That's not an EV. It's a series hybrid. I've been saying for two years that a hybrid could be based on a Stirling-cycle engine. The Stirling engine is more efficient than an internal-combustion engine, but has the disadvantage of very slow response: several minutes to speed up or slow down in response to changes in the amount of heat applied. But as a hybrid that does not matter: the engine can supply an amount of energy needed to re-charge the batteries, rather than the amount of energy demanded by the car at any given moment. Unlike the Prius, the engine would run constantly. But when demand is low and battery SOC rises, the engine would be slowed down, and when demand is great and battery SOC drops, the engine would speed up. Of course, being GM, they've probably just put this out to give the impression of doing "something," without ever intending to actually build it. And it still will have to burn some kind of fuel, such as alcohol or gasoline, though it could be designed to burn any fuel that can be carried in the car. But it's not an EV any more than a Prius is an EV. And 50 mph is an unnecessarily slow limit. Too slow for safe freeway travel. And lead-acid batteries in 2007??? Clearly, GM is not serious.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Mar 6 2007, 12:51 AM) [snapback]400750[/snapback]</div> That's from like 1970 or so. Posted more as a historical interest than anything else. The link has info on this car, the EVT1, the Precept, the Impact etc.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Beryl Octet @ Mar 6 2007, 03:06 PM) [snapback]401245[/snapback]</div> Oops. I thought that was a current news article. Well, at least I was right about their never intending to actually build it. And I still think that the concept of a Stirling-cycle series hybrid is a sound idea. Nowadays it could use lithium batteries and ultra-capacitors and have high performance numbers. But I still want an EV.
