HONDA COULD KILL TOYOTA

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(usbseawolf2000 @ Oct 30 2006, 01:48 PM) [snapback]340508[/snapback]</div>

They were available in 1997-1999. (Google is your friend. )
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_...v33/ai_19597639
http://hondaev.org/acar.html

Ken@Japan

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Bryanmsi @ Oct 29 2006, 01:21 PM) [snapback]340332[/snapback]</div>

This is how I see it happening too. When you look at WWII aircraft engines you'll notice that the superchargers (both turbochargers and mechanically-driven superchargers) started out as a small, ancillary component tacked onto an existing piston engine. Then came progress.

As the war progressed, the supercharger sections got larger and more complicated and, by the time of the US's wild Grumman Bearcat (right at the end of the war), the supercharger was about the same size as the engine. Of course, the guts of a turbocharger are, essentially, the guts of a jet engine. The supercharger got larger and the pistons just "fell off," leaving a jet engine. By the mid-50s, the piston engine was left behind.

The Luftwaffe had the ME-262 jet in production during the war, but there were still many wrinkles to be worked out, not the least of which was range. If "piston engines" sounds to you like "conventional cars," and "supercharged piston engines" sounds like our Prius hybrids, and "jet" sounds like total electric cars, then you've latched onto my evolutional allegory.

Except for a few weirdos (like me), we are nowhere close to total-electric cars. If I had one, I'd figure a way to get by with it, but they're just not "there" yet. The necessary advance in batteries may take 5-years, or it may take 50. Then again, the day won't come at all if someone finds out that Mars (for instance) has some little organisms that eat carbon dioxide and burp hydrogen.

GeronimoPFudgemuffin

 

I really like your comparison - its a good analogy.

Personally, I can imagine a day not too distant when a vehicle is offered with a 500cc, 100 pound ICE used primarily for "limp home" power. Such an engine would add negligible weight to an EV but would create a massive safety net for any occasion where the battery was exhausted. Such a small engine and a correspondingly small (5gal) gasoline tank could be a lifesaver and provide just enough power for the owner to get to a spot where they could recharge.

But a battery that charges in 20 minutes might just change all this. If you could charge an EV as quickly as you can refill a gasoline tank, I think many people would consider one.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Bryanmsi @ Oct 30 2006, 01:44 AM) [snapback]340526[/snapback]</div>

Gasoline's energy content is ~ 32 MJ/Litre, or about 32/.75 = 42.6 MJ/Kg
1 MJ = 0.278 Kwh
If energy effeciency is 30%, useful work is 42.6*0.3*0.278 = 3.558 Kwh/Kg gasoline

Li-ion is closing in to about 0.1 Kwh/Kg useful energy.

So the correct effective energy density ratios of gasoline to Li-ion battery are 36:1, not 100:1.
--------------------------

I say PHEV -- all the way.
How much to downsize the engine isn't really an engineering question, but a consumer choice one, and there is no reason not to expect to see choices. As for the worry about not being able to pass on inclines without a 3Liter engine when the battery is depleted-- I for one could not care less if it were true; which it is not, given good engineering which turns the car into a hybrid like we all drive when most of the battery has been depleted.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Bryanmsi @ Oct 29 2006, 09:57 AM) [snapback]340296[/snapback]</div>

back to the "if it aint perfect, it wont work" line of thinking...

thought we were all past that.

this 90% solution, 10% of the time discussion is a HUGE waste of time. there is no current 90% solution out there today, so why should we try for one now??

honda, or anyone for that matter, should develop a working affordable electric AND plug in hybrids since both vehicles, if done well, will sell and flourish in the niche markets they were designed for.

the Prius succeeded, not because it was a hybrid (if that were the case, why doesnt the insight sell, its cheaper, gets better gas mileage...) because it was like another great seller, the Camry. it succeeded because its an excellent product, well made that fits the needs of a niche market better than any other option out there.

that is the only reason...we are blinded by the hybrid hype, the gas mileage figures, etc, but the Prius is simply another example, in a long line of examples, from the best car company in the world, that takes the consumers needs into consideration and delivers on those needs better than anyone else.

electrics that have a 150 mile range and needs several hours to recharge would easily fit a niche market of the public ultilities fleets of most major cities. that accounts for 25 million vehicles. based on that information alone, the vehicle would be in the top 25 best sellers of all time.

sounds like a viable business option to me

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DaveinOlyWA @ Oct 31 2006, 11:58 AM) [snapback]341245[/snapback]</div>

Here is where I think the problem with electric vehicles is...
Power grid report hints at some dark days ahead

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE("Chicago Tibune")</div>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(EricGo @ Oct 31 2006, 05:43 AM) [snapback]341186[/snapback]</div>

I'll give ya' that, and stand corrected. I was scaling based on the real weight of the battery assemly vs. the theoretical density figures which is why my numbers were higher. For example, a Prius fuel bladder tank holds its entire contents with just a fairly simple plastic container. Most of the weight is gasoline, with just a few pounds for the tank, so the theoretical density of the fuel and the actual realized density are pretty close.

The current battery packs actually in production have lots of individual cells assembled into modules which then become a battery pack. That's lots of addition weight not related to the actual energy storage.

But assuming this can be overcome, you're right about the densities.

 

At this stage it is *ALL* about the battery.

Whoever gets the best battery, WINS.... no question. The remaining engineering issues are insignificant.

Automakers have been well aware of the benefits of PHEVs for years, but have grumbled about the fact that batteries are:

1) Too heavy (energy density too low)
2) Don’t work well at low temperatures
3) Can catch fire spontaneously (thermal runaway)
4) Are too expensive
5) Won’t last the life of the car - calender life is limited to 4-5 years and cycle life to only 1,000 cycles if using the necessary deep discharges
6) Take too long to charge

But ALL of these issues have now been addressed by different lithium-ion battery companies.

1) Energy density of lead-acid batteries, as used in the early GM EV1 was 30 Wh/kg, it’s now 7 times higher (meaning 7-times further range) for Sanyo 220 Wh/kg LiIon batteries. (Prius NiMh is 46 Wh/kg).

2) Altairnano, Polyplus, Sion and others all have cells that work well at -30 to +70oC.

3) Valence, A123 and Altairnano all have phosphate based electrodes which are cheaper to make than the existing cobalt types, and can’t do thermal runaway, even when pierced, crushed, burnt etc. Thus, all of the major automotive battery safety issues are solved.

4) The industry standard size of LiIon, 18650, can be bought for $3 per cell, which is about $350 per kWh. A 20 mile PHEV would require a 4 kWh, or $1,400 battery (not $20,000 as you often read).

5) Altairnano have tested their cells for 15,000 deep cycle discharges (6 minutes full charge then discharge), showing negligible degradation in performance, suggesting a 40 year calender life. This would last the life of several vehicles, not just one.

6) Altairnano, A123 and Toshiba have all shown nanotech enabled LiIon cells that can charge and discharge from 0% to 100% in 5 minutes flat. Fast charge therefore only requires a big enough charger, and since 60 kW EV chargers have already been around for years, you can charge at 5 miles per minute. The battery is NOT the limitation here and faster charge stations could easily be built.

So you can see that there is nothing stopping the production of an excellent PHEV other than the manufacturers getting their hands on one of the advanced battery types.

My own bet is that whoever signs an exclusive arrangement to use the A123 cells will wipe the floor with the competition.

There are rumours and suggestions that this company won’t be either Toyota or Honda.... but GM!!

 

I think Honda's less than stellar success so far in the Hybrid market also has to do with an ambivolent attitude to its marketing...seems to me that they tend to waffle about how much they're 'behind' hybrid technology in general, don't they (recalling how their "engine wizard" is working on super clean Diesel engine which will shake the world, a la CVCC). And production numbers aren't really up there, either, are they, despite pockets of demand.

I mean, the current Honda hybrid has a CVT...and a giant tachometer right there dead center in the dash. Clearly they're not quite as willing to put the engineering $$$ into a dedicated platform, as Toyota has. And it shows.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Nov 2 2006, 12:52 PM) [snapback]342631[/snapback]</div>

I agree. Chrysler too.

Why?

Their cars are too aggressive. The marketing is too (pardon me) "ballsy" and the fantasy of driving is totally obscuring the realities of what a car is primarily used for. Chrysler in particular, with those grilles that look like gunsights (I know it's an homage to their styling past, but still)...and the Escalade what Cadillac seems to have become...that confrontational urban attitude...

There's enough aggression in the world already and I think the last thing we need is for the folks who are most...ummmm...interested in that sort of expression to have their desires fed in this manner. Especially when we have to share the road.

Cars can no longer be exclusively about the individual and escape and power and control and conveying social status to the public...their heavy impact on the planet seems to make those ideas rather...well, self centered and unrealistic. I think that's what makes some American cars in particular seem rather juvenile.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Nov 2 2006, 01:05 PM) [snapback]342677[/snapback]</div>

Me as well; however, my biggest quiff is their short-term attitude.

Just look at how absurd the October statistics are. Those automakers are celebrating the sales figures, as if October of the previous year was normal. But in reality, the country was still dealing with the fallout resulting from Hurricane Katrina. A single month means almost nothing. Heck, even a quarter does little to represent the true story. Years of telling us what we need, to keep sales from being lost to competitors isn't a way to plan for the future.

Change was inevitable. Their choice was to delay as long as possible, then react when forced to. Fortunately, some automakers chose to be proactive instead.

Now we are arriving at the second stage. Toyota continues to push. Honda has backed off, but not given up. GM has finally had a change of heart. Ford remains mysterious.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Nov 2 2006, 02:05 PM) [snapback]342677[/snapback]</div>

The Dodge Ram is right up there with the H2 as an FU vehicle by design.

It's worth reposting Clotaire Rapaille's Interview (who designed and marketed many of the SUVs) While it's about the Hummer, much of it is applicable to the Dodge Ram and Durango.


I have an idea - better than to levy a gas guzzler tax on some of the monster truck/SUVs - require them to be painted pink and put lace in the upholstry.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(clett @ Nov 2 2006, 08:01 AM) [snapback]342543[/snapback]</div>

Thank you. Great Post! I can't wait to see you proved right!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(clett @ Nov 2 2006, 11:01 AM) [snapback]342543[/snapback]</div>

This is amazing stuff! I'd *love* to switch over to an PHEV if it could work with my transportation needs.

I'm afraid, though, that it's not quite true that "nothing is stopping the production of an excellent PHEV except for battery availability..."

I'm concerned that oil companies might not take too kindly to developments like these. Do you think that's a valid concern, or will the superiority of vehicles like these generate consumer demand and force change, despite the best efforts to thwart it?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Delta Flyer @ Nov 2 2006, 01:10 PM) [snapback]342791[/snapback]</div>

Oh man! That's good! Can you imagine the sales figures if people with low self esteem or personal security affectations suddenly saw SUVs for what they are?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Nov 2 2006, 01:49 PM) [snapback]342660[/snapback]</div>

Valid points, but it seems quite obvious that gas/electric Hybrid technology is purely an interim tryst with an aging tart. (please don't construe this to mean that I think I know what's coming next) In a few years we may look back and say, "Whaddaya know; Honda was right!" I own a new Prius, so please; no troll fire. I decided I'd like to get 60-mpg while waiting for my new hydrogen car. (cough, cough...)

I'll also bet that no one is more surpsised than Toyota at the (relative) success of the "weird" Prius. And one more thing PintoGirl... I WANT A TACH IN MY PRIUS. Of course, I'm laughing here, but I completely understand your assignation to the Honda engineers of a "Well, since no one's going to buy these things anyway, it's cheaper to leave it (the tach) there than to design a big chrome plug to stick in the hole." It's as if Honda conceded the race before the green flag even got thrown.

If we agree that the Insight was also strange, and that it "failed," (notice quotes. I love the car, but it's out-of-production and the Prius is not) then Honda must've figured that--perhaps--a normal-looking hybrid could sell in greater numbers. "We tried 'weird' and that didn't work so, this time, let's try 'generic'!"

Honda built the Insight, Toyota built the Prius. To me, these two cars "de-cloak" (and define) the engineering direction of their respective companies. But, as with the (USA) Democrat and Republican parties***, these platforms could turn 180-degrees while we watch.

*** - 19th century Dems were against big government, against centralized planning and against a Federal bank; while Repubs freed the slaves, worked against mega-business running the country and favored looking after the "little man." First they exchanged platorms, then they became the same thing.

Honda has always been a "motor" company, mostly because Soichiro Honda himself was a GearHead. Toyota has always been a "car" company... though not completely without success in motorsports.

We do live in interesting times, don't we?

GeronimoPFudgemuffin

 

Let's remember that Soichiro Honda emphasised fuel economy when he ran his company - he never forgot how scarce gas was in Japan back in 1946. I fear his death will have an effect on Honda like Gene Roddenberry did on the Star Trek franchise.

Have you seen the Insight dash? Clicking the link....

- green box in middle gives instant mpg (it's metric in this picture) and trip or lifetime mpg. On this shot, it got 156mpg
- green arc on the right indicate how much the hybrid battery is being charged
- orange arc on the upper right corner indicates how much the Assiste is helping the ICE

The Civic hybrid would be upgraded to have that.

For the best of both worlds, I would propose a split-level dash like the 2006 hybrid Civic, but with customizable digital displays. No need to look at the center console.