By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Electric sports car goes 200mi on a 10min charge

Source

With an electric motor at each wheel, the UK-built Lightning GT, unveiled yesterday at the British Motor Show, is said to produce a total of 700 HP. According to the company, the Lightning's nanotechnology battery pack will provide a 200-mile range on a ten-minute charge. Those are mighty big numbers to be throwing around, but with precious little known about the batteries, it makes it hard for us to validate the claims without independent testing.

The Lightning GT's nano-titanate batteries are supplied by a U.S. company called Altairnano, who claims the NanoSafe cells have a 12+ year life expectancy and retain 85% of their charge capacity after 15,000 cycles. They're also free from heavy metals, toxins and graphite, and are more thermally stable than other high-tech batteries. They may also grant you three wishes.

Jalopnik Snap Judgment: If everything the company claims is true, the Lightning should be one hell of a ride — even at the roughly $300,000 asking price. Much of that price likely offsets the battery costs. But, as demonstrated over about seven decades now, the British cottage car industry isn't exactly a model of reliability, so we'll be surprised if an all-electric British sports car produces anything more than smoke and irate customers — we can barely keep our gasoline-powered Triumphs running. Things should become clearer as 2010 approaches, the year the Lightning GT is expected to be available.

 

Lightning In A Bottle

 



Around the Network

Nice, if it actually works as described.



Overall I see no reason why we don't have electric cars now. If you read the history of cars you will see electric cars being produced every 30 years or so.

If we had focused on that tech from the beginning (i.e. the first time electric cars were around in the 19-teens) we would probably only have electric vehicles.

The last solid mass produced electric vehicles could go 300+ on a single charge. That is more than sufficient for nearly every single person. The only time that would become a possible issue is in long distance trips or current shipments by road.

Even then, you could plan your trip to accommodate a proper stop for eating or a sleeping at a hotel to let you recharge.

Read Tesla Motors vehicle description for more info on why people don't need a combustible engine. http://www.teslamotors.com/



superchunk said:
Overall I see no reason why we don't have electric cars now. If you read the history of cars you will see electric cars being produced every 30 years or so.

If we had focused on that tech from the beginning (i.e. the first time electric cars were around in the 19-teens) we would probably only have electric vehicles.

The last solid mass produced electric vehicles could go 300+ on a single charge. That is more than sufficient for nearly every single person. The only time that would become a possible issue is in long distance trips or current shipments by road.

Even then, you could plan your trip to accommodate a proper stop for eating or a sleeping at a hotel to let you recharge.

Read Tesla Motors vehicle description for more info on why people don't need a combustible engine. http://www.teslamotors.com/

$109,000.

Unless something miraculous happens, these won't be mainstream for a long time.



We dont even need electricity. It has been proven that cars run on urine



I hope my 360 doesn't RRoD
         "Suck my balls!" - Tag courtesy of Fkusmot

Around the Network

The Tesla roadster's 109 000$ price is reasonable compared to other sports cars. Lets not forget that when using it's first gear a Tesla Roadster can out-accelerate a non-turbo Porsche 911. Of course leaving the transmission in second gear is the recommended setting.

What can I say about this new Lightning other than that it is green sex on wheels. :)



Sam Yikin said:
superchunk said:
Overall I see no reason why we don't have electric cars now. If you read the history of cars you will see electric cars being produced every 30 years or so.

If we had focused on that tech from the beginning (i.e. the first time electric cars were around in the 19-teens) we would probably only have electric vehicles.

The last solid mass produced electric vehicles could go 300+ on a single charge. That is more than sufficient for nearly every single person. The only time that would become a possible issue is in long distance trips or current shipments by road.

Even then, you could plan your trip to accommodate a proper stop for eating or a sleeping at a hotel to let you recharge.

Read Tesla Motors vehicle description for more info on why people don't need a combustible engine. http://www.teslamotors.com/

$109,000.

Unless something miraculous happens, these won't be mainstream for a long time.

Tesla Motors is a ground up company. It is building its capital for mass production quatities and prices. In the next 2 years they will have a mass produced sports car similar to the one they already produce and a $40k-ish family sedan.

The point is GM and other companies had already started to mass produce electric vehicles that with the combined newer batteries and appropiate mass production the costs would dramatically come down over a few years. Thus, putting quality electric cars in the hands of the mass market in the 20k price range for a new vehicle.

I know I would spend up to $10k more for an purely electric version of a car, easy. When factor in the massive reduction in cost for fuel, even at prices from a few years ago, and the reduction in all the maintenance costs for various items that internal cumbustion engines require like belts, seals, oil, filters, etc, you could easily save $10k over a 5 year period.

Not to mention they are quicker, more durable, quieter, and obviously a zero emission vehicle is a good thing.

 



superchunk said:

Tesla Motors is a ground up company. It is building its capital for mass production quatities and prices. In the next 2 years they will have a mass produced sports car similar to the one they already produce and a $40k-ish family sedan.

The point is GM and other companies had already started to mass produce electric vehicles that with the combined newer batteries and appropiate mass production the costs would dramatically come down over a few years. Thus, putting quality electric cars in the hands of the mass market in the 20k price range for a new vehicle.

I know I would spend up to $10k more for an purely electric version of a car, easy. When factor in the massive reduction in cost for fuel, even at prices from a few years ago, and the reduction in all the maintenance costs for various items that internal cumbustion engines require like belts, seals, oil, filters, etc, you could easily save $10k over a 5 year period.

Not to mention they are quicker, more durable, quieter, and obviously a zero emission vehicle is a good thing.

 

For sure the purely economical saving would compensate the initial investment.  The main thing you need to change on an electric motor is the brushes.

Even if you factor in that you might need to rent a gas-powered vehicle a few days over the lifetime of your car, such as when towing a boat or recreational vehicles (jet skis, 4 wheelers, snowmobiles), I think you'd still come out on top.

 



superchunk said:
Sam Yikin said:
superchunk said:
Overall I see no reason why we don't have electric cars now. If you read the history of cars you will see electric cars being produced every 30 years or so.

If we had focused on that tech from the beginning (i.e. the first time electric cars were around in the 19-teens) we would probably only have electric vehicles.

The last solid mass produced electric vehicles could go 300+ on a single charge. That is more than sufficient for nearly every single person. The only time that would become a possible issue is in long distance trips or current shipments by road.

Even then, you could plan your trip to accommodate a proper stop for eating or a sleeping at a hotel to let you recharge.

Read Tesla Motors vehicle description for more info on why people don't need a combustible engine. http://www.teslamotors.com/

$109,000.

Unless something miraculous happens, these won't be mainstream for a long time.

Tesla Motors is a ground up company. It is building its capital for mass production quatities and prices. In the next 2 years they will have a mass produced sports car similar to the one they already produce and a $40k-ish family sedan.

The point is GM and other companies had already started to mass produce electric vehicles that with the combined newer batteries and appropiate mass production the costs would dramatically come down over a few years. Thus, putting quality electric cars in the hands of the mass market in the 20k price range for a new vehicle.

I know I would spend up to $10k more for an purely electric version of a car, easy. When factor in the massive reduction in cost for fuel, even at prices from a few years ago, and the reduction in all the maintenance costs for various items that internal cumbustion engines require like belts, seals, oil, filters, etc, you could easily save $10k over a 5 year period.

Not to mention they are quicker, more durable, quieter, and obviously a zero emission vehicle is a good thing.

 

20k range? links?  

That sounds great.... could mean big changes in car industry

 



Sam Yikin said:

20k range? links?  

That sounds great.... could mean big changes in car industry

 

I think he means that had we continued research in the field of electric vehicles they would now be at a mass-market price.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ev1#Costs

"The price for the car used to compute lease payments was US$33,995 to US$43,995, which made for lease payments of US$299 to over US$574 per month. One industry official said that each EV1 cost the company about US$80,000, including research, development and other associated costs."