Appleseed said:In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
Thank you.
Your reply was helpful and informative.
Honestly it's all been covered between the two threads. The only remaining uncertainties are 1) will this thread also reach 100 pages, 2) how painful will this process be due to a ton of bad and forced decisions.
Your reply was carefully crafted, well thought out and clearly stated too. Many more, and 100 pages is a real possibility!
My wife sent me the link to this article earlier today: https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/man-forced-ditch-115k-ford-ev-truck-family-road-trip-chicago-biggest-scam-modern-times
I had read it yesterday, and it was obvious from the get-go it was going to be a hit piece. I'm pretty neutral on the EV topic, but when they start quoting outrageous prices ($115k Canadian for the headline, article says $77k USD - yesterday it just said $115k), I get skeptical. I understand the non-Tesla charging experience right now typically leaves something to be desired. But many manufacturers are moving to the Tesla charging, so I think things will get better in the long-term. I told her about Tom buying his Lightning in TX and driving it back to FL, and will send her the link to that for a more unbiased view in terms of the charging landscape and a comparison of the trip to the ICE experience with the Porsche that also took the same trip. Ford's statement about charging at dealers and the Supercharger agreement just made it into the article today. Here was their note at the bottom of today's article:
*This story, originally published on 8-10-22, has been updated to include Ford's statement and the clarification of Canadian vs. U.S. Dollars for the car price.
If you can afford to buy a new pickup to the tune of $77k USD, you'd think you'd also have a non-EV vehicle that could make the trip. Or enough to rent another car for a week like they eventually did. Wouldn't you do some basic planning and maybe take some shorter trips to get a feel for the EV infrastructure before jumping on a major trip?
I'm sure it takes time to get parts right now. Heck, it took me almost 2 months just to get into a body shop for my '06 Rav4 earlier this year, and supply chain challenges are creating issues for parts. Are newer cars more difficult to source parts for? Absolutely. Are EVs probably harder to source parts for than their ICE-equivalents? Likely.
I feel the clickbait headlines and the one-sided reporting makes this into more of a holy war than it needs to be. I have to say I've really appreciated the balanced threads on here we're had on hybrids and EVs. I'm probably missing several, but we've had great discussions about the 1st gen Leaf, the Volt, the Bolt (Tuna55's thread), several Tesla threads (both purchasing decision and ownership - Keith's thread has been great), and now we have a couple on the Lightning (Tom's and Galaxie66's threads). And on the hybrid front, we've had a ton of great content on the Prii via John Welsh and others. I've really appreciated the balanced reporting we've had on the ground here, it's been invaluable in forming my opinions based on real-world experiences.
A serious part of the problem is those on opposite sides tend to seek the Gotcha stuff. He said"xxxx" You said"xxxx "
Luckily there are plenty of calmer heads here and as you pointed out. Actual experience speaks volumes.
In reply to frenchyd :
Pointing out you are making up things is not a "gotcha". IT's a "plea to stop the misinformation". Hasn't worked, but at least we tried.
So on the conversions:
If my F500 was going to be an autocross only car then I could see having one as an EV. Currently it weighs 780lbs with me in it, even if the battery packs pushed it to 1000lbs I'd still be OK with that weight, my D-sports racer was 1056 with me in it and I can't say that the F500 feels so so much lighter.
If they made a 1000lb formula car that could go 25-30minutes with being able to use full power and recharge in an hour it'd probably work for track events.
If we focus on talking about EV pickup trucks, it will give everyone something to hate! 
Tom1200 said:So on the conversions:
If my F500 was going to be an autocross only car then I could see having one as an EV. Currently it weighs 780lbs with me in it, even if the battery packs pushed it to 1000lbs I'd still be OK with that weight, my D-sports racer was 1056 with me in it and I can say that the F500 feels so so much lighter.
If they made a 1000lb formula car that could go 25-30minutes with being able to use full power and recharge in an hour it'd probably work for track events.
Would it really take that big of electric motor to replicate the performance of a 500cc ICE engine? I think I've read someplace that a 200 horsepower engine weighs 78 pounds. Then because the total weight would be so light, how much batteries really be required to last 30 minutes at full throttle? Let's assume you are using the common 4680 battery? Nothing exotic.
In reply to dj06482 (Forum Supporter) :
My wife sent me the link to this article earlier today: https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/man-forced-ditch-115k-ford-ev-truck-family-road-trip-chicago-biggest-scam-modern-times
I had read it yesterday, and it was obvious from the get-go it was going to be a hit piece. I'm pretty neutral on the EV topic, but when they start quoting outrageous prices ($115k Canadian for the headline, article says $77k USD - yesterday it just said $115k), I get skeptical. I understand the non-Tesla charging experience right now typically leaves something to be desired. But many manufacturers are moving to the Tesla charging, so I think things will get better in the long-term. I told her about Tom buying his Lightning in TX and driving it back to FL, and will send her the link to that for a more unbiased view in terms of the charging landscape and a comparison of the trip to the ICE experience with the Porsche that also took the same trip. Ford's statement about charging at dealers and the Supercharger agreement just made it into the article today. Here was their note at the bottom of today's article:
*This story, originally published on 8-10-22, has been updated to include Ford's statement and the clarification of Canadian vs. U.S. Dollars for the car price.
If you can afford to buy a new pickup to the tune of $77k USD, you'd think you'd also have a non-EV vehicle that could make the trip. Or enough to rent another car for a week like they eventually did. Wouldn't you do some basic planning and maybe take some shorter trips to get a feel for the EV infrastructure before jumping on a major trip?
I'm sure it takes time to get parts right now. Heck, it took me almost 2 months just to get into a body shop for my '06 Rav4 earlier this year, and supply chain challenges are creating issues for parts. Are newer cars more difficult to source parts for? Absolutely. Are EVs probably harder to source parts for than their ICE-equivalents? Likely.
I feel the clickbait headlines and the one-sided reporting makes this into more of a holy war than it needs to be. I have to say I've really appreciated the balanced threads on here we're had on hybrids and EVs. I'm probably missing several, but we've had great discussions about the 1st gen Leaf, the Volt, the Bolt (Tuna55's thread), several Tesla threads (both purchasing decision and ownership - Keith's thread has been great), and now we have a couple on the Lightning (Tom's and Galaxie66's threads). And on the hybrid front, we've had a ton of great content on the Prii via John Welsh and others. I've really appreciated the balanced reporting we've had on the ground here, it's been invaluable in forming my opinions based on real-world experiences.
That was my first impression when I saw it too, definitely a biased hit piece. That doesn't make it untrue, it's just not something that should have been newsworthy. If that owner really thought that he could just jump in and drive anywhere, he didn't do much research before buying. And surely there were better alternatives to leaving the truck and renting another vehicle once he learned some of the challenges of an EV on a long trip. That said, there are areas of the country that don't have very good fast charging support, and just pulling up a map or app to see where operational chargers should be is not the safest bet.
A similar story happened to a friend of mine. His company purchased some Lightnings. An employee took one up to a job in rural Northern California. He got stuck with no where to charge within range. Time is money in his profession, so said screw it and just left it there. He got a ride with another member of the crew. My friend was tasked with retrieving the dead truck. I believe he picked it up on a rollback, because he didn't have time to mess with charging it either. So it does happen, but a lot of that is about picking the right tool for the job. When I was considering buying one, I knew 90% of my wife's use would be home charging, and we had other options for trips.
In reply to frenchyd :
I have utterly no clue what the batter weights are. The Rotax two stroke is something like 75-80lbs
Deduct 30lbs of fuel in the cell that leaves 250lbs for batteries to get the 1000lb weight I talked about.
In reply to Tom1200 :
How much does the transmission weigh? Any help there?
While I'm at it, how much power does the Rotax make? I'll do a little research to see what a 4680 cell weighs and how much energy it contains.
Here are some rough order of magnitude (ROM) numbers for a real-world* F500 EV conversion. *By 'real-world', I mean that w/in one hour you could expect to find and purchase all the major components. Tesla-spec NMC 4680 cells do NOT exist under this definition of 'real-world'. Double check that I didn't f-up any of the math here.
Motor: Bosch SMG 180/120 from Fiat 500E/ Smart ED/ etc. Weighs 32kg= 70#. There is a motor on ebay now for $750, but there is also a complete 500E locally on FBM for $2k. Rated for 80kW, but a German FSAE team claimed they got 120kW. Let's go with 110kW = 147hp for mechanical output and 120kW for electrical power input. Say the torque curve is flat until 4k RPM where it switches over to constant power output. Calculating backwards from 110kW@4k RPM gives torque output of 262Nm = 193lb-ft available from 0-4k RPM (at max current draw). Estimate that you could still get a max of 80Kw= 110hp mechanical power at the motor's 12.8K max RPM limit. Figure out whatever kind of gear reduction you need/want based on that. Add on maybe 50# for final drive?
Inverter: Prius from whatever gen b/c they are cheap, common, hacked/documented, and can take up to 600V/ 350A. Newer ones will trade reduced size and weight for increased cost. Worst case, say 50# and $350 for the inverter, plus another $400 for the logic board or ZombieVerter and all the fiddly controls and switches and displays and whatnot. Prius inverter has a built-in DC-DC converter, the weight of a mini 12V battery is lost in the noise of all the other estimates, and rather obviously there will not be any on-board charger (although, the Prius DC-DC converter could be used to charge off of a big enough DC power source).
Electrical power and batteries: assume 360V nominal just b/c it is fairly standard. For easy math, say the battery needs to be 100S for NMC (100x 3.6V battery cells in series to get 360V. 96S is more typical, battery cell voltage is not so simple). This is a random choice of brand new 21700 NCM cells b/c I don't feel like looking any more: Molicel 21700 P42A, 4200mAh, 45A, 70g, $4.45 each
Estimate the minimum number of cells in parallel to support max motor power: 120kW/360V = 333A current draw at peak power. 333A/45A-per-cell = 7.4 cells in parallel. Round up to 10P, so the smallest possible battery would be 100S10P (or 1k cells) just to support the ~147hp peak power.
Estimate the number of cells needed for road race or track day capacity: MANY ASSUMPTIONS, I'm sure there is data out there but I'm not getting paid enough to look right now.
The only data I know is from a Leaf owner who said they averaged 1250Wh/mile over 6 miles doing autocross w/o any regen. A complete WAG (wild-ass guess) is that a F500 could be 1100Wh/mi on a road course (=0.91 miles/kWh) . How many miles do you need? Dunno, let's just say our battery is 100S20P = 2k cells. 20P x 4Ah = 80Ah. 80Ah x 360V = 28.8kWh, 28.8kWh divided by 1100 Wh/mile = 26.2 miles. You can race a marathon. 2k cells @70g/cell --> 140kg=308# and $8900 (excluding tax/shipping). Add busbars, cables, connectors, battery box, cooling.......100# is optimistic, but maybe if you start making the battery structural?
So, the initial SWAG/ ROM is like ~580# (not considering the weight of the ICE drivetrain removed) and $10.5k to get 140hp, 190lb-ft, and 26miles of range.
Most SCCA club races are ~30 minutes and 50 miles. A competitive F550/F600 averages about 100 mph on a course like Road Atlanta or Roebling Road.
In reply to Oapfu :
The F500 drive train is all of 80lbs; it's two stroke twin making 100hp.
Removing the motor would take the car (without driver) down to 550lbs. Remove the fuel cell and fuel would take the car down to about 510lbs.
So in theory you could have a 1080lb car.
In reply to Purple Frog (Forum Supporter) :
My thought was an EV 500 would strictly an autocross car.
Jay Novak built an EV F500 for Pikes Peak but I don't remember all of the specs.
The hardest part, which everyone is struggling with, is packaging batteries such that they aren't at risk of collision damage. Meaning, not in an area they will get damaged in a non-diabolical crash.
Roadgoing EVs are putting a heap of effort into it, placing batteries in the passenger "survival cell" that shouldn't crumple in an expected roadgoing crash. Usually either the floor, or under the back seat.
Now, if you examine ICE fire risk and compare road vs race, you find almost all race vehicles going further than a road car with kevlar fuel cells, etc.
So, how do you get similar superior performance in fire prevention in a collision vs a road car for EVs? Well, I don't have a ready answer. It's going to be the great question of this time in motorsports. All the targets I'm seeing are calling for taking the engineered road package and making sure you don't make it worse.
Insofar as making an EV F500. When you consider that the side pods are crumple zone, you aren't left with sufficient space to safely put the required number of batteries. Examining my f500, I have a 5-6 gallon wedge cell under my back in the "survival cell" of the cage with me. You could also possibly include where the current engine resides as survival cell, it's within strong structure. That said, with proper Fail-Safe, you could put the electric motor in a non-survival cell area, break the contactors and it's safe. (I know at least one road car the trips a pyrotechnic breaker in its battery pack when a collision of magnitude to blow an airbag is detected). So... perhaps a small motor in the back of each sidepod, one powering each rear wheel? If you put a sufficient firewall between driver and smartly make it so if the cells start venting, it's directed away from the driver... (The vented gasses become a blowtorch usually if it happens)
I think that's what race safety is going to focus on, safely directing the vented flaming gasses in the event of a severe crash to give time to escape. (We just won't even get into multi car scenarios or putting the bloody thing out in a timely fashion)
Well, I'm an engineer and I somewhat work in similar areas, so that's my contribution to continuing the concept. Probably easier to do something akin to a DSR, more space in the survival cell for batteries.
Side thought, two motors opens some fun possibilities in programming thrust vectoring. Dynamically interesting area.
In reply to dj06482 (Forum Supporter) :
I agree with you that the article was a hit piece, and a lot of the blame falls on the owner for not fully understanding the ramifications of selecting an EV for their use case.
The one item I'd take exception to is: "If you can afford to buy a new pickup to the tune of $77k USD, you'd think you'd also have a non-EV vehicle that could make the trip. Or enough to rent another car for a week like they eventually did. Wouldn't you do some basic planning and maybe take some shorter trips to get a feel for the EV infrastructure before jumping on a major trip?"
To expect them to have non-EV vehicle seems to be a stretch for the argument. If someone spent $77k on a truck with an ICE, would you expect them to also have another vehicle?
The rental part I agree with, and the issues they encountered the trip seem to be mixture of poor planning, not understanding the unique aspects of road tripping with an EV, and a bit of bad luck that brought the planning issues front and center.
Does anyone understand brevity?
In reply to z31maniac :
Yes
TLDR: batteries can catch fire, protect and vent them safety if they do.
z31maniac said:Does anyone understand brevity?
Brevity on internet message boards is of paramount importance due to the fast-paced and information-rich nature of online interactions. In a digital landscape where attention spans are often fleeting, concise communication ensures that messages are quickly comprehended and engaged with. Long-winded posts can deter readers, leading to disinterest or abandonment of the thread altogether. Moreover, brevity encourages focused discussions, as succinct messages prompt participants to distill their thoughts into the most essential points, promoting clarity and reducing the potential for misunderstandings.
Furthermore, the global and diverse nature of internet forums demands efficient communication that transcends language barriers and cultural differences. Concise language minimizes the potential for misinterpretation, making it easier for users from various backgrounds to understand and engage with the content. Additionally, shorter posts facilitate the exchange of ideas among a larger number of participants, promoting inclusivity and enriching the conversation by allowing more voices to be heard. In an era where digital interactions connect people across geographical and cultural boundaries, brevity emerges as a universal language that fosters meaningful dialogues.
In the realm of social media and online forums, brevity also respects users' time and attention. With the constant influx of information, individuals seek to quickly glean relevant insights without sifting through lengthy posts. By adhering to succinct communication, contributors show respect for their audience's time, enhancing the overall experience of engaging in online discussions. In essence, brevity is the cornerstone of effective online communication, fostering clear, inclusive, and time-sensitive interactions that cater to the dynamic nature of the digital age.
In reply to ProDarwin :
Chatgpt, or just copy/paste from somewhere?
Lol
ProDarwin said:z31maniac said:Does anyone understand brevity?
Brevity on internet message boards is of paramount importance due to the fast-paced and information-rich nature of online interactions. In a digital landscape where attention spans are often fleeting, concise communication ensures that messages are quickly comprehended and engaged with. Long-winded posts can deter readers, leading to disinterest or abandonment of the thread altogether. Moreover, brevity encourages focused discussions, as succinct messages prompt participants to distill their thoughts into the most essential points, promoting clarity and reducing the potential for misunderstandings.
Furthermore, the global and diverse nature of internet forums demands efficient communication that transcends language barriers and cultural differences. Concise language minimizes the potential for misinterpretation, making it easier for users from various backgrounds to understand and engage with the content. Additionally, shorter posts facilitate the exchange of ideas among a larger number of participants, promoting inclusivity and enriching the conversation by allowing more voices to be heard. In an era where digital interactions connect people across geographical and cultural boundaries, brevity emerges as a universal language that fosters meaningful dialogues.
In the realm of social media and online forums, brevity also respects users' time and attention. With the constant influx of information, individuals seek to quickly glean relevant insights without sifting through lengthy posts. By adhering to succinct communication, contributors show respect for their audience's time, enhancing the overall experience of engaging in online discussions. In essence, brevity is the cornerstone of effective online communication, fostering clear, inclusive, and time-sensitive interactions that cater to the dynamic nature of the digital age.
Oh god, more mguar and Anthony
Apexcarver said:In reply to ProDarwin :
Chatgpt, or just copy/paste from somewhere?
LoL
chatgpt indeed :)
Apexcarver said:The hardest part, which everyone is struggling with, is packaging batteries such that they aren't at risk of collision damage. Meaning, not in an area they will get damaged in a non-diabolical crash.
Roadgoing EVs are putting a heap of effort into it, placing batteries in the passenger "survival cell" that shouldn't crumple in an expected roadgoing crash. Usually either the floor, or under the back seat.
Now, if you examine ICE fire risk and compare road vs race, you find almost all race vehicles going further than a road car with kevlar fuel cells, etc.
So, how do you get similar superior performance in fire prevention in a collision vs a road car for EVs? Well, I don't have a ready answer. It's going to be the great question of this time in motorsports. All the targets I'm seeing are calling for taking the engineered road package and making sure you don't make it worse.
Insofar as making an EV F500. When you consider that the side pods are crumple zone, you aren't left with sufficient space to safely put the required number of batteries. Examining my f500, I have a 5-6 gallon wedge cell under my back in the "survival cell" of the cage with me. You could also possibly include where the current engine resides as survival cell, it's within strong structure. That said, with proper Fail-Safe, you could put the electric motor in a non-survival cell area, break the contactors and it's safe. (I know at least one road car the trips a pyrotechnic breaker in its battery pack when a collision of magnitude to blow an airbag is detected). So... perhaps a small motor in the back of each sidepod, one powering each rear wheel? If you put a sufficient firewall between driver and smartly make it so if the cells start venting, it's directed away from the driver... (The vented gasses become a blowtorch usually if it happens)
I think that's what race safety is going to focus on, safely directing the vented flaming gasses in the event of a severe crash to give time to escape. (We just won't even get into multi car scenarios or putting the bloody thing out in a timely fashion)
Well, I'm an engineer and I somewhat work in similar areas, so that's my contribution to continuing the concept. Probably easier to do something akin to a DSR, more space in the survival cell for batteries.
Side thought, two motors opens some fun possibilities in programming thrust vectoring. Dynamically interesting area.
Great thoughts. Something I hadn't considered.
However the OP's original intention was autocross
I'm absolutely no expert on the subject but the lower speeds and one car at a time would make some less than ideal solutions workable, I'd think?
In reply to Oapfu :
Well thought out.
I was thinking more along Tesla lines. Since they are the most common. The reason is Tesla seems to minimize weight, and rare earth. For example the same weight ( 78kg)motor in a VW ID 4 makes 200 hp and in a Tesla it makes 300. The 4680 is 1/2 the weight and twice the power of the common 2170 ( yes they are bigger) . According to Tesla's battery day information. I've heard more Optimistic numbers from Sandy Munro, when I googled him. (the guy who tears apart cars and reports to the manufacturer).
The 4680's they are now making in Texas are going into the new Model 3's then the new Model Y's and also the Semi and Cybertruck.
In reply to z31maniac :
My response could be brief or long. You'd likely complain about it either way.
This topic is locked. No further posts are being accepted.
