FEV, Inc. to Unveil Dodge Caliber-Based Range Extended Electric Concept Vehicle at SAE World Congress
14 April 2009
| A conventional MY 2009 Dodge Caliber. Click to enlarge. |
FEV, Inc. will unveil a Dodge Caliber-based range extended electric concept vehicle (ReEV) powered by a UQM propulsion system and generator at the 2009 SAE World Congress next week. The range extended electric vehicle with plug-in capability was developed by FEV to demonstrate the company’s full spectrum of capabilities in hybrid engineering.
The ReEV propulsion system employs a 1.0L, 3-cylinder, 4-valve engine that is mated to a UQM PowerPhase 75 generator that provides 41 kW of continuous power in extended-range mode, with a peak power of 75 kW. The energy storage system consists of a 20 kWh liquid-cooled lithium-ion battery pack that operates at 346V, with a Delphi DC/DC converter. A UQM PowerPhase 125 traction motor powers the wheels.
The Caliber extended range demonstrator has an all-electric range of 40 miles (74 km), accelerates from 0-60 mph in 8.3 seconds, and has a top speed of 84 mph (156 km/h).
The Caliber ReEV concept is one of several new hybrid vehicle technologies that are being developed in FEV’s recently completed Hybrid and Electric Vehicle Development Center in Auburn Hills, Michigan. (Earlier post.)
At the World Congress, FEV will also showcase a Hummer H3 extended range electric vehicle concept developed in partnership with Raser Technologies. The H3 ReEV is the first vehicle equipped with Raser’s range-extended electric vehicle technology. (Earlier post.)
Interesting, I wonder what the target price is?
Posted by: Will S | 14 April 2009 at 06:59 AM
UQM built a Hummer like this 9 years ago. They tried to interest the military in a Hummer that could travel at night in all-electric mode without a significant heat or sound signature that could be picked up by the enemy at long range. The Hummer's ICE could charge the batteries and charge all the onboard communications electronics. I believe they drove the vehicle across country as a publicity stunt and averaged over 50 mpg. Either the timing wasn't right or the Bush administration squashed it because it was anti-oil.
Posted by: creativforce | 14 April 2009 at 07:29 AM
Hmmm, only 84 mph top speed? It'll never sell here in the Atlanta area.
Posted by: Matthew | 14 April 2009 at 09:11 AM
Now, if only chrysler would see this and get the idea.
The calibre is about the right size. If they stripped the weight off they could probably get a descent electric-only range.
@Matthew:
i think you're jesting....84mph is pretty reasonable, but then i don't live in atlanta.
Posted by: danm | 14 April 2009 at 10:57 AM
Those that insist on vehicles that achieve speeds of greater than 84mph will find themselves walking (or even winning Darwin awards) when spiking gas costs from declining oil production prices them out of their ability to use the vehicle.
If/when the economy gets back to some semblance of 'normal', expect gas prices to exceed the records of 2008.
Oil, Gas May ‘Slingshot’ Up After Credit Freezes Rigs --Bloomberg
Posted by: Will S | 14 April 2009 at 11:15 AM
There was an interview with the research director of FEV about hybrids in general and in particular about another Range Extender they build in their HQ in Aachen, Germany.
They created a Range Extender from the Fiat 500 with a 45 kW electric motor, a 12 kWh Li-Ion-Battery and, my personal highlight, a 20 kW Wankel engine. 100 km electric-only range and another 300 km with the range extender.
Even though a Wankel doesn't have a good efficiency, they chose it because of acoustics, weight and space.
http://tinyurl.com/dgn4xt
Check the third pic and search for the ICE. :)
Posted by: randomdude | 14 April 2009 at 11:20 AM
How many $Billions did FEV get in bailout? Oh that right!!! You don't get $Billions unless you have a proven track record of pissing away $Billions.
Posted by: dursun | 14 April 2009 at 11:27 AM
Spending money on the Caliber platform or anything else from Chrysler probably isn't a top priority for anyone right now.
This is a concept vehicle. Those batteries are still expensive.
Hybrids and and EVs are coming in more varieties from more sources all the time. I attribute the recent weakness in hybrid sales to the poor economy and to buyers who are waiting to see the newer models.
Posted by: Ken | 14 April 2009 at 12:33 PM
The old Geo 3 cylinder engines did not cost much. Later they came with fuel injection and you could get a turbo on it.
I would like to see this with less batteries for lower cost. If you want to add more later, that is your choice.
Posted by: SJC | 14 April 2009 at 01:01 PM
Regardless of whether it's right or wrong, 84mph is not at all an unusual speed on the highways around here. GA-400 isn't called the 'Alpharetta Autobahn' for nothing.
As for being priced out of use, that seems unlikely; fuel costs in Europe are far higher than here, and I haven't heard of them slowing down drastically. I suspect you'll see a move to smaller (but still capable) vehicles and a retreat from the exurbs before that happens.
Posted by: Matthew | 14 April 2009 at 01:44 PM
Near as I can figure, UQM is sort of the milspec of motors. I got a quote of $25,000 for their smallest 75kw motor, quantity one. Obviously, you are not going to sell the car for $25k with two of these in there.
Posted by: SJC | 14 April 2009 at 01:55 PM
@dursun: right on!
"You don't get $Billions unless you have a proven track record of pissing away $Billions."
Whine. Moan. Stamp foot. Pout. I can't have it MY way!
Posted by: Reel$$ | 14 April 2009 at 06:15 PM
Matthew, an electric motor is just copper and magnets. The reason UQM would quote 25K is because they don't want to sell "one." They want to sell thousands. The only reason to buy one is to reverse engineer their proprietary technology. For that, you have to pay big bucks.
Posted by: creativforce | 15 April 2009 at 07:00 AM
Regarding the "Atlanta Speedway":
Not that I condone the breaking of traffic laws, but it has been my experience, having owned foreign, domestic, small, medium sized cars, wagons and mini-vans, that I have never seen worse mpg than EPA rated at highway speeds of well over 55. Even my old Plymouth min-van did about 3 mpg better than rated at 75 mph. On the other hand I have seen horrible MPG numbers when forced to crawl in rush hour traffic. My point is that I have yet to see the government or any other entity make a good argument for slowing down other than for safety.
Posted by: RD | 15 April 2009 at 07:06 AM
This may help in your understanding. Note that aerodynamic drag is proportional to the cube of the vehicle speed (i.e, not a linear relationship).
Posted by: Will S | 15 April 2009 at 07:44 AM
SJC:
Agree with you.
All PHEVs and BEVs should be available with modular battery packs. Something like two to four 5 to 10 Kwh standard modules would give owners the flexibility to match the batttery pack size to their requirements and pocket book.
Secondly, additional modules could be added 3 or 4 years latter when price is down and performance is better. The average PHEV and BEV will last up to 15 years.
The average ICE vehicles did not start with 400 hp V-8's. Why should PHEVs and BEVs have to start with 300+ HP and 100 Kwh?
Posted by: HarveyD | 16 April 2009 at 09:24 AM