Gas 2.0

Nissan LEAF: Faster 0-60 MPH Than a (Classic) Mustang?
Peugeot Previews Sexy Electric Sports Car, the EX1
EPA Will Set Tougher Fuel Standards For Big Rigs, Improvements Coming

Nissan LEAF: Faster 0-60 MPH Than a (Classic) Mustang?

Posted: 26 Oct 2010 12:37 PM PDT

I’m not sure who was the first car reviewer or company to test their cars based on their acceleration from 0-60 mph, but it has since become the standard of the world. Nothing is more important to speed enthusiasts like myself than those first few seconds after takeoff. It doesn’t just have to do with the thrill though, as 0-60 mph can be a good gauge of a car’s highway merging ability. We all hate getting stuck behind the guy who proceeds up the on-ramp with all the speed of a Model-T.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again; electric cars can, and should be fast. So it does not surprise me to hear that the Nissan Leaf can apparently go from 0-60 mph in just 7 seconds.

Nissan’s little electric car isn’t exactly built for speed, but rather commuting. That said, electric motors can deliver 100% of its peak torque at 0 rpm. That means from the moment you touch the gas pedal, all the power the car has is right there, ready to go. Even for a humble commuter like the Leaf, that is quite a bit of torque on tap. Going from 0-60 mph in just 7 seconds, as Green Car Advisor’s Jack O’Dell did, is a very respectable performance. He also tested out the top speed, which he says is a bit north of Nissan’s official 90 mph estimate (he got to about 92 mph).

Compare it to some other cars fuel efficient cars, and you’ll see what I mean. The Chevy Volt takes about 9-seconds, the Toyota Prius takes about 10 seconds, and the Mitsubishi i-MiEV takes almost 12 seconds to reach 60 mph. On the other end of the spectrum, the Nissan 370Z takes about 5 seconds, the Maxima takes about 6 seconds, and the Nissan Versa (upon which the Leaf is based) takes 9.5 seconds to reach 60 mph. So really, the Leaf is on the “faster” side of the 0-60 gauntlet, though I wouldn’t quite call it fast (especially since I haven’t had any seat time). Generally, anything that gets to 60 mph in 6 seconds or less has good performance, so the Leaf is right on the cusp.

As I was going down the 0-60 mph list though, I noticed most of the cars in this range are rather…boring. Why not compare it to something a little less sophisticated, yet a whole lot more exciting? Yes, I’d like to line up a Nissan Leaf against a 1967 Ford Mustang GT with the 390 V8 engine. I am a muscle car nut through and through, but I’d put my money on the Leaf, because it took the ’67 Mustang GT about 7.5 seconds to reach 60 mph according to multiple Internet sources. Ya, those original muscle cars weren’t that fast…they just felt fast. I should know, I own a 1969 Mercury Cougar (the “gentleman’s Mustang”.)

Yeah, I went there. The Nissan Leaf is faster than a ’67 Mustang. Anybody want to loan me a ’67 Mustang and a Leaf to prove it?

Source: Green Car Advisor

Peugeot Previews Sexy Electric Sports Car, the EX1

Posted: 26 Oct 2010 12:36 PM PDT

I love going fast, though thus far my need for speed has only been fulfilled by gas-powered engines. I see electric cars as being able to offer so much more in terms of performance though, thanks to their unbeatable low-end torque. This is why the Tesla Roadster has been a success and is easily recognizable across most of the automotive world.

Automakers seem to be realizing that marketing electric cars as sporty might not be a bad idea at all. The latest offering is from French car maker Peugeot, a electric sports car concept called simply the “EX1″.

Peugeot gets right to the point and says that right now, they have no plans to produce an electric sports car. Which is a real shame. Sports cars usually carry a price premium, and people have historically proven that they will pay more money for more power…no matter what the power source may be.

Still, as a concept the EX1 comes with a lot of goodies for those of us dreaming of clean speed. On display at Peugeot’s showroom in Paris, this two-seater concept is narrow-yet-powerful. The lithium-ion battery pack powers an electric motor that produces 125 kW of power, or about 340 horsepower and 177 ft-lbs of torque. Doesn’t sound like much, but since 100% of that torque is available at 0 RPMs, this concept can supposedly sprint from 0-60 mph in about 3.5 seconds. It also has a top speed of 162 mph thanks to its lightweight and aerodynamics.

This is definitely the direction I want to see sports cars evolve towards. I love my muscle cars, but I am a big fan of lightweight cars that handle well and do more, with less. That seems to be the plan with the EX1, and hopefully down the road this sleek concept will inspire some sporty Peugeot’s.

Source: Automotive News

EPA Will Set Tougher Fuel Standards For Big Rigs, Improvements Coming

Posted: 26 Oct 2010 12:27 PM PDT

Big trucks represent just 4% of the vehicles on the road today, but consume up to 20% of the oil our country uses every day. That means they are drinking up five times their fill, largely because this big rigs are rolling 100,000 miles or more every year while getting an average of 6-7 mpg. Yes, they are hauling a lot of weight, but profit margins are driven by fuel costs in this business, so you would think the industry would have done all they could to increase fuel efficiency voluntarily.

They haven’t, so the EPA is stepping in. For trucks sold between 2014 and 2018, the EPA is considering finally enforcing a fuel efficiency standard for the largest of these vehicles. Even a modest increase to 10 mpg could have far reaching benefits, for both truck drivers and the environment alike.

The EPA plans to finalize this legislation sometime next year, which would set a as-yet undetermined fuel efficiency for the largest trucks on the market. The Union of Concerned Scientists (admittedly not the best source for trucking information) put together some useful diagrams to show how even a modest increase in fuel standards could make a big difference.

If big rigs were required to get 10 mpg (loaded? unloaded?), it would add about $44,000 to the cost of a new truck. That cost would come from implementing current technology such as reducing engine idling, more efficient truck and trailer aerodynamics, and improvements to the transmission. Over the course of a 120,000 miles at the cost of $3.50 a gallon of diesel, this would save drivers and owners of big rigs $24,500 a year, and 7,000 gallons of fuel, per rig. In just two years, the extra cost would be paid off, and over five years the owner of the rig would pocket an additional $56,000 in saved fuel costs.

That is huge for these guys, who make a profit on the slimmest margins in this highly competitive market. If you were to run a modest fleet of ten trucks, that is over a half-million bucks in your pocket extra in just five years.

This is how green technology needs to be marketed. But will big rig buyers bite?

Source: Treehugger via UCS