Alfa Romeo 4C Forums banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
With such a light chassis, I bet Alfa Romeo could make a stonking fast EV version to rival the Tesla Roadster. Maybe use some of the Fiat 500e components.

Would anyone else have considered an EV version? Maybe Alfa Romeo has already planned a 4C EV for the future...

I would enjoy a stylish and super-green Alfa Romeo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
DrG said:
With such a light chassis, I bet Alfa Romeo could make a stonking fast EV version to rival the Tesla Roadster. Maybe use some of the Fiat 500e components.

Would anyone else have considered an EV version? Maybe Alfa Romeo has already planned a 4C EV for the future...
When it comes to true high performance handling, electric vehicles are just too heavy.

The batteries' weight will destroy all effort made to achieve the 4C's phenomenal power-to-weight ratio!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
It's a reasonable comparison, and while the Tesla Roadster was ~700 lbs. heavier than an equivilent Elise, it carried its battery in a very vertical configuration just behind the rear seats (picture an upright piano) which kept weight distribution and polar moment very mid-engined. You won't read any Tesla Roadster reviews that say it handles poorly, but in fact it handles very well. Cost was the Tesla's biggest compromise, as the batteries probably accounted for half the build cost of the car. I wouldn't rule out a 4C EV, but Alfa may choose to wait until BEVs are selling much better before they risk the work and cost to build one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,413 Posts
Now why would you want to spit in the face of the inventor of the internal combustion engine?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
15,209 Posts
Electric power is so not the point of this car.
And since they are loathe to even fit the 4C with a much requested manual gearbox, I wouldn't hold my breath for a completely new-to-Alfa electric drivetrain!
Will Alfa Romeo someday make an EV or hybrid? Possibly some day, if they are still around as a company. But it does not presently appear to figure prominently in Fiat Chrysler's immediate plans. Here, at least, Ford and GM are far more committed to that route than Chrysler seems to be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,504 Posts
Fast discharge creates heat. Get enough heat and you have exploding batteries. There's been a few commercial airliners on fire to prove that. I think I'll do the golf-cart battery thing, thank you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Fast discharge creates heat. Get enough heat and you have exploding batteries. There's been a few commercial airliners on fire to prove that. I think I'll do the golf-cart battery thing, thank you.
So Boeing botches the engineering on the Dreamliner, and you're prepared to write of the future of BEV? That's not very open minded. I'm pretty sure some steam cars and early petrol cars resulted in some pretty lousy early designs too. I'm the first to admit it when tech outpaces its responsible use, but I firmly believe we are moving to BEV, and in the short term, that will be a form of lithium battery.

Fiat's 500E compliance car was a quick hack with major heavy lifting by Bosch, but even it turned out to be stonking compliance car, giving 87 miles mixed range, without destroying the car's handling. In fact, reviews of it said the handling, including additional mass all being in the rear floor, was superior to the Pop/Lounge/Sport. Only the Abarth handled better in the model range. Is there room in 4C for a big pack? Probably not without careful reengineering of the chassis and body, but it's an untapped market, since the Tesla Roadster has been out of production for several years.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
15,209 Posts
Only the Abarth handled better in the model range. Is there room in 4C for a big pack? Probably not without careful reengineering of the chassis and body, but it's an untapped market, since the Tesla Roadster has been out of production for several years.
Respectfully (not trying to slam your points, which you do present well), but have you considered that the decision pull the Tesla Roadster was very likely a business one based on sound market analysis and production costs, which we in armchair land are not privy to? At 6.5 litres/100km, the 4C is pretty good at fuel economy as is is, and emissions from a 1.75 litre turbo 4-banger are also a check in the right box as it is. Not seeing how the huge investment could possibly pay off over the very limited market for such a variant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,413 Posts
This really all seems pointless to me, at this rate I'll be flying a battery operated attack aircraft...

Guys, batteries are for torches, vibrators, annoying Japanese toy robots etc...

Fuel vapour, a spark, and a combustion chamber = the smile on my face when I drive...

And in a statement that is bound to get me some flak, napalm would not have been nearly as effective if it had been made out of battery acid.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
15,209 Posts
This really all seems pointless to me, at this rate I'll be flying a battery operated attack aircraft...

Guys, batteries are for torches, vibrators, annoying Japanese toy robots etc...

Fuel vapour, a spark, and a combustion chamber = the smile on my face when I drive...

And in a statement that is bound to get me some flak, napalm would not have been nearly as effective if it had been made out of battery acid.
My friend, you'll be flying an electric powered drone some day! :) :p

I'll leave the napalm comment alone … but I'll raise you another controversial point in that EV's are not a sustainable solution unless electricity generation and distribution grid are hugely improved. Oh, and also when battery costs/materials/eco-footprint are addressed.
My bet would be on hydrogen combustion and/or fuel cell cars will probably leapfrogging plug-in battery-powered technology.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,413 Posts
I'll take that bet, 4Canada. Worldwide H2 car count will be lower than BEV in 10 years. Wager is a beer or a kombucha, whichever is more popular when the time comes.
I'll take that bet, Toyota has just unveiled their production FCV (Fuel Cell Vehicle - hydrogen powered) which should go on sale next April. And as you know, they are a low volume motor manufacturer.:). Looks better than the Prius.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
15,209 Posts
Well, the Honda FXC Clarity is a neat concept that has gone nowhere. But battery-powered cars are not exactly flying off the shelves compared to their infernal combustion counterparts, either! Current hybrids are just that - bastardized EV's that remove range anxiety of the EV by burning dinosaur squeezing's when necessary. Even the Volt does this, just in a different fashion. And, because of their purchase premium, hybrids will almost never save the driver money in the end. They are an unique curiosity - footnote to the history of transportation, at best.

I just don't get the point of the EV in its current form. We cannot all drive them without bringing down the power grid. They are the most polluting form of transportation in the US (you are basically driving a coal-powered car), and you have to plan out every trip so as to avoid running out of juice. You can't just run up to the corner filling station and grab a can of electrons to get you to the next charging port! There you will remain, tethered, for the next 8 to 16 hours, before you can go full range again.

Funny - I was reading a review of the new BMW i3 this morning. Supposed range of 120+ KM, but the reviewer only got 80 before the car (with its internet connectivity) started suggesting nearby public transit alternatives!!! He loved the carbon fibre features and the technology in the car, but hated the way that was all wasted on lugging a 500 lb battery around in the boot. Made me think of this thread. Also made me think of Tallinn on the Nurburgring, running out of battery about 3/4 of the way through his first lap of the day, and having to wait 15 hours to recharge before attempting the second!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
216 Posts
Battery technology will continue to improve, and these arguments will hold less water.

The battery pack of a Tesla S is a huge improvement over the Roadster. And those cars are only 6 years apart. In another 6 years we can expect vast improvements over the current Tesla battery, especially since that industry (as related to automotive batteries) is now hitting critical mass.

In under 10 years we will see full EV proper sports cars.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
15,209 Posts
Battery technology will continue to improve, and these arguments will hold less water.

The battery pack of a Tesla S is a huge improvement over the Roadster. And those cars are only 6 years apart. In another 6 years we can expect vast improvements over the current Tesla battery, especially since that industry (as related to automotive batteries) is now hitting critical mass.

In under 10 years we will see full EV proper sports cars.
There are already some very good* ones out there:
Well, one comes to mind:


* Fine Print: If you don't mind a silent supercar, have a pocket-load of money you don't know what to do with (even by supercar standards) and you can live with very limited range, you can get stellar performance for a very short period.

Battery tech will improve, but not for the masses. For certain applications, yes. And the costs will remain high. I'm not buying any 10-year predictions, as we were all supposed to be driving flying cars decades ago (didn't you know?) :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,504 Posts
Interesting discussion. 500 pounds of battery and a 80 mile range. Not good really. My ugly old truck gets 14 mpg on a good day, has storage for 50 gallons of fuel (300 pounds) and has a 500 mile range.

What nobody has brought up yet, unless I missed it, is the environmental impact of the batteries. They need to be manufactured, shipped, and later discarded. Two of these have a huge negative impact, yet EV's are so clean. Then there is the cost of replacing the battery pack in five or so years. I bet you can buy a six year old EV for cheap cause nobody will spring for new batteries. My boss bought a used RV and had to spend a ton of money ($1500) replacing four of it's six batteries. And these are just 12 volt lead/acid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,413 Posts
I don't need to go faster, just even 1 meter faster and I've one. In principal my grandmother with her walker could go further...:p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,314 Posts
Interesting discussion. 500 pounds of battery and a 80 mile range. Not good really. My ugly old truck gets 14 mpg on a good day, has storage for 50 gallons of fuel (300 pounds) and has a 500 mile range.

What nobody has brought up yet, unless I missed it, is the environmental impact of the batteries. They need to be manufactured, shipped, and later discarded. Two of these have a huge negative impact, yet EV's are so clean. Then there is the cost of replacing the battery pack in five or so years. I bet you can buy a six year old EV for cheap cause nobody will spring for new batteries. My boss bought a used RV and had to spend a ton of money ($1500) replacing four of it's six batteries. And these are just 12 volt lead/acid.
Not to mention where the power comes from.

That said though, imagine all those dictators and crazies around the world drained from oil cash. The sooner we cut that habit, the better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,504 Posts
Not to mention where the power comes from.

That said though, imagine all those dictators and crazies around the world drained from oil cash. The sooner we cut that habit, the better.
Here in Los Angeles, our elect. source comes from hydro and solar. I know that's not the case for most areas though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
RacerZ, not entirely true, but certainly in California as a whole coal is a much smaller portion than other places: http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/electricity_generation.html
Remember, residential solar isn't tabulated in Energy company reports, because the power company doesn't own, or pay you for it in most cases. So in many instances, residential solar is creeping into the mix without power companies reporting it as a core replacement source.
Note the halving of Nuclear with the shut down of San Onofre and the quick rise of solar over the last few years as cost per watt of PVs have plummeted.

LA still uses way too much coal:
https://www.ladwp.com/ladwp/faces/ladwp/aboutus/a-power/a-p-factandfigures?_adf.ctrl-state=ueq79q3gb_4&_afrLoop=41214962565036
Nat. Gas continues to be appear the cheap rockstar of modern production, but Fracking my crack soon as more wells and aquifers are tainted, and fracking induced earthquakes become more well understood by the population. Many BEV fans plop PVs on their roof to at least offset the driving they'll do with solar, even if the time shifting of when they plug in means it's Nat. Gas that is powering at night. Eventually, and I suggest it could be very quickly with the right will, we could use solar, wind, and hydro plus Pump Storage Hydro and Thermal Solar for time offset, and stop Nuclear, Coal, and Nat. Gas usage in all our vehicles.

Let's talk about efficiency. A BEV is somewhere in the realm of 90% efficient in its application of power received back into the job required. ICE engines 40% on a very good day. So the electric motor (in H2 fuel cell or BEV form) has a giant advantage of not wasting 50% of its energy to heat/unburned. This is why BEVs powered from coal are still much cleaner than gas or diesel, as far as wasted energy and CO2 emissions.

Hydrogen powered cars will be powered by Natural Gas refractured into H2 (so fracked and refracked. This is because it's the economical way of generating H2. CARB has a rule stating H2 vehicle fuel production must have 1/3 production from a renewable process (PEM electrolysis), so H2 will be more expensive in CA, and will likely be a net waste of energy as using power to break H2O is currently a loss leader in energy production. Like much of the Ethanol production, you use more energy making your fuel than you get in the end.

Hydrogen also has no fueling stations, and I mean that quite literally. Don't confuse Nat Gas buses. There are tens of stations in the world open to the public in the WORLD. Each station will cost avg $2.5M to install/retrofit, so don't expect Blue Bell PA to get one for the first two guys there who would like to buy an FCV. California and CARB is pushing ahead with $200M of sucker money to seed H2 stations. Wow, 80 stations. But for H2 to take off, a tremendous amount of investment has to happen at the station level, and adoption will be much more challenging because the guy in Blue Bell, already has electricity in his garage, and less importantly, for a small price, his boss might buy a bank of chargers.

Yes Hyundai, Toyota, and Honda are all bringing cars to "market". But watch the details. If they lease them, this is strictly for compliance and CARB credits which they get much more for FCV than BEV. Leasing only is a sign that it is still a huge loss leader and they are hoping to pull them back when conditions change, a la first round of EV, in 1990s. Toyota has announced essentially what equates to an FCV Camry for $50,000 but insiders say this is still costing them $100,000 to produce each one, so more than $50k loss per unit after you get logistics/sales in the mix. So either Toyota is creating for show, the 2001 Insight (Honda's awesome $18,000 hybrid, that was better and lighter than all hybrids that followed, but was pulled because it wasn't selling and if it did, they'd continue to lose even more money per unit) or they are going for CARB credits. I think they're trying to prove they won't work, so they can put their 20 year long project to bed once and for all. Don't expect $50k Camrys to sell well, nor for anyone outside of strategic CA pockets to have access to H2 fueling.

Lurrr, Lithium Ion Batteries are with the exception of diamonds and plutonium, one of the most recyclable things you'll find. They cost a lot to produce, and they tear them down to reuse the lithium. No argument that it's messy, but 5 years battery life for a BEV is not correct at all. Tesla Roadsters, the first production vehicles to use Li batteries, are all still running with their original batteries, to my knowledge, save one guy who abandoned his car for months and bricked it. Zero Motorcycles predict 385,000 miles from their carefully managed lithium cells on their S ZF11.4 w/powertank. http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s/specs.php Is it BS? Time will tell.

Finally, RacerZ, range of BEV is puny for sure. But consider this aspect. Presumably we all work, and for many a spouse does too. Typically we drive to that job an average of 30 miles or less a day. For me and my wife it's 50 and 90 miles respectively and she's got chargers at work. So for 5 days a week, I need a car to go much less than 300 miles range. As a 4C owner/perspecitive owner, you're likely in a situation where you can keep more than one car per driver. So you drive a BEV to work, and use your ICE car for trips out of state (or rent one. Fiat and BMW include ICE loaners/paid rentals in their purchase agreements) Given that scenario, most of us should consider the fun BEV instead of the fun weekend car, because you'll use it most every day, so BEV even with short range, have the utility you need for 50 weeks a year. For me a 100-120 mile range would be fine, and a 4C body and 6 speed box (DCT or manual) would be a stellar commuter.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top