jerry dycus wrote: > > > I want 336V 100 Ah pack in my car and make sure it's > > not > > folding in half and even better - not overweight. > And you'll pay for it dearly.
Yes, and get what I paid for. Dearly in this case means just what it worth. It's simple. If I want a modern car (almost) without known EV limitations such as limited range and overweight, I'm expected to pay at least the same as normal modern car cost ($20k-$25k today). Every EVer wants to spend $2k and have results as comparable $20k car before it became a donor. Would be nice, but ain't gonna happen, sorry. If I have $25k I will have a conversion with it's stock weight (may be +100 kg) and 300 miles range (not 400 average for ICE cars) - almost the same as $25k ICE counterpart. > BTW, I'd say 20 years on the life of ni-cads in EV > service. My 27 year old units spent most of their life > sitting in a medical machine as UPS backup so were > little used probably until I started abusing them 2 > years ago. You seem to like NiCd more, and I'm not debating that. I'm saying that *I* personally looking at my donor car, my driving needs and habits, my wallet and my willingness to be stuck with the same power source for 27 years may choose different battery. > > Don't get me wrong - NiCd is likely best battery > > available > > now to anyone. Everyone's priorities are different > > though. > True!! Being able to charge them once a week > without harming them is nice too. > jerry dycus All else equal, frequency of charging is only function of Ah capacity. 100 Ah batteries at 50% DOD will take the same [roughly] 5 hours @20A to charge, PbA, NiCd or LiIon. All you do is put 50 Ah back, i.e. if you drive such that spend only 50 Ah a week, then you charge once a week (or whatever) regardless of the battery chemistry. Victor
