Toyota negative on batteries because it has more experience than other others on them

Here's the difference. Toyota wants the government to take money from other programs to support fuel cells more than plug-ins because they have decided that plug-ins aren't likely to suceed based on some version of physics. But ofcourse every time they have stated a physics limitation (refueling, efficiency because of waight, can't make an SUV) these limitations have been over come.

The plug-in advocates are simply saying there should be a level playing field, and they mean level, not fuel cells get 9 and long range bevs get 4 and phevs get 0. Because of the low demand and high costs of fuel cell vehicles and hydrogen infrastructure you do expect that fuel cell vehicles on the R&D side will be funded more per potential car, and they are, but why should the US taxpayer pay more to subsidize an expensive commercial test for imported cars (yes japanese government want all these things made in japan) and take money from domestic plug-in manufacturing.

I would say toyota needs to explain again how fuel cells are mainstream in 10 years, but plug-ins even though there will be more of them, have some physics reason not to sell.

 

yes, i would like to see a solid debate from both sides. but it would probably wind up like climate change, both camps entrenched and protecting their turf. maybe the uocs could step in? right now, our government should be leaning solidly in their direction.

 

Your point is well received. Toyota has finally succumbed to the big company mentality. It's sad to see. Meanwhile Hyundai is applying Toyota's past secrets of making really reliable cars that most owners are pleasantly surprised with the quality. Telsa has also figured out that making what the customer wants (in the niche the sell cars in) is a better strategy than using the government as a car choice strong-arming agency.

 

must be why toyota sales are steadily falling.

 

So, this debate is about this! really?

 

yup, not that impressive, is it. not that i'm predicting the future. heck, i'm interested in a bev when they're practical, and i don't doubt the numbers will keep growing, at least until they hit the wall like hybrids did.

 

One member states: Tesla, a small company, builds Supercharger network with its own $ compared to Toyota. Sure, one example: Inside Nevada's $1.25 billion Tesla tax deal

 

The Nevada deal had nothing to do with SuperChargers. It was for the economic stimulus of doubling the world's lithium battery production all in the state of Nevada.
Mining lithium, improving schools and infrastructure, and paid out over 20 years.
I expect Nevada got a better deal than Minnesota for its almost $500 Million in incentives for a new football stadium, or Texas did for its $53 Million to convince Toyota to mo e the headquarters there.

 

Supercharger | Tesla Motors then click on 2015 or 2016 and you'll see something similar to



or



or go to Superchargers (supercharge.info)

if you want to see construction in progress and permits and just focus on the next 3 months.

 

thank you. how many mph will these charge? are they available to any ev driver?

 

They charge over 400 mph at the beginning of the charge on the newest Tesla's and taper down from there. Older Teslas will start out in the 300s and taper down. That is based on Tesla's Model S being less efficient per mile (about 3 miles per kWh) than a Leaf (which would do 4 to 5 miles per kWh).

No, they aren't available to charge anything but a Tesla. Musk has offered to let any car manufacturer join the network but none have taken him up on the offer yet. It would require paying into the network cost on a per car basis and agreeing to use the Tesla car charge connector or providing end users with an adapter to take with them.

 

hey, by the time the $40,000. tesla comes out, it may be viable.

 

as an example on a S70D someone posted

If the car weighs less / gets more miles per kWh but has a similar capacity battery the same charge rate in KW would result in a faster relative rate in mph.

So in 2018 if the $35,000 car gets 20% better range per kWh and Tesla continues to improve charging rates as they have over the last 3 years you can expect to see super chargers hitting 500+ mph on the mid priced Model 3 no problem.

Of course that super fast charge rate is only if you drive it to near empty. The people that always want to charge to full will be there forever if they aren't smart enough to unplug and start driving once they get enough range in the battery. Heaven help us if some idiot pulls in with a 75% charge and tries to charge to 100% even though they don't need it to make it to their next stop.

 

Yes but this is technicalities causing the pioneer fcv owner some pain.
The problems will certainly be solved if/when the fcv will be mainstream.

What haven't been mentioned much in the thread so far is the weight and recharge cycle wear current BEVs are suffering from.
I U don't want to recharge your BEV too often U have to add considerable weight to the car with current battery technology, Almost half of the weight of a Tesla (or any other long range BEV) is caused by the battery pack, that's a huge problem.
Second, every time U charge your BEV. the HV pack degrades a little bit, that means decreased fuel efficiency at every charge cycle and it's particularly true with fast charging.

I believe this is the main reason Toyota is focusing on FCVs.
/Roger

 

It is viable now for some people.
Each month as more pop up it becomes viable for more and more people.
It isn't an absolute, which is why it works.

As Tesla grows, so does their market.

 

Not true on several fronts

1. the weight of the Tesla pack is a plus in terms of crash worthiness and some handling characteristics because it allows for lower center of gravity.

2. fast charging doesn't degrade the pack any worse than slow charging when comparing the energy levels we are talking about. Nissan leafs don't degrade faster with large numbers of chademo charging sessions and Teslas don't degrade faster with large numbers of supercharging sessions.

3. Degradation affects range not efficiency. A heavily degraded pack won't change the Wh per mile or miles per kWh number one bit. You might have to charge more often to offset range loss but the difference in cost per mile is basically zero.

 

Interesting, "400 mph". Is that while parked at the charger?

Bob Wilson

 

1) I'm sure greater weight of the car is good for the user if he can afford it but it doesn't beat the cost equation, heavier cars are more expensive to buy and drive.

2) When I last visited the subject fast charging was bad for your battery and that's linked to battery physics. Maybe some improvments have been made but I still believe there is a problem.

3) Well, it must be bad for efficiency too because when the internal resistance increases, the heat loss of the battery increases and that's a problem both when U charge and use your battery pack.

 

You can really get lost in the weeds staring at a tree instead of trying to figure out the shape of the woods.

I'm not going to argue point by point with you if you want to go by your beliefs and not discuss real world data.

You are more than welcome to run over to Tesla Motors Club - Enthusiasts & Owners Forum or My Nissan Leaf Forum - Index page and discuss your beliefs with someone there but you might find people responding with facts so be prepared for that.

 

I always thought it odd that people talk about charging in mph but it has become the norm.

It involves taking charging Amps x Volts and scaling that to KW charge rate by time and then mentally or in software backing that around to miles charge remaining in the battery pack by way of kWh in the pack divided by wh/mile and then doing further math to account for the time spent charging.

If you have to do the math yourself it sounds complicated but people do it subconsciously and come back to saying things like:

"my leaf charges at 11 mph on L2"
"my Model S charges at 300+ mph on a supercharger"

its a very vague way of stating the power of the charging system and the efficiency of the car at the same time. Doesn't mean squat unless you know all the details about the car in question. Swap tires, have a different year with a different charger on board, use a charger in a different state or country where the voltage isn't the same and it all changes.

But people don't care about details, they just want to know how far and how fast.

edit: fixed spelling errors