Post by: Tallpine on June 05, 2008, 07:16:52 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,363203,00.html
Pure gas/electric drive:
Quote
The Volt's internal-combustion generator engine powers only the batteries, not the car's wheels, meaning that it needs to run at only one speed, maximizing efficiency. Modern diesel-electric rail locomotives have used the same principle for decades.
Post by: mtnbkr on June 05, 2008, 07:21:08 AM
You gotta admit, though, that cars such as the Prius made cars like the Volt acceptable to the average Joe. Something had to ease them into that technology...
Chris
Post by: charby on June 05, 2008, 07:28:03 AM
I still want to know why not a small engine to generator to electric traction motors at the wheels? Just like a train is.
Post by: K Frame on June 05, 2008, 07:32:10 AM
Post by: PTK on June 05, 2008, 07:37:14 AM
Quote
Holy crap, the smug pollution is going to be incredible!
True. And I live near South Park...
Post by: HankB on June 05, 2008, 07:44:45 AM
According to what I read, Toyota has commited to NiMH batteries, which means that the economies of scale won't be available for a while to GM for their lithium ion battery pack. Estimated replacement costs are $10,000, which will probably exceed the value of the vehicle four or five years down the road.
Lithium batteries have recently been implicated as the source of fires in some personal electronics . . . want to bet the GM beancounters are going to nickle-and-dime the Volt's battery pack to get the lowest possible cost, from the lowest cost suppliers?
Hmmm . . . a plug-in hybrid? Sounds like the drivers of these cars will be EVADING their fair share of gasoline taxes. The government has tried to hit users of "home brew" biodiesel vehicles with tax evasion charges for recycling cooking oil on their own, so we can expect extra charges to be applied to license and registration fees of vehicles like the Volt soon after introduction.
Post by: Manedwolf on June 05, 2008, 07:49:44 AM
There's a lot of other companies out there that just BUILD the damn things and sell them when they have an idea.
Post by: AJ Dual on June 05, 2008, 07:58:12 AM
Could be interesting.
You gotta admit, though, that cars such as the Prius made cars like the Volt acceptable to the average Joe. Something had to ease them into that technology...
Chris
You gotta admit, though, that cars such as the Prius made cars like the Volt acceptable to the average Joe. Something had to ease them into that technology...
Chris
I don't know that's true. I think a two pronged campaign could have been successful. One that worked on the er... "NASCAR buyer" by emphasizing "American Made", "reducing Foreign Oil dependancy" , and "Tough manly Technology" like locomotives, the M1 Abrhams MBT, and submarines.
Then the environmental benefits, economy/emissions, union labor, etc. could have been emphasized to the San Fransisco bean sprout set.
But a true hybrid like this is definitely what I've been ranting about. And with the new generation of silicon nanowire LiOn batteries that have longer lives, and can charge to 90% capacity in something like 3-5 minutes will seal the deal.
The current crop of "synergy drive" ones with all the added complexity, cost, and parasitic losses of running a combination gas/electric powertrain are just a huge waste that never recoups their manufacturing energy costs in gas savings.
What I'd further love to see would be having the ICE generator being a completely user removable module. Something the size of a large camping cooler, that can just be dropped out of the trunk and rolled away on casters to a corner of the garage when not needed. For the majority of your daily sub 100-mile grocery runs and short commutes, let it be a pure plug in, saving even more weight/energy. However you still have the flexibility with the ICE module for on the fly recharges for longer trips, vacations, hauling a bunch of crap back uphill from Home Depot etc.
Post by: Tallpine on June 05, 2008, 08:05:02 AM
Quote
I still want to know why not a small engine to generator to electric traction motors at the wheels? Just like a train is.
That's exactly what the Volt (if it is ever actually produced) will be. Did you not read the article ?
BTW, LeTourneau also did this with heavy equipment.
Post by: charby on June 05, 2008, 08:32:30 AM
Quote
I still want to know why not a small engine to generator to electric traction motors at the wheels? Just like a train is.
That's exactly what the Volt (if it is ever actually produced) will be. Did you not read the article ?
BTW, LeTourneau also did this with heavy equipment.
Dad works for the railroad (BNSF), he took me on a tour of the locomotive shops, I saw diesel engines, generators and traction motors. I didn't see any large battery packs.
I have read about a diesel electric hybrid locomotive but I haven't seen one rolling on the rails here yet.
Yes I read the article.
Post by: Tallpine on June 05, 2008, 08:59:55 AM
The battery acts as a sort of "flywheel" to even out the load demands, so the powerplant can be much smaller.
Part of the reason that a pickup or SUV (or any conventional car, really) can't get better mileage is that it needs the power to accelerate quickly and/or pull heavy loads. But most of the time it has excess capacity, which costs a lot in fuel economy.
But batteries are heavy, expensive, and dangerous.
I dunno ... what about compressed air motors for the wheels?
Then just have an gasoline powered air compressor with a really big tank
Or maybe rubber bands ...?
Post by: K Frame on June 05, 2008, 09:04:36 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on June 05, 2008, 09:08:24 AM
I don't think it would be possible to make a clutch large enough/durable enough to get a fully loaded locomotive and train rolling.
Wow, I'd hate to pop that clutch.
Post by: One of Many on June 05, 2008, 10:27:28 AM
Post by: grampster on June 05, 2008, 10:47:18 AM
Subject: The Air Car
www.theaircar.com
I bet they will be outlawed in the USA, might hurt some Arabs feelings and bank account****
a interesting invention that a French engineer has engaged a company in India to produce. It may be the death knell of the American auto industry, but it would sure be a great option for anyone who wants to take the wind out of the sails of the foreign oil industry.
The Compressed Air Car developed by Motor Development International (MDI) Founder Guy Negre might be the best thing to have happened to the motor engine in years.
The $12,700 CityCAT, one of the planned Air Car models, can hit 68 mph and has a range of 125 miles. It will take only a few minutes for the CityCAT to refuel at gas stations equipped with custom air compressor units. MDI says it should cost only around $2 to fill the car up with 340 liters of air!
The Air Car will be starting production relatively soon, thanks toIndia's TATA Motors. Forget corn! There's fuel, there's renewable fuel, and then there's user-renewable fuel! What can be better than air?
This six-seater taxi should be available inIndiathis year -2008!
Post by: Manedwolf on June 05, 2008, 10:56:21 AM
Subject: The Air Car
www.theaircar.com
I bet they will be outlawed in the USA, might hurt some Arabs feelings and bank account****
a interesting invention that a French engineer has engaged a company in India to produce. It may be the death knell of the American auto industry, but it would sure be a great option for anyone who wants to take the wind out of the sails of the foreign oil industry.
The Compressed Air Car developed by Motor Development International (MDI) Founder Guy Negre might be the best thing to have happened to the motor engine in years.
The $12,700 CityCAT, one of the planned Air Car models, can hit 68 mph and has a range of 125 miles. It will take only a few minutes for the CityCAT to refuel at gas stations equipped with custom air compressor units. MDI says it should cost only around $2 to fill the car up with 340 liters of air!
The Air Car will be starting production relatively soon, thanks toIndia's TATA Motors. Forget corn! There's fuel, there's renewable fuel, and then there's user-renewable fuel! What can be better than air?
This six-seater taxi should be available inIndiathis year -2008!
I just watched the video with the very unimpressive prototype. They had to speed up the video for it driving around a parking lot.
That seems beyond unfeasible. I'm expecting this will be another Zap! motors, if you know their saga of getting money from enthusiastic "get a franchise now!" dealers, and then being unable to deliver anything but a rebadged Chinese electric car that gets less than 20 miles before having to recharge.
Also. Three high-volume tanks at 300PSI beneath the entire passenger compartment. Uh. No.
Post by: zahc on June 05, 2008, 11:13:20 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on June 05, 2008, 11:17:14 AM
probably more like 5000psi. That's what scuba tanks use, and my paintball tanks.
Okay. Sit on one. Now hit it with enough force to compromise it.
Post by: mtnbkr on June 05, 2008, 11:21:54 AM
Chris
Post by: Brad Johnson on June 05, 2008, 11:25:30 AM
Quote
Why is it that no one is trying the hydraulic pump and motor approach?
Heat.
You'd have better luck with an direct electric drive hybrid system. An AC motor at each wheel to provide both power and regenerative braking. An added bonus would be total control of power and braking at every corner of the vehicle. It's the ultimate ABS and traction control system
Brad
Post by: Manedwolf on June 05, 2008, 11:31:18 AM
A multicar pileup of those should be interesting...
Chris
Chris
I would think they'd all crash together, and then all fly apart again as the tanks exploded.
Post by: Iain on June 05, 2008, 11:31:33 AM
2.5 diesel V6 and an electric motor on each rear wheel. 0-60 in under 7 seconds (which isn't amazing but...), 45mpg.
Their C-Cactus concept is far more green, diesel hybrid with no performance pretensions that claims 90+mpg.
Post by: mtnbkr on June 05, 2008, 11:33:18 AM
I would think they'd all crash together, and then all fly apart again as the tanks exploded.
I was thinking more along the lines of each car shooting off in random directions or spinning around via random or singular breaches in the tanks.
Chris
Post by: Manedwolf on June 05, 2008, 11:34:40 AM
I would think they'd all crash together, and then all fly apart again as the tanks exploded.
I was thinking more along the lines of each car shooting off in random directions or spinning around via random or singular breaches in the tanks.
Chris
Only if they make the cartoon "fweeeeeee!" sound of leaking air.
Post by: Perd Hapley on June 05, 2008, 12:58:37 PM
You gotta admit, though, that cars such as the Prius made cars like the Volt acceptable to the average Joe. Something had to ease them into that technology...
But the Prius isn't acceptable to the average Joe...
Post by: Daniel964 on June 05, 2008, 03:01:32 PM
Okay, without the battery the engine/generator has to be rated for the maximum load. Plus the inefficiencies of electric transmission. For trains, I think what they were trying to do was avoid needing a 128 or 256 speed manual transmission
The battery acts as a sort of "flywheel" to even out the load demands, so the powerplant can be much smaller.
Part of the reason that a pickup or SUV (or any conventional car, really) can't get better mileage is that it needs the power to accelerate quickly and/or pull heavy loads. But most of the time it has excess capacity, which costs a lot in fuel economy.
But batteries are heavy, expensive, and dangerous.
I dunno ... what about compressed air motors for the wheels?
Then just have an gasoline powered air compressor with a really big tank
Or maybe rubber bands ...?
The battery acts as a sort of "flywheel" to even out the load demands, so the powerplant can be much smaller.
Part of the reason that a pickup or SUV (or any conventional car, really) can't get better mileage is that it needs the power to accelerate quickly and/or pull heavy loads. But most of the time it has excess capacity, which costs a lot in fuel economy.
But batteries are heavy, expensive, and dangerous.
I dunno ... what about compressed air motors for the wheels?
Then just have an gasoline powered air compressor with a really big tank
Or maybe rubber bands ...?
It's being built now in India by Tata. Google air powered cars and you should get some info. Their supposed to be importing to the US later this year or next year I think. Four hours to charge the take by plugging it in at home. About 120 mile range. A gas engine will be in the US ones for long trips. Is supposed to get 800-1000 mile range on one tank of gas.
Post by: anygunanywhere on June 05, 2008, 03:21:47 PM
It's being built now in India by Tata. Google air powered cars and you should get some info. Their supposed to be importing to the US later this year or next year I think. Four hours to charge the take by plugging it in at home. About 120 mile range. A gas engine will be in the US ones for long trips. Is supposed to get 800-1000 mile range on one tank of gas.
So if I bought two of them people would tell me "Nice Tata's"? I don't think so. I need my man card.
Anygunanywhere
Post by: mek42 on June 05, 2008, 04:55:20 PM
You gotta admit, though, that cars such as the Prius made cars like the Volt acceptable to the average Joe. Something had to ease them into that technology...
But the Prius isn't acceptable to the average Joe...
Yeah, because they aren't plug-in and the price difference over the Echo / Yaris negates the gas savings (which on the highway is negligible between them).
Post by: Manedwolf on June 05, 2008, 05:57:46 PM
You gotta admit, though, that cars such as the Prius made cars like the Volt acceptable to the average Joe. Something had to ease them into that technology...
But the Prius isn't acceptable to the average Joe...
Yeah, because they aren't plug-in and the price difference over the Echo / Yaris negates the gas savings (which on the highway is negligible between them).
They're also shockingly junky inside, and the controls being in the center of the dash is just asinine.
Post by: mtnbkr on June 05, 2008, 06:03:34 PM
Chris
Post by: charby on June 05, 2008, 06:09:12 PM
I don't think it would be possible to make a clutch large enough/durable enough to get a fully loaded locomotive and train rolling.
What about those external combustion trains, aka steam powered? They must of had one helluva clutch to engage. The steam trains I have been around have forward and reverse gears.
I have a feeling the diesel electric was created to provide the efficiency of power that an electric motor can give.
That and you don't have to burn a ton of coal and 1000 gallons of water to go a hundred miles.
Post by: Manedwolf on June 06, 2008, 05:18:32 AM
I don't think it would be possible to make a clutch large enough/durable enough to get a fully loaded locomotive and train rolling.
What about those external combustion trains, aka steam powered? They must of had one helluva clutch to engage. The steam trains I have been around have forward the reverse.
I have a feeling the diesel electric was created to provide the efficiency of power that an electric motor can give.
That and you don't have to burn a ton of coal and 1000 gallons of water to go a hundred miles.
I'm picturing the reversing-gear engine on massive reciprocating-piston engines like the Olympic-class liners had. Apparently Titanic the film did a pretty good job in depicting just how violent a clang it would be when the drive shifted over like that with the massive reversing gear.
BTW, New Zealand apparently has cool museums. Check out this HUGE steam engine in operation. I am still in awe of people who designed stuff like that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hKAC8Xru84&NR=1
Post by: mfree on June 06, 2008, 05:41:07 AM
To start, just apply pressure and hope that you aren't on the dead spot (which is why a lot of engines had ~90 degrees seperation between power strokes)
To reverse, you altered the valving to admit steam BTDC and the engine would run backwards.
Post by: charby on June 06, 2008, 05:56:17 AM
Steam trains had no clutch and no gearing.
To start, just apply pressure and hope that you aren't on the dead spot (which is why a lot of engines had ~90 degrees seperation between power strokes)
To reverse, you altered the valving to admit steam BTDC and the engine would run backwards.
To start, just apply pressure and hope that you aren't on the dead spot (which is why a lot of engines had ~90 degrees seperation between power strokes)
To reverse, you altered the valving to admit steam BTDC and the engine would run backwards.
I just read that and was going to post I made an error about trains. Regarding steam tractors, they might have a clutch or something.
Post by: Firethorn on June 06, 2008, 09:47:27 AM
Most trains today are diesel electric because in that size you can get generators and motors that are ~98% efficient, which makes it such that the electric is actually more efficient, lighter, and cheaper than a transmission capable of handling the stresses - much less a torque converter or clutch plate capable of handling those strains.
Making it a hybrid simply invovles a little more electronics/programming and batteries. Still, the question occurs: Is it worth the extra weight of the batteries, considering how many batteries it would take to make regenerative braking worth it, and how little they'd actually be used?
Personally, I'd be more likely to put an external power system into switching yards. You install electrified rails in frequent accelleration areas and use line power/batteries/flywheel to provide the power for a train exiting the station. If you have a flywheel or batteries, you can even have the train dump power to the rail for charging/spinning up.
Post by: charby on June 06, 2008, 06:45:55 PM
Post by: Antibubba on June 07, 2008, 05:22:31 AM
Quote
I'm waiting for Citroen to bring their gorgeous C-Metisse to market. That's the hybrid the non-green part of me wants.
Iain, are you sure that's a Citroen? It isn't ugly enough.
Post by: K Frame on June 07, 2008, 06:32:56 AM
But they don't have a CLUTCH.
They have drive pistons that are linked directly to the wheels.
Steam enters the drive pistons and exerts increasing force until either the wheels slip or the force starts to overcome the train's inertia.
The engineer would, with the "throttle," open a series of valves that would allow increasing amounts of steam into the drive cylinders.
There was no clutch plate, no clutch, no friction surface, no throw out bearing, etc. Just steam pressure in the drive cylinders.
Reversing wasn't done by "gears" either. Throwing the reversing lever changed the valve configuration and how steam entered the drive cylinders.
Here's a page with a better explanation, including animations showing the drive pistons and slide valves work to directed the flow of steam and power the system: http://www.keveney.com/Locomotive.html
Post by: charby on June 07, 2008, 06:58:40 AM
I figures that out after I posted it, look at road locomotives, aka steam tractors and use of gears and clutch to become selfpropelled.
-C
Post by: Gewehr98 on June 07, 2008, 08:49:39 AM
There's an incredible amount of torque available to a 2-cylinder steam locomotive, because they're double-action, essentially acting like 4 cylinders for all practical purposes. Same goes for the Case and other steam tractors that are common in my neck of the woods come August. We host the Badger Steam & Gas Engine show, showcased by a huge Corliss steam engine w/the always-intriguing spinning ball governor. Having a big Case steam tractor clank its way past your house enroute to the show is a sight worth beholding, although it somewhat unnerved our horses.
Post by: charby on June 07, 2008, 09:05:15 AM
What I am talking about is self propelled steam tractors
Like this.
Post by: Tallpine on June 07, 2008, 09:30:54 AM
Instead of having an electronic console in the center of the dash, you could have a little door where you stick in wood or coal now and then
Post by: Manedwolf on June 07, 2008, 09:32:37 AM
I dunno anything about steam tractors, but a steam car would be neat.
Instead of having an electronic console in the center of the dash, you could have a little door where you stick in wood or coal now and then
Instead of having an electronic console in the center of the dash, you could have a little door where you stick in wood or coal now and then
I think that's in the back...and coal is tricky. You need to rake out clinkers, stoke and spread the coal evenly in a quick motion, or you risk lowering the fire temp dramatically, which is bad.
Post by: Tallpine on June 07, 2008, 09:35:23 AM
I dunno anything about steam tractors, but a steam car would be neat.
Instead of having an electronic console in the center of the dash, you could have a little door where you stick in wood or coal now and then
Instead of having an electronic console in the center of the dash, you could have a little door where you stick in wood or coal now and then
I think that's in the back...and coal is tricky. You need to rake out clinkers, stoke and spread the coal evenly in a quick motion, or you risk lowering the fire temp dramatically, which is bad.
Would that be as bad as talking on the cellphone while you drive ?
Post by: charby on June 07, 2008, 09:48:22 AM
I dunno anything about steam tractors, but a steam car would be neat.
Instead of having an electronic console in the center of the dash, you could have a little door where you stick in wood or coal now and then
Instead of having an electronic console in the center of the dash, you could have a little door where you stick in wood or coal now and then
I think that's in the back...and coal is tricky. You need to rake out clinkers, stoke and spread the coal evenly in a quick motion, or you risk lowering the fire temp dramatically, which is bad.
Make carpooling interesting, one would be the engineer and someone else the fireman.
Post by: Tallpine on June 07, 2008, 10:32:21 AM
Post by: K Frame on June 07, 2008, 02:17:20 PM
Quite a few electric cars and trucks, too.
Steam cars did not use wood or coal.
They used kerosene, generally.
Clutching a steam tractor is a LOT more realistic. Far lighter than a locomotive.
We used to churn ice cream at my church with a 1903 Case steam tractor.
Post by: RocketMan on June 07, 2008, 04:06:35 PM
We used to churn ice cream at my church with a 1903 Case steam tractor.
That had to be seriously cool to see.
Post by: charby on June 07, 2008, 04:25:47 PM
We used to churn ice cream at my church with a 1903 Case steam tractor.
That had to be seriously cool to see.
Equally cool is West Point, IA has a sweet corn fesitval in August and they have the corn cookers hooked up to the boiler on the steam tractor. Tractor doesn't do much because they don't build up a head steam to power it but use it to heat the water.
Post by: The Annoyed Man on June 07, 2008, 05:44:57 PM
Instead, they took the biggest dern vehicle they had and made a hybrid version that only gets about 4 MPG better than the standard version.
With those kinds of marketing decisions, no wonder they have to shut down plants.
Post by: Tallpine on June 08, 2008, 07:09:10 AM
We used to churn ice cream at my church with a 1903 Case steam tractor.
That had to be seriously cool to see.
And I thought my 1950 vintage Case VAI was an antique ...
Post by: Firethorn on June 08, 2008, 07:38:16 AM
I wonder who will be the first to produce a light truck hybrid. I thought GM would have nailed that market down.
Instead, they took the biggest dern vehicle they had and made a hybrid version that only gets about 4 MPG better than the standard version.
Instead, they took the biggest dern vehicle they had and made a hybrid version that only gets about 4 MPG better than the standard version.
4 mpg for one of the biggest dern vehicles is better than 4mpg better for a light truck. Hybrids actually make more sense in the largest vehicles before they do the smallest.
Which is why I'm still wondering why UPS hasn't replaced their fleet of city delivery vehicles with hybrids of some stripe.
Post by: Tallpine on June 08, 2008, 08:03:52 AM
Quote
Hybrids actually make more sense in the largest vehicles before they do the smallest.
You got that right. What we need is a 4wd hybrid pickup that gets 40mpg and can still tow a gooseneck trailer
The battery weight wouldn't matter so much, and in fact it might help with balance and traction. Besides, if four wheel-motors were used, you could probably save enough weight from not having 2 differentials, tx case, and tranny to make up for the batteries.
Last fill-up on our new HHR we only got 23mpg
Of course, a lot of that was driving 1/4 mile back and forth from the house to the corrals in the rain to take care of our horses. And I use 2nd gear ("I") for the 10 miles out to the hiway because otherwise you are standing on the brakes half the time.Post by: mek42 on June 08, 2008, 08:20:44 AM
I wonder who will be the first to produce a light truck hybrid. I thought GM would have nailed that market down.
Instead, they took the biggest dern vehicle they had and made a hybrid version that only gets about 4 MPG better than the standard version.
With those kinds of marketing decisions, no wonder they have to shut down plants.
Instead, they took the biggest dern vehicle they had and made a hybrid version that only gets about 4 MPG better than the standard version.
With those kinds of marketing decisions, no wonder they have to shut down plants.
Wasn't Toyota at one time spouting that they'd have a hybrid version of each model by 2007?
Post by: Ryan in Maine on June 08, 2008, 11:31:49 AM
Not trucks, but you can do a lot more with it than the family sedan.
I don't see why they can do it for their SUV's but not their trucks.
Post by: Manedwolf on June 08, 2008, 01:06:54 PM
It's not covered by warranty, either. Will be $2000+ to repair.
Post by: mek42 on June 08, 2008, 02:07:35 PM
Today's Car Talk guys had a guy whose Prius had a catastrophic failure of the electric power steering while he was driving it, locking it into a turn.
It's not covered by warranty, either. Will be $2000+ to repair.
It's not covered by warranty, either. Will be $2000+ to repair.
The car is out of warranty or that part is not covered? Be interested to hear more about this.
Post by: wmenorr67 on June 08, 2008, 09:31:14 PM
Quote
Which is why I'm still wondering why UPS hasn't replaced their fleet of city delivery vehicles with hybrids of some stripe.
A lot of UPS delivery vehicles have been coverted over to CNG.
Post by: Gewehr98 on June 08, 2008, 09:56:41 PM
Truth is, they are rebuilt by UPS on a constant basis, and upgraded when and where necessary.
It's kind of like a military Humvee in that respect - you can't buy a used one.
Post by: K Frame on June 09, 2008, 05:49:33 AM
I saw somethign similar at the Centre Hall, Pennsylvania, antique machinery show years and years ago.
They were making apple butter in huge copper vats.
But instead of building a fire underneath, they had a donkey engine on a skid with steam coils coming off the boiler.
Post by: Firethorn on June 09, 2008, 08:01:56 AM
A lot of UPS delivery vehicles have been coverted over to CNG.
Makes sense in at least some areas.
Gewehr98 -
I know UPS trucks(and other delivery vehicles) have some pretty long lifespans - but my point would be that there isn't any reason real why they couldn't start buying NEW UPS trucks in hybrid form. Whether that be for expansion or the occasional truck ruined in an accident. Heck, I even even expect them to look identical to regular ones, if maybe with 'Hybrid' decal somewhere so they can advertise their greenness. For that matter, with regular rebuilds it shouldn't take much more to convert them to hybrid at some point.
Found a link! Figure a 20 year average lifespan for an average UPS truck, I could see UPS starting up a few hybrid delivery centers - such as in California, actually shipping the older vehicles elsewhere to use, so they only have to have hybrid specific maintenance in one center. Once it proves it's long term cost effectiveness, roll out into more areas using attrition.
On the idea of a hybrid truck, I was struck by a thought. My new truck has a plastic bed, and there's plenty of room underneath the fairly high vehicle to have a sort of second bed with a layer of batteries. As a bonus, it'd lower the center of gravity and place a good deal of weight on the backside, increasing rear wheel traction for winter/ice, rather than having to use sand bags. On the drive side, I think that you'd probably find yourself still better off with a traditional traction system, though having an engine-generator under the hood, then one(RWD) or two(4WD/AWD) motors to provide propulsion might be an excellent solution. You'd get the same benefit a train has - absolutely insane amounts of torque at low speeds. Mated with an efficient 4 or even 3 cylinder diesel and you'd still have plenty of power to haul that 6k pound trailer.
Remember, as electric motors get smaller, they get less efficient. So you have to determine whether the energy losses from a driveshaft and differential exceed the losses from going to multiple smaller motors.
Post by: Gewehr98 on June 09, 2008, 10:31:25 AM
Post by: Tallpine on June 09, 2008, 03:40:02 PM