OT: Electric vehicles
- Thread starter BellyFullOfWhiteDogCrap
- Start date
Maverick hybrids do not have to be plugged in, but just curious if the plug in hybrids charge as fast, slower, or the same as electrics? Anyone know ?
Glad mine won’t be a plug in, but are plug in hybrids and electrics required to be “fully” charged when you stop to charge or are they like gas vehicles where you can get just a half tanks worth ?
Doesn't matter. Charge whenever. Stop whenever.
This is why a lot of the charging times are misleading. There is a charging curve for EVs. You're going to get the fastest charge when at a low state of charge. As the state of charge increases, the charging rate tapers.
Ideally, if you're pressed for time, you want to charge at as low a SOC as possible and then unplug at around 80%.
Google the make, model, year then "charging curve" or "charging taper"
NHTSA should really get their priorities in order. They issue a "recall" for Tesla to update their software for a redundant seat belt chime that may fail (mine doesn't), despite the fact that any unbuckled person is already displayed on the central display of any Tesla.
Meanwhile, cars are not required to have rear seat belt warning systems. Guess who sits in the back seat? Hundreds of unbuckled rear passengers die each year, but NHTSA's priorities are focused on Tesla and a redundant reminder.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...47c21e-07e4-11ea-8ac0-0810ed197c7e_story.html
Meanwhile, cars are not required to have rear seat belt warning systems. Guess who sits in the back seat? Hundreds of unbuckled rear passengers die each year, but NHTSA's priorities are focused on Tesla and a redundant reminder.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...47c21e-07e4-11ea-8ac0-0810ed197c7e_story.html
Lincoln coming out with AT LEAST FIVE electrics—
You mention stuff that applies to ALL manufacturers (Teslas have rear seats just like everyone else). Then immediately state that it's some sort of conspiracy against Tesla. Persecution complex, much?
The NHTSA is not out to get Tesla. You actually have it backwards. Tesla, and for sure the Teslerati, seems to think they deserve some sort of special treatment. And when they don't get it, they claim it's unfair. Ridiculous.
Also, requiring redundant reminders (audible and visual) is just good UI. Hell, they should insist that seats vibrate, too, just to add a third perceptible form of alert to the UI.
Not everybody who climbs into a vehicle is visually-focused, or aurally-focused, or touch-focused. Having all three methods helps to create a warning that will alert a larger cross-section of vehicle occupants, and hopefully save a few lives.
30% of the State of NJ vehicle fleet has to be electric vehicles
The State will be adding charging stations across the State I am assuming they will be at the current gas facilities.
The State will be adding charging stations across the State I am assuming they will be at the current gas facilities.
Last edited:
ThanksThat’s a well-stated sentence.
I just reread it. I am glad I stated it clearly
It's a strong statement on the state of the state's efforts to get to a state where support for ev's is encouraging. as long as solid state batteries don't change the types of connections needed at charging stations around the state, this should get the citizens of the state to achieve a state of assurance that their charging needs are satisfied.
I'm not interested in your ramblings if you don't read what you're responding to.
but you must have read his rambling in order for you to respond to say you're not interested in it or to be able to assess whether you think he's on topic or not. so you ARE interested...
This new patent provides a different way to tackle range anxiety, using a portable battery pack that would reside in the F-150 Lighting’s (or any other EV’s) frunk and could be used as a secondary battery pack(s) or range extender for the EV itself, or be utilized as a way to charge other vehicles or electronic devices. According to the patent, a vehicle utilizing these battery packs could also be moved autonomously using a “Following Mode” to follow the operator of another electronic device or EV.
From the patent images provided, we can see that the portable battery packs would essentially extend through the grille of the vehicle, almost like the giant battery banks that people already use to charge things like smartphones and laptops.
From the patent images provided, we can see that the portable battery packs would essentially extend through the grille of the vehicle, almost like the giant battery banks that people already use to charge things like smartphones and laptops.
Not sure "state" should be capitalized, but yes. In this case, "state" is merely a noun, so I think it should not be capitalized. Not that I'm particularly good at following rules.
He's not interested in my ramblings because he's knows I'm correct.
Whereas his ramblings, which he's trying to claim I failed to comprehend (I didn't, but perhaps he failed to convey what he really intended to convey) were incorrect (as written, at least).
Wouldn't additional portable battery packs be very heavy and therefore mess w/stuff like energy efficiency and handling (because it wouldn't be possible to position them as low as the vehicle's battery) and so forth?
It might be a useful stop-gap measure for driving long distances where no charging stations might be available (if that even exists in the US anymore). But hopefully battery tech will produce much longer-lived and lighter batteries to solve range anxiety.
Perhaps. One of the range anxiety issues for pickup trucks, however, is towing - either a camper trailer or boat trailer. So perhaps the addition of a portable batter pack may be de minimis in such a situation. I'm pretty familiar with patents, and sometimes the ideas behind the patents are not fully developed (or even well thought out), but filing is often a value judgment on whether there is enough "there" to patent now and look to patent improvements later. It is expected that battery technology will improve, and batteries should get smaller and lighter in the future.
As a not so artful analogy, I remember being at a meeting about 10 years ago with chip makers where one of speakers said that under Moore's law, 20 or so years ago, an Ipod would be the size of a large conference room. Now, there is not a Moore's law for battery technology, but it has to be a goal to make batteries smaller and lighter.
True, towing is a pretty good example where an additional battery would make sense. When towing, the handling is screwed anyway, so that aspect of the extra weight won't matter.
There appear to be some very positive developments coming with battery tech. I've posted, in this thread, once or twice about Mercedes promised (but not yet delivered) range improvements.
Manufacturer claims aside, as you say, the investment and effort at creating more efficient, lighter, longer-lived EV batteries has got to be pretty intense right now. There's a lot of money to be made by whomever does the best job of it.
Half of it seems to be arguments between two people. To his credit, BellyFull does a decent job responding with links and backup and thoughtful analysis. But sometimes this thread does seem like:
We had been writing patents for a chemical company going back about 10 years ago on chemical battery technology, but we don't do that any more. Don't care enough to see if some of those patents have come to fruition- wasn't my area, but I would glance at titles, etc every once in a while.
Thank you. I know, i's pointless engaging certain individuals who have no desire to contribute anything.Half of it seems to be arguments between two people. To his credit, BellyFull does a decent job responding with links and backup and thoughtful analysis. But sometimes this thread does seem like:
I do enjoy your contributions, and those of others who post substantive stuff. For the record, I'm neutral on Tesla, despite my recent recount of the experiences of a friend. My issues with Tesla are more on the design/look side of things, and while Tesla has done a great job carrying the EV torch, IMO, more automakers making EVs will be great at advancing EV adoption, technology and success. But as it stands, still not ready to jump into the EV pool, as it is still early, and think that in the next 3-5 years things will get much better and more interesting.
rock and a hard place here. we need lithium for this current battery technology to move to greener cars...but the mining of lithium isn't so green itself.
As stated many, many times, lithium is not a limiting factor, nor will it ever be. It's everywhere, and very little goes into a battery cell. Lithium can be sourced from seawater as well as mined.
Cathode material (nickel, cobalt) is the problem. LFP cells (iron) will help alleviate this problem.
Mining recyclable metals from Earth's crust is greener than mining and burning fossil fuels. The "long tailpipe" argument of EVs has been debunked several times already too.
It may be plentiful, but supply is tight in the short term.
NHTSA hard at work yet again:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/tesla-recalling-579000-vehicles-boomboxes
"According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the problem is that the sounds can obscure the federally mandated pedestrian warning noise electric cars are required to emit at low speeds at specified frequencies".
"While Boombox can enhance the conspicuity of the vehicle to pedestrians, a vehicle that uses Boombox when in motion may cause the PWS to be noncompliant with FMVSS 141, which could increase the risk of a collision. Tesla is not aware of any crashes, injuries or fatalities related to this condition.”
So the noise obscures the noise. Anyone else confused?
Using NHTSA's logic, it should be now be illegal to drive with the stereo on and the windows down at low speeds.
In the meantime, a child in the back seat can unbuckle their seatbelt while the car is in motion without giving the driver any notification. 10 years after this was first brought up, NHTSA is "still considering" a rear seatbelt notification warning.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/tesla-recalling-579000-vehicles-boomboxes
"According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the problem is that the sounds can obscure the federally mandated pedestrian warning noise electric cars are required to emit at low speeds at specified frequencies".
"While Boombox can enhance the conspicuity of the vehicle to pedestrians, a vehicle that uses Boombox when in motion may cause the PWS to be noncompliant with FMVSS 141, which could increase the risk of a collision. Tesla is not aware of any crashes, injuries or fatalities related to this condition.”
So the noise obscures the noise. Anyone else confused?
Using NHTSA's logic, it should be now be illegal to drive with the stereo on and the windows down at low speeds.
In the meantime, a child in the back seat can unbuckle their seatbelt while the car is in motion without giving the driver any notification. 10 years after this was first brought up, NHTSA is "still considering" a rear seatbelt notification warning.
Last edited: