Chevrolet Spark EV

[AndyH]

A123 will build the cells and then assemble the packs, GM must be planning on keeping their existing battery assembly plant busy building Volt packs.. so it sounds good.

Maybe. One of the bits of info on the Volt is that GM may move from LiMn to LiFePO4 for this vehicle as well. Not sure what that does for the GM battery plant...

 

[evnow]

Maybe. One of the bits of info on the Volt is that GM may move from LiMn to LiFePO4 for this vehicle as well. Not sure what that does for the GM battery plant...

LiFePO4 might allow Volt to not need the liquid cooling. That would be a big plus - it would free up space for the 5th seat and possibly reduce cost. Not to speak of the reduced fire incidents after crash tests :lol:

 

[DrInnovation]

Maybe. One of the bits of info on the Volt is that GM may move from LiMn to LiFePO4 for this vehicle as well. Not sure what that does for the GM battery plant...

LiFePO4 might allow Volt to not need the liquid cooling. That would be a big plus - it would free up space for the 5th seat and possibly reduce cost. Not to speak of the reduced fire incidents after crash tests :lol:

I think those "bits" are reporters trying to seem smart and related the spark choice (made back in the summer) to their beliefs about the Volt. If you have some meaningful source for that assertion it would be interesting see it.



If they move to LiFEPO4, in the Volt, to keep range they would need about 10% increase in cells, so that would probably eat up any space saving from reduction in liquid cooling.

 

[SanDust]

LiFePO4 might allow Volt to not need the liquid cooling. That would be a big plus - it would free up space for the 5th seat and possibly reduce cost. Not to speak of the reduced fire incidents after crash tests.

If the choice is between having a fire at the storage yard if some incompetent doesn't depower the battery or replacing my very expensive battery because it didn't have a thermal management system I'd prefer the fire risk.

 

[Herm]

If they move to LiFEPO4, in the Volt, to keep range they would need about 10% increase in cells, so that would probably eat up any space saving from reduction in liquid cooling.

I doubt GM would change chemistry, that would cost a lot more than the $1000 they are talking about to slap on the "feel-good" patch.

Taking out the aluminum heat plates would shorten the length of the pack about 1 ft, plus whatever room there is at the front for coolant hoses etc.. but how would you get rid of the heat?, its a compact pack without a lot of surface area buried in the middle of the car.

 

[AndyH]

LiFePO4 might allow Volt to not need the liquid cooling. That would be a big plus - it would free up space for the 5th seat and possibly reduce cost. Not to speak of the reduced fire incidents after crash tests.

If the choice is between having a fire at the storage yard if some incompetent doesn't depower the battery or replacing my very expensive battery because it didn't have a thermal management system I'd prefer the fire risk.

The beautiful thing is that there's room on the planet for all desires. You can have the fire risk - Done! I'll take a battery chemistry that provides a significantly longer cycle life.

 

[AndyH]

Maybe. One of the bits of info on the Volt is that GM may move from LiMn to LiFePO4 for this vehicle as well. Not sure what that does for the GM battery plant...

LiFePO4 might allow Volt to not need the liquid cooling. That would be a big plus - it would free up space for the 5th seat and possibly reduce cost. Not to speak of the reduced fire incidents after crash tests :lol:

I think those "bits" are reporters trying to seem smart and related the spark choice (made back in the summer) to their beliefs about the Volt. If you have some meaningful source for that assertion it would be interesting see it.

If they move to LiFEPO4, in the Volt, to keep range they would need about 10% increase in cells, so that would probably eat up any space saving from reduction in liquid cooling.

The source is cited in the appropriate forum.

 

[DrInnovation]

snip...

I think those "bits" are reporters trying to seem smart and related the spark choice (made back in the summer) to their beliefs about the Volt. If you have some meaningful source for that assertion it would be interesting see it.

If they move to LiFEPO4, in the Volt, to keep range they would need about 10% increase in cells, so that would probably eat up any space saving from reduction in liquid cooling.

The source is cited in the appropriate forum.

Do you mean your citing of
http://evworld.com/insider.cfm?archyr=2011&nextedition=345#volt" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't consider that a credible source. It does not even credit a statement from GM or an "insider" it just says things being discussed (not by whom).
It cites no sources, but chances are good its tied to the poor stories coming out of a few spots (mostly tracable to bloomberg) that started implying a change with a reporter writing in such a way as to mislead readers into think it was said by GM, but was really the reporters views. But that and a ton of tweeting/pushing of articles by A123 backing folks have confused lots of the media. (Maybe its people trying to prop up A123 stock, which is now at about $2/share but was up at $4 in October).

Autoline http://www.autoline.tv/journal/?p=19284" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
pretty clearly says GM denies any such change, saying A123 is just for the Spark.

 

[AndyH]

<snip>

Reply is in appropriate forum.

edit to clarify that the post was intended to be a pointer to the answer, not a directive.

 

[DrInnovation]

The U.S. has a new electric motor maker: General Motors.

GM has a pilot plant in Wixom, Mich. building prototype electric motors for EVs. Manufacturing equipment and processes developed there will eventually move to a mass production facility near Baltimore, Md. in 2013 for building 85-kW motors going into the Chevy Spark EV, also due out that year.

With the numerous high-quality electric motor makers domiciled in the U.S., you might wonder ......

More at
http://eetweb.com/motors-drives/GM-EV-motors-12-15-11/index.html


Interesting that they are taking it in house..

 

[Herm]

<snip>

Reply in appropriate forum.

whats the forum on A123 cells for the Volt?.. as much as I like the idea is not going to happen.

 

[scottf200]

You guys may like this article (and wonder who logged on to Scott's account and posted it <grin>)

electric-cars-some-are-real-most-are-only-compliance-cars--we-name-names
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1068832_electric-cars-some-are-real-most-are-only-compliance-cars--we-name-names" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Since last year, you've likely heard a lot about electric cars. You'll hear much more in the years to come.

But whether you're a fan or a foe, understand this: A few of the battery-electric cars you've heard about are "real"--meaning their makers want to sell as many as they can.

But quite a few of them aren't. They're not meant to lure in consumers, or sell in any kind of volume.

They're only built to meet California regulations for zero-emission vehicles--which is why they're called "compliance cars."
<snip>

 

[TRONZ]

The logic of that article is very sound. Its not much of a secret that almost every auto mnfr other than Nissan resents making an EV. Doing the bare minimum with conversion cars is a pretty good sign a company is only doing something because they have to. If these mnfrs really wanted to press their case further, they could also make their EV's sorta suck as well. Que the Ford Focus EV. :shock:

 

[TonyWilliams]

I saw a privately owned Spark driving down the road today in Naples, Italy.

 

[DrInnovation]

I saw a privately owned Spark driving down the road today in Naples, Italy.

That would be the gas version of the spark with a 1.0L engine.

 

[scottf200]

Jay Cole InsideEVs:

Said to begin production in January of 2013, GM spokesman Kevin Kelly said the Spark EV will offer the new Combined Charging System on board when production does begin, making it the first announced new electric offering to thrown down the challenge to CHAdeMO.

Karla Sanchez Motortrend:

GM spokesman Kevin Kelly says it all depends. “It varies on battery chemistry design and capabilities, but some batteries can be quick-charged multiple times.” Kelly also noted the upcoming Chevrolet Spark EV will be able to handle fast charging and work with the shared system.

The Combined Charging System is projected to be available by the end of this year while vehicles compatible with the technology should become available in 2013. All automakers involved currently have vehicles in development that will be compatible with the system.

worldcarfans.com

"DC Fast Charging with a Combined Charging System," the technology offers four recharging options:
1) one-phase AC-charging,
2) three-phase AC-charging,
3) DC-charging [at home] and
4) ultra-fast DC-charging [at public stations].
This four-in-one approach will allow consumers to recharge their electric vehicles at a variety of charging stations. More importantly, it could enable EVs to be recharged in as little as 15-20 minutes.

 

[TonyWilliams]

http://www.hybridcars.com/news/chevrolet-spark-ev-will-be-made-south-korea-43108.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Made in South Koreafor California so far:

"Actually, the Spark EV's range – along with curb weight, price, top speed, on-board charger details, and other specifications – are still not being shared, Fox said, as these are still being finalized.

Although Fox did not say so, it’s likely the company will continue using SAE charging connections as it does with the Volt, and not CHAdeMO. He did confirm DC fast charging will be available."

 

[adric22]

No batteries and no infrastructure... plans unchanged. Obviously, they MUST produce the Spark, with or without a Frankenplug and with or without A123. Otherwise, they won't be selling cars in California.

I thought that zero emissions mandate was repealed... What happened?

 

[edatoakrun]

- Lithium-ion battery maker A123 Systems Inc (AONE.O) said on Wednesday there was "substantial doubt" about its viability because the company expects to burn through cash and report steep losses over the next several quarters.

IMO, if GM was a well-managed company, with a significant interest in producing EVs, it would take this opportunity to take a major equity position in A123.

I expect that EV manufacturers without their own battery production, will find themselves in much the same position ICEV manufactures without their own engine programs found themselves in during the 1940's and 50's, always one generation behind the "majors" who could integrate Engine and vehicle developments.

Batteries are arguably even more essential to overall BEV design (and indisputably make up a larger percentage of total cost) than engines are to ICEVs.

IMO, EV manufactures who think that they can just shop around for the cheapest low-volume battery producer, will likely find themselves trailing in battery technology.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

IMO, if GM was a well-managed company, with a significant interest in producing EVs, it would take this opportunity to take a major equity position in A123.

Why? So they can take away some of Nissan's 500 car/month market share? With oil prices plummeting and unemployment increasing?