Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New World Record For Electric Car Speed: 204.2 MPH

Posted by timothy on from the electric-moment dept.

Dupple writes with this excerpt from the BBC: "Drayson Racing Technologies has broken the world land speed record for a lightweight electric car. Its Lola B12 69/EV vehicle hit a top speed of 204.2mph (328.6km/h) at a racetrack at RAF Elvington in Yorkshire. ... The previous 175mph record was set by Battery Box General Electric in 1974. Drayson Racing is not the only electric vehicle-maker hoping to use motorsport to spur on adoption of the technology. Last week Nissan unveiled the Zeod RC (Zero Emission On Demand Racing Car), which can switch between electric and petrol power. The firm intends to enter the vehicle into next year's Le Mans 24 race saying the competition would act as a 'challenging test bed' for technologies that could eventually find their way into road cars." This video from last year introduces the Lola; Drayson's YouTube channel has plenty more footage, too.

65 of 99 comments (clear)

  1. Re:202 ? by Nutria · · Score: 2

    The TGV doesn't have to carry it's own power source.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  2. Nope by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can't drive for 8 hours without a recharge, can't charge in less than 500 microseconds, doesn't cost less than the shittiest Ford = piece of shit.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, let's go for a long cross country journey in a drag racer

      OH WAIT that would be RIDICULOUS

    2. Re:Nope by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      To the moron who modded me flaimbait: I was joking, parodying the typical Slashdot reaction to any electric vehicle. I'm actually a big fan of them.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Nope by Ogi_UnixNut · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There is currently no gas driven car with emissions so low that they are long term viable in large cities.

      I don't get this at all, in what way? Viable according to whose standards? in what way? I mean, cars nowadays pretty much only output CO2, which is the same thing we output.

      Also, cars are bigger than people, we won't be able to fit enough cars into a dense enough city space to make them unviable in that sense.

      We also have to start manufacturing new oil soon, do you have a solution for that?

      You can manufacture as much oil as you like, we've done it for a long time, the problem is that it is expensive compared to what you can get out of the ground, that it is limited to specialty areas (e.g. synthetic car oil). For Fuel we can manufacture hydrocarbons, although not (yet) in the amounts necessary to totally replace what is drilled out world wide.

      In Europe, fuel costs are so high (due to taxes) that they are almost reaching parity with manufactured fuel in cost, which I suspect may well be the long term politicians goal (i.e. they can switch us all over and it would not cause a massive price shock).

      In fact, from the point of view of alternatives, I still think *biofuels are better than EV, at least in the short/medium term. Batteries wear out quickly, are expensive, and have no reached density parity with chemical fuels.

      Of course, you don't have to burn said fuels, perhaps fuel cells with electric traction would be the most efficient.

      *I don't mean the ass-backwards thing in the US where you use corn to make fuel, but sugar cane, algae, grasses, hemp and others, which are far better suited to this without affecting the food supply.

    4. Re:Nope by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      There is currently no gas driven car with emissions so low that they are long term viable in large cities.
      We also have to start manufacturing new oil soon, do you have a solution for that?

      Yes, the current EV might be considered pretty shitty, but the alternatives are even worse.

      it's plenty viable since it's been in use for a long time.. though of course in really big cities nobody drives because there's so much traffic - electric cars or not. soon has been soon for a long while.. depending who you ask from. for the short term future the only reason to manufacture oil from say, coal(because that's economical) is if your country is cut off from any oil selling nations and you don't have any oil of your own.

      What I want to know is what made it necessary to go to these great lengths to go "just" 200mph? I mean, what's the technical reason standing in the way of stripping a nissan gtr(or a lotus elise or what have you - point being a car that doesn't break apart before 200mph) - dropping in some electric motors and some fast discharge batteries and doing the run? why do you need a lemans lookalike made out of carbon fiber?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    5. Re:Nope by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It would make sense if it wasn't so stupid.

      What is "it"? Being a fan of electric vehicles? One can be a fan by recognising their potential, while still recognising their (current) shortcomings. If we all took your attitude to emerging technology we'd still be living in caves and cleaning our teeth with chewed sticks.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    6. Re:Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Weight class and type. Set the speed record for that particular class, but no mention of that here. There are faster electric cars.

      Buckeye Bullet still has a good 100MPH on it, but that Boneville Flats racer tends to stretch the definition of "car" more than something styled after a LeMans prototype racer.

      As for designing the Drayson as a track car? It's much more streetable than something built specifically to go fast in a straight line. You could take a hard turn in it around 30+ MPH and not worry about it rolling over. Engineering around that form factor means whatever developments you come up with may have more practical applications.

    7. Re:Nope by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Yes, let's go for a long cross country journey in a drag racer

      OH WAIT that would be RIDICULOUS

      That's not a drag car, this is a drag car.

      FYI, drag racers are operated on 1/4 mile strips, not full-on racing tracks.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    8. Re:Nope by pr0fessor · · Score: 2

      I normally drive about 30 miles a day {all in town} in a gas car which sits in the garage at home for 12 hours a night an electric cars range and recharge time would not be a major problem for me. Sure there are rare occasions where I actually drive more than 80 miles in a day once maybe twice a year. Since mine is a two car family there is no reason I couldn't have a hybrid and an all electric car, or just rent a car for those long trip days.

    9. Re:Nope by keytoe · · Score: 2

      In Europe, fuel costs are so high (due to taxes) that they are almost reaching parity with manufactured fuel in cost, which I suspect may well be the long term politicians goal (i.e. they can switch us all over and it would not cause a massive price shock).

      Except for the massive price shock in terms of how much less money the government would collect without that tax in place...

      --

      Culture is more than commerce

    10. Re:Nope by tilante · · Score: 1

      "in really big cities nobody drives because there's so much traffic".

      Have you actually thought about that statement? If no one drives, what exactly is all that traffic? Or do you believe that there are millions of driverless cars wandering around on the streets out there?

      Top recorded speed of a Nissan GTR: 195 mph (Nissan estimates 193 mph top speed). Top speed of a Lotus Elise: 148 mph. Also, note the phrase "The firm intends to enter the vehicle into next year's Le Mans 24 race" in the summary. It looks like a Le Mans car because that's what it's meant to be.

    11. Re:Nope by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      Personally, I'm getting ready to buy a big block old 70's muscle car, something with a 455 4-speed. 10mpg....ahh, the good old days.

      I've got a decent job and can afford the gas. So many people seem to forget that cars should also be FUN too....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    12. Re:Nope by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Also, cars are bigger than people, we won't be able to fit enough cars into a dense enough city space to make them unviable in that sense.

      Ever tried to park? Parking spaces sell for big bucks now, even without a house attached.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    13. Re:Nope by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      I'd love to take one of those beasts and put an electric engine in it. Or better yet something truly anachronistic like a late model Silver Ghost and trick it out with all the latest high tech gadgets.

    14. Re:Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'd love to take one of those beasts and put an electric engine in it. Or better yet something truly anachronistic like a late model Silver Ghost and trick it out with all the latest high tech gadgets.

      http://www.lincvolt.com/ Neil Young's big electric cruiser...

    15. Re:Nope by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You know, you could just get as much output or more out of an LS4 or something like that. It would cost you more, but you'd be able to pass a gas station.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    16. Re:Nope by Ogi_UnixNut · · Score: 2

      Except for the massive price shock in terms of how much less money the government would collect without that tax in place...

      They worked that one out already, GPS tracking and black-boxes in every car, and you get get charged per mile driven. So once they switch us over we will just get taxed based on how far we drive.

      They are already rolling out the above, by mandating all new cars from 2013 have said black boxes in them, with permanent internet connection.

      Not that I like the idea, I find it abhorrent (I'd rather they just checked the odometer every year and charge you based on the difference traveled since the last measurement), but I can't fault them for not thinking ahead.

      Hopefully my old car would be exempt, or I might just up and leave the EU to an area with more personal freedom, like Russia (irony of ironies that).

    17. Re:Nope by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      You know, you could just get as much output or more out of an LS4 or something like that. It would cost you more, but you'd be able to pass a gas station.

      Yeah, but there's something to be said about nostaltic. And I always wanted one as a teen like a friend had.....

      I'd thought about getting a high end camaro, but while you do get performance, they all look so alike, and everyone and their goat has a new camaro.

      And old '75-'76 TA 455 4-speed is a bit of a head turner. And with a few mods, the suspension can be modernized, and with only freeing up that air flow in them, a slightly more aggressive cam...you can get up in the 500 HP range on them.

      I only live a short distance from work, so wouldn't be cost prohibitive to be a daily driver, and fun!!!

      Life's too short not to indulge from time to time.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  3. The Lola? by cellocgw · · Score: 3, Funny

    Something something how can a car without a tranny be a Lola?
    (yeah I know electric cars have a transmission but they don't have a gearbox, which is what most people refer to as transmission)

    --
    https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    1. Re:The Lola? by polar+red · · Score: 1

      yeah I know electric cars have a transmission

      NOT necessary: you can mount each wheel with its own motor.

      --
      Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
    2. Re:The Lola? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Something something how can a car without a tranny be a Lola?

      I though most people named Lola were trannies.

    3. Re:The Lola? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      That's the joke.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    4. Re:The Lola? by louden+obscure · · Score: 1

      Now I can't get the damn song outta my head...

      --
      Serenity now, insanity later.
    5. Re:The Lola? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      His joke has gone completely over your head.

      According to the song, something else is completely over his head, too.

      I walked to the door
      I fell to the floor
      I got down on my knees
      I looked at her and she at me
      And that's the way that I want it to be
      I always want to be that way for my Lola
      Lo lo lo lo lo lo Lola

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  4. They don't care that you don't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They're not trying to sell you this car. It's a proof of concept whose purpose is to dispel the myth that electric cars can't be made to perform well.

    1. Re:They don't care that you don't care by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 1

      I thought Tesla already proved that? At least they did in my mind. 0-60, 300 mile range, only $100,00. Far out of my price range, but I if I was in the market for a Porsche or Lambo, I'd consider the Tesla.

      --
      21st Century Renaissance Man
    2. Re:They don't care that you don't care by Ogi_UnixNut · · Score: 2

      I don't think their performance was ever challenged. I mean, their torque curve alone shows that it would be faster off the mark then a IC car of the same curb weight.

      Everything I've gathered about EV's not performing well had little to do with performance, but more to do with energy density, recharge time, exotic materials, and the fact the batteries wear out a lot faster than a fuel tank.

      (incidentally, all of the above (minus exotic materials) would be solved by using fuel cells in an EV car, if they can get them to not gunk up after a while and bring down the cost).

    3. Re:They don't care that you don't care by t4ng* · · Score: 1

      (incidentally, all of the above (minus exotic materials) would be solved by using fuel cells in an EV car, if they can get them to not gunk up after a while and bring down the cost).

      My impression of fuel cells is that they aren't very energy efficient when you take into consideration the energy required to make them and/or the electrolyte they use. They are just compact and light weight for special applications, such as near earth space craft. For example, the energy required to produce the hydrogen needed for a hydrogen fuel cell, usually by breaking bonds in H2O, is much greater than the energy you get out of the fuel cell in using that hydrogen. It's more efficient to just directly use the energy that would have gone in to producing the hydrogen. Fuel cells have been around since the early 1800's. If they were such a great primary energy source, wouldn't they be in use everywhere after 175 years?

    4. Re:They don't care that you don't care by WindBourne · · Score: 2

      Actually, the Model S is cheaper to buy than all of its gas competitor, and MUCH cheaper to run, as well as outperforming them.
      The Model S does NOT compete against a porsche or lambo (though interestingly, the performance version can take them on). It competes against full size Audi, BMW, Cadillac, Lexus, Mercedes, etc.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    5. Re:They don't care that you don't care by Ogi_UnixNut · · Score: 1

      My impression of fuel cells is that they aren't very energy efficient when you take into consideration the energy required to make them and/or the electrolyte they use

      And how much energy is required to make the batteries for an EV? Will not even include the energy required to produce all the advanced electronics for the thing to work (because a fuel cell EV car will need those too). Also, take into account that unlike a normal car, fixing the above will be pretty much impossible unless you are a specialist, and will probably involve just replacing things when they break (compared to a normal car, where any decently specced garage/machine shop can pretty much produce any part you need).

      They are just compact and light weight for special applications, such as near earth space craft.

      And cars/other vehicles. Trust me, weight is critical for cars as well. The lighter the car, the shorter the stopping distance, the better the fuel economy, the better the handling, the less kinetic energy == less deadly accidents.

      For example, the energy required to produce the hydrogen needed for a hydrogen fuel cell, usually by breaking bonds in H2O, is much greater than the energy you get out of the fuel cell in using that hydrogen

      Which is why I wasn't talking about hydrogen. It makes a lousy fuel, worse than batteries, because it is expensive to generate, and bloody impossible to store in a car-sized tank under any decent density. I was referring to ethanol/methanol fuel cells, which are liquid (high density), can be used with existing infrastructure (sometimes with minor modification), and can be burned in IC cars as well as fuel EV's, allowing for a transition period and/or peaceful co-existence between piston-heads and the rest of the world who only want a car to get them from A to B.

      Fuel cells have been around since the early 1800's. If they were such a great primary energy source, wouldn't they be in use everywhere after 175 years?

      So were batteries, yet only now, 170+ years later, we have people trying to make them work for cars (note, people made electric cars back in the time before the Model-T, they never took off for the same reasons that we are dealing with now). The world is primarily driven by economic factors, not technical excellence. Fossil fuels were so cheap that there was no point investing research effort into the alternatives (including man-made fuels, like butanol, which actually pre-dates the use of petrol in IC engines).

  5. Can't wait... by Last_Available_Usern · · Score: 1

    Can't wait to see the pit stop times for this thing. Do those stopwaches measure in hours?

    1. Re:Can't wait... by xeio87 · · Score: 2

      Tesla already has prototypes for swapping batteries out in less than 2 minutes.

      Still too long for a pit stop, but they already use specialized equipment there to refuel quickly (compared to gas stations) so something similar for electric cars isn't unfathomable if the actually catch on in this type of environment.

    2. Re:Can't wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Le Mans pitstops are usually around 55 / 60 seconds for just refueling stop, and around 80 - 85 seconds if it's a tire/driver change/refuel. Usually drivers do anywhere from 2 to 4 driving stints and are changed when the tires need changing.

      (btw, Le Mans 24h was last weekend, my observation stems from watching the race)

    3. Re:Can't wait... by xeio87 · · Score: 1

      What happens when you get to a gas station in Nowheresville and they've run out of gas?

      Also, you trade batteries, they never "run out". Though potentially you'd end up getting batteries that have less than a full charge (and all they have to do to fix that is to have more batteries spare for swapping as demand increases).

    4. Re:Can't wait... by Medievalist · · Score: 1

      Tesla already has prototypes for swapping batteries out in less than 2 minutes.

      How long does it take when you get to the battery station in Nowheresville and they've run out of batteries?

      Much, much less time than it takes to refuel when you get to the gas station in Nowheresville and they've run out of gas. You just plug the car in and wait 3 hours, instead of waiting 24 hours for the next tanker truck, oh wait! It's Saturday. 48 hours no gas for you.

      I can also make up other ridiculous scenarios that could happen to people with bad luck or poor planning skills.

    5. Re:Can't wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're the one not paying attention, I'm afraid. Pit stops in Le Mans are counted from the moment the transponder crosses the pit lane entry line, and the clock only stops when the transponder crosses the pit lane exit line. The winning car (#2 Audi driven by Kristen/McNish/Duval) stopped 34 times during the race, averaging just a little over a minute per pit stop.

      Other ACO rules: at any one time no more then 5 mechanics may work on the car in the pit lane. The engine must be shut off before refueling. The car must be refueled before any other work can be carried out (even if the car is to be retired to the garage for collision repair or any other mechanical problems, it must be refueld all the same). Only one mechanic is allowed to refuel the car. If changing drivers, the outgoing driver may help the incoming driver (adjust the seat mould, buckle the seatbelts, connect the comms cables, connect the drinking hose, change telemetry storage cards, etc)

      (Yes, I've been to Le Mans every year since 95. I also do at least 3 endurance events in the VLN championship every year in a 1988 BMW M3).

    6. Re:Can't wait... by haruchai · · Score: 1

      Just to be clear - the capability is present in every Model S. If by prototype, you mean the machine that does the battery swap, then I agree that's correct.

      However, Better Place, notwithstanding their bankruptcy, has been doing battery swap for a while and Tesla's tech seems scarcely any different.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    7. Re:Can't wait... by Cederic · · Score: 1

      The racing industry can change all four tyres on a car in under three seconds.

      A 45 second recharge isn't impressing me.

  6. Top Gear drove this by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 2

    It topped out at 24 mph.

    1. Re:Top Gear drove this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      It topped out at 24 mph.

      And it exploded and killed Jeremy Clarkson's dog. It was hilarious. You had to see it.

  7. Re:202 ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    these cars can have a small battery

    In other words every car needs to carry in own power source.

  8. Re:202 ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It doesn't have to carry extra apostrophes either. That helps.

  9. Re:202 ? by gl4ss · · Score: 2

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_bus

    I'll let you figure out why we haven't replaced personal vehicles with these.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  10. This is the Future by sidevans · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I am sad I don't have any mod points to give negative shit right now, especially with all the people drinking haterade and talking shit about electric cars - this is a subject I hold close to my heart.....

    Yes we are behind on tech, a 1911-1916 Detroit Motors electric car was doing ~80 miles on a charge, with the best test being 211 miles (340 km) from a single charge - however with small scale wind and solar systems we can manage 90% of consumer and urban driving requirements without relying on a single drop of oil from the middle east. I am from Australia - its 3:10am here (yes I've had a drink) and personally whatever happens over there doesn't affect us apart from catching the flu when America sneezes - but this type of technology is what will make the world free one day.

    Brand new Electric cars are $100k, but for $20k you can buy an old can and convert it to electric with 200km "down under" range (~120 miles) and it will consume a hell of a lot less overall energy than a combustion motor - you guys in the USA will probably get the most expensive part - the batteries - cheaper than we would in Australia and your currency is now stronger.

    Electric cars will always have more instant torque and power than unleaded, ethenol, DIEsel or Gas (LPG, Natural Gas) - and they will kick ass when the time is right. Look up "White Zombie EV" and "EV West" cars for some real education on what is available on the market already.

    If anyone disagree's, you suck and I don't care.

    --
    I'm not signing anything
    1. Re:This is the Future by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      I live in a small Mid-Western US town and there are close to a dozen electric cars running around town not to mention a flood of hybrids. I am thinking about getting an all electric car for my self and a hybrid for the wife {that way we have a car that we can drive on that vacation we take once a decade}. I'm not saying there are no over sized SUVs here there are plenty of those also.

    2. Re:This is the Future by LongearedBat · · Score: 1

      Mod up, please.

    3. Re:This is the Future by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Hear hear, well said sir. Every word the pure ring of truth.

    4. Re:This is the Future by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Brand new Electric cars are $100k, but for $20k you can buy an old can and convert it to electric

      Or for $2k I can buy a pretty good used gasser. I spent less than $4k and got a turbo-diesel sedan which gets 26 mpg (real-world, in hill country on diesel. I'd love to own a small EV but it just doesn't make economic sense.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  11. Re:202 ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    The record is for an electric car under 1000 kg.

    http://www.worldcarfans.com/113062659310/drayson-racing-breaks-world-speed-record-for-a-lightweight

    A TGV is not lightweight by any imagination.

  12. Formula One profile by loufoque · · Score: 1

    Why not make a sports car for dirt roads instead? At least it would be usable outside of perfectly flat circuits.

    1. Re:Formula One profile by sidevans · · Score: 2

      you mean this thing?

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBNxTSTMeII

      --
      I'm not signing anything
  13. 620kW with 20kWh Battery = 2 Minutes full throttle by tp1024 · · Score: 1

    Ok fine. A racecar won't go full throttle all the time on the racetrack. But still at least 50%. That roughly enough energy for a grant total of THREE laps ... on a really short racetrack.

    Sorry, but this is a stunt and in no way practical whatsoever. That's because it runs on batteries and batteries have crappy energy density. It's just the wrong kind of technology for this purpose. Stop kidding yourselves.

    This may work with fuelcells - but those require much more electricity to make and store the hydrogen and generate electricity from hydrogen than simply charging a battery, which you can do with some 95% efficiency, rather than about 33% for hydrogen/fuelcells. So the hydrogen gambit may work, but it's an even greater and more idiotic waste of energy, which isn't exactly what the purpose of this whole thing was in the first place.

  14. Re:202 ? by OhSoLaMeow · · Score: 4, Funny

    I dare you to take out the battery in your car.

    I did. We went to dinner and a movie.

    What happened afterwards is too shocking to tell.

    --
    They can take my LifeAlert pendant when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.
  15. I declare bullshit by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

    I think in order to claim you can drive 202 mph, you should be able to drive at that speed for an hour. Otherwise you are really getting far less actual miles per hour when you have to stop every 5 minutes and charge for 10 hours.

    Really, its speed is more like 202 miles/week.

    Just a reminder, before you slam me, scan for sarcasm first.

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
    1. Re:I declare bullshit by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Yeah. The Brits are also making a car that will do 1,000 mph. They ought to make that run for an hour as well.

      Of course, finding a straight track several thousand miles long might be a bit of a problem. I've heard that there's nothing in the middle of Australia...

      We have rocks, Kangaroos, Wombats, Koala Drop Bears, land sharks and backpacker murders.

      Everything on this fucking content is trying to kill you.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  16. Re:202 ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When I was young and poor I had my car's battery die and had to wait for my paycheck to clear before I could afford a new one. I had to push start my car for a couple of days, parking it on hills and such.

    Though it wasn't that big a deal, really.

    Thank the FSM it had a manual transmission.

  17. KillaCycle by djlemma · · Score: 2

    I immediately thought about the drag racing electric motorcycle I had read about years back, the KillaCycle. Well, apparently those guys designed the battery packs for the Drayson in TFA, which is pretty neat. It's also the bike that the inventor crashed while trying to do a burnout for some reporters... but whatever, still cool.

  18. World Records by Kreegalor · · Score: 1

    World Records are a dime a dozen. 200mph is impressive in an electric but 200mph in an electric has happened a few times in the last 10 years. This is nothing new or that note worthy, just a good hype machine.

  19. Re:202 ? by QuasiSteve · · Score: 2

    Slightly off-topic..

    Between people's desire for individual freedom, lack of a proper transit network, and the popular opinion that buses are not something you want to be found on for cited security and hygiene reasons, at least people in DC don't seem to need much of another reason.

    Which is a shame, really, and here's why.
    I'll be visiting DC (IAD, technically in VA) and have to go to, say, Charlotte Hall in MD.

    Cab: $150
    SuperShuttle: $160 (no longer does shared rides that far south)
    SupremeAirportShuttle (shared ride): $135 (fluctuates - their site is a mess)
    Rental car: $6.35 for gas (assuming 2012 Ford Fiesta), oodles more for rental+insurance (remains cheaper than the above for the first 2-3 days or so).
    Bus (5A to Rosslyn and 909 down south): $10.35

    If buses were held in higher esteem (and Dillon's seems a perfectly good commercial operator, but not many people seem to actually review bus service over there), made more stops (there's just a few along that entire route, though local transport including taxis may be viable from there), and drove a little faster, I'd say buses would be a great option there.. electric or otherwise.

    ( I was disappointed to find that the railroad tracks there are only used for goods, and not for people movers. Unless I missed something. )

  20. they have the wrong idea by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    Here's my idea. Don't take all that time and effort making an electric car drive fast. Take a hot wheels car and launch it out of an electric rail gun at about 10,000MPH and then spend all the time and effort convincing the judges that that counts.

  21. Re:202 ? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    That's not fast. the tgv has already done 574 kph. (360mph) Electric engines are capable of MUCH more.

    Yes, but electric motors can do even more.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  22. Oh Bollocks. by mjwx · · Score: 1

    I think in order to claim you can drive 202 mph, you should be able to drive at that speed for an hour. Otherwise you are really getting far less actual miles per hour when you have to stop every 5 minutes and charge for 10 hours.

    Really, its speed is more like 202 miles/week.

    Just a reminder, before you slam me, scan for sarcasm first.

    Most cars wouldn't be able to maintain 300 KPH for 1 hour without refilling. Hell, most cars wont reach 200 KPH let alone maintain it.

    Doing 300 KPH for 1 hour is nothing like doing 300 KM per week as:
    1) You'll be doing 300 at lower speeds, thus using less fuel (gross oversimplification, but a vast improvement over the Parents analogy).
    2) You'll also be stopping and starting a lot more.

    I track my lightly modified DC5 and at 250 KPH I'd go through 50 litres of RON 98 in less than half an hour as I'm doing 8000 RPM in 6th gear (I can easily see my fuel economy being 100L/100KM). However in normal conditions 50L will last for 550 KM with an average speed of 56.5 KPH using approx 9.2L/100KM. The DC5 is a 2L 4 banger, Turbo's and 6cyl cars are even worse, your fuel economy at high RPM is crap, regardless of if it's petrol or electric.

    Now if you wanted it to run for 300 KM at 60 KPH you might have a point. But top speed is not sustained cruising speed.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  23. Re:Units! by Cederic · · Score: 1

    That's right. Proud conquerors of the vastest empire the world has ever seen - and then we gave it back.

    We're that good.

  24. When I was a lad... by metaforest · · Score: 1

    My mentor and I built a RC model car that on smooth concrete could do 105MPH, and sustain it for 8 - 10 minutes. It had so much torque that 'punching it' off the line turned it into a 'ground-bloom-flower'. Factor in the car's scale MPH (1/12 scale) and it was doing 1260 (scale) MPH.

    I used to impress my nerd-friends by 'drag-racing' cars going down the street (at 25 - 30 MPH) and passing them before they had gone 100 meters. That is the car being raced was going 25 MPH and the RC car was going from zero to whatever was needed to overtake the fullsize car before it got through to the end of the block. That wasn't even using the most advanced motor drivers available back then, Back then PWM DC motor drivers were terrible for reliability and performance because FETs were too small and power transistors had more losses than a simple high wattage rheostat driver.

    That was with NiCad batteries, resistor-based DC control, and traditional DC motor tech back in the late 70's. If I were to build that RC car now.... it would easily do 205 (real) MPH due to improvements in battery tech, and motor tech in the last 35 years. The only thing impressive about this car is that it is a full-sized Le Mans compliant vehicle.