rainnw
Posts: 283
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 10:26 am
Delivery Date: 26 Jun 2015
Location: Seattle

Re: Range- 100 mile versus 200 mile

Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:32 pm

Tesla roasters have all sorts of faster charging rates than we have. I almost want to say there is a "fast" charge mode around 90 amps @ 240, but i am not entirely sure.

I really don't think an extended range battery is in the best interest of Nissan. There is room for a larger pack (I believe it can physically hold more without too much complication), but I do not think folks will like the price at this point.

Check out the Tesla S:

$50k base price for "160 miles"
+$10k for 230 mile option
+20k for 300 mile option

Can you imagine putting a $20k option on a heavily modded $37k Nissan Versa? Not to mention how much of a pig the thing would be afterwards. Just the thought of it makes me want to put down for a Tesla S reservation.
Ordered 11/24/2010 (November)
Delivered: 5/28/2011
Red SL-e, ECO package, cargo, splashguards
Commute: 75 miles round trip (60 miles highway, 15 side roads)
miles: 45,000 miles
Charge daily to 100%, lost 1st bar at 43k

http://www.chargesticker.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

GRA
Posts: 12067
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Range- 100 mile versus 200 mile

Sat Oct 15, 2011 2:45 pm

drees wrote:
planet4ever wrote:My two rules are:
  1. Plug it in if I'm down to 6 bars or less.
  2. Charge to 100% (regardless of bars left) only if I think I might be driving more than 50 miles the next day.
Very similar to me. Key is that 99% of the time I'm charging to 80%. Much better for efficiency overall as well since you get maximum regen from the start. Not having maximum regen for me can really hurt efficiency for me especially as I live on a small hill. And others have noted that since the charge rate slows down near the end when charging to 100% that also seems to lead to less efficiency.

Personally, I would love to have enough capacity to drive 115 miles at 65 mph with the A/C on in moderate temperatures. Of course - that would mean another 50% battery capacity - about 36 kWh rather than 24. Since I make that trip so infrequently - I would settle for another 20-25% range which would let me go closer 90+ miles at highway speeds without worry.

Edit: Of course as garygid also says - a couple well placed QC stations would also make a world of a difference - In most of my scenarios which I might want a larger pack 5-15 minute QC would solve the problem and avoid lugging around another 25-50% more battery 98% of the time when I don't need it.
Having no need for a city or commute car (walking/bicycling takes care of those for me), I think it's time for the EV companies to stop quoting ideal ranges with new batteries. Here's how I would spec my personal range requirements:

(T) Threshold = minimum requirement (O) Objective = What to shoot for

Battery at 80% of original battery capacity, to allow for aging:

Interim:
(T) 110 miles (100 + 10 reserve) @ 60 mph, lights/audio on, 32 - 95 deg. F (0-35C), HVAC/Defrosters used to maintain a minimum cabin temp of 65 and a maximum of 75 deg. F, with 450 lb. payload (driver/pax/luggage), <1,000 foot climb, Price $35,000. Example trips: Hayward-Monterey via 880/101/156/1. Hayward-Sacramento via 80 or 580-205-5.

(O) 165 miles (150 + 15 res.) @ 75 mph (or 5 mph > speed limit), lights/audio on, HVAC/Defrosters, 23-114 deg. F (-5 to +45C) at Max. VGW, cabin temp maintained at 70 deg., 4,000 ft climb. (no range credit for descents), Price $25,000. Example trips: Hayward to Tahoe City/Kings Beach or Stateline via I-80 and/or 50, or Lee Vining via 580/205/99/120, with one* L3 charge enroute in the Roseville-Auburn-Colfax, El Dorado Hills-Placerville-Pollock Pines, or Manteca-Oakdale-Crane Flat areas, respectively. Or, with battery exchange, no more than two enroute for the same trips.

*A second, short L3 charge at Crane Flat is acceptable for the Lee Vining trip (max. el. 9,945 ft. at Tioga Pass).


Ultimate:

(T) 265 miles (240 miles + 25 mile reserve) @ speed limit +5 mph, lights/audio on, temp 14-122 deg. F (-10 to +50C) HVAC/defrosters maintain cabin temp at 70 deg. F., 450 lb. payload, 7,500 ft. climb (no range credit for descents), AWD, Price $30,000. Example trip: Hayward to Tahoe or Lee Vining* non-stop (or one battery exchange). *For Lee Vining a short L3 charge enroute is acceptable.

(O) 500 mi (470 + 30 mi. res.) freeway range @ speed limit + 5 mph (Max 75), lights/audio on, temp 0-131 deg. F (-18 to + 55C), HVAC/Defrosters maintain cabin at any set temp between 65-75 deg. F), max. GVW, 7,500 ft. climb, AWD, Price $25,000. Example trips: San Francisco/San Jose to Bishop non-stop via Tioga Pass. S.F. - L.A. non-stop via I-5.
Last edited by GRA on Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

Volusiano
Posts: 1461
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 2:41 pm
Delivery Date: 03 Jun 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Range- 100 mile versus 200 mile

Sat Oct 15, 2011 3:12 pm

I think in the long run, different battery options based on range needed would be available. I also think you would not have to select one option up front and be stuck with it for the rest of your car's life.

I think the easiest model is to keep the battery equation out of the car purchase altogether. You'd buy the car, but you'd lease the battery. This makes the car fully affordable and comparable to or possibly even lower then ICE car prices. Then you can select the battery range option you want to rent, and if you change your mind later, you can simply swap the battery out at the dealer and rent a different one with a different range.

Then over time, the concept of battery swapping stations will be more popular, and you can simply go to one of these stations and automatically swap a smaller battery for a larger one if you need to go on longer trips. Then swap back to a smaller battery after your long trip.

This makes the issue with battery longevity becomes a moot point, too, because you don't own the battery. Bad batteries will be recycled and replaced with good batteries by the manufacturer and the cost of this is factored into the cost of doing business overall. You don't need to worry about 80% or 100% charge anymore either, because with different range options available, all batteries can just be capped at 80% charge automatically by the manufacturer for longevity. If the current battery range option is too short for you, just move to the next range option, instead of worrying about going from 80% to 100% charge.

The battery leasing model is already being offered by Renault in Europe (Sweden)? for some of their cars. The battery swapping model is already being implemented in Sweden and Israel by Better Place. It's too advanced a concept for the US right now because the US is not as committed as Sweden or Israel to EVs to justify the infrastructure cost. But eventually I'm confident the idea will find adoption in the US once there are enough EVs in America for this model to make sense. You guys are already talking about the idea of having different battery range options here in this post, aren't you?

Herm
Posts: 3765
Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 3:08 pm
Delivery Date: 29 Aug 2012
Location: Timbuktu, Mali

Re: Range- 100 mile versus 200 mile

Sat Oct 15, 2011 4:06 pm

Battery leasing is very desirable, here is my reasoning:

1. Choice, you lease as much battery as you want.. you can buy "miles" like in the Project Better Place system.
2. lower cost: manufacturers can afford to use much cheaper cells.. since they dont have to meet the 8-10 years requirements of a personally owned battery pack
3. you will always have the latest tech battery, no worries about charging the battery to 100% and damaging it
4. it opens up the possibility of battery swap systems.. even the temporary lease of a 300 mile pack for the weekend
5. dealers and quick swap stations can use the standby battery packs to provide grid stabilization to the local utility, another revenue stream and allows full utilization of an expensive item.. thus lowering the cost
6. it opens up a used battery market in 3 year old fully depreciated batteries.. to purchase for your home grid or perhaps for your low range Leaf
7. it encourages the development of standardized modular packs, imagine a Ford F150 conversion with two "Leaf Form Factor" standard aftermarket packs
8. removing the cost of the battery out of the purchase decision would speed up electric adoption, it may become the lowest cost car you can buy.. yet it remains eternally new.

User avatar
ElectricVehicle
Posts: 631
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 1:05 pm
Delivery Date: 18 Jul 2011

Re: Range- 100 mile versus 200 mile

Sat Oct 15, 2011 4:21 pm

LKK wrote:I love the idea of a consumer being able to pick and choose the battery that best meets their requirements. Why pay for more range than you really need?

Does anyone know how much power would be needed to charge a 200 mile battery in say 8 or 10 hours and will normal home wiring support this? My guess is it wouldn't take much more than running an electric range, so I would think it possible.
Take 200 mile range in 8 hours. Use 3.3 miles/kWh which is 70 mph constant speed on the highway. Many people will do better than 3.3 mi/kWh, some will use a little more energy. Range-Speed-Bars Thumb Rule Table These numbers are a bit conservative - shorter charging time, higher energy consumption per mile. Some people with low speed commutes and good driving techniques are achieving 5+ mi/kWh.

200 miles / 3.3 miles/kWh = 61 kWh energy to travel 200 miles.

61 kWh / 8 hours = 7.6 kW
7.6 kW / 220V = 35 A at 220V
(for 10 hour charge: 6.1 kW = 28 A at 220V)

Again using 3.9 mi/kWh - 60 mph constant speed:
200 miles / 3.9 miles/kWh = 51 kWh energy to travel 200 miles.
51 kWh / 8 hours = 6.4 kW
6.4 kW / 220V = 29 A at 220V
(for 10 hour charge: 5.4 kW = 25 A at 220V)

These calculations do not account for charger or battery charging efficiency, so that would add around 15% to either the time or power level, but it's close enough...

A standard 6.6 kW charger would do just fine with a 9 or 10 hour charging window. You can think of a 6.6 kW charger as charging at a rate of about 25 LEAF miles/hour of charging. The 2014 LEAF is coming standard with a 6.6 kW charger based on current knowledge. The 200 mile battery pack is another question, though with some deployment of Quick Charge stations in late 2011, 2012, 2013 we'll get more utility out of our current 100 LEAF miles pack.
Blue Nissan Leaf SL+QC rsrvd 4/21/10 order 11/24/10 delivered 5/29/11 (Apr May Jun Jul Jun May Jun) Polar Bear Hug 12/11/2010
1999 Green GM EV1, 7.2kW Solar Electric (PV); 2002 RAV4 EV; Carbon Neutral since 2010
It's time to LEAF! LEAF Oil behind!

GRA
Posts: 12067
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Range- 100 mile versus 200 mile

Sun Oct 16, 2011 4:03 pm

Volusiano wrote:I think in the long run, different battery options based on range needed would be available. I also think you would not have to select one option up front and be stuck with it for the rest of your car's life.

I think the easiest model is to keep the battery equation out of the car purchase altogether. You'd buy the car, but you'd lease the battery. This makes the car fully affordable and comparable to or possibly even lower then ICE car prices. Then you can select the battery range option you want to rent, and if you change your mind later, you can simply swap the battery out at the dealer and rent a different one with a different range.

Then over time, the concept of battery swapping stations will be more popular, and you can simply go to one of these stations and automatically swap a smaller battery for a larger one if you need to go on longer trips. Then swap back to a smaller battery after your long trip.

This makes the issue with battery longevity becomes a moot point, too, because you don't own the battery. Bad batteries will be recycled and replaced with good batteries by the manufacturer and the cost of this is factored into the cost of doing business overall. You don't need to worry about 80% or 100% charge anymore either, because with different range options available, all batteries can just be capped at 80% charge automatically by the manufacturer for longevity. If the current battery range option is too short for you, just move to the next range option, instead of worrying about going from 80% to 100% charge.

The battery leasing model is already being offered by Renault in Europe (Sweden)? for some of their cars. The battery swapping model is already being implemented in Sweden and Israel by Better Place. It's too advanced a concept for the US right now because the US is not as committed as Sweden or Israel to EVs to justify the infrastructure cost. But eventually I'm confident the idea will find adoption in the US once there are enough EVs in America for this model to make sense. You guys are already talking about the idea of having different battery range options here in this post, aren't you?
I agree that battery leasing and exchange is extremely desirable, but both that and charging stations require expensive infrastructure investments (and design standardization for exchange), so I expect it will be 15-20 years before we get the kind of ubiquity that gas stations have. I think there's about a 5 year window for battery prices to drop enough that BEVs will sell for the same as ICEs, because if they can only be sold through incentives the market's unsustainable. As it is, Hybrids have never taken more than 3% of the market, and now that incentives and perks like single-occupancy HOV-lane use have disappeared they're below 2%.

I'm surprised that Nissan choose to go with a 5 passenger car as their first EV; I'd think that the best way to get large numbers of batteries out there and get the price down would be via inexpensive 2-passenger (or 2+2) city/commuter cars like the Smart or (more likely) the Scion iQ/Think City. $10-15,000 is the price range I think it will take.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

User avatar
TonyWilliams
Posts: 10091
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:48 am
Location: San Diego
Contact: Website

Re: Range- 100 mile versus 200 mile

Sun Oct 16, 2011 6:26 pm

GRA wrote:I'm surprised that Nissan choose to go with a 5 passenger car as their first EV; I'd think that the best way to get large numbers of batteries out there and get the price down would be via inexpensive 2-passenger (or 2+2) city/commuter cars like the Smart or (more likely) the Scion iQ/Think City. $10-15,000 is the price range I think it will take.
Thankfully for me, they didn't. I don't want a tiny car. I'd prefer one a bit bigger.

GRA
Posts: 12067
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Range- 100 mile versus 200 mile

Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:54 pm

TonyWilliams wrote:
GRA wrote:I'm surprised that Nissan choose to go with a 5 passenger car as their first EV; I'd think that the best way to get large numbers of batteries out there and get the price down would be via inexpensive 2-passenger (or 2+2) city/commuter cars like the Smart or (more likely) the Scion iQ/Think City. $10-15,000 is the price range I think it will take.
Thankfully for me, they didn't. I don't want a tiny car. I'd prefer one a bit bigger.
Good for you. But I suspect the typical market demographic has more use for a 2nd car for commuting/errands than they do for a family urban car. Apparently the average Leaf buyer is 45-55, with either an environmental or techie background. They'd need to skew a fair bit younger to need to haul kids around frequently to school/sports practice and what have you. If they're regularly hauling friends around town, the Leaf may be just the ticket.

I'm glad to see that Car2Go plans to put 300 Smart EDs in rental service; I suspect that will introduce more people to EVs quicker than any other method (and be the best use of them).

Off topic, a friend of mine spotted and photographed what I believe is one of the Smart EV pre-production vehicles in Monterey about a month or so ago. It was black and silver and sporting BMW badges ('000'), but comparing it to photos of the basic Smart it appeared to be identical. Fortunately, it appears that they realized that they'd need more accel and a higher top speed for the 3rd-gen. production vehicle. 40 hp, 23+ sec. 0-60 and 63 mph top speed just doesn't cut it for a commuter car that will probably have to merge and cruise on freeways. 71 hp, 13 sec. 0-60 and 75 mph is more like it. Now all they need to do is change the designation from Smart 'ED' to something else, because otherwise people will be calling it the 'Viagra'! :roll:
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

User avatar
abasile
Posts: 1922
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 10:49 am
Delivery Date: 20 Apr 2011
Location: Arrowbear Lake, CA

Re: Range- 100 mile versus 200 mile

Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:48 pm

The size of the LEAF is perfect for us. We have two younger children, and it is our main family car. For our day-to-day use, the current range is more than enough. We just need some QCs for longer trips. For us, using QC would be more economical than a larger battery pack.
2011 LEAF at 71K miles, pre-owned 2012 Tesla S 85 at 98K miles
LEAF battery: 9/12 bars and < 49 Ah (-28% vs. new)
Tesla battery: 250+ miles of range (-5% vs. new)

Herm
Posts: 3765
Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 3:08 pm
Delivery Date: 29 Aug 2012
Location: Timbuktu, Mali

Re: Range- 100 mile versus 200 mile

Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:50 pm

GRA wrote: Good for you. But I suspect the typical market demographic has more use for a 2nd car for commuting/errands than they do for a family urban car. Apparently the average Leaf buyer is 45-55, with either an environmental or techie background.
You are describing a limited niche market, and the reason 2 seaters have always failed in the US.. for electric cars to be massively successful they have to be low cost, with perhaps a 2 year payback, and be able to carry 4-5 passengers. These are the minimum requirements for success... Electric cars are already saddled with the low range problem, no need to pile on more issues on top.

I'm not sure what the range requirements are, but we will know in a few years.

Return to “Suggestions for Nissan”