Is the Hummer "greener" than the Prius?

Page 5 of 9  
Nate Nagel wrote:


Look at the QED mini.
0-60 in 4.2 seconds. That's not golf cart performance.
And it's a plug in hybrid.
http://www.autoblog.com/2006/07/21/pml-s-mini-qed-boasts-640-in-wheel-electric-horsepower /
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

a) where can I buy one
b) how many kWh does its batteries store and at what density
nate
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nate Nagel wrote:

I think you got your sums scrambled there.
It's ***MJ*** not mJ btw. A mere billion to one difference.
The batteries I was talking about are 150Wh/kg.
150 ***kWh*** / kg would be really something !
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Eeyore wrote:

And yet it is less than what you get from gasoline or Diesel. Odd, that.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nate Nagel wrote:

Not odd at all. Up to 80% of that energy in gasoline is just wasted anyway.
And they don't contain > 150 kWh/kg either.
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nate Nagel wrote:

Then by definition, it's not regenerative braking.
In Europe there is somewhere useful for it to go. Back into the electrical power system. Many of our trains (and all the high performance ones) are electric you see.
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nate Nagel wrote:

The pieces all already exist.

Yes. that's exactly what I have in mind. It can be done NOW ! There's no excuse for further delay..
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nate Nagel wrote:

Hey, I've not foul mouthed you and I'd be obliged if you stopped that.
This design already contains all of the elements I've been talking about.
I do wish they'd chosen a larger vehicle though and maybe been a bit more serious instead of giving a Mini a crazy 640 bhp.
http://www.caranddriver.com/carnews/12050/pml-flightlink-electric-mini-cooper.html http://www.worldcarfans.com/news.cfm/country/ecf/newsID/2060724.006/mini/pml-builds-640hp-electric-mini
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Eeyore wrote:

You're just arrogant and ignorant, which is a bad combination. I'll take foul mouthed over arrogant and ignorant any day.

http://www.caranddriver.com/carnews/12050/pml-flightlink-electric-mini-cooper.html
http://www.worldcarfans.com/news.cfm/country/ecf/newsID/2060724.006/mini/pml-builds-640hp-electric-mini
The claimed 200 mile range smells suspiciously like bullshit. I haven't seen anything actually demonstrated that comes anywhere close to the kind of performance they're claiming.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nate Nagel wrote:

The range is limited only by the size of the 'gas tank' for the 250cc engine.
As for arrogance and ignorance you're exhibiting vast quantities of both. Not to mention the truly dreadful 'it can't be done-ism'. I've spent lots of my life doing things ppl said 'can't be done'. I'm sick of that attitude.
Incidentally, unlike ICE powered cars, an EV with larger motors to accelerate faster barely uses any more power than an EV with smaller motors. That's where electric motors win out big time since they don't waste lots of power when they're only delivering a fraction of their rated output.
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Oh, I get it, you actually believe the press releases. That car you posted is vaporware, pure and simple, until it actually operates under its own power.
Past experience tells me that the claims in the press release are optimistic at best.
nate
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
N8N wrote:

You don't understand that electric motors operate at high efficiency over a wide range of power outputs ?

It does.

My posts are based on simple scientific facts. Such as the power required to move or accelerate a vehicle, which can be readily calculated.
I know that the dumbed down world has trouble understanding or even accepting science these days, but it does provide the all the answers.
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
N8N wrote:

That's simple prejudice. Old-tech electronics has the disadvantage of poorer energy efficiency. What do you think's going to happen anyway ?

Actually, they're used because you're more interested in low-power and low-cost in such applicarions and don't need all the bells and whistles of a PC CPU never mind it only requires a tiny fraction of the computing speed.

Cars don't use either PC chips or PC software. The software being the real culprit because Microsoft in particular can't code reliably to save themselves.
Airbus airliners are run by computers. The computers don't crash them. The pilots do sometimes when they over-ride the computers though.
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Eeyore wrote:

Well, I can envision my car suddenly losing all power in the hammer lane of a crowded freeway very easily...

Nope, not even close to correct. They are used because it takes time and money to get through the UL (or FM, or whatever) certification process, so mfgrs. tend to stick with an already-certified design until it is actually inadequate for the purpose.

Wrong, some cars actually are using MS OS's embedded in various electronic bits.

And how modern do you think those computer CPUs are compared to PCs?
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nate Nagel wrote:

Old or new electronics isn't going to affect something as basic as that.
In fact, modern power electronics is better (lower cost, weight, losses - better reliability) than ever.
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Eeyore wrote:

To use one of your words, bollocks. Newer electronics is... newer, and that's about the only generalization you can make. I'm sure that most of the stuff on the market is indeed cheaper, lighter, and draws less power, but mre reliable? I seriously doubt it. If it *were* more reliable, the mfgrs. would make it even cheaper and lighter until it again just barely met spec.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nate Nagel wrote:

It's a plain fact.
That some manufacturers choose these days to deliberately perhaps under design so as to limit product lifetime is a wholly different matter. That's the 'throw away society' for you.
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nate Nagel wrote:

Maybe in the USA. That's the only place where UL applies btw. Elsewhere it's the IEC and its equivalent localised derivative standards..
You'd have to have a really incompetent engineering team to do that btw. As an electronics product design engineer myself there's no way I'd have anything to do with such a policy.
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Eeyore wrote:

Well, that's how it's been explained to me by engineers at at least two major FA equipment manufacturers, so I guess they're incompetent.
Of course, you've proven yourself rather quick to declare common practice "incompetent" and state that *your* way, which nobody does, is the only sensible way.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nate Nagel wrote:

There's 100's of thousand of pieces of kit out there that I designed working quite happily.
And yes, incompetence is rife today. I see it all the time. Almost the norm nowadays in fact. Modern management is largely to blame for the rise of incompetent ppl IMHO.
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.