All are welcome at our monthly meetings.
Monthly Meeting Day: Second Monday of every month @ 6pm.
2017 Meeting Dates:
We meet at the Natural Cafe on Hitchcock.
The Santa Barbara Electric Vehicle Association (SBEVA) is a group of people with a strong interest in electric vehicles of all types, from electric bicycles, electric motorcycles, and three and four wheel electric cars. Currently, members are working on two different three-wheeled cars and an electric motorcycle. Past projects include numerous electric bicycle projects, two cars, and an electric motorcycle conversion.
To Get Involved or Just Keep Track:
You can contact us.
Not street legal anywhere
1500 watt Hub motor for speeds of up to 28mph
52v 20ah Panasonic PF Battery for reliable performance
20 inch Sun Ringle Front wheel
Comes with both drifter (slippery) and grippy (sticky) rear wheels. We recommend riding without the drifter covers on the tires.
Optional LED whip light for fun and safety
Shimano M355 Hydraulic disc front brake with ebrake cut off
110/220v charger included
About the Bafang 8Fun BBS02 eBike motor kits…
it’s LP It’s been a while since I’ve been to meeting. but I’m interested in converting, creating an electric bike .so I need help. can you lead me towards some sites and who I should buy some components and what components I need, which ones I can make all help is greatly appreciated I’d want to build a work horse, 12 mile one direction, carry 200 lbs. maybe tow a trailer. I have a mongoose frame, and $1000.
I don’t think you can do what you want with a quality motor kit and li battery for $1K.
Least expensive is a hub motor with a LFP4 battery…just maybe you can do this for $1000. But here is why I do not recommend it: Hub motors do not allow you to use the bikes gears…and for carrying a 200# load and yourself and the bike this is hard for a prime time hub motor to do. Geared hub motors are better for getting you going off the line than a direct drive hub motors. Of course you can mod hub motors to get over 3KW’s but I do not get the sense that this is the way you want to go, because of all the work and experimentation involved…even so I still would not recommend a hub motor for you.
I think mid drives are a much better, if more expensive, way to go. Mid drive kits use the bikes rear gears which is much better for going up hills and starting out from a stop. At the last meeting a new member brought his BBS02 kitted bike – it’s powerful and quiet and costs about $750. Everyone that rode it came off it with that now famous E-grin.
I have installed 3 of these motor kits now and in each case the owners are delighted. I have one and it’s so much better than the geared hub motor I had before. I installed one on a heavy tandem trike ( 100#’s for the trike and another 150#’s for the wife in addition to the 200#+ driver ) and the owner is delighted. And the most recent one I installed was on a new Specialized RockHopper 29er – the owner has 3 or 4 Bionx systems and says the BBS02 is far better in most ways, he also is delighted.
I think for a person that wants a great motor kit and battery – buy the motor kit and battery from a well respected USA based vendor. Sure you might get a better price at em3ev.com, Alibaba, or eBay but the shipping from China plus the customer support is a pita. I do not think it’s worth saving a few bucks for the potential issues.
I suggest Hi-Powercycles.com or lectriccycles.com. Ron Noe used Hi-Power and got a discount and he says they give great customer service. I got my 3 units from LectricCycles – got great customer service but paid full price. I did not know about Hi-Power at the time I got my units. I also think that Hi-Power has more battery options but the batteries need to be put into a canvas bag of some kind – so there is a bit more to the installation. The LectricCycles batteries are a bolt on affair to the water bottle inserts.
Oh, and I think this is VERY important – put your new motor kit on a bike with disc brakes…You WILL need disc brakes – rim brakes will not hold up to the heavier use that a mid drive motor will impart on your bike…especially if you are going to tow a trailer…mechanical discs are OK and easier to get the brake electrical disconnect set up on your bike…means that when you pull on the brake lever it shuts off the power.
Now for batteries. You want the battery to get you home and run for a min of 24 miles…
The battery size you require will depend on how much you contribute – in other words if you pedal along all the way you will probably make do with a 10Ah battery…but I would get more…I recommend 15Ah or more. Yes more Ah capacity costs more…but over the 5+, up to 8, year life of your battery you will not regret paying more for more range.
Because of your needs and wants – specifications – I recommend the 48v BBS02 [750w] motor kit. There is a 500w motor kit but I don’t get why one should get it. There is a 36v BBS01 motor kit of 350W’s but again because of your needs and wants I suggest the 750W – BBS02.
OK, why this motor kit when there are so many other choices out there? It’s a great quiet powerful reliable motor with a built in controller and great wire harness with snap together water resistant connectors and a control panel that is easy to use and set up. It drives through your bikes rear gears. It’s easy to install – with the complete install including battery of about 3 hours. Compared to other mid drive options it’s a very good price.
As soon as I saw this kit I was sold – it’s a solid ready for prime time ebike motor kit. I am sure that you will enjoy this kit and not be sorry you spent the money.
Check out the April 2014 article on electric bicycle motor kits. Click the articles button above and then the BBS02 link.
All are welcome at our monthly meetings.
Monthly Meeting Day: Second Monday of every month @ 6pm.
We meet at the Natural Cafe on Hitchcock.
2015 Meeting Dates:
URBAN AND COMPACT ELECTRIC VEHICLES
Coming from Italy and presented at the Bologna Motor Show, the first units of this vehicle designed by Dario di Camillo will be available by year-end
Presented as a concept several years ago the super-micro-car was exhibited at the LA Auto Show and should be available later this year.
Electric Ford Focus
Its price is already announced in the U.S. and production started in Wayne, Michigan. The Electric Ford Focus is expected by the end of 2012.
Honda Jazz EV (Fit EV)
The electric version of the Honda Jazz will be launched in the U.S., at a price of $ 38,657, so far no confirmation of its launch in Europe
Kia Venga EV
Even though it is likely to remain a test fleet (like the Kia Ray EV), we might see some Kia Venga EV on our roads
The small French manufacturer announced a few weeks ago the arrival of a compact 4-seater based on technology developed for the Smera.
The compact and highly anticipated Zoe teased with the version Preview will be revealed later this year.
Already presented several times and available for test rides in Paris on the “Ile Seguin”, Renault 100% electric and urban two-seater car will be on the road from the beginning of the year.
As a reminder two version will be available, a version without license Twizy 45, and the Twizy 80.
Announced for the beginning of the year it should finally arrive only in September
Toyota iQ EV
After a reveal on February 12, and more recently as the FT-EVIII Concept at the Tokyo Motor show, the electric iQ will be available for rent.
Finally updates of the Mitsubishi i-MiEV (announced on July 6th) with M and G versions will be launched in Japan.
Only one sedan for this year 2012, but a very important one for the industry and its manufacturer…
The Tesla Model S, that we reveal gradually over our articles, with a recent pricing confirmation (57.400$ before grants) is expected to arrive in Europe from fall 2012 (Signature Editions)
With the end of the Tesla Roadster, the reference electric sports car title is to be taken in the year 2012, and the manufacturers seem aware of that with an impressive line-up in perspective …
Audi R8 E-tron
The electric version of the R8 named E-Tron whose the last evolution (RSe-2) was revealed last May should finally be launch as a production vehicle this year
Exagon Furtive e-GT
The French Exagon Furtive-eGT does not lack of qualities starting by its style (undeniably beautiful), by the expertise of its designers (Exagon Engineering), of its testers (Nicolas Prost) and finally the technological option elected with an optional range extender …
It should finally reveal its price that is estimated around € 250,000
Announced since 2009, the English Electric Supercar Lightning GT is making more and more exhibitions (testing at Silverstone, exhibited at Goodwood…) confirming the intentions of the brand regarding a launch later this year.
Not to mention the e-Alpha Wolf 2 that should have been presented in 2011 but has finally been postponed to 2012.
Australia will be granted with two electric sports-cars the ArcSpeed and the Varley EVR450
Evatran’s Plugless Power wireless/proximity charging system continues to evolve. In the photo gallery below, you can see that the new circular sensor is quite different from the large rectangle that was on display at the Plug-In 2010 Conference. It’s not only the shape that’s changing. From the wall to the car, Plugless Power’s system is around 90-91 percent efficient, and the efficiency across the gap is an astonishing 97 percent. A year ago, the overall efficiency was just 80 percent.
See Tesla And The Future Of The Electric Car for the full story. Alternative Energy Stocks where this is posted, tracks green technology stocks for investors, and does not have a cheerleader attitude about green development. That doesn’t mean they have a superior understanding of the market or indeed economics of the transportation/energy problem, but then none of us do. The blog is at least open minded enough to publish this as a rebuttal to their call to abolish BEVs.
The substance of the blog’s critique of BEVs is accurate, but does not cover the problem of peak oil, climate change, or indeed possible global depression.
The Rebuttal, a sample:
A debate has once again been raised with regard to the future of clean technology and in particular the electric car. Whilst many of the issues on which this debate is based are genuine, they in fact fail to get to the heart of the matter. It therefore seems worthwhile to address some of central issues directly.
The Global Problem of Oil’s Monopoly in the Transport Sector
At the heart of the matter is the simple fact that a number of threatening global issues cannot be dealt with unless we end the effective monopoly of petroleum products in the transportation sector:
- Economic security – the monopoly position currently enjoyed by oil leaves the global economic cycle very exposed to the gyrations of both the oil price and political instability in the Arab world – an arena which continues to be very volatile. It is no co-incidence that the recession and financial calamity of 2008 was preceded by a sharp rise in the price of oil or that the same has been true of the softening of the recovery this year. Oil is the only strategic commodity capable of having such a disruptive impact on the economic cycle and frankly the world’s oil reserves are largely concentrated in hands which don’t necessarily appear to act in favor of stability.
- National Security – oil’s monopoly position ensures a continued flow of funds into the national economies of nations who are not particularly friendly to the interests of the US or western democracy as a whole.
- Global warming and associated abnormal weather patterns. I have no wish to get embroiled in the current debate over climate science. However, the risks are clearly there whether or not we fully understand the processes at work. Most importantly, climate science predicts not just a warming of the planet over time but more importantly a proliferation of abnormal weather patterns – more frequent occurrence of droughts and floods etc. That is exactly what we are seeing. If climate science is correct these disruptions will continue to get worse. I don’t believe that the precise interactions at work here can be definitively proven. Only time will tell. However, all the risk is that this is another factor likely to increasingly influence both policy-makers and consumers….
A Sample of the Critique:
In the most under-reported cleantech story of the year, researchers from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory have used an impressive array of computational and modeling tools to prove that the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility, which holds that the first unit of consumption of a good or service yields more utility than the second and subsequent units, doesn’t have a loophole for plug-in vehicles. The penultimate slide from an NREL presentation at Plug-in 2011 says it all – and proves beyond doubt that cars with plugs are less effective at saving fuel and reducing emissions than conventional hybrids and other simple fuel efficiency technologies….
For a really thorough discussion on Peak Oil see The Oil Drum. Let me offer a few points of comment about the critique:
- If worldwide demand stays flat or continues to expand ( 1 billion cars worldwide, 13 million cars a year built in China) then there will be a collision between rising oil prices plus diminishing availability, and transportation needs.
- The transport sector is roughly divided into military, commercial/public, and personal use. Clearly military and commercial uses will be favored over personal transportation, if fuel is more difficult to find.
- No fuel or energy storage system is as efficient as petroleum, that’s why the market chose petroleum in the first place. Arguments about the physics of oil-powered vs alternatives are moot.
- Personal transport is the least important and least efficient mode from the point of view of the economy. So in my view it will be sacrificed first if there is a crisis, just as it was during WWII.
- Personal vehicles are also more flexible and more adaptable than commercial ones, and the fleet turns 0ver more rapidly. The low hanging fruit of increasing transport efficiency comes with simple conservation, as you can see comparing a single driver in a 15 mpg SUV versus 4 people in a 50 mpg hybrid, and this is the essence of Alternative Energy Stocks’ critique. But once the easy conservation is done, what then? Will there be enough fuel for decades to come to fuel a billion 50 mpg cars?
- Alternative Energy Stocks also ignores the need for industrial-transport policy to develop nascent industries. There is an enormous emotional barrier to the idea of industrial policy among money people, but in fact all nations have one, where they retard some industries and encourage others. The maturity and size of the oil-based transport industry builds up so much policy/financial/mindshare/engineering inertia, that there is a great need for market incentives to nurture future technology.
Many dream of Bonneville, but few attempt and fewer succeed. But the electric classes are new and many classifications appear to be untried.
At El Mirage, they run a smaller set of classes under the same rules ( almost) as Bonneville. El Mirage is only a three hour drive from Santa Barbara.
The rules are complex, but for E machines they break down into simpler classes. LSR rules have a dual class system: first half for chassis, second half for engine.
For bikes, the chassis classes are:
MPS Modified Partial Streamlining
A Special Construction
APS Special Construction Partial Streamlining
SCS Sidecar Streamliner
For E bikes the engine classes are much simpler:
12. U. SOLAR/ELECTRIC (W)
Weight determines this engine class:
NOTE: Pound weight converted from Kilogram weight to match the FIM regulations for this class.
- 150kg (330.7lb)
So the easiest, likely slowest class is P for production and 150 kilos. But production bikes are expensive without a sponsor, so here are some other classes that would make sense for us:
A Special Construction
APS Special Construction Partial Streamlining
An A bike could just be the APS without the fairing.
So if we went for the A-APS we’d need a stretched chassis from a road racer or dirt bike, its good to stretch it out to get more room, and say 100 lb of batts. That ought to get us to 100 mph with ease I’d think.
Here are the national records from AMA and Bubb:
Solar/Electric Weight Classes (W)
150kg (Approximately 330.69 US Pounds)
APS-W 68.848 Ingber, K Electrobike 2007
SC-W 60.583 Carey, G Kawasaki 2010
300kg (Approximately 661.4 US Pounds)
M-W 20.256 DeSimone, H -2005
APS-W 173.36 Thede, P Lightning 2010
Unlimited (301kg and over)
A-W 47.246 DeSimone, H Honda 2007
Practically speaking a 150 kilo limit means you need to start with a roller thats about 200 lbs. That means GP-style bikes TZ250 RS125, and dirt bikes. Dirt bikes are plentiful and cheap, but they have the wrong wheels and brakes, you’ll want standard 17″ rubber like a motard and serious brakes.
SCTA 2011 Rule Book
In making policy and predicting market strategy, and the doomer in me says, in preparation for collapse, we need to know what the absolute limits are on personal transportation efficiency. That is, the limits which no amount of engineering can pass.
Here is a post on an interesting blog, that captures the rough data for limits to efficiency for highway driving on gasoline. Unfortunately, most of the comments are not interesting, and miss the point of how these limits are absolute. The actual values produced depend on how fast and how slippery and how efficient you think engines can be.
Partial quoting from Do The Math:
So let’s evaluate the energy requirements to make that journey at freeway speeds. We will use the somewhat awkward (although appropriate) speed of 67 m.p.h. because it conveniently maps to 30 meters per second. At these speeds, aerodynamic resistance is the dominant energy drain, so we will start by evaluating only this to get a lower bound on fuel efficiency, and find that we do a pretty good job!
Putting these together, a tragically un-aerodynamic car would see a drain of energy of Edrag=½(ρAD)v², where the term in parentheses is the mass of the air involved. A real car has better aerodynamic performance than a piece of plywood, so we include a term called the drag coefficient, cD, and the energy expended on fighting air for the journey becomes Edrag=½cDρADv². The drag coefficient for cars ranges from 0.25 for a Prius to numbers like 0.5–0.6 for SUVs and pickup trucks. Loads of sedans come in around cD=0.3, so we’ll use that number for the present analysis.
A more practical set of limits given our behavioral and aesthetic preferences might be A=2.5 m², cD=0.2, and 30% engine efficiency. This puts us at 84 MPG. Not a bad place to be, but shy of the magic 100 MPG. And even this is not a snap: note that we are nowhere close to this mark at present.
How does the Prius today get a fuel economy in the low 50′s? The drag coefficient is on the low side, at 0.25. The area is small-ish—I estimate 2.5 m², and the big trick is that the engine can be optimized for freeway speeds since the battery can assist acceleration at lower speeds. Traditional cars sacrifice freeway efficiency for the get-up-and-go performance that is so important in test drives. If I use 25% engine efficiency with the aforementioned values, I get 56 MPG.
We have so far neglected rolling resistance (mainly from tires) in this analysis, primarily to keep things simple while capturing the dominant contributor to fuel economy at freeway speeds. At a rolling friction coefficient of 0.01, a 1 ton car (1000 kg; 10,000 Newtons) requires 100 Newtons of force to push along—independent of velocity. This effect alone (e.g., driving in a vacuum) would result in a limit of 160 MPG at a 20% engine efficiency. At 30 m/s (67 m.p.h.) in air, factoring in rolling resistance: … and our “realistic” 84 MPG car now gets 63 MPG.
So you can plug whatever figures you like into the equation. You can factor in transmissions and differentials and air conditioning and lighting. But the important point is, barring fantastic efficiency improvements to ICEs, don’t hold your breath, some number between 60 and 100 mpg is probably the best fleet average we will ever achieve in consumer vehicles at highway speeds.
The limit would be higher for small unusual vehicles like a single-seat recumbent faired motorcycle, and there are impractical vehicles like the solar racers and electrathons that have low drag.
As a sidebar aircraft get much worse mileage due to increased speeds. Flying magazine says some famously efficient 4 place Mooneys get around 18 mpg and smaller slower planes a little bit better. Long distance powered sailplanes can get very high mpgs.
quoted from here: http://www.autonewschina.com/en/article.asp?id=7317
SHANGHAI — Over the past year, Beijing has bet heavily on pure electric cars and plug-ins, hoping that these technologies will help domestic automakers to leapfrog their international rivals.
By contrast, conventional hybrid vehicles have gotten short shrift. After all, a Chinese knockoff of the Toyota Prius would not produce the much-desired Great Leap Forward in technology.
But Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao has dropped a pointed hint that the government is losing faith in this strategy.
In a recent article, Wen suggested that Beijing will very likely expand its subsidies for green cars to include vehicles powered by conventional hybrids and fuel cells. Currently, only pure EVs and plug-ins qualify for subsidies.
This bias against fuel cells and hybrids is relatively recent. Before 2010, Chinese officials always included these powertrains in any discussion of green vehicles.
But early last year, Beijing concluded that EVs and plug-ins were its best bet for upgrading China’s know-how.
It has since repeatedly raised the bet. Last summer, Beijing introduced subsidies ranging up to 50,000 yuan ($7,400) for each plug-in and 60,000 yuan for electric vehicles in five major cities.
At Beijing’s request, 16 leading state-owned companies formed an alliance last August to produce electric vehicles, components and battery charging stations. Participants included automakers, oil companies, the telecom industry, electronics manufacturers and electric utilities.
Taking their cue from the central government, provincial and municipal governments pledged additional subsidies.
Meanwhile, a slew of domestic automakers made extravagant claims about the long range and high speeds of their EVs.
All this has conjured up an impression that China is on track to become the world’s EV leader. But is this true, or just an illusion?
It was hard to tell for a long time. But thanks to Wen’s article in the official magazine Qiushi (meaning “seeking the truth” in Chinese), we know it’s an illusion.
In his article about technology development in emerging industries, Wen singles out EVs as a sector in which Chinese companies still lag far behind global companies.
Contrary to their claims, China’s EV manufacturers have made limited progress, Wen wrote. Domestic automakers still import key components and materials to build their electric vehicles.
“EV development in China is still at a preliminary stage, and Chinese companies in general are still exploring the technology and learning it from foreign companies,” Wen added.
Chinese companies have made “some” progress developing plug-in hybrids, but they still trail global rivals, he said. Wen implied that it is premature to exclude fuel cells and conventional hybrids from government subsidy policies.
“Are （plug-in）hybrids and EVs the ultimate products we should pursue in alternative energy vehicle development? We don’t have a definite answer,” he said.
Among senior Chinese government officials, Wen is known for his candid acknowledgment of the major problems facing the Chinese economy and society.
Thanks to him, we now have a better idea about where China stands in EV development. And there is reason to believe Beijing soon will drop its bias against conventional hybrids and fuel-cell vehicles.