Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Electric Vehicles' started by Doug_G, Mar 1, 2013.
Design News - Fisker Says 'Plug-In Hybrids Make More Sense Than Pure Electrics'
...says the CEO who hasn't built a car in 6 months.
That's what I was thinking...
What does the Fisker production issue have to do with the statement? HEV verse EV is the commentary, that's irrespective of the manufacture. If Company X built two good quality HEV and EV models with similar functionality and confort, which one would be more practical? The analyst suggest the HEV is more practical.
Actually I find his comments disgraceful and dishonorable, but a revelation of his true motives. He choses to very deliberately slam EV's in his own self interest. He obviously has no interests but his own at heart.
I guess everyone has self interest to some extent, but the statement similar to what Henrik is saying is the sentiment of this article -- what's their motivation?
Design News - Captain Hybrid - Auto Execs: Plug-In Hybrids Will Soar, Pure EVs Decline
I was surprised to see 5 were delivered in the Netherlands in february. Inventory cars?
Hmm, to some degree everyone has self interest, even you and I @artsci. Henrik comments are not totally without merit see Design News - Captain Hybrid - Auto Execs: Plug-In Hybrids Will Soar, Pure EVs Decline.
Are you assuming these people were bought and paid for by the PHEV manufactures?
Sorry, but I'm thinking hybrids are the ones that don't make sense long term. I mean, lugging around that big heavy ICE all the time when you only really need to use it a couple of times a year. It just doesn't compute.
Commuting the rule, long road trips the exception. The Model S with the big battery pack will, with Supercharging available, meet 99.9% of my future non-towing driving needs.
Yesterday I did a range charge, drove 40 miles around town (yeah, it was a crazy morning) then drove 70 miles on I-5 to Roseburg with the cruise control set at 73 and the heat on. I plugged into 240v 30A charger for three hours while I met with clients, then unplugged and cruised home in the same manner. Did approximately 10 more miles of driving around town (dinner and a basketball game) and then plugged in at night in my garage. No stress, no gas, and still had about 40 miles of range left. I could have done the whole thing without the charge in the middle by simply driving the speed limit on the way home.
My dad drives his to Salem and back every weekday (roundtrip is about 140 miles). He plugs into a 110v while there which basically keeps the battery warm. Even with the standard charge he has plenty of driving around charge when he gets home. He hasn't been to a gas station since November.
Sure makes a lot of sense to me.
In other news Corn growers say High Fructose Corn Syrup better than sugar!
Grape growers in a small part of France say Champagne is better than sparking wine!
Apple Fanboys say Apple is better than everyone!
PC Fanboys say PCs are better than everyone!
Linux Fanboys still have not been spotted outside of parent's basement! :tongue:
Headline: Plug-in hybrid car maker touts plug-in hybrid cars.
Hmm, see Energy storage: Difference Engine: Air apparent | The Economist
and Design News - Captain Hybrid - Auto Execs: Plug-In Hybrids Will Soar, Pure EVs Decline
they have a diffrent take
Henrik's statements from the Chicago Auto show are old news. Clearly he's going to promote the technology he's trying to sell.
Regarding the headline, though, I will say though that for the near to mid term, plug-in hybrids can make more sense for some people's situations, and will likely appeal to more consumers than pure electric.
How is carrying around a "giant" battery for your commute different than carrying around a similar amount of weight in an ICE (or possibly ICE+G), gas tank, etc. that (hopefully) goes completely unused during said commute?
Sure, larger capacity batteries cost more at time of purchase. But with a PEV, you have to pay to maintain all of the ICE's hoses, camshafts, belts, chains, pistons, cranks, etc. And don't forget that "giant" battery can fit between the floor and the ground, resulting in astounding amounts of usable cargo space. I don't see a sufficiently powerful ICE contorting itself like that. Perhaps a boxer engine with six very small pistons on either side? The crank case would still likely be thicker than the brilliant battery pack design in the Model S. Or a series of 4" Wankel rotors with the long axis parallel to the ground? But you still have to deal with dispersing the excess heat or recapturing it somehow (esp. during non-winter months). Everything has trade-offs.
Also, Fisker (or perhaps clever editing and/or selective content by Design News/UBM Canon) touts the convenience of gas stations without mentioning the convenience of always having a full charge in for the majority of your driving, after plugging in at night. Sure gas stations are more convenient in terms of time-to-refuel for road trips. But where's the love for the majority of trips that are much shorter? It's not like the Karma & Atlantic won't reap this benefit. So why not mention it?
Why is the media so focused on long trips? Is it because it's one of the very few things a gasoline-powered ICE does better than than a BEV?
If you could engineer a way to easily add (& later remove) an ICE for long trips while not significantly sacrificing aerodynamics and other efficiencies, maybe you'd have something. Instead of renting a whole car, rent just the bolt-on-ICE for your long trip. Instead of a plug-in hybrid, you'd have an add-an-ICE BEV. Of course, that's not convenient if you want to leave at the drop of a hat. But how many people drive farther than 150 miles or so at the drop of a hat?
Or, you could just work to increase the battery/superdupercapacitor energy capacity per weight (but not at the expense of volume), decrease the time to charge, and roll out the charging infrastructure. Then Bob's your uncle. Nearly half the Economist article discusses other Lithium-based technologies (air & seawater), which have higher capacity.
Lastly, I'm really interested to see how Model S sales in 2013 will affect the BEV numbers. One of the reasons I'm buying a Model S is because I wanted to wait for something that didn't look like a Leaf or i-MiEV and is available outside of California. My wait will be over in three weeks.
You are right Doug. For instance in Italy and more in general in Europe for the time being plug-in hybrids are more successful than pure electric cars.
But in the long term period when the Supercharger network will be realized also in Europe pure electric cars can overtake plug-in hybrids. I read that the Supercharger network should start to be built in Europe within this year. I am waiting for a confirmation of this news.
I've changed my opinion on the usefulness of PHEVs. I think that they are very helpful to bridge the gap for the moment. I'm sure you'll see in about 5 years, a lot of Volt owners making the complete switch to pure EVs.
As long as the infrastructure is there. Putting aside who the quote came from, I tend to agree. There are some inconveniences to driving electric, and not everyone is going to want to deal with them. A 50 mile EV range with say, 30mpg beyond that would work for just about everyone.
HEV and PHEV are two different things. HEVs (no modifier) tend to be much cheaper than BEVs or PHEVs and are essentially typical ICE vehicles, just more efficient. PHEVs tend to be more expensive than BEVs (compared segment to segment), esp. if you want a decent amount of AER.
And looking at within only one manufacturer is misleading (rather than looking at segment). A manufacturer that focuses mainly on PHEVs (like GM, Toyota or Fisker) will of course try their best to make the PHEV the best car in their line-up. One that focuses on BEVs (Nissan or Tesla) would tend to put more attention on BEVs (and might not even have a PHEV in their line up).
Are you talking about me or Henrik?