# Im starting a car company



## evmetro (Apr 9, 2012)

Have you already built a prototype?


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

yes.


----------



## evmetro (Apr 9, 2012)

Can you tell me more about your prototype? Do you have the build documented somewhere?


----------



## palmer_md (Jul 22, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> yes.
> View attachment 24689


very nice....as evmetro said, do you have a build blog somewhere?


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

I have the build documented but not interested in sharing the slaughter house pics. Its a fresh sheet design no donor used.


----------



## evmetro (Apr 9, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Here goes: Starting a car company first car is going to be all electric sports car street /track. looking for all the help I can get. Who's with me.


What kind of help do you need?

I have build threads in here for my conversions that include pictures of rough unfinished work, and end up getting lots of valuable help from this forum community. There are engineers and experienced EV builders on here that have incredible amounts of knowledge. We all know about "slaughter house" pics and understand that cars don't look show ready during the build stage. You may get a lot more help if we know a lot about the car.


----------



## dragonsgate (May 19, 2012)

I suppose you are looking for financial backers. You will have to be a lot less secretive before I would consider ponying up any cash.


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

that car is pretty cool looking 

if ur looking for financial backers u might have come to the wrong forum

if u r looking for technical help u have definitely come to the correct forum
people dont just run, they sprint toward a project like this

u will no shortage of helpers 

but yeah we need more than just a picture u took off google images


----------



## 67BGTEV (Nov 1, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> yes.
> View attachment 24689


I can offer $15 for it, hmmm.. may be less..


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

Wow didnt think I was going to be received so well.

First: the car is already complete no drive train motors batteries etc. 

Second: Didn't post here to hustle for money. Want to make fans first as I am of others and get this thing working like I want. 

Third:I'm happy to post more pictures but not work in progress. Maybe some day but for now thats simply not going to happen. If some of you want to know whats involved its better to ask specific questions rather than the outline that which started as a blank sheet of paper.

The help in simplicity need three things: lots of power 
550+hp , range, dont want to pay too much. no matter how I stack it it seems i can only get two of those things.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

I don't get the $15 remark? clarify please. do you want me to leave?


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> The help in simplicity need three things: lots of power
> 550+hp , range, dont want to pay too much. no matter how I stack it it seems i can only get two of those things.


Best to drop that last one, since you can only have two of three. You can't compete with the big boys on price.

Building a car company is really hard. People on here will ask you a lot of questions to see if you are serious. If you are overly coy with them, they will assume you aren't.


Who are your target buyers?
What will be the distinguishing factor of your car?


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

body: Aluminum/carbon fiber/kevlar.
frame:N grain Aluminum tube / cast aluminum sections / steel tube tower to tower built in roll cage. 
weight 1200lbs w/o drive train don't know final weight 
price in the $110k range 
car is 172l x 73.8w x 45h 111wb it was built to to satisfy my desire.
View attachment 24745
View attachment 24737
View attachment 24729


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

here you go


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

for you non believers 

some of you guys are or know people who work for places that can help. I really don't want to charge more.


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

bit of a non electric car suggestion but im guessing your car design is something a few people would like
u could sell the car 'as is' and let them put their own thing in it whether its electric, petrol or hamsters

it is a sweet looking concept, bit blocky but i would definatly put it in my car spank bank 

550hp in an electric car is what the white zombie has so if u copy him youll have 1200ft-lb of torque and do 0-60 in 2 seconds
youll need fattys in the rear to take advantage of all that torque and with wide tyres comes reduced range

if u want a car that is super fast id be considering a zilla 2k with dual warp11s or warp9s and use the zillas feature of switching between series and parallel

to put out 2000amps though ur gonna need 140ah of headway cells as a minimum, other cells exist but the price goes up a mountain after headways
to get the voltage youd need 95s so 1330 cells
$23940 and 468kg\1028lbs

hp in engines and motors is different
if u tuned it down to 300hp youd be able to beat most cars


----------



## Ivansgarage (Sep 3, 2011)

arklan said:


> if u want a car that is super fast id be considering a zilla 2k with dual warp11s or warp9s and use the zillas feature of switching between series and parallel


I wonder why Tesla doesn't use zillas and warps? 


Ivan


----------



## dragonsgate (May 19, 2012)

arklan said:


> bit of a non electric car suggestion but im guessing your car design is something a few people would like
> u could sell the car 'as is' and let them put their own thing in it whether its electric, petrol or hamsters
> 
> it is a sweet looking concept, bit blocky but i would definatly put it in my car spank bank
> ...


I like Arklan's first suggestion. Sell it as a glider.


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

Ivansgarage said:


> I wonder why Tesla doesn't use zillas and warps?
> 
> Ivan





[email protected] said:


> 550+hp , range, *dont want to pay too much*.


if he did it teslas way he wouldnt meet the requirements


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

arklan said:


> if he did it teslas way he wouldnt meet the requirements


Eh...it depends a little on volume.

Anyway, brushed DC motors have incredible peak power. But they are hobbyist motors. No one is going to pay 110K for a hobbyist car.

OP: is the glider set up to be FWD, RWD or AWD?


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

Hollie Maea said:


> Eh...it depends a little on volume.
> 
> Anyway, brushed DC motors have incredible peak power. But they are hobbyist motors. No one is going to pay 110K for a hobbyist car.
> 
> OP: is the glider set up to be FWD, RWD or AWD?


AC starting with rwd not going to sell it as a glider rather not do it.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

Does anyone know someone good to help me with a quality website?


----------



## browncamaroz28 (May 14, 2014)

[email protected] said:


> Does anyone know someone good to help me with a quality website?


Hey I live in the LA area and would be interested in helping out with the project. Is the car in the area? 

I've also done a few websites but with tools like wordpress you can get one up within a matter of minutes and make it look professional within a few hours. The hardest part of a good website is the content that you intend to put up. 

Here's a site i did for a buddy of mine, basic wordpress, a few mods to the theme http://www.motoenzo.com/v3/ the big thing is he puts up tons of useful content pertaining to his service. 

Anyway I wouldn't mind helping out, PM me.


----------



## sergiu tofanel (Jan 13, 2014)

I think that the glider idea is a good one. There are plenty of people out there with drivetrain expertise who would be willing to purchase a product like this, myself included. That way, you spend your limited resources on things that make good first impressions: fit and finish, interior, climate control, etc, etc.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

Going for the stars here guys, have other models on the board, not going to do a roller.


----------



## sergiu tofanel (Jan 13, 2014)

Obviously, this is your show, your ponies. But ... unless you have tens of millions of dollars in your bank account, I suggest you start small. The stars can wait a little longer.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

So what's your budget here? You mentioned 110K per car. But the first one will cost more than that...low volume pricing, NRE expenses.

Specifically, what is your budget for the drivetrain? Could be tricky to hit your budget if the roller takes up a big part of your budget.

You mentioned "starting out" with RWD. Does that imply that your roller could accommodate AWD? That's really the way to go. Then you can do torque vectoring and have a real supercar. Your price would probably need to rise though...But I'd you did it well, you could justify it.

You could get your 550 with four AMR motors driven by RMS 100kW inverters, and upgrade to 800 with the 150 inverters if your wanted to. Otherwise, it is tough to get the power you want from just two AC motors. Might have to wait for the RMS 250.

Of course, I'm biased, as I work for a company that has all the technology you are looking for. On the other hand, that's the route Rimac took as well, and they are the gold standard, so maybe I'm not too far off.

Won't be cheap though...probably 60k just for motors and controllers.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

I have done a little research,this wasn't just pulling the trigger on a dream. I made a product which is what I would want "absolute excellence" spent 4 years developing, testing and making virtually every peace over again some as many as 10 times to make sure. All or nothing.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

Im going to do a video , anyone out there that does editing/knowledge on doing something quality to post please pm me


----------



## peterguy (Jun 18, 2012)

One question from engineering side:
What is the point in planning and constructing a rolling chassis without having taken into account the drivetrain before?

To my mind, the intuitive way in designing a car is to first plan the drivetrain (and batteries!) and then build the chassis around it.

Sorry, even if I like the design and really admire the work you've done, I do not think that this project will end up in a successful car company.

Just build in the drivetrain you want and be happy about beeing the only one in the whole world driving this cool car.

Have a look on the Website of evwest as a reference.


----------



## browncamaroz28 (May 14, 2014)

peterguy said:


> One question from engineering side:
> What is the point in planning and constructing a rolling chassis without having taken into account the drivetrain before?
> 
> To my mind, the intuitive way in designing a car is to first plan the drivetrain (and batteries!) and then build the chassis around it.
> ...


peterguy I agree with a lot of what you're saying,

Typically high performance cars are designed with an initial estimated mass, place drivetrain, passengers etc in model, create a force diagram derived from requirements for handling, acceleration etc. Then tire choice, design suspension geometry next, and then build the chassis around them. Obviously the design process would be iterative, especially in a case where you want to sell a complete car.

Even Tesla made the mistake with the roadster, just assuming they could put a drivetrain in an elise and start a car company. After several design iterations they show how little the two cars actually share. http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/mythbusters-part-2-tesla-roadster-not-converted-lotus-elise

The volt concept car is a great example showing how designing a body that looks cool may not meet performance requirements. The production volt only carries a few hints of the concept car for these reasons. 
http://newaudicars.blogspot.com/2008/09/chevrolet-volt-hybrid-from-concept-to.html


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

peterguy said:


> One question from engineering side:
> What is the point in planning and constructing a rolling chassis without having taken into account the drivetrain before?
> 
> To my mind, the intuitive way in designing a car is to first plan the drive train (and batteries!) and then build the chassis around it.
> ...


Not the first car I built, Not the first prototype, Have been in and around the industry all my life. You may not be the only engineer on this thread. Be an engineer know before you shoot...please for my sake.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

None of us know whether or not Adam knows how to build a car. He says he does, so why not take him at his word. No one benefits from ten pages of him saying he does with people doubting. Since he is asking for advice and not money, who cares? If he doesn't actually know how, he'll fail. If he does, well he might still fail because car companies are hard. But it didn't matter to any of us.

On the advice front, if you are building an electric car from the ground up, I think your platter should look a lot like the one under the Model S. With four motors instead of one though.

I don't get all the calls for just releasing a roller. The drivetrain us the easy part of making an EV from the ground up. But I second the wisdom of designing around the drivetrain.


----------



## piotrsko (Dec 9, 2007)

Didnt stop duryea, ford, huxman, Daimler this lack of engineering. Did make the debug process more involved.

Santos Dumont, or the guy that did the pou du ciel maybe finished high school. 

My $.02 YMMV

Stuff a couple of arduinos in, viola!! { hackaday joke}


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

Hollie Maea said:


> So what's your budget here? You mentioned 110K per car. But the first one will cost more than that...low volume pricing, NRE expenses.
> 
> Specifically, what is your budget for the drivetrain? Could be tricky to hit your budget if the roller takes up a big part of your budget.
> 
> ...


As is the case with all low volume the first pre production models are going to be losers. In production I should be able to come in under.


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

Hollie Maea said:


> None of us know whether or not Adam knows how to build a car. He says he does, so why not take him at his word. No one benefits from ten pages of him saying he does with people doubting. Since he is asking for advice and not money, who cares? If he doesn't actually know how, he'll fail. If he does, well he might still fail because car companies are hard. But it didn't matter to any of us.
> 
> On the advice front, if you are building an electric car from the ground up, I think your platter should look a lot like the one under the Model S. With four motors instead of one though.
> 
> I don't get all the calls for just releasing a roller. The drivetrain us the easy part of making an EV from the ground up. But I second the wisdom of designing around the drivetrain.


he comes in here acting cool as a cucumber and we dont know anything about him, not a thing, that explains half of the doubting

other 50% of the doubting is that everyone wants him to succeed and the way he talks makes us think he doesnt fully comprehend what hes getting himself in to

i really hope you make it with your clone tesla business model mate, i really do
i dont have 110k lying around but if i did i prefer the look of your car over the tesla, it looks like a lambo


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

arklan said:


> he comes in here acting cool as a cucumber and we dont know anything about him, not a thing, that explains half of the doubting
> 
> other 50% of the doubting is that everyone wants him to succeed and the way he talks makes us think he doesnt fully comprehend what hes getting himself in to
> 
> ...


That is one of the nicest things someone has said to me ever.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> need three things: lots of power
> 550+hp , range, dont want to pay too much..


 Hope you are aware that with high power comes a high weight penalty too !
For a 550 hp motor you need a battery capable of supplying that 550+ hp , and much compounded if you want continuous "track" performance and extended range also.
That will be a very large, advanced, complicated, battery that will be far in excess of the Benchmark Tesla's,.... which already weighs 1200lbs 1
So (without a lot of tedious calculations) you probably should be expecting around 2000lb for a battery pack ....on top of whatever else the motor , transmission, and drive package weighs.
Is your chassis / suspension designed to handle that sort of weight ?
How will that impact on your performance and handling expectations ?


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Karter2 said:


> That will be a very large, advanced, complicated, battery that will be far in excess of the Benchmark Tesla's,.... which already weighs 1200lbs 1
> So (without a lot of tedious calculations) you probably should be expecting around 2000lb for a battery pack ....


Not even close. There are batteries with far higher power density than Tesla uses. The LG HE2 cells would be ideal for this. You would only need about a 40kWh pack to handle 550 hp. That's only 430 lbs cell weight. 500 pounds at the most for the pack.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

This is important . which is it. 1200lbs for batteries literally outweighs the benefits. Considering the weight of similarly power engine, accessories, cats ,mufflers , radiator and full fuel tank vs batteries @550lbs I'll take the batteries.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Hollie Maea said:


> ....You would only need about a 40kWh pack to handle 550 hp. That's only 430 lbs cell weight. 500 pounds at the most for the pack.


 Yes, there are many ways to build a small , high power pack..
.... but how long would that 40kWhr pack last ?
even running at a "slow" 200kW average, that would be about 10 mins !
Taking that to a track day would be a little embarrassing. 

Remember he wanted power AND range.
Anybody in the market for a $100+k EV is going to be making comparisons to the Tesla,s 300mile range

If you want "better than Tesla" car, you are going to need a better, (bigger , more capacity).. battery pack.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> This is important . which is it. 1200lbs for batteries literally outweighs the benefits. Considering the weight of similarly power engine, accessories, cats ,mufflers , radiator and full fuel tank vs batteries @550lbs I'll take the batteries.


 With a 40kWhr (500lb) battery you will have little more than a 100mile range.
...driving steadily !
Remember , Tesla started out with a "small" 60kWhr pack, but no body wanted it. Customers want range ( or track time) .


----------



## PStechPaul (May 1, 2012)

It is a cool looking car but it looks like it has very little ground clearance, so that might limit where it can be driven. Even a speed bump might make it bottom out. But maybe it can be fitted with hydraulic or electromechanical "lifters" to raise the chassis for such conditions and then hunker down for road racing. For a sports EV, the HP should not be the primary selling point or engineering goal. The main factors will be acceleration, top speed, handling, and range, although not necessarily in that order. 

Then it will be necessary to do the design engineering for the entire drive train, using whatever space has been allotted to those components, and see if it is even possible with today's technology. You will very likely need to compromise on a few of those parameters. Then, if you want to produce this car for the general public, or even just to make it road legal, you will need to look at safety considerations. Not only will it need to pass crash-worthiness safety testing for survival of occupants, an EV also needs to consider how the battery pack and associated circuitry will respond to various hazards, such as the recent fires in Teslas caused by road debris. 

I am far more interested in small high efficiency vehicles, particularly tractors and off-road utility vehicles and NEVs, so something like this would only interest me as a curiosity, but I'm willing to help second-guess and reality check some of the design. However, my specific experience is pretty far from what is needed for something like this. Good luck.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

PStechPaul said:


> It is a cool looking car but it looks like it has very little ground clearance, so that might limit where it can be driven. Even a speed bump might make it bottom out. But maybe it can be fitted with hydraulic or electromechanical "lifters" to raise the chassis for such conditions and then hunker down for road racing. For a sports EV, the HP should not be the primary selling point or engineering goal. The main factors will be acceleration, top speed, handling, and range, although not necessarily in that order.
> 
> Then it will be necessary to do the design engineering for the entire drive train, using whatever space has been allotted to those components, and see if it is even possible with today's technology. You will very likely need to compromise on a few of those parameters. Then, if you want to produce this car for the general public, or even just to make it road legal, you will need to look at safety considerations. Not only will it need to pass crash-worthiness safety testing for survival of occupants, an EV also needs to consider how the battery pack and associated circuitry will respond to various hazards, such as the recent fires in Teslas caused by road debris.
> 
> I am far more interested in small high efficiency vehicles, particularly tractors and off-road utility vehicles and NEVs, so something like this would only interest me as a curiosity, but I'm willing to help second-guess and reality check some of the design. However, my specific experience is pretty far from what is needed for something like this. Good luck.


Agree with basically the whole, concerns on rang vs weight of battery is really worrying me, Reviews on the Tesla Roadster didn't help. If I cant get decent range where does that leave me? in the end it needs to be usable. need to solve this issue now.


----------



## palmer_md (Jul 22, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> Agree with basically the whole, concerns on rang vs weight of battery is really worrying me, Reviews on the Tesla Roadster didn't help. If I cant get decent range where does that leave me? in the end it needs to be usable. need to solve this issue now.


Unless you are able to purchase a pack from Tesla, your going to have limited range. I'm not sure you have the purchasing power as a startup to do much about that. You could just build a prototype with LiFePO4 and it has the power density to give you the performance you are looking for albeit without the range. If the performance is good, and the car has a warm reception, you can then talk to Tesla about purchasing battery packs from them and for the same weight and volume (in other words an exact replacement pack enclosure), you will get ~3-4 times the range. It varies because, power, weight and volume do not scale the same, but it should be at least 3x better.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

That may end up being the way.


----------



## evmetro (Apr 9, 2012)

PStechPaul said:


> ...Then, if you want to produce this car for the general public, or even just to make it road legal, you will need to look at safety considerations. Not only will it need to pass crash-worthiness safety testing for survival of occupants, an EV also needs to consider how the battery pack and associated circuitry will respond to various hazards, such as the recent fires in Teslas caused by road debris.


This. I can design and build my own EV, but this is why I am more focused on doing conversions. I may be mistaken, but I believe that what Paul is talking about takes much more effort and much deeper pockets than doing conversions. Excellent point, Paul.

A conversion may be a great testing platform to master your EV drive system in, without having to mess with all the bureaucracy of getting your own chassis design into production. This may give you something solid to bring to the table to compliment your chassis if you need to interest investors or venture capital when the time comes.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Karter2 said:


> Yes, there are many ways to build a small , high power pack..
> .... but how long would that 40kWhr pack last ?
> even running at a "slow" 200kW average, that would be about 10 mins !
> Taking that to a track day would be a little embarrassing.
> ...


Yes, I get that he will want more than 40kWh. My point is that you are incorrect that you will have to oversize the battery to get the power delivered. An 80kWh pack would give plenty of range, have twice the needed power capabilities, and weigh less than 1000 lbs.

Sometimes you have to do the calculations.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> Agree with basically the whole, concerns on rang vs weight of battery is really worrying me, Reviews on the Tesla Roadster didn't help. If I cant get decent range where does that leave me? in the end it needs to be usable. need to solve this issue now.


You can easily get the range you need. Anyone who tells you currently is wrong.

People on this board use LiFePO4. Great hobbyist battery, but not what you will want to use.

People say "you can't get the range unless you but a pack from Tesla". Or you could make a pack like them. They use commodity batteries. Anyone could make a Tesla style pack if they have engineering abilities.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

The problem is not the range

It is the amount of work in a car design,

When Issigonis "designed" the mini it was team effort
25 men over three years

That is 75 man years of design work for a very simple car - building on a lot of existing parts

You can "design" a car and get the big bits specified in much less time

BUT a modern car has a lot of "details" - a hell of a lot of "details" - 
and these details are the difference between a success and just another concept car


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

just for my own thought exercise
the car without drive train weighs 1200lbs i think he said which is pretty damn light
lets assume it will weigh 2500lbs when all said and done, so 250wh per mile and lets assume 200 volts as a round number
300 miles would take 75kwh not including the 20% extra u need

that makes 372ah
assuming 2.2kg for a 100ah pouch cell that makes 8.184kg per 372ah cell or 18.186lbs
x63 to get 201.6v gives 1145lbs/515kg
372ah would also put out 1860amps at a 5c burst rate and 1116 continuous 3c

pouch cells are the lightest i have found anywhere on the internet at 22g/49lb per ah

they r cheap(ish)
will give u the range
and will give the power

ps: cost calculations based on $1 per ah
$372 per 372ah cell x 63 = $23436
1200lbs for the car and 1116lbs for the batteries = 2316lbs
leaves 184lbs for the motors and stuff so it will be more than 2500 lbs but still a good thought exercise


----------



## Nathan219 (May 18, 2010)

If you are enjoying what you are doing, rock on anyone belittling you is probably jealous of your guts in my opinion. If there is anything I can do to help let me know.


----------



## palmer_md (Jul 22, 2011)

Hollie Maea said:


> You can easily get the range you need. Anyone who tells you currently is wrong.
> 
> People on this board use LiFePO4. Great hobbyist battery, but not what you will want to use.
> 
> People say "you can't get the range unless you but a pack from Tesla". Or you could make a pack like them. They use commodity batteries. Anyone could make a Tesla style pack if they have engineering abilities.


You completely missed the point of what I said. It is a cost and effort function. There is already an enormous engineering effort into building the electric car itself. It's pretty simple to use LiFePO4 as the test bed, and volume and weight for a given power output would be about the same as the more expensive and complicated construction of a pack using cells similar to what Tesla is using. Why not save that engineering hurdle for after you have the car working. At that point you can talk about purchasing from Tesla since you'll have something to talk about, or if they are still not going to work with you, then work on the battery design yourself.


----------



## aeroscott (Jan 5, 2008)

What kind of production numbers are you planing and how much is projected cost which will indicate size of potential market.
Will you be using advanced manufacturing such as 3d printing, etc. These things are downsizing the infrastructure of manufacture. We are at the dawn of the 3ed industrial revolution .


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Hollie Maea said:


> ...An 80kWh pack would give plenty of range, have twice the needed power capabilities, and weigh less than 1000 lbs.
> 
> Sometimes you have to do the calculations.


You are going to need to show me how you calculate a 1000lbs for a working 80kWhr pack ?
But of course someone has already done it in practice. ?
Tesla are pretty much at the sharp end on this,
They know you dont need expensive , lower capacity, high drain cells for their pack, because they build in the Ahr capacity, which will bring with it the power capability .
.. They have "state of the art" high energy density cells and yet their 85kWhr pack is 1200lbs. (of which less than 800lbs is cell weight ?)

And as i said , if you intend to beat Tesla you will have to at least equal that range and a more powerful car will likely need more battery capacity to do that

Really, all i am saying is that compromises are going to be needed in terms of Range, power, weight, cost and market demands.
..until a major improvement in battery tech is available !
Also, i would ask what the real options for a pack ?
1) Buy from Tesla ? ..possible, i i suspect a large quantity contract would be needed ?
2) self build "tesla type" packs ? (18650 based) ... major project for any significant volume of commercial standard .
We are talking of ~ 8000 individual cells to connect , manage, cool , protect, and "package" !
3)Source commercial pack modules (A123, Enerdel, AIG, etc)
4) self assemble from individual commercial cells. ?

And any option other than an 18650 based pack will significantly add to the weight or reduce the range.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

arklan said:


> that makes 372ah
> assuming 2.2kg for a 100ah pouch cell that makes 8.184kg per 372ah cell or 18.186lbs
> x63 to get 201.6v gives 1145lbs/515kg
> 372ah would also put out 1860amps at a 5c burst rate and 1116 continuous 3c
> ...


 1) 1860 amps at 200volts is only 372 kW ( <500hp ) = failed to meet requirement.
2) How many 100Ahr cells do you need for 372 Ahr ? Answr. 4.. not 3,72!

That kinda' throws the rest of your weight and $$ calcs off !

And your weight (now over 1200lbs ) is only cell weight.. no connects, no cooling, no BMS, no compression, no housing, no protections, etc etc.

sorry, ..but just trying to be realistic.


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

Karter2 said:


> 1) 1860 amps at 200volts is only 372 kW ( <500hp ) = failed to meet requirement.
> 2) How many 100Ahr cells do you need for 372 Ahr ? Answr. 4.. not 3,72!
> 
> That kinda' throws the rest of your weight and $$ calcs off !
> ...


u r absolutely right, there is no such thing as a 372ah battery but it was a loose calculation, 380ah is possible
assuming the car is 3000lbs he will need 450ah which is above 1300lbs

anyway, just had a look on google and the panasonic 18650 batteries (what tesla uses) weigh 89g
128.8wh per kilo
pouch cells 145.4wh per kilo but much lower c rate

anyway with those rough calculations i only wanted to show that it really doesnt matter what kind of battery u use, its gonna be heavy
and it doesnt matter what kind of C rate u have, with that kind of range/ah it will definatly have enough amps so just go for the lightest battery u can find


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Cheapest way to prototype this would be to find a wrecked Model S with a good pack and motor. You get your drive train and cells in one package, and you might be able to sell off other parts in good condition to offset your costs. Then in a few years replace the cells with newer more energy dense versions, possibly from another wrecked Tesla


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

aeroscott said:


> What kind of production numbers are you planing and how much is projected cost which will indicate size of potential market.
> Will you be using advanced manufacturing such as 3d printing, etc. These things are downsizing the infrastructure of manufacture. We are at the dawn of the 3ed industrial revolution .


3d manufacturing is slow and expensive even in low volume so unless its a complex part which I need to prototyping for testing I don't yet see it replacing current manufacturing. Not sure how many will sell, if the range and or performance isn't there than calculating sales is difficult. It needs to have it all.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

arklan said:


> , just had a look on google and the panasonic 18650 batteries (what tesla uses) weigh 89g
> 128.8wh per kilo
> pouch cells 145.4wh per kilo but much lower c rate


 I think you will find that 89gms is the "total weight per cell" for the completed pack, including all cooling, management and packing weights.
The actual cell weight is 45-50 gms before assembly.
http://industrial.panasonic.com/www-cgi/jvcr13pz.cgi?E+BA+3+ACA4001+NCR18650PF+7+EA
But since not many outside Tesla/Panasonic actually know what cell they are using (its a custom spec), the exact details are hard to nail down, but its for sure a 2900 or 3200 mAhr cell of less than 50gms weight, which would put it at over 200 Whr/kg ! ...for the cell.
...and you can assume they will be working on using the 3400+mAhr cells which will raise that figure still further.
High "C" ratings are not too important when you have a 200+ Ahr pack.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I'm 99.9% sure Tesla is using about a 3.4ah cell, around 260wh/kg at the cell level. For the 85kWh car 7104 cells at 3.4ah x 3.6V = 12.24 watts x 7104 = 86952.96 watt hours.


----------



## browncamaroz28 (May 14, 2014)

[email protected] said:


> The help in simplicity need three things: lots of power
> 550+hp , range, dont want to pay too much. no matter how I stack it it seems i can only get two of those things.


As much as I love to read about a good battery debate, could we talk about the requirements here for a bit?

Adam, have you considered changing your requirements to define performance goals rather than specs? 550+hp is great but its very different when you have electric motor vs an ICE. Would it be better to take a step back and redefine the requirements as 1/4 mile times, 0-60mph times and range at a specific mph?


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Karter2 said:


> I think you will find that 89gms is the "total weight per cell" for the completed pack, including all cooling, management and packing weights.
> The actual cell weight is 45-50 gms before assembly.
> http://industrial.panasonic.com/www-cgi/jvcr13pz.cgi?E+BA+3+ACA4001+NCR18650PF+7+EA
> But since not many outside Tesla/Panasonic actually know what cell they are using (its a custom spec), the exact details are hard to nail down, but its for sure a 2900 or 3200 mAhr cell of less than 50gms weight, which would put it at over 200 Whr/kg ! ...for the cell.
> ...


There is nothing magical about the cell that Tesla uses. They teamed up with Panasonic early on, but all of the big consumer electronics companies make equivalent cells: Panasonic, Sony, Samsung, Sanyo, LG.

The high power (10-14 C) cells are all about 2.5 Ah, the low power (2-3 C) cells are all 2.9 to 3.4 Ah, and the bleeding edge that isn't for sale yet gets as high as 4 Ah. I suspect we will see those in the Model X, as the Model S cells are starting to skew their age and the roadster cells are downright ancient. All three cells are 45-50 grams, making them the highest energy density there is.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

browncamaroz28 said:


> As much as I love to read about a good battery debate, could we talk about the requirements here for a bit?
> 
> Adam, have you considered changing your requirements to define performance goals rather than specs? 550+hp is great but its very different when you have electric motor vs an ICE. Would it be better to take a step back and redefine the requirements as 1/4 mile times, 0-60mph times and range at a specific mph?


Agreed 0-60 3sec 1/4 mile 11sec top speed not important but needs to hit 165. Not just for my project but here on out for the whole industry the batteries should be the main focus.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Yes, you need to have performance targets. And for an EV Range should also be a key parameter As it has major implications on basic specifications.
Have you thought about what range would be acceptable ?...or do you need to match Tesla ?


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

250 miles would be least. any less and its time for gas.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> Agreed 0-60 3sec 1/4 mile 11sec top speed not important but needs to hit 165. Not just for my project but here on out for the whole industry the batteries should be the main focus....
> ...250 miles would be least. ...


 Benchmark Tesla 85 Performance model .. 416 bhp, 435 lbft
0-60 = 4.4
1/4 mile = 12.5 sec
Top speed 130 mph
Range 300miles

so your 550bhp was probably a good estimate..
..but in order to get the 0-60 time AND the 165 mph , you will probably have to consider a 2 speed transmission which Tesla and most EVs avoid.

Have you sounded out these guys for component supply..
http://www.rimac-automobili.com/products-and-services/motors-and-transmissions-23


----------



## Owlexmyth (Aug 12, 2014)

I'm the only one to post here on the forum other than Adam, the one that started this thread, who has actually seen the car in person. It's an awesome project. One of the best ideas was about going to Tesla for a battery, as it seems (with the coming of their gigawatt factory) that they plan on producing more cells than they will consume for their own cars. They may already have buyers for those extra cells, though. There are probably cells that are (or are near) ready for market that could compete with the current offerings in terms of price, power and or energy density or maybe all three, just none of use have heard about them. The order of the day is to beat down some doors and beg/demand for batteries, letting every battery manufacturer know what you need and that you've got a product in which to place their newest battery. The advantage you can offer to such a hypothetical supplier is that the first vehicle to get their cells is going to blow everything else (Tesla) out of the water in terms of style, performance, range and could be delivered at a price that could reach production numbers that would give them incentive to provide support for integration and a price that would be agreeable to a start-up. Once the battery issue (the most pressing) is solved, then the motor and controller situation would seem like a cakewalk. With regards to my hypothetical battery idea, just think about where we were just before LiFePO4, which wasn't that long ago; since then tons of money/time/energy has been spent on R&D, mining, energy management systems and other products to support the battery tech now in our Volts, Teslas and conversions. Another idea is to beat Tesla to bring to market a hybrid battery system that utilizes two different chemistries (one of which usually lies dormant until one of the less common trips that require greater than normal energy/power needs.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Owlexmyth said:


> There are probably cells that are (or are near) ready for market that could compete with the current offerings in terms of price, power and or energy density or maybe all three, just none of use have heard about them.


There are, and lots of people have heard of them. There's a whole sub forum about them on Endless Sphere (electric motorcycle forum, where energy density is at a premium). A couple of weeks ago I built a 70kWh out of 6200 3.1Ah cells that are nearly identical to the Panasonics that Tesla uses.

If you are buying in large quantities, it is easy enough to get the cells.


----------



## Owlexmyth (Aug 12, 2014)

I need a pack that size for my electric VW trike. Would be nice if I had the funds. I've only got 36s1p 40 Ah CALBs, which do ok for now. I was talking about cells that we don't know about, though. Not about those which we do. The ones companies are hushed about ATM.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Owlexmyth said:


> .. The advantage you can offer to such a hypothetical supplier is that the first vehicle to get their cells is going to blow everything else (Tesla) out of the water in terms of style, performance, range and could be delivered at a price that could reach production numbers that would give them incentive to provide support for integration and a price that would be agreeable to a start-up..


 You are assuming there are better cells available than those Tesla is using and planning to produce in the MF ...Which ones would that be ?

And further, as Adam is probably realizing,.. its maybe not so simple to build a saleable car that can match Tesla's all round performance..let alone "blow it out of the water" 
Rimac has built a car that can do it ...but few can afford it !




Owlexmyth said:


> .. just think about where we were just before LiFePO4, which wasn't that long ago; since then tons of money/time/energy has been spent on R&D, mining, energy management systems and other products to support the battery tech now in our Volts, Teslas and conversions. Another idea is to beat Tesla to bring to market a hybrid battery system that utilizes two different chemistries (one of which usually lies dormant until one of the less common trips that require greater than normal energy/power needs.


 Why, ?..Tesla type (18650) packs are capable of producing all the power / energy you need at a lower weight than any other (existing) chemistry.


----------



## Owlexmyth (Aug 12, 2014)

So is the idea squashed to build a hybrid battery that enables cars to pass 400 miles range? I believe the idea was a metal air battery and a Lithium battery working together to achieve it and no cars are currently available that are getting over 300 miles range, so how was that a bad idea?


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Yes .
, that was one of Teslas "ideas" ...
..but its going off into the realms of "possibilities" rather than what is actually practical currently.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hollie Maea said:


> A couple of weeks ago I built a 70kWh out of 6200 3.1Ah cells that are nearly identical to the Panasonics that Tesla uses.


A lower capacity cell is not nearly identical. We know Tesla uses 7,104 cells for the 85kWh car, and you can't get there with a 3.1ah cell.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> A lower capacity cell is not nearly identical. We know Tesla uses 7,104 cells for the 85kWh car, and you can't get there with a 3.1ah cell.


True. 7104 cells of 3.1 Ah capacity only gives you 81kWh. 

Tesla uses 3.4 Ah cells. Those are readily available too.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

How do you get 81kWh? 3.1 x 3.6 x 7104 = 79,280.64


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> How do you get 81kWh? 3.1 x 3.6 x 7104 = 79,280.64


I used the more commonly used 3.7V nominal voltage. Nominal voltage is a bit nebulous on these batteries, as the voltage curve is not as flat as with LiFePO4.

I don't know why we are bickering over a couple of percentage points. Yes, 3.1 is less than 3.4. But I think it is wildly overstating it to suggest that Tesla's Panasonic cells are way beyond other available cells.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I never said that, I'm just trying to be accurate.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Hollie Maea said:


> Nominal voltage is a bit nebulous on these batteries,
> .


 Yes, 
It just depends who is choosing the voltage to use.
If you are a salesman you might be tempted to pick a voltage that gives you a nice round number for the press release, and as long as its not wildly out on the voltage spectrum,..everyone is happy.
The Model S was presented to the world in 2009, and i am pretty sure the 3400mAhr cell was not available then. ?
Also remember Tesla are not using a "commercial" cell, theirs is custom spec, so it could easily be 3.15, 3.2 Ahr and 3.75 v nominal
(note _ A Panasonic 3.2Ahr high drain cell has been retailing for several years under the Keepower brand !)


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

My guess is that Tesla and Panasonic had a good idea of what would be available in 2012 when the car actually started production. The initial Panasonic/Tesla agreement did mention the 3.1ah cell, but unless you use an usually high nominal cell voltage of 3.86V you can't get an 85kWh pack with 7,104 cells. Could be a 3.3ah cell at 3.7V.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Where does it say you have to use "nominal " cell voltage when writing a promotional sales brochure ??


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

good conversation guys, keep it up


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Tesla isn't writing a brochure though, they are building a car that needs a certain amount of kWh's to produce the range and performance they advertise. I guess they could be overstating the capacity of their packs but I'm not sure to what end.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Try this..
The Model S 85 owners manual states the pack voltage as 366 v nominal.
If you accept that its a 7104 cell 96S, 74P pack, that would imply a nominal cell voltage of 3.81 volts !


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I guess it's possible that the cells Tesla are using have a higher nominal voltage than any other cell I'm aware of. That means a 3.15 ah cell would give an 85kWh pack, assuming no extra capacity headroom.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> I guess it's possible that the cells Tesla are using have a higher nominal voltage than any other cell I'm aware of. That means a 3.15 ah cell would give an 85kWh pack, assuming no extra capacity headroom.


No, they have the same nominal voltage as the others. Voltage is determined by chemistry.

The only reason why there is any discrepancy in what nominal voltage is reported as is because it changes over the state of charge. For example, the cells I recently used to make a module spied at 3.8V. By the time they are discharged, they'll be around 3.4. But nominally they are called 3.7 though some say 3.6. Teslas cells have the same essential chemistry, and are therefore the same nominal value.


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

from the kokam website


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

The one thing missing from that Kokam s'sheet is the prices !


----------



## Tomdb (Jan 28, 2013)

Karter2 said:


> The one thing missing from that Kokam s'sheet is the prices !


For small quantities the kokam prices are insane, i have had quotes from them above 700 dollars/kwh for just cells.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

Does the product justify the price > is it better?


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> Does the product justify the price > is it better?


If you want a relatively low kWh pack that can output huge power, nothing compares.

So serious drag racers are pretty much stuck with it.

Kind of pointless for a street car though...if you are outputting at 60C, you drain your battery in one minute.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

Are you saying its not for me?


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> Are you saying its not for me?


Indeed. It's pointless to pay a huge premium for a feature you can't use.

What you need is something that could scale up to probably sting 60kWh (to give you range) without being too heavy our expensive, and that will give you a peak of about 10-15C (to satisfy your power requirements).

If you want to read ten pages of people arguing about the best way to do that, look up the Zombie 222 build thread.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

Seeing your up to date on that thread, Ill take your suggestion on which to consider.... Please.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

The Kokam sheet shows a cell with 5C continuous, 8C pulse, and 170 Wh/kg, which isn't bad. That should get you near 500 hp with a 60 kWh pack, 352 kg/772 lb, cell weight. Might be better to give up some C rate for better energy density if you can find it.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> Seeing your up to date on that thread, Ill take your suggestion on which to consider.... Please.


Well, if you hadn't noticed by now, I prefer the high discharge 18650s. There is nothing that matches the energy density.

There are available 2.5 Ah ones these days with high power. That's more energy then the old cells in the roadster, but they output 20A continuous, 35A peak.

I'm kind of alone on this opinion on these forums, because 18650s take extra engineering design to make modules of then, and are not suitable for hobbyists.

I do work for a company that makes custom 18650 packs, so many people question my objectivity...but I'm not trying to make sales; I'm just amazed at the energy density. So since you asked, that's my personal recommendation.

Expect lots of other people to give other ideas, and take them all into consideration.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Since, as you pointed out earlier, there is no point using a cell with features you don't need, (8C continuous, 14C peak), wouldn't it make more sense to go for more energy density in this case?


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Since, as you pointed out earlier, there is no point using a cell with features you don't need, (8C continuous, 14C peak), wouldn't it make more sense to go for more energy density in this case?


Well he said he wants over 550hp, so he'd need around 10C with a 60kWh pack, depending on sag.

The next tier of 18650s, that are around 3Ah, are more like 5 or 6 C. So that would be marginal.

Still, even the 2.5 Ah high discharge 18650s are higher energy density than pretty much everything else out there.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

You probably lose some of that advantage with the extra packaging required for 18650 cells, don't know if it's enough to make a difference. Tesla goes from a cell level 260Wh/kg to a pack level 150Wh/kg. Of course they use liquid cooling and 1/4 inch thick aluminum plate for the bottom of the pack enclosure. Do you use liquid cooling when building your 18650 packs?


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

does anyone know how hot these thing get i know they like to be in the mid 70's. what happens at the track?


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> does anyone know how hot these thing get i know they like to be in the mid 70's. what happens at the track?


It depends on internal resistance and current. And heat capacity and heat transfer.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

How does tesla rout the water in the battery pack?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Through tubes that go in between rows of cells.

By the way, you have some new competition 

http://www.worldcarfans.com/114081579695/2015-renovo-coupe-unveiled-at-pebble-beach


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

JRP3 said:


> Through tubes that go in between rows of cells.
> 
> By the way, you have some new competition
> 
> http://www.worldcarfans.com/114081579695/2015-renovo-coupe-unveiled-at-pebble-beach


 I hope he does well.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

$500K+ with only 100 miles of range, not sure how successful it will be.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

$500000 wow now I really hope he does well .


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I think that cost puts a premium on the Shelby chassis, suspension, and body, since similar range and performance could be had for much less money using the FFR kit car, as Kadie did: http://www.ssi-racing.com/


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> $500K+ with only 100 miles of range, not sure how successful it will be.


I have to agree. What they've done, they have done extremely well. But I don't feel like they aimed high enough. Starting with an old Shelby makes for a car that looks absolutely stunning. But it has its drawbacks. Having to to 2wd really limits your power. Since no one currently makes a compact inverter with higher power than the RMS 150, you are limited to about 500 hp...plus beyond that you would run into traction issues.

If I were doing a 500k conversion, I would start with an Audi R8. Not as amazing looking, but set up for high performance and AWD. Put a motor on every wheel and do real torque vectoring.

Basically similar to what Mate did, but cut the price in half by initially using an existing car. Not everyone has the upfront money that Mate had to build from the ground up, and even he had trouble with cash flow.

Finding the rich customers is the hardest part


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

One for the whole community: does any one have an idea of how many car companies started and went bust would really love to know? Looking for names and general time frame (year started)? any order will work Adam.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Very few car companies outside the big boys ( Toyota , GM, Ford, Nissan etc) ever actually make money.
The Auto industry history is littered with failed enterprises ( here are a few thousand !... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defunct_automobile_manufacturers_of_the_United_States) 
But names like Hudson, Nash, and Packard , spring to mind.
And as we know even the big boys like GM and Fiat have been propped up by government funding from time to time.
Closer to my home Holden and the National Ford operation are shutting down.
Roll Royce has failed financially previously and Aston Martin has never made a profit in 50 +years of operation ! 
Even the darling Tesla is still operating a negative balance sheet.
Its a high stakes gamble with few long term success stories for the smaller players ( Ferrari, McLaren ??? etc)


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Are you looking for just EV companies, or any auto companies in general?


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

Looking for electric.


----------



## mulderfox (Aug 4, 2014)

dragonsgate said:


> I like Arklan's first suggestion. Sell it as a glider.


is it possible to make a glider and the use a cap or any special energy bank time to time for a drag day?


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

mulderfox said:


> is it possible to make a glider and the use a cap or any special energy bank time to time for a drag day?


not sure about this question or if its aimed at me? please clarify.


----------



## mulderfox (Aug 4, 2014)

[email protected] said:


> not sure about this question or if its aimed at me? please clarify.


Oh no 
sorry
I try to talk to some one else. please forget about it.


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

this thread went a bit cold

whats the latest?


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

Putting together web site and components. Thanks for asking.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

just posted a bunch of pics on facebook for those interested: look up Jettechnologies Adam or follow the link. 
* https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100006370363502 *


----------



## mulderfox (Aug 4, 2014)

[email protected] said:


> just posted a bunch of pics on facebook for those interested: look up Jettechnologies Adam or follow the link.
> * https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100006370363502 *


Already checked your facebook out.

I came across this interesting electric car drive train and it really make me thinking about your project.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

looks excellent actually.


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

double wishbones front and back, all wheel drive, holy shit dude look at it


----------



## mulderfox (Aug 4, 2014)

[email protected] said:


> just posted a bunch of pics on facebook for those interested: look up Jettechnologies Adam or follow the link.
> * https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100006370363502 *




If I were you I may use the back bone system which in the future allow me to easily change the wheel base of the car and allow the customer to buy a fiber glass kit to install over it and have their own style. 

Just sell the super electric drive train! instead

That may give you something to enter the market and do some thing that TESLA can't give to the people?

For a super electric car like your project perhaps one might add the third spring system in to it to help maintain the riding height at very high speed?


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

mulderfox said:


> If I were you I may use the back bone system which in the future allow me to easily change the wheel base of the car and allow the customer to buy a fiber glass kit to install over it and have their own style.
> 
> Just sell the super electric drive train! instead
> 
> ...


The chassis is so specific that it actually takes on the shape of the car internally, there are air guide channels and all kinds of things the chassis is actually formed into those structures. even the roll cage is inside the body panels, doors sides, center console .....so on. I just don't see selling the bare chassis with this car.


----------



## John (Sep 11, 2007)

See SLS AMG E-Cell for an example of a thrust vectoring 4400lb monster. Its pay load is probably less than 400lb with two on board. So its payload is less than 9% of its total rolling mass. A small improvement in the power density of the battery should allow a quite dramatic scaling down of the vehicle for similar performance at much reduced weight and cost (if it weren't based on a production vehicle and hence dimensionally locked in). Payload is the one thing you can't really change except by eliminating seats. 

Virtually everything that affects the performance of a vehicle is proportional to either the weight of the vehicle or its aerodynamic drag. Shave weight by 1/3 and drag by 1/3 and the vehicle will perform much the same with 1/3 less power. When we talk about performance, economy is the flip side of that coin. So you would travel the same distance on 1/3 less battery capacity also. Aero drag is the one that is difficult to reduce by much. 

The advantage you have over the Tesla S is not providing seating for up to 7 people so the possible pay load is much smaller and the vehicle can be much more compact and lighter. You should be able to go further and faster with a smaller battery than the S. The Model S is limited to 130mph by its gearing not its power. At 130mph its motor is redlined at 14,000rpm. By using just one gear ratio Tesla have had to compromise both the initial acceleration and the top speed of the model S. Tesla made this compromise in the roadster because they couldn’t get a reliable two speed gearbox in time. Using multiple motors would dictate using one ratio or multiple synchronized gearboxes.

Your vehicle looks like a classic mid engine lay out, i.e. cabin forward and quite long behind the cabin. You can have more styling freedom with electric power.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

I guess I agree with the whole. I would say to the point of classic mid engine yes it is, but Ive allocated battery space in the front, under the seats from the get go. There are more pictures on my website http://www.jettechnologiesauto.com/ go easy on me its new haven't registered yet on Google let me know what you think.


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

iv been waiting for this 

quick question, wouldnt that indent all along the side and that gap at the back create drag/wake ?

and that little box in front of the window wiper, what is that? is it the wiper motor?

it looks pretty spartan
but if its meant to be a track car it doesnt need much 

its coming along great


----------



## palmer_md (Jul 22, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> I guess I agree with the whole. I would say to the point of classic mid engine yes it is, but Ive allocated battery space in the front, under the seats from the get go. There are more pictures on my website http://www.jettechnologiesauto.com/ go easy on me its new haven't registered yet on Google let me know what you think.


I like the car! Looking forward to your powertrain design. This thing is going to be awesome!


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

arklan said:


> iv been waiting for this
> 
> quick question, wouldnt that indent all along the side and that gap at the back create drag/wake ?
> 
> ...


 (1st q.)
Both would , except their not negative pressure, the side is actually slighly positive as air from the front is exduce into it. The channel looks to narrow but deapens to relatively the same volume. The rear gap has air coming through it Picked up from underneath and inner door channels, the wing produces most of the drag by working the fluid. The wake your looking for is behind the bumper.

and that little box in front of the window wiper, what is that? is it the wiper motor? No it houses fluid chamber and fill hole for brake master cylinder. Wiper motor is non intrusive.

it looks pretty spartan, 
but if its meant to be a track car it doesnt need much  I'm not a fan of spartan I like gadgets. But this one is not fitted with them becuase I wanted to show its focus, what its core is if you will... as possibility. There are provisions for speakers in the doors, the center console is purpose designed for mechless system, the seats will recline an be covered with leather / alcantara and there will be a place for cell phone to dock not just rest (if you want) cupholder for sure please forgive me I am an American. Pm me if yo want more.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

palmer_md said:


> I like the car! Looking forward to your powertrain design. This thing is going to be awesome!


 Thank you very much .


----------



## epyon (Mar 20, 2008)

I made a lot of money off people that had $100,000.00 cars get smoked by my $220.00 car . The best handling car you can buy is $25,000.00(1.3 G's on the skid pad) . The fastest EV cars out there is DC . White Zombie did 12s with regular batteries , just saying . I say go DC . 100 mile range , 12 sec 1/4 mile , looks cool , I'd buy it now and not even look at a Focus Electric . Don't go after Tesla , be better . Build a DC powered monster . I drove a Leaf an a Model S ......Use a DC motor .


----------



## epyon (Mar 20, 2008)

My new screen saver .


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

I want the power, but someone has to help me with the questions of rev range . ac motors have such a higher rev band, the next issue is longevity, a whole lot of more experienced guys have and are telling me that ac motors generally will outlast DC. I've been manufacturing moving components for a long time and every time one of my products fails, I feel like a close relative past away, I never got used to it. This is bigger than anything, reliability needs high on the list.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

DC is unbeatable at the drag strip.

But if you are building a serious car, AC is a must.

If you want range, you need a big battery. If you have a big battery, you have weight. If you want long distances with a weighty car, you need liquid cooling. That means AC.

Also, serious buyers aren't going to go for a car with a motor that might "zorch".

Edit: the rev band doesn't matter. You can compensate for that by changing the gearing. Horsepower is horsepower. But DC motors lack the sustained power. Also, a big heavy car without regen is going to burn through brakes like they are kindling.


----------



## PStechPaul (May 1, 2012)

I agree that brushed DC motors are impractical for a production car that needs to be reliable and virtually maintenance free. Perhaps you could look at BLDC, but the permanent magnets are expensive and relatively fragile and sensitive to heat and overfluxing. AC induction motors are rugged and reliable and can be improved by designing them for higher frequency drive. 

Switched reluctance motors and similar technology is very promising and may surpass induction motors in performance, although dynamic regenerative braking might not be possible. It would be worthwhile to take a look at ABB and Siemens and other large industrial motor suppliers to see what they have.


----------



## epyon (Mar 20, 2008)

Ok , I'll P.M you . They have big AC motors . But what about the Focus Electric . Not a big Battery . Straight up , if you want it to sell , do something no one else has an your in . An company's are still doing DC motors and coming out with new ones . An not only are they smarter then most of the people here , but they will be in business for decades to come . Do what auto dealers do , have maintinces an service . AC motors break to , don't buy into a fantasy . Even the Veyron has a short range .


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

There is no fantasy. Without brushes and comms to wear an AC motor built to the same standard will outlast a DC motor. Plus the previously mentioned regen and liquid cooling. Almost no one will spend a lot of money on a brushed DC car with no regen.


----------



## PStechPaul (May 1, 2012)

The only way to make a DC motor comparable to an AC motor is to use electronic commutation to eliminate the brushes and mechanical commutator. That is where the bulk of the inefficiency and longevity issues resides. But then you have essentially a synchronous motor, which often requires slip rings to provide magnetization to the rotor field. Slip rings are more efficient and require less maintenance than brushes with a mechanical commutator. It is also possible to induce high frequency AC into the rotor and then perform conversion to DC there, so the slip rings can be eliminated.

There are many other novel designs for motors, but each has a set of advantages and drawbacks. I would suggest contacting the EE department of various universities and find out what they are working on, and if you find something promising, you may be able to fund the engineering effort to develop a new motor without the expense and management of your own engineering department. Also, if and when your business really takes off, you may have an excellent source of employees.


----------



## philt (Sep 7, 2014)

I have to agree with Paul.
DC brushless or AC induction is the only way to go.
Brushed is too much maintenance, noisy and dirty.

Yes they are cheap but brushless is worth it in the long run.
We are using Remy HVH250-115ROC3 in our KigerStangEV.

3) 237V 100 Ah battery packs in series (700V).
Vehicle will weigh in at around 3500 lbs. with batteries.
We are hoping for a 100 mile range and 0-60 should be under 5 seconds.
I suggest keeping a manual tranny. We are using the original "R" code mustang top loader good to over 600HP. We also used the first Eaton 9" 35 spline trutrac diff with 4:11 gears good to 1000 ft/lbs. (Thanks Eaton) Super high torque in 1st gear for fast 0-60 (0-8000 RPM).
Then to cruise on the highway drop it into 4th. No clutch needed.

There are only a few companies that make motors with the weight ratio as the Remy, Yasa, for example but they are NOT in production although they claim they are. The Remys are available, made in the USA and I support that.
Here is the link to the project that has just been changed from ICE to EV.
http://1drv.ms/1ofABfp

More pics. will be up this weekend with coil over front and rear ends installed. Finally getting it off the rotisserie!

Good luck with the startup. You can do it with enough drive, confidence and motivation. And a little support from those here.


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

philt said:


> I have to agree with Paul.
> DC brushless or AC induction is the only way to go.
> Brushed is too much maintenance, noisy and dirty.
> 
> ...


Yep, no argument... but just one question: what inverter are you going to use to drive that lovely Remy motor? A 100kW *peak* RMS? Pathetic.


----------



## philt (Sep 7, 2014)

Are you usually this rude to new people on this forum?

Since I am an EE & a controls engineer with 36 years experience designing industrial inverters, I can build my own. but I likely will end up using a Sevcon Gen 4 size 10 or a Reinhart PM250DZ.

Seriously, are people really this rude on this forum?


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Tess said

_Yep, no argument... but just one question: what inverter are you going to use to drive that lovely Remy motor? A 100kW *peak* RMS? Pathetic.

_Where is the rudeness in that??

_Are you usually this rude to new people on this forum?_

YES we are usually much ruder than that


----------



## rochesterricer (Jan 5, 2011)

philt said:


> Are you usually this rude to new people on this forum?
> 
> Since I am an EE & a controls engineer with 36 years experience designing industrial inverters, I can build my own. but I likely will end up using a Sevcon Gen 4 size 10 or a Reinhart PM250DZ.
> 
> Seriously, are people really this rude on this forum?


I think you misunderstood Tesseract. He wasn't calling you pathetic, he was saying that the current selection of inverters available to the general public is pathetic.


----------



## sholland (Jan 16, 2012)

rochesterricer said:


> I think you misunderstood Tesseract. He wasn't calling you pathetic, he was saying that the current selection of inverters available to the general public is pathetic.


So true...


----------



## ishiwgao (May 5, 2011)

philt said:


> Are you usually this rude to new people on this forum?
> 
> Since I am an EE & a controls engineer with 36 years experience designing industrial inverters, I can build my own. but I likely will end up using a Sevcon Gen 4 size 10 or a Reinhart PM250DZ.
> 
> Seriously, are people really this rude on this forum?


If you'd looked though this forum a little more before posting that comment, you'll know that Tesseract is one of the nicest people around. 

You didn't need to put your credentials down.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

My email got hacked apologies to friends of the forum for the spam, will try to keep it secure.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Tesseract said:


> Yep, no argument... but just one question: what inverter are you going to use to drive that lovely Remy motor? A 100kW *peak* RMS? Pathetic.


Come on, dude. You don't need to resort to strawmen to make your argument.


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

Hollie Maea said:


> Come on, dude. You don't need to resort to strawmen to make your argument.


Either you are misusing the strawman argument or I've missed something here... I see that the PM150DX (150kW peak) is officially available - at least it appears it is on EVWest's website - but that only marginally improves the situation w/r/t to the OP's desire to make an electric supercar for a reasonable price. I think we can all agree that, "reasonably priced," "high power," and "AC" do not all go together; at best you can pick 2 out of 3 and, arguably, you can't even pick "high power" regardless of the price you are willing to pay. Not for an automotive-specific inverter, anyway.


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

iv seen u can get a ac35x2 kit that uses 2 motors and 2 controllers to get 124kw

so if the power is the goal then youd just stack 5 of those 100kw ac motors and 5 controllers
by this time youd have no room left to put batteries and no weight left to be able to carry them either

why doesnt anyone make a 200-300kw ac kit? surely theres enough demand for it


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

At what price?


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Tesseract said:


> Either you are misusing the strawman argument or I've missed something here... I see that the PM150DX (150kW peak) is officially available - at least it appears it is on EVWest's website - but that only marginally improves the situation w/r/t to the OP's desire to make an electric supercar for a reasonable price. I think we can all agree that, "reasonably priced," "high power," and "AC" do not all go together; at best you can pick 2 out of 3 and, arguably, you can't even pick "high power" regardless of the price you are willing to pay. Not for an automotive-specific inverter, anyway.


Anyway, it's obvious that you haven't paid any attention to RMS for a couple of years. And that's fine...there is no reason that you would need to...unless you are going to mock them. Yes, there is a difference between 100kW peak and 150kW continuous, which is what the PM150DX is capable. And your implication that it is vaporware, by calling it "officially available" is ridiculous. It has been out for several years, and is featured in a number of cars including the elmofo electric radical in Australia as well as the new Renovo Shelby Daytona. The 250kW will be available by the end of the year, with the 350kW close behind.

I really appreciate the efforts you take to help people on this forum. And I think you designed one of the best controllers in the world. But I have to say my personal perception is colored a bit by your constant disdain for everything else that is on the market.


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

Hollie Maea said:


> Anyway, it's obvious that you haven't paid any attention to RMS for a couple of years. And that's fine...there is no reason that you would need to...unless you are going to mock them. Yes, there is a difference between 100kW peak and 150kW continuous, which is what the PM150DX is capable.


I think maybe you ought to check out RMS' website before making any more accusations. To wit, it says that:



> *PM150 - 150kW peak*
> 
> The PM150 is identical to the PM100 except for an additional 50mm in length to accommodate the significantly larger internal DC Link capacitor assembly and power module. *This drive is presently in prototype build, transferring to DV-stage and limited production volumes by mid-Q4 2010*
> 
> ...


If they can't be bothered to update their website in over 4 years then can you perhaps see why I might think that the PM100DX is still their only official (ie - non-prototype) product? Surely you don't expect me to continuously trawl all possible vendors and forums where competing products might be discussed to ascertain if they are, in fact, freely available, do you? My function at Evnetics is engineering, not sales or marketing.

Furthermore, the PM150DX is described on the RMS website as *150kW peak*, not continuous. Maybe other people have extracted 150kW continuous from the PM150DX, but the manufacturer says that is a peak rating on their own website, and I tend to believe the manufacturer.



Hollie Maea said:


> I really appreciate the efforts you take to help people on this forum. And I think you designed one of the best controllers in the world. But I have to say my personal perception is colored a bit by your constant disdain for everything else that is on the market.


I wasn't mocking RMS in particular, rather, I was being dismissive of the more general assertion that an AC system of sufficient power to meet the OP's requirements was available at all. I only used the RMS PM100DX as an example because I know it is in production, that it actually works and is well-regarded by our esteemed motor guru, major, and that it can be purchased from several places. I don't consider one-off prototypes, or "products under development", or products from companies that have gone out of business to be viable solutions to the OP's stated objectives. 

It is also slightly - but only slightly - worrisome that your personal perception is that I express constant disdain just towards everything else on the market, when my intention is to express constant disdain - and skepticism - towards *everything in general*. Clearly I am being too positive elsewhere and need to work on that some...


----------



## Tomdb (Jan 28, 2013)

I would suggest getting 100kw peak unit's which are available from some big players, those who deal mostly in Business to business sales. 

And in order to achieve your desired power ratings just keep adding motors to say around 4. 

Pricing for using these components might vary from 5k to 8k $ depending on amount bought at once. So its quite possible, however for an viable market case your glider has to be crazy cheap (money not quality).


----------



## rochesterricer (Jan 5, 2011)

If big power is what you seek you can contact Rimac. However, be prepared to cash in your 401k.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

rochesterricer said:


> If big power is what you seek you can contact Rimac. However, be prepared to cash in your 401k.


They are using the same AMR motors everyone else is using. No need to reimport them from Europe.


----------



## rochesterricer (Jan 5, 2011)

The inverter is proprietary though is it not?


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

rochesterricer said:


> The inverter is proprietary though is it not?


Good question.

I'd be surprised if they made their own inverter, but I don't know what they are using.


----------



## A[email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

Tomdb said:


> I would suggest getting 100kw peak unit's which are available from some big players, those who deal mostly in Business to business sales.
> 
> And in order to achieve your desired power ratings just keep adding motors to say around 4.
> 
> Pricing for using these components might vary from 5k to 8k $ depending on amount bought at once. So its quite possible, however for an viable market case your glider has to be crazy cheap (money not quality).


When was the last time anything of quality was crazy cheap?


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

this thread is good entertainment


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

I must say the debate has been incredibly fruitful, I have learned, thank you to everyone it's making a difference.


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

how goes the car business? got this thing moving yet?
do u have a proper workshop or is it still a fiberglass model in ur carport?
what have u been doing the past month? have u been refining the body or working on the interior or working out the power for it or what?
tell me!?


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

arklan said:


> how goes the car business? got this thing moving yet?
> do u have a proper workshop or is it still a fiberglass model in ur carport?
> what have u been doing the past month? have u been refining the body or working on the interior or working out the power for it or what?
> tell me!?


Its not a business yet and I'm fortunate to have a shop. Mostly buying components and talking to people who have more than just a passive interested in buying. Yes It moves, I'll post pictures when everything is set up. Both interior and exterior are getting refining touches. Except roof,bumpers and some interior peaces its all aluminium. Will post pics when its complete.


----------



## arklan (Dec 10, 2012)

any update/progess?


----------



## philt (Sep 7, 2014)

Adam:
A few pieces of advise.
1) Go Brushless, Tesla doesnt use brushed for a reason, too dirty, too heavy,too much maintenance and not reliable enough.
Our Remy HVH250-115 motor which is mounted to a Tremec TR3650 tranny will do 10,000 RPM and over 450HP at 360 ft/lbs when mated to a good drive that can peak 900 amps at 700V. In 1st gear at 3.3 ratio the motor puts out over 1000 ft/lbs at the rear wheels. BTW, the motor ONLY weighs 95 lbs and is a 12" cube. Motor is good to over 1 million miles with NO maintenance. NO brushed motor can say that.

2)Wait till the last minute to buy the batteries. There are several companies that are about to release new technologies. Li-S is one of them that will be in production Q4 2016. These batteries put out 5 times the power density of today's best batteries. Price is promised to be 1/2 as is the weight. 
A typical LiPO4 pack with 80KWH producing 700V weighs around 1200 lbs. 
Li-S weighs in at 600 lbs. CON - Charge cycles are being improved but still under 650 when discharging 100%. You can double that with 80% max discharge but still not as long life as liPO4. li-S is also very safe unlike other high power Li's.

You need to get the weight down, especially for a 2 second acceleration.
We are being sampled some of these in 2015 for testing.

The longer you wait the less you will pay for batteries as technology keeps improving, cost keep coming down.

3) Tires, we are using Pirelli P375ZR25-21 (15" wide). Although don't expect a 200 mile range with these big tires. We needed them for our 3.5 second 0-60 and that's a lot slower than 2 seconds.

4) You will need a very beefy rear end, we used an Eaton 35 spline true track (SN1) and Fab9 rear housing capable of handling 1000 ft/lbs.

Hope it helps and do not let anyone deter you from your dreams. All successful people have had an ass or two tell them they couldn't do it. Walt Disney, Elon Musk, Joe Eaton... all successful dreamers.


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

philt said:


> ...Our Remy HVH250-115 motor which is mounted to a Tremec TR3650 tranny will do 10,000 RPM and over 450HP at 360 ft/lbs when mated to a good drive that can peak 900 amps at 700V....


The Remy datasheet says that motor can take 600A peak. You think you'll get more torque/power from it by pushing peak current to 900A?


----------



## philt (Sep 7, 2014)

We don't THINK it , we KNOW it. We put the motor on the Dyno .

We are getting MUCH higher peak torque/HP than Remys published curves.
NDA prevents me from publicly stating actual results but our Drag strip video to be shot later 2016 will prove it to everyone. We expect low 11's, high 10's depending on the battery weight, which is yet to be determined.

http://Total AUTOmation works, LLC


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

arklan said:


> any update/progess?


The car is exterior is getting "finishing touches" just about there.
The big news is that I'm on the edge of major financing, assembling a team now am hoping to recruit from here too! If anyone is interested let me know.


----------



## philt (Sep 7, 2014)

I can definitely help with the control. I am currently working on an IPC with 21" center touch screen (integrated) and two other dash mounted HD screens for typical vehicle monitoring.
The entire system is CANbus and monitors/controls the drive, BMS, accessories, keyless ignition, GPS, Forward/Rear cameras with DVRs, Laser diffuser and radar detector, Blue Tooth smart phone hookup, auto tilt/scope steering and two driver seat/mirror adjustments (automatic based on proximity).
Auto UV tinting windows and servo suspension that regens back to the batteries.

The controller updates are downloadable via the Internet like Teslas.

We will be selling this with our Motor/Drive/mount kit in 2017.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

philt said:


> I can definitely help with the control. I am currently working on an IPC with 21" center touch screen (integrated) and two other dash mounted HD screens for typical vehicle monitoring.
> The entire system is CANbus and monitors/controls the drive, BMS, accessories, keyless ignition, GPS, Forward/Rear cameras with DVRs, Laser diffuser and radar detector, Blue Tooth smart phone hookup, auto tilt/scope steering and two driver seat/mirror adjustments (automatic based on proximity).
> Auto UV tinting windows and servo suspension that regens back to the batteries.
> 
> ...


Very good, also on the Remy motor /trans set up if its that good I'll buy it from you Instead of developing our own sequential transmission (what were doing now) I don't remember the Tremec being the most robust unit (second gear failure's in 300hp mustang's) are you beefing it up to handle the extra power? Also the assembling of a team isn't an instant job, it may be months at least before anything happens. If your still interested P.M. me well talk some more I'll fill you in go from there.


----------



## philt (Sep 7, 2014)

Adam:
I'm impressed. You are very correct. The TR3650 had a weak input shaft 10 tooth 1" that had a tendency to shear off much past 450 HP with slicks.
Much of that problem had to do with other clutch issues though.
The 2nd to 3rd gear issue had to do with the front mount on the shift linkage being mounted to the body. When the motor torqued, the gear would pop out and messed up the teeth.
We solved that and also went with a Hurst Competition shifter that provides a much reduced throw and better notching. (not the Billet model).
We do have a 26 spline option but at present we are attempting the stock 10 spline to see how it holds up.
The coupling is a hardened 24 to 10 tooth. Our intent is to build custom couplings for DIYers to use their own manual trannys (without clutch), we simply provide the coupling and mounting plates.

So its better to use stock parts because a complete tear down to replace the tranny input shaft is beyond most DIYers.
2005-2010 GT Mustangs used this tranny and there are a lot of them out there but we could just as easily use a TR6060 (C5, C6, C7 vettes and Camaros).
This tranny is good to 600 ft lbs. A bit of an over kill.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

philt said:


> 2)Wait till the last minute to buy the batteries. There are several companies that are about to release new technologies. Li-S is one of them that will be in production Q4 2016. These batteries put out 5 times the power density of today's best batteries. Price is promised to be 1/2 as is the weight.


The only ones I've seen projected for 2016 are around 400 Wh/kg, with maybe 500 cycle life. Since today's best batteries are the Panasonic NCA cells at 250 Wh/kg and much better cycle life the unproven claims of some companies do not have me holding my breath. Certainly cells will keep improving but we've seen enough "projections" that did not pan out.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

Philt, I own supercharger company have seen my fair share of broken transmission's. 
If it holds I'm definitely interested but would highly recommend replacing gearing not just for strength but the ratio's.


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

philt said:


> We don't THINK it , we KNOW it. We put the motor on the Dyno .


Mmm-hmm... Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the default configuration of this motor is with an IPM rotor, no? And you are completely and totally sure 900A isn't causing even progressive demagnetization of the buried PMs? This would show up as a shift downwards in the torque/amp ratio.


----------



## philt (Sep 7, 2014)

No after long term testing and algorithms added to our control that prevents excessive duty cycle and proper motor cooling, no degration of PM has been witnessed.

We have over 4000 hrs logged on the motor with peak currents applied for no longer than 10 second intervals. This doesnt seem like a long time but when you consider the vehicle will travel 0-60 in under 4 seconds, it really is plenty long enough for that once in a while tromp a C7,Camaro, Viper or even GT500 at a street light.


----------



## piotrsko (Dec 9, 2007)

Been my experience that the a$$ in the (insert name of expensive car here) generally gets immediately STOOPID, and one ten second burst gets you into way more trouble than it is worth. You need at least a minute's worth to be able to tuck down a side street or three. And it's worse in Smell-A, where they pack and have equally stoopid friends with cell phones.

MY $0.02, YMMV, I was running 11 second Pinto


----------



## philt (Sep 7, 2014)

JRP3 said:


> The only ones I've seen projected for 2016 are around 400 Wh/kg, with maybe 500 cycle life. Since today's best batteries are the Panasonic NCA cells at 250 Wh/kg and much better cycle life the unproven claims of some companies do not have me holding my breath. Certainly cells will keep improving but we've seen enough "projections" that did not pan out.


Good news is there is a battery in proto now that is 450Wh/kg and has a 3000 cycle from DEAD 100%, not 80% like current lithium Ion.

We hope to have this Q2 2016 in our project but I'm staying conservatively optimistic. This is scary close for SEMA 2016, which is why I'm shying away from committing to SEMA 2016 at present.

The pack will weigh 466 lbs, deliver 600 amps peak, 300 amps continuous, 720vDC at 70KWH. Size of the pack is incredibly small 24"X24" X18".
Range of the vehicle is planned to be close to 300 miles conservatively driven based on the new pack. 
The lower weight should bring the car under 3.5 seconds 0-60. Not bad for an every day driver with a maintenance free drive train rated at 1 million miles. (no brush changing needed).


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Any chance you'll let us in on the company or the chemistry? Hints? I've got a couple of possible candidates in mind....


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

This is a game changer, if your interested in partnering up let me know.


----------



## samwichse (Jan 28, 2012)

JRP3 said:


> Any chance you'll let us in on the company or the chemistry? Hints? I've got a couple of possible candidates in mind....


A little Google-foo turns up Sion Power:
http://www.sionpower.com/vehicles.html

Which claims 450wh/kg in their up-and-coming 70kwh Li-S battery with a module weight of 426lbs. I'd say that's probably them...


----------



## dcb (Dec 5, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> This is a game changer, if your interested in partnering up let me know.





Hollie Maea said:


> If you are overly coy with them, they will assume you aren't.


Maybe he is a student doing a social research project on gullibility?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Possibly, but no mention of cycle life, which has been problematic with LiS.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Sion?..
Impressive claims, and much as I want to believe battery tech can make that kind of progress, something tells me we are not seeing the full picture ?
Why has someone like Tesla, or GM etc not jumped on and swallowed up this technology ?
What is the drawback ?.....
Cost ?
Power density ?..looks to be way below 500W/kg !
Charge & discharge rate ?
Cycle life ?


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

philt said:


> . There are several companies that are about to release new technologies. Li-S is one of them that will be in production Q4 2016. These batteries put out 5 times the power density of today's best batteries. Price is promised to be 1/2 as is the weight.
> .


.??? Can you reference that power density comment ?
I suspect you miss read it for Energy Density ?


----------



## philt (Sep 7, 2014)

Unfortunately I am not at liberty to discuss manufacturer.

I don't know Sion but I will reach out to them on Monday and see what they are about. 

Tesla isn't going standard LiIon. Those that think they are spending billions to incorporate a technology that will be obsolete by the time the factory opens are fooling themselves. Expect an improved technology from them also. 

The rate & success of R&D over the past year eclipses previous years and I expect EVs to be our main mode of transportation by 2020.

The point of the post is new technologies are about to emerge and I am not talking ten years.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

philt said:


> Unfortunately I am not at liberty to discuss manufacturer.


Ooohhhh....secrets !



philt said:


> Tesla isn't going standard LiIon. Those that think they are spending billions to incorporate a technology that will be obsolete by the time the factory opens are fooling themselves. Expect an improved technology from them also.


Improved tech ?.....yes, 
Standard liIon ? ......They have always been ahead of the " standard" chemistry game.
Revolutionary ? ... I don't think even Tesla would gamble the success of a $5bn battery plant, and their future supply chain,... On some new commercially unproven battery technology !


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

philt said:


> Unfortunately I am not at liberty to discuss manufacturer.
> ....
> The point of the post is new technologies are about to emerge and I am not talking ten years.


Uh... fail.

[NB - philt is not the OP and his posts are not only lacking in substance, they are lacking in relevance...]


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

philt said:


> Tesla isn't going standard LiIon.


 Not sure what qualifies as standard li ion, Tesla is already using a modified LiNiCoAl formula from Panasonic.


> Those that think they are spending billions to incorporate a technology that will be obsolete by the time the factory opens are fooling themselves. Expect an improved technology from them also.


Sure, but production lines are flexible and adjustable, Musk has said they are designing to accommodate future changes, but he's only been guiding for about a 30% or so improvement over what they have now. Plus a factory that large can make more than one type of cell. But Musk has also said there is more hype than substance in the battery industry, and he said if anyone can send him an actual cell to test, not just a presentation, he'd welcome it.


> The rate & success of R&D over the past year eclipses previous years and I expect EVs to be our main mode of transportation by 2020.


I agree that there are a number of promising developments that seem to be looming, but I'd say 2020 is a bit early for EV's to be dominant, since that's just slightly over 5 years from now.


----------



## Anthonyelectric (Oct 3, 2013)

What kind of help do you need?


----------



## sirwattsalot (Aug 27, 2012)

This is something that I wanted to do but after completing my first car, I discovered that suddenly Ford, Chevy, and Nissan plus others are getting very serious about mass produced electric cars that fast charge in under 30 min and go a couple hundred miles. They are priced quite low at about $35,000. The Chevy Spark is an even lower priced car that goes 82 miles on a charge and it can fast charge. So, my only point is, if you can build a really sporty car that charges in 25 min, goes 200 miles and it has a really low price, people would buy it. I enjoy driving my own DIY car but, I may never build another one simply because my car is already obsolete; based on performance, cost, charge time, and range.


----------



## dragonsgate (May 19, 2012)

sirwattsalot said:


> This is something that I wanted to do but after completing my first car, I discovered that suddenly Ford, Chevy, and Nissan plus others are getting very serious about mass produced electric cars that fast charge in under 30 min and go a couple hundred miles. They are priced quite low at about $35,000. The Chevy Spark is an even lower priced car that goes 82 miles on a charge and it can fast charge. So, my only point is, if you can build a really sporty car that charges in 25 min, goes 200 miles and it has a really low price, people would buy it. I enjoy driving my own DIY car but, I may never build another one simply because my car is already obsolete; based on performance, cost, charge time, and range.


I converted my car 15 years ago and compared to some of the resent builds on this forum in the last few years much less the ones now on the market my car is obsolete but it still gets me where I want to go. Also It has a unique look that isn’t seen every day.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 7, 2014)

I've been working this issue for a long time. With all the R&d I've done internally, 250 miles will happen only happen driven softly/slow.


----------

