# 3 simple foundations to move our industry forward



## mdimarco (Oct 22, 2013)

I believe it is because of the lack of these 3 things that electric cars are not in the rightful widespread use they should be today.

1. Stick with low voltage systems. Motors should be made to get 3500 or so RPM at a low voltage. Going low voltage has numerous benefits. One downside is it requires thicker wire in the motor. But when you think about it, that is totally negligible on the scheme of things. It decreases the amount of cells you need (which itself has numerous benefits), it allows for a balanced pack of parralel and series connections, it reduces arcing, it improves safety, it improves range, ect.

2. Stick with DC series wound motors. Cheap, ubiquitous, powerful, easy to control. The efficiency needs to be worked on, but lets work on it instead of jumping to the next shiny tech.

3. Stick with flooded lead acid batteries. Cheap, relatively high power density, and safe. Yes they need to be maintained, but lets innovate easier ways to maintain them instead of jumping to the next shiny technology with a whole host of other downsides. Another downside is their weight and size, but that can be worked around because they are just so good at bieng cheap and have a sizable energy storage capability. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Flooded will always be inherently better.

And thats it. If we try to innovate within that framework my thought is we will see much more growth of our sport because we keep it in reach of the average joe and it will be a cost effective an practical solution. Right now these exotic technologies pigeonhole the industry to just a serious hobbist or green believer market.

We have to make cost effective solutions for TODAY for this to ever take off. If we stick to my 3 principles above, it is impossible to not make a cost effective solution.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

mdimarco said:


> 1. Stick with low voltage systems.
> Going low voltage has numerous benefits.
> *None of which make up for the problems with increased current *
> 
> ...


All three of your points are totally wrong!

I might give you half a point for series DC,

AC are definitely better BUT
at the moment AC is either wimpy or expensive or both


----------



## mdimarco (Oct 22, 2013)

Thanks for the input but the simple fact is the only way we can make cost effective solutions is to stick with my 3 constraints.

Just saw your in quote stuff. What are the problems with increased current? Bigger wires? thats negligible. Also I'm pretty sure the only bonus to ac over dc is efficeincy and you say the efficiency is ok on dc so...?


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

mdimarco said:


> Thanks for the input but the simple fact is the only way we can make cost effective solutions is to stick with my 3 constraints.
> 
> Just saw your in quote stuff. Also I'm pretty sure the only bonus to ac over dc is efficeincy and you say the efficiency is ok on dc so...?


_What are the problems with increased current? Bigger wires? thats negligible._

So says somebody who has never tried to wrestle with "bigger wires"

Series DC has brushes, can't re-gen and fails full power - otherwise it's fine

I am a "cost conscious" Scotsman!
and my project 
Uses;
150v - would have been more but that was the controller limit
Lithium Ion Batteries
and (OK) DC series motor

http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forum...-dubious-device-44370p2.html?highlight=duncan

Total budget ~ $6,000 - and that includes building the car

There is no way that a low voltage lead sled would be anywhere near as much fun


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

On the High Current part

At 150v a current of 700amps would be OK - I have 500amps - not quite enough
at 50v - you would need 2100amps!!

Controlling 500 amps is easy and not too expensive - OpenRevolt - $600
Controlling 1000 amps is expensive - Soliton - $2,500?? (Lovely controller)
Controlling 2100 amps is very expensive - Siva? - $8,000???

Not to mention all of the contactors and the like being rated for 2000 amps and the charger having to charge at much higher current


----------



## steven4601 (Nov 11, 2010)

Marco, you're not really serious are you?
lead is more expensive then LiI-on if you drive 50-100km every day and expect to do so for the next 5-10 years. Also weight is impractical.

Fact is, costs are higher for any real world (B)EV's at the moment than a non exotic used petrol car..... OTOH, Fuel cell cars are still more expensive than Battery electric vehicles.


----------



## mdimarco (Oct 22, 2013)

At 60v you could get 80 hp out of a 1k zilla, 2k zilla double it. As long as the motor was built for low voltages (aka high RPM at low voltage) it would be more than peppy. 1-0 wire for the parallel connections.

I'm not advocating for straight parralel obviously. But I'm not advocating for straight series either which seems to be the current fad (no pun intended)...

And you don't think you could get 5-10 years out of well maintained flooded lead acid?

At a rough .35 kw per mile, and the average american commute at 32 miles (50km), we are looking at a 12kw FLA pack that fulfils the majority of americans needs in 2 car households (1 commuter 1 general purpose). That requires only 8 of my favorite batteries (6v 235 ah) at a whopping $1000.
How much would lithium ion cost? 15k for LiFePo4?

The big 6 have seemingly given up on making a cost effective EV, but I feel like we have the tools to do it. The EV industry is like the airplane industry in the early 20th century. It is going to be us that make cost effective EV's that spark the industry, not the big 6. To do so we need to stay grounded in all the most cost effective and practical solutions for today, not for 20 years from now.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Today's thread brought to you by the year 2004.


----------



## mdimarco (Oct 22, 2013)

Hollie Maea said:


> Today's thread brought to you by the year 2004.


Compare the cost of 1kwh lead acid vs li ion in 2013 please? Then tell me which battery is for 2013. Ps: in case you don't know, lead acid could do 1kw for under $100.

I think the majority of us have our head stuck in 2050 with lithium and ac and high voltage ect.

In order to make a case for lithium in 2013 you have to fudge the lead acid numbers which I see happening on this forum regularly.


----------



## onegreenev (May 18, 2012)

1964 VW Ghia, 96 volts DC motor and 152 volt 850 amp controller with 16 6volt GolfCart Lead acid cells open flooded type. 705 lbs maximum safe carrying capacity. Lead Acid weight (1040 lbs). Gross Safe Weight Limit exceeded. Car now unsafe to drive. At 96 volts the DC motor pushed the little beast to a two time best of 85 mph given some extra time. Average speed was 0 to 65 mph. Typical drive was 45 mph to 55 mph and typical distance maximum with the pack was about 25 miles and the car was crawling along full throttle to the floor. It is not a viable vehicle for daily driving if I needed any more than 15 miles. Thats less than most drive daily. Cells lasted about 2 years. At that time I was getting more like 10 miles per charge.


----------



## major (Apr 4, 2008)

mdimarco said:


> Ps: in case you don't know, lead acid could do 1kw for under $100.


I presume you mean to say _1 kWh for under_ 

Here is what real life Pb-Acid looks like: http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78826 These 6 batteries have a list price of about $200 each. That puts the real cost near to $300/kWh. And at that usage, expect maybe 500 cycles, if you're lucky.

You're entitled to your opinion and entitled to use Pb-Acid for your EV or whatever else. But even at early adopter costs, Lithium batteries are a superior value for EVs by far over Pb-Acid.


----------



## onegreenev (May 18, 2012)

> AC are definitely better BUT
> at the moment AC is either wimpy or expensive or both


I beg to differ now. The HPEVS AC-75 is a kick in the pants for the affordable low voltage AC Systems. Check this out. This Beast has the newest of the HPEVS line of AC motors and controllers and he is not even using the 144 volt version. That sucker scoots rather nicely. I have driven these types of vehicles and this motor gives a much better performance. I know of a nice Geo Metro that has one in it too. Time to take a ride in that one.

For a nice peppy street vehicle and some nice powerful light weight LiFePO4 cells this is one hell of a nice ride. DC and Lead are going to go away. I will still continue with my DC motor but I too am moving over to AC.


----------



## rwaudio (May 22, 2008)

wow... when I started reading this I thought someone had brought up a thread from '08 or something.

If people build cars to your constraints NOBODY else will ever want one because they will be short range heavy crap.
To get others to WANT to drive electric they have to be better than ICE.
None of your constraints (with the possible exception of DC motors) will get you anywhere near that.

Follow this guy if you want the EV movement to step back 30-40 years.


----------



## frodus (Apr 12, 2008)

mdimarco said:


> Don't mind me I'm a newb.


Yes Indeed.


----------



## ga2500ev (Apr 20, 2008)

mdimarco said:


> I believe it is because of the lack of these 3 things that electric cars are not in the rightful widespread use they should be today.


I am respectfully going to disagree with each and every one of these below. They simply are not the issue.



> 1. Stick with low voltage systems. Motors should be made to get 3500 or so RPM at a low voltage. Going low voltage has numerous benefits. One downside is it requires thicker wire in the motor. But when you think about it, that is totally negligible on the scheme of things. It decreases the amount of cells you need (which itself has numerous benefits), it allows for a balanced pack of parralel and series connections, it reduces arcing, it improves safety, it improves range, ect.


Low voltage certainly does not improve range. The thicker wires are heavier. Also the increased current dissipates more heat, reducing efficiency.



> 2. Stick with DC series wound motors. Cheap, ubiquitous, powerful, easy to control. The efficiency needs to be worked on, but lets work on it instead of jumping to the next shiny tech.


Totally irrelevant for widespread adoption. The typical user could care less. That's only a debate between tech heads.



> 3. Stick with flooded lead acid batteries. Cheap, relatively high power density, and safe. Yes they need to be maintained, but lets innovate easier ways to maintain them instead of jumping to the next shiny technology with a whole host of other downsides. Another downside is their weight and size, but that can be worked around because they are just so good at bieng cheap and have a sizable energy storage capability. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Flooded will always be inherently better.


I know that "Dem's fighting words!" in this forum. Weight. Power density. Peukert. maintenance. Did I mention weight? I should mention weight. Maybe even mention weight again.

This one is a non starter.



> And thats it. If we try to innovate within that framework my thought is we will see much more growth of our sport because we keep it in reach of the average joe and it will be a cost effective an practical solution. Right now these exotic technologies pigeonhole the industry to just a serious hobbist or green believer market.
> 
> We have to make cost effective solutions for TODAY for this to ever take off. If we stick to my 3 principles above, it is impossible to not make a cost effective solution.


The cost is not the issue. That's why your 3 ideas above won't matter, right or wrong. From the average user's perspective, here are the three real issues:

1. Range. For the average user the range of their current vehicle is pretty much considered unlimited. Anything less is a non starter. Do you see how many new folks come in and ask about putting together a hybrid?

2. Rechargability. For the average user, getting more energy is a 5 minute or less affair. Anything much more than that is a non starter.

3. Ubiquitous infrastructure. Points 1 and 2 work for liquid fuel ICE vehicles precisely because there is a gas station on virtually every corner.

Cost only comes into play after the three of these for the average user. A Leaf can currently be purchased with the tax rebates for less than $20K USD. Leased for $199 a month. However, no average Joe will buy when it is explained that the effective range is about 70 miles, it takes upwards of 5 hours to recharge, and that the most useful charging station is at home. 

So for most the Leaf is... Dead on arrival. Even if 99% of the trips a user takes fits within that model, the range anxiety of needing to take that extra trip, or running out of energy, or being stuck takes it off the plate of most users.

The fix for widespread adoption is long range packs and ubiquitous fast charging. We should be working at building Level 3 fast chargers everywhere people go. We should be dotting them along the highways. We should be trying to get the range up above 200 miles per charge. Not that a user needs the 200 miles, but because it'll relieve the anxiety of running out of energy. Note that these two items are exactly what Tesla is working on because they want to be the foremost EV company of the 21st century.

Everything you have outlined deals with the DIY community. Any of the three of these items above is fine for anyone that's getting started doing their own conversion. But in terms of widespread adoption?....

Way off the mark.

ga2500ev


----------



## ga2500ev (Apr 20, 2008)

steven4601 said:


> Marco, you're not really serious are you?
> lead is more expensive then LiI-on if you drive 50-100km every day and expect to do so for the next 5-10 years. Also weight is impractical.


True and true. The problem is that most times the sticker shock is the cost of capitalization, not the total cost of ownership.

This is the reason that car dealerships no longer even bother negotiating the price of a car. Since virtually all of them are financed, the only cost question they have is "How much of a monthly payment are you looking for?"

Most folks balk at a high price tag. Same folks will happily pay monthly with a total cost that far exceeds the original price tag. Offer most users the option of paying $15k USD cash or paying $280 a month for 84 months, and many will take the latter even though the total cost is more than $8K USD more.

Same with lead vs. lithium. Many would rather buy 6 $1200 USD lead packs instead of buying a single $3800 USD lithium one even though the TOC of the lithium is more than 40% less than the TOC of lead.

It's one of the items I stress here and Marco is trying to reiterate. Sometimes it is more important to get started cheaply than it is to save money in the long run. If I can afford $280 a month now, and do not have the $15K then it may be worth the extra $8K to get it now and pay for 7 years as opposed to having to save for nearly 5 years in order to get the $15K.

We actually should continue to encourage lead started packs for those who cannot afford to invest in lithium. Getting started cheaply can get you started. Waiting for perfection may never do so.



> Fact is, costs are higher for any real world (B)EV's at the moment than a non exotic used petrol car..... OTOH, Fuel cell cars are still more expensive than Battery electric vehicles.


But it's the same issue. Fuel vehicles have the ability to get be financed. BEV is a capitalize as you go operation.

ga2500ev


----------



## dragonsgate (May 19, 2012)

Lead versus lithium, lithium versus lead. You have to make do with what you can afford at the time. Those with enough money or brave enough to take the plunge by going into debt for a pack of lithium batteries will argue the merits of lithium batteries. Those that can only afford lead as a start up will defend the merits of lead. I see a lot of good things about lithium. On the other hand there are practical things about lead. My fuzzy math says that a set of forty seven 100amp lithium batteries will cost around $4700. Eighteen 8volt Trojans T875 batteries cost $2160. (I checked this out about a week ago.) If you have lithium 100amper’s that last eight years or you have a pack of lead and switch out for a second pack of leads after four years at the total of $4320 and tack on the $380 difference for any rise in price and the price of both battery packs that give about the same range are about the same amount of money. I have not heard of anyone owning lithium for more than four years yet. I have seen good lead acids that are still going after four years. So in my opinion the argument of lithium being cheaper in the ling run has yet to be seen. So you buy some lithium for $4700 and get them installed and you make some kind of mistake and worse case scenario blow them all up. You are out $4700 vs $2160. There have been some threads on here about lithium and what happens if you over charge, under charge, drag down below acceptable level, or bottom balance versus top balance. Lithium owners seem to always be tinkering with their batteries trying to solve some minor problem here or there. It has been my experience that with lead you pretty much drop them in and go. If anyone reading this hasn’t realized I am using lead by now the nasty truth is out. My pack of lead is 1134 pounds and I have the car set up to handle it. This pack was four years old this September and still with in spec’s. This is my forth pack in over 14 years totaling $7200. Keep in mind that 14 years ago anything other than lead was around $30,000. I am managing quite well with lead. I can get 30 miles to a charge and still be well above critical and that is ok because my range need is usually 10 to 12 miles every day. My longest commute is 25 miles when I drive to wal-mart in the next town. I can’t see making payments on a $17,000 pack of lithium batteries that could easily be destroyed just so I can make it to wal-mart and back three times on one charge. Some side notes; If you are going to go with lead to begin with then get some good quality batteries. If you go too cheap then you are going to be in for problems. Pound for pound you will not get the range from lead as Lithium. Even though I think lithium batteries can be more temperamental than lead batteries they are still the way to go and if I ever get a good ROI on my ******* 401K so that I don’t have to worry about the money lithium batteries will be at the top of my shopping list.


----------

