Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Electric Vehicles Electric Vehicle Pros & Cons
1586 messages, Last post on Oct 23, 2009 at 4:19 PM
You are in the Electric Vehicles Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
|
Looks like the UK is going to get a usable electric car on the road before the USA. Think Electric The compact battery-powered run-about, which goes on sale in the UK at the end of the year, has a range of more than 100 miles, and a top speed of 60mph. Better still, it’s constructed to proper crash test standards and doesn’t look too bad, either! But the key question is, how does the electric TH!NK perform on the road? From behind the wheel of the Norwegian-built 2+2, everything looks refreshingly normal. There’s a proper dash, familiar dials, automatic gearshifter, regular key – all made to a high standard. Only a charge gauge and prominent button marked ASSIST give away the fact that the car is powered by an electric motor. And although the design is not as cool as that offered by the likes of the Smart ForTwo, room up front is on a par, plus buyers are given the option of cramming two children in the back seats, too. It all looks familiar, partly because of the plundered Ford parts. The TH!NK project was the blue oval’s baby until it bailed out in 2002, leaving the Norwegians scrabbling to fund the launch. Six years on, the car is back, with one big difference: the battery is lithium-ion – the latest, most powerful available. Turn the Ford key and a hum alerts you that the 40bhp electric motor is ready to go. Shift into Drive, press the accelerator and it doesn’t have as much instant acceleration as some electric cars, but instead the silent shove builds and builds. It feels as quick as a supermini, confirmed by the quoted 6.5-second 0-30mph time – not bad as it weighs a hefty 1,400kg.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Apr 03, 2008 7:42 am) |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Apr 02, 2008 5:59 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Apr 03, 2008 5:46 pm) Seeing that carbon is the basic building block of all live on this planet I would say tons. Thats just the opinion of one carbon based life form. Ducking and running
|
|
|
Replying to: snakeweasel (Apr 03, 2008 5:59 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Apr 03, 2008 6:17 pm) Really? How so? My comment would tell most people that I am a wise a**. A sense of humor is a wonderful thing, try one sometime. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Apr 03, 2008 6:17 pm) Okay, so why don't you give up the preaching and get about the hard work of producing that energy and figuring out a way to sell it at a profit? |
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Apr 03, 2008 5:46 pm) I don't see people preaching it. I see people selling it and making money on our carbon based society. I am waiting for alternatives myself. I don't think we will divest ourselves of the use of carbon for at least a couple more centuries. We have enough coal for several hundred years. That is not going to just go away without a less expensive alternative. As far as EVs, I am not optimistic. I think other alternatives will come along and steal the show. The current direction of battery development is not very promising. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Apr 05, 2008 1:06 pm) I disagree. There may not be less expensive alternatives but there will be better alternatives. I believe CA is already transitioning away from using electricity generated from coal. Hawaii generates very little of their electricity from coal. The same is taking place in many European countries. I don't see this trend reversing itself. Is it your opinion that since coal is the cheapest source we should be maximizing it's use? As far as EVs, I am not optimistic. I think other alternatives will come along and steal the show. The current direction of battery development is not very promising. Just about every major auto manufacturer has an ongoing EV program. Their CEOs are pretty much in agreement when it comes to the eventual electrification of the fleet. Maybe these EVs won't use batteries, maybe it will be hydrogen, ultra-capacitors or some yet to be discovered storage device. However they will be EVs, not ICE powered vehicles. I'm not sure why you are so pessimistic when it comes to battery development. It seems to me that development here is taking place at a rapid pace. Today's best Li-ion batteries have over twice the energy density of the best NiMH batteries from 10 years ago. The only remaining hurdle is cost. From what I'm reading that will largely be overcome through mass production. The battery packs may never be cheap but they don't need to be in order for battery powered EVs to make financial sense. One of the things GM is considering for the Volt is leasing the battery packs. I think this would be a good idea given that the battery pack will represent the biggest area of uncertainty for most buyers. Some people are fundamentally opposed to leasing because they want to own something. In this particular case I don't see the issue. You are leasing a battery pack as opposed to buying gasoline. At the end of the year how much of the gasoline that you purchased do you still own? |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Apr 05, 2008 1:06 pm) Few moving parts, no ugly metals or chemicals. Safe, cheap, and an infinite supply. This is about twice as efficient as the other engine/design. http://www.engineair.com.au/ That air car they are selling in France isn't half bad, either. Same range as an electric vehicle, but none of the upkeep or cost. http://www.mdi.lu/eng/affiche_eng.php?page=accueil |
|
You are here:
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Electric Vehicles Electric Vehicle Pros & Cons
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
