GM's 200 mile electric car
 

GM working on 200-mile electric car, exec says: Associated Press Business News - MSN Money

With current battery prices it should be possible, $18,000 in batteries should be able to power a car for 200 miles if they can keep the watt hours per mile down to 250 watt hours per mile and that is possible with batteries that I can buy at bulk prices right now.
That would be around 1,000 pounds of batteries of course.
As it is the 10 cheapest cars in the USA are $12,800 to $15,300, pull the cost of the gasoline parts and a glider might be as cheap as $10,000, leaving around $2,000 for the motor, controller and everything else.
So it would be tight to make a $30,000 car with a 200 mile range, but possible.

The GM EV1 was able to go ~55MPH at ~150-160Wh/mile, so that would greatly reduce the battery pack requirement.

The Nissan Leaf uses 233watt hours per mile at 55mph, but the average American doesn't drive like that! but a 24kwh battery from a Leaf would get it close to that 200 mile range.
Question is, what is the EPA rated range, at 70mph, going to be?

I could drive to my parents' house!

Also, I could use my electric car as an excuse for not driving further! :D

No! the goal is to make driving so cheap that people will drive everywhere, all the time! once we get self driving cars when you are bored you can just get in your car and travel across the country.
Put 100,000 miles a year on your car because it's so cheap! other then the congestion and road repair costs.

So, if the average goes from 15,000 to 100,000 miles per year, there would be several times as many cars on the road at any given moment.

Would doubling our roads handle that?

Obviously, we need to perfect micro homes and self-driving cars, then we can pave the world and never stop moving from one stretch of asphalt to another!

I am sure it will turn out like the 238MPG volt and it will be built after the next time our government bails them out.

Hmmm I had never considered that.

ALERT: TROLL/SCAMMER lol

They'll get to deleting it/them. No value to any of their messages. I can't be too judgemental, as I just posted a link to a newer company that could have helped me (the old referral program gave new members who were referred people a free month, AND the new members).

Guys, you can use the red triangle ! icon in the lower left corner to report the post. ;)

And idiot.
But a true scammer at the very least.

Yeah... deleted. But FYI, don't quote them! The only reason they post here is to hi-jack our Google ranking to promote their spammy links, so quoting them helps them.

Gah! Nice. Noted. lol

Makes sense. I know I have heard that before, but slipped my mind.

ON TOPIC.

Is it worth while to have a fully electric car with a bigger battery than just a small tank, and the engine (diesel maybe, .5L?) just charge the battery when it gets low?

I keep laughing at the idea of clicking it on your post and saying "It works!"

Not going to, though, that would be bad!

Oh sure! Make me delete my own post after very politely asking to have it deleted as well! :D

There is an on-topic? That is allowed?! :P

Something like a cheaper equivalent to the Fisker Karma?

Exactly. Cruze/Focus size. Why couldn't a totally stripped out model be >25k?

Top Gear made one. Seriously, I know it was entertainment and a big joke, but it worked. It's not the solution but it's a cheap alternative to hybrids and electric.

I have already seen some portable gensets fitted with stationary single-cylinder Diesel engines with a built-in fuel tank, which could be easily contained under the hood of a Focus or a Cruze. The batteries could be mounted in the place of the OEM fuel tank.

I have already considered some different setups for the fuel tank, to save some space, such as a custom one to be mounted behind the dash, altough that would probably be illegal...

I honestly have no idea why more than just a handful of people would want, or require, their electric vehicle to go 200+ miles on a charge. 265 miles on a Tesla is absurd, and a waste of money.

Most families have 2+ cars, one of which should be a gasser. If the need arises to travel more than 100 miles, they should take the gasoline powered car. For those that have only an electric car in the stable, they should temporarily swap for their friend's gasoline car for the longer trip... and these are just 2 of the many other solutions to the range anxiety people have concerning electric cars.

I'd like to see a Leaf equivalent car sell for ~$20,000 and be available in the used car market (private party) a few years later for half that price. One of my cars would then be electric. As it is, there is no cheap commercial option out there for me, so I'm likely to purchase a used Prius.

The generator idea has been discussed at length in this thread, starting at about post #154.

To sum it up, if you're going to burn fossil fuels to propel a vehicle, it's more efficient to directly use the mechanical energy in a mechanical way, (IE pusher trailer). Extending the range of an electric vehicle using gas defeats the purpose of an electric vehicle.

The purpose of an electric car is to travel with electricity. As you mentioned, who needs the range to go 100+ miles in one direction? Well, if one had 35 miles of electricity(much less battery), and a generator to power up and charge it then shut down, it seems like the purpose is to make electricity, and extend that range when it's needed.

Not all power comes from rainbows, sunshine, and gentle breezes- it's still a fossil fuel somewhere. But that would offer an alternative. If some one from horseville was on the fence about an alternate fuel vehicle, would they be more likely to risk an electric vehicle, or use one with a back up?

Using gas is the opposite of defeating the purpose. It's expanding the purpose in a cost effective manner. Not wasting weight, money, and resources on batteries that will go unused. 40% of the batteries and a little generator could do wonders on a 200 mile commute, 20 mile commute, or 3,000 mile cross country trip.

I quite like the idea of a generator extending the range of an electric vehicle, but it simply cannot do that efficiently. I see that the point of the generator is to extend the range, but I see no reason for doing so inefficiently when there are more efficient ways to travel those longer distances.

Regardless of the hypothetical ignorant consumer, it's more efficient to produce electricity in bulk and distribute it, than to have mini power stations attached to electric vehicles. I'll admit that I may have missed the point regarding a consumer being offered a choice between an EV, or an EV with a generator. The Volt is essentially an EV with generator, but it doesn't get good fuel economy when running on gasoline, and is phenomenally expensive.

I'll argue that the 200 mile commute and 3,000 mile cross country trip are best served by a fuel efficient gasoline powered car, and that an EV is a poor choice for these distances. As you point out, making an EV with a minimum of weight, cost and resources is efficient. This relegates their use to typical commutes and around town errands. Pairing an EV with a generator is an added expense, hassle, and is inefficient when other alternatives exist.

If you read through the other thread I linked to, you will see that I started off on the side of generators for all EV owners. Eventually I crunched the numbers and came to the conclusion that it only makes sense if someone already has a generator, or has an alternative use for a car generator, such as emergency power for the home.

The longer range is what makes Tesla be considered more seriously than just a neo-hippie attempt or a celebrity toy in the eyes of the average Joe. Not everybody would either want to keep a gasser beater to be used just eventually, or to depend on someone else's car.