Sign In Join 



Hybrid Prius that gets over 100 Miles per Gallon

74 messages,  Last post on Mar 11, 2008 at 12:31 PM

You are in the Toyota Prius Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer

What is this discussion about? Toyota Prius, Ford Escape Hybrid, Lexus GS 450h, Fuel System, Engine, Hybrid Cars, Future Vehicle, Hatchback, Sedan, SUV


Messages Page 2 of 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#9 of 74
Re: Toyota Prius [gagrice] by pathstar1
Jul 02, 2006 (7:57 am)
Reply

Replying to: gagrice (Jun 28, 2006 11:47 am)

Always keeping in mind the "stock" Prius battery only has a few amp-hrs of capacity, so I doubt you could use it for much. It only carries the car a few km on its' own. The primary design goal of the battery was to store the recovered regenerative brake energy (about 20% of the mileage gain) and to give a torque boost to the gasoline engine under acceleration. The gas engine is run in a different mode than usually used, and this gives it higher efficiency (another 10-15% mileage gain) but in this mode it develops a lot less power than the "normal" cycle engines).
 
The aftermarket guys add a much larger battery (something I have often wondered about). The NiMh battery was never developed by GM! It's a design done by a separate company (who have been trying to get the car manufacturerers to listen for a few years now). The NiMh battery has been improving rapidly. Just look at the capacity increase of AA batteries over the last two years. Almost doubled!
 
As for adding an inverter, not a good idea. Most aftermarket inverters run on 12VDC. The Prius 12V battery is tiny and you'd run the risk of discharging it rapidly - and damaging it (because it's a lead acid battery it can be damaged if discharged too much).
 
As for heat under charge, all battery technologies heat up, but both the LiI (lithium ion) and NiMh (nickle metal hydride) seem to suffer from this a little more. An easy solution is to use coolant passed though small pipes between the battery cells. There are up to 400 cells in the Prius (500 V battery), though I suspect it's closer to 333. Lots of places for improvement. There isn't actually a lot of heat energy, so a simple free air radiator would suffice with a charger that throttles back when the temp gets too high.
 
Oh, and there are rumours that Toyota will add "plugin" capability to the Prius in 2008. We shall see.
#10 of 74
Re: Toyota Prius [pathstar1] by timinalaska
Jul 02, 2006 (10:00 am)
Reply

Replying to: pathstar1 (Jul 02, 2006 7:57 am)

Oh yeah, I forgot one thing. There is a new movie out which is going to major metropilitan areas in July and August. It's called "Who Killed the Electric Car?" (www.whokilledtheelectriccar.com).
 
I just saw this at the opening in Los Angeles last week. It's very interesting, and it also discusses to an extent the improvement over battery technology over the last few years, and also how the Automakers have not used the best battery technology available to them.
 
The movie's been distributed by Sony Classics, and it's well worth seeing.
 
Thanks! Tim
#11 of 74
Re: Toyota Prius [pathstar1] by gagrice
Jul 02, 2006 (1:52 pm)
Reply

Replying to: pathstar1 (Jul 02, 2006 7:57 am)

The NiMh battery was never developed by GM!
 
 Here is a brief bit of history concerning the NiMH battery that was developed by a GM company for the EV-1.
 
Detroit, October 10 -- Texaco (NYSE:TX) and General Motors (NYSE:GM) today announced Texaco's intent to acquire GM's share of a joint venture that has developed an advanced battery technology for the automotive market.
 
Under the terms of the memorandum of understanding, Texaco will acquire GM's 60 percent share of an existing joint venture with Energy Conversion Devices – ECD – (NASDAQ:ENER), a firm in which Texaco already holds a 20 percent interest. GM and Ovonic Battery Company, a subsidiary of ECD, formed the joint venture, GM Ovonic, in 1994 to manufacture and commercialize high-efficiency, nickel metal hydride (NiMH) automobile batteries. The joint venture, which will be re-named Texaco Ovonic, plans to fully commercialize and expand its applications to a broad range of energy markets.
 
"ECD and Ovonic developed breakthrough advanced NiMH battery technology and General Motors has brought it to the production stage

 
http://www.cobasys.com/news/PressReleases/20001010.htm
 
OK, now onto the heart of the matter about Cobasys' long history of aggressively defending its comprehesive NiMH patent portfolio, which gives it exclusive control over worldwide NiMH battery production.
 
I have not actually read the legal judgement against Panasonic in favor of Cobasys by the international court of arbitration because that decision was sealed and supposed to remain confidential by prior agreement of the parties, as you probably know. However numerous details of that judgement/settlement have emerged in the press, including some revealed by Cobasys itself. What we know is that the court levied a $30 million fine against Panasonic and Toyota which they had to pay to Cobasys for violation of Cobasys' NiMH patents and back-payment of royalties owed to Cobasys.

 
NiMH History, why no PHEV
#12 of 74
Re: Toyota Prius [gagrice] by pathstar1
Jul 03, 2006 (7:54 am)
Reply

Replying to: gagrice (Jul 02, 2006 1:52 pm)

Ah, I see you were confused by the "corporate speak" of GM. The battery was developed by Texaco Ovonics (among others), and GM is a "partner", not a working partner, a small percentage money provider (and probably has a deal to use the technology). Texaco Ovonics has successfully defended their patent, which will historically back up their claim to be the inventor (even if history proves they weren't). Even so, GM has shown little interest in use of the technology in electric cars. Their use appears to be for the purpose of advertising and improving their "fleet fuel use".
 
I stand by my statement - "The NiMh battery was never developed by GM!"
Partially funded, perhaps, but that's it.
 
This brings up an interesting point - I'm not sure there is another example of such a quick adoption of a "new invention". The development hatched the battery in 1999 and look how pervasive use of the NiMH technology has become in six short years!
#13 of 74
Re: Toyota Prius [pathstar1] by gagrice
Jul 03, 2006 (4:09 pm)
Reply

Replying to: pathstar1 (Jul 03, 2006 7:54 am)

I think you missed this part. GM was the owner of Ovonics when they invented the NiMH battery. Texaco owned 20% at the time. GM sold their controlling interest in Cobasys (Ovonics) to raise maoney.
 
Under the terms of the memorandum of understanding, Texaco will acquire GM's 60 percent share
 
The bottom line is the US taxpayer through Clinton's giveaway program PNGV was involved in the development of the NiMH battery.
 
PS
Texaco Cobasys (Ovonics) sued Toyota and Panasonic after GM sold their 60% to Texaco.
#14 of 74
Re: Toyota Prius [pathstar1] by pathstar1
Jul 05, 2006 (10:52 am)
Reply

Replying to: pathstar1 (Jul 02, 2006 7:57 am)

A correction of my previous post.
I've got to remember to RTFM! The Prius battery consists of 28 modules of 6 cells each. That's 168 cells. Peak voltage will be 252 V and "average" voltage will be around 210 V. Minimum voltage would be 201.6 V, and if you measured the battery voltage and found it lower you might have some shorted or otherwise dead cells. You can estimate how many dead cells there are by dividing the difference by 1.2 V (the minimum voltage you should see across a nickle metal-hydride cell). This would be difficult unless you actually separate the 7.2 Volt modules though, as the voltage can vary depending on state of charge -of each cell-, so the battery voltage can vary more than you would think it would caused by dead cells.
 
Bottom line of this is -if- you can buy the 7.2 V modules the battery is made of, you can "repair" a battery pack. Once it's over about 7 years of operation, this might not be a good way to go as all the cells will be getting old. Nice to know though in case there are cell failures early. As Toyota absorbs these per the warrenty, I guess they made it easy to repair.
#15 of 74
Re: Toyota Prius [gagrice] by pathstar1
Jul 05, 2006 (10:56 am)
Reply

Replying to: gagrice (Jul 03, 2006 4:09 pm)

I yield to your superiour knowledge. I still don't think -GM- "invented" it, though obviously they helped (in a majority way) fund the development.
 
I guess Texaco Ovonics is the company they interviewed (with a plant visit as well) on Motorweek last year. I think the head guy they talked to was the actual inventor. They are also into using the Nickle hydride matrix to store hydrogen at "low" pressure (100 psi instead of several thousand psi) to build "practical" hydrogen storage tanks for hydrogen powered vehicles.
#16 of 74
Re: Toyota Prius [pathstar1] by gagrice
Jul 05, 2006 (11:43 am)
Reply

Replying to: pathstar1 (Jul 05, 2006 10:56 am)

I read something about Ovonics/Cobasys being involved in hydrogen storage. My only emphasis is that many folks think that everything good in automotive comes from Japan. Many thought that Toyota invented the NiMH until they got sued and lost. Toyota is in court over the HSD system as well. GM was screwed by CARB on the electric vehicle. The mandate should not have been made then pulled. All of the Big 3 built hybrids in the early 1990s. None came to market as they were too costly and they thought they would not sell. Toyota called that one right. Are they making any money at it? Who knows?
 
I personally would rather see a simple electric vehicle for running errands with a 50 mile range. Much easier to build and maintain. Would satisfy a lot of people's needs. As long as modifying a Prius is the only option for PHEV, I don't see that as practical. There is just too many things that can go wrong and not be covered by a warranty.
#17 of 74
Re: Toyota Prius [gagrice] by timinalaska
Jul 05, 2006 (4:32 pm)
Reply

Replying to: gagrice (Jul 05, 2006 11:43 am)

Regarding the last post, I'm not sure why you say that 'GM' was screwed by CARB on the electric vehicle. GM was very aggressive in getting CARB to remove the mandate. GM and other auto manufacturers did not want the mandate, and were actually successful in changing the mandate to only force the auto industry to produce electric cars 'per' consumer demand versus a specific number. The auto industry makes money on auto parts and repair.
 
The electric vehicle is very clean, never needs oil changes, and has many less moving parts. When the EV1 was around, it needed very little maintenance. The auto industry relies on cars needing parts, oil changes, etc, especially dealerships. I forget what the exact percentage is, but dearlerships make a large portion of revenue from their repair shops. The EV1 was very successful and had a range of about 80 miles, and 'could have' been marketed succesfully. GM and other auto makers (and oil companies) did not want electric cars around.
 
When GM1 ended the leases to the EV1, rather than simply selling the cars to the leasees, they forced leasees to return the cars against their will. The cars then got crushed and went into the shredder. Why not just sell the EV1s that have already been driven. Toyota finally allowed some customers to keep the RAV4 EV after consumer protest against Toyota also forcing customers to return the vehicles and then crushing them.
 
GM and other auto makers did not want anything to do with electric vehicles even when there was customer demand for them. There is more information about this at www.whokilledtheelectriccar.com and the movie is being shown throughout hundreds of theatres across the nation over July and August.
#18 of 74
Re: Toyota Prius [timinalaska] by gagrice
Jul 05, 2006 (6:31 pm)
Reply

Replying to: timinalaska (Jul 05, 2006 4:32 pm)

OK, I pretty much agree with your analysis. I think we the public got screwed and GM indirectly got screwed by CARB. They could have stayed the course on demanding 10% of the cars to be ZEV. Instead the little minds at CARB went for the hybrid carrot. Hybrids may be OK but as you put it so well, they will be money makers in parts for the automakers. GM lost the lead in ZEV cars that it held for a very short time. I don't think they wanted any responsibility for replacement parts on the EV-1. It was easier to scrap than carry parts for them. Toyota is still on the hook for warranty on the last of the RAV4 EVs sold in 2003. I will have to rent that movie when it comes out on DVD.

Messages Page 2 of 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement