Monday 12th January 2009

Detroit '09: Dodge Circuit EV

Hard-charging Dodge Circuit is based on Lotus Europa

---

Haven't I seen you somewhere before?

The Dodge Viper and Lotus Europa couldn’t be more different if they tried – but what would happen if they had a lovechild? Well, it might look something like this – the Dodge Circuit EV.

As the name suggests this is in fact an electric car and although the original concept was seen last year, Dodge has decided to give it more of a family face.

The new car has been unveiled at the Detroit Show and is obviously based around a Lotus Europa but is powered by a Tesla Roadster-style lithium-ion battery pack.

The car has a similar range of between 150 and 200 miles but could cost considerably less than the £90,000 Tesla. It is expected to go on sale in the US in 2010 and in the UK in 2011.

 

[spoonoff]

This is the equivalent of McDonalds trying to improve their image with vegetarians by setting a cow up in a luxury penthouse-barn, after painting it orange...

[kambites]

I wonder what "considerably less" means.

[Timayyyy]

Electric cars FTW!!!

[carsnapper]

ridiculous car.

150 miles range is totally useless, and I suspect that after a years worth of use that'll drop to >100 miles 'real' driving. Lithium batteries are an environmental disaster to build and recycle. It'll take hours to recharge even with a huge industrial 70 amp + output and still uses fossil fuel or nuclear generated electricity to power it.

Stupid, stupid, stupid. Play toys for the rich and stupid.

[kambites]

carsnapper said:

ridiculous car.

150 miles range is totally useless, and I suspect that after a years worth of use that'll drop to >100 miles 'real' driving. Lithium batteries are an environmental disaster to build and recycle. It'll take hours to recharge even with a huge industrial 70 amp + output and still uses fossil fuel or nuclear generated electricity to power it.

Stupid, stupid, stupid. Play toys for the rich and stupid.

Well reasoned argument there, thanks for that.

[Skinner.Daddy]

kambites said:

I wonder what "considerably less" means.

+ 1

An electric car that: -

1. is good looking
2. has a good range
3. is affordable

Will make the company that builds it extremely rich!

[pits]

looks good, if ots cheap enough, just stick a big v8 in it, i would, then send the pics and co2 emissions to greenpeace etc

[kambites]

pits said:

looks good, if ots cheap enough, just stick a big v8 in it, i would, then send the pics and co2 emissions to greenpeace etc

It's an Elise chassis. Where exactly are you going to put a V8?

[fairplay101]

Skinner.Daddy said:

kambites said:

I wonder what "considerably less" means.

+ 1

An electric car that: -

1. is good looking
2. has a good range
3. is affordable

Will make the company that builds it extremely rich!

Suspect you're right.

But for me I'd REALLY miss the sound of a good engine note in particular - I wonder if they'd consider various high quality engine sound tracks in the options list, tick the V6, V8 or any engine you like for that matter These options would also stop me wondering how long it will be before I get run over by one of these electric sports cars?!

[OJ]

PH said:

It is expected to go on sale in the US in 2010 and in the UK in 2011

Is it? I thought Autocar said it had been canned

[vetteheadracer]

carsnapper said:

ridiculous car.

150 miles range is totally useless, and I suspect that after a years worth of use that'll drop to >100 miles 'real' driving. Lithium batteries are an environmental disaster to build and recycle. It'll take hours to recharge even with a huge industrial 70 amp + output and still uses fossil fuel or nuclear generated electricity to power it.

Stupid, stupid, stupid. Play toys for the rich and stupid.

150 miles is about the range of a Mitsubishi Evo.

[carsnapper]

kambites said:

carsnapper said:

ridiculous car.

150 miles range is totally useless, and I suspect that after a years worth of use that'll drop to >100 miles 'real' driving. Lithium batteries are an environmental disaster to build and recycle. It'll take hours to recharge even with a huge industrial 70 amp + output and still uses fossil fuel or nuclear generated electricity to power it.

Stupid, stupid, stupid. Play toys for the rich and stupid.

Well reasoned argument there, thanks for that.

Your statement was very constructive too, although I don't think you understand- it is not an 'argument'. It was a statement.

Would you like me to provide you with lots of links to loads of sites to support my statement?
Then, if you supplied similar information contradicting mine...then it would be an argument

No malice, I feel that these battery operated electric vehicles should not be marketed as having environmental / social benefits, inferred or otherwise. And don't get me started on the 'perceived' benefits of the Prius....

Edited by carsnapper on Monday 12th January 13:47

Edited by carsnapper on Monday 12th January 13:48

[carsnapper]

vetteheadracer said:

carsnapper said:

ridiculous car.

150 miles range is totally useless, and I suspect that after a years worth of use that'll drop to >100 miles 'real' driving. Lithium batteries are an environmental disaster to build and recycle. It'll take hours to recharge even with a huge industrial 70 amp + output and still uses fossil fuel or nuclear generated electricity to power it.

Stupid, stupid, stupid. Play toys for the rich and stupid.

150 miles is about the range of a Mitsubishi Evo.

correct, and that car is constantly ridiculed for it's pathetic range! Although at least it only takes 2 mins to refill it tiny tank at any petrol station. You don't have to sit around for 3 1/2 hours to fill it!

[tridave]

OJ said:

PH said:

It is expected to go on sale in the US in 2010 and in the UK in 2011

Is it? I thought Autocar said it had been canned

I thought it had been canned as well

[jayfish]

Good on Dodge and Tesla; this isn't the technology that we need for the future, but we need cars like these as test beds for the future.

[1000TCR]

Some months ago I've read an article concearning the ecological overall calculation of a car. They came to the clue, that a Hummer H2 is far more eclological then a Toyota Prius until you drove about 150 000 Miles. The battery of the Prius is nothing less then an ecological desaster like "carsnaper" said already.

Edited by 1000TCR on Monday 12th January 13:53

[skint_driver]

carsnapper said:

No malice, I feel that these battery operated electric vehicles should not be marketed as having environmental benefits, inferred or otherwise.

Burning fossil fuels in a power station to run electric cars is more efficient than using internal combustion engines. This is good for the environment, even if you ignore power generated by wind,solar,tidal,hydro and nuclear power - all commercial methods of generating power which can't easily be put into a vehicle (unless you have a "Mr Fusion" handy?).

The reason is that IC engines are really inefficient - IIRC only about 20% of the energy in the chemicals goes into moving the vehicle - the rest is lost in heat, noise, and operating the engine (alternator, valves, ignition all sap power). The turbines in a power station do a much better job.

Also an IC engine rarely runs at its most efficient speed, as the speed of power generation is linked to the speed of the vehicle by the gearbox. This means that an electric drive vehicle with a small on board battery and a diesel generator may be more efficient than a traditional IC-powered car.

The only problem with electric vehicles is the time it takes to charge them, but the infrastructure required to (for example) put 70-amp charging stations in car parks would not be crazily expensive to develop and deploy.

[theluckyman]

Hmm

Claverton Energy Research Group

http://www.claverton-energy.com/

and

http://www.claverton-energy.com/download/289/

apologies that the formatting of the paper isn't the best but I was in a hurry.

No bias or greenwash - I'm an energy analyst/engineer rather than working for any car firms - but if we don't reduce our dependance on the black stuff *soon* then we're going to be in the very deep brown stuff (no not the PM)

Not sure either the Tesla Roadster or the Circuit are the way to go - the batteries should be air cooled and in the floorpan of the vehicle to optimise the CoG - but they're not at all bad for first attempts at a pure battery sports car.

[Scuffers]

skint_driver said:

Burning fossil fuels in a power station to run electric cars is more efficient than using internal combustion engines. This is good for the environment, even if you ignore power generated by wind,solar,tidal,hydro and nuclear power - all commercial methods of generating power which can't easily be put into a vehicle (unless you have a "Mr Fusion" handy?).

The reason is that IC engines are really inefficient - IIRC only about 20% of the energy in the chemicals goes into moving the vehicle - the rest is lost in heat, noise, and operating the engine (alternator, valves, ignition all sap power). The turbines in a power station do a much better job.

Actually, although you have a point, your numbers are way off.

modern petrol IC engines these days are making 30-35% fuel efficency (diesel car engines are aproaching 50+%).

Yes, Turbines are way more efficent at using the energy in their fuel, but now consider that for every KW generated in a power station, only ~60% at best ever comes out of the socket, transmittion looses are not insignigicant.

skint_driver said:

Also an IC engine rarely runs at its most efficient speed, as the speed of power generation is linked to the speed of the vehicle by the gearbox. This means that an electric drive vehicle with a small on board battery and a diesel generator may be more efficient than a traditional IC-powered car.

Yes and no, same issues with electric cars (and no gearbox) as IC engined cars, Tesla worked way more efficently with it's two speed box, they just could not get it to work reliably.

skint_driver said:

The only problem with electric vehicles is the time it takes to charge them, but the infrastructure required to (for example) put 70-amp charging stations in car parks would not be crazily expensive to develop and deploy.

now your having a laugh....

Work out how many Kw/h's you need to equivalent a tank of petrol/diesel.

now, work out how many A supply you need to provide this int he time frame you want to charge said battery (don't forget to factor in the chargers in-efficency along with the battery's in-efficency)

now tell me how much it cost to provide said power outlet and more to the point, the infrastructure to support it - just ask your elec company for a quote to provide a 100Kva commercial supply (enough for say 5 70A outlets - approx 20Kva per 70A/240V outlet), then ask the same question with a 1,000Kva supply.

then consider where this power is going to come from, the argument only works of you can do this using off-peak power, we do not have the generating capacity to cope with this in addition to the normal daily usage...

[kambites]

carsnapper said:

kambites said:

carsnapper said:

ridiculous car.

150 miles range is totally useless, and I suspect that after a years worth of use that'll drop to >100 miles 'real' driving. Lithium batteries are an environmental disaster to build and recycle. It'll take hours to recharge even with a huge industrial 70 amp + output and still uses fossil fuel or nuclear generated electricity to power it.

Stupid, stupid, stupid. Play toys for the rich and stupid.

Well reasoned argument there, thanks for that.

Your statement was very constructive too, although I don't think you understand- it is not an 'argument'. It was a statement.

Would you like me to provide you with lots of links to loads of sites to support my statement?
Then, if you supplied similar information contradicting mine...then it would be an argument

No malice, I feel that these battery operated electric vehicles should not be marketed as having environmental / social benefits, inferred or otherwise. And don't get me started on the 'perceived' benefits of the Prius....

Well 200 mile range (or even 100 mile range) with an overnight charging time would be fine for 100% of the driving I do in the Elise. You seem to be saying "I don't want one therefor it's useless" which is just stupid.

I don't know about the environmental impacts because there are a million different research papers coming up with completely different results depending on the political bias of the researcher and/or their funder.

Your argument strikes me as the same thing that luddites would have said comparing internal combustion engine powered cars to the horse and cart a hundred years ago.



There are a HUGE number of people for whom it would make a perfect mode of transport. The fact that you're not one of them doesn't take it "stupid".

Edited by kambites on Monday 12th January 14:15