Electric Car Faster Than A Ferrari or Porsche

jumpeel writes "CNN's Business 2.0 has photos and video of a Silicon Valley-made electric car with a 0-60 acceleration rate that's faster than a Ferrari Spider and a Porsche Carrera. From the article: 'In fact, it's second only to the French-made Bugatti Veyron, a 1,000-horsepower, 16-cylinder beast that hits 60 mph half a second faster and goes for $1.25 million.' The X1 is built by Ian Wright whose valley startup WrightSpeed intends to make a 'a small-production roadster that car fanatics and weekend warriors will happily take home for about $100,000 --a quarter ton of batteries included. The X1 crushed the Ferrari in an eighth-mile sprint and then in the quarter-mile, winning by two car lengths.'"

Comments

No Shit, Sherlock!

[mrchaotica]

The problem with electric cars was never performance, it's range. And this car doesn't solve that problem, although the range isn't that bad either (100 miles). Being an open car, it's not exactly a daily driver though.

Also, if you look at the pictures this is actually just an electric Ariel Atom, which is also faster than a 360 Spider or Carrera GT.

Don't get me wrong -- this is cool. It's just not nearly as revolutionary as the article writer thinks it is, and it certainly won't "save the planet--fast!"

Re:No Shit, Sherlock!

[Rei]

That's why there's the big rush to move to fuel cells. Being able to convert hydrogen to electricity at 70% efficiency or ethanol to electricity at 50% efficiency lets you use high energy fuels instead of low energy batteries. Hydrogen has greater difficulties when it comes to density, obviously, but if they can be resolved (and the tech is progressing steadily), it's a great solution (second only to having your car get its power straight from the grid).

Fuel cells aren't very heavy or bulky, but they still don't put out as much power as batteries (and they don't even approach ultracapacitors). Thus, an ideal situation would have fuel cells charge batteries or ultracapacitors, producing electricity faster than it's used at cruising but slower than it's used during acceleration.

This matters to me why?

[DaHat]

Maybe I'm just crazy... but I'm sick and tired of hearing about new and grand vehicles that could potentially reduce our dependency on foreign oil, or make the environment clean or run a bajillion miles to the gallon... I don't really care about the theoretical, research side or first builds that cost more than a single family house... I'd like to be able to find such a vehicle reasonably priced at my local car lot in sufficient shapes and sizes that I drive off with one without feeling crammed into a matchbox and as if I just shelled out far more than I could afford.

Wake me when they are affordable and widely available will you?

Re:This matters to me why?

[Tweekster]

I think we just need to charge any vehicle that gets less than 25MPG an extra 2 dollars per gallon of gas.

Seriousely. Those people that get 15 to the gallon raise the global demand by consuming far more than they need to. They drive up the price of gas.

They should pay more and the rest of us that are responsible people that give a damn should not have to subsidize their selfishness.

SUV's should flat out be banned. Trucks should be restricted as work vehicles or heavily taxed for personal use.

There is absolutely no reason why you cant get away with every personal use vehicle getting at min 25 to the gallon. I just bought a brand new corolla. 41 to the gallon, just a standard, rather roomy vehicle. There are tons of cars that use regular gasoline that get great mileage.
    There is no reason to be buying SUV's other than to look retarded (SUV's are rather ugly)

Either ban those vehicles or make them pay $5 a gallon. Let the rest of the country enjoy lower prices because we act responsible.

It goes fast, what about far?

[ZSpade]

It may be speedy, but is this car going to be of any practical use, or is it simply going to be a novelty item, used for racing or showing off your newest toy to the other bajillionaires?

Also, as an obligatory point... Where are they getting the electicity to run this thing? Most of the US still get's it's power from Gas run power plants. It's good to see improvement in the tech though, so when we do have other methods of power generation we'll be ablt to take full advantage of them.

Re:Acceleration Range

[mspohr]

"The solution allows at least 350 highway miles per charge and can be fully recharged in 5 minutes or less."

I think you're being a bit unrealistic here. What you describe is the typical characteristics of a gas powered vehicle. However, how many people need to drive for 6 hours and then refuel in 5 minutes (so they can drive another 6 hours)?

Most people drive less than 100 miles a day commuting and have all night to recharge. This car meets these specs just fine.

If you're driving cross country, rent a gas car.

Re:Interesting, but not new

[Phanatic1a]

Gasoline engines are restricted by the tolerances of their mechanical parts

Well, so's an electric drivetrain. The big difference is the torque curve. An internal combustion engine at 0 rpm stalls out, providing absolutely 0 torque, so you need some way to couple non-rotating parts (red light!) to an engine that has to idle at some minimum rpms. And then the engine delivers more torque as you spin it up.

Electric motors deliver their maximum torque at 0 rpm, and then it drops off as mechanical friction starts acting as a parasite. And since you don't need to worry about mating non-rotating to rotating parts, your drivetrain can be more efficient overall, since you can get out some of the lossy linkages.

You're right. This is nothing new. I saw a video online of an all-electric car beating a Ferrari off the line years and years ago (And not just beating, dominating). But at the end of the quarter-mile it needed a recharge. There are a lot more obstacles to electric cars replacing IC cars than just performance.

TUTORIAL: why electric cars will never replace gas

[goombah99]

When a hybrid is traveling on a highway for an extended period, 100% of it's power is coming from the engine. To push a modest car (honda accord) down the road a 55MPH requires about a 30-40 HP engine. You probably want a larger one so it does not wimp out if you want to go faster for an extended period.

The batteries in hybrid cars are only used for acceleration in city driving and short periods of excess speed on highways. They are NOT used for anything else because ultimately 100% of the average power comes from the gasoline.

Thus the sole benefit of hybrids is that it turns city driving inefficiency (stop and accelerate) into the equivalent of highway driving since the engine can run at a constant, efficeint, tuned point almost continuously. For people who actually stop and leave the engine running for long periods, the hybrid can save a few sips by shutting down the engine. Also the hybrid can make use of engine type not associated with sexy car performance, like diesel.

But anyhow it cant avoid getting 100% of the energy from the gas.

What about charging the batteries off the grid? That will not work if everyone tries to do it.

If you wanted to be able to pull your car into gas station and gas it up in under 10 minutes to a range of 300 miles like you can with gasoline then the gas station would have to deliver power to your car at a rate of a megawatts. Besides the absurdity of delivering that over the powerlines, any practical battery would explode when charged that fast.

Okey you say, well what about trickle charging it overnight or while you are parked for a long time at work. Well that would work, for you. But if everyone else in your neighborhood did it, then we are back to delivering many megawatts to every neighbor hood. that simply is impossible until we have underground superconduction transmission lines in every city in america.

Thus electric cars re nice show pieces but cannot replace gasoline on a large scale at this time.

Thus the only way to charge an electric car is to have distributed power production or distributed chemical fuel delivery.

So this can mean: 1) hydrids that burn fuel like now. 2) hydrids that burn hydrogen like fuel cells (make the hydrogen at nuclear plants and ship it as chemical energy not over wires)

or charge batteries at nuclear plants and ship them in trucks to refueling stations where you swap batteries.

Thus you can only transport the power needed for typical driving as chemical energy.

30 HP = 22,371 watts

300 miles @ 55 Miles/hour = 19,636 seconds

30hp for 19636= 43,9285,090 joules

delivering 24 mega joules in one minute requires

7,321,418 watts from "pump" at gas station to recharge one car.

If a gas station was a busy one and was processing one car per minute all day long then it would have continous feed of 7 megawatts.

The total capacity of the US for power production is 300 terrawatt hours. so that would mean that if we doubled the entire electrical capacity of the US we could build less than 10,000 gas stations, ignoring all the transmission problems.

Re:Interesting, but not new

[CreatureComfort]

We don't need a new battery technology. Just build batteries so that they are standardized in some form of rack or enclosure that can be swapped out. You pull into the "gas" station an automated device pulls the battery rack out of your car, gives you credit for any remaining charge, loads in a new rack of already charged batteries, and charges you for the difference in energy between the two packs. If properly designed, the enitire transaction could happen much faster than filling a 24, or even 10, gallon gas tank.

The issues come in where someone figures out a scam of pulling in with "bad" battery packs from the junkyard, and pulling out with brand new, fully charged packs.