Yes, but still too slow for me compared to the Tesla Superchargers. They’re great if I’m going to be in the office, but not so great if I have to run to Flat Rock or Auburn Hills, or even to Chicago or Louisville.
L2 would be good enough at home, though, where presumably I’d start with my max charge after a whole night of charging. Still need something Superchargeresque for Louisville/Chicago/Oakville, though. Driving through Ohio already sucks enough without having to add two hours of charging time to the itinerary.
I’m giggling at this back and forth about the “inconvenience” of plugging in EVs every day because I live somewhere where you have* to plug in your ICE vehicle every day in winter. It’d be pretty awesome if plugging the block heater in also put enough fuel in the tank to get to work.
*You don’t have to with most vehicles except on the very coldest of days, but even if you don’t strictly have to the “inconvenience” is worth it for the decreased engine wear and the shorter time it takes to get the heater blowing air that’s actually hot.
And the nice thing about EVs & PHEVs is, you can remote-start your car and warm it up with the garage door closed. No exhaust to worry about.
This also extends the range, because you are using mains power to pre-heat the car, not the battery.
(Though you have to be careful with PHEVs, the default setting on my Volt is to start the engine and use it as a heat source when it’s below a certain temperature. Fortunately this feature can be disabled.)
The Chevy Volt may be the ideal car for you. The current model has a 53 mile electric range, and after that it gets 42 miles to the gallon.
Mine is the 1st gen so it’s not as efficient, but it’s still a great compromise. It uses no gas for daily commutes, and when we take it on road trips, we don’t have to look for charging stations.
Yes, BMW wants to charge me $199.95 to update the software on my nonexistent 2003 BMW. That’s down from the already low, low regular price of $338. What a steal! And it will probably only require a day or two at the service center. I wonder if they fixed the bug where address numbers over 32767 turned into negative numbers.
I can tell from the blurriness that this guy got the email from the same place; Stevens Creek BMW in Santa Clara.
I’m in core so I don’t have to go out to suppliers or plants that often, so if 727 has reasonable range then it’ll probably work just fine for me. start from full charge in the morning, and if I can’t get back to full at work, no biggie.
Google is weird sometimes. CX727 isn’t exactly a secret, and when I search for “ford cx727”, I get a bunch of sites walking about Ford’s EV plans, but most of them don’t mention the CX727. I wonder if they’re being linked to by unindexed sites that do mention the CX727.
No idea what you’re talking about. I’ve never pretended to know the first thing about CX727, other than that it seems to be Ford’s first “real” EV platform. Even the rumors about it are very limited. You’ve been mentioning it in this thread for almost two months, but the name has been floating around for longer than that.
I just find it weird that Googling the name leads me to pages about Ford’s EV stuff that don’t actually contain that keyword. I’m curious how that’s coming about. I know that Google will use the source links to make inferences about a page, but I don’t see those origin pages come up at all.
My mistake–it looks like it was Balthisar who mentioned the platform first (you had just quoted him). Anyway, that’s when I had first searched around for more information elsewhere, but found very little then and now (and no, I don’t expect either of you to say anything more on it).
The 53 miles isn’t much different than the 26 for my purposes. That, and “drive what you build.”
What’s reported in the press about the 300 mile range is probably accurate. I’d guess 200 miles on a January morning. Those would both be plenty for local plants and supplier visits.
And I still have the beater Expedition that I use for camping, demonstrating once again that even for those of us who want electrified vehicles, they’re still not practical for 100% of current use cases.
I’m happy to say anything that’s been reported in the press. Or anything that’s not secret. Honestly, I know a lot of mundane manufacturing details that probably aren’t secret (as we mentioned several times, Tesla/GM/Audi/etc. all do the same thing), but aren’t really interesting to non-industry folk. Will the rheology of this particular material allow meter filling of 35 cc within cycle time at x jobs per hour given the ambient temperature in February at 7382 feet above sea level?
Will it? Inquiring minds need to know! slight hijack: I’m kind of disappointed that Ford’s giving up on cars and focusing on SUV/CUV and trucks. (I know Mustang and the Focus thing, but still…) . I ended up buying a Focus ST at the end of September partly due to this (and the fact the “local” Subaru dealers are horrible to deal with).
I’m hoping the prices will come down some more on EVs because as much as the Model 3 or S would be an almost ideal car for me, plunking down $60k+ (no rebates in Alberta and the exchange rate is murder) isn’t in the cards for the near future.
Really, I can’t think of anyway to describe that other than precious. It’s a long ways off, so be sure and remind me not to plan to keep any BMW past 2038.
Also, you mention sticking with 110 because it’s suiting your purposes. It probably would have been fine for me, too. Anyway, you should look into the difference in efficiency between charging with 110 and 220. The short answer is that 220 is enough more efficient that you will save a non-trivial amount in electricity over a year.
I know your setup is tricky, so a 220 install might be expensive enough to not make sense. If the efficiency numbers I found online (about 70% for 110 and 80+% for 220) are accurate, then my install should pay for itself in 3-5 years. The main driver for me was that the available 110 outlet left the charge cord as trip hazard at ankle level right in the walking path. It would have only take one fall into any number of sharp garage hazards to justify the expense of the 220.
A good guess, but it turns out to be some Bluetooth related nonsense (which my car never had). Nav discs for my system were in the ballpark of a couple hundred bucks, though.
Also, apparently BMW actually offers a free download of the software, which can be installed via USB stick. That’s good… but also means the dealer wanted to charge me $199 (or $338) for plugging in a USB stick and pressing a few buttons.
If I knew everything that was reported, I wouldn’t have to ask :).
Public information that I’ve found is that it’s a 300+ mile “affordable” BEV crossover, “Mustang inspired” design and may or may not be called the Mach 1. Seemingly a focus on performance as well.
I’m curious if there’s much information about the battery pack. Suppliers, form factor, capacity, chemistry, etc. I feel that the pack really makes or breaks the car as a whole. If Ford is claiming 300+ miles at a mainstream price (without being a subsidized compliance car), then they must have some interesting stuff cooking.
Related–Ford has a recent trademark on Fastor Charge, which seems to apply to Charging station services for electric vehicles; battery charging services; vehicle service stations. Almost sounds like a Supercharger competitor…
It took me a second read to get this, but I smiled when I did :). Hey, at least Unix did better than Windows 95, which crashed 2[sup]32[/sup] milliseconds after starting. That’s only 49.7 days.
Indeed. I ended up using the ceiling outlet my garage door is plugged into, then suspending the cable from eye hooks to the corner the charge port is at. I printed out one of these to hold the plug. Works out quite well.
The efficiency is certainly a consideration. Were the numbers you found applicable to the 3 specifically or the S/X?
I’m just basing it off what I read on some other boards. Due to the cable trip issue, I was getting the 220 anyway, so learning it would save money was just a nice bonus.
These are the estimates based on my charging experience:
5-15
115 volt * 12 amps = 1380 watts
4 to 5 mph charging = 345 to 276 watts per mph of charging
5-20
115 volt * 15 amps = 1725 watts
5 to 6 mph charging = 345 to 288 watts per mph of charging
14-30
236 volts * 24 amps = 5664 watts
21 to 26 mph charging = 269 to 217 watts per mph of charging
I’m not sure who’s supplying the cells. We have a supplier (not the cell supplier) combining the cells, and then we will assemble the combined cells into the completed package. I’m not sure that assembly contracts are issued, so I won’t name companies, but they’re located reasonably close to the manufacturing plant. Our final assembly of the finished packs will take place in our final assembly area.
I’m manufacturing (not design), so I’m not aware (yet) about the chemistry and capacities. I know how many cells and cell packs we’re using, but won’t disclose that presently. Given the cells, the overall manufacturing process from cells to completed battery pack is fairly simple and highly automated. But “fairly simple” might be the same as “black magic” to many outside observers.
Some of us always mention Tesla’s factory, and how we do things the same. I don’t ever mean their battery factory, though, as I’ve not visited it. I should check to see if benchmarking center has a Tesla teardown; then I’d have an idea what their battery packs look like. Given that we have the same mutual suppliers, though, and there are only so many ways to package cells, I’d guess that our processes will be similar. That’s only a guess at this point, I’ll caution.
CX727 is a purpose built electric vehicle, so, not a Fusion or C-Max with a battery wedged into it wherever it might fit. This means that the battery pack assumes some of the role in the vehicle structure. That’s industry-wide knowledge, though. As far as generic things, I can say that the tophat (everything above the underbody) is pretty conventional. Steel construction keeps the cost down, and the use of UHSS allows lightweighting, which is also a known industry trend. There will be use of composites, but specifying where is probably going too far.
I know many of these things apply when comparing any modern luxury car with any old car.
I had to drive my 18 year old suburban for the first time today, since getting my model 3 six weeks ago. These are the problems I had.
I had to go back in the house for keys.
I forgot to turn it off before getting out.
Later I remembered to turn it off, but forgot to take the keys.
I had to walk back into fob range to lock it.
Crossing three lanes to get over to the HOV lane after merging behind a slow dump truck was painful, because a 200k mile V8 at altitude is slow.
I forgot to take the keys out of my pocket before getting in. Every time.
I had to keep my foot on the brake the entire time I was stopped.
slight hijack: I’m kind of disappointed that Ford’s giving up on cars and focusing on SUV/CUV and trucks. (I know Mustang and the Focus thing, but still…) . I ended up buying a Focus ST at the end of September partly due to this (and the fact the “local” Subaru dealers are horrible to deal with).