Fixing Americas car industry

SpaceNut · 2021-04-29 20:23:00

The technology is simular to the cellphone charging pad in which the energy sent in is twice as much due to converting the energy from a DC source into AC for the device to pick up while setting on it. The device however only recieves half of the energy to charge with. The energy drops with seperation growth of distance between the sender and reciever coils. For building vehicles that distance is going to be hard to maintain as the vehicles we use are not all the same with wheel clearances not to mention tire wheel rim sizes.

SpaceNut · 2021-04-30 21:18:39

This does not bode well 1 in 5 electric vehicle owners in California switched back to gas because charging their cars is a hassle, new research shows

Fast charge low costs....

still are getting it wrong

https://autos.yahoo.com/citroen-ami-app … 00683.html

1,070-pound weight. Citroën quotes a 43-mile driving range from a 5.5-kilowatt-hour lithium-ion battery pack, and a top speed of precisely 27.9 mph on flat ground. It was developed solely for short, urban trips at low speeds.

Stop and go streets this is useless...

can not even use it on the highway....

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-30 22:05:35

For SpaceNut ... the run halted again ... I had time to look at your post here ... Actually, 43 miles on city streets would just about cover most of my needs. The key question I would have is what is the cost of a vehicle new. I also wonder if the insurance cost might be lower, since the gas vehicle I have is necessarily insured at the full rate for a vehicle that can do a lot of damage.

Regarding the halt ... I have multiple wireless routers, and was using one some distance from the laptop. I just changed to one that is a few feet away, and has a 100% signal. I'll bet performance will improve!

(th)

Calliban · 2021-05-01 06:43:10

Fast charging batteries would place extreme demands on the electric grid. If transportation is fully electrified, it would just about double total daily electricity demand. Imagine how much generating capacity would be needed when everyone plugs their fast charging cars in at 7pm and charges them in just two hours. To meet those sorts of demand peaks, most grid operators build open cycle gas turbines. They have low capital cost and ramp up to full load very quickly, within minutes. They are almost certainly what would end up being used. Fast charging electric vehicles would simply shift combustion from the vehicle to the powerplant.

louis · 2021-05-01 07:06:51

That's why they want "smart meters" in every household. They are clearly going to have sharply differential rates through the day/night. The aim would be to encourage people to put their vehicle charging on a timer and I expect timers will be incorporated in future models, so you can plug in and instruct "begin charging at 3am" or whatever.

Calliban wrote:

Fast charging batteries would place extreme demands on the electric grid. If transportation is fully electrified, it would just about double total daily electricity demand. Imagine how much generating capacity would be needed when everyone plugs their fast charging cars in at 7pm and charges them in just two hours. To meet those sorts of demand peaks, most grid operators build open cycle gas turbines. They have low capital cost and ramp up to full load very quickly, within minutes. They are almost certainly what would end up being used. Fast charging electric vehicles would simply shift combustion from the vehicle to the powerplant.

kbd512 · 2021-05-01 19:21:33

SpaceNut,

The most practical answer is a heavily boosted, smaller displacement internal combustion engine paired with super capacitors and an electric powertrain that eliminate the driveshafts, transmissions, and transfer cases. There's no technological reason why smaller displacement combustion engines can't power heavy vehicles if the acceleration energy is provided by a super capacitor bank, rather than the engine itself. This is an achievable automotive technological advance that doesn't require non-existent battery technology. Any type of battery using current or projected near-term battery technology is impractically heavy for delivering continuous power to a land motor vehicle that is primarily overcoming rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag at constant speed.

'In Pursuit Of Perfection' Carbon Fibres Drive The Future Of Lightweight Cars

The admission here from the CFRP automotive technology promoter is that if vehicle weight only accounts for 23% of a land-based motor vehicle's fuel consumption, then the other 77% is overcoming rolling resistance and aerodynamics. Those problems cannot be solved by using a material that requires 14 times as much energy to produce, per unit weight, as steel. The practical achievable weight reduction using CFRP is 50%, but the energy input is more than double what steel requires, so 1,555kWh for the 320kg of steel (20MJ/kg) vs 9,824kWh for the 125kg of CFRP (283MJ/kg). That's the energy required to make the carbon fibers, not the energy required for the epoxy and molding processes. If you figure that the composite is around 60% fiber and 40% epoxy, then it's obviously less energy than the 9,824kWh figure would suggest but then the energy for making the epoxy, curing the part, and the 10% scrap rate has to be added. So, bare minimum, the CFRP structure consumes more than twice as much energy as an equivalently strong steel structure.

Argonne National Laboratory - Energy Systems Division - Lightweight Materials for Automotive Application

Clemson University TigerPrints - Mechanical Engineering - Department of Automotive Engineering - Cost Estimation Model for PAN Based Carbon Fiber Manufacturing Process

My thinking on the general utility of applying aerospace materials and fabrication technology to land motor vehicles has changed as I've spent more time analyzing the average lifespan of consumer land motor vehicles. The heavy duty trucks are a different issue. To recycle CFRP fibers into new CFRP fibers, requires almost as much energy as it took to produce them from virgin stock to begin with, because the recycling process is basically the production process. Older consumer vehicles are typically replaced with new vehicles every 3 to 5 years, so it's unlikely that substantial total energy consumption can be saved through a reduction of gasoline consumption associated with lighter CFRP vehicle chassis by switching to aerospace materials.

Now that we have ultra-high strength steel that competes with 7075 Aluminum on a per-unit-mass tensile strength basis, we've reached a point of diminishing returns on lightweight but strong materials with low embodied energy. This is a necessary compromise because we will scrap nearly all of them in a few short years. What this actually suggests is that we operate a lesser number of more durable steel vehicles that have hybrid powertrains. The market seems to suggest that very small compact vehicles work best for urban transport and much larger trucks or SUVs work best for rural areas where the owner / operator has to haul a variety of cargo to / from home.

Audi's switch back to steel part of growing trend

The LS series V8s are used specifically for their ability to accelerate heavy vehicles quickly, but that is not the only technologically and economically viable solution. The LS tends to expend more fuel to keep the rotating mass spinning at all times, even with its displacement-on-demand technology, irrespective of the load placed upon it. The problem with displacement-on-demand is the fact that the remaining 4 cylinders must keep the engine spinning at a given RPM, merely touching the throttle disables the system, greatly diminishing its utility for economizing on fuel consumption, and it both complicates the engine's valve train and becomes a new failure mode for the engine.

The 420hp LS V8 engine in our Escalade provides 20mpg to 25mpg on the highway. A small cast iron 50hp inline-4 that's designed to run at WOT, when paired with a battery pack or super capacitor pack, could also provide the necessary acceleration to 70mph, with both less weight and less total system complexity, by eliminating the heavy duty 10 speed transmission, driveshaft, rear differential, and transaxle. This single change would at least double the fuel economy of the vehicle, especially in stop-and-go traffic, but also on the highway due to the drastic reduction in rotating mass. The 4-banger and fuel tank would be relocated to the engine bay, the generator that the engine powers would charge the battery pack located where the large gas tank was previously located, and a pair of electric hub motors would directly drive the rear wheels.

Apart from racers, most other people care about fast acceleration to maximum legal road speeds. I want to accelerate quickly and then burn as little fuel as possible at all other times. I can't do that with a V8, but if I had a small battery pack or super capacitor pack, then I could use the stored energy to accelerate quickly and then loaf along using 25hp. I don't care if the vehicle can ultimately go 160mph with a V8. That's nonsense. It's not legal to do and the vehicle is marginally controllable at 80mph. Going much faster than that is unacceptably dangerous to me.

A few notes on how aircraft differ in service life, as compared to land motor vehicles:

Aircraft are typically operated for a minimum of 10 to 20 years, with most light aircraft operated for many decades more. Substantial numbers of Aluminum airframes from the 1960s / 1970s / 1980s are still in operation today, due to the high cost of labor in modern times. In many cases there are no functional differences in the airframes produced 50 years ago, as is the case with many of Cessna's light aircraft. Cessna 172 model airframes, the most produced aircraft of all time, have been produced by the thousands since the 1950s, with the only differences being glass cockpit avionics in the most recent examples produced (same Aluminum alloys, same airframe design down to the rivet placement, same engine, same propeller, same fuel used, same hand assembly methods, only modern digital avionics that weigh less than the analog steam gauges). Production cost rose from $25K back in the 1950s to over $500K for current year production. If there's still service life left in the wing spars, then Aluminum aircraft are repaired and pressed back into service. That simply does not happen with land motor vehicles. In point of fact, all-Aluminum airframes are restored by addressing corrosion issues with sanding and application fresh paint after replacing badly corroded metal with new metal, in accordance with FAA-issued or manufacturer-issued ADs (Airworthiness Directives). Military aircraft like the A-10 or C-130 receive completely new wings, if need be, and we operate very few of those on account of the associated manufacturing, engine maintenance, fuel, and training costs. If you have the steel assembly jigs, or better yet, matched-hole-drilled parts, then you can make new parts until you run out of Aluminum.

In contrast to aeronautical designs that only change enough to remain airworthy (such as slightly stronger wing spars or better corrosion protection or replacement of defective parts), automotive designs frequently incorporate major changes every few years, so very little of the embodied energy and human labor cost sunk into design and production setup can be recovered over decades of production. This is one of the major reasons why Ford / GM / Chrysler / VW / Mercedes-Benz / BMW / Honda / Toyota / Mazda / Nissan / Suzuki mandate that different brands use the same engine and computer control technology. Tesla is a notable exception that has sworn off constant major changes and introduction of completely new models in favor of improved manufacturing methods and engineering of powertrain systems into the same basic designs, which is ultimately the correct approach to sustainable automotive engineering at a global scale that eventually reduces rather than continually increases production and repair costs.

The very first certified all-composite airframe aircraft ever produced, the Windecker Eagle (USAF designation YE-5; all rights now owned by a Chinese entrepreneur enamored with the design), is still in service, for example. It was restored a few years back, rather than build an entirely new airframe, at substantially greater cost. That composite airframe cost $20M to certify with the FAA back in 1989. A grand total of 2 prototypes and 6 production airframes were produced before Windecker Industries went bankrupt, proving the timeless adage in aviation that if you want to make a small fortune from your aircraft design, then start with a much larger fortune.

In the intervening years, composite aircraft construction has greatly improved, to the point that all commercial airliners are now mostly composites by weight. Burt Rutan's series of mold-less GFRP composite airframes were capable of marginally improved speed and range at weights and power output levels below what was achievable using all-Aluminum airframes. His CFRP airframes were even more performant than their all-Aluminum contemporaries. Much of this was attributable to the aerodynamics improvements that Burt Rutan, his team at Scaled Composites, and the aerodynamicist John Roncz were able to achieve with truck loads of investment money provided by the US Air Force, primary defense contractors, and private investors. The basic airframe designs were also quite good at maximizing strength for a given weight, with a keen eye to the practical ability to fabricate composite parts with minimal tooling. Similarly, Windecker Industries had lots of US Air Force money backing it. As GW already noted, the composite airframe parts used in radomes and antenna fairings, prior to the advent of all-composite airframes in 1970s were comparatively low complexity, small, and absurdly expensive. Such parts are still far more expensive than sheet metal equivalents today, on account of the energy and labor required to produce them. They're not things that can be thrown away or recycled every few years because the owner wants something new. Steel foams and honeycomb structures offer a more practical weight compromise between composites or light alloys, while maintaining ease of recycling, as compared to traditional thicker and heavier sheet metal stampings.

A good analog for the 4-seat all-composite Windecker Eagle is the 6-seat all-Aluminum Piper Piper PA-32 Cherokee Six. Both airframes are equipped with 300hp class Continental IO-520 or Lycoming IO-540 engines. Piper delivered 7,842 PA-32 airframes between 1965 and 2007. The Cherokee Six is 36mph slower than the Eagle at cruise speed and has a range of 840 miles vs 1,232 miles, but the PA-32-300LD (Low-Drag variant of the PA-32; only one built) proved that the airframe could achieve significantly greater range and a higher cruise speed if additional cost was devoted to the airframe structures. This was deemed uneconomical, so it wasn't pursued. The retractable gear Piper PA-32R Saratoga has a cruise speed that's only 24mph slower than the Eagle, is a 7-seat airframe, has a 200 pound increased max gross weight, and a range of 1,007 miles. The real story here is that 1950s-era all-Aluminum airframes were considerably more capable than all-GFRP airframes built 20 to 40 years later when equipped with the same types of power plants. The Saratoga also has a 94 gallon fuel capacity vs the Eagle's 86 gallon fuel capacity.

The modern fixed gear all-composite 4-seat Cirrus SR22 achieves equivalent range and speed equivalent to the Windecker Eagle, equivalent fuel burn and max gross weight as the retractable gear Piper Saratoga, but has only 200 miles of additional range. The SR22 has been the best-selling GA aircraft, every single year, since 2003. For light aircraft that fly at 250mph or less, retractable gear can often be significantly heavier than fixed gear (the Piper PA-32 vs PA-32R represents a 200 pound weight increase) and provide only marginal aerodynamic and therefore range improvements. Basically, any affordable airframe and power plant combination that is not propelled by very large and heavy WWII era radials, or is multi-engined, or is equipped with a turboprop, is what the wisdom of fixed gear applies to. You can't legally fly faster than 250 knots below 10,000 feet anyway. Oddly enough, that slippery SR22 also uses a John Roncz airfoil design. That should demonstrate just how "tight" the design space is for a 300hp 4-seat to 7-seat aircraft. The SR22 is "only" about double the cost of an all-Aluminum airframe with only slightly less performance. You have to get deep into 6-seat to 12-seat turboprop territory before the strength-to-weight ratio of autoclaved CFRP composites provides enough of a weight advantage over Aluminum to truly justify the cost. In lighter / slower aircraft with fewer seats, the weight of most composite aircraft built with sufficient structural margin for certification generally makes them as heavy as Aluminum.

The fixed gear SR22 has a substantially higher empty weight than the retractable gear PA-32R Saratoga, specifically because the strength margins required to certify a small composite airframe cause it to be every bit as heavy as an Aluminum airframe with similar range and speed. The only real advantage is the ability to do compound curves using composites, as the Aluminum in very light aircraft is too thin for that. The SR22's airframe is crazy strong, no doubt about that, but that's because it has to be to pass certification. Only 80 pounds of the 292 pounds of increased weight over the PA-32R is due to the CAPS ballistic airframe parachute system installed.

The automotive-applicable aspect of all this talk about composite aircraft design is the simple fact that the new Cirrus SR22 is a four-seat flying vehicle with a 300hp gasoline engine happens to have roughly the same empty weight as an all-steel Chrysler 4-seat compact car from the 1960s that still has more interior volume than most modern full size sedans made today, with an all-cast-iron slant 6 engine tuned to make around 300hp at peak output, not continuous as in the case of the IO-550N that powers the SR22, naturally aspirated. The car in question was restored / modified by a YouTuber / shade tree mechanic who calls himself Uncle Tony, of the Uncle Tony's Garage YouTube channel.

If a shade tree mechanic with hand tools can figure out how to make an all-steel chassis as light as a SR22 yet capable of a similar top speed, then let's start rounding up guys like him to help engineers design a practical / affordable / maintainable all-steel vehicle that doesn't require a monster engine with high fuel consumption. Uncle Tony made the hood / trunk / frame rails look like the Aluminum ribs of an aircraft wing, for example, to make them light but stiff. The unibody chassis technology is here to stay, so let's make the most of steel and existing aerospace fabrication methods to come up with light but strong steel structures that allow us to use, in this case, a 225 cubic inch slant six that produces as much output as a 550 cubic inch flat six.

This is clearly achievable using 1960s sheet steel and cast iron construction, so the combination of modern steel foam or honeycomb sandwich panels and compacted graphitic iron engine block / head technology will allow us to arrive near light aircraft empty weights in passenger vehicles, with spritely performance provided by much smaller displacement engines. The other part of the key to weight reduction is simplicity, which includes manual steering, shifting, windows. If the car doesn't have electric windows or infinitely variable electronic transmission, then there's no motors to add both weight and cost to the finished product. If you want an infotainment system, then buy an iPad.

tahanson43206 · 2021-05-02 06:59:49

For kbd512 re #56

SearchTerm:Analysis of materials, energy costs, performance and other factors for automobiles vs aircraft

Comment: Nice to see mention of Uncle Tony !!!

(th)

kbd512 · 2021-05-08 12:04:11

As of right now, we're experiencing a severe global chip shortage due to the COVID-19 lockdowns that included both global shutdowns of chip fab facilities, along with the rest of the upstream supply chain infrastructure, compounded by retooling of existing manufacturing lines to produce more profitable consumer electronics chips that were / are still in high demand. There is also a fresh water shortage, and the semiconductor industry requires copious quantities of water to produce the chips in everything from refrigerators to spacecraft. The auto makers use specialized or older chips based upon older fabrication processes, and these chips are produced at lower volumes than consumer electronics chips as a result, so the automotive specialty chips incur longer production lead times in addition to higher production costs.

Some auto manufacturers have switched back to using analog gauges in their vehicles and removing nice but unnecessary features, such as infotainment systems, back-up cameras, and other computerized vehicle options / accessories. By volume, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (TSM) and China produce the majority of these chips. Both TSM and China have prioritized manufacturing of automotive chips, but resuming manufacturing is not like hitting a light switch. It’s not possible to go from a dead stop to full output. TSM says it wants to fill the backlog by June, but the automotive manufacturers have stated that that is a highly ambitious timeline and they expect chip shortages well into 2022, and possibly beyond.

The reason that there are so many barges loaded with thousands of vehicles sitting just offshore is that none of them can even start their engines, so it’s not possible to move them off the barges without external power. Despite being complete in every other respect, these vehicles are effectively very expensive bricks without their chips. The automotive manufacturers have begun shutting down production lines and laying off workers because they can’t make any new cars that can leave the factory under their own power.

We went to the Cadillac dealership yesterday to return my wife’s XT5 lease vehicle. For the first time in the years we’ve been there, the lot is no longer full of cars. There’s a mix of older models, the remaining inventory of newer models, and a growing number of empty parking spaces. Since we have switched over to working at home, we no longer need two vehicles. We still have our Cadillac Escalade, which has enough room for the kids, dog, and groceries. Our “big car” is driven a handful of miles each week, mostly to take our kids to and from school, to buy groceries, and doctors visits for my wife.

From roadside observation, the car lots of the other nearby dealerships are also noticeably emptying out. Some of the car dealerships have started parking the cars sideways in the parking spaces, which is slightly humorous. There’s no hiding what’s going on. It should go without saying that absent inventory, you can’t have car dealerships.

tahanson43206 · 2021-05-08 12:38:57

For kbd512 re #58

First, thanks for this update on the state of the chip industry in general, and the automotive segment in particular.

Two thoughts came to mind ...

Second (a) This ** might ** provide an opportunity for the domestic chip industry to rebuild itself ...

I get the impression there might be some government support for an initiative to pull selected product lines out of China (in particular)

Second (b) This is a stretch ... but there ** is ** a Mars connection (indirect, I'll admit) ...

The first new member since the Great Spammer Lockdown is marc.

You posted at least once (as I recall) in his topic that SpaceNut called Microprocessors ...

Marc's design is actually a minicomputer, based upon (relatively) simple chips ...

My guess is that automobiles don't need state-of-the-art speed to manage the hardware in modern vehicles.

Self-navigation is a separate arena, and for that state-of-the-art chips would appear to be mandatory.

Marc's mentioned interest in securing funding for his work ...

Not sure if there's anything to the (b) connection, but there might be something going for it

(th)

Last edited by tahanson43206 (2021-05-08 12:39:40)

kbd512 · 2021-05-08 14:14:13

tahanson43206,

Marc can continue obtain funding through grants if that's the way he wants to do it, but he could also draft a proposal to domestic automakers to use SRAM technology to control vehicle systems and accessories. It'd be nice to have a need-based use case scenario for the hardware he's developing to solidify the requirement for such hardware in industry. The use of older / specialty hardware that doesn't have any other uses is not a good operating model when there are supply constraints. The major manufacturers would likely be skeptical at first, but if shortages shut them down long enough, then they'll "see the light". Governments are already talking about spending tens of billions of dollars to open locally-based chip fabs to prevent this sort of situation from occurring again.

Another pandemic or mutation of COVID-19 or a major war could bring automotive manufacturing to a screeching halt for lack of required technology. The automotive specialty chips are already more expensive than consumer electronics chips, so it would make more sense to adapt commodity hardware in generalized use across multiple industries. Most consumers would also appreciate the security aspects of his designs if the benefits of his technology were appropriately marketed to them without delving too far into the technical details. Anyway, the total computing power is rather low and the required processing speeds, even for engine and transmission control, are pretty modest, so this is a very good "first practical application" of his designs and ideas.

Very highly integrated System-on-Chip designs like Apple's M1 chips will likely continue their domination of the consumer electronics market, but the automotive and aircraft control systems markets can (and already have, by virtue of the chips they use) justify increased hardware costs for their comparatively simplistic computerized devices, provided that some kind of tangential benefits exist for the manufacturers, such as assurance of chip supplies, lower error rates, improved system security for systems that use bi-directional communication (cars and aircraft that exchange information with other vehicles and/or control towers, which provides an entry point for malicious code), etc.

In a recent interview by Sandy Munro (an automotive engineer), Elon said their AI-based autonomous driving app is only a few hundred thousand lines of code, and that both he and other engineers saw having fewer lines of code as having greater benefits than more. This seems to indicate that even outwardly complex control systems are not over-the-top complicated. Over the span of six months or so, I've written a few apps with several hundred thousand lines of code in them. I've also taken apps with that much (repetitive) code behind them and distilled them down to a few tens of thousands of lines of code, but that process took more than a year to accomplish. Just to be clear, these were business apps, not real time control systems.

A good example of how even extremely complex software like the software that controls the F-35 is more a function of system usage than anything else. Of the tens of millions of lines of code, nearly all of it is devoted to the radar, multi-spectral electro-optical suite, electronic counter-measures, and weapon systems. Very little of that mass of code is devoted to manipulation of the flight control surfaces and engine. Most of the engine control software is devoted to diagnostics interfaces and recording of operating data, not control of the engine itself. This would seem to indicate that these human-safety critical control systems are good candidates for SRAM-based computing technology, whereas the radar and sensors might benefit from having an appropriately protected and domestically manufactured M1 chip doing the processing and rendering of sensor information to the pilot. M1 appears to be an extremely potent little number cruncher and graphics rendering solution that is very efficient at using electrical power and RAM. I'd wager that a single M1 could run every system aboard the F-35 with ease, not that we'd want a general purpose chip controlling the airframe and engine of a machine that can receive and install mid-flight software updates.

Anyway, I see SRAM-based computers as an "in conjunction with" control solution that increases protection of safety-critical systems and allows commodity hardware to make sense of the sea of data created by ever-more-sophisticated sensor suites that provide operating environment details to the engineers for after-action analysis, but shouldn't directly override critical control systems.

louis · 2021-05-08 16:17:20

When the President gets 10% from his son's crooked dealings with CCP front companies? I doubt it.

tahanson43206 wrote:

I get the impression there might be some government support for an initiative to pull selected product lines out of China (in particular)

SpaceNut · 2021-05-08 16:44:21

Two very log posts kbd512 but spot on for the US automotive industry current status.....

I did car and truck ecm. pcm ect... computer test code simulating engine running conditions for the remanufacturing industry during the 90's to which I am sure that code I wrote is still in use today.

SpaceNut · 2021-06-12 12:52:00

Biden gifts UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, a cycling enthusiast, an American-made bicycle during his first overseas trip] AAKWZSr.img?h=400&w=799&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=1271&y=238

$6K for a Bike?

Twitter image of bike and helmet
E3lExOTWYAMHXOG?format=jpg&name=360x360

E3lExOUXIAEECyM?format=jpg&name=360x360

You are lucky to find a running car for that which will not break down after a year....

Many of the car dealers have a low inventory of new cars and are selling used cars at a much higher than normal price just to keep the business a float...

Make cheaper bikes...

SpaceNut · 2021-06-12 20:48:40

This Is Why We Don't Have Solar-Powered Cars Using the sun’s energy to power green vehicles seems like a no-brainer.

article for the use of EV's
https://www.yahoo.com/news/getting-poin … 00601.html

Rare earth metals at the heart of China's rivalry with US, Europe

Rare earth minerals with names like neodymium, praseodymium and dysprosium are crucial to the manufacture of magnets used in industries of the future like wind turbines and electric cars.

just another reason for the higher cost....

SpaceNut · 2021-06-18 21:33:29

Renault's mobility unit plans three EVs with modest ranges, aimed at car-sharing and last-mile delivery. AALaXko.img?h=401&w=799&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f

Well that's not what I want it for....

sbarro-twike295.jpg?zoom=2&resize=640%2C400

https://www.electricbike.com/the-twike-challenge/

twikesnow.jpg?w=400&ssl=1

Mars_B4_Moon · 2021-07-14 10:07:31

Chasing Tesla: how traditional carmakers are revving up their electric vehicle production
https://www.schroders.com/br/insights/e … roduction/

Tesla captures nearly half of Korean electric vehicle market
https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News … 626204342/

SpaceNut · 2021-07-14 21:25:01

Most people use a vehicle for less than a 2 hr period each day with the government reimbursement being

Beginning on January 1, 2021, the standard mileage rates for the use of a car (also vans, pickups or panel trucks) will be: 56 cents per mile for business miles driven, down 1.5 cents from the 2020 rate. 16 cents per mile driven for medical* or moving purposes, down 1 cent from the 2020 rate.

7 x 2 x 60 = 840 miles for the week x 0.56 = $470 only if we could all get that to spend on a new car we would if that was what we could afford. but most of us spend closer to 15% on fuel and maintenance…

SpaceNut · 2021-07-21 19:58:59

The discussions of not only how to repair or replace but the means to not remove complete assemblies is also quite trying let alone having the room to do it so that you do not need to make the removal of the assembly the only options in repair.
Next is the testing to assure that the work you do will take care of the problems which one might be having as even the gasket and head issues would not have found the other issues since its not running correctly to aid in the isolation of other items as its running rough from the gasket or head issues.

SpaceNut · 2021-07-24 18:58:28

I have been thinking of the how to build an EV that is based off from the much lighter bicycle and then I see that we now have an interest in the electric bikes.
The Senate’s E-BIKE Act could make electric bikes a lot cheaper

A bill that would offer Americans a refundable tax credit on the purchase of a new electric bicycle was just introduced in the Senate by Ed Markey (D-MA) and Brian Schatz (D-HI). The bill is called the Electric Bicycle Incentive Kickstart for the Environment, or E-BIKE Act for short, and it’s the companion bill to one introduced in the House of Representatives earlier this year.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/2/24/2229 … blumenauer
E-bikes are more expensive than normal bikes, typically costing anywhere from $1,000 to $8,000 for some of the more high-end models. But they also have the potential to replace car trips for a lot of people, with a recent study finding that if 15 percent of car trips were made by e-bike, carbon emissions would drop by 12 percent.
“the electrification of transportation is not just about cars”
This afternoon, I conducted a brief interview with Senator Schatz over text message to get a sense of the legislation’s goals, its chances in Congress, and whether he himself would ever consider buying an e-bike. (He said no, but I think I got him to reconsider.)
“The idea is simple,” Schatz said, “the electrification of transportation is not just about cars, it’s about every way to get around.”
At its core, the bill is about accessibility, the senator said. More people should be riding e-bikes than just those who can afford them. Driving is already highly subsidized across the country. We build cheap — often free — areas for parking, we invest in highways, drivers don’t pay for congestion or CO2 emissions, and zoning laws and taxes favor sprawl. We need to start accommodating bikes — and especially e-bikes — if we want more people to switch to greener forms of transportation.
“The bill makes a clean alternative more accessible to more people,” Schatz said. “E-bikes make lots of sense for working people, young people, and others who either cannot afford or don’t want a car.”
Much like the House bill, Schatz and Markey’s legislation would offer Americans a refundable tax credit worth 30 percent of a new e-bike’s purchase price, capped at $1,500. All three e-bike classes would be eligible for the tax credit, but bikes with motors more powerful than 750W would not. The credit would also be fully refundable, which would allow lower-income individuals to claim it.
A common refrain you hear from critics of this legislation is that people won’t switch to bikes without safer infrastructure to support it
A common refrain you hear from critics of this legislation is that people won’t switch to bikes without safer infrastructure to support it. Protected bike lanes are still in short supply in the US, and it’s unclear whether a surge in demand for e-bikes would necessarily lead to better policy decisions on the local level.
Schatz said there needs to be a “major infusion of physical infrastructure for bike lanes and safe streets” for this bill to have the desirable outcome, which is more people switching from cars to e-bikes. There is $20 billion in President Biden’s infrastructure proposal for safe street improvements, which include bike lanes. But whether that money survives in the final deal — if there is a final deal — remains to be seen.
“I’m optimistic,” Schatz said about the potential passage of the E-BIKE Act, “but this overall package will face multiple near-death experiences before it becomes law. We plan to get it through in the coming package, but if we don’t, we will keep pushing.”
The House version of the bill has 21 co-sponsors — all Democrats — while the Senate version is just now making the rounds. But Schatz said he doesn’t think it will be a tough sell with his colleagues.
“We anticipate that we will be able to build momentum for this”
“We anticipate that we will be able to build momentum for this,” he said. “It’s one of those rare ideas that is both revolutionary and noncontroversial.”
And while Schatz said he’s only tried riding an e-bike once, while on vacation, and doesn’t have any immediate plans to buy one for himself, he would reconsider, given his newly acquired position as an advocate for this mode of transportation.
Capital Bikeshare in Washington, DC, has a number of pedal-assist e-bikes in rotation. Just sayin’.

Most roads are dangerous enough for motor cycles and the typical bicycle rider is not aware that they are considered part of the motor vehicle use of roads. That a different set of rules apply to night time use and that most roads prohibit use.

SpaceNut · 2021-07-24 19:33:41

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-con … xt?r=1&s=1

CLASS 1 ELECTRIC BICYCLE.—The term ‘class 1 electric bicycle’ means a two-wheeled vehicle equipped with an electric motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, that is not capable of providing assistance when the speed of the vehicle exceeds 20 miles per hour, and that is not a class 3 electric bicycle.
CLASS 2 ELECTRIC BICYCLE.—The term ‘class 2 electric bicycle’ means a two-wheeled vehicle equipped with an electric motor that may be used to propel the vehicle without the need of any additional assistance, and that is not capable of providing assistance when the speed of the vehicle exceeds 20 miles per hour.
CLASS 3 ELECTRIC BICYCLE.—The term ‘class 3 electric bicycle’ means a two-wheeled vehicle equipped with an electric motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that is not capable of providing assistance when the speed of the vehicle exceeds 28 miles per hour.”.

Now that we call them a motor vehicle its only natural that others want to now make you get insurance.

Requires liability insurance for bicycles, bicycles with electric assist and electric scooters

tahanson43206 · 2021-07-24 19:54:27

For SpaceNut ... your post #70 helped me to remember that we have NOT included insurance in My Hacienda, but spreading of risk is a characteristic of an advanced society. Thanks!

This topic is about "Fixing America's car Industry" ... hmmm.... I'll be back after checking the opening post.

Well! This topic was created by RobertDyck ... here is his opening paragraph:

Before Tesla started business, I looked at producing a kit to convert old cars to electric. Was thinking in-wheel electric motors, which rotate once per wheel rotation. That means no transmission, no differential. The differential is electronic. Full time 4 wheel drive. Was thinking of hydrogen fuel cell, but today's battery technology could do all electric. There are charging stations now, but almost no hydrogen fuel stations.

Is is fair to ask if there is an electric conversion kit for the Subaru 2008 Outback? There sure were a lot of those vehicles sold in the US (per reports of sales by year). If you were to settle for 30 miles an hour and distance of 60 miles round trip, such a kit might serve reliably for many years, with only the occasional battery swap to keep it going. There would be NO complication with air quality certification.

(th)

Last edited by tahanson43206 (2021-07-24 19:59:42)

SpaceNut · 2021-08-02 20:46:12

The coversion is quite expensive and still requires a great deal of know how even when you are given all the right parts to work with.

started to read this article Is DryCycle the Electrically Assisted Car-Bike Thing the World Needs? AAMRinG.img?h=450&w=799&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=2048&y=1152 but after a few lines I realized that it was nothing more than a rich persons toy and not really designed for the task its expected to perform in commuting.

The DryCycle isn't self-propelled. Instead, the rider—er, occupant—pedals the vehicle forward, receiving an assist from an electric Shimano hub motor fed by a 1-kW battery pack, just like your typical e-bike. Top speed is limited to 25 kph, or just under 16 mph, and when fully charged, the DryCycle can deliver up to 50 miles of pedaling assist.

conforms to electric bike laws

The starting price for all this bike-tastic car-adjacent enjoyment?So far the DryCycle is only being offered, it seems, in Europe, where it retails for £14,995—or nearly $21,000 at current exchange rates. While it's true that many e-bikes cost thousands of dollars and don't shield you from the rain or let you sit in a carlike position, you could—hear us out—choose from among a (shrinking) number of affordable cars for similar money. Whether the savings in insurance, registration, and gas costs are worth it, or you've just gotta have the sort of maneuverability and freedom to weave through stopped traffic like a bicycle might, is up to you.

buy a car at that price as its a modified bike and not a car....

Calliban · 2021-08-03 05:00:56

SpaceNut, this sort of compact velomobile is more likely to be affordable to most people than a Tesla. But it needs to be produced in volume to bring the price down. A small vehicle of this type, with a battery of just a few kWh, is supportable by the electric grid as well.

SpaceNut · 2021-08-03 18:59:34

Ther bike and any combination of wheeled pedal powered are considered to be a motor vehicle in most states due to drunks so an operators license is required once you reach that magical 16 to 18 year old and above. They are only treated as a pedestrian rule set if you are walking the ride.

The license for a plate is required when a motor of any type is greater than 300w for most states still require you to have the drivers license for any 2 or 3 wheeled with 4 seemingly needing a plate. With any power levels exceeding the state limit in the give or take 500w will required to have a license plate to use on the roadways.

The roads of NH are posted low 25 mph for inner city town speeds would make you an obstacle for motorists and quite unsafe in the roadways with no bike lanes, while as you go further from the urban centers on rural roads going upward to 40 ish mph with narrow shoulders or no breakdown lane for you to ride safely in. With the major roads being in that 40 to 55 mph area for speed with full lanes for use.

The highways and toll roads are limited to no mopeds or pedestrians with a vehicle towing a trailer having a speed of 45 with regular vehicles maxing somewhere in the 70 mph for the most part.

So at least with a protective shell like the velomobile one would want a minimum max speed of 45 just to utilize the roads to the probable level for commuting.

kbd512 · 2021-08-04 06:46:55

SpaceNut,

Maybe we have to build it ourselves, provide the plans for free, and tell everyone where they can source the lowest cost materials from. We need to come up with something that is low cost, sturdy enough to survive a serious impact with a much larger and heavier vehicle, yet still provides good handling and acceleration. It's going to use an internal combustion engine out of necessity until battery technology improves, just not one of the behemoths powering the current crop of feature-bloated trucks and SUVs that have so much money spent on everything except being a durable and reliable vehicle.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#51 2021-04-29 20:23:00

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#52 2021-04-30 21:18:39

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#53 2021-04-30 22:05:35

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#54 2021-05-01 06:43:10

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#55 2021-05-01 07:06:51

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#56 2021-05-01 19:21:33

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#57 2021-05-02 06:59:49

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#58 2021-05-08 12:04:11

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#59 2021-05-08 12:38:57

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#60 2021-05-08 14:14:13

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#61 2021-05-08 16:17:20

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#62 2021-05-08 16:44:21

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#63 2021-06-12 12:52:00

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#64 2021-06-12 20:48:40

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#65 2021-06-18 21:33:29

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#66 2021-07-14 10:07:31

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#67 2021-07-14 21:25:01

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#68 2021-07-21 19:58:59

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#69 2021-07-24 18:58:28

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#70 2021-07-24 19:33:41

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#71 2021-07-24 19:54:27

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#72 2021-08-02 20:46:12

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#73 2021-08-03 05:00:56

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#74 2021-08-03 18:59:34

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

#75 2021-08-04 06:46:55

Re: Fixing Americas car industry

Board footer