Yea the early stuff Eaton did paved the way but it's evolved. Cool systems that seem to have a place in the market.

Maybe GD directed sarcasm

Attached File


Nomads are CAF

True, but counterpoint - this is what the Volt looked like:



It’s like they looked at the Prius and said “But how can we make it even uglier?”

Fisker was a little known low-volume startup Tesla competitor.

I’m just saying you’d think one of the big manufacturers would offer at least one car like this to offer to all the people who see the benefit and increased performance of EV drivetrains but don’t want the limited range. And that doesn’t look like a fugly abortion

Deisel or JetA?

Appreciated

The Nomad is fucking awesome, I just wish they made it in AWD.

This EV w/ generator drivetrain in a chassis like the Nomad would be my absolute dream car

Attached File


Your last sentence tho...$50k didn't help

EVs might have better initial accerallation against some fuel driven engines [ICE is a liberal term], but sustained EV performance falls short even within 1320ft.  No enthusiast drives or races a stock vehicle unless they have to by rules.  Modded fuel engined vehicles are not even on the same spectrum as EV in performance.  They completely outclass EVs.  

There are zero sanctioned races including both gas and EV vehicles for a reason.  It's segregated like women's and men's sports because the men always dominate.  Examples being Formula and NHRA.

I'm affiliated with quite a few "non pro" racing events like World Cup Finals and TX2K.  Zero EVs are capable of competing and the 1/4 mile is best realm for EVs since they don't have the endurance to compete in any other form of racing.  

As for this Ariel EV, the video you posted showed a 100% non-functional turbine range extender was most likely a fake prop. The turbine was the only reason for it being in a video.  If it was real it would be high pitched loud as fuck and a shit choice for a generator on a street driven vehicle.   Heck, the EV part of the car even broke during the limited filming and when it worked it wasn't impressive for claimed stats.  

FIA WC says hi.

I seriously looked into a Nomad 3 years ago.  Joined their forums and spoke with Atom owners.   The Atom owners liked them as track toys, but thought the build quality was shit and they received zero after sale support from Ariel NA or UK.  None of them ever drove them on the street more than once or twice because it was that bad.  

I learned the Nomad is basically non-existant. They made a few of them and haven't made a new one in roughly 3 years because no one wanted them with much cheaper and capable options in the class... mainly SxSs.   When one of the few used ones pop up (less than a year avg ownership), they sell for $100k to someone that thinks they look cool from a youtube video.  $100k used for a poorly made barely capable British Dune buggy.  I'll pass.  

ETA:  I posted about the Nomad a few years ago on here when I was interested.  Probably the first on this forum and probably the last until this thread.  Lol.    

The prices surprised me. Definitely seems like it would be a a cool setup if you could buy it in kit form and save some bucks but I don't know how that works for street legality.

There were discussions about both models here when they first appeared. I've given my impressions of Ariel previously. Simons overriding design aim is uncompromising performance in an attractive package.

Ariel's a small outfit - 20-30 folx dependent. It's a step above or below Superformance, I can never decide which. I've got a fair amount  of experience with small mfgs, therefore not much in the way of misplaced expectations.

For what it is, the Nomad's a slicker package but a comp buggy's more capable, and depending where you are (Europe), buggy's possibly unroadable. Like all Ariels they're fucking fast tho. Not my thing but remains CAF.

100k would build a heck of an exo cart buggy thing

It’s an APU, it only needs to have enough power to sustain highway speed while slow-recharging the batteries.



I wish to God I could buy a 4x4 Hybrid van with this technology.  Is that so much to ask?

Bigger rigs could get pretty interesting.

The Ram 1500 EV was supposed to have a range extender - we'll see what offered at launch.

Ford, Renault, Karma, prolly a few others have BEVRE "vans" that are squarely aimed at commercial use, but I don't think any are ready for prime time.

Are the EPA rules even written so that one could be used? Until we're able to scrap out current rules and regs innovation is a bit limited

Yeah, but can it run Crysis?

I'm unaware of EPA rules that disadvantage PHEV/BEVRE?

TO THE BATCAVE!

I just assumed all the weird emissions rules that exist would have to apply to the range extender. Catalytic converters, DEF for diesels, etc etc. I have no idea how it works with them.

I think Ford patented a modular turbine range extender a few years ago.

Extenders would need to be certified to  whatever bin applies. This hasn't seemed to be an issue for any of the extenders extant.

As far as turbines, the class 4-8 turbine extender Wrightspeed (Ian Wrights company) was working on was supposedly very clean but I'm not at all familiar with turbine emission characteristics

Id be interested is seeing anything Blue or Model e doing with turbine development.

There was the bed package (tool box) that was a removable extender - but I don't recall any specific extender system associated

Cosworth has the rights and patents tied up for the CatGen system. The eyes on hydrogen as well.

Which ones exist currently I did a search but it included the Volt which seemed weird because I thought it had a mechanical connection. It's the one I know the least about.

I don't think  any are currently produced for USDM. The 3 mentioned above, Fiskar Karma, Volt (and Caddy ELR) and i3 which just ended production.

Volt and ELR operated as a serial hybrid unless conditions warranted - which Houston's explained above

The turbine extender isn't an axial turbine like in modern aircraft engines. It's basically like a turbocharger that has it's own combuster.

Catalytic combustion applied to turbines is being worked on by numerous companies. The catalytic combustion lowers temperatures below the point where the various NOx are formed. So it works in large part by not creating EPA emissions in the first place and after treatment of the exhaust is not needed.

All of the companies claim that the catalytic combustion doesn't lower efficiency. None of them explain how that is possible with lower temperatures in a brayton cycle heat engine. Perhaps combustion efficiency offsets the lower temperatures, but I am suspicious of marketing bullshit.

The numbers claimed for emissions are quite a bit lower compared to modern internal combustion engines with conventional smog control as well as turbines.

28% efficiency is low compared to peak efficiency of gasoline engines and especially Diesel engines. However, smaller engines tend to be less efficient than big ones and the average efficiency of the turbine operated at steady state and 28% may be higher than a typical IC engine that drives the wheels.

Going to need operational numbers to sort Overall efficiency of the entire thing.

The multifuel aspect is nice. When you invade some progressive state in your bat mobile, you can run on whatever fuel they have left.