Slashdot Mirror


100-Year-Old Electric Car Design Makes a Comeback

CNet's Green Tech Blog is reporting that Detroit Electric plans to release a small number of cars based around a car designed nearly 100 years ago. Detroit Electric is a joint venture between Santa Rosa, CA-based electric transportation specialist, Zap and China's Youngman motors. "Back in 1917, a Detroit Electric cost anywhere from $1,775 to $2,375--in other words, fit for the proletarian or plutocrat. The cars could go 65 miles to 100 miles on a battery charge, but only go at speeds ranging from 6 miles per hour to 25 mph."

14 of 385 comments (clear)

  1. Article doesn't have much to it. by sgt.greywar · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Back in 1917, a Detroit Electric cost anywhere from $1,775 to $2,375--in other words, fit for the proletarian or plutocrat."

    This was my Father's era and he was a "prole". Working as a logger he earned somewhere around $200-300/year. The earliest data for per capita income I could find was 1929 here:

    http://www.census.gov/statab/hist/HS-33.pdf/

    but even then it was ~$700/year.

    So how does a car that cost 3-4 years salary qualify as being "fit for the proletariotarian"?

    In today's terms that car would cost ~$120,000!

    Aside from a announcing a publicity stunt by a company cashing in on a green fad in visible and public low-carbonism (believe me the replica cars will *not* be for the proles!) this article is shamefully low on any actual news or facts.

    Just a bit of hype.

    --
    Laborare Est Orare
    1. Re:Article doesn't have much to it. by eebly · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm not certain you're doing your math right.

      Using the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator, $2375 1917 dollars have the same buying power as about $39000 2008 dollars. That inflation is based on the CPI.

    2. Re:Article doesn't have much to it. by sgt.greywar · · Score: 5, Informative

      You are correct. Problem is that in 1917 the "proles" weren't making $2375 1917 dollars. They were making a few hundred.

      Doing CPI, GDP, or per capita back that far is pretty difficult but there was no way this vehicle was even close to the proletarian price range. the article just used it to be cute without regard to the facts.

      --
      Laborare Est Orare
  2. Who Killed the Electric Car? by mysqlrocks · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you haven't seen the documentary, Who Killed the Electric Car? then I highly recommend you check it out. It explores the roles of automobile manufacturers, the oil industry, the US government, batteries, hydrogen vehicles, and consumers in limiting the development and adoption of the electric car.

    1. Re:Who Killed the Electric Car? by rrkap · · Score: 2, Informative

      The GM EV1 existed for one reason - to meet the California Air Resources Board Zero Emissions Vehicle mandate that required a certain percentage of cars sold in the state to be electric. The mandate was repealed when the car makers proposed significantly improving the emissions controls on a big proportion of the cars that they sold. This solution gave more emissions reduction and was much cheaper than forcing manufacturers to make uneconomic electric cars - a rare example of smart regulation.

      --
      I like my beverages with warning labels!
  3. Zap car review by wile_e_wonka · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'm not too hopeful at the moment, myself. Here is a review of a Zap vehicle produced in China (actually, a Chinese vehicle with a Zap badge):

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/reviews/2008-zap-xebra-review/

  4. Re:Why no go back to horses sometime? by WillAdams · · Score: 3, Informative

    But they also eat constantly and require a great deal of care / attention --- apparently you weren't paying attention when your teacher read you _Black Beauty_. There're also a number of regions in the country where it's well-nigh impossible to secure the services of a veterinarian (to attend to a horse).

    They also have this charming habit of defecating and urinating w/ great regularity...

    William
    (who as a youth, would help a neighbor plow his field w/ a horse)

    --
    Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
  5. Re:And this is being brought back why? by Ron+Harwood · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, they're just bringing the brand back... that should have been in the summary - but it does encourage one to read the article. ;)

  6. Re:Why no go back to horses sometime? by Reziac · · Score: 2, Informative

    [laughing] Having grown up in ranching country, where horses as transportation are still a backcountry way of life... Rare is the rancher who doesn't abandon horses for motorbikes or old-style VW Bugs (which are a pretty good cross-country vehicle) at every opportunity, simply because horses are so high maintenance. And you don't just get on and turn the key; there's grooming and tack to be concerned with, not to mention training and conditioning of both horse and rider -- it takes a minimum of two years (three if you count gestation) to grow and train a horse to a minimally-usable point, and it's not fit for daily work for at least another two years after that. And it requires decent-quality fuel twice a day to function, and a variety of anti-parasite treatments year-round. And that's all assuming it never founders or colics or impales itself on a nail that you coulda sworn was 10 feet overhead!!

    But as to electric vehicles -- I'm wondering if some combination of -- ah, hell, what's the name of the gyro-propelled scooter contraption? with an electric bicycle and some sort of minimal driver shelter (small bubble or the like, for rain) could be extremely viable in many city environments, and usable even for people who can't physically propel a bicycle, or where hills/wind make it too much work even for folks in reasonably good condition.

    OTOH, if we went back to horses, either all today's whale-blubber folks would lose weight, or they'd be afoot, cuz you just can't put that much mass atop the average riding horse.

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  7. Re:Why no go back to horses sometime? by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 2, Informative

    San Francisco installed cable cars because trolleys can't go up hills.

  8. Re:Why no go back to horses sometime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is bullshit. There is no evidence whatsoever that Polish cavalry ever attacked tanks. There was a battle where Polish cavalry were killed by tanks and machine guns, but that was only due to them dispersing an infantry group and then later surprised by an armored division (from which they immediately retreated).

    The idea that Polish cavalry attacked tanks is Nazi propaganda. Stop repeating it. The Nazis made it up so that it made the Poles look stupid. Tanks always have infantry support and machine guns so that nobody (cavalry or infantry) can approach them and put bombs in their treads. You entire post is some sort of redeeming myth built upon Nazi propaganda.

  9. Re:Such a lovely place, that Eastern front by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    They were riding on horses because Germany was having a hell of a time supplying them and they were getting their asses kicked by the Allies.


    The latter half is ignorant. They were riding horses because, contrary to popular mything originating from the Blitzkrieg in Poland, 80-90% of the German Army were not mobile with vehicles -- troops were generally transported by rail and disembarked by foot/horse/bicycle close to where they had to go. You still see plenty of pictures of German bicycle troops in 1940 France -- long before they were losing. Calvary also still played a part.

    And in Russia, the horse was sometimes very valuable. Plenty of pictures of horses/mules/donkeys used to pull vehicles/tanks(!) out of the mud -- because during the spring thaw and fall rains -- you just couldn't drive. Russians had few paved roads at the time.

    Yes, it was a mistake not to make more vehicles before the war. But by the beginning of WW2, more than 1 in 5 Americans had a car, and only 1 in 40 Germans had a car -- that was a major factor in determining factory output capacity of vehicles.
  10. Re:And this is being brought back why? by AragornSonOfArathorn · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, if you'd actually RTFA, you'd have seen this: "To promote itself, Detroit Electric--a new joint venture between Zap and China's Youngman Automotive Group--plan to release a limited number of cars based around the Detroit Electric"

    It does encourage one to comprehend the article one is reading ;-)

    --
    sudo eat my shorts
  11. Re:And this is being brought back why? by C0vardeAn0nim0 · · Score: 3, Informative

    it's a short, one page arcticle, drop the excuses and RTFA!

    most of the arcticle is about the old detroit electric and the company that used to make it. the only paragraph of interest is this:

    "To promote itself, Detroit Electric--a new joint venture between Zap and China's Youngman Automotive Group--plan to release a limited number of cars based around the Detroit Electric, an electric car produced by the Anderson Electric Car Co. in the early part of the 20th century."

    my guess is that it's gonna be something like the P/T cruiser, prowler or new beetle. a modern design inspired by a (very) old one.

    --
    What ? Me, worry ?