Fisker . . . a poor shadow of a Volt?

with ev, the more the better. as long as you don't have to pay for it! what is the shortest range of an ice vehicle? that's the benchmark fo ev. hybrid? more difficult to answer. there are so many possible combinations.

 

I think Toyota actually got it right.
But, The genius of the Plug in Prius escapes most folk, apparently.
The Ev range may seem paltry, but the total package efficiency is stellar.

The current and forthcoming domestic offerings are masking comparitive ICE inefficiency with a larger battery pack.

That being said, I hope the next evolution of the Pip has a greater EV capacity, but maintains all other attributes.

 

I think you guys might be stuck in the "ICE age". Wanting to achieve the most efficient use of gasoline is noble, but very narrowly constrained.

Why would you want to optimize on gasoline rather than some other input, like kWh or BTU? The nice thing about EV is that you have a choice of energy sources, wind, solar, hydro, waste heat, geothermal, natural gas, coal, nuclear, etc ...

 

I respectfully disagree with you there Bob.
I want a car that is the most efficient over the distances I travel most frequently.
So if I make 10 mile trips 90% of the time, an 20 mile trips 10% of the time, as long a the car is at least 2/3 as efficient in the 20 mile trips I still come out ahead.

Now, this does mean what is best for each driver is completely individualized. But, tastes in cars is now, so maybe that isn't so bad.

 

The problem with that and a twin fuel and power system like a plugin is that you likely have to hinder the efficiency when going by the standard of the other. Unless you meant 52mpg or higher, the EV side would have to intentionally waste gas in order to have its input to not pull up the gas sides fuel economy.

The Prius PHV does that without the serious handicap on EV efficiency. The EV is used until the engine is warmed up. Roughly, since it actually has a EV range longer to it really needs for that. A block heater could probably give most of the benefit without the high cost.

It does have some hinderences on its EV efficiency. By not having the ICE decouple from the electric drive train, its spinning is a parasitic loss. To counteract this, and also of preheating benefit, gasoline is burnt during EV. The battery is also too small for EV. This isn't a statement against short range PHVs. If an otherwise EV only trip requires highway travel or just involves a heavy merge, the Prius PHV will burn gas for what could be a gas free trip. In the cost benefit analysis, these drags on EV efficiency are truly minor and cost savings greater sticking with standard Prius drive train and using a smaller battery, but they are there. Ford apparently agrees for the upcoming Energis.

I think GM's decision to aim for an EV range that can serve the majority of US commutes is good for PHV range. The EV efficiency is comparable to most BEVs on the market(so is the Prius PHV), despite carrying around the weight of a ICE and gas tank. Gasoline economy actually to compares to most hybrids. The Prius is the exceptional outlier in fuel economy of what's available now. Even though the Volt doesn't match the Prius in fuel economy, it seems to be saving more gas. Focusing on just the gas fuel economy regardless of individual use ignores the potential of gas saving through more usable EV range and ability.

In future, PHVs and BEVS might be offered with different battery pack sizes to better fit an individual's budget and use. I can see the next generation Volt actually getting a smaller in kWh battery. The 2013 has increased EV range and efficiency because GM realized they were too conservative with the pack and freed up some of the reserve buffer. Reducing the pack size will reduce weight. Increasing efficiency for all modes. It might also allow for a fifth seat. Ending the seats 4 argument and widening appeal to more buyers might be worth a slight reduction in EV range. Depends on how battery life is holding up and, unfortunately on the tax credit.

 

I hadn't thought of it from that perspective before, and I'm now wondering whether it would be worth it for more manufacturers to offer PHEVs with a variety of battery packs. So long as they could be added serially, it wouldn't compromise production costs or efficiencies, and it would allow the buyer to more or less customize the car for its intended use (or simply save money on the front end by not buying more battery than necessary or affordable). After all, you still can by most mid-size cars with either an I4 or V6. For a PHEV, though, there is no worry about having to marry different ICEs and transmissions. One should do the trick. It is kind of the same as selling the car with a larger gas tank and beefed up springs as an option to the base model.

 

We have a few issues here. First I would say a phev is going to be more efficient short distance, a hv low efficiency short distance. The idea in a phev is to substitute electricity for gasoline. This produces less tailpipe emissions in our polluted cities and reduces oil imports. Many would be happy at 70 mpge and longer range, the electrical efficiency of the volt or phv are not an issue. We do have liquid cooled/heated batteries in the volt and that could be used to preheat the engine. A cold weather package for the phv could include a block heater and phone app to set time to leave.

The karma simply was about form not function. The bmw ice should improve cs efficiency. The high weight and rolling resistance of the tires makes it tough to improve cd efficiency.

Ford seemed to push the battery up to 68kw (90hp) and electric speed to over 80 mph. That will allow many to stay in EV mode. Toyota seems to be working on higher power batteries, which means they may be able to do what the energis do in a phv pack size. Toyota has been getting the feedback that initial adopters want a more ev like experience.

+1

As battery tech gets better I would expect that the added weight of the bigger pack becomes less of a disadvantage.

GM actually slightly changed the chemistry, and felt more comfortable using a larger SOC due to longer testing. GM is likely to use a lower kwh battery in a different model than the volt. I expect volt 1.5 to be 40 miles aer.

The transit connect, tesla S, and Rav4 bev show the way to reduce battery pack volume problems. Lay it flat accross the floor. I don't think the 4 seat argument has much merrit. The leaf and phv have 5 seats and sell less. The key is reducing costs in the volt in the future. That seems to be the biggest complaint, but the new lease rates may be working.

 

The I4 and V6 are probably a better analogy since a larger pack can also increase the electric motor's power output with the higher energy flow possible. It's a question of cost as to if it happens. The cost of batteries has been dropping. If the battery support components; charger, thermal management system; costs remain relatively fixed, the cost savings and probable efficiency loss may not be worth effort. Parallel/serial hybrids and even parallel hybrids ICE drive trains puts limits on the max size of battery possible. The multiple battery options will appear on BEVs first.

It will interesting when a 100mile EV range PHV becomes possible. At that range, a pure serial hybrid's inherent inefficiencies become more acceptable. The less time it is used, and greater installation options, make a comparatively lower fuel economy more acceptable. But at that time, would add on generators, or even fuel cells, be more feasible for BEVs?

 

The current tax credit rewards Karma ($7,500) more than Prius PHV ($2,500).

Which plugin has a higher chance of succeding, reaching the middle market and becoming more affordable for the average family and their functional needs?

In that sense, the plugin tax credit is ineffective because it is promoting the inefficient plugin and penalize a better cleaner plugin.

 

The credit is to help plug-ins by offsetting the cost of the new technology(mostly the battery). Not advance better emissions itself, and even inefficient ones are more efficient than the average vehicle.

The Karma's price starts above $100,000. Few will be sold. The amount of the tax credit has little to do with a buyers decision on whether or not it is within their budget. Buyers of the Karma are very unlikely to buy a Prius PHV. The Corvette and other super sports cars are its competitors.

 

Isn't the whole point of the incentive is to make the plugins successful?

The A123 would sell a lot more battery if they are in Ford C-MAX Energi rather than in Fisker Karma, espeically if both cars qualify for the same tax credit amount. That's basically my point.

 

Yes and all EV car makers are padding their bottom line with it. Car would costs $30k but qualifies for $2.5k incentive so MSRP moves up to $32.5K.

I think once the incentives are used up (or cut if a certain someone is elected) then you will "magically" see costs come down very quickly. <wink, wink>

 

$110,000 I was quoted last week by a Fisker rep. I am going to go with Tesla Model S instead <not - just kidding>. They told me next Fisker will be made in USA. I am not a huge fan of plug-in yet, but I can see where, if you are going to take the trouble to plug-in every nite, then you probably want at least the PiP EV distance.

 

Compare Side-by-Side

Click the link above. The karma has a cd range of 33 miles three times further than the prius phv. It gets about the same gas mileage as the lexus lsh after the batteries are depleted, and has a similar price. YMMV The volt and tesla S get significantly better CD range, are made in america, and cost much less. I thought the atlantic factory location was unknown now, the karma is made in denmark.

Fisker Gets $100 Million In New Funding To Build The Atlantic

Well yes, the karma has a bigger battery. Toyota has sold more, so the government has encouraged more phv sales. 1900 x $7500 = $14M for the karma. 6068 x $2500 = $15M for the prius phv. Since that $15 is bigger and a higher percentage of the sales price and manufacturing costs, I would say toyota is getting subsidized more by the tax credits by the US government.

Which ever one is more successful will get more of a subsidy. That is the beauty of the system when it comes to technology incentives.

Last I checked $15M was bigger than $14M. I don't see a penalty for toyota, they along with GM wrote the law. Toyota lowered the minimum battery pack to 4kwh. They will likely use a bigger battery pack in the next car as battery prices have come down, which was the hope of the subsidy.

Now there is a doe loan to fisker, that seems quite political. Al gore and Leo Decaprio probably helped as they are investors and got the first cars. But the tax credit system is fair to all manufacturers. I think tesla is likely to get the highest benefit from the credits and is likely to be most successful with bevs. The point is not to reward past accomplishments but allow new players to innovate.

 

The Volt has won me over to the PHV concept. A BEV plus other can work for many families. Its just even with increasing ranges, it would be a leap of faith for most of them to change. There are limitations that they would have to accept, and make changes to accommodate that. It sounds like a major thing looking at that sentence. That's mostly our fear of change though. After owning a PHV, I think most would make the leap when a BEV could meet their needs.

If the Karma gets the same gas economy as the LS600h, then it isn't a bad hybrid. But what did they do to get such low EV efficiency. Its worse than the Transit Connect EV, and that's a converted ICE brick.

 

The proposed new CAFE targets 54 MPG CAFE of course only apply to cars, so SUV's and minivans are trucks. What makes sense about this proposal is it probably forces families to have max one SUV and one Prius-type car or plug-in. Which is pretty much my situation now. We put 75% of our miles on the Prius. The minivan I only use when I think nobody from Prius chat is watching me.

 

Hehe, after living with plugging in every night for a little over 2 years, I have to say it is much more convenient that pumping gas once every week or two. Perhaps it is more of a personal thing.

 

285/35R22 tires in the rear have to have high rolling resistance. Cd of .31, and likely they aren't doing as well on regen braking, but the numbers still seem out of line. The 19" wheels on the tesla S don't take nearly the hit, and cd is .24. Tesla S 89 mpge, Karma 54 mpge.

It is partially needs not wants. Many of us need more than a 80 mile range. Its a want to have a car without an ice. I could do with a tesla S 60kwh pack, but a phev is likely less expensive other than the karma. Most days I do not drive more than 25 miles. I would likely do over 80% electric miles with a 40 mile pack, and 50% with a 20 mile pack. With the tesla, I would be in another car 10% of the time, but those are trips with other people anyway, so no rental needed.