the entire consumer market will be manifestly different. Primarily because more than 50% of EV users will only ever need remote charging rarely, unlike everyone needing petrol stations regularly. And then there will be significant pricing competition from car park owners at locations where those without home charging tend to visit.
Ultimately, super fast charging for many years to come is and will remain the preserve of the most affluent.
leglessAlex said:
Lefty said:
Why on earth anyone want an electric sports car is beyond me.
I would!I don’t always like noise, so the quieter nature of electric cars is often very appealing. I have neighbours too, and I like the idea I can slip out the close at 6am in the summer without waking anyone.
I like the way electric cars behave and feel too. Not trying to convert anyone or say it’s better, but I like it.
I also like the way some cars look, and at least to my eyes this is a pretty thing, so is the Caterham Project V.
I like engines, but I also like electric motors. People like me really aren’t that rare
Oh, and yes, I have a NA V8 also.
Took the Elise out for a run today - went to see my dad who lives the other side of Manchester from my place on the Fylde coast. Eschewed the motorway, skirted Bowland, past Burnley, Rochdale, Oldham, Stalybridge. Came back via Sowerby Bridge, Hebden Bridge, then past Burnley and Bowland and finished off with the back road from St Michael to Hambleton.
Only about 125 miles in all, but on mostly twisty little roads or faster ones over the moors, that’s enough range for me. Being able to pound down the motorway or dual carriageway for hundreds of miles is just irrelevant to what I use the car for.
Only about 125 miles in all, but on mostly twisty little roads or faster ones over the moors, that’s enough range for me. Being able to pound down the motorway or dual carriageway for hundreds of miles is just irrelevant to what I use the car for.
Panamax said:
I'm an optimist. I suspect that as soon as any big manufacturer produces a decent EV sports car at the right price it will sell like hot cakes. It'll need to be a big manufacturer simply because of the huge development cost of any proper new car.
I'm quite sure that back in the late 1980s people would have fallen about laughing at any suggestion Mazda was about to start building a sports car that would go on to become one of the most successful of all time. And "only a 4-pot" at that.
The world moves on. Some people move with it while others try to cling on to a bygone era.
Build it, and they will come.
Exactly. Cue the EV Boxster. I'm quite sure that back in the late 1980s people would have fallen about laughing at any suggestion Mazda was about to start building a sports car that would go on to become one of the most successful of all time. And "only a 4-pot" at that.
The world moves on. Some people move with it while others try to cling on to a bygone era.
Build it, and they will come.
Benzinaio said:
So you want to know 'What's NOT to like?'
How long have you got?
Every journey of modest distance will involve meticulous levels of planning re fast chargers, and that wouldn't tell you if they were out of order or if there was a queue for them.
It wouldn't sound anything like a sports car.l
1250 kg is heavy!
Oh, and climate change is a hoax anyway.
My tin hat is fastened secure.................
+1How long have you got?
Every journey of modest distance will involve meticulous levels of planning re fast chargers, and that wouldn't tell you if they were out of order or if there was a queue for them.
It wouldn't sound anything like a sports car.l
1250 kg is heavy!
Oh, and climate change is a hoax anyway.
My tin hat is fastened secure.................
Surprises at the overwhelmingly positive comments.
myhandle said:
Benzinaio said:
So you want to know 'What's NOT to like?'
How long have you got?
Every journey of modest distance will involve meticulous levels of planning re fast chargers, and that wouldn't tell you if they were out of order or if there was a queue for them.
It wouldn't sound anything like a sports car.l
1250 kg is heavy!
Oh, and climate change is a hoax anyway.
My tin hat is fastened secure.................
+1How long have you got?
Every journey of modest distance will involve meticulous levels of planning re fast chargers, and that wouldn't tell you if they were out of order or if there was a queue for them.
It wouldn't sound anything like a sports car.l
1250 kg is heavy!
Oh, and climate change is a hoax anyway.
My tin hat is fastened secure.................
Surprises at the overwhelmingly positive comments.
So to say 1250kg is heavy is uninformed nonsense,
As to every journey of modest distance requires meticulous planning is ignorant tosh. But I suppose you could say ignorance is bliss so suggest you live in blissful ignorance.
BTW my S1 Exige weighed 837kg (actual weight) but no one in heir right mind can call this car anything but a stripped out noisy rattly machine albeit a great car on the track
I won’t comment on Climate change as there is a thread for that save to say I know a couple of qualified experts who would disagree and my qualifications lead be to take their opinions seriously.
leglessAlex said:
Misanthroper said:
It’s very misleading saying you can get to 80% range in minutes when that range is so low, it sounds amazing but is actually pretty rubbish when taken in context of the range.
I dunno. 108 miles at steady motorway speeds will be about 90 mins driving, and maybe closer to two hours on variable country lanes and going though villages.Stopping for 10 mins total at those time intervals doesn’t seem like such a big deal?
Yes, you’d be absolutely correct in pointing out that you can go much further when stopping for a similar time in a petrol car, but this article wasn’t about that.
Take a run out through Wales, the Lake, Peak District etc - the sorts of places where a run out in a lightweight sports car might be fun - and without careful planning it’d not be impossible that you wouldn’t pass a petrol station in 90 mins.
Even lower density of EV chargers of any description in places like that and, due to the capacity of chargers that exists, you’d be charging at well under max rate the vehicle can handle. If it’s 30+ mins every 90, the use case gets much less appealing.
There is certainly a role for small battery EV’s, but I’d suggest it’s urban/commuting rather than sports cars.
LooneyTunes said:
There is certainly a role for small battery EV’s, but I’d suggest it’s urban/commuting rather than sports cars.
Unless someone is using a sports car for the illusion and in reality just pottering around the shops locally as they would with a Jazz. Until the step change in energy storage density the EV sports car is the least relevant of all EV options where the local potterer is at the polar opposite.
But this car isn't intended for sale or use beyond reprinting 'look at us' PR articles for fund raising.
DonkeyApple said:
LooneyTunes said:
There is certainly a role for small battery EV’s, but I’d suggest it’s urban/commuting rather than sports cars.
Unless someone is using a sports car for the illusion and in reality just pottering around the shops locally as they would with a Jazz. Until the step change in energy storage density the EV sports car is the least relevant of all EV options where the local potterer is at the polar opposite.
But this car isn't intended for sale or use beyond reprinting 'look at us' PR articles for fund raising.
Interesting the comments in the BBC article that suggests a lack of confidence/some issues yet to solve: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz9dp3ye77do#:...
LooneyTunes said:
Agree. It seems to be a couple of years since their Series B so they’ve probably smoked that cash by now (haven’t checked if they’ve raised more).
Interesting the comments in the BBC article that suggests a lack of confidence/some issues yet to solve: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz9dp3ye77do#:...
More this May from the FBC pool, hence the need to be running a spot of PR. Interesting the comments in the BBC article that suggests a lack of confidence/some issues yet to solve: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz9dp3ye77do#:...
The issue is that it's not really a business but just a conventional uni research team working under funding programs and hoping to IPO and buy a house and Ferrari.
But while there is no evidence of the degradation claims they have at least publicly shown the fast charging but any battery can be fast charged it's the amount of damage done that matters.
The huge sums of money now washing around the Western race to catch up with the Chinese does mean there is an escalation in fraud so it's important to be wary.
https://medium.com/batterybits/preventing-fraud-in...
DonkeyApple said:
LooneyTunes said:
Agree. It seems to be a couple of years since their Series B so they’ve probably smoked that cash by now (haven’t checked if they’ve raised more).
Interesting the comments in the BBC article that suggests a lack of confidence/some issues yet to solve: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz9dp3ye77do#:...
More this May from the FBC pool, hence the need to be running a spot of PR. Interesting the comments in the BBC article that suggests a lack of confidence/some issues yet to solve: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz9dp3ye77do#:...
The issue is that it's not really a business but just a conventional uni research team working under funding programs and hoping to IPO and buy a house and Ferrari.
But while there is no evidence of the degradation claims they have at least publicly shown the fast charging but any battery can be fast charged it's the amount of damage done that matters.
The huge sums of money now washing around the Western race to catch up with the Chinese does mean there is an escalation in fraud so it's important to be wary.
https://medium.com/batterybits/preventing-fraud-in...
Sadly, tech commercialisation is something that UK academic institutions really struggle with. They all like the idea, but few manage the execution - IMO often due to failing to bring in proper commercial startup/scale up expertise.
LooneyTunes said:
Sadly, tech commercialisation is something that UK academic institutions really struggle with. They all like the idea, but few manage the execution - IMO often due to failing to bring in proper commercial startup/scale up expertise.
that's cause they're academic institutions, they exist to extend the bounds of knowledge not commercialise existing knowledge. it's what they were conceived to do, it's what they are set up to do, it's what motivates the people who go there to study and work there. the criticism that is much more meaningful is to say that UK companies struggle to commercialise new technology. it's much more reasonable to contend that it should be the commercial sector that does this, rather than the academic sector.
(the CSO wouldn't be full time on this venture, in my view. She's a prof at Cambridge and is probably way more interested in actual science - doing the first 80% - than in fine tuning something we already know to get the last 20% needed to put it into boring powerpoints and sell it to grey men. I know I would be, anyway.)
Edited by PlywoodPascal on Monday 1st July 10:58
Edited by PlywoodPascal on Monday 1st July 10:58
Regrettably UK doesn't have the financial/commercial horsepower to deliver the dreams politicians keep pushing that the country becoming a "world beating" hub for what you might call technical manufacturing.
UK has appropriate research activity in science parks around the major universities but, unlike California, lacks the next step which is major manufacturing plants. The domestic market isn't big enough and many global companies look askance at UK's decision to turn its back on Europe. The politicians' promises of "free trade agreements" here, there and everywhere have come to nothing. There's just too little stability for the huge capital commitments required to build big manufacturing plants and the cost of doing business here is very high compared with the Far East.
20 years ago it would have been difficult to foresee the huge steps forward that have been achieved with phone, laptop and electric car batteries. The next 20 years may see at least as much change again but I don't think it will be led by the UK.
UK has appropriate research activity in science parks around the major universities but, unlike California, lacks the next step which is major manufacturing plants. The domestic market isn't big enough and many global companies look askance at UK's decision to turn its back on Europe. The politicians' promises of "free trade agreements" here, there and everywhere have come to nothing. There's just too little stability for the huge capital commitments required to build big manufacturing plants and the cost of doing business here is very high compared with the Far East.
20 years ago it would have been difficult to foresee the huge steps forward that have been achieved with phone, laptop and electric car batteries. The next 20 years may see at least as much change again but I don't think it will be led by the UK.
PlywoodPascal said:
LooneyTunes said:
Sadly, tech commercialisation is something that UK academic institutions really struggle with. They all like the idea, but few manage the execution - IMO often due to failing to bring in proper commercial startup/scale up expertise.
that's cause they're academic institutions, they exist to extend the bounds of knowledge not commercialise existing knowledge. it's what they were conceived to do, it's what they are set up to do, it's what motivates the people who go there to study and work there. the criticism that is much more meaningful is to say that UK companies struggle to commercialise new technology. it's much more reasonable to contend that it should be the commercial sector that does this, rather than the academic sector.
(the CSO wouldn't be full time on this venture, in my view. She's a prof at Cambridge and is probably way more interested in actual science - doing the first 80% - than in fine tuning something we already know to get the last 20% needed to put it into boring powerpoints and sell it to grey men. I know I would be, anyway.)
Ventures where a supposedly senior exec of the firm (especially a co-founder) isn't fully committed rarely work out (and certainly aren't easy to raise VC/PE money for).
IMO the best model for this sort of tech commercialisation is for the academics to play to their strengths, recognise their weaknesses (or areas of disinterest) and bring in people who are complementary to their own skill sets. Spin-offs from academia rarely seem to do this, perhaps because:
1) There are relatively few people with the skillset to manage scientists/techies whilst building a company;
2) The skill set that's needed tends to be motivated and wired differently to pure scientists;
3) It's human nature for some people (I've been guilty of this too in the past) to hold on to too much.
There's also a huge difference fine tuning and selling the tech vs building a company of any real scale that sells real products and/or services.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff