That’s the original 1.0 TURBOCHARGED engine. My experience with turbos is that they hurt fuel economy. It also might be the case that frequent start/stops erode turbo life (this was, for sure, the early experience with some turbo engines – getting the thing properly lubed at startup was a problem).

In any event, the Rav4-EV did just fine with a 500cc engine. It was probably lighter than the forever-forthcoming Volt but it also had much poorer aerodynamics.

#126, Mitch,

And then they abandoned the idea. Pity. I wonder who they stole it from? Those coal-and-wood-fired steam car conversions of wartime?

Whatever… the fact remains that GM’s chasing “range anxiety” when smart marketing should realize that a BEV is as good as an RE-EV for anyone with access to a second car for long-range trips. GM’s spinning a lot of gears, burning a lot of cash and taking a lot of time building an overpriced, overly heavy, overly complicated failure when they could get a much simpler vehicle on the road with much less effort.

But these are the decisions when some blowhard – I mean, “visionary” – at the top can make major product decisions in a vacuum.

I’m surprised the Volt isn’t being offered with a pickup body and hideaway hardtop and marketed as a dragster/roadster/coupe/pickup and called the SSR-EV.

“Of course, here’s the real genius of the Rav4-EV-RE effort; the range extender is mounted on a trailer”

It is SHEER GENIUS!!

In fact..THAT IS WHAT GM did with the EV1!! Imagine…

“GM’s 1.4L engine is overkill and is going to hold down ultimate fuel economy.”

Where have you been? The 1.4L is more fuel efficient as a low speed generator drive than the original 1.0 engine. You obviously don’t understand the Volt or ICE’s.

How does it feel to be technically incompetent? Fortunately for you, there is no law in this country against ignorance.

But I’m sure you will keep submitting your brainless posts.

1. Chevrolet Volt
2. 2010 Camaro
3. 2010 Fusion Hybrid
4. 2009 Honda Insight
5. 2010 Prius
6. PRODUCTION Fisker Karma
7. Pontiac G8 GXP
8. Corvette (used 05 C6’s are down around 28k)
9. New Mazda 6
10. New Mazda 3
11. BMW 135i (hopefully there will be one sitting around)
12. – 25. Lots of electric concepts with 2 years-till-production plans

Should be good! Despite all the negative media of automakers pulling out.

Most Rav4-EVs are not so equipped (in fact, this one may be unique); most owners do not have that sort of range anxiety. Most people who do have that sort of range anxiety have (drumroll…) a second car. In this particular case, the owners decided they were willing to do what was necessary to get by with just one electric car.

In fact, dealing with range anxiety by building an overly complicated RE-EV is just another sign of GM’s marketing incompetence.

Of course, here’s the real genius of the Rav4-EV-RE effort; the range extender is mounted on a trailer.

Tootling around town? Leave the trailer at home, keep your range and performance maximized. Going out of town? Hook up and take off, you can refuel the trailer as needed along the way and it keeps your BEV running nicely. The Rav4-EV, by the way, has the aerodynamics of a brick and the Rav4-EV-RE get fuel economy somewhat better than a regular Rav4 after the initial battery charge is used up. The secret to the improvement is the very small range-extender engine. It’s a 500cc. GM’s 1.4L engine is overkill and is going to hold down ultimate fuel economy.

Moreover, we reconsider the business model altogether… why buy an engine you’ll use just a few times per year to recharge your 60+ mile BEV? Rent it just for the times you need it. In fact, if you get stuck with a “flat can” as the Silent Service used to say, AAA could bring out a trailer for you.

Certain manufacturers (probably motorcycle engine manufacturers) would specialize in them. You could get them in different sizes and with and without certain amounts of cargo room.

GM could mount their antiquated pushrod V8s on trailers and get a little revenue by selling RE-trailers for all the BEVs other manufacturers will provide. Well, maybe not, weight is really important in this market. I guess it’s more likely GM will just fade away.

(I waited ll night for some one else to reply to this..but no one has..)

“Someone built a range-extender engine for the Rav4-EV. That generator produces something like 20 to 25KW and it easily keeps the Rav4-EV going indefinitely”

OH!! Someone had range anxiety..and decided that making like a VOLT was a GREAT IDEA…

Whoda thunk it…(and it wasn’t Toyota BTW)

Lets see if I understand..Toy made the best EV..but hmmm..I may need to go farther…since Toy does not offer an EREV..I’ll Make MY OWN!!

By the way from a manufacturing and insurance standpoint..you have essentially built your own car, and nullified ANY coverage and warranty…Unless the mod is sanctioned by the factory..this of course does not apply to lights, spoilers, etc..but any drive / safety compomises do affect it..if you doubt, look at it like this..EREV RAV4EV has accident..fuel tank leaks..causes fire..injures / kills someone. Owner / family sues Toyota..Toyota can easily show they built the car WITHOUT a fuel tank..no liability..no coverage either as the mod was not sanctioned, and the insurance was for an ELECTRIC car..

Owner / family has to pay for ALL..

Which is why a MANUFACTURED EREV is better…like the the volt…

Thanks for that link. I’m a little clearer now. From what I gather on the charge depletion mode then charge sustaining mode, assuming I am driving through I-5 up the Grapevine to Disneyland, I may use the FULL 150HP which means there is a possibility that long uphill climbs may deplete the battery past 30% because there is no way the ICE/generator can solely supply the full power to get the DC motors to it’s 150HP.
One has to wonder now what happens in this scenario? You’re going up hill and you have already depleted the battery to 30% and you have 65mins left in the drive.

@Rashiid Amul 102

If the volt is not using a PMG then what is it using? Electrical excitation is way too inefficient to self generate electricity. PMG’s/PMA’s seem to be the most (to my limited knowledge) efficient way using NdFeB. Any ideas on what is being used? Inquiring minds want to know.

“LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS OCVD” (Obsessive Compulsive Volt Disorder

As I really understand it is, the DC motor at 120KW will be used because it is overrated for long term use. If it were 53KW/53KW you’re using it at max all the time as opposed to only half its max therefore longer life.”
————————————————————————————–
It doesn’t sound like you’re not getting it.

The battery supplies up to 120kw to drive the electric motor for PEAK power. This is around 150 horsepower.

The 53kw ICE/generator only supplies AVERAGE power. This is around 75 horsepower. When the ICE comes on, there’s still a 30% charge left on the battery, so the battery and ICE/generator work together to supply 120kw to the motor.

Here’s some pictures that show better how it works:
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzenu6hr/ebay_pictures/Volt_Electrical_Block_Diagram.jpg