0 - 60

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
efusco said:
Assuming that the available power and capability of the motor can give you a 0-60 of 8 sec., Nissan's testing might show that "normal" drivers tend to accelerate hard enough that it has a negative impact on real world range. Negative press about range could kill this car before it gets started. If reports start surfacing of people running out of juice at 60 miles Nissan will have a serious problem after "promising" 100 mile range.

So, if they govern the acceleration rate to 'encourage' drivers to drive more conservatively and thus are better able to stretch the range close to the 100 mile mark that's one issue they don't have to worry about.

I think it'll be a balancing act...and others here may be right that 15 seconds is too long, but 12 seconds or so may be where the compromise comes. It really depends upon what Nissan decides to do I think.
Click to expand...
This is the best argument I've seen yet for waiting a year before buying the car! I don't want the manufacturer deciding for me that I mustn't accelerate hard! As a long-time EV driver, I KNOW that hard acceleration shortens range, and gentle acceleration extends range. I want to have the CHOICE whether to spend some of my range on acceleration. Driving the car constantly hard is a bad idea. But having the capacity enables safer merging.

Instead of limiting acceleration, they should teach drivers what kind of driving will enable them to achieve 100 miles.

Actually, I don't expect that they will limit acceleration merely to extend range. They've made it clear that the 100 mile range is based specifically and uniquely on the LA<whatever-it-is> test protocol.
 
KarenRei said:
Re, energy used for hard accel:

1) Motor efficiency varies, and it's hard to make any generalizations. Depending on the situation, a high torque accel may actually be *more* efficient than a slow one. Or less. You need the brake-specific energy consumption data for the powertrain.
2) Battery pack efficiency does drop with increased currents, but for li-ion, that drop is very small.
3) In terms of energy used, the laws of physics don't care whether you go from 0-60 in 2 seconds or 20 -- excepting that in 2 seconds, you'll have 18 more seconds of the sort of aerodynamic drag you get at high speeds ;)
Click to expand...

daniel said:
This runs counter to my experience with my Zap Xebra and also counter to my experience with my electric Porsche (during the short time I was driving it -- long story).
Click to expand...

I'll repeat, with bold:

KarenRei said:
2) Battery pack efficiency does drop with increased currents, but for li-ion, that drop is very small.
Click to expand...

I don't know what your electric Porsche was like, but the Xebra is lead-acid. Lead-acid batteries suffer from something called Peukert's Law -- the faster you draw them down, the less you can get from them. This isn't nearly as significant with li-ion.

Also as mentioned, if you accel faster in city driving, you may expose yourself to braking more or driving more at higher speeds. Both of these will reduce range, but are not a requisite element of fast accel. There's an additional illusory aspect: if you're watching your current, you'll see it spike up much higher on hard accels. However, this is largely just an illusion, as you're using more current for a correspondingly shorter period of time.

E=1/2 * m * v^2, no matter how fast you get to v.
 
KarenRei said:
KarenRei said:
Re, energy used for hard accel:

[...]
2) Battery pack efficiency does drop with increased currents, but for li-ion, that drop is very small.

daniel said:
This runs counter to my experience with my Zap Xebra and also counter to my experience with my electric Porsche (during the short time I was driving it -- long story).
Click to expand...
I'll repeat, with bold:

KarenRei said:
2) Battery pack efficiency does drop with increased currents, but for li-ion, that drop is very small.
Click to expand...
I don't know what your electric Porsche was like, but the Xebra is lead-acid. [...]

Also as mentioned, if you accel faster in city driving, you may expose yourself to braking more or driving more at higher speeds. [...]
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
My Xebra has an aftermarket LiFePO4 battery pack, and the Porsche has the same (just more of them). And while I stomp on the go pedal if I am not concerned about range (i.e. my trip is well within my range) I almost never stomp on the brake unless a light turns yellow when I am very near the intersection.

You obviously know what you are talking about and are very educated. Electrical engineer maybe? I appreciate your insights. Your posts are very knowledgeable and useful. I'm just reporting my experience with my two EVs. I've been driving the Xebra for 4 years, most of that with the lithium batteries. I only drove the electric Porsche for a couple of months before I realized that the conversion was done so incompetently that it was dangerous to drive. It's now being done over by someone more trustworthy.
 
I work in the EV industry. Ouch, sorry to hear about your Porsche :(

I think part of what we're seeing here could be different ways of looking at acceleration. If one measures acceleration to a fixed speed, you get different results than acceleration for a fixed length of time (heavy accel in the first case is for a shorter duration, while heavy accel in the latter case leads to a higher max speed). Of course, there's also the potential of the drivetrain efficiency profiles, particularly heavy losses in the connectors from the pack to the inverter, and so forth. Most of my experience is with the Roadster, mind you, which is designed for some pretty intense accel. ;)
 
All I can add here, after driving a PHEV-Prius (10KWh LiPO4) for several months is that it has made me a slower driver. I think that most Prius drivers see how much their mileage improves with more "hypermiling" techniques.

Granted, the Prius electric motor is on the wussy side and was not meant to be the sole propulsion of the hybrid.

I also think that Leaf drivers will see the obvious improvements to their range, or possibly begin to notice the lower KWh numbers to recharge when they drive less aggressively.

Scott
 
After the "Great Gas Tax Bill" of 2032 (5x on ICE vehicles, 2x on hybrid, 20x on gas itself, or some such), perhaps highway driving will become less of a sport or competition, and more just another transportation mode.

We must also be building alternative transportation systems and "city architectures", that will require much less personalized transport.

I believe that even the currently-popular concept of "owning" a single place to live will come to be re-evaluated.
 
garygid said:
After the "Great Gas Tax Bill" of 2032 (5x on ICE vehicles, 2x on hybrid, 20x on gas itself, or some such), perhaps highway driving will become less of a sport or competition, and more just another transportation mode.
Click to expand...

In 2032 - there won't be much gas to go around. There will definitely be rationing of gas by then.

Even the US military is warning of major shartage by 2015.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/apr/11/peak-oil-production-supply

"By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear, and as early as 2015, the shortfall in output could reach nearly 10 million barrels per day,"
Click to expand...

We actually hit Peak Oil in 2005, and the production has been flat even though the price has increased substantially.

Oilwatchapril2010_1.png
 
garygid said:
Well, maybe 2022, or 2017?
Click to expand...

I don't think you got it. If there is a shortage of gas the prices will sky rocket (as it happened in 2008). No need for any taxes.

BTW, everytime we spend more than 6% of gdp on oil, US goes into a recession - which in turn leads to demand destruction and thus price down. So in the future we will see rapid cycles of boom & bust. Prosperity and continuous growth we have seen in the past decades is essentially over.
 
Assuming you are correct, then the free-market for oil is "broken", and other methods of regulation will be tried (like paying a tax credit to buy an EV).

Before too-highly priced oil is allowed to "paralyse" the nation or world, I hope some bright people will provide other solutions.

Perhaps only commercial uses, huge taxes on private use, large taxes on all oil-based uses, and building trains, etc. to move things around.

Or, grow and make things locally. When it costs $200 to make something and $800 to ship it ... ?

Sounds like an expansion-based (growth-based) economy might be ready for a replacement?
 
garygid said:
Or, grow and make things locally. When it costs $200 to make something and $800 to ship it ... ?
Click to expand...

Thats the basis of this book by Jeff Rubin, former CIBC chief economist. He was also the first to predict $50 and $100 oil prices.

"Why Your World Is About to Get a Whole Lot Smaller: Oil and the End of Globalization"

http://www.jeffrubinssmallerworld.com/

Here is a good source for anyone new to Peak Oil.

http://www.peakoil.net/about-peak-oil
 
garygid said:
Assuming you are correct, then the free-market for oil is "broken", and other methods of regulation will be tried (like paying a tax credit to buy an EV).

Before too-highly priced oil is allowed to "paralyse" the nation or world, I hope some bright people will provide other solutions.

Perhaps only commercial uses, huge taxes on private use, large taxes on all oil-based uses, and building trains, etc. to move things around.

Or, grow and make things locally. When it costs $200 to make something and $800 to ship it ... ?

Sounds like an expansion-based (growth-based) economy might be ready for a replacement?
Click to expand...

There ARE bright people on this problem, the plan is to convert %75 of the US Light duty fleet to EVs by 2040, see this link, and the 180 page report... BTW, Nissan, Tesla, and many other EV, Technology, Utilities and other industry leaders are on the board of directors, and it does look like the US Government has taken them seriously, as many of the "recomendations" in the report are being implemented, such as the $7500 federal tax credit, deploying public ev charging infrastructure etc.

http://www.electrificationcoalition.org/electrification-roadmap.php
 
mitch672 said:
There ARE bright people on this problem, the plan is to convert %75 of the US Light duty fleet to EVs by 2040, see this link, and the 180 page report...
Click to expand...

This is my last comment on PO in this thread. Don't want to side track it even more.

We needed to have done something by now. Not 30 years from now. Just too late.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirsch_report

The Hirsch report, the commonly referred to name for the report Peaking of World Oil Production: Impacts, Mitigation, and Risk Management, was created by request for the US Department of Energy and published in February 2005. It examined the time frame for the occurrence of peak oil, the necessary mitigating actions, and the likely impacts based on the timeliness of those actions.
Click to expand...

Here is the important thing ...

"The peaking of world oil production presents the U.S. and the world with an unprecedented risk management problem. As peaking is approached, liquid fuel prices and price volatility will increase dramatically, and, without timely mitigation, the economic, social, and political costs will be unprecedented. Viable mitigation options exist on both the supply and demand sides, but to have substantial impact, they must be initiated more than a decade in advance of peaking."
...
Mitigation efforts will require substantial time.
- Waiting until production peaks would leave the world with a liquid fuel deficit for 20 years.
- Initiating a crash program 10 years before peaking leaves a liquid fuels shortfall of a decade.
- Initiating a crash program 20 years before peaking could avoid a world liquid fuels shortfall.
Click to expand...
 
evnow, if you take the time to read the report we ARE doing something now, but replacing %75 of the light duty fleet CANNOT be acomplished overnight, the report outlines a realistic and achievable plan for how to get the US light duty fleet OFF gasoline, and onto electrically powered vehicles. It won't happen overnight, it will take YEARS, and there is no easy way to speed it up, because of the lifecycle of cars and how often people replace them, and also acceptance of EVs by the general public. Read the report, or browse through it, you will see there IS a plan, and it IS being executed, finally.
 
ok, well to me it looks like a workable plan, and it may be sped it up by a huge spike in oil prices or a shortage. It's just too bad it wasn't started in the late 1990's/early 2000's, with the EV1, RAV4EV, Solectra, and all of the other EVs that have come before. It shows we have to be on the brink of a serious crisis to start implementing a solution that should have had much more progress by now, we could have been 10 years into that 30 year plan by now. I guess it didn't help with bigoil getting control of the battery patent and shutting down the large format battery line.. wow, really veered off topic on this, back to the 0 to 60 discussion :)
 

Similar threads

G
CAR COVER Under $60 Recommendations
Replies
5
Views
282
gmcjetpilot
G
E
2018 Leaf Battery charge fluctuante… help
Replies
11
Views
696
Deleted member 37802
D
E
2018 Nissan,
Replies
0
Views
188
ElTazz
E
B
2017 Leaf tekna I need an advice
Replies
5
Views
654
Jamesjeff
J
P
2011 LEAF pulling slightly to left under acceleration
Replies
4
Views
361
philso
P

Latest posts

Back
Top