Hyundai To Build a 300-Mile-Per-Charge Electric Car (reuters.com) 177
On Thursday, Hyundai Motor said it will launch a long-range electric vehicle with a driving range of 500 km (311 miles) per charge after 2021. The company is reportedly planning 31 eco-friendly models by 2020, up from a previously flagged 28. Reuters reports: The South Korean automaker is planning to launch an electric sedan under its high-end Genesis brand in 2021 with a range of 500 km (310 miles) per charge. It will also introduce an electric version of its Kona small sport utility vehicle (SUV) with a range of 390 km in the first half of next year. The automaker and affiliate Kia Motors Corp, which together rank fifth in global vehicle sales, also said they were adding three plug-in vehicles to their plans for eco-friendly cars, bringing the total to 31 models by 2020. Underscoring Hyundai's electric shift, those plans include eight battery-powered and two fuel-cell vehicles -- a contrast to its 2014 announcement for 22 models, of which only two were slated to be battery-powered. Hyundai also confirmed a Reuters report that it is developing its first dedicated electric vehicle platform, which will allow the company to produce multiple models with longer driving ranges.
Why after 2021. (Score:3)
They are relying on the recent advancement in lithium battery technology (that enables solid state storage at a higher density) to reduce the cost of batteries for their cars since they will be able to get that same range with fewer batteries. I would expect to see Tesla putting out cars with double what Hyundai is quoting on their base models long before 2021.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I would expect to see Tesla putting out cars with double what Hyundai is quoting on their base models long before 2021.
reading is fundamental.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, battery tech is evolving slowly... but in a lot of different directions. Seriously, only one thing changed in this latest iteration of lithium batteries. Also, considering that Tesla is actually designing their own manufacturing equipment, I don't think there is any problem with lock-ins.
Re: (Score:2)
"one thing changed" is not a great method of measuring improvement.
Batteries are improving energy density at a rate of 14% per annum. That's a doubling time of 7 years.
That improvement can either mean longer ranges, or lighter, cheaper EVs.
Isn't the real news the fuel cell? (Score:2, Interesting)
The headline is over an electric car that has the same range as a gasoline car since... forever? Not impressed.
Later in that article though is a bit about how hydrogen fuel cells might come to market. I think that hydrogen as a fuel is a terrible idea but the idea that a fuel cell might be cheap and durable enough for a passenger car would be news.
Electric cars and hydrogen fuel cells are all about the supposed "addiction" to fossil fuels, and the damage it may (or may not) be doing to the environment. T
Re: (Score:2)
You're free because you don't have anything anybody wants.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, and NUCLEAR BAD!! Because strip mining the planet for rare earth metals to make windmills, batteries, and solar panels has NO IMPACT on the environment.
How often do I need to tell you:
a) rare earths are not rare, it just a name. If you honour regulations it is no problem mining them
b) the only rare earth for windmills is Niob, used for magnets which is waste product in iron mining
c) 99% of all solar panels don't use rare earth metals
Get a damn clue and stop repeating the same myths over and over again.
Re: (Score:2)
rare earths are not rare, it just a name.
Did I say they were rare? I said they had to be mined. Wind power takes a lot of resources, ten times as much as coal, natural gas, or nuclear. Very few talk about that. Not just rare earth elements but also steel, copper, and so on.
If you honour regulations it is no problem mining them
If you follow the laws of the USA mining rare earth elements means it is prohibitively expensive. Thorium is a byproduct of rare earth mining and US federal law considers this "weapon grade material" and has to be handled as if it is high grade plutonium, even though it's w
Re: (Score:3)
You are definitley an idiot.
Thorium is useable for nuclear reactors, but freshly mined thorium is in no way weapon grade.
If you have bollocks laws in the USA, then change them, but stop claiming that renewable energy sources need rare earth elements. They don't.
Repeating that in dozens of posts since months: that is a lie.
Re: (Score:2)
You are definitley an idiot.
You are correct. I am an idiot for trying to argue with you. You apparently are arguing with the voice in your head and not anything I wrote.
Re: (Score:3)
Electric cars and hydrogen fuel cells are all about the supposed "addiction" to fossil fuels, and the damage it may (or may not) be doing to the environment. There is nothing inherently wrong with the internal combustion engine.
Uh, no. The internal combustion engine is fundamentally flawed. It's a heat engine that intentionally throws away all of the heat it generates. It has a torque curve that is so mismatched against the task of providing motive force that it's laughable. The very fact that the automotive shifting transmission even exists is proof that the internal combustion engine is not fit for purpose. It has the concept of idling, meaning it's turning over, wasting power, even while the vehicle is stopped. Even when
ICE, EV, and BS (Score:2)
ICE cars are better at some things and EV cards are better at other things. Apparently there are a lot of people around that think this makes EVs are worthless, not viable, a waste of time and purchased only by easily duped starry-eyed fanboys.
4WD electric cars? (Score:2)
Is anyone making a reasonably affordable four-wheel-drive electric (or "range-extended electric" a la Chevy Volt) vehicle?
My Toyota Yaris ought to have another hundred thousand miles left in it, but when it dies I'd like to go electric. I've also taken a job in Snowsville, USA, and between that and my fondness for the outdoors may look into getting a 4WD car.
Re: (Score:2)
Is anyone making a reasonably affordable four-wheel-drive electric (or "range-extended electric" a la Chevy Volt) vehicle?
The Tesla Model 3 will be available in four wheel drive next year. They'll probably only make that feature available together with an expanded battery pack, so it will probably cost ~$45,000. You'll have to decide for yourself if that's affordable to you.
Re: (Score:2)
But people say that the traction control in Teslas is so well done there are no issues driving a rear-wheel drive version in the snow.
I hope everyone standardizes on Tesla tech (Score:2)
Pro electric car BUT... (Score:2)
Be aware that their range drops much faster when being driven over 65mph than that of gasoline vehicles. And there are lots of highways with speed limits over 65mph.
Fast but legal driving (80mph) reduces an Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) car by about 10%. It reduces electric vehicles by about 30%. Range on electric cars goes up when driven slower (not so much on ICE cars).
However- for 95% of car trips are under 20 miles. and even for the longer trips, almost all daily commutes are under 40 miles each
modular batteries (Score:2)
Any estate among those? (Score:2)
Or minivans?
Yeah, it's a European thing.
But estates are far more practical than SUVs, IMO.
Re: Get back to me when you can charge it in 3 min (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe a lot of people fail to realize the vast numbers of vehicles on the road that are not people commuting to work, getting groceries, or picking up kids from school. There are still a lot of long haul trucks on the road.
Say what you will about replacing trucks with trains and barges but that's not likely to happen anytime soon. Electric commuter cars are just nibbling at the edges of replacing petroleum as a fuel. Even if batteries could be charged in full in a matter of minutes there is still the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Long haul trucks are actually an ideal case for EVs
No, they are not. I used to wash trucks for UPS and I'd talk with the drivers. The REALLY long haul trucks would have two drivers and sometimes even a chemical toilet. They wouldn't even stop to take a piss if they didn't need to stop for fuel too. That's just the mechanics of the driving. When you look at how much battery would be needed, and how long it would take to charge, nothing less than a total battery swap would do and those batteries would have to be HUGE. That's a lot of dead weight they'd
Re: (Score:2)
What about all of us who live in older apartment buildings or terrace houses that don't have off-street parking? We have council parking permits allowing us to park on the street, we don't have a place to plug in and charge overnight.
Re: (Score:2)
There are several companies attaching plugs to street lamp posts. Potentially every lamp post could be a charge station.
https://www.zap-map.com/lamp-p... [zap-map.com]
https://techcrunch.com/2017/04... [techcrunch.com]
http://www.independent.co.uk/e... [independent.co.uk]
https://www.fastcompany.com/30... [fastcompany.com]
https://johnbrianshannon.com/2... [johnbrianshannon.com]
It's an easy problem to solve.
Re: (Score:2)
Looking out of the window I see three lamp posts (all on the same side of the street) and about 30 parked cars (on both sides of the street).
It's not that trivial.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
By the time those 3 lamppost chargers are in regular use, some company will have seen the profit in installing dedicated chargers too between the lamp posts.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Explain how that's supposed to work for people who don't have a private garage to park their car in and charge it overnight.
In many high density urban areas, where practically everybody lives in apartments or condo's, you don't get that luxury... in many cases, for the foreseeable future.
Re: (Score:2)
Electric service is ubiquitous.
It's trivial to install an outlet at a car park, parking garage or lamppost for street parking.
(only 30% of people live in apartments.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The cost of installing charging sockets is a rounding error compared to the cost of an apartment or condominium. All that is required is demand in the market.
You can just look at the northern cold areas of the US and Canada for an example. Many apartments, hotels and businesses have installed electric sockets at each parking spot so people can plug in their engine heaters. This has been done because of demand for this service. The cost is minimal compared to the cost of the rest of the building. It's usuall
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, in high density urban areas, it's entirely consequential to most people. It's only inconsequential to most people that live in suburban or rural areas where detached housing is more common.
Typically, well over 50% of people live in apartments or condominiums if they happen to live in a large city. The statistic of 30% of people in the USA live in apartments is an overall statistic, and ironically, the people that would typically benefit the most from an electric vehicle are people who live in
Re: (Score:2)
It's not like I'm just bringing it up now.... I explicitly mentioned high density urban areas right from the very beginning.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Electric vehicles are most beneficial for city commuters, and not for people in more rural areas, where if they do commute they typically have distances to travel that make the limitations on electric vehicle range impractical. Since high density urban areas typically have a majority of the population living in multiunit dwelling's such as apartments or condominiums. While these people may have available parking they rarely have private garages with full control of the electricity offered to it, and as suc
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
And tomorrow I leave for a 600 mile road trip. Did another one last month.
Then don't buy an electric car. They obviously don't fit your use case. But for many other people they are a good choice.
I drive an electric, and I am very happy with it. I will never go back to an ICE.
Re: (Score:2)
What's so exasperating is that manufacturers and the public still aren't taking aerodynamics seriously enough. How smooth is the underside of your electric car? Probably nowhere near as smooth as it could be. Last time I looked, the Leaf had a structural crosshatch pattern showing on the underside. Overlarge grill openings at the front are still quite common. Many people feel that wheel skirts are ugly and will even take them off though that causes 5% more fuel consumption. The fuel economy could be d
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
One of the reasons for Teslas success is that they make attractive cars that people don't feel ridiculous driving. Those vehicles you linked to are ridiculous and can't be products because they wouldn't sell.
Real EVs will make stepwise improvements on aerodynamics. They won't suddenly be redesigned.
Re: Get back to me when you can charge it in 3 mi (Score:2)
Your words to Musk's ears. But of course you know why they do it - most people will say "oh that's too weird" and not buy it.
My "dream car" would be a slightly larger Aptera with the rear taper adjustable, so you can choose between extreme range / top speed / refill rate, or having more cargo space) rear seating. The long taper means that it's basically like an enclosed pickup. And such wing-shaped cars have a higher optimal clearance height to boot.
But I have little hope of ever getting to buy such a c
Re: (Score:2)
And still another when it's 50C out.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or I drive my IC car to a gas station, fill up in two minutes, and am back on the road. . . And even though I live in a major metro area. . .there are a grand total of 4 SuperChargers. . .
Logistics is what **currently** makes EVs unsuitable for regular use for most people. . .
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You press the accelerator and it growls and then reluctantly starts to move. What fun is driving THAT?
Over-engined, naturally aspirated vehicles with manual drivetrains and tight suspension are as instant as you'd like. The time it takes a modern vehicle of that description to react to your input is way below the level of human perception. And they make glorious noises.
I'll be glad when EVs are cheap and ubiquitous, but they aren't better in every way, just the ways that matter most.
Re: Get back to me when you can charge it in 3 mi (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Over-engined, naturally aspirated vehicles with manual drivetrains and tight suspension are as instant as you'd like.
They most certainly aren't unless you go up to the level of supercars.
Patent nonsense. What makes a car engaging is not speed, it's reaction time. My 240SX wasn't the car I've owned with the best power to weight ratio, but once lowered and stiffened it was the most engaging because it was basically telepathic. And it was fun to drive because with 155 hp, you could drive it at 8 or 9 most of the time instead of dicking around at 3/10ths like you do in a supercar.
And electric cars are instant, there's really no comparison.
But they're heavy, or they have short range. These problems will solve themselves as technology marches on, but for
Re: (Score:2)
Or I drive my IC car to a gas station, fill up in two minutes, and am back on the road. . . And even though I live in a major metro area. . .there are a grand total of 4 SuperChargers. . .
Logistics is what **currently** makes EVs unsuitable for regular use for most people. . .
Still, you could easily still save time overall since you're not filling up at a station for the rest of the month. And has the potential to be cheaper to fuel, cheaper to service...
The killer problem for me is not the ultimate range, it's that I don't have a garage or a driveway, I can't sensibly run a lead to the street, so that convenience won't work for me either
Re: (Score:2)
300 mile range would mean at least one or more likely two stops. That's not really a bad deal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Get back to me when you can charge it in 3 mi (Score:2)
4.5, not 5.5. Even less.
And yeah, if anyone plans to drive all day without any breaks, do us a favour and let us know when and where so we can try to not be on the road at the same time as you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
This is a problem with all new technologies: people with no experience with it create worst-case scenarios in their mind and inflate them, while making little of the problems of the technologies they're replacing.
Yes, you can make your occasional trips, using the sort of break times that you're supposed to take when driving on long trips (regardless of whether you actually take them or not). But that's not your everyday life. EVs start every day with a full charge and you never need to randomly detour from
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The majority of people don't have garages.
60.3% of US residents live in single family homes [infoplease.com].
Whether or not all of these have garages specifically is immaterial, they have a dedicated place to park (and charge) their car.
Re: (Score:2)
Just realize, there are others, they have different priorities, and they spend it differently
When, or if, your point of view becomes minority view, with additional costs let us see if you are as committed to the 3 minute fillup as the electric car proponents are today, and the stuff they are willing to pay and put up with,
Re: (Score:2)
LOL you waste 3 minutes of your trip "filling" up your car. What a daft and outdated concept. My car is just full every time I get to it.
Re: After 2021 (Score:2)
Um, cars with real-world 300 mile ranges are on sale now. Driven slowly the Model S 100D has gone *670 miles*; 335 is the range you get in normal highway conditions for the average person (some less, some more... speed is the main factor, ambient temperature second).
Re: (Score:2)
yes, a $100,000 car has 315 mile range (not the 335 you cite), useless for the average person.
driven slowly gets X. yeah that's funny. my honda civic can roll downhill for a 100 miles on a teaspoon of gasonline too.
Re: (Score:2)
Please keep your models straight. The Model S 100D has a 335 mile EPA range. the P100D has a 315 mile EPA range.
And you don't need to spend that much to get 300+ miles range. The base Model 3 LR is 310miles EPA range, at $44k.
For the record, it was flat land with no net elevation change, and beyond that, where exactly are you expecting to have a meaningful average slope over 670 miles?
Re: (Score:2)
that mythical LR model is not sold yet. Real price in USA will be around $60,000 not $44K
Re: (Score:2)
Your first link is a dead link.
Your second link was for "theoretically" if you drove a Roadster (which never had a 300+ mile range) full out on a track. And guess what, if you drive a gasoline car full-out on a track, it will also have terrible range.
I'm sorry, but EVs do average their EPA ranges in real-world highway driving. This isn't a hypothetical, it's a fact. Slowing down makes you go much further than that - as mentioned, 670 miles [electrek.co] for a Model S 100D. If you want to see how speed will affect you
Re: (Score:2)
And dammit, where's my Jet Pack? I was promised there'd be Jet Packs in the Future . . .
Re: (Score:2)
yes, the sun and main sequence stars do fusion, but Valve developers not and can not do half life 3.
Re: After 2021 (Score:5, Informative)
you'll only get [311 miles] in efficiency mode (0 to 60 in 2 minutes) traveling over flat ground with no AC or accessories.
Aggressive acceleration doesn't reduce efficiency in electric cars the way it does with gas engines, so ahead and step hard on the pedal if you like. Just try to use regen when slowing down as much as possible. Likewise, hills are not really a problem - I live at the base of the Rocky Mountains and find the descents mostly make up for the lowered climbing mileage in my BEV. Hot and cold weather, on the other hand, do reduce range, in some situations very significantly.
Re: After 2021 (Score:2)
In cold weather, the big range loss (at least warly on) is pack heating, esp if you don't use something like Tesla's range mode (which delays hearing). Cold packs can still discharge but they can't be recharged without damage, so you can lose regen. The energy consumption decreases when the pack is warmed; assuming you're not compacting fresh snow all the way, you may only lose 20-30% range, which can be made up for by slowing down . Preheating the pack and cabin on mains power eliminates the big heatin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have no clue where you got from "a pack declining 2-3% total between year 1 and year 5" and the pack declining 13-14% between year 5 and year 10.
Degradatiion is fastest in the beginning (as mentioned, about 4% in the first year) and slows with time. Basically what you're doing is that the most vulnerable structures in the anode and cathode become unusable (such as due to swelling) early on, but after that what's left is the more durable
Re: (Score:2)
In highway driving (where you care about range) most of the power goes to maintaining your speed, not for a bit of acceleration.
I was driving 85mph on an interstate in Nevada yesterday and a Tesla passed me like I was standing still...
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, they'll do that ;)
Re: (Score:3)
300 miles at 80mph works out to almost 4 hours so 3 hours or so I'd look to stop and recharge. Not too shabby. Hook up to charge, take a leak and wash up a little. Grab a coke and a snack then hit the road again. Not bad at all.
Re: (Score:2)
300 miles is just fine as a range, better than most ICE vehicles. The problem is the time it takes to "gas up" again. This is the lat big barrier to electrics replacing ICE. Until this one is solved, they will still be commuter machines.
Re: (Score:2)
Has anyone told that to Tesla owners, because the don't seem to know. How lucky they have you talking from a position of ignorance.
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla supercharging stations charge with up to 145 kW of power distributed between two adjacent cars, with a maximum of 120 kW per car. That is up to 16 times as fast as public charging stations; they take about 20 minutes to charge to 50%, 40 minutes to charge to 80%, and 75 minutes to 100%.
Re: After 2021 (Score:3)
And that's where Tesla stands today, not where it'll be in 2021, 4 years from now. Its funny, these EV announcements from other companies acting as if they're not chasing a moving target. Their consistent failure to realize this and consistent undrestimation of demand for quality EVs and infrastructure is why Tesla is now the highest market cap US automaker, why the Model S and X capture nearly 10% (and growing) of their global market segments, and why Model 3 is about to do the same to the midrange.
To
Re: (Score:2)
Not true. EPA range figures are based on the 5-cycle, which is actually a pretty good representation of how people drive on the highway. Some people drive faster, others slower, but on average it's about right (including accessory loads like climate control). EV manufacturers can also approximate the five-cycle by taking the US06 cycle [epa.gov] and multiplying the resultant range by 0.7.
Re: (Score:3)
Why would AC matter that much? These EVs have sometimes a 60kWh battery.
My split unit mitsubishi usually hovers around 300W and manages to keep things cool. It uses 600-700W when cooling things down.
So lets say a car AC to uses 2kW to keep a car cool, that's 1,2 percent of the battery capacity pr hour?
What am I missing from the equation? Do they use more than 2000 watt?
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds about right. My Leaf, 30kWh, uses about 5% of the battery if I run the AC constantly. Even that can be mitigated by simply pre-cooling or pre-heating the car while is plugged in.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I don't know if it uses that. It has a heat pump so could cool the battery, but I don't know if it does.
The new model is out next month, will probably have an active cooling system.
Re: After 2021 (Score:2)
Tesla does that. Their heat flow system is an engineer's dream, capturing every bit if waste heat and shunting it to where it's needed. They recently patented (to be used in Supercharger v3?) a system for running offboard coolant through a separate path in the primary heat exchanger (which connects the battery, radiator, and ac coolant loops) so heat removal can be offload to the charger when supercharging. Should significantly improve max charging rates (while simultaneously cooling the charge connector).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on what the ion mobility is. You have to two main limits on charging - ion mobility (the limit to how fast you can charge before all excess energy turns into heat), and heat removal (if you're pumping hundreds of kilowatts in, even 10% losses is still dozens of kilowatts of heat). Ion mobility is a customizeable parameter - you can get it as low as seconds, but it's a tradeoff vs. other parameters in design (primarily energy density); there's no point to improving it if you're heat limited. Heat
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention changes in technology. Fisker is reportedly about to introduce a car powered by LSG–manganese-dioxide super-capacitors, and they're suggesting a 400-mile range with a 9-minute recharge cycle.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
if you want to go on long trips, which most people do
Citation required.
Until then we Americans aren't interested.
You know over 80% of people in the US live in urban areas. Sounds like YOU aren't interested, which is fine because the other 80% of us don't care about you, since you are making it aggressively clear that you don't care about us.
Re: (Score:2)
This is what the Chevy Volt is for: an electric vehicle with an on-board generator when you need it.
Re: If it doesnt have (Score:2)