Re:Worked for 52 Years, Still Running: 1912 C-T 4WD Electric...
by rdtsc on Tuesday January 23, 2018 @10:17AM
(#16214194)
So why didn't the clean and efficient design dominate then?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Worked for 52 Years, Still Running: 1912 C-T 4WD Electric...
by jandrese on Tuesday January 23, 2018 @11:05AM
(#16214580)
Because the batteries sucked. They take too long to recharge, don't hold enough charge, are heavy, are bulky, and cost too much.
As ugly as a gas engine is it does offer quick refueling, long range, and low cost. It's just more practical, especially with turn of the century technology.
Re:Worked for 52 Years, Still Running: 1912 C-T 4WD Electric...
by dsfyu404ed on Tuesday January 23, 2018 @01:46PM
(#16216161)
>. It's just more practical, especially with turn of the century technology.
Both 19th/20th and 20th/21st according to the sales numbers
Re:Worked for 52 Years, Still Running: 1912 C-T 4WD Electric...
by jandrese on Tuesday January 23, 2018 @03:14PM
(#16217195)
Yep. Fast charging is still an unsolved problem for electric cars (15 minutes for a 85 miles is not fast enough IMHO) although some electric scooters have swappable battery packs which do fit the bill.
I do fully expect we will have these problems licked before the next turn of the century.
Re:Worked for 52 Years, Still Running: 1912 C-T 4WD Electric...
by mr_overalls on Tuesday January 23, 2018 @04:26PM
(#16217864)
Although Tesla abandoned the idea because of lack of interest (which I do find strange), a swapping station solves this problem. A depleted battery can be swapped for a fresh one in less time than a gasoline fillup requires.
Re:Worked for 52 Years, Still Running: 1912 C-T 4WD Electric...
by felipelemos on Tuesday January 23, 2018 @04:53PM
(#16218113)
Tesla uses the battery as a structural part of the chassis. A swappable battery simply would not be possible.