CNET's Roadshow Takes a New Look at the Clarity PHEV

Discussion in 'Clarity' started by insightman, Dec 30, 2019.

To remove this ad click here.

  1. Agzand

    Agzand Active Member

    What I mean by a few hundred dollar is the marginal cost to make an additional engine. The design and tooling will obviously add to the cost. But for an existing design which is used on other models (Insight for example) the marginal cost of the engine is not significant. If you add the retail price of various components of a $35k car, probably you will end up more than $100k. That doesn't mean it actually cost that much to make it.

    For an ICE engine, the major cost is tooling. For a battery, the materials are about 60% of the total bill. Therefore I don't think current batteries can become much cheaper, there needs to be a technological change in chemistry to make them cheaper.
     
  2. To remove this ad click here.

  3. insightman

    insightman Well-Known Member Subscriber

    The fact we are still privileged to read your posts is a very positive reflection on your Volt's crash-protection virtues.
     
  4. Since the discussion of the CNET review abruptly ended after post #7, and we’ve plummeted into yet another hagglefest over the virtues of PHEV vs BEV, I’ll chime in with my crystal ball vision of the future that is yet to unfold.

    Ten years from now BEV market penetration may be 5%. With luck it will never go over that percentage because it’s just a bad idea. Has anyone calculated the kWh’s of battery capacity that would be required to replace all the ICE vehicles currently used for personal transportation?

    Trying to make BEV’s take the place of all ICE vehicles isn’t going to happen until Captain Kirk returns with the dilithium crystals. We don’t even need to make that happen.

    BEV’s are extremely limited in capability and are more expensive than an ICE car. The cost can be reduced by installing smaller batteries. Yes, smaller. Put a 30-40 kWh battery in these things and keep them in the city. That’s where most people drive and that’s where most people put on the miles. They don’t need to go 300-500 miles and we don’t need to build supercharger stations all over the country. Build them in the cities.

    BEV’s, PHEV’s and ICE vehicles are expensive because they are loaded with nanny features and comfort features that no one really needs. I honestly think my next vehicle will have a V-8 with a distributor cap and an 8-track player.

    Internal combustion engine, fuel and exhaust system for $10K, or a 25-60kWh battery for $8-16K? Which one will continue to perform as originally designed after 5-6 years? Which one will be more likely to be replaced after 100K, 200K or 300K miles? And some owners on this forum have demonstrated that it is less expensive to operate their PHEV on gas rather than electricity. So the thinking needs to be more than an inch deep when comparing operating costs and total ownership costs.

    This is particularly true in a single vehicle household. A PHEV can provide ~90% of the benefits of a BEV and 100% of the benefits of an ICE, for the price of one vehicle. I don’t see a PHEV as a bridge to a BEV. I see the push toward long range BEV’s as being more detrimental to reducing vehicular emissions than a push toward more PHEV’s.
     
  5. DucRider

    DucRider Well-Known Member

    This would be somewhat true if you assume that battery tech and costs remain the same as they are today (I think that notion is absurd). There is a reason the use of carburetors and distributor caps have long ago been abandoned - not sure what attraction they hold for you. You can insist that the Earth is flat in as loud of a voice as you can muster, but it still will not be true.
    BEV's are a bad idea "because of the kWh's of battery capacity that would be required"? There is a leap of logic in that statement that needs some sort of explanation. Kind of along the lines of "Gas vehicles can never replace horses because of the massive amount of wells, refineries, ships, pipelines and trucks required to get it to the user." Use horses (or steam engines?) for long distance travel and put gas stations only in the cities?
    I'll throw out my question:
    $15K+ for a hybrid ICE (and association components) or $10K for 150 kWh battery (both probable in 5 years)?
    150 kWh is more than enough to drive cross country with fuel stops of 10-15 minutes every 3-4 hours - possible with today's charging equipment and batteries (800V batteries and real world 275 kW charging).
    There are plenty of 6+ year old BEV's with over 100K miles performing as originally designed - not sure you could say that about ICE vehicles from the 8 track tape era. Very, very few consumer vehicles make it to the 300K mile marker, most for reasons other that their power train. There is no reason to believe a BEV will have any more difficulty with this milestone than an ICE (unless you buy into the assumption that batteries only last 5-6 years), and a pretty good argument that they will actually perform better. BEV's also have a significantly lower maintenance cost, and the more miles you drive, the greater the savings.
    You obviously place little to no value in the environmental benefits of EV's, but most people have come to acknowledge that a reduction in carbon emissions would be beneficial if not vital. I remember the air quality in the LA basin in the early 70's - I can't begin to imagine what it would be like today without the push towards cleaner vehicles. BEV's are a natural extension of the choice to have cleaner, healthier air. How much $ value this represents varies by individual, but most would be willing to pay at least a little more.
    A PHEV provides ~60% of the benefits of a BEV, and about 90% of the detriments of a pure ICE vehicle.
     
  6. Did I ever say this? No.

    Did I ever say this? No. I asked a question about the amount of battery capacity that would be required to replace all of the ICE vehicles currently being used for personal transportation. So far you’ve done a pretty good job of misinterpreting my statements, putting words in my mouth and reaching your own conclusions.

    Here you’re just making up numbers. All any of us could do is speculate on an answer.

    Are the batteries still providing 100% of their original capacity. Any proof?

    Again, I never said the batteries will only last 5-6 years. Maybe you could explain in another thread, your good argument for how today’s lithium battery technology, or the technology in a 6 year old lithium battery, will provide the same performance in 10-15 years, as it did when new.

    Not if it costs more to charge the batteries than it does to fill the tank.


    You obviously have no idea about my values.

    I’ve lived and worked in LA for most of the past 40 years. I believe we had more bad air days last year than we’d had in decades. You actually can imagine what it would be like, but that’s about all you can do. We don’t have a controlled study to determine if the air would be better or worse than it is today.

    Again, you’re cherry picking words. I said in a single vehicle household a PHEV could provide ~90% of the benefits of a BEV while also providing all the benefits of an ICE vehicle. Despite your distaste for ICE vehicles, they are capable of doing things a BEV simply cannot do. If you lined up an ICE, a PHEV and a BEV and told someone they could only have one, I’d bet 95% would pick the ICE and the other 5% would be about equally split on the other 2. If someone explained the PHEV and the BEV to the 95%, I’d bet a much larger percentage would choose the PHEV over the BEV.

    I believe putting large batteries in BEV’s, and pushing the sale of BEV’s is not an efficient method for reducing vehicular emissions on a large scale.
     
    BeMurda likes this.
  7. To remove this ad click here.

  8. Johngalt6146

    Johngalt6146 Active Member

    Has anyone seen the article below??? They basically re-invented the Clarity. :):):)
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    In order to lower the price of the Tesla Model 3, the Austrian company Obrist Powertrain is converting the Californian BEV to hybrid drive – with a smaller battery (17.3 kWh) and a small petrol engine in the front. However, the hybrid Tesla Model 3 will then only be able to drive just under 100 kilometres electrically.9 hours ago
    Austrian hybrid Tesla for the masses - electrive.com

    https://www.electrive.com › 2020/01/07 › austrian-hybrid-tesla-for-the-masses
     
  9. Yes please.

    Honda should hire those guys.
     
  10. DucRider

    DucRider Well-Known Member

    If you think the Clarity PHEV suffers from "angry bees", try it with a 54 HP ICE (about 1/2 what the Clarity ICE produces). This is also a purely serial drive train (like the BMW i3), with no way for the ICE to ever work in tandem with the electric motors so both provide power. Because of this, it will always run the ICE at speeds over 40 mph, no matter the SOC of the battery. As an added bonus, it requires premium fuel. They do, for some odd reason, let people know it has "better comfort than a V12 engine".

    The range figures they quote are also NEDC, EPA range would be about 30% less so you would get ~40 miles of electric range (if you stay below 40 mph).

    Battery is also air cooled "for improved cost and reliability". That worked out so very well for Nissan...
     
  11. Has anyone in this thread used that ridiculous term to describe a 4 cylinder engine spinning at ~5000rpms? No.

    Have you driven their vehicle?
    The Clarity PHEV runs on batteries well above 40 mph. Their vehicle appears to be very similar, with the exception of Honda’s Direct Drive mode. The ICE can be triggered in the Clarity well below 40 mph with the appropriate amount of throttle input.

    Do you believe it is impossible for a medium sized PHEV sedan with a 17-24kWh battery, that weighs less than a Clarity, to exceed 40mph on batteries alone?

    I like to believe some things are possible. Like a PHEV that’s costs the same as an ICE vehicle and weighs less and costs less than a BEV. Or that some new battery technology lies just around the corner.

    Some things are possible now, others are not.

    Also, can you tell us exactly how the 103hp engine in the Clarity PHEV distributes that power to the wheels?
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2020
  12. To remove this ad click here.

  13. DucRider

    DucRider Well-Known Member

    Some people actually read and research before posting. Try it sometime.

    Range extender "fundamentally wrong"
    The energy management system, which works much more efficiently than in other vehicles with a serial hybrid drive, is also patented. This also applies, and in particular, to the version of the BMW i3 with range extender that Bavaria has been offering until recently . Comparisons with the car quickly upset Obrist: “The Range Extender already contains everything that is fundamentally wrong by engineers. Why should I buy an electric car that makes a conventional combustion engine do all the work when the battery is empty? ”With all the noise, vibrations and emissions that go with it.

    Constant recharging protects the battery
    In Obrist Mark II, the combustion engine is not an auxiliary engine that jumps in when the battery is at the end of its strength. With the concept of the Austrians, the generator jumps in when the car is driving at speeds of over 65 km / h - not to direct additional forces onto the drive axle, but to gently recharge the battery. “What all today's batteries are least capable of is fully charged and completely discharged. After maybe 500 charging cycles, the battery only has a capacity of 80 percent, ”criticizes Obrist. With his system, the battery is always recharged a little in between - "chemistry can convert ten times more energy."​

    I also have a hard time believing they will be able to deliver a 17.3 kWh battery pack, electric motor, BMS, charging ports, engine, fuel tank, etc all for $3,571.04.
    They also claim that since their motor is 40% efficient, it "does not require exhaust gas aftertreatment". There is a loophole in EU rules that could allow this to work, but it would not even come close to passing US emission standards.

    https://www.obrist-powertrain.com/fileadmin/user_upload/powertrain/Documents/HyperHybrid_Brochure_EN_2019.pdf.
    https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-plugin-hybrid-engine-conversion-obrist/
    https://edison.media/tesla-model-3-faehrt-besser-mit-hybridantrieb/25198866/ (need to use Google or other translator)
     
  14. jdonalds

    jdonalds Well-Known Member

    To me it's all about charge times, not battery size. If we take a 550 mile each way trip which we do twice each year in our Clarity we drive almost straight through in about 10 hours including gas stops whch take less than 5 minutes each. This is a very long time to spend in a car and we certainly don't want the trip to take any longer. In a 250 mile range BEV we would likely drive about 200 miles before stopping to charge. Let's say it takes one hour to charge to 80%. The next leg will start with 200 miles of range so we'll likely stop to charge at about 175 miles and spend another hour charging. Now we're 375 miles into the trip with 175 miles to go so we can make to to our hotel and hopefully charge there. The trip has taken 12 instead of 10 hours. This all depends on finding charge stations that are of the right type, unoccupied, and not broken. So for us it's not as much about BEV range but rather BEV charge times that don't work. Cut the charge time to 15 minutes and I'll switch to an EV. And forget fuel cell cars that refill quickly. I have no interest in them unless I can refill at home. We charge the car with roof solar.

    I do believe PHEVs are not getting the press they deserve. I imagine there are many owners who are in a similar situation as we are. We can go for months without having the ICE come on as all of that driving is close enough to home to do it all in electric mode. I really like driving electric only and it's quite easy to do in the Clarity. Only when we take occasional 300 mile round trips, or those two 1,100 mile round trips, that we have to use gasoline. The price to pay for the engine, including the weight of the engine, exhaust, cooling, and gas tank, all appear to be well worth it because Honda has shown us it is in the wonderful Clarity.

    A flip view of the Clarity is the inclusion of the engine allows us to have a smaller, less expensive, lower weight battery bank. The tradeoff in balance works perfectly for us. We drive at least 50 miles each day, and often up to 70 miles. Because we are retired we can return home between trips to charge. So the PHEV gives us 100% electric except for long trips. It's a sweet package. For those who think the ICE is required for speeds over 40mph (obviously don't know the Clarity) our daily trips involve some 70 mph segments about 5 miles in length.
     
  15. DucRider

    DucRider Well-Known Member

    The 40 mph was referring to the Obrist powertrain, not the Clarity.

    And the one hour to charge to 80% is much longer than it currently takes on new generation DCFC. The Taycan can charge at 275kW, and Tesla's are at 200 to 250 kW.
    At 200 kW and 3.5 mi/kWh, that would yield 175 miles in 15 minutes. It does take a relatively big battery to fully utilize fast charge speeds (due to tapering). The average rate will be lower when trying to fully charge a battery, and will also vary based on beginning SOC, etc. But we are not too far away from the charging rates you deem necessary.
     
  16. If So Equipped

    If So Equipped New Member

    Yes, after driving about 350 miles or so the 2019 Leaf of ours (we also have a Clarity BEV) will DCFC at around 18kW. Still 3X Level 2 used by most PHEV. Does fine in warm temperatures; we have only had difficulty at >100F (hot). Most drivers will never notice the limitations of passive cooling and Nissan has a performance warranty on the battery pack. An e-Golf driver told me VW prohibits DCFC twice in a row to protect the battery; why does Nissan take all the heat (guess that was a pun) for a less restrictive policy? Anyway, the Clarity BEV charges at a ridiculous 22kW if the battery is not above 80F or so; it cools the pack nicely but there seems to be no easy way to pre-heat it. So we have a Summer car (Clarity) and a Winter car (Leaf).
     
  17. jdonalds

    jdonalds Well-Known Member

    I'm thinking those cars with fast charge are likely out of my price range.
     
  18. insightman

    insightman Well-Known Member Subscriber

    And currently a very sparse infrastructure, too.
     
  19. DucRider

    DucRider Well-Known Member

    Both of those are true today, but in the next 3-5 years? I can remember when a plasma TV was $10K and not that great, digital cameras were low res and high $$, a decent scientific calculator was about 30% the price of a full sized new car, cell phone coverage was slow (plus big $$$) and only in large cities, etc.
    Decent fast charging speeds are possible today, and is naturally implemented first on higher end products. EA is installing 150 & 350 kW stations at all of their locations, so infrastructure is improving. The Mach E has 150 kW capability and starts at ~$44K. Ford is far from reaching the 200K cap so it qualifies for the full $7,500 Federal incentive. A Tesla Model 3 is <$40K with 250 kW capability.
    Within a few years, I expect 150 kW to be the minimum we see on new vehicles, with prices continuing to fall and number of choices increasing.
     
  20. jdonalds

    jdonalds Well-Known Member

    We'll see how many years but of course we do expect progress in batteries and lower prices. When the time comes that a reasonably priced EV can be recharged in under 15 minutes I'll be the first in line to buy one.
     
  21. Some people are better at answering questions than others.

    Thanks for the tip.
     

Share This Page