ZF already has the drivetrain technology, as they do for Jaguar's awd system. Lithium ion battery pack makers are out there. Regenerative braking systems I'm no so sure about but that seems to be something the big brake manufacturers should be on top of. Jaguar's engineers only need to fine tune these systems for their cars as they do for a myriad of components made for them by others, including seats and ICE systems for example.

No, the holdup here is lack of sufficient demand. Jaguar first has to meet its probable market for conventionally powered cars and leave all that expensive development up to others. Jaguar can easily afford to completely ignore this hybrid market until the economics make more sense.

 

Jaguar have plans for hybrids, in the Ingenium engines

Ingenium: Configurable, Flexible, ModularJaguar Land Rover has developed its own new family of advanced technology, low-friction, high-performance petrol and diesel engines to meet growing customer demand for lower fuel consumption and cost of ownership, without compromising performance and the driver experience.
Ingenium’s design brief presented Jaguar Land Rover’s engineers with a tough and complex challenge. Its new engine family would need to be:

• Configurable and flexible to enable seamless installation in a range of new Jaguar and Land Rover vehicles
• Scalable up and down to create smaller or larger displacement variants in the future
• Able to accommodate a range of powertrain layouts including rear-, all- and four-wheel drive
• Engineered to support manual and automatic transmissions as well as electrified hybrid drive systems
• Easily accepting of new advances in engine technologies as they become available

 

I have plans to launch my own line of premium sports cars. Would you like to see the powerpoint?

 

Plug in or, more likely, inductive charging will become more readily available as the new hybrids become more common but to be workable the hybrid must initially be self charging from the IC engine and regenerative braking.

If I understand you correctly then it seems that Mercedes with their plug-in S500 and 350e have met your needs with regard to charging from the IC engine and provision of energy recovery via the braking system and in addition charging results from engine coasting.

 

Correct. This is the hybrid technology that works in the real world for real customers, as you have decided for yourself. It is not economically sensible, yet. But once the technology is proved feasible and acceptable to customers (remember how long it took for stop start to even be tolerated let alone appreciated) then that paves the way for regulations to encourage pollution free and noise free driving in congested areas. I look forward to being able to buy this technology not for fuel economy per se but for these other virtues. Once the wrinkles get ironed out: cost, reduced trunk space and extra weight, then this development will further civilize the personal car and make it less of a nuisance in congested areas frequented by pedestrians and cyclists.

 

I can of course understand the argument about price. I tend to forget, that I live in a country, where we have 180% tax on cars and 25% VAT on top of that. Electric cars on the other hand have been exempt from the car tax. That means, that electric cars are only a little expensive compared to other cars of the same size and "class". A Tesla S costs about the same as a four cylinder XF. The Tesla even seems cheap compared to the XF, the BMW 500, Audis and so on. Smaller electric cars tend to be on the expensive side compared to cars with IC engines, but only just a little. That's the reality I live in, when I discuss cars with my friends. I know, but I forgot before, that for most of you, electric cars are 2-3 times as expensive as comparable IC cars. That makes a difference. Hybrids have normal car tax here in Denmark, so they are also quite expensive compared to the same car with a normal engine (like a Volvo V60, VW Golf, Peugeot 508 and so on).

 

Lots of incentives here in the UK as well. Government will provide £5000 (50459.64 Danish Krone) plus relief from annual vehicle and local authorities congestion and environmental tax. They will also cover the cost of home charger installation in many cases.

 

Just catching up on this discussion. I see no point in hybrid for me. For a start having to drive 20 miles on battery then 425 miles further on a possibly inferior petrol engine on my regular journeys to France. On the rare occasions I drive into London when I would use battery only I would also like the air conditioning, heater, radio, satNav, electric windows, heated rear screen, ACC etc . as necessary to work. How long will that last? far better to take a train or Taxi on these few occasions if forced to do so. As for driving to and through Spain, yes I have and would do so again.
This still leaves the higher cost, extra weight, less storage, and an expensive battery that is not ever lasting. I will not be buying Hybrid any time soon and the reason for my earlier comments. However I repeat they can make perfect sense if your only use of a car is shopping and the school run.

 

@Bernard

Isn't that the whole point? Different missions require different cars.

If your mission is constant driving in heavy stop and go traffic, a hybrid would do fine. If you have a short round trip commute into a regulated city center and high liquid fuel costs, then an electric car would work fine. If you have long distances motorway runs, and don't care too much about sound/performance, diesel is your ticket. If you want a track and street ready car for fun, and live in a low liquid fuel cost, then a powerful gasoline V8 is your thing.

Where I live most homes have at least 2 cars, and often 3 or 4. There is room for you petrol sports car, diesel SUV, hybrid run-about, full electric sedan.

This discussion seems to have degenerated into trying to prove that certain cars don't work for certain people. Duh!! I hope we can all agree to that.

Point is, electrics and hybrids are starting to make sense in more and more use cases. Still a niche for sure, but growing.

 

Piker, I was challenged on my statement that Hybrid cars are not fit for purpose, so I explained that they were not fit for me but conceded that they were perfect for other people so why do you argue with me by making the exact same point. Just asking.

 

It's called "dog on a bone" over here.

Your points are the same points I am trying to make. Over here it is most unusual to have only one car or passenger vehicle. Almost everyone has at least two. If you have driving age kids you tend to have three. I was up to five at one point. So the idea of relying on one vehicle to do it all is not understood here.

Public transit is quite unbelievably bad in many North American cities. Imagine the tube running once every 15 minutes or perhaps longer....

 

Watch this.....for the end game....or at least Musk's version of it

 

You are a bit late with this one, it's been on UK news with comments such as "You spend $3,000 to get $3 of electricity and worse.

 

At Northern latitudes there isn't enough daylight to provide the power you need, which is more in winter than in summer, unlike latitude 35 or so.

The whole package of batteries and solar panels will set you back over US$30K. My total electrical power bill for the next 30 years is less than that.

Heck my total petrol bill for the next 25 years, taxes included, is probably less than that. The whole idea is crazy beyond comprehension.

 

Advances in technology certainly occur but not by wishing it were possible. Movies are made on that basis.

I was writing partly tongue in cheek of course but tidal or wave power isn't going to work for home storage of electricity.

This is is not a new idea nor a particularly clever idea. Battery power for residences was invented a very long time ago and was used before 1930 in rural areas with no access to the grid. The product mr Musk is so proud of is no more ingenious than the UPS (uninterrupted power supply) to which my computer server is connected in case of a power outage. This is not new stuff. Where I live power outages are just not tolerated for any reason. Within as little as an hour without power in minus 35C temperatures there are serious risks of injury or death and extensive property damage. They just don't happen here.

Wind power might work for home generation but the size of generator and the noise it makes are substantial impediments to adoption in urban areas.

I recognize that micro generation is a hot topic right now but I remain sceptical about the feasibility.

The feasibility of a big Li ion battery pack on your garage wall to store cheaper electricity and balance peak usage seems a far fetched idea economically speaking. I fail to see this as much of an advance in technology although I am familiar with the promotion techniques used by quasi inventors like Mr Musk. Similar techniques are used in Ponzi schemes.

 

You guys are missing the point on the Tesla Energy.

The #1 use case is as back up power. I may be tempted to buy a couple just to replace the back-up generator. In other words for short to mid duration power outages, the Tesla Energy picks up the load. For longer duration, we typically leave town and go to hotels anyway. So no need for the smelly noisy generators.

The #2 use case is energy arbitrage. You can get the packs charged off-peak and used-up on peak.

The above use cases require no solar panels or wind generators or anything else.

Now, if you connect Wind/power/geothermal sources to it, they become even more effective.

The #3 use case is for commercial users to claim "Eco certification". E.g. I'm a partner in a new stadium that is seriously considering this. Capture energy during the day, where most stadiums are empty, use it at night when most stadiums/arenas/concert venues are occupied.

The #4 use case is factory/service_center migration from North to South. Lots of manufacturing and service centers are migrating from US North to US South (lower labor cost/regulations/taxation) or to Mexico or from say Netherlands to southern Spain or Northern China to Southern China. Usually, when this move is made, the only expense that goes up is energy. Particularly, energy used for cooling. Solar Panels on the roof in the Texas of Mexico desert plus Tesla Energy solves that problem beautiful.

Panacea? No. Almost nothing is.

Good Idea? Probably.

Will it succeed? Too early to tell, but I'm glad someone is going after that business. Choice is great.

 

Not missing any points.

I did make the point that we solve the problem of power loss by not experiencing them. A better use of money I think.

Power arbitrage might make sense where you are but not here. We solve that problem by charging only commercial customers the differential rate, residential consumers must have continuous access to power for safety reasons.

The Tesla power packs are unrelated to electric vehicle requirements.

 

The domestic battery packs being marketed by Tesla, by the way they have been trialed in the UK and found to be very beneficial to the homeowners taking part. will find a latent market with all the owners of houses with solar panels on the roofs.
I believe that there will be a spin off to the motor industry because the scale of production of the batteries in line with an enthusiastic adoption of the packs will lead to a fall in the cost of the batteries which will be reflected in the price of the Tesla car and eventually all hybrids.

 

Point being that we are moving to a "many of the above" if not "all of the above" energy/transportation paradigm. Liquid fossil transportation fuels will co-exist with hybrid drives, electric drives, bio-fuels (e.g. ethanol) augmentation, etc and the grid will also grow more diverse from nuclear/fossil/hydro to one where wind, solar, geothermal, etc play small but increasing roles.

A lot of this will be driven by (smart or misguided) tax/regulatory schemes.

And it is all good. The fact that you have a choice to buy a BMW that is either diesel or petrol or hybrid or all electric is all good. The fact that you can soon get workable backup power from battery packs instead of only generators is good. The fact that solar panels and micro-helical wind turbines are coming down in price and can complement home battery systems is great.

In other words, choice is good. It is all good for the consumers (most of us), it is even good for investors (many of us) and even some in the industry (few of us).

It may not be good for a company like Jaguar, that does not have the resources to show innovation and give users, like peter today, all the engine choices that the competitors give.

If Jaguar loses as a customer the founding father of the Jaguar XF forum, I'd think they'd lose quite a few more, on the exclusive issue of lack of engine choices. Now, *that* is *not* good.

 

The fact that you can soon get workable backup power from battery packs instead of only generators is good.

Not exactly what this thread is about but you should know there is nothing new in this. In 1974 during the UK power cuts I was using lead acid batteries and a static inverter to power essential 240 volt items in my home and 12 volt fluorescent lighting. I presume you were still using candles.

 

the problem with all hybrid vehicles is that even new to market they are yesterdays technology by tomorrow due to the constant development is said battery technology. and in the long term, ie two to three years the main battery will need changing due to battery efficency re charging cycles

 

Not a happy thought considering batteries can cost a third of the cost of the car however don't worry. Most car manufacturers guarantee the battery for 8 or 10 years or 100,000 miles if sooner. I think Tesla is the exception with only a five year guarantee.

 

What exists or is technically feasible is meaningless. What matters is what is marketed and offered in a convenient and enticing package to consumers.

Touch screen smartphones, existed for a decade before the iPhone, but the iPhone (and the subsequent Android clones) captured the consume imagination.

Similarly, electric cars are 150 years old (almost), but it was Tesla who captured the consumer's eyes and wallets.

Same with Energy (home battery storage), no one has really marketed it is a big way and/or offered an enticing product until now/soon Tesla.

The chances of a London, New York or San Francisco, apartment dweller installing a lead-acid battery bank are nil. The chances of them putting solar pannels on the roof and installing an attractive Tesla Energy pack (or two), is probably higher than nil. That is what counts.

 

Tesla has captured the imagination only of the stock market so far.

 

What about the thousands of customers each months who forego buying Jaguars, BMWs, Mercedes, etc to buy Tesla cars?

 

I think Jagular you are ignoring the momentum associated with not only hybrids, pure electric and of course Tesla in particular.

Tesla loss narrows as electric car orders rise

• 6 May 2015
• From the sectionBusiness

esla recently announced it would offer a battery to power homes in the U
Electric car maker Tesla has reported better-than-expected revenue growth as sales of the firm's cars continue to grow.


Tesla said it manufactured 11,600 cars in the first three months of 2015, 1,000 more than it had been projecting.
That led to revenues of $893m (£586m), a 52% increase from a year earlier.
However, the firm still reported a loss of $154m, reflecting continued investment in research and new manufacturing facilities.

Tesla said it planned to increase production by about 12% and manufacture 12,500 cars in the second quarter of 2015, but warned that a strengthening dollar would continue to hurt its bottom line.
It said it would increase its prices by 5% in Europe to try an offset that loss.

After admitting earlier this year that its China sales were less than expected, Tesla said that it was seeing a recovery in the market. It said it was still on track to sell 55,000 of its Model S and Model X cars in 2015.
The company added that it was still on track for the launch of its battery factory - known as the Gigafactory - in the US state of Nevada in 2016.

Last week, Tesla announced it would manufacture batteries for home electricity use in addition to those for its cars at the facility.
Shares in the firm fluctuated in trading after US markets had closed, rising by nearly 5% before declining.

 

Very good. I like that.

Momentum is the key to the future success of all electric and hybrid vehicles.

Lol.

 

Meanwhile, in Norway, the Tesla Model S is the #1 selling car, and electric vehicles reached 25% of new car sales.

And that in a country that is a petroleum exporter

 

Simple explanation. They are relatively cheaper than an equivalent petrol model. Norway is the greenest country in the world. All electricity is from hydro power. Petrol revenues allow massive incentives including freedom from all taxes for EV. There are other reasons you just would not understand.

 

Come on Bernard, that is not fair. Piker has a very good understanding of commerce and environmental imperatives so I can imagine he will be aware of these "other reasons" but sad to say, I am not as well briefed as him so please enlighten me at least.

 

You are, of course absolutely right but Piker has refused to accept anything I say so far, and Jagular for that matter, so I was deliberately bring provocative. If you are interested I found a very interesting article by googling "How Can Tiny Norway Afford to Buy So Many Teslas? A New Freakonomics Radio Podcast

 

I'm very aware of the situation in Norway, and the horrendous taxation of vehicles, and the exemption of electric cars. (btw starting in 2018 they will reduce the benefits for electric cars somewhat)

But that is exactly the point - we live in societies where elected politicians make lots of choice that are always distorting "the market". Hi petrol taxes in the UK are simply the flip side of high EV incentives in Norway. They both distort the choices that people make.

Car makers operate within this "distorted market", not an "ideal market", whatever that is.

Jaguar and Bernard are ranting against EVs, claiming that it is governments providing the incentives. Duh!!! So what. That is what governments do. That is why petrol V8s are relatively popular in the US and middle east. That is why it is rare for a car in China to have over 3.0L of displacement (because the taxes are steep above that). That is why in Brazil 1.0L cars are so popular (the taxes are punitive above that engine size).

Government made distortions are everywhere in the car market. Ranting against them as the reason why electric cars are bad is silly, since the distortions are likely to continue and even increase.

I love electric cars. Not because I desire to own one, but because it is marginally contributing to a drop in fuel prices. I love electric cars as much as I love fracking and horizontal drilling.

The way politicians are going, Tesla is in the right place at the right time. Jaguar is about to be caught with its electric pants down.

 

In other news...

Britain’s Supreme Court has ordered the UK government to submit a new plan to the European Union that will outline action to dramatically reduce levels of the pollutant nitrogen dioxide. The plan has to be submitted by 31 December.

Now guess if this will be better for Tesla or better for Jaguar with their brand new engine factory, which currently only makes diesels.

 

The way politicians are going, Tesla is in the right place at the right time. Jaguar is about to be caught with its electric pants down.

The pressure is piling up




Why Tesla's $35,000 Model 3 should finally make electric cars a real transport alternative in 2017

VAUGHN HIGHFIELD

8 May 2015

Tesla's affordable car should change electric transport when it arrives in 2017


Tesla CEO and founder Elon Musk has revealed that the highly-anticipated Model 3 electric car should be revealed in 2016, with a launch in 2017.


“I mean, we are hoping to show off the Model 3 in approximately March of next year”, said Musk during the Tesla Earnings conference call on Wednesday.
“Again, like, don’t hold me to that month, but that’s, like — that’s our aspiration”.

Anticipation around Tesla’s new car is high because it really could be the driving force behind an affordable electric car revolution. Priced at just $35,000 (~£22,700) before tax incentives are factored in, the Model 3 would be a stylish sub £20,000 electric car.

For comparison’s sake, that places it in the same ballpark as a Seat Leon, Audi A3, Ford Fiesta or Volkswagen Golf. Add in the benefits of reduced fuel costs, larger storage capacity and roomier cockpit thanks to a removal of the combustion engine, the Model 3 is an enticing prospect.

Mileage is also not really an issue for many UK drivers. While 300 miles on a single charge is limiting for US or mainland EU drivers, there are only a handful of times UK drivers would be needing to worry about making a 300 mile journey in a single day, where charging facilities wouldn't be available.

Before we get caught up in what 2017 could bring for electric cars, it’s worth remembering that Tesla has a reputation for missing its release windows. Despite Musk presenting a rather liberal window of an entire year for the Model 3, Tesla’s previous new car - the Model X - is only just coming to market now, two years after its intended release date.
Despite a potential delay, the fact that the Model 3 is on the way at all is an incredibly enticing prospect for those sitting on the fence about electric cars.

Tesla may have set the electric car market alight - or essentially built it from the ground up - but it hasn’t been able to make a commercial dent in the automotive industry doing so. The Model 3 should be the success story they need to really shape the industry in a similar way to Toyota’s affordable Prius model.

Tesla has also had marginal success in the UK. While that’s more speculation on my part than hard-fact, it’s clear that the limited number of dealerships and the compromises drivers have to make when buying a premium vehicle have made it a hard sell. The cheapest Tesla, the Model S 70D, still costs over £55,000. If the, so far unseen, Model 3 can deliver the same level of premium quality, alongside decent battery life and present it in a package costing £30,000 less, it’s hard to believe Tesla hasn’t found the key to unlocking the UK market.

 

I hesitate to say this because I can anticipate the reply from certain quarters but as I understand it lower prices are apparently due to the halving of battery costs when his new factory is operational. However I previously read this is being doubted in many quarters. Good luck if he can do it.

 

I too remain a bit skeptical about such a steep cost drop for the batteries. However, if you understand how much California labor goes into assembling the individual cells into packs, and individual packs into competed battery assemblies, it seems plausible, that a more automated, higher scale factory can significantly cut costs.

We will see, but in general, in manufacturing, price is inversely correlated with volume. And Tesla is talking about massive battery production volumes.

And the Model 3, of course, being small and lighter also requires fewer cells.

I think the challenges to Tesla are really being able to open more direct to consumer dealerships. That is probably slowing down the company more than the batteries at this point.

 

Hybrid drivetrains are available from transmission suppliers when needed. Battery packs are available from battery manufacturers. KERS systems are available from specialist suppliers.

Jaguar can safely ignore all of this technology until the market has been established by others.

Until all forms of government support for hybrid and EV are removed no manufacturer needs to worry about building hybrid or electric vehicles. Every manufacturer currently in that market is losing money on every vehicle they try to sell. Without heavy subsidies all production of such vehicles would stop as uneconomic.

Newsflash, the subsidy programs are necessary because otherwise not a single such vehicle would be sold. That's how subsidies work.

As for subsidies being analogous to regulation that is well known to be incorrect. Regulation affects all suppliers and consumers in the same way. Subsidies target particular industries and encourage demand for their product by effectively providing profit opportunities where none exist. Subsidies typically distort the market less than regulation but unless it is expected the subsidies will eventually succeed in creating a viable business when the subsidy is removed it is a stupid idea. EV and hybrid vehicles will never become profitable.

So, to achieve their declared purpose governments should stop dinking around handing out taxpayer money and impose the regulated result they claim they are looking for. Because no government yet has ask yourself why not? It may have something to do with votes.