Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The real "stunt" pulled with the Comet test was that the engine didn't get heat-cycled 7,000 times. The thermal expansion and contraction is the largest single damager of engines.
Put most modern vehicles through the same challenge and they'll run a million miles, even if they only run a quarter that in closer to real conditions.
~
Fast charging EV batteries is much the same, only it would favor real-world conditions. The more frequently you can "slow" charge the battery, or the shallower the cycling, the longer they last. There's no need for 8 minute empty to full charging if 98% of charging occurs overnight and is only replenishing 30-50 miles of range.
Seems the Rivian experiment from somewhere down in Chile all the way to Los Angeles is a better metric of capability, at least for that brand. Still it would be cool to see Tesla or Polestar do something like this. If nothing else maybe it could expose some logistical blindspots that help implement EVs into the market more effectively.
I think this is a great time to be alive as a car enthusiast. (I'm a mild enthusiast.) There are some amazing engine options out there (A Mustang GT with 460 HP? You weren't finding that even in the Mustang's heyday and now you can find one on ANY Ford lot in the country!) I think EVs just add to the excitement. I don't actually want one but I love that they are becoming options for people who do. An endurance run like this could do a lot to boost publicity and generate interest.
You could be right but I failed to mention they also drove through two tropical storms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EckyX
The real "stunt" pulled with the Comet test was that the engine didn't get heat-cycled 7,000 times. The thermal expansion and contraction is the largest single damager of engines.
Put most modern vehicles through the same challenge and they'll run a million miles, even if they only run a quarter that in closer to real conditions.
~
Fast charging EV batteries is much the same, only it would favor real-world conditions. The more frequently you can "slow" charge the battery, or the shallower the cycling, the longer they last. There's no need for 8 minute empty to full charging if 98% of charging occurs overnight and is only replenishing 30-50 miles of range.
I agree with you, but I failed to mention they also drove through two tropical storms.
Both the internal combustion engines vehicles and the electric vehicles would have to go beyond normal operating
recommendations in such a competition. One of the most incredible parts of this story is the
racers continued to race through two tropical storms during the 40 days of racing.
Also considering the 40 hours of rpm's being maxed out on those Mercury Comet engines might be equal to 70,000 thermo
expansion cycles and make it a wash in a 100,000 mile, 40 day, flat
out race, but I respect your opinion and I could very well be wrong, so I will do more research on the subject.
Concerning batteries the thread title asks how would Electric Vehicle technology do in such a competition. I suggested
earlier that swapping battery's or not to swap would be the manufactures option.
Yea, plus something like a Le Mans or Daytona 500 with pit crews would probably be doing battery swapping instead of charging since their goals are to make the best time possible. There are electric motorsport races that exist right now, which makes a lot of sense in the context that motor sports was originally a way for automakers to serve as a testbed for pushing the boundaries of new technologies, but none of them quite have that push to demonstrate flat out endurance the way a 100K mile run does.
My money is on the car running on Duracells AA's !!!!
My money is on the car running on Duracells AA's !!!!
Lol! That energy density is incredibly low and the price is pretty bad. The US actually had a pretty good chance of taking a strong lead on battery manufacturing and technologies over the last two decades because of a lot of existing operations, research institutions, owned early patents, and access to raw resources and industrial base.
Unfortunately, sort of like with semiconductors over the 90s, the US for whatever reasons has not been able to keep itself the dominant player in batteries despite the massive amount of growth in the now hundreds of billions battery industry and despite having so many early major players. Some combination of inertia, poor government planning and policy, and maybe a touch of stupidity means that the US isn't even close to being the dominant player in the field even with how well known and massive Duracell and Energizer were. It's not impossible to catch up, but there are a lot of entrenched interests and general inertia to overcome, and I'm not so certain the US can do it. Right now, it's certainly a joke to think Duracell could be a serious, let alone dominant, player in the business.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 03-10-2021 at 05:42 PM..
Looks like you are right about Duracell and energy density.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler
Lol! That energy density is incredibly low and the price is pretty bad. The US actually had a pretty good chance of taking a strong lead on battery manufacturing and technologies over the last two decades because of a lot of existing operations, research institutions, owned early patents, and access to raw resources and industrial base.
Unfortunately, sort of like with semiconductors over the 90s, the US for whatever reasons has not been able to keep itself the dominant player in batteries despite the massive amount of growth in the now hundreds of billions battery industry and despite having so many early major players. Some combination of inertia, poor government planning and policy, and maybe a touch of stupidity means that the US isn't even close to being the dominant player in the field even with how well known and massive Duracell and Energizer were. It's not impossible to catch up, but there are a lot of entrenched interests and general inertia to overcome, and I'm not so certain the US can do it. Right now, it's certainly a joke to think Duracell could be a serious, let alone dominant, player in the business.
Looks like you are right about Duracell and energy density. I'm still doing solar research that I'll include next update.
Here are the latest record breakers in both the electric and petroleum based competitors in the 1/4 mile drag racing world.
The recent 200 mph barrier was broken by an electric drag racing Tech team.
The petroleum powered drag racers did their best as well.
Many of these engines produced over 10,000 horse power.
Looks like the research and development continues to move both technology's forward at a rapid pace.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll bet the publicity around the 100,000 mile endurance race had a little something to do with that purchase.
