Looks like we're typing in at the same time. yes i feel nothing wrong w/the piston engine-if we had the right fuel to power it. Dad had an 89 ranger 2wd 2.3auto reg cab sb, indeed a bit too small, and no better mpg then the '71 302. Mabey I'm paranoid cause the ranger still had the 'old ford style' and i'm sure they won't bring it back. i'm simply scared to see what ugly thing replaces it. i also strongly feel the consumers are somewhat brainwashed w/ideas the corporate's push.
90 y old lady in her late husband's '61 plymouth backs into it, knocks it over and drive's off w/o a clue.
Oh that would never happen , all it takes is to swing the door of that '61 open and the smart would go flying across the lot. All you would hear is a muffled "pop" of the airbag going off (not enough metal to make a bang on impact).
Right now, ford and its customers have the choice of what kind of vehicle they want to have, in a few years, that may change. Who knows, maybe ford is aware of this situation and has a super fuel efficient engine waiting to go for when everyone suddenly can't afford to fuel these big trucks anymore. All I know, is that ford better have something, because the time is coming, when there will no longer be a choice.
__________________
1986 F250HD Ex cab Fresh built up 6.9L diesel Lariat AC leather seats power everything w/full cluster, sterling rear 3.08LS gears, E4OD trans, ram intake ATS 088 turbo
1986 F150 Ex cab Lariat rollercam 5.0L on LPG AOD trans 3.55 gears 390 000Ks
I have a sneaking suspicion all the automakers have had a mega-efficient engine up on the shelf for a long time. i was on utube earlier and i saw phoenix ev shows their new pickup, it kinda-sorta-mabey looks supercrew-ish. i think the vid's called 2007 'ev truck pasadena earth day' or something. but it sure looks encouraging. too bad phoenix ev couldn't retro a 50's ford panel. oh well at this point can't be too picky. but this thing sounds like it's got good range/perf etc. - lookin good
New to Post and Ford-Trucks.com
Ford has the Ecoboost coming. Direct injection gas engines that deliver more horses and torque than a regular engine. I think that will "cure" consumers of thinking a V8 is the only thing with real power and head-snapping accel out there.
I have a sneaking suspicion all the automakers have had a mega-efficient engine up on the shelf for a long time. i was on utube earlier and i saw phoenix ev shows their new pickup, it kinda-sorta-mabey looks supercrew-ish. i think the vid's called 2007 'ev truck pasadena earth day' or something. but it sure looks encouraging. too bad phoenix ev couldn't retro a 50's ford panel. oh well at this point can't be too picky. but this thing sounds like it's got good range/perf etc. - lookin good
130 mile range with optional 250 mile range (their claim)
The truck is a korean import glider (complete minus powertrain)
The batteries have been tested to 15 000 rapid cycles which calculates to nearly 40 years of service life (calender life cannot be proven since the technology is only aa few years old)
The battery cost has not been revlealed, but reading between the lines, it is more than $35 000 for the smaller pack per vehicle (cost of first shipment, they claim they can drive the cost down)
Truck is only available in 2wd
Uses direct drive to the differential through a carbon fiber driveshaft without a transmission (no shifting, and reverse is electronic)
I had high hopes for this company since it is completely independant, but so far only the odd celeberty has been allowed to buy one, and their website as remained unchanged for the last year, not a good sign.......we shall have to see.
__________________
1986 F250HD Ex cab Fresh built up 6.9L diesel Lariat AC leather seats power everything w/full cluster, sterling rear 3.08LS gears, E4OD trans, ram intake ATS 088 turbo
1986 F150 Ex cab Lariat rollercam 5.0L on LPG AOD trans 3.55 gears 390 000Ks
130 mile range with optional 250 mile range (their claim)
The truck is a korean import glider (complete minus powertrain)
The batteries have been tested to 15 000 rapid cycles which calculates to nearly 40 years of service life (calender life cannot be proven since the technology is only aa few years old)
The battery cost has not been revlealed, but reading between the lines, it is more than $35 000 for the smaller pack per vehicle (cost of first shipment, they claim they can drive the cost down)
Truck is only available in 2wd
Uses direct drive to the differential through a carbon fiber driveshaft without a transmission (no shifting, and reverse is electronic)
I had high hopes for this company since it is completely independant, but so far only the odd celeberty has been allowed to buy one, and their website as remained unchanged for the last year, not a good sign.......we shall have to see.
Interesting find.
I am skeptical though, they seem to leave too many questions unanswered.
What type of battery does it use?
What is the total cost per vehicle?
Who makes the truck itself? You said its korean made does that mean its hyundai?
I would really like to see an electric car from a large automaker. Their buying power would likely drive the cost down significantly. Also with this vehicle we don't know who makes it. Is the vehicle itself goign to be reliable. With the larger automakers we can at least be sure that they have some of the basic issues or reliablity resolved.
What is the bottom line with these batteries. How long will they really last. How quickly do you start to encounter the problems we normally see in rechargeable batteries. Sensitive to temperature, lose their ability to hold a charge etc. Maybe it is capable of getting 130 miles to charge when new in ideal ambient temps but what about when its 4 years old and 100 degrees F outside, or -5?
Seems to put a heavy load on the grid. Thats not the best thing in its target market of california. Don't they still have rolling blackouts? I like the effort but I think we are one or two technological breakthroughs away from an electric car.
I don't know the name of the company that makes the truck, I'll try to find it.
Electric cars (or trucks) are typically recharged an night during off peak hours (peak hours are mid morning, and mid afternoon). At a first glance most assume that there is not enough electrical power currently in the grid to run EVs, this is in fact a myth. Another myth is that EVs cost more to operate than a comparable gasoline vehicle. In fact, on average, the cost is 1/2-1/3 that of a gas vehicle.
To get an idea of what the vehicle would cost to operate, the battery can hold 35kwh of energy, and according to claims, can go 130 miles per charge. 35kwh / 130 = 0.269kwh per mile. You can check your electricity bill to find th exact cost per kwh in your area, but $0.066/kwh is about what we pay, so if we assume that: (35kwh x $0.066/kwh) = $2.31 for recharge.
>$2.31 / 130miles = $0.017 mer mile.
OK, now EVs are not 100% efficient, so lets assume a 20% loss, that still works out to $0.021 per mile, under ideal conditions but even at twice that cost, you can see how much cheaper it would be to run. I also understand that B.C has relatively low electricity rates for north america, check your bill for th exact cost/kwh.
The truck is supposed to sell for about $40 000 (the company is heavily subsidized to absourbe the cost of the batteries, which is already dropping now that volume is rising)
As for the california power market, its a long story so I won't get into the details, but in general its the fault of enron who owned most of the grid at the time. In reality there is plenty of power generation in the state.
If you would like to see an EV from a large automaker, you may have to wait a while, hybrids are as far as any of them are willing to go. 40 mile range on electric is not bad (chevy volt), but when independent companies like tesla motors, or phoenix motorcars can get over 200 miles without gas, I tend to get a little cynical of the big three.
2008 is the year that retail sales of the truck is supposed to begin, so we shall have to wait and see how real they are.
__________________
1986 F250HD Ex cab Fresh built up 6.9L diesel Lariat AC leather seats power everything w/full cluster, sterling rear 3.08LS gears, E4OD trans, ram intake ATS 088 turbo
1986 F150 Ex cab Lariat rollercam 5.0L on LPG AOD trans 3.55 gears 390 000Ks
I agree with most of that. But I might be a little less trusting that you.
That article seems to answer some of my questsions, but overall I am very skeptical of these. I suppose that is justified until they are actually proven. When I was younger I was always told, "if it sounds to good to be true it probably is", and as I've progressed in my career as an engineer I've found that is generally true. I hope I am wrong this time.
They do seem to be much more cost efficient than the gasoline motors, but again that is based on the given information on the batteries. One battery replacement quickly prices it out of range.
I haven't heard a sound from the automakers that make me think they are working on battery operated vehicles. I do remember from my internship (testing fuel cells for the gov't) that they expect to release fuel cell vehicles around 2010. I think they are a waste personally.
I am also disappointed to hear that they are being given subsidies for teh batteries. I assume you mean gov't subsidies. I am against this kind of thing. Its one of the reasons everyone is wasting time on corn based ethanol.
I don't know the name of the company that makes the truck, I'll try to find it.
Electric cars (or trucks) are typically recharged an night during off peak hours (peak hours are mid morning, and mid afternoon). At a first glance most assume that there is not enough electrical power currently in the grid to run EVs, this is in fact a myth. Another myth is that EVs cost more to operate than a comparable gasoline vehicle. In fact, on average, the cost is 1/2-1/3 that of a gas vehicle.
To get an idea of what the vehicle would cost to operate, the battery can hold 35kwh of energy, and according to claims, can go 130 miles per charge. 35kwh / 130 = 0.269kwh per mile. You can check your electricity bill to find th exact cost per kwh in your area, but $0.066/kwh is about what we pay, so if we assume that: (35kwh x $0.066/kwh) = $2.31 for recharge.
>$2.31 / 130miles = $0.017 mer mile.
OK, now EVs are not 100% efficient, so lets assume a 20% loss, that still works out to $0.021 per mile, under ideal conditions but even at twice that cost, you can see how much cheaper it would be to run. I also understand that B.C has relatively low electricity rates for north america, check your bill for th exact cost/kwh.
The truck is supposed to sell for about $40 000 (the company is heavily subsidized to absourbe the cost of the batteries, which is already dropping now that volume is rising)
As for the california power market, its a long story so I won't get into the details, but in general its the fault of enron who owned most of the grid at the time. In reality there is plenty of power generation in the state.
If you would like to see an EV from a large automaker, you may have to wait a while, hybrids are as far as any of them are willing to go. 40 mile range on electric is not bad (chevy volt), but when independent companies like tesla motors, or phoenix motorcars can get over 200 miles without gas, I tend to get a little cynical of the big three.
2008 is the year that retail sales of the truck is supposed to begin, so we shall have to wait and see how real they are.
Only one problem with your math, the first chance utility companies get they will increase the cost of electicity they will and then it will get out of control for those who are not running ev's. I think that it would be a good thing but lets face it someone is always looking to make the all mighty dollar, so you will always have someone raise the cost of consumables. supply and demand is our biggest problem along with the epa. just my .02 worth
You are correct, but EVs will not take over the world overnight, they are merely one in a long list of potential solutions (which I happen to like). Oil will not likely stay the same price either, and the cost of these batteries may not seem so high in another 5 years.
Dascro, the subsidies are a temporary measure, and if the batteries cannot be made cost effective, than this will all have been for nothing. Something else I should mention is that Altair's nanosafe is only one possible solution, there are other battery suppliers all over the world each with their own solution to offer. LionEV for example can match the performance, and possibly life expectancy, but at a lower cost, a cost which has already fallen.
I agree with you 1 000 000% about fuel cells, they are a waste of time and money. Not efficient enough, not safe enough, and most importantly, not cost effective. The cost of fuel cells has not fallen in any significant way in the last 30 years.
__________________
1986 F250HD Ex cab Fresh built up 6.9L diesel Lariat AC leather seats power everything w/full cluster, sterling rear 3.08LS gears, E4OD trans, ram intake ATS 088 turbo
1986 F150 Ex cab Lariat rollercam 5.0L on LPG AOD trans 3.55 gears 390 000Ks
Yeah as oil cost increases and our technology increases the cost of the alternatives will fall.
The fuel cells are actually about as fragile as fine china. They are also very sensitive to impurities in the hydrogen or whatever fuel they run on. They may have some use in stationary applications but never in vehicles, well at least not in the near future.
The fact that they are the auto industries solution shows just how far behind they currently are.
Nuclear power is the answer. Everyone who understands it realizes that it is the answer for our energy independence at this point in time. The problem is most people are uniformed and have an irrational fear towards it. I think that, combined with plug in hybrids and eventuly electric cars is the future.
I rode nuclear powered submarines and diesel powered Coast Guard cutters for many years and I have to say that nuke power is the most logical power source for the buck and the future. Why the investors and the decision makers to act faster is beyond me.
I love Ford as much as the rest of you, but face it, FMC is lightyears behind GM and Yota. Truck owners are loyalists, almost to a fault and and the truck manufacturers know it. Ford needs to get back to basics. Build me a truck with a kickass V-8, a tranny with tow-haul / crawl mode, bring back the locking hubs on the F-150 and give me an interior that i can hose out when I'm done playing and I'll consider giving up my old reliable "88.
i wouldnt say there lightyears behind toyota or gm.i personally think toyota has better engineers than both of them.thats pry because america is one of the dumbest coutries at least my generation in the world and japan and china are one of the smartest.if you look at the best engines ever in history youll see more ford engines than anyone.altough i hear ford is making a 6.2 boss which is more powerful than any newer light truck engine,that a good thing.
Join Our Site - Its free, quick and easy!
, all it takes is to swing the door of that '61 open and the smart would go flying across the lot. All you would hear is a muffled "pop" of the airbag going off (not enough metal to make a bang on impact).
Lariat AC leather seats power everything w/full cluster, sterling rear 3.08LS gears, E4OD trans, ram intake ATS 088 turbo
