I will also say (as a bit of a designer myself), I'm quite confident that EV designers wanted to make incredibly bold choices. It's not enough to stuff an electric motor in a Civic, then no one really knows it's an EV. Designing a new form of transportation is not only a designer's worst fear, it's their greatest opportunity. Of the dozens of EVs that were redesigned from the ground up, some of them will define the new normal for automotive design. If I had been a designer for Dodge or Ford, I would be going crazy. Making mustangs and Chargers that are supposed to look new but adhere to strict design cues that evoke nostalgia and stay true to the heritage of the car's history. Then all those designers heard that companies are doing EVs and all you need is your imagination and a pencil. Carte blanche. Design a car from scratch. That would be my dream.
Think about the jump from the boxy motorized carriages of the 20s to the Dusenbergs and Cords of the 30s. Or from the boxy, straight lines of the 60s to the swoopy pudgy lines of the 70s. Or for that matter, think of nearly every new Bimmer design. I remember when the E65 replaced the E38, or the E46 replaced the E36. I thought BMW was nuts. I thought they were hideously ugly. But BMW seemed to have the knack for almost predicting design desirability. Or think about the big three and their diesel pickup wars for the last 30 years. Ever since Dodge made a truck in the early 90s that looked more like a Freightliner, the war was on.
I think designers of EVs are taking chances and re-defining art. It may not be something you care about, or something you like. Not everyone likes Picasso.
mtn (Forum Supporter) said:
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:
My point (from my personal perspective) is that I don't care how long it takes to charge batteries, I will just accept it and alter my range/travel time accordingly. If I had a Crown Vic and wanted to travel cross country, I realize it would take me about 4 days when you factor in sleeping and 5-minute gas stops every 300 miles. If I wanted to take a Tesla cross country, I realize it would take me 5-6 days with an hour every 300 miles for recharging.
I realize I'm probably more chill than most, I'm simply saying that I DGAF how it impacts my daily travel times. I also realize that most of the world doesn't view things that way. I know there will be a majority of people that will be shopping for a new car and look at the ICE version with a 400 mile range, and the EV version with a 300 mile range, and they'll pick the ICE just "because 400 miles." I'm just saying that I ain't one of those persons.
The only reasons I don't have an EV as my commuter is because A) not in my price range yet, B) I need a full size truck/van for work and towing and having two vehicles simply for two different purposes kinda further violates reason "A." But as soon as it becomes feasible for me, I'm down with EVV like Marky Mark.
From Yankee stadium to Dodger Stadium, it is Only 12 hours more in a long range model 3 than it is in a normal car. That is assuming 9 Fuel stops at 5 minutes each in the Crown Vic.
Also, the EV can recharge every night while you sleep, so there's one recharge stop per day. Also, if you stop to eat, that's another "free" recharge. So the actual time spent just waiting to charge is a lot less than you think. Refer back to my friends who actually tried it.
^I think its hilarious that this is even used as an example. What % of drivers in the US actually do a coast to coast blitz? 0.01%?
I've done that once in my life. Not in my own car, and I will never do it again. There is no way that would be part of my criteria for a car purchase.
I feel like my daily schedule is pretty normal, but apparently not. I could drive an EV for all daily use with only 110v charging and the only impact it would have on me is I would spend less time at gas stations. I've made one trip, maybe 2 (depending on the EV chosen) in the past 2 years that would require me to charge during the trip.
RevolverRob said:
What if you go with the Imperial Death March from Star Wars?
That would be AWESOME!!! Although only for about 5 min. Then, meh.
Side note; I went to see the first one in the local theater, back in what, 77 or so? I did notice something about episode III, but didn't pay it any atention at the time!
I has just read some science fiction book with something similar to the light sabers in it (called a force knife) so when I saw the previews, I had to check it out.
preach (fs) said:
My EV song:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30QzJKCUekQ
Same answer as above. Great choice, though.
I don't remember what OddBall played from his tank going into battel in Kelly's Heros, but same concept.
In reply to ProDarwin :
Now that I no longer travel, and life may not ever let me again, an EV for my 90 mile commute (45 x 2) would be fine for 80% of my driving. And we don't have as high of demands on an outdated electric grid out here in the backwoods. But the very citys than want a ban to happen, are where the worst of the brownouts and blackouts happen. Will the US be ready for that in 14 years? Maybe, but not when most folks don't even want to admit that it is a real problem, and not just a myth.
As soon as I can get a EV that will meet my needs, and cost me as little to own and operate as my Grand-Ma Quis, over the next several years, I'm interested.
I love to drive cross country. I've done it 5 times (one way trips not round) in my Cayman in the last 4 years. EV would be a buzz kill. BUT a trip up the coast in CA would be great as there are charging places all over.
Panther, I saw A New Hope 22 times in the theater when I was a kid due to my mom having a class at Penn State that made the matinee an easy sitter for a 7yo.
In reply to ProDarwin :
I find that kinda music... well... ludicrous
And completely inappropriate for anyone in public. But it does actually fit!!!
P. S The old farts didn't appreciate me blasting out Lynyrd Skynyrd on my 8-track as I rolled by in my Merc. back then, so nothing has changed!
Appleseed said:
In reply to ShinnyGroove (Forum Supporter) :
I dont think it's more of "Are are EVs Feasible?" because they are. It's more of how long will it take electric to surpass fuel it terms of practically. If the mass banning of ICE by 2035 is a reality, rural citizens have to be accounted for. I'm hoping the next 14 years of development are mind blowing.
Te LAST 14 years of development have been mind blowing, and this was without as big of an incentive. More people WANT EVs now that they see that they aren't awful lead-acid battery DC motor things like they used to be. There's a lot of money to be made if they can come to market with a good product.
I like Teslas not because of the cars themselves, I think they're kinda awful, but I like the IDEA of what is actually possible today, and what the future holds when established automakers get geared up. It's kind of like when Audi started doing well in stage rally with the Quattro. The cars themselves were awful, and Audi could barely figure out how to empty sand from a boot with directions on the heel as far as building a competitve rally car... but the makes who DID understand rally soon came up with their own all wheel drive cars and instantly dominated.
THAT is what I am looking forward to. Serious EVs from companies like GM and Ford and the like. The Bolt looks VERY interesting and I wish I'd known about it sooner..
Plus, if people flock to EVs all on their own, mandates like this become fairly well pointless. I do agree that an all-or-nothing mandate is a bit silly since there are still many valid reasons to have an ICE vehicle, but if it turns out that, say, 90% of all new-vehicle sales are EV by 2035, why bother halting their sale?
In reply to ProDarwin and Keith Tanner:
Yes, excellent points. Keith, I was thinking about your thread documenting your friend's cross country trip when I typed this up. I'd imagine that the hotel charging brings it down to an actual real world difference of about 6 hours, or less.
I continue to look for use cases that an EV isn't suited for. They're very few and very, very far between.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:
Te LAST 14 years of development have been mind blowing, and this was without as big of an incentive. More people WANT EVs now that they see that they aren't awful lead-acid battery DC motor things like they used to be. There's a lot of money to be made if they can come to market with a good product.
I like Teslas not because of the cars themselves, I think they're kinda awful, but I like the IDEA of what is actually possible today, and what the future holds when established automakers get geared up. It's kind of like when Audi started doing well in stage rally with the Quattro. The cars themselves were awful, and Audi could barely figure out how to empty sand from a boot with directions on the heel as far as building a competitve rally car... but the makes who DID understand rally soon came up with their own all wheel drive cars and instantly dominated.
THAT is what I am looking forward to. Serious EVs from companies like GM and Ford and the like. The Bolt looks VERY interesting and I wish I'd known about it sooner..
Plus, if people flock to EVs all on their own, mandates like this become fairly well pointless. I do agree that an all-or-nothing mandate is a bit silly since there are still many valid reasons to have an ICE vehicle, but if it turns out that, say, 90% of all new-vehicle sales are EV by 2035, why bother halting their sale?
I am 100% in agreement with all but the question at the end. I do not understand the point of the question, 'cause I don't think anyone has promoted halting (or hindering, even) EV sales.At least not on this thread.
EV's have been improving by leaps and bounds. And thats a good thing. Mandates, bad. Options, good!!!
In reply to 03Panther :
Halting ICE sales, is what I meant.
Ah, then I am in agreement 100%!!! And well said, sir.
From other post of yours, I was not aware you felt his way.
Real question tho; what song would you have play out of your EV at low speeds? Assuming you get some ~20 seconds of play time?
Rigght now, i'm feeling some Vapor remixes of Tame Impala
Appleseed said:
ProDarwin said:
^I think its hilarious that this is even used as an example. What % of drivers in the US actually do a coast to coast blitz? 0.01%?
I've done that once in my life. Not in my own car, and I will never do it again. There is no way that would be part of my criteria for a car purchase.
I feel like my daily schedule is pretty normal, but apparently not. I could drive an EV for all daily use with only 110v charging and the only impact it would have on me is I would spend less time at gas stations. I've made one trip, maybe 2 (depending on the EV chosen) in the past 2 years that would require me to charge during the trip.
Semi drivers.
Actually, the hour of service regulations for professional drivers mean that you actually have a fair window of potential (had har) charge time. Mandated 30 minute lunch breaks, no more than 10h of driving in a 14h window (iirc) and a maximum number of on-duty hours in a certain number of days. I've posted before that a commercial driver driving from Grand Junction to Las Vegas (500 miles) would take the same amount of time as a Tesla. And the the truck would have to gas up in the morning as the Tesla leaves with a full battery. Once you start paying attention, the delta is not as big as you think.
Get a driving partner and it would be harder for the truck to keep up.
Personally, I see long-haul semis as one of the last to change over from ICE.
However, semis seem like almost the perfect use case for a hybrid + CVT. Extra torque to start off, no need for 18 speed transmissions, and regenerative braking. Seems to me like they would get faster acceleration and higher efficiency at the same time.
I'm guessing there are some pretty big engineering hurdles there though and that's why we haven't seen it happen.
Long haul trucks are about the only place where I think hydrogen might win out, and even then it's not a sure thing as the pace of BEVs keeps going. Nikola was talking a good game but turned out to be a snake oil product.
Keith Tanner said:
Long haul trucks are about the only place where I think hydrogen might win out, and even then it's not a sure thing as the pace of BEVs keeps going. Nikola was talking a good game but turned out to be a snake oil product.
I read some analysis projecting Tesla getting their cost down to around $55/kwhr by 2025. At that price, even a 500-1000kwhr battery is feasible. The weight may be a concern though - I'm not sure how much their design improvements impact weight.
ProDarwin said:
Personally, I see long-haul semis as one of the last to change over from ICE.
However, semis seem like almost the perfect use case for a hybrid + CVT. Extra torque to start off, no need for 18 speed transmissions, and regenerative braking. Seems to me like they would get faster acceleration and higher efficiency at the same time.
I'm guessing there are some pretty big engineering hurdles there though and that's why we haven't seen it happen.
Weight would be the largest hurdle. Every pound in the tractor is a pound that cannot be hauled, because of gross vehicle weight limits.
I've heard of truckers being loaded so tight to the weight limits that they had to run 100 mile hops between fuel stops, because filling the fuel tanks all the way would put them overweight.
That is also why they don't run APUs for cabin heat/air conditioning when parked overnight. An APU would save fuel relative to letting the engine run overnight, and could also be used to keep the coolant and oil up to temperature. But, it's added weight.
The engineering hurdles are non-hurdles. Locomotives have been Diesel-electric for a very long time, and even a lot of mining equipment is too. Turning that into a series hybrid just requires sticking a battery pack in there somewhere. Heck, the locomotives use the electric motors for "engine" braking, but they don't charge a battery with regen, they just have a huge resistor bank to burn off the generated electricity as waste heat.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:
The engineering hurdles are non-hurdles. Locomotives have been Diesel-electric for a very long time, and even a lot of mining equipment is too. Turning that into a series hybrid just requires sticking a battery pack in there somewhere. Heck, the locomotives use the electric motors for "engine" braking, but they don't charge a battery with regen, they just have a huge resistor bank to burn off the generated electricity as waste heat.
I don't mean that its not possible. I mean there is some cost, weight or performance metric (or combo of the 3) that can't be achieved.
In reply to ProDarwin :
I wonder if a turbine engine would be lighter enough than a Diesel engine.... Hmm. It could run on the same fuel, at least.
New problem: Emissions controls on a turbine
Pete. (l33t FS) said:
In reply to ProDarwin :
I wonder if a turbine engine would be lighter enough than a Diesel engine.... Hmm. It could run on the same fuel, at least.
New problem: Emissions controls on a turbine
GE built turbine locomotives for Union Pacific in the 50s & 60s. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Pacific_GTELs
