tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875771813122616391.post8267422581211653669..comments2023-08-19T22:42:27.817-07:00Comments on chevy spark ev UNOFFICIAL blog: SparkEV is quickest charging EV in the worldsparkevhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04362518920979349841noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875771813122616391.post-66066467598262865942022-04-12T02:38:39.964-07:002022-04-12T02:38:39.964-07:00This is a nice and great blog because that it cont...This is a nice and great blog because that it contains informative knowledge. please keep sharing this information with us. If your are looking for these best <a href="https://www.in-chargeevinstallation.com/eo-ev-charger-installation" rel="nofollow">EO EV Charger Installation</a> services. Our company provides the best services in United Kingdom.IN-Charge EV Installationhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13953824335329086592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875771813122616391.post-89298097793325879122016-06-29T10:34:47.891-07:002016-06-29T10:34:47.891-07:00If fast charging alone is the issue with battery l...If fast charging alone is the issue with battery longevity, we'd have lots of complaints with SparkEV owners with battery degradation. Fact is, it's not a problem.<br /><br />One should question what it means by "1 million miles battery". They don't mean zero degradation, but some finite amount. Also, Tesla battery is not drained to low on almost daily basis, unlike 80 miles range SparkEV. That makes direct comparison difficult, even if same number of DCFC are applied. Taking that into consideration, SparkEV does quite well.<br /><br />As for time taken, one only has to look at charge taper on Tesla to see that it's 40 minutes to 80%, double that of SparkEV. Knowing that Tesla battery overheats on extended driving at full speed (12+ minutes), I suspect the taper is due to inadequate battery cooling. With Tesla S aerodynamics only taking 14 HP (10 kW) at 70 MPH, 140 MPH would be 112 HP (80 kW), roughly that of supercharger power. Indeed, this is probably why Tesla tapers so quickly, the same reason why it cannot drive at top speed for long, which is inadequate battery cooling.sparkevhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04362518920979349841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875771813122616391.post-51505954448619307262016-06-29T09:14:17.198-07:002016-06-29T09:14:17.198-07:00If you do notice a vehicle winning the charging sp...If you do notice a vehicle winning the charging speed contests, question the variables underlying the physics trade off. What do I compromise by having a faster charge? Internal wear and tear, vs personal time waste.<br /><br />One thing Tesla and GM always bring up when questioned about charging speed, is that a faster charge is possible by sacrificing battery life and occupant safety. Charging a Lithium battery is not simple like filling a gas tank. (Gas by the way has a dozen variables on fueling speed too, vapor pressure, ingredients, etc) Each charge has slightly different variables. Get one variable wrong just once, the battery dies prematurely(Leaf) or the car catches fire(Volt/Tesla). Charging requires adaptive rates of volts & amps, altitude, air pressure/temperature/humidity, battery temperature, starting SoC, cell balancing, chemical decomposition over lifetime, etc. Tesla is open about it's compromises in charge speed to make the battery last 1 million miles. Tesla also uses historical data from all it's vehicles. Comparing similar variables from all cars and sending optimization updates to every car. I have not heard GM's position, but they appear to engineer vehicles to the more realistic 200,000 mile mark these days. GM also spends more time up front calculating the safe charge rates for the life of the vehicle. They may cautiously undershoot variables because they don't update like Tesla does. Nissan completely ignored the trade off with their first generation leaf, causing the whole world to think EV batteries were going to prematurely fail.<br /><br />Tesla owners who do not understand the complex calculations involved in just 1 extra minute of charging time, will definitely feel the spark cars are charging faster. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02264481259316091880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875771813122616391.post-32503716567231177532016-04-18T12:42:11.686-07:002016-04-18T12:42:11.686-07:00By the way, I also state this:
"Before you j...By the way, I also state this:<br /><br />"Before you jump on "your table is ludicrous for making SparkEV faster than Tesla", read the explanations below."sparkevhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04362518920979349841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875771813122616391.post-35368598177410143292016-04-18T12:39:30.822-07:002016-04-18T12:39:30.822-07:00As for "screw up" you mention, I explici...As for "screw up" you mention, I explicitly say this: "While it's not apples to apples" and give scenarios for EPA MPGe as well as my experimental value. You should read it again.<br /><br />For 500 miles trip, yeah, that's not happening with SparkEV (or often), and that's not the point. The point of the comparison is that there is no question SparkEV is quicker than Tesla in terms of % charged. And if anyone thinks SparkEV is quicker in 500 miles trip than Tesla S, well, that's just delusional.<br /><br />However, SparkEV could be quicker than Tesla in terms of miles added per time on shared Supercharger (vs no-waiting case for SparkEV). Again, I explicitly state this in blog.<br /><br />As for time for DCFC, it's actually 20 minutes at the charger to 80%. If you sit at DCFC for 33 minutes, it would've reached 100% way before then. In contrast, Tesla to 80% would be over 45 minutes mainly due to taper.<br /><br />As for hypothetical long distance travel with SparkEV using DCFC, that's covered in another blog post. I have a graph of average speed including DCFC + time off/on highway + highway time that shows what is possible.<br /><br />http://sparkev.blogspot.com/2016/03/range-polynomial.htmlsparkevhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04362518920979349841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875771813122616391.post-32750545053494717422016-04-18T11:57:50.667-07:002016-04-18T11:57:50.667-07:00You still have so many problems with your comparis...You still have so many problems with your comparisons. <br /><br />SparkEV highway MPGe is 109. Using 157 MPGe is completely disingenuous. A Model S 90D gets 106 MPGe. Compare like situation to like situation.<br /><br />You screwed up the calcs for the 500 mile trip. First of all, each stop adds additional time just to make it to the charging station. Let's say both cars have full charge. We are going 500 miles. Each charging stop adds 4 miles and 10 minutes above charging itself. You then assume perfect spacing. Not real world, but ok. We use EPA highway MPGe, averaging 60 mph.<br /><br />You go 64 miles, then 2 miles to the charging station. Charge for 33 minutes. Then drive 2 + 62 + 2 miles, then charge for 33 minutes.<br /><br />500 66 minutes<br />436 33 minutes charging, then 66 minutes = 99<br />374 99<br />312 99<br />250 99<br />188 99<br />126 99<br />64 99<br />0<br /><br />total is 759 minutes or 12.65 hours. That's assuming perfect DCFC placement.<br /><br />A Tesla 90D starts with 290 miles of range, subsequent stops are 120 miles apart.<br />500 290 minutes for 288 + 2 miles<br />212 needs to add 40 kWh, so that's 25 minutes. Drive 124 miles, so 124 minutes = 149 minutes<br />92 needs to add 31 kWh, so 18 minutes. Drive 92 miles, so 110 minutes<br />0<br /><br />total is 549 minutes, or 9.15 hours.<br /><br />The Tesla can tolerate a lot of slop in that Supercharger placement and still get well under 10 hours.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875771813122616391.post-41097590228740732612016-03-21T22:21:08.028-07:002016-03-21T22:21:08.028-07:0010% to 95% = 85%. Assuming 100% on i3 is 20kWh out...10% to 95% = 85%. Assuming 100% on i3 is 20kWh out of 22kWh battery, 85%=17 kWh. To get that in 15 minutes, you need 68kW of power on average. ABB chargers only go to 50kW even at 100% efficiency (which it isn't). Considering charge taper requires even higher power from charger, I doubt what you claim is true. What I've seen is 30 minutes with i3 with ABB, so yeah, SparkEV easily beats i3.sparkevhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04362518920979349841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875771813122616391.post-74097032778605367802016-03-21T17:55:46.003-07:002016-03-21T17:55:46.003-07:00ABB charger at BMW Group Plant, Oxford, UK, goes f...ABB charger at BMW Group Plant, Oxford, UK, goes from 10 to 95% SOC in just 15 minutes on the i3 BEV. Beat that Tesla/Chevy SparkEV/Nissan Leaf et alAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875771813122616391.post-87380515893027154282015-12-18T10:00:40.173-08:002015-12-18T10:00:40.173-08:00CCS is being built out, so hopefully they will be ...CCS is being built out, so hopefully they will be in your area soon. If Chevy was smart, they'd installs CCS in all their dealers and price it as going rate similar to eVgo before Bolt is released to pull in competing EV drivers into their dealers.<br /><br />Bigger problem is that SparkEV is even less available than CCS. Still, for a cheap little car, it's impressive what Chevy engineers achieved. It's quicker than any car in % charged and coming within 10% to 20% of cars that cost 4 times as much (Tesla) in number of miles added per time.sparkevhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04362518920979349841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875771813122616391.post-43816558331134200732015-12-18T08:52:37.784-08:002015-12-18T08:52:37.784-08:00The Spark EV is the quickest charging EV in the......The Spark EV is the quickest charging EV in the... wherever they have CCS chargers. My state has NONE. All the neighboring states have NONE.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com