How easy we forget - The first 100 mile Electric car 1909!

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

mikesus

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2014
Messages
103
http://www.edisontechcenter.org/ElectricCars.html#baker" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Amazing how we have forgotten and believe that the most we can get is 85 miles (or 40 in the volt).

Wonder how much big oil paid to help make folks forget?
 
Wow, I bet that is a fun project to keep running - I'd sure enjoy it! Talk about a fun vehicle to drive around town and get noticed, heh.

As to range - what is the range of the Leaf when limited to 25mph? Imagine trying to get that thing to pass minimum safety standards.. not really an apples to apples comparison.

I don't think anyone has to pay much to get folks to forget - making them remember is more difficult (look at amount paid in advertising budgets just to keep folks thinking of various brands).
 
That is to say, 100 miles in a car with a top speed of 22 mph.

Let's say that's 15mph average. I think someone's done 300 miles in a Leaf at some steady ultra low speed like 15mph, haven't they? (or was that 200 miles?)

Anyhow, an EV is generally 19th century technology really, excepting the energy storage, so is there that much of a surprise?

Not that it isn't interesting to look back, but I'm not quite sure what it is likely to tell us. Some fond nostalgia perhaps. Not sure I'd take one of those on a freeway!
 
mikesus said:
http://www.edisontechcenter.org/ElectricCars.html#baker


Amazing how we have forgotten and believe that the most we can get is 85 miles (or 40 in the volt).

Wonder how much big oil paid to help make folks forget?

Folks didn't forget. Automotive needs simply outstripped the rate of improvement in battery technology; which was pretty flat for many decades. The batteries simply could not compete with the energy-density of gasoline at highway speeds.

A lightweight flivver powered by Lead-Acid batteries might could get 100 miles in 1909 at a very low speed and running the batteries flat. Even with that it was a stunt because nobody would dare run Lead-Acid down to 0% SOC in the normal course of practical driving. Best not to go below 50%. 20% on rare occasion. Even with that, the degradation would make the problematic Gen1 Nissan cells shine by comparison. Not to mention that the LEAF can easily surpass 100 miles, even 150 at speeds comparable to that 1909 car, without seriously stressing the pack and moving probably twice the weight if not more. Also, the LEAF pack is maintenance-free while the Lead-Acid packs of early EVs required fanatical attention in keeping electrolyte levels maintained, corrosion at bay, and keeping cells equalized. We've come a long way, baby!
 
I get over 100 miles of range in my LEAF. I drive almost exclusively on low-speed city roads in "B" mode. Almost every morning my GoM is over 100. It was 103 this morning and only went down 5 miles for my 9 mile commute to work.
 
Nubo said:
A lightweight flivver powered by Lead-Acid batteries might could get 100 miles in 1909 at a very low speed and running the batteries flat. Even with that it was a stunt because nobody would dare run Lead-Acid down to 0% SOC in the normal course of practical driving. Best not to go below 50%. 20% on rare occasion. Even with that, the degradation would make the problematic Gen1 Nissan cells shine by comparison. Not to mention that the LEAF can easily surpass 100 miles, even 150 at speeds comparable to that 1909 car, without seriously stressing the pack and moving probably twice the weight if not more. Also, the LEAF pack is maintenance-free while the Lead-Acid packs of early EVs required fanatical attention in keeping electrolyte levels maintained, corrosion at bay, and keeping cells equalized. We've come a long way, baby!

Thank you. I actually get people saying stuff like this to me all of the time. If not a car like this, then the Leaf or Volt is getting compared to an EV-1. And I have to remind people of all of the shortcomings of the EV-1.
 
donald said:
That is to say, 100 miles in a car with a top speed of 22 mph.

Let's say that's 15mph average. I think someone's done 300 miles in a Leaf at some steady ultra low speed like 15mph, haven't they? (or was that 200 miles?)
188 IIRR, by LEAFfan. In Phoenix, on a hot day, and averaging 18 mph.

donald said:
Anyhow, an EV is generally 19th century technology really, excepting the energy storage, so is there that much of a surprise?

Not that it isn't interesting to look back, but I'm not quite sure what it is likely to tell us. Some fond nostalgia perhaps. Not sure I'd take one of those on a freeway!
There were quite a few BEVs around 1910 that were advertised (and achieved, in some conditions) 100 miles or more on a charge. And one was driven over 200 miles on a charge around then (forget the date, but it was in France). I rather like the notech magazine article, "The status quo of electric cars: better batteries, same range", which accurately sums up the situation then and now: http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2010/05/the-status-quo-of-electric-cars-better-batteries-same-range.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
Hence my suggestion I'd not want to go on the motorway.

But I also value my creature comforts; controls over temperature, noise and vibration.
 
mikesus said:
http://www.edisontechcenter.org/ElectricCars.html#baker

I like this line;

Tesla Motors achieved success with the Model S. The Model S appealed to the masses with its standard 4 door sedan design and ease of use.

It might appeal, but it's the comfortably well-off that buy!

C'mon. Let's see this Model 3!!
 
Although the linked article says these used 'Edison Lead Acid' batteries, I'll bet they really used Edison Cells (Ni/Fe), which are still manufactured. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel–iron_battery
for info.

Edison cells were/are famous for very low specific energy density, but an ability to withstand unbelievable abuse. Discharging them to 0%, and recharging, is completely harmless. Occasionally, you replace the KOH electrolyte, and they are as good as new. If you don't care about weight, they are the best deep-cycle batteries in existence, I think.
 
mendenmh said:
Although the linked article says these used 'Edison Lead Acid' batteries, I'll bet they really used Edison Cells (Ni/Fe), which are still manufactured. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;–iron_battery for info.

Edison cells were/are famous for very low specific energy density, but an ability to withstand unbelievable abuse. Discharging them to 0%, and recharging, is completely harmless. Occasionally, you replace the KOH electrolyte, and they are as good as new. If you don't care about weight, they are the best deep-cycle batteries in existence, I think.

The above link brings me to just a page on Nickel, maybe because the shortcut cuts off there?

Probably, people in 1909 didn't go very far, even if they could afford a car and electricity. Traveling on a road at 20 mph was crazy fast! Longer trips, they took a train.
 
mendenmh said:
Although the linked article says these used 'Edison Lead Acid' batteries, I'll bet they really used Edison Cells (Ni/Fe), which are still manufactured. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;–iron_battery
for info.

Edison cells were/are famous for very low specific energy density, but an ability to withstand unbelievable abuse. Discharging them to 0%, and recharging, is completely harmless. Occasionally, you replace the KOH electrolyte, and they are as good as new. If you don't care about weight, they are the best deep-cycle batteries in existence, I think.

They also have poorer cold-weather performance than even lead-acid batteries which is why they ultimately failed in the automotive market, even as starting batteries for ICE vehicles.
 
Back
Top