Nissan Will Introduce An EV With Range Extender Next Year

Yoshi Shimoida, Nissan’s deputy general manager, for electric car engineering, tells Australia’s Motoring, “In the future, Nissan will add to the lineup of EV systems an engine that is only for generating energy.” He is quick to point out the LEAF will not be getting the range extender engine. The technology will be used for an entirely new car with a chassis separate than the one the LEAF is built on.

Unlike the Chevy Volt, which has an internal combustion engine that can drive the front wheels directly in certain situations, the Nissan will have have a range extender engine that is used solely to generate electricity. It will not be able to power the front wheels at all. “Next year we announce what it’s called,” Shimoida said.

That’s similar to the system BMW uses for its i3 REx. Shimoida acknowledges the similarity to the BMW approach, but said his company refers to its system differently. “It’s something like that [range extender]. But we call it a series hybrid,” he says. He declined to give details about how far the new Nissan would be able to travel using a combination of battery and generator power. The BMW i3 can go about 150 miles before needing to refuel.

Could the new Nissan be based on the IDS Concept the company revealed at the Tokyo motor show last month? That car featured styling that was much more exciting than the LEAF. As good as that car is, its styling has never been its strong suit.

Why would Nissan, the world’s leading electric vehicle manufacturer, be introducing an EV with a range extender motor? People are noticing that there are a lot fewer EVs on the road then we thought there would be a few years ago. President Obama famously predicted there would be a million EVs on American roads by the end of 2015. In actuality, there are only one third that number.

People are still spooked by electric cars. They don’t understand quite how they work or how to recharge them. Dealers are doing a lousy job of selling them. Range anxiety is real for many mainstream drivers who fear being stranded miles from home. The recharging infrastructure- even considering the growing Tesla Supercharger network– to support more electric cars is still in its infancy.

EV purists often thumb their noses at ICE-equipped cars like the Chevy Volt and BMW i3 REx. My own son-in-law sniffs that he will never own a car with an internal combustion engine of any kind ever again and, perhaps, in 10 or 15 years, we will look back on these internal combustion machines as quaint anachronisms. We will shake our heads and ask, “What did people ever see in them?” But they may be the bridge the world needs between conventional cars and electric cars. Nissan’s new marketing strategy may prove to be quite brilliant.

Mazda Rotary Motor Finds Second Life As Range Extender

While the rotary engine once set Mazda apart from automakers, these days the design just isn’t fuel efficient enough to meet today’s rigid fuel economy standards. But the idea of using a small rotary engine as a range-extender for a plug-in hybrid is being bandied about by Mazda, and the results are something worth writing home about.

Rotary engines are compact and simple compared to standard internal combustion engines, and lightweight to boot. So even in a small car like the Mazda2, a 0.3 liter rotary engine hardly takes up any space at all. An eletric motor is good for about 100 horsepower and 200 ft-lbs of torque, and the battery bank is good for about 125 miles of driving range on Japan’s admittedly-generous testing scale. The 330cc rotary engine doubles the driving range, and ensures you’re never without the ability to add range in a short time.

The gas tank holds only about 2.6 gallons of fuel, or 10 liters, which works out to be about 45 or so miles per gallon for the rotary engine. That is quite efficient, and this electrified Mazda2 reminds me a whole lot of the BMW i3 with a range extender, but almost assuredly much cheaper. While the rotary never directly drives the vehicle, it may be the best use of rotary technology in the 21st century.

For now the Mazda2 plug-in is mostly just a test vehicle, with a limited top speed of just 75 mph, with the 0 to 60 mph time somewhere in the 12 second range.  There are other Mazda3 alt-fuel vehicles, including a regular hybrid, in the works as well though Mazda still seems to be betting on diesels in the long run

. This car isn’t going to light the world on fire, but it could give rotary engines another life as range extenders for the quirky Japanese brand. Rotary fans can rejoice…sorta.

Source: AOL.uk

Op-Ed: More All Electric Miles Equal Less Range Extender Need For 2nd Gen Chevrolet Volt

The 2nd Gen Chevrolet Volt Volt Gen 2 Would Benefit From A Smaller, Lighter Pure Series Range Extender.

With More Electric Range Comes The Need For Less Range Extender

I think we would all agree that, as AER increases, the need for a range extender decreases. This is depicted graphically in figure 1.

If we have an EV with 200-300 miles range, no range extender is required: witness Tesla Model S. If we have an EV with 100 miles range, a small range extender will suffice: witness BMW i3.

How does the Volt fit into this picture? We need to put some numbers to the words. (Engineers love numbers..yes?)

What Does Voltstats Say?

GM pitched the Volt by saying: “We will just make the battery big enough to cover the daily driving distance of the average driver of 40 miles.”

But how many miles does the average fleet driver really drive in a day?

50 Mile Mark Is More The Sweet Spot

Referring to figure 2, we see a high concentration of drivers at the 50 mile mark using the range extender. Also, referring to figure 3 we see an average fleet MPG of 135 miles/gallon.

Figure 3 (click to enlarge)

In figure 4 the AER/ER split is calculated that gets 50 miles total range and 135 MPG. The breakdown of the average fleet driver is: 36 miles on electricity and 14 miles on gas for a total of 50 miles. The 36 mile AER is probably less than 40 because some of the fleet miles are in cold weather.

Not Use Of Sophisticated Technology To Highlight # Miles

Using this average driving cycle, we can now derive partial derivatives (influence coefficients) for the effect of AER and ICE cycle efficiency on fleet fuel consumption.

Just 5 More Miles Of AER Makes A Big Difference

Figure 5 shows that adding only 5 miles of AER has a HUGE effect on fleet fuel consumption equaling a whopping36% savings in fuel.

How does this compare with a more efficient range extender? Often discussed is a turbo 3 cylinder for Volt Gen 2. It is expected that the turbo 3 would have approximately 10% better cycle efficiency than the current Volt ICE.

The comparison of the influence coefficients is presented in figure6.

Demonstration Of Better Use Of Resources To Provide More AER Than Engine Efficiency

Five more miles of AER decreases fuel consumption by 36% while going to a Turbo 3 cylinder decreases fuel consumption by only 10%. The influence of AER is nearly 4 times as great as the influence of the Turbo 3.

Keep in mind that one of the goals for gen 2 Volt is to reduce costs. GM’s turbo 3 undoubtedly will be a pricy piece of equipment compared to the current 1.4, 4 cylinder. Is this costlier range extender justified? I say no. One would be better off by increasing AER instead.

But you say: “How much does another 5 miles AER cost? Batteries are exensive. Wouldn’t it be cheaper to go with the turbo 3 than with expensive batteries?” Again I say no. The cost of another 5 miles AER is zero. All we do is switch to Spark EV chemistry which is more robust and has a higher cycle life. We increase DOD to achieve the added 5 miles of range. Spark EV DOD is 80% versus 65% for the Volt. That is a 23% increase and it is worth an equivalent percentage increase in AER of 9 miles. Spark EV battery article found here (http://gm-volt.com/2013/08/02/spark-ev-versus-volt-battery/).

A more expensive range extender is not justified.

Conclusion

Volt Gen 2 With Smaller Range Extender/Single Transmission Is The Way To Go

Volt Gen 2 would benefit from a smaller, lighter pure series range extender. Not only do we save money on the range extender, we save money on the transmission. We can eliminate the costly 2 mode transmission we have now.

We could have a Gen 2 Volt that is:

• Lower cost
• Lower weight
• Higher performance
• More Interior room

It is hard to argue against that combo.

ebuggy Solves Range Anxiety With Battery Trailer

If EVs have proven anything over the course of the past couple of years, it is that as viable as electric cars may be for a small sliver of the population, range anxiety is very much a real thing. While numerous ideas have proposed ways to solve range anxiety, a German company has come up with a solution that is both silly, and sensible; a battery pack confined entirely to a trailer.

Called the “ebuggy” and designed by ze Germans, the ebuggy is a new take on an old idea; namely, adding an extra battery pack to the outside of an electric vehicle. Designed as a replacement for immobile charging stations and rare battery swapping stations, the ebuggy can be positioned at any gas station to offer EV drivers some extra range.

Customers need to register for the ebuggy system, after which they’re recieve a kit that contains a tow hitch, power socket, and an in-car display. After hooking all of these up, an EV driver merely needs to pull into a gas station with the ebuggy system, hook up the battery trailer, and go!

The trailer can go up to 62 mph and offers up to four hours of driving range. Some simple math tells us that the ebuggy can offer over 200 miles of range, on top of what your car’s battery can normally provide. Once the trailer is drained, it has to be returned to an ebuggy station to be recharged. Clever, but will EV buyers go for it?

If you ask me, it’ll be a hard sell. People who are buying electric vehicles aren’t looking to take long trips with them, often choosing a secondary car for extended driving excursions. ebuggy’s inventors believe that their innovation could leader to cheaper EVs with smaller on-board batteries, but I doubt many consumers are keen on the idea of dragging a trailer along with them on any trip longer than 60 miles.

Trailer range extenders are probably best left to the DIY-crowd and concept cars. As a business model, it just doesn’t seem like a long range idea.

That said, the trailer-mounted spoiler IS pretty sweet

Source: Gas 2.0