another electric car

A quote from the article,
"The white flag is lowered. The first contestant is the Ferrari 360 Modena which the X1 rapidly passes in a hands down victory: on the quarter mile track, X1 clocks in at 11.9 seconds while the Ferrari trails behind at 13.5 seconds. The Porsche fares even worse, clocking five seconds slower than the Wrightspeed prototype. "

This must be wrong. That means the porsche turns the same time as a stock ford Expedition and only one second faster than my Prius. 11.9 seconds isn't all that fast either. The record for an electric car is 8.8 seconds in the quarter. My father in law's '57 chevy turns mid 8s. A Ferrari with 650 horsepower can surely do better than 13.5 seconds.

 

The link to the race video was posted in this thread (see post #4). Pretty neat stuff!!

 

With the blessing of Ian Wright, I made the streaming version of the clip and hosted it on my site: video
Is anybody else as excited as I am that I get to actually drive the X1 proto later this month? I didn't think so... h34r:

(watch the volume!)

 

The production car the X1's based on is the Ariel Atom. Spectacularly fast - one of the funniest moments in the last series of Top Gear was watching Jeremy Clarkson driving it, and the effect on his face of a 130mph blast of wind .

It's even street-legal. :blink:

How fast is the X1 compared to the Atom? The Atom does 0-60 in 3.5 seconds.

 

Between the ownership of EV's in the past, and getting the chance to drive the X1, I'm so friggin envious of you!

I'm so excited that this technology is coming forth. All I want is an inexpensive EV to take me my 4 miles to and from work, with a few miles here and there on the side.

 

There is either a serious problem with either the Porsche and Ferrari, or the drivers. A Porsche Carrera GT can do the quarter mile in 11.3 seconds, beating the Wrightspeed. The Ferrari also should be a full second faster in the quarter mile. It also has 400hp, not 650. For comparison purposes, the new Ferrari F430 can do the quarter mile in 11.7 seconds, which also beats the Wrightspeed. The F430 has 483 hp.

While I'm not trying to say the electric car is bad in any way, it is not a good comparison. Both of the gas cars were driven way under their capabilities. I have no way of knowing if this was intentional or what exactly happened, I'm not going to make any accusations.

I should also make it clear that I think the Wrightspeed is a phenomenal car. It's capabilites are spectacular. I think it's great that they built the Wrightspeed on an Ariel Atom chassis. Of course, this car can do what a Porsche Careera GT can do with one third thepower, so it's almost cheating. If you compare the creature comforts of either car vs. the Wrightspeed you get a severe discrepancy in equipment. Both the Ferrari and the Porsche have leather interiors, power windows, locks, etc, full stereos, and are much more civilized. Any car based on the Atom will be spartan at best. I'm very familiar with the Atom as I plan on purchasing either that or a Lotus Elise in a couple of years. I also know a lot about all the other cars as well, as I know poeple who own them. I have driven all of them other than the Carrera GT.

I think it's great that there are capable electric cars out there. I have bragged on more than one occasion that my Prius has far more torque than many of my friends cars, and can quite easily beat them off the line (and has... ). I wish that pure electric cars were more capable and not so severely limited. Did the Wrightspeed drive to the track? Did it drive back home after the race? Probably not, as it's batteries were likely depleted. And how long does it take to recharge? Either of hte other cars could just go home right after the race, no waiting or charging. In this respect I feel that EV's are never going to become as widely successful as other clean cars becuase of limited functions. Fuel cell, hybrid, and hydrogen vehicles WILL do much better as they will have "unlimited" ranges like gas vehicles do today.

Vehicles like the Wrightspeed are great. I'd love to drive one, and blast Mustangs and other punk cars off the road with no emmisions and practically no sound. But I likely never will, and my Atom/Elise will be a standard gas powered one.

 

I saw that piece, and yes, the facial distortion was amazing.

While the atom would have a higher top speed, and would likely reach that top speed faster than than the X1 if the X1 were geared for it, the X-1 will most certainly beat the Atom to 60. 0-60 in the X-1 is about 2.8 seconds. I sometimes sneeze longer than that!

In all of this we must realize that the X-1 is a one-off prototype that was designed, built and paid for by ONE MAN. This was not done by some huge coporation with limitless resources. And it is just the first attempt.

Glad to hear that nobody was tweaked about the "3x as efficiient than the Prius" comment.

 

I can't verify or argue with anything you've said here, unfortunately. I haven't a clue what the ICE cars are capable of. I do know that it was a "fair" race though as far as everybody was *trying* to go as fast as they could, and there were no practice runs. Or to be more clear - the ICE vehicles had all done the quarter mile before, and this was the first-ever quarter mile for the X1. The outcome was unknown during the filming. The cars were all driven by their owners, and each driver most definitely wanted to win. Everything also was street legal. As far as the ICE cars being driven below their capabilities... (** added after learning more **) that just is not the case, as I found out recently. See later posts.

No question that there are severe discrepancies. Just the weight differences alone are staggering. But Ian's main point (regardless of the commentator's words) is to show what EVs are capable of doing - because of the crazy image that EVs are all golf carts.

You and me both, brother. The deal is - it doesn't have to be this way. The "production" EVs that were made were fabulous cars - and they were made by companies that didn't want to make them, and they were the very first units. Imagine what we could have had by now on the third or fourth generation if the car makers WANTED to make them.... and did.

I don't know that answer, but I do know that the car could have easily made the round trip to the race track. The X-1 has a 150 mile range, and Ian lives in the Bay area. Regardless, I do understand the point the EVs have limited range. Still, 150 miles is 50% better than my car - and we use our electric for 95% of our driving. The better question is what would have happened if it were raining.

I have to disagree here. We have fast charging, and we have high-density batteries. Put them together and TODAY we have the capability of 300-400 miles of range with 15 minute recharge. This isn't unobtanium, it is real. Yes, it would be expensive (at first), yet would be just a drop in the bucket as compared to Fuel Cell development where we don't even have infrastructure and the cost of the vehicles still needs to come down by 99% before they're affordable. But even ignoring that, MOST vehicles spend their entire lives driving WITHIN the range of yesterday's' EVs (I won't call them current because they're all 10 years old now!). EVs even in their crippled configuration are still valuable cars right now - It just requires people to be realistic about how and where they drive. Just think of SUV advertising for an example of exciting people about driving in a way that they never really will drive.

My point: Not every car *needs* unlimited range. Hybrids might be the best way for when that is required, but it isn't required for all drivers. Not even close. When gasoline gets expensive, just take a look at how many long trips are suddently not so important to American motorists. With unlimited resources, things would look different. But today we have some stiff realities to consider when we think to our future of transportation.

Hey, when I get my X1, we'll have to hook up!

Thanks for your insight and good info.

 

Uh-oh. I might tick you off even more. My EV ownership wasn't just in the past. I've had an EV for seven years now.... and I still own two today (though the Ranger is for sale). The Rav4EV is our most-used vehicle, and covers 95% of our automotive miles.

A plug-in Prius would be just the ticket for this kind of stuff. Only burn gasoline when you need to.

 

Hi guys. Just back from my drive in the X-1, and I finally have the answer to this. I've now seen the video of all that went on that day, and learned many more details. There was no "serious problems" with any of the cars, nor with the drivers. ALL cars were hampered by the track conditions. These races were all held on a wet track. EVERY car will be slower on a wet track, even the X-1. On a dry track, they'd all be faster. The playing field was level... or biased to the gas cars. The driver of the Porsche insisted on a rolling start to "save his clutch." The Porsche had a hell of a time getting off the line. In fact, the one race shown was one of three competitions performed that day - and it was the only one where the Posche driver got a reasonable start (you may notice that he actually jumped the flag).

Either way, showing ACTUAL race numbers on a particular day (constgrained by real track conditions) has very little to do with the capabilities of the vehicles in perfect conditions, yes? All vehicles had to deal with the same conditions, and this was the result. The Porche driver in particular (all drivers in all cars were the owners) knew in his heart that no EV could ever beat his vehicle. Calling him "ticked" at the end of the day is likely a large understatement.

That said... I don't know if I'll ever be more excited about a drive in a car. It wasn't raining, but the streets were totally wet. Best acceleration we could do was 0-60 in 3.3 seconds. Quite a bit slower than what it can do on dry pavement. But oh man, what a ride! Passing another vehicle going 50mph takes the blink of an eye. I used to ride motorcycles, and I thought THEY were fast. Well... no more! What a day! Pictures and more later. I'm still on the road.

 

ahem, sorry but I lost you after "slender long-legged model saunters"

 

Actually the Atom can go 0-60 in less than 3 seconds if you can shift flawlessly!

 

Not to bash the EV car, even though I think its an awesome car. The cars that it is compared to are production cars. Yes the X1 is modified, so how will it stand under modified cars, like a twin turbo carrera gt with over 1500whp?

 

Good lord. I saw the clip with the models. They were all bought and paid for by the film crew. Worth seeing... but still silly.

 

The point isn't that it is the fastest thing on four wheels. The point is to show that EVs are not golf carts. I think this demonstrates that fact quite nicely.

What makes for a fair race? Same HP? Energy consumption? Weight? Cost to build? No limits beyond choice of fuel? There's no real level playing field here. The fact of the matter is that an EV can be made to be VERY fast.... nothing else to read between the lines.

One neat little factoid is that under race conditions, both cars in the video consumed gas at the rate of about 3mpg. The X-1 consumed the energy equivalent of 35mpg.

 

Excellent. How about with one gear, and no clutch?

The cool part here, guys - at least to me - is that all this phenominal performance is coming from a vehicle that when driven "normally" is 3x as efficient as a Prius. It will go 170 miles on the energy equivalent of one gallon of gasoline! Even when using maximum power, the car acheives better energy per mile numbers than the average small sedan at cruising speed. That, my friends, is what amazes the hell out of me. No, it has no doors. It has no production numbers. It is a one-off prototype built and funded by one individual, and on a dollar-per-dollar, and certainly on an energy-per-energy basis, I don't see much else able to touch it.

Obviously an ICE can be made huge and fast. But at what cost, and at what ENERGY consumption? An EV can be made huge and fast too, of course. The X-1 was built not for top speed or even top acceleration. It was built with many compromises so that it would also be a well-mannered street vehicle. Since I assume that most Prius folks are at least *somewhat* interetested in efficiency, I think this kind of performance coupled with this kind of efficiency is something to marvel at.

I want one.

 

Errr. Can't remember. Did I share my X1 page yet?

http://www.darelldd.com/ev/wrightspeed.htm

A few more videos that don't do the experience justice. You'd never know that we were doing 100mph between the corners.

 

I think it's worth pointing out that the X-1 is nowhere near as fast as it could be. It's a fantastic achievement, but it has still been developed a long way short of where lithium and motor technology could take it today.

Rasertech recently demonstrated a small electric motor in a race car that dishes out 500 horsepower, double that of the motor in the X1. LG-Chem have lithium-ion batteries that dish out 3kW per kg. With these it wouldn't be too hard to give a vehicle like the X1 1,000 hp - that's well beyond Formula 1 territory. Bear in mind also that the electric motorbike racers reckon for an ICE powered competitor to keep up with them on a medium track, the ICE bikes need 3 times the amount of power as the EV bikes just to keep up!

Presumably the only things that reigned in the X1 project from these sort of figures were dollars and sanity. With a little more of the first and a little less of the second, things could be very hairy indeed....

 

I like the way you presented this last sentence.

Yes, the X1 is a compromise. The goal was to build an "affordable" (in super-car terms) race car that was fully capable of sanely and legally driving on the street. There's obviously no question that an EV could be made faster, more powerful, etc. All it takes is money and effort... and it should be pointed out that it will typically take LESS money and LESS effort than an equivalent (if such an animal existed) ICE vehicle would require.

Electrics are all about torque - and as you've pointed out (but few people realize) the number of HP just doesn't translate to how quick the car will be. My EV1 had ~130 hp electric motor, and it was faster to 60mph than my V70T5 250HP Volvo. Vehicles weighed basically the same.