bomccarthy -> RE: OT - Cars (3/5/2017 12:27:50 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wdolson quote:
ORIGINAL: bomccarthy What kind of range did you get on the charge where you hit 100 mph? I'm afraid of getting stuck somewhere in an all-electric car because I was doing 80 on the freeway (most everyone in SoCal drives 75+ when traffic permits). I'm hoping that hydrogen filling stations start proliferating in the next 10 years - if so, hydrogen fuel cell cars will probably replace battery pack cars, and then (eventually) internal combustion cars. We will end up back where the first automakers dreamed; even Ferdinand Porsche's first design in 1898 was powered by an electric motor at each wheel. I did do the normal 80 mph on I-5 on my last trip to CA. Going over the Siskyous as well as the Coast Range back and forth from Morro Bay, I averaged 318 Wh/Mi for the entire trip. That's an equivalent of 103 mpg. (Gasoline has around 33 KWh/gal.) I never got below 20% charge, the superchargers are spaced well enough that you'd have to be wandering well into the back of the beyond before range becomes a serious issue. On the leg between Red Bluff and Vacaville I was probably averaging around 80 mph the whole way and it cost me about 9% of rated range. I burned off 152 miles of rated range doing 131 miles. I documented everything because I'm writing off the trip. I work for a company in the Bay Area and I stopped in there for a day. The segment from Morgan Hill to Morro Bay isn't tax deductible, but the rest is. It's free money because the trip cost me $0 in "fuel". Supercharging is free for my car. Hydrogen may find a niche somewhere, but I'm pretty sure it's a dead end technology for passenger vehicles. H2 cars need to carry around a large hydrogen cylinder somewhere and that takes up space. The Mirai is an SUV to get enough space under the backseat for the cylinder. Hydrogen is the smallest molecule in the universe and it will leak through any container. As it leaks through metals, it weakens them and hydrogen car drivers need to replace the H2 tank every few years or risk the chance of a rupture. The economics of hydrogen aren't that good either. It doesn't store well, so H2 stations need to be frequently restocked, or have their own H2 making equipment on the premises, which requires a lot of electricity if you're making it from water, or a hydrocarbon refining facility if you're making it from natural gas. Most have it trucked in from some kind of centralized refinery, but there are losses in transport and storage. This article outlines the losses converting electricity to hydrogen vs an EV: http://energypost.eu/toyota-vs-tesla-can-hydrogen-fuel-cell-vehicles-compete-electric-vehicles/ There is a graphic a little ways down. If you start with 100 KWh of electricity and set out to fuel a hydrogen car or an EV, you could get 69 KWh turning the wheels of the car vs 19-23 turning the wheels of the hydrogen car. These are pretty much the best case scenarios for each tech. The fossil fuel industry likes the hydrogen car model because the cheapest way to make H2 today is from natural gas and North America has a glut of the stuff right now. Consumers might be a bit better disposed towards hydrogen because the fueling model is more familiar. But once you get used to the different way of fueling EVs, I prefer it. At home, I always leave the house with a 90% "tank" of gas, no more refueling in bad weather. On the road the "fuel" is free and I found being forced to take break every 200 miles was a good thing for my body. I did 600 miles in one day on one leg and felt much better than I did in 2015 when we did 700 miles in one shot from the Bay Area to home. I'm not really an eco buyer. I wanted a little better fuel economy, but I wanted at least the same performance as my Buick (0-50 in 8s) so I could get on the freeway without concern. I was looking at cars like the Ford Taurus and Subaru Outback, but they really didn't do it for me. The 4 cylinder Outback got better gas mileage than my Buick, but had something like an 10s 0-60 and with the V-6 the acceleration was more reasonable, but the gas mileage was essentially the same as my Buick. The Taurus also didn't have very impressive gas mileage. The Tesla was a lot more than my initial budget, but the more I looked, the more I liked. It's really the only car I looked at that I felt was actually a better car than my 1992 Buick. All the other cars had new gadgets, but in many cases they were worse where it counted, in driving performance and capability. And I was surprised gas mileage really hasn't improved in 24 years. The improvements in fuel economy have mostly been from shaving edges rather than fundamental improvements. My degree is in Electronic Engineering and I've been around science my entire life. (My older sister is a petroleum Geologist in Bakersfield.) I look at any tech through an engineering lens. I can appreciate good engineering. As much as I hate Apple's software, their hardware is very well designed. They are better at battery management than most of their competition, but otherwise their tech is not all that remarkable, just well executed. Tesla is in another league. The Model S took the concept of a car and rethought it from the ground up. They ended up with a 300 mile range car with over 100 mpg equivalent and the cheapest version accelerates like a sports car (my car is 4s 0-60). On top of that, it has insane cargo capacity. We were getting rid of an extra long twin mattress from a guest bedroom and I was able to get the mattress into the back and close the hatch. I had to run the driver's seat up to a point where I couldn't drive it, but my SO could. A standard twin mattress would have been no problem. I'm still impressed by this car and I've had it since June 6 of last year. Bill That was an interesting article on battery vs hydrogen fuel cell technology. I haven't gone too deep into electric car technology, so I started reading some articles written from the car enthusiast side. I didn't realize that current electric cars are so much heavier than internal combustion cars. I'll wait until someone gets some more sporting models into the 3,000 - 3,500 lb range. Cars heavier than that just aren't much fun in corners. Weight is also the main reason for the lack of progress in gas mileage over the past two decades. Your early 90s Buick probably weighed less than 3,500 lbs (a 1992 Regal had a curb weight of 3,300 lbs). With modern impact standards and design emphasis on rigid structure, the 2017 Regal has a curb weight of just over 4,000 lbs.
|
|
|
|