The battery as the new frontier

[Ryeman]

3 minutes ago, mac11irl said:

 

That pile of gack makes the new lada look positively handsome!

They can’t be serious, surely !

[Ryeman]

More from VW -

https://electrek.co/2018/09/18/vw-meb-platform-electric-for-all-affordable-evs/

 

(howzat?)

[wyx087]

8 hours ago, Ryeman said:

More from VW -

https://electrek.co/2018/09/18/vw-meb-platform-electric-for-all-affordable-evs/

 

(howzat?)

I like how the drivetrain is on the rear axel. Imagine a rear wheel drive, 50-50 balanced, low centre of gravity hot hatch  

[Ryeman]

Just now, wyx087 said:

I like how the drivetrain is on the rear axel. Imagine a rear wheel drive, 50-50 balanced, low centre of gravity hot hatch  

I’m more into recovering from snow and deep ruts and thus FWD if only one axle.

I’m much too old for oversteer........that’s if ESP/DSC will allow that sort of fun these days.

[Odin1123]

 

Seems Audi did not get away with it.

[Odin1123]

I wonder how easy it will be to replace a battery on the MEB once a body is sitting on the frame.

[wyx087]

1 hour ago, Ryeman said:

I’m more into recovering from snow and deep ruts and thus FWD if only one axle.

I’m much too old for oversteer........that’s if ESP/DSC will allow that sort of fun these days.

The "rear wheel drive is bad for snow traction" type of thinking surely came from front engine RWD cars? How are beetles and Porsche in snow?

 

If it is around 50:50 weight distribution, the traction should be similar front or rear.

 

EV motors have massive amount of torque, even in my sedate Leaf I can feel clearly the torque steer (when both accelerating and re-gen slowing down). So I think all EV should be RWD to allow more balanced feel of the car when driving and less distraction from torque steer.

Edited 19 September, 2018 by wyx087

[Ryeman]

1 minute ago, wyx087 said:

The "rear wheel drive is bad for snow traction" type of thinking surely came from front engine RWD cars? How are beetles and Porsche in snow?

 

If it is around 50:50 weight distribution, the traction should be similar front or rear.

 

EV motors have massive amount of torque, even in my sedate Leaf I can feel clearly the torque steer (when both accelerating and re-gen slowing down). So I think all EV should be RWD to allow more balanced feel of the car when driving and less distraction from torque steer.

For me FWD gives directional traction.  A RWD has the problem of front wheels being rudders causing significantly more drag to overcome.

[Ootohere]

VW / Audi / Skoda / SEAT are front wheel drive with Haldex and then the rear drive comes in.

BMW x-drive is rear wheel drive and front wheel drive comes in, as do Mercedes unless maybe a CLA and Front wheel drive and rear comes in.

 

Land Rovers were Rear Wheel Drive and Front came in then,  Full Time AWD, and Freelander were Front and Rear came in.

Suzuki Jimny were rear & front came in and maybe now going to be Front wheel drive with rear coming in.

 

Rear Engine Beetles & Skoda & Imps Porsche etc were Rally & Race Cars, Monte Carlo Rally etc, still are these days in Historic events.

FWD Minis also used in snow rallies, rear wheel drive Escorts.

 

Its about the tyres and the drivers.  Cars are for driving.

 

Skoda need to get the e-Citigo on the go and the Fabia / Rapid Hybrid thing, rear electric motor.

Motorsport Heritage & Success, Small light vehicles not Elephants with vRS badges.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 19 September, 2018 by Offski

[Ryeman]

I suspect northern North Americans like to simply get home in winter at lowest cost.

[xman]

I wonder why Vw doesn't simply stick a couple of electric motors/generators on the back wheels, along with a bit of a extra battery (plug in), keep all the fwd stuff substantially the same, maybe big alternator, voila mild hybrid on the cheap, plus 4x4 at not much more money than an unreliable haldex and a lot more economical, lower co2

 

Or maybe they have...

[Ootohere]

They were near there with the Golf & A3,  1.4TSI Hybrid,  DSG special for the job.

Pity there is the 'Battery issue' maybe, and the Co2 g/m Implausible / Irregular issue.   But once the 1.0 or 1.5TSI is in the front they can maybe get that rear drive sorted.

 

First they need to spin the 2020,2022, 2025 guff.    While that happens Skoda can get the 19 or is that 9 new models by the end of 2020 built.

[xman]

Dont understand why they are integrating the electric motor with the dsg, isn't it unreliable enough?

[Ootohere]

Cause the DQ200 after a decade is not reliable enough, and the Wet Clutch 7 speed are having issues.  The hybrids got new technology with the DSG and that is under investigation in the USA. There were 'Test Modes'   ie maybe Defeat Device in the DSG ECU's as with some Petrol & Diesels....

So they will sort out Alternator / Coolant Pump / 48 Volt, regen braking, & rear electric motors do not need connected to FWD ICE engine.

No prop shaft  to rear/ less weight.

http://autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/skoda-readies-19-model-product-drive-next-two-years

 

Stefan Jacoby CEO of VW North America 2007-2010 when VW took Green Diesels to the USA left in 2010 to work for Geely as Head of Volvo.

(He left, ill health to go to GM.....)

So anyway VW part owned Suzuki, had Small Turbo, Supercharger & Light Hybrid R&D knowledge, from Suzuki, Fiat & Mitsubishi, Stefan Jacoby had been at Mitsubishi after he started with VW in Germany...   (Suzuki bought them self out of VW Group the night before the Emissions Scandal broke.)

and Volvo have managed to produce and sell the technology.

Vorsprung Durch Technik,  translate to Chinese.   Volvo & Mitsubishi & GM have plug in Hybrids, & Suzuki have light hybrids.

VW are talking a lot about them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 19 September, 2018 by Offski

[xman]

Latest electric truck caught on test, heavily disguised as usual

 

[Ootohere]

Sean 'Big Tam' Connery drove one of them on his round. 

My mum was about the same age as him when she was in the bakery and him on the milk.  Somehow now she is a lot older than him..

[Ootohere]

 

 

[Ryeman]

As a tow rope, it looks a bit thin George.

[xman]

Could be carbon fibre

 

Looks mildly pornographic.....or is that just me?

 

Edited 19 September, 2018 by xman

[Ryeman]

Amazon to sell you your charger -

https://electrek.co/2018/09/19/amazon-sell-electric-car-chargers-installation/

[Ryeman]

EV specific tyres from pine tree resin - (to cope with the performance)

https://premium.goauto.com.au/new-tech-needed-for-evs/

 

[Ootohere]

 

 

[MikeHig]

wyx087: On those energy reports, not sure what you mean by " not really representative of what we are actually using ".

Anyway, if you dig into the BP document it states that electricity generation accounts for around 40% of the total energy consumption in 2017. Further down, wind power provided 4.4% of global electricity and solar was 1.7%. So by a bit of man-maths, that puts Wind + Solar at about 2.4%.

That is a bit lower than the 3 - 4% I have seen quoted. My guess is that the report picks up figures for generation which is monitored by national grids. Much solar and some wind is not monitored by grids (assuming other countries work like the UK) - the so-called "embedded" systems. These are typically estimated at a further 25 - 30% on top of reported outputs.

If that guess is valid, it would take the W + S total up to 3.5 - 4 % as is usually reported.

The BP report has been running for over 60 years and, despite its origins, the commentary seems quite pro-renewables (remember when BP = "Beyond Petroleum"?). It highlights their rapid growth and makes the point that they are the second-largest contributor to the growth in energy production (after natural gas). It also bemoans the fact that coal's share of primary energy is the same today as it was 20 years ago: 38%. The section on materials availability for batteries is quite positive and does not see the much-hyped "cobalt cliff" as a great concern.

 

With regard to the broader climate debate, I am on totally the opposite side of the fence to yourself. So I suggest we leave it lie rather than hijack Ryeman's thread. 

[Ryeman]

I’m interested in the science involved in climate change being debatable.

[wyx087]

Climate change / global warming by burning fossil fuel is not a debate, it is a fact.

 

This book gives a really good account of past events, how a handful of scientists and businesses generated doubt and debate regarding clear scientific conclusions. How mass media only circulated the debate and repeated cases where only the scientific journals published the peer reviewed truth.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Merchants-Doubt-Handful-Scientists-Obscured/dp/1408824833 

Such "debate" include smoking, acid rain, second hand smoke, insecticide and global warming.

 

 

By not representative of what we are using, I mean in UK, we have much higher renewable generation. UK power generation is 30% renewables in Q1 2018 (was dark few months for solar):

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/720407/Electricity.pdf

Similarly, the Wikipedia link I posted in my previous reply points to UK wholesale price of electricity. Disputing claims that renewable are expensive.