Fully electric cars and range

As a Leaf driver since July 2013, first off, via the J1772 inlet, it accepts AC, NOT DC. It will not let you put the car into READY mode w/anything connected to the J1772 inlet. So, you can't shift into D or R.

There is an optional
CHAdeMO Association inlet for DC fast charging, but you'd need reverse engineer or properly implement everything that is required for that charging standard's protocol and its safety checks:
Technological details — CHAdeMO Association and
Certification test — CHAdeMO Association. But, you'd also run into the problem of not being able to put the car into READY while connected. BTW, another problem w/the CHAdeMO approach is the price of the connector, besides all the engineering work required. See Chevy Spark EV Forum • View topic - CCS to CHAdeMo adapter?. Skip to about ~58:05. (Spoiler: $2200/each, in quantities of 100.)

Back to J1772 inlet, not only would you need to supply AC of the proper voltage, you'd need also confirm to its protocol: J1772Basics - open-evse - The Basics of the J1772 pilot protocol - Open Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) - Google Project Hosting . A few more details in the last PDF at Downloads - open-evse - Open Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) - Google Project Hosting .

The reason for not letting you put the car into "gear" when connected is to prevent accidental drive off w/the car still connected, which would break and/or damage the handle, connector/inlet, cable and possibly the station too.

 

It appears electric cars are deliberately restricted by existing manufacturers.

The Nissan Leaf has a battery worth $5k and has about an 80/100 mile range. OK, let's increase the battery by 50% at a cost of $2,500 and get a range of 120/150 miles. A Leaf costing $22k will then cost $24k with a much more usable range. Surely that would make it much more sellable?

And if they say they can't fit it in the Leaf, then what about in one of their SUVs? Or the 7 seater EV they sell in Europe?

This very discussion of all EVs being restrictive in some way is hot stuff on the UK ev forums. All of them other than Tesla are restricted; limited range, 4 seats not 5, weird and/or strange designs, no fast charging, no medium charging with some, etc.

Other than Tesla, and maybe Nissan/Renault to a lesser degree, they really don't have their hearts in it. They're not stupid, so it must be deliberate.

 

No doubt, there are many various reasons but battery size and cost is the central reason.

The battery cells that Tesla is using are about 50% more energy dense by weight and 100% more energy dense by volume. They are also cheaper per kWh because of that and because of high volume purchasing. The downside is needing to assemble thousands of them to make a pack.

But Tesla's aggressive GigaFactory battery and Model 3 plans along with R&D improvements by other battery makers along with government sponsored lab research is quickly driving these trends at other battery makers as well. Thus, we see GM and LG Chem moving quickly to bring out the Chevy Bolt with similar capabilities, price point, and timeline as the Model 3 with access to a widespread supercharging network being the only missing piece (so far). And we see other automakers now beginning to publicly fall into line with preliminary plans of their own.

JB Straubel and Elon Musk are claiming battery cell price targets of around $100 per kWh for 2020. At that price and with improved cell density we will soon see widespread availability of 200-300 mile cars for $mid-30K and 80-120 mile cars for $25-30K in the U.S. market.

 

I'm not so sure.
Some other OEMs are into BEVs including GM who is still tinkering with the Bolt over here.

I'm seeing a near arms-race pace of development with PHEVs and BEVs compared with where we were 5 years ago. The thing that I'm stymied about is why they're not wildly popular in the EU.
Our gas is much less expensive and we drive much further.
PHEVs over here are getting to be cheaper than their wireless contemporaries after the state and federal kick-backs, and BEVs prices are dropping faster than Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush's popularity ratings.

As far as the OPs suggestion, I'm thinking that 10 AGM batteries would represent both a cost and physical safety challenge in a LEAF sized vehicle, and the follow-on Leafs are probably already in prototype testing.

Patience.....

 

I believe in China regular lead acid batteries are used in cheaper EV's with some success, since lead acid is cheaper than Li.

 

That's been pondered over here too. I think it depends where in Europe as it does in the US. Some States offer incentives like California and as such EVs are very popular. In other States nothing is offered and thus barely any EVs are sold. There are also restrictions on which States get certain EVs too.

The same applies here. Norway and the UK are quite pro EV, France is starting to become so, especially in Paris, yet I can't see EVs popular in the old Eastern Block countries, and I believe some models are just not sold there at all. The added problem we have in the UK is that we're a RHD market and that can limit some models, though does open us up to many JDM products instead, such as being an early market for the Outlander PHEV.

EV/PHEV sales in the UK are up 400% this year to last, and seem to becoming much more popular. Mrs Cabbie and I just returned from a walk at a country park 10 miles away and we passed 3 Outlander PHEVs on the return trip alone. The PIP by comparison is rarely seen. I was at my Toyota dealers yesterday and they had one on display. When I enquired it was reported that it receives attention until the price is discussed, then that attention is very quickly lost.

 

whats the range on the outlander?

 

Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV | Speak EV - Electric Car Forums
Outlander EV range | Speak EV - Electric Car Forums

Between about 20 in winter and 30+ in summer. Some have got about 40 in ideal circumstances. The Outlander PHEV has a Chademo port so can easily be fast charged in about 10-20 minutes at virtually all UK motorway services as well as elsewhere.

 

thanks. i was thinking ev, i guess that's what the o/p is looking for. i'm sure in the next 5 years there will be more options from 120-200 miles. hill, don't say it, not from toyota.

edit: i was thinking kia soul, but that's around 100 miles as well.

 

Not exactly... I doubt Nissan is able to make the Leaf's battery pack for $5K yet, given the industry prices I've heard. I don't think they're making any money at the $5500 price for a replacement (My Nissan Leaf Forum • View topic - Update on Nissan LEAF Battery Replacement). Nissan said they were losing $ on each, at that price: Nissan Leaf $5,500 Battery Replacement Loses Money, Company Admits. At this point, that's probably true.

I believe a primary reason why virtually all pure BEVs in the US have about the same range as a Leaf (~70 to 80ish miles on the EPA test) is because of the California ZEV program, see credits list at Toyota Rav4 EV Forum • View topic - Why did Toyota build Rav4 EV? Why hydrogen after 2014 ?. You can read http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/factsheets/zev_tutorial.pdf for the gory details.

Numerous BEVs are California only compliance cars (due to the above) or CA compliance cars + CARB emission states.

There is not much incentive from a ZEV credit POV to have a little more range but at a higher cost, for what many perceive to be expensive as is. Too high at cost can == low sales. The notable exception is Tesla.

The Rav4 EV had MUCH better range as it had a ~41 kWh usable battery vs. ~21 kWh for the Leaf, but it was WAY expensive (and barely sold) until Toyota started putting on huge incentives. It was California only and Toyota only built 2600 before it was discontinued (Toyota even has CARB Mandate For Zero Emission Vehicles.).

We are finally starting to see a few more w/a little more range like the Kia Soul EV and Mercedes B-Class ED.

Part of the problem of just putting on more batteries is short of a chemistry w/higher energy density, you may need a larger car. Model S is EPA classified as a large car.

Also, Tesla's using a much more dangerous chemistry. See My Nissan Leaf Forum • View topic - Lithium ion batteries suspect in 787 fire from Volt thermal management system temperature band?.

TonyWilliams also refers to this at My Nissan Leaf Forum • View topic - How to put out a Lithium Battery Fire and My Nissan Leaf Forum • View topic - Steel Reinforced Battery Pack.

Take look at the video at Nissan LEAF Battery Cell Destruction Video - NO FIRE - Just A Little Smoke | Inside EVs. Look at the 2nd video at
Man steals, crashes, catches on fire and breaks in half Tesla Model S when they cut to the scenes at night. You can see what are obviously cells shooting in the air.

 

(sigh)

 

leaf / "safer" versus model S "more dangerous" - I think the comment after this article that best sets facts straight, was the fellow who pointed out 1 screwdriver in one module is hardly tantamount to a 100+ mile per hr /cutting the car in half Tesla collision . And if that doesn't put reality in focus a tad better..... then remember what happens when you pierce a gasser's gasoline tank. Unlike the Tesla - which protects the life of the 100+mph idiot Tesla driver - the gasser simply causes Instantaneous Kaboom !

 

Does it really? I hear this assertion all over the place and I've yet to see any real examples of outright gasoline explosions (although fire is a real risk)

 

While true that the instantaneous explosion is largely a myth, a large percentage of highway deaths are a result of fires, and seemingly spontaneous fires of ICE vehicles is vastly more common than any type of fire in electic vehicles (as measured by incidents per Million miles traveled).

The Leaf battery chemistry is 'safer' than the Tesla's battery chemisty.
Both are far safer than ICE vehicles.

Alternatively, the Model S has better crash test safety results than the Leaf. Actually, by the measurements they provide, better than any car ever tested.

 

I'm honestly interested in seeing data showing where highway deaths are primarily caused by fire as opposed to collision.

As for the "safest car ever" - a lot of cars get the same crashtest scores, but without all the "enthusiastic" people endlessly repeating marketing talking points.

 

A correction, I did not say "primarily". I said a large percentage. Perhaps a better term would have been "significant percentage".
As it turns out though, I was incorrect. It seems the actual number of highway deaths is only about 1%. Thank you for pushing back on that, I learned something

There are about 10-13 deaths per Billion miles driven: List of motor vehicle deaths in U.S. by year - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to:

Vehicle fire trends and patterns

the number of fire related deaths are about 0.15/Billion miles.

While collision/overturn is only listed as causing 3% of fire events, they are responsible for 58% of fire fatalities.

As for safety, a lot of cars do not get 5 stars across the board. A few do, about 1%.
Here is a list of 2014-2015 models that managed it: 8 New Cars With 5-Star Crash Ratings for 2014 and 2015

However, there are additional numbers that show in the tests. One is the rollover percentage rate.
The Tesla scored 5.8% (from memory). No car ever tested got even close to that. Most start in the 8-9% range and it goes up from there.

 

I think they suffer from several problems:

1. Limited range.
2. Limited charging infrastructure.
3. Long recharge time.

The 3 above make an electric vehicle out of the question for me. Not sure what the solution would be. Maybe easily swappable batteries?

 

The statistic that basically says "if the collision at 70mph doesn't kill you, the ensuing fire likely will" is far more reasonable than any gas-tank or battery explosion/conflagration hyperbole. I was honestly a little surprised by the tremendous hostility I got from fellow Tesla owners when making jokes about making it across town without dying in a car fire.

Quite a lot of newer cars do well on the new NHTSA tests because they're engineered to do well in the simulated test - for example the car's listed have generally had relatively recent major model refreshes (as opposed to slight changes to existing designs).

As far as rollover risk goes, I'd argue the big dichotomy is between SUV/crossover/tall-obese-vehicle and everything else. The rest is really arguing tenths of percentages.