BrianBM

The electric F-150

77 posts in this topic

10 mins ago, BrianBM said:

Would you even need a differential of any kind, with hub-mounted motors? No transmission at all.

Portal axles don't need a differential, but they need a gear box of some sort.  The idea is increased ground clearance.  
This is for RC cars, but the concept is the same.  The gear box is where the hub is.  

TRX-4-portal-axle-diagram.jpg?ssl=1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Captain Planet said:

That 300mi range is definitely completely unloaded.  

It's probably half or less while towing. 

 

Same for gasoline engines. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chumfish said:

Same for gasoline engines. 

Yer but you could be refilled in 5 min and be on your way again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Captain Tuttle said:

What happened to hydrogen?  

So far, it appears to be more grief than it's worth. It might have value to fleet operators that recall a large number of vehicles to a central depot, so they can fill up each morning or night, but it would require more careful handling than batteries. Hydrogen is an escape artist, you can't run it through pipes that are OK for natural gas.  Worse, the processes for making H2 out of water and turning it into liquid are very, very, very energy intensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, BrianBM said:

So far, it appears to be more grief than it's worth. It might have value to fleet operators that recall a large number of vehicles to a central depot, so they can fill up each morning or night, but it would require more careful handling than batteries. Hydrogen is an escape artist, you can't run it through pipes that are OK for natural gas.  Worse, the processes for making H2 out of water and turning it into liquid are very, very, very energy intensive.

It requires tons of insulation.

Years ago, BMW said that the fuel cell for their hydrogen test mule would keep a snowball frozen for like a hundred years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2021 at 7:02 PM, BrianBM said:

So far, it appears to be more grief than it's worth. It might have value to fleet operators that recall a large number of vehicles to a central depot, so they can fill up each morning or night, but it would require more careful handling than batteries. Hydrogen is an escape artist, you can't run it through pipes that are OK for natural gas.  Worse, the processes for making H2 out of water and turning it into liquid are very, very, very energy intensive.

A lot of progress is being made in hydrogen fuel production. It is now possible to produce hydrogen from seawater. As you point out though producing hydrogen is very energy intensive but that becomes less of a problem when using renewable energy like hydroelectric power. I believe there is a future for hydrogen vehicles but it will mostly be limited to heavy duty commercial use where long range driving and heavy hauling would make it more practical than batteries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

ChasingTales,I expect you're right. Off roading multiplies the need for power, deflated tires have a higher rolling resistance,and I doubt any first-generation battery pack is up to that use. And SW-related corrosion? Forgedabboudit.

 

FlipNDip, solar and wind farms aren't going to lower the price of electricity all that much, if at all. Our energy appetites are increasing, not holding steady. As for long-haul use, I dunno. The energy density of liquid H2 is well below that of hydrocarbon fuels. A gallon of gasoline has several times the energy potential of a gallon of liquid hydrogen. To go long haul with H2 would require that the size of the fuel tank be multiplied, and bear in mind Captain Planet's point that the tank would have to be hyperinsulated. That would multiply the size of the tank needed again.

 

H2 is used in rockets, but never (if you notice) in the first stage. The low energy density of the fuel would multiply the size of the first stage. Second stage use, when the rocket is at X altitude and Y velocity, is more practical.

 

Advantages for an H2 system do come to mind. You can burn it in an internal combustion engine with little modification. Better still, put it through a fuel cell and feed current to electric motors in the wheel hubs. Very straightforward engineering, eliminate the transmission and lots else. The product of either system would be mostly water vapor. I could see the US Postal Service using fuel cell mail delivery trucks in many densely populated areas. Such a system wouldn't have the sensitivity to cold temperatures of a battery system, either.

 

This reminds me of another hydrogen question, but I'll make a separate thread as needed. First, to Wikipedia!

 

 

Edited by BrianBM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

took long for corruption to enter and steal, huh ? .....  :banghd:

 

Tesla Found Guilty Of Throttling Charging Speed And Battery Capacity In Norway
BY TYLER DURDEN
MONDAY, MAY 24, 2021 - 09:45 AM
Tesla has been found guilty of throttling charging speed and battery capacity by a court in Norway.
The company is going to "have to pay $16,000 to each of the thousands of owners affected in the country", until it appeals, according to the pro-Tesla lot over at electrek. 
Dating back to 2019, electrek had pointed out reports that Tesla owners were seeing drops in range of 12 to 30 miles after a software update. The affected vehicles appear to only be Model S and Model X vehicles with 85 kWh battery packs.

Tesla owner David Rasmussen told the blog at the time: “My 2014 Model S 85 was getting Rated Range of 247 miles until May 13. Now after the next update, it continued to drop to now 217 miles. This is an 11% drop in 5 weeks.”
He even plotted the battery capacity of his Model S, showing the obvious dropoff in capacity around the time of the update. 

Around the same time, the DC fast-charging rate at Supercharger stations had also been reduced, the blog notes, stating: "Affected owners are seeing much slower charging sessions."
Tesla, meanwhile, claimed that the update would “protect the battery and improve battery longevity”. The company claimed that range loss only happened for “a small percentage of owners.”
The controversy led to a "series of lawsuits", one of which was in Norway. When Tesla didn't respond to the lawsuit, the 30 owners "were automatically awarded 136,000 kroner (~$16,000 USD) each in compensation" unless Tesla appeals. 
But the real devil could be in the forthcoming details: there could be over 10,000 other Tesla owners affected by the update in Norway alone, not to mention owners involved in similar lawsuits in other countries. 
The affected update was Tesla’s 2019.16.1 and .2 update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2021 at 1:55 PM, ChasingTales said:

From my understanding  none  of the electric options are for any kind off road use. Never mind near the salt water

Yeah that is what I'm thinking.. going to be interesting to see the first year or two during the winter on salted roads and at the boat ramp in the summer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.