BMWs current MINI E lease program is the first step in what BMW calls its MegaCity Project i, the goal of which is to develop a mass-production electric car within the next five years.
The company has just unveiled the next step in the program. It is a vehicle that will be revealed in next month’s Detroit Auto Show and is called the BMW Concept ActiveE which evolves the MINIE to the next level.
This is a 4-door 4 seat compact sedan which borrows its stylish shell from the current 1 series.
It uses a a 170 hp (125 kw) electric motor which is mounted to the rear axle, making the car rear-wheel drive. BMW says this “guarantees the characteristic sheer driving pleasure which is typical of BMW.”
It is a pure electric car and will derive power from a newly designed and engineered lithium-ion battery pack produced in cooperation with partner SB LiMotive. The car will have a 100 mile “real-world” electric range, 8.5 second 0 to 60 time, and electronically limited top speed of 90 MPH. The newly crafted electric power unit is unlike asynchronous electric motors and is specially designed to deliver high torque not only at the start but at higher speeds, more closely simulating a combustion engine. 184 lb-ft of torque is available at the start.
The lithium ion pack appears to be 44.4 kwh of which 35.5 kwh is useable.
The battery system uses a liquid-cooled “intelligent battery management system” which allows the car to achieve its stated range regardless of outdoor climate conditions. The current MINI E range drops significantly in cold weather.
The battery pack is housed in separate modules which are placed where the normal car’s combustion engine and fuel tank would be. The car will have a curb weight of 3900 pounds and 50-50 weight distribution. This differs considerably from the bulky pack taking up the rear seat location in the current MINI E.
The vehicle will continue to offer high intensity regenerative braking that will occur as soon as the accelerator is released, similar to what is seen in the current MINI E, allowing single pedal driving in almost all situations.
The interior is tastefully designed utilizing liquid white and blue highlights. Gone are the spartan accoutrements of the MINI E, replaced with high tech more sophisticated driver interface. A 7 cubic foot luggage space is also provided.
The power electronic unit, prone to failure in the MINI E, will instead be “reliable and safe.”
Charging can be done at 240 volts and 32 amps in 4.5 hours. A specialized electric HVAC system has also been designed which can be remotely programmed to acclimatize the car using grid energy before the driver actually takes off. This can be triggered via a mobile phone application as well, and limits use of on-board energy to attain passenger comfort. The mobile application will also provide charging status information.
BMW states they have already begun building these vehicles and will introduce them into a new field test involving consumers and utilities in the US and Europe. The current MINI E fleet of 450 cars are due to be returned in the summer of 2010, and these cars will likely replace them and be offers in siginificantly higher volumes. Pricing and lease details have not been announced.
Source (BMW)
+6
Dec 17th, 2009 (7:29 am)Very nice looking car. But if it is not an EREV, I’m not interested.
+3
Dec 17th, 2009 (7:30 am)Impressive, and I’ll bet it is fun to drive.
+3
Dec 17th, 2009 (7:34 am)From the article,
A 7 cubit foot luggage space is also provided.
I’m surprised BMW is still using cubits as a unit of measure.
+9
Dec 17th, 2009 (7:51 am)I find it interesting that BMW used the phrase “real-world” driving range.
Related to this, check out this post on the disappointing “real-world” range of the I-MiEV (allegedly 100 miles). Consumer reports barely got 12 miles on a half charge.
http://green.autoblog.com/2009/12/16/consumer-reports-suffers-range-anxiety-in-a-mitsubishi-imiev/
I suspect that as these first generation EVs hit the market, people will learn to be very skeptical about proclaimed EV range.
As a result: A. The Volt will look much more attractive since range anxiety will not be an issue; B. The general public’s skepticism about EVs could well extend to the Volt, especially if the first generation falls short of the promised 40 mi. AER in real world driving.
+4
Dec 17th, 2009 (7:58 am)They had me until the “100 mile range” part. Tesla is planning ranges much, much higher than that for the Model S, (granted the Tesla will be considerably bigger than this car). With that said, this is still a very nice electric car that appears to well represent the enjoyable driving attributes of BMW’s. And it will no doubt be well engineered, or at least better than Lyle’s Mini-E. BMW is barking up the right tree here.
Question for Lyle:
Are you going to have an opportunity to lease one of these when your lease of the Mini-E runs out?
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (7:59 am)Rashid, I think that’s Lyle’s phrase. Lends a charming Biblical twist to the discussion, eh?
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:00 am)So Lyle,
Will you be getting one of the next BMW models when you turn in your Mini E?
Or are you going to wait for a Volt???
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:06 am)Congrats to BMW for their electrification efforts! The more the merrier.
FME makes a good point about the “real world” range differing from the advertised range. My hope (and belief) is that GM is under-promising and over-delivering on the AER, and that the all electric range on delivery will exceed 40.
PS Yeah, cubits are so old school.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+10
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:09 am)Obvious Afterthought: Just the fact that more and more of the major companies are offering an electric alternative is a really great sign.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:09 am)Nice car … looks expensive.
Anyone beside Phoenix going to offer a small truck EV?
=D~
+7
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:10 am)In 5 years, given the research and breakthroughs in battery design, I expect BMW and all electric drives will have much better range and usability.
This is good news. As major manufacturers get into electric design we will see better and better offerings. Base components will become less expensive for all.
The electric revolution is going way better than the fuel cell effort. Bring them all on so I can get one!
Volt is still my first and best choice. Phrases like ‘corners like a BMW on rails’ will be used to describe Volt in auto magazine reviews.
May the best car win!
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:11 am)Soon, Grasshopper, soon.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:13 am)Well said!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:14 am)I want 40 rods to the hogshead. That’s the way I likes it!
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:18 am)I must agree with many prior posters, it is a great looking car, and BMW has done many things well. I think the motor size hits the mark, whereas the Volt’s seems a tad weak, but we will not know until we get to take it on the road and up the grapevine or similar hill. But, and there always seems to be a but when evaluating the initial set of electrically driven vehicles, the 100 mile range (2.8 miles per kwh) real world would give me several cubits of unease.
I sure hope the Volt’s lesser weight lets it get more than 2.8 miles per kwh (22 mile AER real world).
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:30 am)Just yesterday (for my job) I got to drive a MiniCooper for the first time (as well as a Hummer!). The Cooper (IMO) rode really well and is a cool vehicle overall. I did have a bit of an issue curling up and uncurling to get in and out, but that’s not the Mini’s fault. An electric one would be exceedingly cool except the drive was about 80 miles through the woods. I’d have been sweating cubits (or not gone) with a 100 mile range.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+3
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:38 am)Hmmm, 0-60 in 8.5, top speed 90 MPH? Hardly sounds like “the characteristic sheer driving pleasure which is typical of BMW”.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:44 am)I think the sweet spot will be around 150 miles of range.. and it is possible this car will reach that with gentle driving.
That rear axle looks very busy, I wonder what all those components are. Apparently they are using a transmission ( perhaps with a clutch) to increase high speed torque. Any guesses on the cost?
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:46 am)I think that these points and the lower miles per KWh are artifacts of using an existing model and converting it to a plugin – high areo drag.
The plugin Prius is already streamlined so it may fare better with the battery upgrade. The Volt, of course, is really squeezing the cubits out of the drag coefficient.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:47 am)Miles Electric has one but it doesn’t travel at highway speeds!
http://www.milesev.com/#zx40st.swf
It’s only intended for urban use.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:49 am)I know the mini-e lease is about an arm and a leg/month.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:53 am)Colorado State University Spinoff to Commercialize “3D” Li-ion Battery Technology for Higher-Capacity, Longer-Life Cells.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/12/prieto-20091217.html#more
” a new 3D structure to enable a much larger functional surface area resulting in batteries up to 1,000 times more powerful and 10 times longer-lasting and cheaper than traditional batteries.”
This is an Interesting cell design update. “duh” (slaps forehead) why did somebody not think of this before…
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:57 am)Followup to earlier comment about Miles Electric.
A possible match between Raser Tech and GM and/or Ford may be in the not to distant future.
http://www.rasertech.com/motors-and-drives/products/drive-systems/series-phev-drive-system
Raser took a Hummer in cooperation with GM and electrified it. The link above shows what look like a GM sierra truck. They are working on developing the drive traun as we speak, so IMHO, electrified truck aren’t to far off. The Raser drive train is also suggested for SUV’s.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:02 am)The publicized figure for the Volt has been 5 kwh. See comment to post on the Plug-in Prius, and elsewhere.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:03 am)My first reaction was that by definition all batteries are three dimensional, but having read the article, I now “get it” (lol). I hope the prototype works!
Thanks for the link.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:05 am)Many people realize that the really *big* reductions of oil use in transportation is with the larger vehicles – either retrofitted or new. I really hope this whole thing takes off!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+3
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:15 am)GM gives the Volt 0-60 in 8.5 also and has a top speed of 100 mph.
It will be interesting to run to the two vehicles, Volt vs ActiveE, side by side and compare. This is good news for the Volt. The Volt has a 100 kw compared to the 125 kw motor in the ActiveE: with the Active =E being only a BEV, it requires a larger and heavier battery and therefore a hit on acceleration. The Volt in Sport mode should be an invigorating drive.
The Volt is looking better every day.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:22 am)From this post: “The newly crafted electric power unit is unlike asynchronous electric motors and is specially designed to deliver high torque not only at the start but at higher speeds, more closely simulating a combustion engine. 184 lb-ft of torque is available at the start.” I am curious how they deliver the higher torque just as you are and will follow the links I find on this issue.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+3
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:24 am)I wish this to be true. However, if history is to be any guide,
battery technology increases at a snails pace.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:32 am)Whats the Cd of this car?
What’s the warranty?
90MPH max speed will be scary on the Autobahn.
I dont undestand the comment on torque. Most of the motors I deal with offer constant torque over a huge RPM range.
I want 250 miles of AER before considering pure EV.
I don’t want RWD.
Glad BMW is pushing EV’s technololgy. I look forward to seeing this car and all the others at the Detroit Auto Show.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:45 am)If you browse technologyreview.com (MIT site) there are advances in battery tech being announced daily. Almost all of these advances end with the scientists starting a new company to try to bring their advance to market. I think this area is absolutely exploding (maybe a bad choice of terms, but you know what I mean)!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:46 am)A quick search didn’t reveal anything more on the higher torque from their electric motor. I found this info:
“Based on BMW’s 1-Series Coupé, the ActiveE has a lithium-ion battery pack in the space previously occupied by the engine, fuel tank and drive train. This helps preserve the car’s internal space and weight distribution.”
“Drive comes courtesy of a 125kW (170bhp) electric motor that develops 250Nm (184 lb/ft) of torque, while forming an integrated part of the rear axle assembly, BMW said.”
“ActiveE tips the scales at 1800Kg (3960lbs) and so is roughly 350Kg (773lbs) heavier than a diesel engine-powered 1-Series.”
at: http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/12/17/bmw_activee/
It may be that they achieve the increased torque at the start and at high speeds by electronic means, similar to the Volt sport mode, to give increased acceleration of the line and when passing at high speeds.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:51 am)Finally! Some honest pure electric range marketing.
Seems to me the kwh numbers provide the best way of judging the honesty of range estimates. Scanning the internet I found the following numbers:
42 kwh – BMW ActiveE – 100 mile range – 170 hp
44 kwh – Tesla Model S – 160 mile range – 0 to 60 in 5.4 sec
35 kwh – Mercedes Blue Zero E/Cell – 125 mile range – 136 hp
35 kwh – Mini E – 150 range claimed – 208 hp
Lyle knows the 150 mile range for the Mini E is not real.
Based on the 42 kwh for the ActiveE we can believe its 100 mile range estimate.
The other major players have smaller batteries, less horsepower, and unreal range estimates. But they will cost less.
24 kwh – Nissan Leaf – 100 mile range – 107 hp
23 kwh – Ford Focus EV – 75 mile range – 141 hp
16 kwh – Mitsubishi iMiev – 80 miles – 63 hp
It’s great having choices in pure electric.
Of course, the Volt will solve the range issue, but at the cost of using gas.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:51 am)Hey Tag, your “sweating cubits” did not make me spill my coffee, but I did have to set the cup down.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:02 am)I think they are hinting at a brushed permanent magnet motor, or they could be using two motors serially mounted on the same shaft, one optimized for low speed the other for high speed. There are commercial motors setup this way, there are two windings on the motor and the rotor slips forward or back to change its characteristics.. seems like a lot of complexity for no real pressing advantage.
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:03 am)I guess that you’ve never sweat a cubit then, because it really hurts! (lol).
Thanks,
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:05 am)That really *does* sound like a layer of complexity (and potential problems)!
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:07 am)For really large transport trucks, like the 40 foot Fruehauf ones, battery capablity is insufficient: T. Boone Pickens proposes using CNG to offset the use of foreign petroleum. He has the ear of many politicians and has gotten Congress to work on this problem and solution. The Natural Gas At of 2009 is working its way through Congress now and has been delayed by Health Car Reform. It was going to be considered around October but that has gone and passed . We need this bill enacted as soon as possible. Once the effort to convert transportation fleets to CNG has started Pickens believes it will take five (5) years to accomplish. As of now that represents half of the consumption of foreign oil. The mix between passenger and transportation vehicles is fifty/fifty, so we need to be working in both areas. The move to electrify passenger vehicles is well under way but that still leaves transportation vehicles.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:08 am)Another step forward in automobile electrification!
I find it interesting that BMW chose the 100 mile range target and moderate power offering, being a higher end vehicle manufacturer and one that could charge more for their offering than, say, Nissan. It seems like this is a compromise for a BMW. Of course this is still part of their extended test. I’m sure battery cost is primary but I’m just curious what all went into their configuration decision.
Again, I think GM has the best solution for this point in time and can easily modify their configuration to take advantage of any new tech improvements.
-2
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:13 am)How do they know? They went 12 miles and the indicator said it was a half-charge, but, they *did* make it to their destination. There is nothing here indicating that it was the last electron and they were barely able to coast into the driveway.
Consumer Reports is schlock automobile testing. They wouldn’t know a BMW from a Yugo.
Wait until your beloved Volt is ripped apart by Consumer Reports. We’ll see some protest then I’m pretty sure!
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:13 am)Err, BMW’s are pure driving machines because they don’t fall apart in the corners…
The 318 (1.8 litre 4 cyl) has long been slow off the line but once you get through the first couple corners you don’t care about the low power, it becomes a game to keep the speed up. That is entertaining and is the heart of what makes an “Ulitimate Driving Machine”.
Sadly and truly north american cars tend to like straight lines and struggle in the corners. The Corvette being a notable exception, even the Ford GT was shown to ‘plow’ through the corners by our funny friends on Top Gear who pull no punches.
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:15 am)I’d be hard-put to think of a non-oil alternative that isn’t attractive – well, maybe hydrogen isn’t attractive to me. I was really talking to the personal transportation side of the equation. Converting the larger personal vehicles saves more oil than converting smaller ones (that already GET good mileage).
More power to Pickens and his plans – especially for trucking.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:16 am)I hadn’t heard of this before. Interesting idea. I agree that it seems unnecessary for power purposes but would it provide slightly more efficiency at higher speeds?
-1
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:18 am)Volvo is starting to do field testing of large LNG/CNG powered heavy trucks, they can also run on diesel if a gas refill is not available.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/12/volvo-20091215.html#more
http://www.volvo.com/trucks/global/en-gb/newsmedia/pressreleases/press_article.htm?pubid=8098
“There are two main factors driving the increased market demand for gas-powered trucks. One is cost savings. Methane gas is currently a relatively cheap fuel in many markets. For example, Volvo Trucks’ technology already offers a profitable fuel option for trucks undertaking long daily transport jobs and returning to the same filling station.”
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:19 am)Does the Volt get 40 miles of AER in city and highway driving? Here is what one computer simulation says:
“Compare three common driving profiles the EPA75, HWY, and US06. We note that these profiles are dynamometer profiles. They are not done in the wind, rough roads, or on road grades, all of which lower AER. Nor are they done with max power (209 motor hp) to simulate passing. The goal of these profiles was to check and compare emissions, not evaluate EV performance, such as AER.
The EPA Federal Test Procedure, EPA75, is called the City Cycle. It consists of the Urban Driving Cycle, UDDS, followed by the first 505 seconds of the UDDS. It has a top speed of 56.7 mph. It uses a maximum of 37 hp road power. See attachment.
The EPA Federal Test Highway Procedure, HWY, has a top speed of 59.9 mph. It uses a maximum of 30 hp road power. See attachment.
The US06 Supplemental Federal Test Procedure (SFTP) was developed to address the shortcomings with the FTP-75 test cycle in the representation of aggressive, high speed and/or high acceleration driving behavior, rapid speed fluctuations, and driving behavior following startup. It represents an 8.01 mile (12.8 km) route with an average speed of 48.4 mph, maximum speed 80.3 mph, and a duration of 596 seconds. It uses a maximum of 89 hp road power.
I did a detailed second by second Volt simulation with these three profiles. The results were an AER of 40.2, 39.6, and 28 miles for the EPA75/UDDS, HWY, and US06 profiles, respectively.” (End of quote)
Thus according to this simulation the Volt will get 3.5 miles per kwh in real world (US06) driving. This would be better than the BMW but less than the Prius PHV claim of 4.1 miles per kwh.
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:20 am)I like the TRON styled decals on the sides. Much less offensive than the Nissan Leaf decals.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:27 am)The Prius claim is done using the even milder JC-8 cycle.. I can guarantee that I WILL get the 40 mile range (or more) out of the Volt.. how about you?.. I think ultimately all these cars will get the same exact power consumption per mile, as long as they dont have brick aerodynamics like a Mini.
Just because the Volt can move like a sports cars does not mean you have to do so.
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:29 am)A) They state clearly that they were not intending to measure AER (accurately). Without the areo advantages of the Volt, I don’t know how they can provide real world numbers.
B) You don’t mention who ran this study. Who ran it? I’d love to read it.
C) These #’s will actually be determined this coming spring. Computer simulations don’t do so well on daily weather forecasts. I’m not too sure I’d take one to the bank on aer.
Thanks for the info though.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:35 am)Its just too much complexity for a few extra % points.. you would be better off waxing the car and making a producticve bathroom trip before you get in the car.
Eventually all electric cars will end using very similar motors and controllers, probably almost identical and made in Asia.
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:40 am)I think you’re right about the standardization of the hardware, but at this point there will be a “sorting out phase” to see just what that standard should be (what works best).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:40 am)13 years ago, EV1 was using lead-acid and quickly switched to NMh. Prius also ran NMh until the plug-in generation. All existing and proposed electrics are now running Lithium-ion in some form or another.
According to the Chevy site, GM is on it’s third generation battery for the Volt before it even hits the street. They are talking solid-state for Gen III Volt (don’t know what generation the battery would be).
All battery manufacturers are on high alert and in very intensive competition to make the best possible power-to-weight battery. Government grants are in the hundreds of millions for development.
Seems like a couple of major leaps in around a decade to me
And a large effort under way for the near future.
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:42 am)AMEN!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:44 am)I’m looking at that rear drive ‘unit’ and wondering if it would fit under the rear of a Volt…
AWD is the answer with the weather we have had over the last few weeks here in western Canada. It’s really pretty straightforward, the FWD Malibu has been left parked and the AWD Subaru and the 4WD Land Rover have been driven.
AWD Volt, Please.
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:44 am)Your comparing two different cases for the Volt and Prius. GM claimed 5.0 miles per kwh and Toyota, 4.1 miles. We have a simulation for the Volt but not an identical one for the Prius, so to compare the two on your basis is valid.
I previously pointed out a difference between the HSD drive of the Prius and the Voltec drive: the Prius has a mechanical device, the HSD between the electric motor and the wheels which the Volt does not have. The HSD would cause additional loses in power. IMHO giving everything else being the same, i.e. the motor, the Volt would get higher miles per kwh.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:51 am)Hmm… I wonder where they will be released first…
I am getting tired of being considered “between the coasts”. Other than food companies, most testing companies consider the United States to be just California (and the west coast), New York (and the East Coast), and others. Someday, the “others” will rise up and destroy the coasts, finally earning our rightful place in the sun!
Or, we could just comfort ourselves that food companies like to use us to test new flavors… We got the Angus Third-Pounders before everyone else! So there!
+4
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:57 am)Cubits…
Noah will be impressed!
Not to mention what his elephants will think of all that TRUNK SPACE. Zing!
.
.
.
OK, it took a team effort, but I think I’ve officially killed the joke.
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:59 am)I know what you mean, given that I’m also in “fly-over” country. I really thought that the Angus Cubit-burgers would catch on better than they did, but it takes 3 hands to handle a Cubit-Burger.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:01 am)Nope I did one after this post (lol).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:13 am)The dash looks very conventional for an advanced powered vehicle. Minimum effort, maximum price = BMW.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:15 am)Every alternative has problems; with the electric battery, it’s insufficient power. We need to think beyond the box.
It’s time to bring back rail transportation for moving large cargo long distances. I remember when Hidden Valley had a plant in Niagara County, New York. They had a spur that a oil tanker could be pulled up next to the plant. They’d hook up to the mobile tank to get the oil for their salad dressings. The railroad closed down the spur and a new location on the main line had to be built to off-load the oil into tanker trucks. Hidden Valley eventually closed the plant. Moving large cargo by rail is much more efficient.
All forms of vehicles, passenger cars, trucks, ocean going vessels, and airplanes, will be converted to hybrid types using a mix of fuels. It is said that airplanes would likely be one of the last transporters to not use petroleum; although the Air Force is considering the use of biofuels.
Be Well, and Happy Trails to you ’til e meet again.
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:15 am)If it eliminates the need for a transmission, it easily be worth pursuing.
+6
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:18 am)There is a feeling driving Mini-E #183 of absolute responsive performance.
Responsive performance that I have yet to find in any car I have driven in the past 32 years . Instantaneous inputs for acceleration and deceleration and of course, the Mini cornering and fun factor.
Range has not been an issue with me and I have no problem coaxing 100 miles per charge in Mini-E #183. To be fair, when i’m punching it hard range goes to 80 miles per charge.
I’m 8000 miles and six months into this field test of Mini-E #183 and without trying to be over dramatic, This is the future, today.
A future so bright, powered by that big yellow ball in the sky. Solar powered electric cars equates to about $0.50 a gallon of gas for the rest of your life, fixed cost with no increase.
Never in my life have I felt so passionate, so optimistic about the change in front of our world. Environmentally, economically and socially, a change so large it dwarfs the Wright bothers at Kitty Hawk, Henry Ford and the Model T and the communications revolution of the past 30 years.
I can only hope that my experience as a pioneer will have a chapter two in this vehicle.
My driving is as an enthusaist, and this car, assuming equal or better performance than the Mini-E fits me well.
As far as the Volt goes, It’s a great car and will most likely be my first purchase. What I would really like is a Voltec drive train in a small SUV would be the other car in the garage.
Cheers
Peder
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:21 am)You use your lip for the third hand.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:22 am)I too would love to see more rail transportation of goods AND it’d remove some of the truck travel on our highways. There is work being done on battery powered aircraft, but that’s at the infant stage.
Be well and Happy trails,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:24 am)Actually, I looked it up and a cubit is about the length of a man’s forearm. So a 3 cubit burger would feed quite a crowd!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:29 am)1) Love the idea of control though the clients phone.
2) Love the idea of using their advanced system engineering to control and monitor everything.
3) Love the look, design, etc. A cool electric BMW. Very nice.
4) Love the idea of their regen improvements.
5) Hate that they just made an expensive EV toy. Without fast charge, EREV-like hybrid backup, swap, etc. It’s just not a primary vehicle.
So, I’m not holding my breath that we will see this “in the first half of the next decade”. However, It’s nice to see BMW engineers are at least considering electrification projects like this.
Dear BMW, Keep up the good work BMW but don’t forget what killed the EV in the first place. Learn that lesson and don’t repeat the same mistakes. GM learned this the hard way and thus created the Volt. Better Place thought this though and thus created their swap concept. Open your mind before you try to perfect a flawed concept.
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:33 am)Glad to see BMW getting on the band wagon— the more the merrier. But like I said before, for an all around car, I would never buy an EV w/o a range extender.
An EV might be good as a second car for around town, but I don’t think many people will spend the money for such a car. And for those who risk going the maximum distance will find themselves stranded along the road, guaranteed!
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:34 am)Comparing the price of the ActiveE with that of the Volt’s will provide a real world test of the price advantages (if any) of the EREV design. The two cars are about the same size and performance, at least as given by the 0-60 times, seem similar as well. The Volt will have the nod for the top speed, though 90 MPH certainly seems sufficient. Even the looks of the two cars give somewhat the same impression of a small sporty vehicle.
The big deal is that the BMW will have another $15K tied up in the battery cost. For all those moaning about the Volt’s price that is one very big premium. Should be interesting to see a real world test of Frank Weber’s cost chart!
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:41 am)We’ve all read the hundreds of headlines that scream out in bold type, Why can’t American cars get 50 to 100 miles per gallon. I’m beginning to think that cars sold in NA can get 40 mpg or more but US drivers can’t.
How many times, just in Lyle’s last few posts, have we seen drivers saying, things like – the average speeds on my commute are 75mph – so that car won’t work for me. Or the PHEV Prius will only go 62 mph all electric.
Folks want unlimited power, comfort and speed, cheaply and without giving up anything, all the time. I bet every time we’re going 75 mph to “keep up with traffic” there is that annoying guy who “everyone has to pass” that is actually quite satisfied with the mileage he is getting. And he’ll get to his destination just a few minutes, or even just seconds after everyone who rocketed past him on the highways.
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:44 am)Brushed motors are very problematic and should never be used for such an application! I sure BMW knows better than to use a brushed motor.
A three phase, 380 volt AC motor is the way to go ….like the Volt will have.
+4
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:47 am)jeffhre,
You make a really valid point, We Americans (overall) seem to always be in a hurry. I think we’re the only people who pace in front of a microwave. It’d be great if we all just slowed down a step (on a lot of levels), but unfortunately, I don’t see that happening anytime soon. As you say, doing what’s good for us, isn’t necessarily what we *do*.
Be well,
Tagamet
/bbl
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:55 am)COOL!
Another EV in da mix.
Of course this BMW will probably be in the $50,000.00 range with a big azz batt pack like that.
But the more the merrier.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (12:00 pm)See Peder’s post at comment #62. Everyone has different range requirements. Can’t we get past the idea that all cars must universally meet my personal range requirements to be attractive in the marketplace?
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (12:05 pm)I think that’s the point of selecting 40 as the AER – it does meet or exceed the majority of driving needs. The remaining 20% will still need (and have) CS mode. I’m sure that there will be people who choose to go with a BEV – that’s why having so many choices is a great thing!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (12:15 pm)a mild application of a heat gun and all the decals come off.. cant stand decals on my cars. If you are too cheap to paint it on then dont bother.
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (12:21 pm)Exactly!
Well said bro!
That’s why I keep asking for a EV version of the Volt. Just ommit the Genset. My commute is 9.5 miles door 2 door. Nobody in my fam is further than 15 miles one and unfortunately so are the inlaws.
Dec 17th, 2009 (12:38 pm)This car sounds redonculously expensive. I can pretty much guarantee it will cost close to $100,000. It’s similar to a Tesla except bigger, with slightly less battery, and way more complicated systems.
I wouldn’t buy a BMW with a battery made from some random SB LiMotion. I have no confidence that it would last 10-15 years as they are probably using regular plane jane Li Cobalt technology that wouldn’t last more than 5 years, if that. I’m very glad GM spent so much time and effort verifying who was making the best batteries and chose to go with a Korean powerhouse that has been researching Li batteries for the last 5 years with full backing from the Korean government.
It sounds like BMW is trying to apply their over engineering mentality to EVs between this and the infinitely variable diesel/electric concept they made a while ago.
I think BMW is going to struggle to stay relevant if even the gen 1 Volt has such superior handling and responsiveness.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (12:38 pm)I love consumer report’s testing on one ton pickups. They drive them around the LA freeways empty like they are a passenger car. That might be what people in LA do with one ton trucks, but the rest of the country uses them to haul a load.
Dec 17th, 2009 (12:49 pm)+1 big time there. Not only is rail FAR superior in energy efficiency, it is well demonstrated technology to directly electrify.
The problem with attempting a hybrid on either airplanes or ships is that they run at 100% power steady state for the duration of their voyage.
In the case of ships, the choice is either a fossil fuel or nuclear. Nothing else really has the sustained output to do the job.
The Air Force is in charge of the fuels program for the Pentagon, even though they are behind the Navy as the #1 user of petroleum.
The Air Force is looking at natural gas or coal sourced FT jet fuel. They have abandoned biofuel because they have deemed it unable to meet the temperature requirements for jet fuel.
Dec 17th, 2009 (12:53 pm)Hi Tag, the source for my info is from this site, here is the link:
http://www.gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=581
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:02 pm)I bet BMW doesn’t market this car with a preschool cartoon and jingle.
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:09 pm)Series DC motors have a inverse torque / speed relationship. Since they are the classic motor for vehicle drive applications for over 100 years, there certainly a large class of motors out there that aren’t constant torque.
At low speed, induction Induction motors run on inverters are constant torque. Above a certain speed they have a constant power behavior above a certain speed known as “base speed.”
Below base speed, the winding voltage is proportional to speed. As speed increases the inverter must supply more and more voltage. At base speed the inverter voltage will reach the limit of the DC voltage supply. Since the voltage can’t increase more, the current will start dropping and so will torque. Depending on the winding turns, maximum safe mechanical speed and available voltage, the base may or may not be achieved before the motor reaches the mechanical speed limit. More turns on the winding turns gives greater start torque vs. current but reduces the base speed.
With a permanent magnet AC motor, the base speed is a hard speed limit because the voltage is always proportional to speed due to the fixed flux of the permanent magnets.
To get around the base speed limitations, the Prius boosts the inverter bus voltage to 600V using a DC-DC converter between the batteries and the motor inverters’ bus.
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:22 pm)I seriously doubt any brush / commutator motor will ever be put in a new car. The various inverter fed AC motors are superior in every aspect.
One possibility is a double fed wound rotor motor with the two windings fed from the same inverter source. If the rotor winding and stator winding is connected in anti-parallel the rotor spins at twice the synchronous speed. The torque behavior of the motor is somewhat like a synchronous motor in that the frequency and rotor speed are locked with phase angle between the applied voltage and rotor determining torque. It is not completely analogous though since the AC applied voltage supplies the magnetizing VARS and the operating voltage is under full inverter control instead of a separate field winding or permanent magnet.
The double fed wound rotor motor is simultaneously one of the most compact motor sand the most efficient one out there. The double windings and slip rings also make it expensive though and the slip rings do mean there is a service item.
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:26 pm)Between this and yesterday we are turning into quite a bunch of jolly folks. Maybe they should replace the dancers with a vaudeville act with ideas from us.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:33 pm)But it won’t have all the components related to gas. What is that worth in materials, build time, and warranty? >5K?
And thanks to GM and their “everyman-chevy Volt PR”, people are more likely to accept a $45K fully electric BMW 1-series as opposed to a $40K hybrid Cruze.
Hmmm… no more oil changes.
But it is a beamer, so the maintenance woes are likely to even greater than that of a chevy…
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:35 pm)Hi LRGVProVolt, lets consider why the Volt’s assertion of 40 AER seems not to be real world. All other vehicles, where real world performance is known get much less than 5 miles per kwh. The Prius claim of 4.1 is also high compared with real world numbers from Tesla and the Mini.
How much does the Volt weigh? We do not know, but a good guess in 3250 lbs (375 lbs more than a Cruze). We do know what the Plug-in Prius weighs, 3130 lbs. So the weight advantage seems to go to Prius.
How much less loss is probable for the Volt drive train, then the Prius when operating in EV mode? Unknown but unlikely to be different by more than 5%.
Drag? The difference in Cd is unlikely to give much of a boost to the Volt, say 5%.
So if the weight advantage of the Prius offsets the apparent advantages of the Volt, the Volt would still not do better on a per kwh basis, so if we apply 4.1 to the Volts 8.8 kwh (85% SOC to 30% SOC) we get a range of 36 miles in charge depleting mode.
This would compare with the 14.5 miles of the Prius. And as has been pointed out repeatedly, these numbers appear to be optimistic, just as the 28 miles per the simulation of US06 appears pessimistic. If we split the difference, we would expect the Volt’s real world range to be around 32 miles.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:36 pm)They are, but I can see a low cost, relatively low power brushed motor working quite well in a low cost Tata.. you will lose range but the controllers are much cheaper (1/3rd the cost).. yes you will have brush maintenance forever, gotta keep those ICE mechanics employed
Possibly the inductance ac motors will end up being the cheapest..
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:38 pm)Spot on Texas. Initially seeing this post reminds me of all the other car manufacturers that trotted out their new EV concept in the last 18 months. Guaranteed that when the real world is applied, this version of the BMW will be left on the cutting room floor.
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:42 pm)I wish I could give you the link to the article where the use of alternate fuels was mentioned. Ocean vessels are currently using hybrid engines where huge battery banks provide power; I’ll assume the electricity is used to get the ship moving initially.
The article mentioned using a combination of power methods for each type of vehicle. For sure the future changes will realize what we image today. Technology is where it’s at. Thanks for your addition to the topic.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+2
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:42 pm)just a little bit more…
I’m positive that I am done with gas.
My solar P.V sytem will be producing enough electricity to power our home and provide the 3500 KWH annually needed to drive 12,000 miles for the rest of my life.
http://www.sunpowermonitor.com/residential/kiosk.aspx?id=581F0406-8F31-4B77-94C5-21D51B5AF3F3&type=address
I am certain that my future cars will have plugs and run on sunshine. The brand or model of car is not as significant as the motive power. EV is a requirment, Model or brand is a preference.
Range is an individual decision and their is no right or wrong answer.
Everthing helps in the movement in this direction and should be applauded begining with the first hybrid.
The Chevy Volt represents one of the largest leaps ever getting us off gas and in to locally produced electricity, preferrebly renewable. It deserves all the credit and buyers (including me) that comes it’s way.
leave fear behind and move forward.
Cheers
Peder
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:44 pm)Mathew_B, you seem to know a lot about electric motors, so a question: is it feasible to put smaller electric motors in each wheel for all wheel drive and also eliminate hardware that connects the motor to the wheel (differential, shafts, u-joints)?
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:50 pm)If I were interested in pure electric, I guess it be good.
What I would like is some choice in the EREV market. Right now, the only other EREV from a major car maker is the Mercedes BlueZero E-cell Plus:
http://gm-volt.com/2009/09/01/mercedes-bluezero-e-cell-plus-extended-range-electric-car-to-go-into-limited-production-in-2010/
and this doesn’t have a production date.
Chrysler has canceled their EREVs, which I feel were never real to begin with. Sure they built some prototypes, but getting something to production at a reasonable price – I don’t think they ever really planned for that.
The Fisker Karma and Aptera 2h, these types of companies won’t have any major impact on the market, at least for the next 10 years or more.
I think this forum would get a lot more interesting if there were another EREV competing with the Volt. And when I say EREV, I’m not really picky. Anything that gets at least 30 miles AER and stays electric up to 75 MPH would be OK. So a parallel hybrid could work as well, if the battery was big enough and the electric motor was powerful enough.
We desperately need some competition for the Volt!
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:52 pm)Peder, it would seem that for folks like you a really good option would be an extra battery pack that you could charge by the solar setup and then easily swap with the pack that is in the car. That might be a very good way to go as solar electric systems gradually become adopted.
Dec 17th, 2009 (1:57 pm)First you have to define what “real world range” is, last I heard the EPA has not done so. You also need to make sure everyone agrees with that definition.. good luck
I think both the Prius, Volt and Tesla will end up with very close numbers. Take a look at the energy usage of the Tesla charts:
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog4/
note how well it matches the Volt:
1. 50kw at 100mph, this matches the Volt exactly.. telling you that ALL the losses are similar.. electrical, drag, tires..
2. the Volt gets 40 mile range at the 48mph average of the EPA tests, from the chart we see the Tesla needs 10kw power to achieve 48mph, at the 10kw power level we know the Volt can go 38.4 miles.. pretty close to the spec.
The Volt is heavier than a Tesla Roadster, yet with modern tires it does not matter much.. the Volt is more aerodynamic than a Roadster, but the Roadster has less frontal area, and it washes out.
Here we have an all-out sports car and a family sedan.. yet the electrical numbers seem to match closely. This is one of the beauties of electrical power in cars.. you can have performance and efficiency at the same time.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:12 pm)I second that motion and call for a vote…
Regards
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:13 pm)Gotta love German over-engineering. I may have mentioned this before but a couple of months ago my neighbor asked for a jump for his BMW M-something. When I showed up I asked where the battery was. He said “in the trunk” but then explained that the BMW engineers, thinking of everything, had put battery connectors on the front right of the engine compartment. My thought was: “Yeah, they thought of everything — including how to turn a $75 battery into a $575 battery.”
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:15 pm)Hub motors have long been considered the holy grail of electric propulsion. There has been a lot of talk for decades on how to do this.
There are several challenges.
First is the economics of an inverter and a motor for each wheel. Because of the different wheel speeds going around corners, each motor has to have it’s own inverter. Some people think this is technically complex but it’s not… it is just expensive. One inverter and one motor save a lot more than the cost of a differential and suspension parts.
I do note that the current all wheel drive hybrids are using a small motor on the rear axle with no mechanical connection to the engine, so things are trending towards more motors slowly.
Next is un-sprung weight. If the motor is directly attached to the wheel, then the motor adds to the weight moving with the wheel and tire. When the car goes over a harsh bump, the tire compresses first and then the suspension responds. Extra mass makes the suspension response slower, and the tendency for tires to hop increases. The extra also mass makes the ride much harsher. Also, the motors wouldn’t get the benefit of the vehicle suspension and would take a beating.
There is the mis-match between optimal motor speed and wheel speed. The difference is on the order of 10:1 A motor certainly can be made to turn at wheel speed, but a fast turning motor plus a gear reducer seem to always win out over a slower spinning motor. Once you start talking about not just a motor, but a motor plus a gear box at the wheel, then the unsprung weight concern grows even more.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:17 pm)You are most likely right on that because neodymium is high in cost. I’ve been following Raser Technologies Symetron Motor; they make an AC induction motor that is very efficient. They have collaborated in electrifying a Hummer that gets 100mpg and have a drive train for light trucks and SUVs.
http://www.rasertech.com/category/motors-and-drives/motors
Currently, electric motors are about 86% efficient. But one Japanese Researcher has invented a motor that is 96% efficient! It is a brushless DC motor. It is 100 Kw motor, the same Kw as the Volt motor.
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20090403/168295/
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:23 pm)The Prius does the same thing… and the Volt probably does too.
The Prius DC-DC converter for the 12V power operates both ways so that the car can be jumped using 12V. The 12V battery is back beside the traction battery. To make it easier to hook too, there is a pair of terminals under the hood. It is also a good way to fry the $2K inverter by jumping backwards since there is no reverse polarity protection on the inverter.
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:32 pm)“The current MINI E range drops significantly in cold weather.”
I think we would all appreciate more details on your MINI E cold weather experiences.
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:39 pm)Nice job. My first guesstimate was a 28 mile EV range for the Volt during US06 driving. That seems to have been pretty close. The only thing I’d mention is that US06 is pretty aggressive. A lot of people should do better than that.
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:41 pm)Bash BMWs over-engineering as much as you want…I am lucky enough to be an owner and I have drank the kool-aid, there are no other cars like them, at least in my experience. Everytime I have to spend way too much for general servicing I drink more kool-aid and just go with the mentality that you get what you pay for…then just drive off and continue to enjoy my 106mi commutes.
I’m SOOO happy BMW is working on electrics because they were way too heavy on the Hydrogen dellusion (and still are somewhat).
All this being said, I still need an EREV …. because that is MY personal need.
Now way BMW will ever be concerned about relevance.
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:41 pm)Most braking in any car is done overwhelmingly by the front wheels. Doesn’t this put a rear-mounted electric motor at a significant disadvantage where regenerative braking is concerned?
Brush commutation is a maintenance nightmare, but a permanent magnet DC motor using electronic commutation is possible (Oversimplification: The coils are stationary, and the permanent magnets spin around on a rotor). If nothing else, this could make the controller design simpler for regeneration than would be the case for an AC motor’s inverter, which has to apply field voltage even while collecting energy during vehicle slowdown. I doubt very much that BMW is excessively concerned by the scarcity (cost) of Neodymium. Whatever we speculate about the features it has, BMW’s EV is likiest to have a BMW price.
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:44 pm)You also fry other electronics in the Prius, a messed up jump can end up in a everal thousand $$ repair bill..
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:46 pm)I’m thinking more like a $60K 1-series. But that’s the fun of the test, eh? Seeing where the price points actually end up.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:50 pm)Anyone expecting a low-cost breakthrough from BMW is looking in the wrong place. $60K is optimistic, IMHO.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:56 pm)There was that company that had the Mini with four hub motors (actually they did not) at about 600hp.. they fixed the unsprung weight problem by getting rid of the iron disc rotor (used for the friction brakes) and just using regen braking. That was an interesting idea.
Other companies have gotten as far as getting rid of the springs and shock, going to an active suspension along with a hub motor.
As you said, the main problem is the cost of the extra 3 inverters.
I always thought GM should have gone with a three motor design with 3 inverters.. all identical or similar. Use two of the 50kw motors to drive the front wheels (no differential needed) and the 3rd 50kw motor is attached to the ICE and acts as the starter/generator. Advantage of doing this is having fault tolerance, one failure would not strand you and lower parts cost due to increased production, and parts that could be used in every GM vehicle.. perhaps it would have increased the wiring complexity and assembly time a bit. The inverter would have been integrated into the 50kw motor and shared its cooling.
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:57 pm)You have the right attitude that’s for sure. And if I had a 106 mile commute rather than a 6 mile commute I might think the same way as you do, though truthfully I personally haven’t been wowed when driving BMWs.
I have a friend how is a BMW fan, and we’ve been talking about driving the BMW 3 and 5 series and then the Cadillac CTS and the Buick LaCrosse. Should be fun to see what we think but we just haven’t gotten around to it yet.
Your conclusions may depend on how much of a car person you are. Some people say they can’t hear the difference between top end ear buds and lower end one while to me it’s night and day. Probably the same with cars — what some think is a big difference others will just think to be negligible.
Dec 17th, 2009 (2:59 pm)But the BMW could just use a standard regular battery …
Dec 17th, 2009 (3:02 pm)A better option would be sell solar electricity to the grid during the day, and charge the Volt from the grid at night, for 4 reasons:
1) peak electrical usage is during the day, especially in the summer
2) electrical rates at night are cheaper
3) batteries are expensive
4) there are many issues with swapping batteries
Dec 17th, 2009 (3:02 pm)Electric Motors are wonderful peices of equipment.
A high efficiency can be reached over a wide range of RPM values as well as differing power levels.
However, I think there will be a dramatic difference between a direct coupling and a transmission coupling.
The Volt and Roadster both are designed with a single speed fixed gearbox. This dramatically increases efficieny over “moving” transmissions such as Prius E-CVT (which is itself a huge improvement).
If an electric car uses a “moving” transmission, it will naturally have 10-20% less efficient conversion of battery energy to forward motion.
The BMW at the top apparently uses a moving transmission and a special electric motor. It may be a standard electric motor and fixed gear transmission may return more like ~3.3 miles per kWh or 120 miles of range in this same BMW.
Dec 17th, 2009 (3:09 pm)Van,
My point was that the loses for the Volt drive train would be less than the Prius because the later has a mechanical link. Loses are usually due to friction. The frictional loses of an electric motor are very low, allowing it to convert electricity to rotary motion with efficiencies over 86%. The electric motor is the more efficient apparatus.
Saying that the two vehicles use the same motor but one has an additional mechanical device that will result in a lower mileage per Kw for the later. I’m not sure of what the lost for the Hybrid Synergy Drive but believe I saw something about the lose for gear trains to be about 10% (efficiency of 90%); anyone with precise info on this please correct me if I’m wrong. Then we also have frictional loses going from the tires to the road. So 5.0 x 90% = 4.5 and Toyota is stating a figure of 4.1! Take it from there.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 17th, 2009 (3:10 pm)Nice concept, but I’m not sure those wheels scream Efficient Dynamics lol
Dec 17th, 2009 (3:17 pm)Excellent point. I wonder how Tesla does it.
Dec 17th, 2009 (3:39 pm)HSD is situated before the electric traction, not after it.
That 60kW motor is the final component, closest to the wheels.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (3:40 pm)Hey, that’s really cool! So this is your actual pv system being reported?
Dec 17th, 2009 (3:40 pm)Thanks!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (3:41 pm)I dont know why everyone wants to put the motor in the wheel itself. Put 2 motors/gearboxes at the rear end of the car where the differential would go. This removes the unsprung load. You could also just use 1 motor and leave the differential in there. Do the same thing on the front end and you have all wheel drive. There are motor controllers that can control several motors, but i’m sure something custom egineered would be best.
Dec 17th, 2009 (3:44 pm)LOL, as long as we’re transported between gigs in Volts!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (4:07 pm)Sweet. The ancestral home-town has a BMW parts factory. If the Volt has too high of a foreign parts content then I’ll take a look at one of these bad boys and not feel too guilty about it. 100 miles of “real world” range would be good enough on about 59 days out of 60 for me, and on the other day rest I can drive my wife’s car. The styling reminds me of a stock car.
Dec 17th, 2009 (4:48 pm)If you want to put four motors in a car for AWD, go ahead and do it; but connect them to the wheels via short shafts. You’ll still need the 4 channel controller, but the problem of unsprung weight for hub motors is solved and the motors will last a lot longer since they won’t “feel” every bump in the road.
How’s this for a compromise? 3 motors. One for each front wheel, and a single smaller motor attached to a rear, lockable differential. How would that work, snow guys? (I’m from the Deep South, so I have no idea how this might work out in practice). Would a motor for each front wheel work any better than the single motor/transaxle design such as the Volt’s?
EDIT: Sorry, kdawg, missed your #118.
Dec 17th, 2009 (4:49 pm)When you brake hard, the weight shifts forward. This means for maximal braking, the front brakes have to be stronger than the rear brakes. In a normal stop the front brakes also do most of the work only because the front brakes are sized larger. Traction alone doesn’t dictate this to be the case, it is simply a byproduct of the brake size.
For pure regeneration stopping, the rear tires can supply enough traction for the maximum regeneration possible. Regeneration can’t be any stronger than the “go” torque. If it doesn’t burn out the tires accelerating, there isn’t enough torque to slide the tires regenerating.
If the driver calls for more braking than regeneration can provide, then the friction brakes will come on. The friction brakes will remain sized with the front end bigger even in a RWD electric, so the extra power needed up front will be there.
That very same motor is both called a brushless DC motor or a permanent magnet synchronous motor. In reality it is a synchronous AC motor.
Yes, the control is more complex for an induction motor. With the synchronous AC motor, the drive waveforms can be trapezoidal and the timing of the switches can be driven only by rotor angle. The amplitude of the applied waveform is the only knob to adjust to change power. With an induction motor the current must be shaped into a sinusoid and the torque is controlled by both the slip frequency and current amplitude. The magnitude of each must be calculated for maximum efficiency and/or power.
The reality, however, is that with over 40 years of algorithm development and the computing power found in a modern $3.50 DSP processor, the difference in control complexity is irrelevant. There are already canned designs available to offer very good control over an induction motor so the design difference is negligible.
The only real difference is a power density advantage and a very slight efficiency advantage with the permanent magnet motor and a considerable cost advantage with the induction motor.
Dec 17th, 2009 (4:55 pm)Newer cars don’t need lockers. A over-spinning wheel can be checked at any time using the brakes and the already existing ABS hardware. Traction control performs even better than a locker because a locker has the tendency to “plow” the front end in low traction conditions. When the wheels are supposed to turn at different speeds due to turning, the traction control stays out of the way; but when you have wheel spin due to unequal traction, the over-spinning wheels are checked so more torque can go to the wheels that have traction.
The rest of it sounds real good: either two with double differentials or three as you propose. GM isn’t going to do it early on because the Volt is already over cost target, and two or three gearboxes mean more total hydrodynamic drag.
Dec 17th, 2009 (5:03 pm)Not sure if you are aware, but in-wheel motors have made tremdous strides in terms of weight:
http://www.pmlflightlink.com/motors/hipa_faq.html
The unsprung weight is now about the same as a regular car.
It’s clear to me that this is where we are headed. How long it takes to get there… who knows?
Dec 17th, 2009 (5:05 pm)Are you saying that the pair of powerful motor/generators (MG1 and MG2) go through the ICE to get to the wheels?
My understanding of HSD comes from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_Synergy_Drive#Power_sources
“HSD replaces the gear box (transmission), alternator and starter motor with a pair of powerful motor-generators[3] (designated MG1 and MG2, ~60 Hp total) with a computerized shunt system to control them, A MECHANUCAL POWER SPLITTER THAT ACTS AS A SECOND DIFFERENTIALl, and a battery pack that serves as an energy reservoir.”
AND
“MG1 effectively controls the transaxle’s continuously variable transmission.”
AND
“The mechanical gearing design of the system allows the mechanical power from the ICE engine to be split three ways: extra torque at the wheels (under constant rotation speed), extra rotation speed at the wheels (under constant torque), and power for an electric generator. A computer program running appropriate actuators controls the systems and directs the power flow from the different engine + motor sources. This power split achieves the benefits of a continuously variable transmission (CVT), except that the torque/speed conversion uses an electric motor rather than a direct mechanical gear train connection.”
AND
“An HSD transaxle contains a planetary gear set that adjusts and blends the amount of torque from the engine and motor(s) as it’s needed by the front wheels.”
Seems to me that the power is mechanically linked through the HSD. Do you have a source of information that shows otherwise?
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 17th, 2009 (5:18 pm)As I understand it, the peak efficiency of an induction motor will be a little less than a permanent magnet motor, but average efficiency of the induction motor may actually be better. This is because the B fields of the induction motor rotor are adjustable.
In other words, if you routinely use the electric motor at a small fraction of maximum output, induction is apt to be more efficient.
Note that cruising at 70 MPH on level ground only uses around 30kw of the Volt’s 110kw electric motor. Peak power is usually only needed for acceleration and uphill driving.
Dec 17th, 2009 (5:24 pm)y
Yes,, this is my actual system being shown in real time.
We generate 100% of our energy for our home and our transportation. Our system is a 7.4kw system which generates 12,000 kwh of electricity a year.
Annually, we will use 3700kwh for the Mini-E, 400kwh for our 2007 Gem E4, and 7900kwh for the annual energy use of our home for a total of 12,000kwh.
Solar fuel works out to a fixed cost of less than $0.50 per 30miles, or another way of saying this is it’s comparable to gas at $0.50cents a gallon. fixed in price forever.
Cheers
Peder
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (5:30 pm)Not to throw a rain cloud on your solar, but, if you only drive at night this might work
Probably be better to sell the solar to the electric company at 20 cents and buy it back at night to charge the Volt at 5 cents.
Dec 17th, 2009 (5:32 pm)No, exactly the opposite. MG2 (the big motor) is connected to the outer ring of the planetary-cvt, physically the end of “HSD” where the reduction chain/gear attaches. MG1 is the inner most (sun). ICE is the middle (planets).
Dec 17th, 2009 (5:33 pm)Yes, exactly.
Dec 17th, 2009 (5:36 pm)Like this:
Dec 17th, 2009 (5:50 pm)Exactly, and I hit the plus icon for you! I think that pure EV’s will only serve to highlight the practicality of EREV’s. You may not need it, and you may not wish to use it any more than is necessary, but having a ICE in the car to backstop those random times when you really need to blast the heater or run the A/C, when you really want to put the pedal to the metal, when you are using the headlights to drive all through the night, when you are heading off on a long road trip, when there is no place to plug in, is, as they might say, “priceless.” Pure EV’s are like walking a high wire without a net, IMHO.
Dec 17th, 2009 (5:51 pm)Bingo. You’re spot on.
We need to think about how we are going to fuel the Volt and future cars with plugs.
for 12,000 miles of electric driving you need 3500 kwh of electricity.
On a useage based approach this equals a 2kw solar PV system at a cost of $8000 that will provide the energy required 3500kwh to drive an electric car 12,000 miles a year for 25 years and beyond. that beaks down to $320 a year fixed cost.and that devided by 12000 miles is .027 cents a mile.
.027 cents a mile for 20 miles (equivilent of a gas car MPG) = 54 cents a gallon of gas equivilent,
Now for the bingo part.
On a cost based approach, I only need to generate 1750 KWH at the peak rate of 30cents a KWH to pay for my usage of 3500kwh at the off peak rate of 15cents a KWH.
You then devide the system size and the equation above by half and you end up with a gas equivilent of 27 cents for a gallon of fuel, fixed cost for the rest of your life.
Pretty cool, and very real. I live it everyday.
Cheers
Peder
Dec 17th, 2009 (5:56 pm)What do the letters S, C, & R stand for? Just curious.
TIA,
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (5:57 pm)Right.
I would add really cold days as well. This is where a pure BEV really has problems. With the Volt, the ICE runs for the first few minutes of driving until the battery is warm. This is a HUGE advantage for an EREV. We don’t all live in California…
Pure BEVs are for brave souls, not me.
Dec 17th, 2009 (6:01 pm)S: central “sun”
C: planetary “carrier”
R: outer “ring”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hsd
http://www.wind.sannet.ne.jp/m_matsu/prius/ThsSimu/index_i18n.html
Dec 17th, 2009 (6:16 pm)OIC, THANKS!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (6:18 pm)And it’s actually a win-win. You’re generating power to the grid when the power company needs it most. Peak electrical usage is during the day, especially hot summer days. This is why power companies offer large rebates on solar systems.
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (6:36 pm)Converj, anyone?
Dec 17th, 2009 (7:14 pm)I’m not sure where you live — when I saw your production my guess was you had a 7-8 KW system in inland CA or AZ — but most people are not likely to generate 3500 kWh with a 2 KW system given current efficiencies. Maybe half that in a lot of places. (I live in a fairly sunny place and get something more like 1500 kWh/kW).
As for cost, installed costs are generally around $7K/kW. Plus you will have wiring issues and potential panel failures and of course you will have to replace the inverter every few years. PV systems are not completely maintenance free.
Even with government subsidies the return on a PV system is middle single digits. Not terrible but no great shakes. Most people would do better by turning off the lights and junking the old refrigerator in the garage — the one that probably uses 1500-2000 kWh per year to cool a couple of six packs.
Dec 17th, 2009 (7:21 pm)You know more about this than I do. Why do you have to replace the inverter every few years?
Dec 17th, 2009 (7:42 pm)Sorry about that; after I read it, I realized what I said was wrong.
However, I did find a link later that depicts exactly what you said this time:
http://www.eahart.com/prius/psd/
This link has a nice interactive diagram that allows you to adjust the speed of the engine and MG2. I’ve found other links that show the electric motor, MG2, connected to the wheels as you indicate.
However, if you go to this link you will see a few interesting working of the HSD:
http://prius.ecrostech.com/original/PriusFrames.htm
Looking at this link, you will see that the wheels are connected to the engine/motors threw 1) a differential. 2) reduction gears, 3) a silent chain, and then 4) power split device. All of these are mechanical devices that put a load on the system that uses up power and causes the mechanical loses I have been referring to in my comments.
I hope this helps everyone understand how the HSD of the Prius operates.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 17th, 2009 (7:55 pm)I’ve got a “green” house I’ve been working on for the last few years (finally got moved in this summer). I had planned to use solar, but have to say, by the time I got it all done, it looks like it’s not going to be worth going up on the roof for the solar (even with the subsidies and DIY install).
I’ve spent some time running the numbers, but it keeps coming back to basically what Don alluded to: if you want to put effort into saving energy/money, the lowest hanging fruit is always conservation.
/Of course, if electricity rates were to double, I might have new outlook.
//The info I’ve gotten was the inverter should be good for 7 + years.
Dec 17th, 2009 (7:56 pm)Tag, go to :
http://www.eahart.com/prius/psd/
There is a neat interactive diagram if you scroll down that shows and explains a lot of this HSD.
also, go to; http://prius.ecrostech.com/original/PriusFrames.htm
drill down through Understanding the Prius and then Powertrain Components for another diagram. I failed to realize the need to drill down to get to Powertrain Components in my comment under #142.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:13 pm)A good inverter should last 7-8 years. Cheapo ones will go down a lot faster. Why do they go down so fast? Usually the cause would be said to be “immature state of the art” aka poor quality control and cheap parts.
But an inverter consists of different electronics, and with all electronics you know that sooner or later you are going to have failures of one type or another. Inverters are also mounted outside so the weather hastens the aging process along. And of course if you live near the coast the salt air doesn’t help. LOL
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:24 pm)I’m not so sure that the ICE automatically runs the first thing on cold days. The battery is warmed by the power (plug) and is heavily insulated. What you say is likely true in brutal cold when the Volt hasn’t been plugged in at night.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:28 pm)Thanks! I’m learning a lot (and still chuckling about cubits).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:43 pm)Well not quite.
A basic BMW coupe will run you $35k. A Cruze, about $20k (similiar to Volt, but sans battery).
Comparison can be done, but you need to first normalize the base car. So, take the price they quote for the BMW BEV, subtract $15k, then you have a “balanced” comparison.
BTW: My guestimate is the BMW comes in at about $60k.
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:45 pm)The Prius power mechanical path, thru all the gears/chains you mentioned, is 98% efficient.. 2% losses in all the gears, this was an improvement in the 2010 Prius, it used to be worse.
This is not the final efficiency of the HSD since about 25% of the wheel power is transmitted thru the electrical path at hwy speeds.. unfortunately the electrical path has only an efficiency of 70% due to all the serial steps in power conversion and such. If you go past about 70mph more and more of the power is transmitted thru the electrical path and thus the final efficiency of the HSD drops below a typical modern automatic transmission at speeds over 70mph, note the ICE retains diesel like efficiency. The Lexus GS450h modifies this by adding a clutch that changes the gear ratio on the MG2 motor to optimize the HSD for low and high speeds.
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:56 pm)These have 10 year warranties:
http://www.solarelectricsupply.com/Inverters/Solectria/index.html
http://www.solarelectricsupply.com/Inverters/xantrex/xantrex-gt-inverter.html
Still these are not cheap devices, one lightning strike and forget it
Dec 17th, 2009 (8:59 pm)It’s really enjoyable to have the comparison of Volt to BMW’s new entry. (A far closer and comparable set of technological pathways). It really seems that the prius comparisons are flogging a dead horse already. Very refreshing post, DonC. Very refreshing new comparison direction.
Just my guess, but I’m guessing that price is going to range between $88,000 and $94,000. (And they’ll get every penny of it too).
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:02 pm)We have a burger place near our house here in the Valley that grinds there own meat every day. They aren’t cubit size but are Angus meat and we just love them. We had a lot of restaurants up North where I came from that made great hamburgers but nothing like these!
Be Well and Happy trails to you .
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:05 pm)The french would use the short shafts and place the brakes ON the shafts also.. the ultimate in unsprung weight reduction
+1
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:10 pm)Its really a waste of time trying to compare the Volt with a Prius, we have very little to none hard numbers on the Volt’s performance.. even after it is released it will take time for someone to dig into it and measure everything.
The Volt and the Prius can coexist, no need to pit one against the other.. the more the merrier..
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:17 pm)The Prius comparisons provide a great peek at what we may go through trying to explain to people how the innards of the Volt differs from BEV’s. In it’s own way, the Volt’s architecture is every bit as complex as the Prius.
If the BMW edition comes out at the price of 2+ Volts – sans ICE backup – It’ll need to sell itself based on the BMW name, IMHO.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:22 pm)If we eliminate speculation from this site, it’ll be awfully quiet (g), but I totally believe that both the Volt AND the plugin Prius will do very well. They’ll both sell every one available for at least a year or two – probably longer. JMO.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:25 pm)How about a Mini Beachcomber, with the above mentioned AWD.
I got to hand it to BMW, the Beachcomber really hauls Cubits….
Dec 17th, 2009 (9:27 pm)LOL, most excellent!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Dec 17th, 2009 (10:03 pm)OK, what I really want is to Morph that thing into a better looking HHR Beach Buggy…
I see a bit of resemblance in the grill & fenders, the HHR would be, like the Volt, more aerodynamic.
Cheers
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:08 pm)Correct. The induction motor will beat the permanent magnet motor at high RPM, low torque. The permanent magnet motor beats the pants of an induction motor at low speed high torque where the rotor currents are really high.
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:19 pm)I’m curious who did the measuring to come up with those numbers? Are they Toyota’s or another lab’s numbers?
Dec 17th, 2009 (11:54 pm)Part of it was in an Argonne Labs report, but I dont have the link.
Dec 18th, 2009 (12:23 am)DonC
Hi again,
your correct, it’s So Cal in Carlsbad Ca. Our first install 2 years ago (4.5kw) was net cost to us 7k per KWH.
Our last install 3 months ago was 3kw with a net cost to us of 4k per KW. this is pretty typical around here.
Sunpower 215 panels, 25 years W 10 years W on inverter.
Inverter is warranted for 10 years, MTBF is 20 years. It is the one part you will most likely need to repalce during the 50 year life of the system.
The solar radiation maps show that the majority of the country would be within 10% to 30% of our generation with some areas even better than us.
But for the northern most folks solar is only half the kwh, this is true and makes it imprctical for many.
But that’s my story and I’m sticking to it
Cheers
peder
Dec 18th, 2009 (2:22 am)I think what you find is that the cheap inverters are sold by “Snoflake Enterprises”, meaning that when the warranty work piles up and the heat is on, the company just melts away. Basically the game is to sell cheap, using a long warranty to give a false sense of security. When the warranty claims start coming in, that company gets shut down, a new company selling the same stuff with the same long warranties shows up, and the rewind button is pressed.
The warranty issue is also present for the warranties on the installation of the system. I’m always surprised when people think a 20 year warranty from “ABC Local Roofing Co” means anything when the chances of that company being around for 20 years is remote.
Dec 21st, 2009 (5:57 am)As we all know about increasing Global warming, All automobile companies are concentrating on these Electric car which are also known as Hybrid cars. These cars has greater efficiency to produce the high power. than the fuel cars.
Now a days GM is leading in this technology, It’s good to hear that BMW is also in this race.
Jan 4th, 2010 (10:54 pm)Will it also be slow off the line, offer peaky power bands, herky, jerky shifting, especially at lower and moderate speeds and in technical driving (real world traffic and traffic infrastructure), and offer less horsepower over time and at higher altitudes, and unavoidably loud, intrusive engine noises so it is “more closely simulating a combustion engine”, as the article lauds?
Why anyone would want their vehicle to emulate the intrinsic deficiencies (er, characteristics) of being driven directly with a combustion engine is lost on me. That’s like trying to make a 21st century jet fighter aircraft such that it is “more closely simulating a combustion engine” propellor driven airmail biplane from the 19th century.
Oops, that was way too harsh, wasn’t it? I’m sure that BMW will get it just right for their typical customers’ desires:
http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1658545_1657686,00.html
Jan 4th, 2010 (11:30 pm)/electric drive enthusiast rant on
What I meant to say is show us the torque curve of the BMW ActiveE compared to today’s torque curve of a first edition BMW New Class that was used 15,000 miles a year on average. You know, the BMW New Class that went from 0 to 60 mph in 15 seconds when brand new. Add in the miles on the internal combustion engine and you’d be lucky to get from 0 to 60 in 20 seconds in a used original BMW New Class today. Why did I choose the New Class? That was the vehicle that financially rescued BMW during some tough times, through its popularity, and allowed BMW to ultimately export in bulk to the new world.
Do you think that 0-60 in 8.5 seconds, TWICE as quick as an original BMW New Class, AND multiple times more efficient than a Prius is good enough for today’s middle class driving slobs, by comparison?
On rear wheel drive, BMW has a history with this approach:
“How odd to launch a small car but still send the power hindmost. Front-wheel drive is certainly the future. With little effort the box could oversteer, requiring armfuls of opposite lock to point the nose onto the right course.”
That comment was about a coupe that cemented BMW’s original market share growth in the US.
Bring it!
/electric drive enthusiast rant off