-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Chevrolet Spark EV
- Thread starter graham
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Electric Vehicles
TonyWilliams
Active Member
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Bodes well for the Gen III Tesla.. If GM can do it carrying around the extra wt of the iron phosphate, Tesla should be able to average 180 wh/mile; That'll really push down the price of the car, instead of 50 kwhr, they may be able to get away with 40 kwhr.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Weight means less than aerodynamics for steady state long distance driving, which this test was, and where range really matters. The G3 will have a larger frontal surface area than the SparkEV but I'm sure it will have a better coefficient of drag so I'd expect a better overall aero value. I don't think the G3 will get less than 200wh/mi but I do expect it to be in that range, which means it could get 200 miles from a 45kWh pack, which could keep the base model price down. The SparkEV is 3000lbs, I hope the G3 can come in around 3500lbs.
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
Spark EV has more torque than a Tesla Model S 60???
I haven't had a chance to drive it yet, but looking through the materials I could find online I was stuck by this little fact:
Spark EV: 400 ft lbs of torque (brilliantly the GM website calls it 400 lbs/ft).
Model S 60: 325 ft lbs of torque.
Wow. That must be a fun car to drive. But then with that brutal amount of torque, why only a 7.6 sec 0-60 time?
I haven't had a chance to drive it yet, but looking through the materials I could find online I was stuck by this little fact:
Spark EV: 400 ft lbs of torque (brilliantly the GM website calls it 400 lbs/ft).
Model S 60: 325 ft lbs of torque.
Wow. That must be a fun car to drive. But then with that brutal amount of torque, why only a 7.6 sec 0-60 time?
scottf200
Well-Known Member
It is about efficiency.
http://insideevs.com/gm-general-says-spark-evs-400lb-ft-of-torque-no-misprint/
Peter Savagian, who is GM’s General Director for for Electric Drives and Electrification Systems Engineering
http://insideevs.com/gm-general-says-spark-evs-400lb-ft-of-torque-no-misprint/
Peter Savagian, who is GM’s General Director for for Electric Drives and Electrification Systems Engineering
TonyWilliams
Active Member
Spark EV: 400 ft lbs * 3.18 gear reduction = 1272ft/lbs for 3000 pound car
Model S 60: 325 ft lbs * 9.73 gear reduction = 3162ft/lbs for 4600 pound car
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
Excellent way to put this into perspective. Thank you for that.
BTW: the unit for torque really is ft * lbs in silly imperial measurements (N*m in the sane part of the world) - not ft/lbs...
The obvious next question is: what's the comparable gear reduction for the Ferrari that GM quotes in its commercial?
According to this total gear reduction in 1st gear would be 3.08 * 5.14 = 15.8 which would give the Ferrari 458 a total of 398 * 15.8 = 6300 ft lbs for a 3500 pound car... which explains the 3s 0-60 time
(oh and it gets a combined 14 miles/gallon so with 22 gallon tank it has a slightly bigger range than a P85+
)And thanks to the mod who moved this into the correct thread...
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Another factor is that the Spark motor probably doesn't carry it's peak torque as far into the RPM range as the S, and power is torque x rpm. I'd love to take the Spark motor and mate it to a 2 or 3 speed transmission.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
GM wrong about itself
Actually GM is wrong when admitting the Spark was not designed as an EV.
It actually was, just not thoroughly, because it was one of the earliest ones.
Spark is basically a reworked Daewoo Matiz, which was originally designed
by Italdesign for a partnership between FIAT and the EV drive train pioneer
Miro Zoric, who created the first inverters for AC motors, yes, even those
in the Tesla. First for industrial use and then for automotive use. He
also made first drive trains for GM's EV1, for instance... AC motors
were a non existing option for cars before that. They were not
controllable. In a way, due to that breakthrough, today batteries
are the narrow throat, since AC drive trains are usable and efficient
now.
Anyway, what was later known as Matiz, was originally intended to be FIAT's first
electric car. A small but zippy city commuter. Due to administrative issues, Gianni Agnelli's desire to have each FIAT model also have an electric version by 2000, was put aside and Daewoo bought the Matiz design and GM later bought Daewoo
and renamed Matiz into the Spark. So in terms of legacy, the Spark did start out
as a would be EV, but not in the way most would think.
And it was originally supposed to have an AC motor and lead acid batteries, since
Mr. Zoric only made rechargeable zinc air batteries (first one in the world)
slightly later, in 1997. Because they would take up more space than lad acid, the
little car would have lead acid batteries initially and zinc airs were used in buses
and trucks. Some trivia
Actually GM is wrong when admitting the Spark was not designed as an EV.
It actually was, just not thoroughly, because it was one of the earliest ones.
Spark is basically a reworked Daewoo Matiz, which was originally designed
by Italdesign for a partnership between FIAT and the EV drive train pioneer
Miro Zoric, who created the first inverters for AC motors, yes, even those
in the Tesla. First for industrial use and then for automotive use. He
also made first drive trains for GM's EV1, for instance... AC motors
were a non existing option for cars before that. They were not
controllable. In a way, due to that breakthrough, today batteries
are the narrow throat, since AC drive trains are usable and efficient
now.
Anyway, what was later known as Matiz, was originally intended to be FIAT's first
electric car. A small but zippy city commuter. Due to administrative issues, Gianni Agnelli's desire to have each FIAT model also have an electric version by 2000, was put aside and Daewoo bought the Matiz design and GM later bought Daewoo
and renamed Matiz into the Spark. So in terms of legacy, the Spark did start out
as a would be EV, but not in the way most would think.
And it was originally supposed to have an AC motor and lead acid batteries, since
Mr. Zoric only made rechargeable zinc air batteries (first one in the world)
slightly later, in 1997. Because they would take up more space than lad acid, the
little car would have lead acid batteries initially and zinc airs were used in buses
and trucks. Some trivia
If it is 'newton meters' then torque is properly 'pound feet' (lb ft).
So GM chose a massive low rpm motor for the Spark. Hope they had more reason to do this than just being able to brag about '>400 lb ft'. It is meaningless to brag about this figure since it is the power applied to the road by the tires that determines a car's performance. But having a low rpm motor can indeed be quieter overall with less gear shifting, noise & driver fuss. Thus I want to test drive one whenever that becomes possible. :smile:
--
So GM chose a massive low rpm motor for the Spark. Hope they had more reason to do this than just being able to brag about '>400 lb ft'. It is meaningless to brag about this figure since it is the power applied to the road by the tires that determines a car's performance. But having a low rpm motor can indeed be quieter overall with less gear shifting, noise & driver fuss. Thus I want to test drive one whenever that becomes possible. :smile:
--
Thanks. I've been reading it for a long time and I figured it is time to join. The Matiz was a popular small city car in Europe and also in parts of Asia of course.
It is funny how Agnelli really wanted to make FIAT unique again and how today they make a great car, but only as a compliance car and are really weird about
electric cars simply because they can't turn a profit on them over night. As if they don't firs invest hundreds of millions of Dollars in each new ICE and have
in all their current tech. Agnelli had more innovative spirit in him than today's leaders. Anyways, the related motors initially intended for the predecessor of
the Matiz/Spark, then went into Think cars (bought by Ford which is how Ford got the AC based drive train knowledge) and later into Mercedes A class
and also for smart I think. Both cars were initially designed to be electric cars, which is why the A for instance has room under the cabin for batteries
and was rolling over in the subsequent ICE version, after the electric plan was scrapped. The low center of gravity which the batteries in the floor,
like with Tesla, was not there anymore so they rolled over when moose testing the cars.
Oh, the Tesla AC drive train link is from the EV1 program, via AC propulsion, made up of folks from the program.
Basically the entire AC drive train history in automotive use stems from one guy initially.
We would kind of need something like that for batteries now. To make the leap. He was doing with with zinc air
but they are still too bulky and too soft. When this second leap happens, the game will change within a few years.
It is funny how Agnelli really wanted to make FIAT unique again and how today they make a great car, but only as a compliance car and are really weird about
electric cars simply because they can't turn a profit on them over night. As if they don't firs invest hundreds of millions of Dollars in each new ICE and have
in all their current tech. Agnelli had more innovative spirit in him than today's leaders. Anyways, the related motors initially intended for the predecessor of
the Matiz/Spark, then went into Think cars (bought by Ford which is how Ford got the AC based drive train knowledge) and later into Mercedes A class
and also for smart I think. Both cars were initially designed to be electric cars, which is why the A for instance has room under the cabin for batteries
and was rolling over in the subsequent ICE version, after the electric plan was scrapped. The low center of gravity which the batteries in the floor,
like with Tesla, was not there anymore so they rolled over when moose testing the cars.
Oh, the Tesla AC drive train link is from the EV1 program, via AC propulsion, made up of folks from the program.
Basically the entire AC drive train history in automotive use stems from one guy initially.
We would kind of need something like that for batteries now. To make the leap. He was doing with with zinc air
but they are still too bulky and too soft. When this second leap happens, the game will change within a few years.
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
So I drove a Spark EV today.
I have mixed feelings about the car. It's obviously tiny with a ridiculously small trunk. But the thing that really disappointed me the most was its handling under acceleration. The motor is indeed nice and peppy - but with the heavy batteries in the rear and the shift of the CG when accelerating, the front wheels get really light and especially on a wet road (I'm in Oregon, it was pouring rain today) the car gets really squirrely. Not a good feeling.
Add to that the fact that they went with the "break pedal triggers 'real' regen" (go-pedal only does a max of about 8-9kW), the Spark EV doesn't give me the wonderful single pedal driving experience that I learned to love so much in my Model S.
I really wanted to like this car (and we were considering it as a second car...) but I don't think this is going to work out.
I have mixed feelings about the car. It's obviously tiny with a ridiculously small trunk. But the thing that really disappointed me the most was its handling under acceleration. The motor is indeed nice and peppy - but with the heavy batteries in the rear and the shift of the CG when accelerating, the front wheels get really light and especially on a wet road (I'm in Oregon, it was pouring rain today) the car gets really squirrely. Not a good feeling.
Add to that the fact that they went with the "break pedal triggers 'real' regen" (go-pedal only does a max of about 8-9kW), the Spark EV doesn't give me the wonderful single pedal driving experience that I learned to love so much in my Model S.
I really wanted to like this car (and we were considering it as a second car...) but I don't think this is going to work out.
My view is that they used a Volt-spec motor for developmental reasons. It's manufactured in Baltimore. Maybe a cheaper motor for the Gen 2 Volt?
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
