Electric buses in the UK have been charged with diesel generators and there was a bit of an uproar about it at first, but a large static diesel generator running at a constant speed can be more efficient than multiple stop/start diesel engines, and therefore more friendly to the environment.
Usually seen as a stop-gap until they can get the power upgraded in the depot to support multiple charging buses.
Stellantis is still producing 400V EVs with below-average efficiency. Their cars display estimated range based on their marketing number rather than real battery condition and driving history, so the range drops by 1.6 miles for every mile driven.
A lot of range anxiety would go away if their EV tech wasn't crap.
Interestingly, brands like Mercedes do the opposite - a recent test by What Car? indicated that the real (UK) highway range of the GLC 400 4Matic Electric is just 1.4% lower than its WLTP rating - 390 miles vs 394.
I don't know about anyone else, but I always needed a short break after 450km or so. Those 390 miles are more than I would ever use without stopping to charge.
Those 390 miles are from 100 to empty and you don’t do that in real life.
Usually on long trip stops I charge to 75% because after that it becomes painfully slow to charge the rest of 25. And I rarely stop below 20%, because of, eh, low battery stress.
So in reality I have to stop at half of the advertised range.
For people thinking that pure ev + backup generator is more reliable than PHEV, i recommend this video : Nobody understands the point of hybrid cars from Technology Connections
It explains why PHEV is actually a very clever idea and now it simplifies things not complicates them.
I drove an i3 rex, first generation. The gas motorcycle engine loved breaking down, due to disuse. Such an unreliable offence of crap.
According to the dealership mechanic, the engine was packaged in a way that made the fluids collect in places they shouldn't.
I have driven the entire east coast on mine. I have put 60k miles in mine. All trouble free. Best car I have ever owned. If I have time on a trip I charge up and if I don’t I just use gas. That mechanic was pulling your leg.
First generation? According to Wikipedia and the few websites I could find, in American models, the rex had a different control setup that was simpler then here in Germany.
It's new in that it's not really a hybrid. It isn't meant to take over when you run out of battery. It's meant as an emergency recharge for the battery to get you to the next charging station.
Hybrids can just run on gas and not have to worry about the distance to the next charging station.
That’s a bit of a stretch… most of the announced EREVs are using pretty conventional 4 or even 6-cylinder engines (like the 3.6L Pentastar V6 in the upcoming Jeep Wagoneer REEV). Even though it isn’t connected to the wheels, the engine is capable of keeping the car charged and running normally once the battery runs out. AFAIK, the intention is to be able to drive for hundreds of miles on the engine, not just limp along a dozen or so miles to get to a charger.
> It's new in that it's not really a hybrid. It isn't meant to take over when you run out of battery.
Because the latter was used in the trolleybuses since forever. I remember riding one on this mighty emergency power during some local blackout only to realize that it would be faster to walk :)
3rd sentence: It is a fully electric car with the security blanket of a gas-powered generator to charge the battery. So not your average hybrid whos gas-powered motor directly drives the wheels.
> running generator to charge battery to drive the wheels is somehow better than just driving wheels directly
In some ways it is, yes. The engine design is not the same, it doesn't need gearbox, variable power output etc to charge battery. In some ways it can be more efficient.
from the article: "Most plug-in hybrids on the road today are essentially gasoline vehicles with a battery shoehorned in to provide a small amount of all-electric range. EREVs [Extended Ranged Electric Vehicles] flip the concept. They are designed first as electric vehicles, and the engine solely acts as a generator for the battery, with no mechanical connection to the wheels."
This is EREV (Extended-Range Electric Vehicle) where the fossil fuel engine is used solely to charge the battery, as opposed to a PHEV (Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle) where it can also drive the wheels.
Either way, the cost is that the vehicle has the complexity of both systems. The benefit is variable, YMMV (Your milage may vary). There must be cases where it's a good idea. Especially at present, while the energy supply systems are in transition.
Wait, how does one of these new extended range EV’s have the complexity of both systems?
To me it looks like it has the complexity of a pure EV with generator in the back seat, and the charging cord plugged into the generator. Which does away with much of the complexity, in part because the generator doesn’t have to turn the wheels.
> Wait, how does one of these new extended range EV’s have the complexity of both systems
because it obviously has both a battery+electric motor system and a gasoline storage+ICE motor system? It has both systems. It can only be much more complex than a pure EV.
I take the point that EREV could be simpler than other designs that have both motor systems - the PHEV option, in the "it could always be worse" sense. But pure EVs are actually much simpler than ICE vehicles or hybrids.
renault already put out some of these cars a few years ago, with this system you could get up to 1000km with a full gas tank! Just what my much cheaper diesel always could do!
The BMW i3 used what was basically a scooter engine. The Ampera/Volt used what was essentially an Opel Corsa engine (from memory).
Toyota's approach of using a small battery and modified atkinson cycle engine seems to have paid off. Taxi drivers love them and fuel economy is pretty consistent. But the engine is a core part of the process. So it isn't dead weight a lot of the time.
The real question is whether an 'Extended Range EV' is using a motor intended to work efficiently as just a generator or whether it's another parts bin special.
I worked on unmanned ground vehicles that did this... 10 years ago. In fact we designed them from scratch.
FWIW, now you have all the same joys of engine maintenance that one has with a traditional ICE car: oil changes, oil filter changes, spark plug replacement, starter replacement, coolant, probably an alternator, etc, along with needing to worry about an IG bolted on to the side of the engine connected to an MV bus. It is a complex design.
Less maintenance the traditional engine. well assuming you plug it in of course but if you're plugging it in you're only using the edge for longer trips and so you're going to save a lot of money while still having range to make longer trips. Of course there is some worry about the gas going stale if you never run that engine. On the other hand gas engines get more efficient the higher the load and so a generator optimized for the engine gets everything running at optimal is going to get roughly 40% fuel energy efficiency versus a normal car which is going to be close to 20 - that was the main promise of a hybrid all along.
I have a PHEV where the engine has about a thousand hours on it my previous car driven about the same would have had about three thousand hours on it. But there are definitely plenty of reports of people who have the plugging hybrids who never actually plug it in it so don't see this advantage.
Low effort? How about low effort screaming "buy Tesla or you are nazi" around 2016-2019?
Or when we tried to have a civilized discussion about low powered ICE engines, versus 2 ton luxury heavy battery cars?
The green crowd always mainly ran on low effort shit posts with state sponsoring. It is just laws of physics and politics did not really worked out as you imagined!
Sounds like what Mazda did with the MX-30 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_MX-30) which flopped hard. They used their new Wankel engine as range extender, perfect use case since the power:weight ratio of these is impressive.
It’s charging facilities being down far too frequently, whereas gas stations are rarely bone dry.
It’s sites lying about charging port availability, leading to wasted range on red herrings (thanks for lying about NACS chargers, Sheetz!).
It’s the anxiety of not knowing whether a charging area will be safe to hang out in for half an hour, unlike a gas station where you can pump and run pretty quickly if necessary.
The anxiety doesn’t come from a “limited” range (especially when gas vehicles get comparable or worse ranges); it’s the experience surrounding charging itself that needs improvement. One series of service stations offering reliably available charging ports with both plug standards and offering clean bathrooms, hot food, and space to wait in, is what’s needed to soothe “range anxiety”.
Electric buses in the UK have been charged with diesel generators and there was a bit of an uproar about it at first, but a large static diesel generator running at a constant speed can be more efficient than multiple stop/start diesel engines, and therefore more friendly to the environment.
Usually seen as a stop-gap until they can get the power upgraded in the depot to support multiple charging buses.
Stellantis is still producing 400V EVs with below-average efficiency. Their cars display estimated range based on their marketing number rather than real battery condition and driving history, so the range drops by 1.6 miles for every mile driven.
A lot of range anxiety would go away if their EV tech wasn't crap.
Interestingly, brands like Mercedes do the opposite - a recent test by What Car? indicated that the real (UK) highway range of the GLC 400 4Matic Electric is just 1.4% lower than its WLTP rating - 390 miles vs 394.
I don't know about anyone else, but I always needed a short break after 450km or so. Those 390 miles are more than I would ever use without stopping to charge.
Those 390 miles are from 100 to empty and you don’t do that in real life.
Usually on long trip stops I charge to 75% because after that it becomes painfully slow to charge the rest of 25. And I rarely stop below 20%, because of, eh, low battery stress.
So in reality I have to stop at half of the advertised range.
For people thinking that pure ev + backup generator is more reliable than PHEV, i recommend this video : Nobody understands the point of hybrid cars from Technology Connections
It explains why PHEV is actually a very clever idea and now it simplifies things not complicates them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnUFH5GX_fI
Indeed this. A range extender engine will never be as efficient as hybrid
BMW i3 REx with range extending petrol engine was released in 2014.
I drove an i3 rex, first generation. The gas motorcycle engine loved breaking down, due to disuse. Such an unreliable offence of crap. According to the dealership mechanic, the engine was packaged in a way that made the fluids collect in places they shouldn't.
I have driven the entire east coast on mine. I have put 60k miles in mine. All trouble free. Best car I have ever owned. If I have time on a trip I charge up and if I don’t I just use gas. That mechanic was pulling your leg.
First generation? According to Wikipedia and the few websites I could find, in American models, the rex had a different control setup that was simpler then here in Germany.
"New"? Like hybrids haven't been around forever?
It's new in that it's not really a hybrid. It isn't meant to take over when you run out of battery. It's meant as an emergency recharge for the battery to get you to the next charging station.
Hybrids can just run on gas and not have to worry about the distance to the next charging station.
That’s a bit of a stretch… most of the announced EREVs are using pretty conventional 4 or even 6-cylinder engines (like the 3.6L Pentastar V6 in the upcoming Jeep Wagoneer REEV). Even though it isn’t connected to the wheels, the engine is capable of keeping the car charged and running normally once the battery runs out. AFAIK, the intention is to be able to drive for hundreds of miles on the engine, not just limp along a dozen or so miles to get to a charger.
> It's new in that it's not really a hybrid. It isn't meant to take over when you run out of battery.
Because the latter was used in the trolleybuses since forever. I remember riding one on this mighty emergency power during some local blackout only to realize that it would be faster to walk :)
3rd sentence: It is a fully electric car with the security blanket of a gas-powered generator to charge the battery. So not your average hybrid whos gas-powered motor directly drives the wheels.
somehow it makes you think that running generator to charge battery to drive the wheels is somehow better than just driving wheels directly :)
"not your average hybrid whos gas-powered motor directly..."
> running generator to charge battery to drive the wheels is somehow better than just driving wheels directly
In some ways it is, yes. The engine design is not the same, it doesn't need gearbox, variable power output etc to charge battery. In some ways it can be more efficient.
The Prius isn't really using a gearbox in the conventional sense either, it's much simpler.
You are describing what the Volt was doing back in 2011
Indeed. This headline had me feel like I was taking crazy pills. As far as I can tell, this is in no way, shape or form a "New Idea".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt_(first_generati...
Also the Nazi's Maus tank/armoured vehicle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_VIII_Maus
2 things can be true: the 2011 Volt would be classified as an EREV, and "your average hybrid" would not.
No, this design is not totally new. Despite the article implying this.
from the article: "Most plug-in hybrids on the road today are essentially gasoline vehicles with a battery shoehorned in to provide a small amount of all-electric range. EREVs [Extended Ranged Electric Vehicles] flip the concept. They are designed first as electric vehicles, and the engine solely acts as a generator for the battery, with no mechanical connection to the wheels."
This is EREV (Extended-Range Electric Vehicle) where the fossil fuel engine is used solely to charge the battery, as opposed to a PHEV (Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle) where it can also drive the wheels.
Either way, the cost is that the vehicle has the complexity of both systems. The benefit is variable, YMMV (Your milage may vary). There must be cases where it's a good idea. Especially at present, while the energy supply systems are in transition.
Wait, how does one of these new extended range EV’s have the complexity of both systems?
To me it looks like it has the complexity of a pure EV with generator in the back seat, and the charging cord plugged into the generator. Which does away with much of the complexity, in part because the generator doesn’t have to turn the wheels.
> Wait, how does one of these new extended range EV’s have the complexity of both systems
because it obviously has both a battery+electric motor system and a gasoline storage+ICE motor system? It has both systems. It can only be much more complex than a pure EV.
I take the point that EREV could be simpler than other designs that have both motor systems - the PHEV option, in the "it could always be worse" sense. But pure EVs are actually much simpler than ICE vehicles or hybrids.
renault already put out some of these cars a few years ago, with this system you could get up to 1000km with a full gas tank! Just what my much cheaper diesel always could do!
no no no no no no you don't get it.
there are EVs! with a backup generator.
but are EVs so they get all those sweet incentives
Could be an obvious mistake in the title to drive engagement, or as someone said in the comments of the article:
> WSJ catering to the anti EV crowd to get them to say "Har har look at those silly EVs, needs a gas engine now."
The REX issue is an interesting one.
The BMW i3 used what was basically a scooter engine. The Ampera/Volt used what was essentially an Opel Corsa engine (from memory).
Toyota's approach of using a small battery and modified atkinson cycle engine seems to have paid off. Taxi drivers love them and fuel economy is pretty consistent. But the engine is a core part of the process. So it isn't dead weight a lot of the time.
The real question is whether an 'Extended Range EV' is using a motor intended to work efficiently as just a generator or whether it's another parts bin special.
Every time they try and do this, it fails. The math is very much against you with converting energy this way and obviously they haven't solved that.
This seems to be a huge investment to make just to try and market the same technology but better this time.
Isn't it very old tech? Like WW1 tanks used this, no?
Apparently the first modern vehicle to have this was indeed the BMW iREX.
However, the first vehicle to have this at all was some 1901 Porsche model...
Won't gas just varnish if you don't ever have an emergency where you need this? This seems ill conceived.
https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/carmakers-have-a-new-idea...
Toyota was right all along.
Toyota was right, but this is not hybrid. It's a range extender engine, won't be as efficient due to power conversions
I worked on unmanned ground vehicles that did this... 10 years ago. In fact we designed them from scratch.
FWIW, now you have all the same joys of engine maintenance that one has with a traditional ICE car: oil changes, oil filter changes, spark plug replacement, starter replacement, coolant, probably an alternator, etc, along with needing to worry about an IG bolted on to the side of the engine connected to an MV bus. It is a complex design.
The maintenance on these will be quite expensive.
Less maintenance the traditional engine. well assuming you plug it in of course but if you're plugging it in you're only using the edge for longer trips and so you're going to save a lot of money while still having range to make longer trips. Of course there is some worry about the gas going stale if you never run that engine. On the other hand gas engines get more efficient the higher the load and so a generator optimized for the engine gets everything running at optimal is going to get roughly 40% fuel energy efficiency versus a normal car which is going to be close to 20 - that was the main promise of a hybrid all along.
I have a PHEV where the engine has about a thousand hours on it my previous car driven about the same would have had about three thousand hours on it. But there are definitely plenty of reports of people who have the plugging hybrids who never actually plug it in it so don't see this advantage.
ITT: a disappointing number of low-effort drive-by comments responding to the headline alone.
Low effort? How about low effort screaming "buy Tesla or you are nazi" around 2016-2019?
Or when we tried to have a civilized discussion about low powered ICE engines, versus 2 ton luxury heavy battery cars?
The green crowd always mainly ran on low effort shit posts with state sponsoring. It is just laws of physics and politics did not really worked out as you imagined!
Sounds like what Mazda did with the MX-30 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_MX-30) which flopped hard. They used their new Wankel engine as range extender, perfect use case since the power:weight ratio of these is impressive.
For me anyways, range isn’t the issue.
It’s charging facilities being down far too frequently, whereas gas stations are rarely bone dry.
It’s sites lying about charging port availability, leading to wasted range on red herrings (thanks for lying about NACS chargers, Sheetz!).
It’s the anxiety of not knowing whether a charging area will be safe to hang out in for half an hour, unlike a gas station where you can pump and run pretty quickly if necessary.
The anxiety doesn’t come from a “limited” range (especially when gas vehicles get comparable or worse ranges); it’s the experience surrounding charging itself that needs improvement. One series of service stations offering reliably available charging ports with both plug standards and offering clean bathrooms, hot food, and space to wait in, is what’s needed to soothe “range anxiety”.
[dead]
[dead]
bwahhhaahhaaaa so to sell more of their old crappy ice they just change the narrative to "ice + e_car == e_car + ice" :D