toyota rav4 electric

[TomT]

A good portion of the EVSEs (Blink, for example) out there are 30 amps max so that is likely the charge rate they are using for their estimate...

guess that will be MUCH lower charging systems since it still states a 6 hour recharge which would be about what a 6.6 would do if the available is in the 34 Kwh range

 

[mitch672]

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1076004_more-details-live-photos-2012-toyota-rav4-ev-electric-suv-launch" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The charger is mentioned in the above article, as being the same 10KW being used in the Model S
And yes, you would need an EVSE capable of supplying 41.6Amps to use the full 10KW charging rate, in practice that means a 50A EVSE.

 

[evnow]

Eek !! 42kWh battery and no QC? What are they going to do, leave space for a "future" QC?

If this uses Tesla's 40 kWh battery - there won't be QC - just as there is no QC in the Model S base version. Speculation is that the 40 kWh battery can't handle QC without much degradation.

 

[Herm]

Speculation is that the 40 kWh battery can't handle QC without much degradation.

Laptop cells.. apparently there is no demand for recharging a laptop in 30 minutes.

 

[surfingslovak]

Laptop cells.. apparently there is no demand for recharging a laptop in 30 minutes.

Herm, funny you should say that. I spent some time on the Tesla forum when the Model S feature announcement was made, and found some of the discussion about the lack of QC on their base 40 kWh model to be misguided. Were you there as well? It's been pointed out that Mitsubishi offered QC on a 16 kWh pack, and we see no reason why this should not be possible on a 40 kWh pack. After the dust settled a bit, the best explanation the forum could come up with was that the cells would not last long enough in an automotive application, if QC was thrown into the mix. The argument then was that Tesla decided to nix QC in order to provide more adequate warranty. Admittedly, that's a bit far fetched and not very plausible, but better than a the earlier statement, which was essentially "QC on a 40 kWh pack is simply not possible".

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Different company differenf packs different parameters

 

[TEG]

Different cell chemistries are more or less amenable to quick charging.

One larger pack could be limited on QC, where as a smaller pack of a different type of cells could be OK with QC.

So, it is plausible that 40kW S has no QC for battery longevity reasons, whereas iMiEV could use different types of cells that are OK with QC even though the pack size is smaller.

I think it boils down to max C rates per cell. Typical laptop batteries aren't designed for high C rates. Some other types of cells (such as A123 for instance) which are designed more for things like power tools can handle quick discharge and recharge better.

 

[surfingslovak]

So, it is plausible that 40kW S has no QC for battery longevity reasons, whereas iMiEV could use different types of cells that are OK with QC even though the pack size is smaller.

Right, I'm not opposed to the idea that cell design and warranty considerations had something to do with this, but I think that it's not the main reason why QC is not offered on the smaller Tesla packs. I suspect that there are other business reasons behind this, but that's just my personal opinion.

I've been following Tom Saxton's blog and couple of threads on the Tesla forum with great interest, and I must say that I'm amazed how well the packs are holding up. Although the Roadster does not have bona fide QC, it's worth pointing out that its level 2 charger is much faster than what the Leaf has. The custom ClipperCreek EVSE Tesla markets is capable of 16.8 kW. This is not all that far from the average power CHAdeMO users will see on their Leaf or Mitsubishi i.

As Herm alluded above, the RAV4 EV will lack QC for several reasons, and the most important one might not be of technical nature.