New Mitsubishi 4WD Electric Vehicle; Running in Shikoku Rally
24 August 2005
|The Lancer Evolution MIEV|
Mitsubishi Motors has announced that it has developed and will enter another new electric test vehicle—the Lancer Evolution 4-wheel-drive MIEV (Mitsubishi In-wheel motor Electric Vehicle)—in the Shikoku EV Rally 2005 to be held August 27-28 on the island of Shikoku, Japan.
Based on the company’s Lancer Evolution IX high-performance 4WD sports sedan (minus the conventional 4WD powertrain), the Lancer Evolution MIEV uses a lithium-ion battery system to power four newly-developed in-wheel motors.
The Lancer Evolution MIEV is the latest MIEV test vehicle, following the Colt EV announced in May 2005 (earlier post).
|Mitsubishi’s latest in-wheel motor.|
The new in-wheel motor uses a hollow doughnut construction that locates the rotor outside the stator as opposed to a common electric motor where the rotor turns inside the stator. (A design that sounds similar to Wavecrest’s Adaptive Motor System—earlier post.)
Mitsubishi points to several benefits from this design for the motor:
Greater ease of raising power output and torque.
Higher torque allows the speed reducer unit to be eliminated, meaning less weight and improved power transmission efficiency.
Better space efficiency with the brake assembly fitting inside the motor which itself fits neatly within the wheel house.
The outer-rotor arrangement also surmounts the difficulties presented to date by the steering system, making it suitable for fitting to and driving the front wheels—and facilitating 4WD in-wheel motor vehicles.
|The layout of the Lancer.|
Each motor, manufactured by Toyo Denki Seizo K.K., produces a maximum output of 50 kW with 518 Nm of torque.
A 355V lithium-ion battery system comprising 24 modules fits under the floor between the front and rear wheels to provide power.
The Lancer Evolution MIEV has a top speed of 180 km/h (112 mph) and a cruising range of 250 km (155 miles).
Mitsubishi intends to evaluate the outer-rotor motor under a range of driving conditions, and to that end has acquired vehicle type certification for the Lancer Evolution MIEV to allow testing not only in the proving ground but also under normal driving conditions on public roads.
The tests will verify the reliability and durability of the outer-rotor in-wheel motor when subject to road surface inputs, to water inundation, and to exposure to sand and dirt. The test program will also allow the Company to carry out research and development aimed at raising performance and at reducing weight and size.
Mitsubishi sees its MIEV system as key for its future high-performance electric, hybrid and fuel cell vehicles that deliver not only superior environmental performance but also output performance and maneuverability equal to or better than gasoline-fueled vehicles.
The Shikoku EV Rally 2005 is organized by the Shikoku EV Challenge Committee and the Shikoku EV Rally 2005 Executive Committee.
Mitsubishi is coming up with promising electric vehicle models. I have been waiting for an EV to be released for a long time, and I sure hope they actually manage to get these (and the Colt) into the North American market. Got a Prius in 2001 because it was the closest thing to an EV that's available.
I wonder what this car looks like under the hood with no engine or tranny?
Posted by: Schwa | 24 August 2005 at 07:48 AM
>>I wonder what this car looks like under the hood with no engine or tranny?<<
Full of batteries :)
Posted by: JN | 24 August 2005 at 09:22 AM
>The Lancer Evolution MIEV has a top
>speed of 180 km/h (112 mph) and a
>cruising range of 250 km (155 miles).
155 miles? Perfect. Thats more than
I need for my daily. When will I see one?
Wonder what the cost would be?
I am hoping that this happens soon!
Posted by: Bob Tasa | 24 August 2005 at 09:36 AM
This car has all it's batteries under the floor, so that leaves the engine compartment free for just the inverter.
Posted by: Schwa | 24 August 2005 at 09:56 AM
"This car has all it's batteries under the floor, so that leaves the engine compartment free for just the inverter."
When you open the hood, you get a great big fake gasoline engine made out of plastic so as not to scare potential consumers ;P
Posted by: Mikhail Capone | 24 August 2005 at 10:34 AM
"When you open the hood, you get a great big fake gasoline engine made out of plastic so as not to scare potential consumers."
Good one, LMHO :-)
Posted by: Emmanuel M | 24 August 2005 at 11:20 AM
Well - At least this is part of what I've been promoting for over a year. Now all they need to do is install a small - diesel generator and they can cross the USA on one tank of fuel.
Posted by: Lucas | 24 August 2005 at 12:18 PM
A range of 250km! Thats exactly what I'm looking for. Hopefully the in-wheel-motor can stand the test phase.
German and US automakers are still in deep sleep mode and waisting time in developing 120 year old granny oilburn technology...they might wake up too late. however, the market will clarify.
Posted by: 156pilot | 24 August 2005 at 08:21 PM
One would imagine that an in-wheel motor would increase unsprung weight.
Posted by: joib | 25 August 2005 at 01:13 AM
Way back in the ice ages when I was a child most cars had heavy unsprung solid rear axles. Even the cheap cars handled bumps better than most cars today.
Posted by: tom | 25 August 2005 at 05:48 AM
The link in the post requires registration. Here is a better link, with a picture of the wheel engine.
Posted by: Emmanuel M | 25 August 2005 at 09:43 AM
So how does this Car do when the street is flooded,with 335 V DC Batts under the Floor Boards,Motors at the Wheels,I'd be scared to be in the car for Fear of beeing electrocuted or simply stranded.
Posted by: HHN | 26 August 2005 at 06:57 AM
Unless the battery problem isn't solved the pure e-cars have no chance in the market.
350km minimum drive distance and a recharge time of maximum 3 to 5 min. are the target.
At this point (in 3-5 years) we need a nationwide european plug in net, e.g. gas stations have to offer by law at least one rapid recharge port.
Exactly, the construction is questional.
But other manufacturer will do a better job.
I'm sure about that, the only way to lead us out of the oil dependency is the full e-vehicle.
Excuse my lousy german-english :-P
Posted by: Marcel | 26 August 2005 at 08:45 AM
Most people utilize the 250-350 mile range on their gas engines so that they only have to make a fill-up once per week or so. With this vehicle, you will only have to visit a fueling station a few times per year to do a quick charge on a long-haul trip. What I find exciting about this car is the fact that most people, who drive 20-30 miles/day, will be recharging their batteries from only a 10-15% depth of discharge, which will extend the battery life. But the 155 mile range still gives the option of going farther.
Posted by: Caoimhan | 26 August 2005 at 10:50 AM
I don't need 250-350 miles range per charge to useful.
People typically fill their tank, as the gas station, 1-2 times / week. With an electric, I can "fill up" at home, which is someplace I'll be going anyway.
I commute about 85-90 miles each day. Considering the price of gas, I'm looking at about $55-60/week, just for fuel. If I can run 100 miles on electricity each day, then charge up after hours, I'm good to go. If the car gets about 5 miles / kWh, and our current electric rates are 7.5 cents / kWh, that's 1.5 cents / mile. That's less than $7.50 week for my regular commute.
Give me a 100 mile range and good efficiency and I'm a happy camper. Give me a portable gas-powered generator which can be hung off a trailer hitch on the back, turning the car into a series hybrid, for the occasional long-range road trip (hell, make the charger a rental item), and there won't be a need to own another vehicle.
Posted by: ChesserCat | 28 August 2005 at 04:52 PM
This could be a satisfying approach if coupled with plug-in hybrid technology.
As the autonomy of Plug-ins or PHEVs is progressively extended above 100 miles and as much as 200+ miles with higher performance batteries, more efficient drive system, much lighter vehicles, superior aerodynamics etc., the on-board, rather large and expensive, ICE driven generator could be replaced with a very low cost, very light weight (less than 100 lbs.) very small aluminum 7 to 8 KVA unit. This small ICE/generator could effectively increase the PHEV autonomy for the occassional full day long drive of 500 to 600 miles with 4 to 5 gallons of fuel for most compact and mid-size cars.
Considering that the average North-American couple is about 100 lbs over-weight, the additional weight of the small on-board ICE/generator could easily be offset by appropriate eating habits and diet.
Large Hummer, large 4 x 4 and large pick-ups trucks fans would have to install more batteries and larger ICE generators to get equivalent range and/or install large on-board solar panels to partly compensate for their taste for the big and heavy.
A new progressive $2 to $5/gallon pollution tax (on top of the coming $100/barrel for oil) would help to convince the diehards to replace their gazoline guzzlers with more efficient plug-in hybrids. The equivalent treatment for smokers help to reduce their number by almost half over the last 10 years. The pure money approach is simple, easy to apply and works most every time.
The money (new high fuel taxes) approach could also quickly convince the motorbikes, VTTs and boat owners to go with plug-in hybrids and make a lot of bystanders very happy.
The switch to plug-in hybrids would progressively increase the national electricity consumption. Part of the pollution tax should be used to offset the extra cost for the installation of new clean electric generating plants (wind-solar-nuclear) to increase the national (USA) electricity production by 50% over the next 10 years and by 100% over 20 years.
Part of the new pollution tax should be used to offset the extra cost for plug-in hybrids, especially during the first 10 to 15 initial years.
Those are win-win solutions for the next 20 years that would create jobs, develop new industries, reduce petroleum consumption, eliminate oil imports, reduce air pollution, reduce noise pollution, negate the requirements for new polluting oil refineries, reduce global warming, reduce severe hurricanes and weather extremes etc.
The $15 billions recently identified to implement the national energy policy is a drop in the bucket and is by no means sufficient to change the American's ways. The transformation from petroleum to mostly electricity for private and commercial transportation will cost at least 100 times that much over the next 20 years.
Investing $1500 billions in our future well-being is a much better idea than to spend about the same amount to finance 'OIL' wars to get ours hands on somebody else dirty polluting petroleum.
Let's go America. Let's do the right things before it is too late.
Posted by: Harvey D | 29 August 2005 at 02:30 PM
Well dont forget most of the designs for a real hydrogen car call for it realy to be a hybrid battery/fuel cell car.
The hydrogen is there only to keep the battery in peak charge ranges and to extend range over what a medium load of batteries can take such a car.
In fact im expecting the fuel cell car will have the same battery pack as the current hybrids do. And that the first hydrogen cars will in fact be ice/battery hybrids.
Now the only question is do they intend to make plug in models? And of course how spendy the fuel cell/ice hydrogen modual will be.
Posted by: wintermane | 30 August 2005 at 04:28 AM
I wonder of the MIEV will be compatable with household electic. . . . plugging it in when I get home will be easy enough and well worth 40.00 savings in gas.
On another note. . . how about the pothole situation. Would the MIEV motors be damaged in rough terrain?
$ 18,000.00 sounds too good to be true.
Posted by: Joe | 05 September 2005 at 09:06 AM
This Mitsubishi should be in production by 2010.
The battery charging time should not be a problem, as there are soon batteries on the market that can be recharged within a few minutes.
Take a look at this Toshiba news:
Posted by: romza | 09 September 2005 at 04:37 AM
it's very important us in the future any one of us have a economic a real Electric,ev car,I wait for it too Long times,Thanks.
Posted by: Mathieu Petit frere | 29 September 2005 at 07:46 AM
it's very important to us in the future any one of us have a economic a real Electric,ev car,I wait for it too Long times,Thanks.
Posted by: Mathieu Petit frere | 29 September 2005 at 07:47 AM
I love this idea, I would prefer the GM EV1 Gen II but since GM is not giving us a EV choice I will be happy to buy a full Electric vehicle from anywhere I can get it. I prefer true EV's over any hybrid. If I'm going to pay for an expensive battery, I never want to visit a gas station.
Posted by: mrwsm | 29 September 2005 at 10:03 PM
may i know what is the price of this car?? and where it is??
Posted by: darshana kale | 08 November 2005 at 11:37 PM
Add a quiet diesel generator running on bio diesel @ 7500 watts of power and you should be able to cross Canada on about 100L of diesel with no net cost to the environment.
Posted by: Allan | 13 June 2006 at 10:40 PM
Hi, just 3 question how much power per milage, how much will it cost? and what year will it come out?
Posted by: mussa | 22 January 2007 at 01:52 PM