TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

Tesla to make gas-electric car

Discussion in 'Model S' started by donauker, Feb 1, 2008.

  1. donauker

    donauker Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2006
    Messages:
    757
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #1 donauker, Feb 1, 2008
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2008
    Tesla to make gas-electric car

    Interesting way to put it. I always thought it was called being an idiot and running out of gas.
     
  2. doug

    doug Administrator / Head Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    15,914
    Location:
    Stanford, California
    #2 doug, Feb 1, 2008
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2008
    That was a really poorly written article.

    As an example, the author uses that "completely conking" line twice.
     
  3. mt2

    mt2 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    544
    Location:
    Chicago Area, Northwest Burbs
    #3 mt2, Feb 1, 2008
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2008
    REV?

    Did they get that wrong? Or are we now calling them Range Extended Vehicles instead of REEVs. Or was it E-REV? Maybe we should call them RVs - er, no...

    Assuming that the article is accurate, it's good to see that REEV (REV, whatever) will be an option. I'll just have to make sure I'm wearing my glasses when I check the box for BEV.
     
  4. stopcrazypp

    stopcrazypp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    7,056
    Hmm, I suppose it makes sense to supply both options so people who want a REV (or REEV) can get one if they want. However, the design of a REEV is significantly different than an BEV, and the Whitestar will have to accomodate both in its body. That's a little worrying as that means it's unlikely the chassis will integrate the battery pack to save weight, but we already knew the Whitestar wouldn't get much weight reduction.

    I hope they really assess their plan of doing both beforehand because I can see that the REEV might not necessarily save money, and might even raise the price of both versions esp if they run into problems again. The BEV is more straightforward as that have experience from the Roadster already. If GM's Volt is any indication, the parts for a REEV is likely cheaper (esp true for GM since they have been working with ICE the whole time), but the design is much more complicated, so Tesla has their work cut out for them.
     
  5. doug

    doug Administrator / Head Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    15,914
    Location:
    Stanford, California
    In another example of poor writing, the article keeps using the article "an" as in "an REV." My guess is at one point it might have said, "an E-REV."
    Though, I definitely prefer REEV to E-REV.
     
  6. mt2

    mt2 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    544
    Location:
    Chicago Area, Northwest Burbs
    I didn't catch that. I'm guessing that means they were spelling it out; "an ahr ee vee." So it could mean that the author heard "an ahr ee ee vee" and just got confused about what he heard.
     
  7. domenick

    domenick Nerd

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    600
    Location:
    Florida
    God, when will they ever learn. It's an EVRx for cryin' out loud!
    I think GM went with E-REV so they can have an E-REVolution marketing scheme.

    A Tesla with an internal combustion engine sounds like a bad idea to me. But, what the hell do I know.
     
  8. tonybelding

    tonybelding Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,091
    Location:
    Hamilton, Texas
    It's a PHEV, people. A Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle.

    Tesla and GM can't decide from one day to the next what they want to call these things. The only thing they can agree is that they're desperate to avoid calling them any kind of hybrid, even though that's exactly what they are. They're afraid people will hear "hybrid" and think Prius.

    I say to Hell with their marketing spin! A PHEV is a PHEV, and a lot of confusion will be saved all around if we just call them what they are.
     
  9. domenick

    domenick Nerd

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    600
    Location:
    Florida
    Yah, you could say PHEV. I just like the way EVRx sounds. PHEV sounds like something that happens after I eat too much cabbage. ^_^
     
  10. DDB

    DDB Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    590
    Tony, I think there's a lot of people that would diagree with this statement. I'd imagine, whoever wins this war (which may turn out to be something like Pepsi vs Coke as opposed to Blue Ray vs HD), will decide what we call range extended vehicles.

    Regardless, I'm optimisitc that Tesla will let me choose to buy a BEV sedan at about half the price of a Roadster.
     
  11. raymond

    raymond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    Messages:
    345
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Elon's Roadster in Amsterdam?!

    In a related article it says:

    The company originally expected the first production Roadster to arrive Tuesday, but a missed connection in Amsterdam delayed the arrival (see Missed Flight Gives Tesla Another Headache).

    It will probably be quite a while before we get the next Tesla in the Netherlands. :frown: Such a pity...
     
  12. tonybelding

    tonybelding Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,091
    Location:
    Hamilton, Texas
    Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that Tesla announce they are going to drop the "REV" handle and start calling them MFDVs -- Magic Fairy Dust Vehicles. Would you accept that?

    All I'm asking for is something that's descriptive and not misleading. REEV and REV are poor descriptions and they are misleading.


    I suspected for a while that they would do this. It makes sense.
     
  13. Cobos

    Cobos S60 owner since 2013

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,267
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    Tony: I don't see what is misleading with the REEV name ? Personally my only hope is that we reserve the EV name for anything that has an electric motor and electric motor only to drive the wheels. So most of these mild hybrids are not EV's they are electrical assist ICE vehicles while both a BEV and REEV are pure electrical vehicles. Though they store the energy in different ways and one is zero-emission while the other is not.

    Cobos
     
  14. donauker

    donauker Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2006
    Messages:
    757
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    I agree that there is definitely a place for the REEV term as far as I am concerned. To me it is good identifier for a particular category of PHEV which is a category of Hybrid Vehicles which is a category of Vehicles in general. After my Roadster arrives, my next vehicle purchase will almost certainly be a REEV.

    I have no interest in a PHEV that requires the ICE to run to do anything more than gentle acceleration or to provide cabin heat. I will only purchase a vehicle that is a full capability electric vehicle for at least 40 - 50 miles. I also believe that if I plug in my REEV every night and only drive it less then 40 miles a day it is just as much an electric vehicle as my Roadster that I drive less then 40 miles a day. In one case I am carrying around an ICE which I never use and in the other case I am carrying around a lot of extra batteries.
     
  15. tonybelding

    tonybelding Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,091
    Location:
    Hamilton, Texas
    It doesn't give any hint that there is an internal combustion engine on board, or that the vehicle derives any of its power from gasoline (or diesel, or biofuels). "Range-extended electric vehicle" sounds like an electric car with some kind of super battery. Or maybe a really long extension cord. That's misleading.


    I keep hearing this, but I can't figure out why anybody thinks it would matter to ordinary people. Ordinary people care about things like:

    Can I plug it in? Do I have to plug it in?

    Can I fill it at a gas pump? Do I have to fill it at a gas pump?

    If you start to talk to most people who are not gearheads about what is or is not connected to some shaft, or gear, or mechanism in the power train, their eyes will glaze over. It's not their problem.


    Except that it's not, in fact, a pure electrical vehicle. This is the thing that worries me the most. . . That electric cars will become the next big fad, and companies will try to cash in by selling "100% pure electric vehicles" that are primarily (or entirely) powered by filling them from a gas pump. GM and Tesla are both paving the way for that to happen.
     
  16. doug

    doug Administrator / Head Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    15,914
    Location:
    Stanford, California
    #16 doug, Feb 2, 2008
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2008
    Tesla defies its roots, plans gas-electric car for 2009 - Engadget

    Engadget picked up the CNET article and is now also calling it a "REV (range extended vehicle)." I think REV must be a mistake by CNET since "Range Extended Vehicle" is a pretty meaningless term. REEV at least tells you there's an EV in there. E-REV, recently coined by GM, is pure marketing and I think was created to go along with E-FLEX, since otherwise that hyphen placement makes no sense.
     
  17. tonybelding

    tonybelding Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,091
    Location:
    Hamilton, Texas
    Nissan's 100% Pure Electric Vehicle

    No sooner had I posted my message above than I went to AutoblogGreen and found this:

    How does Nissan's battery-free e-4WD work? - AutoblogGreen

    Yep. It's a 100% pure electric vehicle -- as defined by GM and Tesla -- which has no batteries, no plug, and derives all of its power from an internal combustion engine burning gasoline. The ultimate REEV. Is this our future?
     
  18. donauker

    donauker Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2006
    Messages:
    757
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #18 donauker, Feb 2, 2008
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2008
    Actually I don't see anyone calling this a pure electric vehicle or a REEV for that mater. This is the exact setup of one of the most used series hybrids around. The train locomotive.

    This is exactly the reason why I support the REEV term as applied to the VOLT or a REEV Whitestar. It clearly identifies the the radical difference from this series hybrid implementation.

    On further review it isn't even a series hybrid it just has electric rear wheel drive added to a regular FWD vehicle.
     
  19. malcolm

    malcolm Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Messages:
    2,143
    #19 malcolm, Feb 2, 2008
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2008
    How about FEV, for Fuelled Electric Vehicle?

    There will also need to be a way of comparing battery-only range to total range 15%/85% or something like that.
     
  20. stopcrazypp

    stopcrazypp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    7,056
    Actually the PHEV designation will do exactly that, it will separate those that don't have a plug from those that do. It puts a parallel PHEV-40 and a series PHEV-40 at the same level. The only thing the REEV term does is it makes the series PHEV sound that much better. Like it's MORE of an electric car and MORE green than a parallel PHEV (basically GM's strategy against Toyota's prius as mentioned, and also the recent "war" with GM backing series and Toyota backing parallel). In other words, it's marketing speech.

    Though I don't think people will call that e-4WD a REEV, I see no reason they can't as REEV just means a Range extended electric vehicle, which means as long as there is a range extender on an EV drive train (regardless if there is a plug or not), they can still call it a "range extended electric vehicle" since the term is ambiguous enough in terms of its english meaning that one can do that. It is just GM's marketing department attempting to create a new term to make their car sound better.

    In fact, I think the PHEV designation and convention is actually very good. It tells you the car is a plug-in hybrid, meaning it has both an EV drivetrain, likely a ICE based generator/engine (as implied by the hybrid term), and also can be plugged in. PHEV-(miles) tells you exactly how many miles you get in EV mode and this is also an established convention (for example PHEV-40 PHEV-10 PHEV-20 terms used before). The REEV doesn't use an equivalent convention. Also, you can add series or parallel to the front of the PHEV term and it tells you exactly what type you have. "Series PHEV-40" tells you all of the relavant information about the Volt, while the REEV term doesn't really tell you much.

    The only function the REEV (or E-REV or REV or whatever) serves is to make the series PHEV sound better. I'm not going to strongly resist it because if the marketing departments push hard enough, the term will be accepted as it is now. However, I think Tony has a point in that the PHEV term and conventions are already very good and the REEV doesn't really improve on that.

    On a side note, I do have some rebuttal to what I am saying. Using the series PHEV designation, many of the media reporting on the Volt dropped off the "series", a main difference between existing hybrids and the Volt. Then some even just called the Volt a hybrid, which makes it sound as if the Volt didn't really have a significant EV range. So GM came out strongly to invent the REEV term so that lazy reporters won't miss the major differences.
    However, my point still stands, the REEV term is designed specifically to separate from the prius or a future plug-in prius. It is designed to specifically make the series PHEV Volt sound like more of an EV and more green, when an equivalent parallel PHEV-40 will be on the same level. By using the REEV term, I see many GM advocates argue that the Volt is a pure electric car (Bob Lutz seems to refer to it that way too). When I referred to it as a PHEV, I had one person respond to me "f* you, the Volt is an electric car it's not a hybrid!" It seems the REEV term made them forget the Volt only gets 40 miles in EV mode with a VAST majority of its range given by the ICE.
     

Share This Page