Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Solo Certification And Specs (Again)
#1
This is seriously puzzling to me, but EMV recently filed information with NHTSA in USA about Solo. See https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/mid/home/displayfile/39470

The kicker is the file for VIN decoding which contains
"Chart 1: Information for Positions 4 through 8
Positions 4-8                             ESA11
Make                        Electra Meccanica Vehicles Corp.
Model/Line                                 SOLO
Type                              Three-wheel Autocycle
Electric Motor Type               HPEV AC-35-26.25.11
                                82 hp (61 kW) Peak Power
                         15 hp (11 kW) Continuous Rated Power
Battery Type                           LiFeMnPO4
                                     12 modules/pack
                                      4 cells/module
Number Battery Packs                         1
Battery Capacity                         8.64 kWh
ABS                                         No
Top Speed                          130 km/h (80.8 MPH)"

Aren't we done with this wandering of the specs? 8.64kWh!!! 48 cells in the battery!!!

I'm in pain. This was filed 2017-08-24. Won't such errors delay certification? Won't such errors plunge confidence in government regulators and consumers into the depths? Why is this happening?

Granted, the places 4 through 8, "ESA11" in the VIN refer to EMV, Solo, AutoCycle, and not battery-capacity, why include the erroneous information? Is this just the VIN of a prototype going to USA for testing? Don't they need to test the production model? I just don't understand.
My blog is an eclectic list of rants and commentary about things for which I care. See MrPogson.com It's been around a decade...
Reply
#2
(10-01-2017, 08:31 AM)pogson Wrote: This is seriously puzzling to me, but EMV recently filed information with NHTSA in USA about Solo. See https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/mid/home/displayfile/39470

The kicker is the file for VIN decoding which contains
"Chart 1: Information for Positions 4 through 8
Positions 4-8                             ESA11
Make                        Electra Meccanica Vehicles Corp.
Model/Line                                 SOLO
Type                              Three-wheel Autocycle
Electric Motor Type               HPEV AC-35-26.25.11
                                82 hp (61 kW) Peak Power
                         15 hp (11 kW) Continuous Rated Power
Battery Type                           LiFeMnPO4
                                     12 modules/pack
                                      4 cells/module
Number Battery Packs                         1
Battery Capacity                         8.64 kWh
ABS                                         No
Top Speed                          130 km/h (80.8 MPH)"

Aren't we done with this wandering of the specs? 8.64kWh!!! 48 cells in the battery!!!

I'm in pain. This was filed 2017-08-24. Won't such errors delay certification? Won't such errors plunge confidence in government regulators and consumers into the depths? Why is this happening?

Granted, the places 4 through 8, "ESA11" in the VIN refer to EMV, Solo, AutoCycle, and not battery-capacity, why include the erroneous information? Is this just the VIN of a prototype going to USA for testing? Don't they need to test the production model? I just don't understand.

If you're in pain over a fantasy vehicle, perhaps it might not be a bad idea to take a step or two back.  It worked for me.  

JK/EMV has consistently shown than numbers/specs/stats are just part of a sales pitch, and not meant to be taken seriously.  Having said that, quite recently you made a strong argument that the battery in the Solo probably is only 8.43kWh.  The TurboCord, with it's 12 amp capacity, would fully charge an 8.64kWh battery fully in 3/6 hours @ 240/120V.  The smaller battery would also explain the slow acceleration and limited range being reported for the current prototypes and production units.  The Spark EV, with twice the weight, and greater frontal area, gas been reported getting over 6 miles per kWh under ideal conditions.  If the Solo could double that, you;d have 100 miles range (under perfect conditions).  In other words, it may well be that the 8.62kWh battery spec is correct, and the 16.1kWh battery is just a hope for the future.

While it may be fun to follow fantasy vehicle development, taking things too seriously is just a drain on real time, money, and energy.
I'm done.
Reply
#3
Jamaf did say that Mark told him that there was a smaller battery in the Solo Jamaf test drove.
The NHTSA is getting information about a red Solo that was sent to the testing company almost a year ago.
The size of the battery and motor may or may not make much of a difference in 'the rest of the car' passing standards.

The ultimate size of the battery in your anticipated production model is a completely understandable concern.
Required listening... House of Lords - Can't find my way home
This version kicks. There's just no other way to describe it. Shivers. Turn...it...up!
Disclaimer: No false statistics were supported, displayed or harmed in the making of this post.
Reply
#4
(10-01-2017, 01:10 PM)DiscjockeyDale Wrote: The size of the battery and motor may or may not make much of a difference in 'the rest of the car' passing standards.

The VIN has many uses:
  • identification for insurance and law-enforcement
  • identification for suppliers of parts
For ICEd vehicles that VIN does tell the parts guys what size battery to install or what sized motor etc. I sure hope all this chaos comes down to certitude sooner rather than later. It's quite likely that EMV will develop EVs with different capacities for passengers, motors and batteries. I sure hope their VINs have meaning. It's puzzling that a letter written a month ago to a certifying/standards organization was about last year's prototype and not this year's production model. I seek regularity in the universe. Otherwise, how can anyone in the public or government believe any data provided?

I come from a scientific background. To me numbers are certain countable things, pseudo-random things meant to imitate chaos or measured things. I'm fine with any as long as I know what I'm dealing with. Battery-capacities are things that can be measured. Under specified conditions one takes a fully charged battery and drains it as far as practical. One measures the Ampere-hours or Watt-hours in the process. One identifies precisely what is to be measured, chooses a standard to compare the thing, counts how many of the standard units matches the thing and records that number and the units. If one is a good person, one also provides the range of likely readings achievable in production. That adds confidence in the meaning of the measurement. Publishing stuff for consumer-goods that might be out by a factor of two is just not right. No one accepts half a loaf of bread after paying for the whole loaf unless one is desperately hungry. Do we have the number of seats, wheels, and doors right? Who can be sure if we live in quicksand?

I thought Solo meant something described by a certain list of specs. I loved that meaning. How can I love something that is unknown in the market? 16.1kWh is absolutely lovely in Solo. 8kWh would be OK for most of my trips like local errands or visiting my nearest city but it's absolutely not OK for visiting most of my relatives on my side, not OK for fishing some fantastic places 16kWh can easily reach, or gathering berries or mushrooms or hunting, stuff that I love to do. I want Solo so I don't have to compete with my wife for use of the gas-guzzler. 8kWh might be enough to choose Leaf instead. That's bad business. I just don't understand not trying hard to please customers. JK and the crew have done a lot of wonderful things but showing the world "Solo" and not delivering what was shown is not wonderful. Telling the world about lots of stuff happening in Vancouver is kind of useless for those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere (NOT). If EMV were trying to be a small local business, OK, do what works in Vancouver. JK has stated repeatedly that Solo is intended to be the Beetle for the 21st century. I don't understand the business-plan. It's not working for me and I want seriously to be a customer. I feel that I'm just a count in the subscriptions instead of a valued customer.
My blog is an eclectic list of rants and commentary about things for which I care. See MrPogson.com It's been around a decade...
Reply
#5
(10-01-2017, 02:16 PM)pogson Wrote:
(10-01-2017, 01:10 PM)DiscjockeyDale Wrote: The size of the battery and motor may or may not make much of a difference in 'the rest of the car' passing standards.

The VIN has many uses:
  • identification for insurance and law-enforcement
  • identification for suppliers of parts
For ICEd vehicles that VIN does tell the parts guys what size battery to install or what sized motor etc. I sure hope all this chaos comes down to certitude sooner rather than later. It's quite likely that EMV will develop EVs with different capacities for passengers, motors and batteries. I sure hope their VINs have meaning. It's puzzling that a letter written a month ago to a certifying/standards organization was about last year's prototype and not this year's production model. I seek regularity in the universe. Otherwise, how can anyone in the public or government believe any data provided?

I come from a scientific background. To me numbers are certain countable things, pseudo-random things meant to imitate chaos or measured things. I'm fine with any as long as I know what I'm dealing with. Battery-capacities are things that can be measured. Under specified conditions one takes a fully charged battery and drains it as far as practical. One measures the Ampere-hours or Watt-hours in the process. One identifies precisely what is to be measured, chooses a standard to compare the thing, counts how many of the standard units matches the thing and records that number and the units. If one is a good person, one also provides the range of likely readings achievable in production. That adds confidence in the meaning of the measurement. Publishing stuff for consumer-goods that might be out by a factor of two is just not right. No one accepts half a loaf of bread after paying for the whole loaf unless one is desperately hungry. Do we have the number of seats, wheels, and doors right? Who can be sure if we live in quicksand?

I thought Solo meant something described by a certain list of specs. I loved that meaning. How can I love something that is unknown in the market? 16.1kWh is absolutely lovely in Solo. 8kWh would be OK for most of my trips like local errands or visiting my nearest city but it's absolutely not OK for visiting most of my relatives on my side, not OK for fishing some fantastic places 16kWh can easily reach, or gathering berries or mushrooms or hunting, stuff that I love to do. I want Solo so I don't have to compete with my wife for use of the gas-guzzler. 8kWh might be enough to choose Leaf instead. That's bad business. I just don't understand not trying hard to please customers. JK and the crew have done a lot of wonderful things but showing the world "Solo" and not delivering what was shown is not wonderful. Telling the world about lots of stuff happening in Vancouver is kind of useless for those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere (NOT). If EMV were trying to be a small local business, OK, do what works in Vancouver. JK has stated repeatedly that Solo is intended to be the Beetle for the 21st century. I don't understand the business-plan. It's not working for me and I want seriously to be a customer. I feel that I'm just a count in the subscriptions instead of a valued customer.

Oh, you're one of those who thinks that numbers actually mean something.  Big Grin Rolleyes  You may be following the wrong company.  Jerry was horribly offended when we pointed out that there was a tremendous difference between a 992 lb Solo and a 1350 lb Solo.  Not to mention his annoyance when various other discrepancies were pointed out.

See my tag about spec's.  Anyway, until the Solo reaches full production, it is a waste of time and energy to take anything that EMV says very seriously.  Sorry, but that is just how it is.  Not as bad as Elio Motors, but the same general direction.  Enjoy the show, but don't get caught up in thinking that it is real before it is.
I'm done.
Reply
#6
(10-01-2017, 02:16 PM)pog Wrote: I feel that I'm just a count in the subscriptions instead of a valued customer.

I'm just saying that it's almost a certainty that the letter you quote was about the same red Solo tested over the past year.
Otherwise, EMV would have to send another Solo and the third party testing would have to start ALL OVER AGAIN.

I honestly think all that will have to happen, when they're ready, is that EMV will pop the larger pack into the red Solo and make the corresponding adjustments.
I think they'll then send that red Solo back to the testing facility and have it tested. At that point, an amendment letter and testing verification will be submitted to the NHTSA.

As I said, anxiety over battery size without clear explanations from EMV are completely understandable, but I think this may be much to do about nothing.
I think EMV knows if they deliver production vehicles with half a pack while advertising 16.1Kwh, it will be a PR disaster.
One that they'd almost certainly not recover from.
Required listening... House of Lords - Can't find my way home
This version kicks. There's just no other way to describe it. Shivers. Turn...it...up!
Disclaimer: No false statistics were supported, displayed or harmed in the making of this post.
[+] 1 user Likes DiscjockeyDale's post
Reply
#7
This is not good. We just have to wait and see
Reply
#8
It might be worth asking on Monday's chat what happened to move production out another 12 months. If any explanation was given, I missed it. Admittedly, I haven't been watching that closely.

What were the battery spec's on the vehicle sent of U.S. certification?

Are any of the spec's finalized?

I would suspect that either something unexpected happened with testing of the current vehicles, or EMV realized that hand-building even a few hundred prototypes might turn out to be prohibitively expensive.

Perhaps the Signature Series Solo's will be signature only, rather than hand-built as I had previously understood. My guess is that EMV will be trying to get ABS and AC working before production starts.

At any rate, with production now 9-12 months away, there may be sufficient time to finish R&D and pre-production testing.
I'm done.
Reply
#9
EMV (InterMeccanica) was/is well aware of the labor intense cost of hand assembly.  Perhaps with the recent announcement of the Chinese motorcycle manufacturer contract agreement EMV is giving Zongshen time to tool up for the manufacture and delivery of parts and sub-assemblies to maximize the Canadian assembly time and insure quality control.  EMV is still well ahead of where I thought they would be R&D and production wise since their short 1 1/2-2 year startup time.
White Hot Solo #166
Reply
#10
Zongshen motorcycles are not sold under the company name. Reviews of the motorcycles indicate they are built to a low price with lower quality parts not as JK & EMV promote. I see the partnership as a mixed bag. Sad that the Solo price was set prior to an increase in production to yield a lower sales price. Maybe the partnership is an ends to a means and profitablity.
Solo Alpha Series #64 Silver
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)