Electric car beats ferrari

Black XR6 · 06-05-2006, 08:26 PM

Not sure if this has been posted.

An electric car made by a company in the states called wrightspeed has posted a 0-60 speed that is second only to 1,000 horsepower bugatti veyron. The bugatti beats it to 60 by half a second.

It also raced against a Ferrari spider down the quarter and beat it by 2 lengths.

The company wants to market them as roadsters sold in the states for $100,000usd.

Check out the link
http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/04/tech...2_wrightspeed/

AU-MUSTD · 06-05-2006, 08:46 PM

When you compare 1/10 scale cars it doesnt suprise me at all. Electric power is instant and grunt only limited by the power of the batteries.

jarridtheruler · 06-05-2006, 08:58 PM

yeh, i guess this it what the future is going to look like.
Its scary, and sad really

Black XR6 · 06-05-2006, 09:31 PM

why is it scary?

Other than the pollution produced to make the power it uses, its clean. Its obviously fast. We dont really need to be driving around burning our fossil fuels all our lives.

Lukeyson · 07-05-2006, 03:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black XR6

We dont really need to be driving around burning our fossil fuels all our lives.

awww but thats fun !

jmc-007 · 07-05-2006, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black XR6

why is it scary?

Other than the pollution produced to make the power it uses, its clean. Its obviously fast. We dont really need to be driving around burning our fossil fuels all our lives.

The perception of electricity that it is clean is false.

If we stopped buying petrol cars tommorow and all went electric. where does the power come from. COAL FIRED POWER STATIONS.

So untill the govt puts our GST money to good use then using electricity will be no better than burning fuel.

Mike Gayner · 07-05-2006, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmc-007

The perception of electricity that it is clean is false.

If we stopped buying petrol cars tommorow and all went electric. where does the power come from. COAL FIRED POWER STATIONS.

So untill the govt puts our GST money to good use then using electricity will be no better than burning fuel.

With electricity we have a choice. The power could potentially by generated with nuclear plants or even hydro power and wind farms. With petrol there is no option - you have to burn the fuel to drive your car. Electricity isn't clean by necessity, but has the potential to be a lot cleaner than fossil fuels. Eventually we have to start taking responsibility for what we are doing to this planet. I'm all for alternatives to hydrocarbon based fuels.

mash85 · 07-05-2006, 09:04 AM

how many kays can this electric car do to a umm...errr...tank of electricity? can it get 500 - 600 like my fairy. if its like only a range of 50 clicks or something, its useless, even if it can blow off a ferrari

OLDFORDNUT · 07-05-2006, 09:37 AM

heres the link direct to right page"http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/04/technology/business2_wrightspeed/index.htm
after reading the storey ,it is hoped to improve distance to 100km,so must get a fair bit less now, also it is hoped to improve recharge time down to 4.5hours with future battery technology,must be overnight at the moment by the sounds of it,so even with this leap thats happened so far it looks like long distance out of city driving is still a long way off.

Falcon Freak · 07-05-2006, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AU-MUSTD

When you compare 1/10 scale cars it doesnt suprise me at all. Electric power is instant and grunt only limited by the power of the batteries.

In theory electric motors produce maximum torque at 0rpm.

FF

Thunder · 07-05-2006, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mash85

how many kays can this electric car do to a umm...errr...tank of electricity? can it get 500 - 600 like my fairy. if its like only a range of 50 clicks or something, its useless, even if it can blow off a ferrari

True, but give it some time because its only new. It wont be long before it gets distance like a petrol car.

Soon we wont be arguing over LS1 Chevs versus Boss blocks...........it will be Energiser versus Duracell.

:

vino3o2 · 07-05-2006, 05:02 PM

The Ferrari was owned but geez it still sounded oh so much sweeter than that other buzz box

chich · 07-05-2006, 05:11 PM

There is no such thing as a 100% non-polluting alternative, all we're doing is shifting the pollution problem somewhere else until that too becomes excessive. I.e. How the hell are we going to dispose of all those batteries and electric motors?

Black XR6 · 07-05-2006, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmc-007

The perception of electricity that it is clean is false.

If we stopped buying petrol cars tommorow and all went electric. where does the power come from. COAL FIRED POWER STATIONS.

So untill the govt puts our GST money to good use then using electricity will be no better than burning fuel.

Jesus im sure reading and comprehension must have been neglected at some stage. Is said, "Other than the pollution produced creating the power". I have already addressed your point.

Quote:

it is hoped to improve distance to 100km

Ah, make that 100 miles. And it isnt hoped to improve it to that. The manufacturer is confident they can make one with 100mile range. 100 mile is 160km which would be quite acceptable for a car of the future used primarily for travelling to and from work. Even outside the city, 160km would be sufficient for a lot of people for a whole day.

Wokkas · 07-05-2006, 06:42 PM

Electric motors are by far more efficient than any sort of combustion engine.

100% torque all through the rev range is the main advantage of electric motors, thus an extremely linear power curve.

Battery technology is still another generation away though.

Marhleet · 07-05-2006, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vino3o2

The Ferrari was owned but geez it still sounded oh so much sweeter than that other buzz box

the stupid ads mucked up my playing it again , but ....
wasn't there a constant squeal of tyres all the way down the strip ?
and I bet the ferrari wasn't making THAT noise

S3SR · 07-05-2006, 07:10 PM

the wrightspeed

and well i was watching Topgear and well i thought i seen the wrightspeed somewhere before and i did

its called the ariel atom

dont no if they are the same make or just different models

XR6Dan · 07-05-2006, 07:14 PM

Coal fired powerstation 50-60% efficient, combustion engine 30% efficent. Even if you do plug it in at night, *some* environmental savings, and keeps polution in the city low.
Switch to hydrogen power, 0 emissions (except for steam). Just getting hydrogen is the problem, takes electricity to produce.

Mike Gayner · 07-05-2006, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XR6Dan

Coal fired powerstation 50-60% efficient, combustion engine 30% efficent. Even if you do plug it in at night, *some* environmental savings, and keeps polution in the city low.
Switch to hydrogen power, 0 emissions (except for steam). Just getting hydrogen is the problem, takes electricity to produce.

That's right - also, not all electricity has to come from fossil fuel sources. As I stated earlier, the electricity could well come from nuclear plants or even solar/wind/hydro plants. It is entirely plausible that an infrastructure could be set up for electric cars that would reduce pollution by a massive factor. The big question is, will we go electric or will we develop efficient, cost effective alternative fuels such as hydrogen cells.

Whether you like it or not, something has to give. If we continue to pump hydrocarbon emmissions into to air, we will kill this planet. If you don't care about that, you should be lined up and shot.

XplosiveR6 · 08-05-2006, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Gayner

The big question is, will we go electric or will we develop efficient, cost effective alternative fuels such as hydrogen cells.

Hydrogen is not a fuel its a energy carrier, like a battery, and has been proven that its certainly not efficiant or cost effective. It actually takes more oil to charge a hydrogen cell, then it would to simply use the oil for petrol

XplosiveR6 · 08-05-2006, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wokkas

Electric motors are by far more efficient than any sort of combustion engine.

100% torque all through the rev range is the main advantage of electric motors, thus an extremely linear power curve.

Battery technology is still another generation away though.

thats interesting, i wonder what the efficiancy differences are between electric motors and combustion motors, i know electric motors are about 70% efficient

Rev28K · 08-05-2006, 11:21 AM

Electric motors have a lot of torque from low revs too. So their initial acceleration should be good, get the gearing sorted out (CVT) and it is possible to be quick.

Pininfarina did a series of very good-looking carbon-fibre bodied showcars with electric motors a few years ago (Ethos 1, 2 & 3) that were very zippy (Ferrari quick from memory).

turboute · 08-05-2006, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FALCONSR

the wrightspeed

and well i was watching Topgear and well i thought i seen the wrightspeed somewhere before and i did

its called the ariel atom

dont no if they are the same make or just different models

If you read the article you will realize that he sourced the frame from ariel. His goal was to produce a car that he could make with 'off the shelf' parts.

Barry_v · 08-05-2006, 08:41 PM

If they put the electric engine in a real car rather than a go cart, maybe it would have some respect.