Meet the Electric Porsche From 1898 143
cartechboy writes "We all talk about the Tesla Model S and Nissan Leaf as if electric cars are brand-new. In fact, electric cars were around long before you were alive, or your father, or maybe even your grandfather. It turns out that the very first Porsche ever built was an electric car--way back in 1898. It wasn't called a Porsche, but an 'Egger-Lohner electric vehicle, C.2 Phaeton model'--or P1 for short. Designed by Ferdinand Porsche when he was just 22 years old, it has a rear electric drive unit producing all of 3 horsepower--and an overdrive mode to boost that to a frightening 5 hp! It had an impressive range of 49 miles, not that much less than many of today's plug-in cars. Porsche recently recovered the P1 from a warehouse--where it has supposedly sat untouched since 1902--and plans to display it in original, unrestored condition at the Porsche Museum in Zuffenhausen, Germany."
Generalizing much? (Score:5, Insightful)
Does the article really need to begin with ridiculous generalization?
"We all talk about the Tesla Model S and Nissan Leaf as if electric cars are brand-new. In fact, electric cars were around long before you were alive, or your father, or maybe even your grandfather. It turns out...."
Yes, yes - the readers on slashdot are morons, who have absolutely no idea about most basic technology. "We all" are so dumb, we think the wheel was invented yesterday. Hurr-durr...
Re: (Score:3)
Next week we'll teach you how the first car above 100km/h was electric.
Stay tuned shortly afterwards for the amazing discovery of DNA...
Re: (Score:3)
do you really know when the first electric car was invented without looking it up? it was in the 1830s...
Re:Generalizing much? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I have repeatedly had people tell me that electric cars are "new technology that needs to be given time to mature."
The modern electric car is quite some distance removed from the lead-acid battery technologies of the 1880s.
Re:Generalizing much? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Generalizing much? (Score:5, Informative)
That's because modern ICE cars have been under continuous development for over a century. Electric cars had a few early models, then languished undeveloped for a hundred years, before we recently started up development of them again.
Re: (Score:1)
"Electric cars had a few early models, then languished undeveloped for a hundred years, before we recently started up development of them again."
The two main components, the motors and the battery tech, have also been under continuous development.
There is no magic technology reason that electric cars are suddenly interesting again. It's environmental and fuel price concerns.
Re: (Score:2)
The two main components, the motors and the battery tech, have also been under continuous development.
The control system which mates the two wasn't really developed over that time. Most of the motors were hooked up to the grid, and battery packs the size of modern EV's were extremely rare, much less mobile versions.
There is no magic technology reason that electric cars are suddenly interesting again. It's environmental and fuel price concerns.
No magic, but I figure the 'bullet' is a combination of LiIon battery technology allowing an EV to finally compete with the unrefueled range of a gasoline vehicle, the development of speed controls that allowed efficient use of AC Induction motors [wikipedia.org] as motor-generators as opposed to less efficient
Re: (Score:2)
In 1968, MIT students had developed an electronic controller for use in the Great Electric Car Race against Cal Tech. Alas, the controller went up in smoke and they had to use more conventional means for controlling the motor.
More generally, variable speed motor control has been important for industry as long as there have been electric motors, and research into controls has been ongoing. Consider for example the thyratron, developed around 1920 and commercialized about 1928.
Re: (Score:2)
Read through the wiki - until relatively recently(we're still talking about decades here) they had to use DC or slip-ring motors, which reduced efficiency, which translates to more batteries needed for a given range, which means more weight and expense.
It's a matter of margins and economy more than whether they could actually do it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Funny. That's what people seem to have thought about electric vehicles for the last 100 years or so.
They built a car that got 15 miles / gallon of kerosene and could pass today's California emissions testing. In 1924.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It was a 5500 lb car. Which is about what a GMC Yukon Denali weighs. The Yukon gets 16 MPG city.. Since there were no real highways like there are now, I don't think highway mileage is comparable. The Doble got up to 40 mph in 12.5 seconds (at 900 rpm) and had a top speed of 100 mph. A Model T of that area had a top speed of half that and took at least twice as long to reach 40mph. Chrysler put out it's first car in 1924 and it had a top speed of 70 mph. This was such a big deal that they named it the B-70
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would anyone want to go back to steam engines? You still rely on combustion to heat the steam, but it's external combustion instead internal, which means most of the energy is wasted.
Re:Generalizing much? (Score:4, Insightful)
This may on the surface be true. But the primary technological challenge with electric vehicles is battery technology, and this has been under development for a century and a half. Maybe even 2. Even still, though rechargeable batteries have gone up in capacity maybe 10x, it is still not anywhere near competing with ICE vehicles cost effectively. That will come when the air-chemistry batteries hit the market, with another 10x increase in energy storage per volume/weight due to negating the need to carry your cathode. (or is it anode?)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Generalizing much? (Score:2)
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki... [wikipedia.org]
Here Is the wikipedia article on lithium air batteries. If not 10x then atleast gasoline equivalent energy storage is possible. Are you saying that you would need a lithium hydrogen battery to reach 10x potential? The lithium air battery doesn't carry a cathode so it can hold more charge per weight so that's why I assumed it would live up to the 5-15x claim on wikipedia.
Re: (Score:2)
Even still, though rechargeable batteries have gone up in capacity maybe 10x, it is still not anywhere near competing with ICE vehicles cost effectively.
Depends who you are. A Model S is already a lot cheaper than an equivalent ICE car over its lifetime due to lower fuel costs (comparing to similar high end saloons). That's excluding subsidies, BTW.
Some commercial operators like bus companies have already started making significant cost savings by moving to pure electric vehicles too.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The early cars were practically all electric or steam driven vehicles - ICE didn't come around until later.
I think it was Ford that actually got the whole gas infrastructure in place then ICE really took off and everyone abandoned electric and steam. Porsche himself noted that I
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
And how did you react when a good electric car was finally invented, thus proving your friends had been right all along?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on your definition of "good".
If "good" means "usable in daily live and economically viable" then we've already got good EV cars.
If "good" means "better than anything before it" then no car will ever be good.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like taking a Tesla would do it, with adequate charging station support. Charge up each night, do a quick-charge to extend the range during lunch each day, and you're comfortably there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Any history of motorised transport will mention electric and steam-powered vehicles.
There's the opening lines of the old folk song "He's Been on the Job Too Long":
"Well its twinkle, twinkle little star
And along comes Brady in his 'lectric car..."
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Does the article really need to begin with ridiculous generalization?
"We all talk about the Tesla Model S and Nissan Leaf as if electric cars are brand-new. In fact, electric cars were around long before you were alive, or your father, or maybe even your grandfather. It turns out...."
Yes, yes - the readers on slashdot are morons, who have absolutely no idea about most basic technology. "We all" are so dumb, we think the wheel was invented yesterday. Hurr-durr...
I may know that the first electric batteries were created thousands of years ago, but I had never realized or come across information that anyone had made a functional electric car so long ago, and with a range of nearly fifty miles, no less. I find this information new, interesting and fascinating. Lacking this information makes me ignorant on this particular subject, not stupid.
There's only one jackass here making ridiculous generalizations. Knowing a fact that someone else doesn't know does not mean you
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm (Score:5, Insightful)
Made a fortune on the internet.
Started a car manufacturing company producing high-tech electric vehicles that make anything produced in Detroit these days look like a Model T.
Building spaceships to take tourists out of the atmosphere.
"Just lucky in life"? Maybe, but it makes me wonder what you've achieved lately.
Re:Hmm (Score:5, Insightful)
You forgot "helped drive the consumer solar industry in the US".
Man, that dude is just plan LUCKY. There can't be any other explanation. No matter how many lottery tickets *I* buy they don't seem to lead to a string of successful multibillion dollar businesses that all practically revolutionized their respective industries. But maybe next week...
Re: (Score:3)
He's got a reputation as a Playboy and admittedly has a very punchable face. This seems to be enough to brand him a shameless opportunist and dickhead, despite the fact that he's both successful and has chosen to invest his time and money into companies that actually do properly cool stuff which may have positive impact on the world.
If he's a shameless dickhead I hope for more shameless dickheads in the world.
Re: (Score:3)
True. I guess it's hard to separate arrogance from leadership. A surprising number of CEOs are literally borderline sociopathic :)
I think my biggest complaint of Musk is that after accepting almost $500M in loans from the government for Tesla (not to mention the billions on battery research and $7500 credit per Tesla sold), $100M in grants for Solar City (and untold billions on solar panel research), and who knows how much money for Space X (over $1B, I think? Plus nearly a trillion dollars in space rese
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Interesting)
Building spaceships to take tourists out of the atmosphere.
Err - that would be Branson. Musk is concentrating on real astronauts, real payloads and real destinations.
Re: (Score:3)
Started a car manufacturing company producing high-tech electric vehicles that make anything produced in Detroit these days look like a Model T.
At the risk of being nit-picky: Musk only invested in Tesla, not started it. The investment was significant and included the right for Musk to call himself co-founder IIRC.
Re: (Score:1)
Why yes, they are achievements. Quite sizable ones actually. You on the other hand have done what exactly?
Re: (Score:1)
You dont "get" lucky the number of times you think Musk has, dickhead. Once might be lucky, twice he just happened to be in the right place maybe believeable.... but with the number of very successful ventures he's been involved with, there is zero chance luck has got dick to do with it.
Yeah yeah, Paypal is a shithole, fine I agree. SpaceX isnt. Tesla are superior electric cars. Solar City wasnt luck. Youa re just a shit poster on the Internet. Musk only you know only founded 4 highly successful and innovat
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I'm willing to bet a majority of Slashdot readers have no idea electric cars were A Thing before petrol. And that Porsche created a successful hybrid not long after the vehicle in question. And I know I'd win a bet if I said 95% of ALL motorists have no idea about the history of cars. Yes, the statement is warranted esp. to an audience who is not educated on car history. You know that signifigant minority of drivers have no idea if their car is FWD, RWD or AWD and I would even think that percentage would be higher here, where knowledge of cars is scant?
And to answer a statement made later in discussion - not knowing car history is moronic? NO. It's damn well understandable given knowledge of cars is thin at best for most people and it is not relavent as well. It's only people like me who take an interest in car history that it's relavent.
Even someone who does know more than a bit about cars had no idea Porsche made a successful heavy vehicle hybrid. Hybrids were actually quite a thing it turns out for heavier vehicles as the automobile developed.
Could we have a computer analogy?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Hybrid.... hmmmm....
The Mass storage system for the original IBM PC had a hybrid option.
The original IBM "True Blue" [bare bones, five slot] PC did not come by default with a hard drive [the original 5 Mb drive was insanely priced]. An optional second 5 1/4 inch floppy drive cost several hundred dollars.... IBM trying to widen their market decided to give 'low end' [i.e. read: poor engineers, hobbyists, techno-working class, and students] users an option for mass storage, IBM designed and included a "casse
Re: (Score:2)
Um... (Score:1)
> We all talk about the Tesla Model S and Nissan
> Leaf as if electric cars are brand-new.
People who don't know history do, I suppose. In the early years, electric, steam, and various fuels were used in cars. It was about 25 years before the internal combustion engine dominated the industry. The first line of the Wikipedia page on electric cars [wikipedia.org] (after defining what one is) says "The first electric cars appeared in the 1880s."
Re:Um... (Score:4, Informative)
In a country where the chief executive makes claims that the US invented the automobile....yest, it is appropriate to assume we are all ignorant.
Re:Um... (Score:5, Insightful)
In a country where the chief executive makes claims that the US invented the automobile....
To be fair to Obama, his actual statement was:
"I believe the nation that invented the automobile cannot walk away from it."
And Germany has heeded his advice, and not walked away from it. But Obama bugged the phone of Angela Merkel to find that out.
Now if Obama says:
"If you like your car, you can keep it."
. . . you will know that new government regulation to take your car off the road is underway . . .
Re: (Score:1)
Cash for Clunkers was just a warm-up exercise.
Does your car have the smarts in it to be remotely disabled? Does it have the capability to track where it has traveled, so that the road tax can be calculated based on usage? Those are slated to be required features. The day will come when speed limit signs are obsolete because the max speed is beamed at your vehicle from the roadside.
In the eyes of forces within the Government it's obsolete and only a matter of time before it's not permitted on public roads
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
105 years in a warehouse (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
That's only true when there are tens, hundreds, thousands of something in existence, so that the patina can be compared.
The 'historic value' of the remaining original paint finish is important, but the paint also serves to preserve the vehicle, and if it's chipping off it can't do that.
Jay Leno has a 1909 Baker Electric (Score:5, Informative)
And there's a great summary of electric vehicles in the US 100+ years ago on his page.
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/... [jaylenosgarage.com]
Thank you... (Score:2, Insightful)
...for producing the first informative post on this whole sorry thread.
Gawd slashdot has gone downhill over the years!
Better hurry! (Score:2)
Unless the rate of progress speeds up the past might catch up, or even pass us.
Sadly there are too many inventions that are an improvement upon their successors.
I wonder if Porsche could use this [johannes-l.net] for inspiration for a future hybrid solar-human vehicle?
Re: (Score:2)
You may have to refactor your thinking since the story is about Germany. That is the same Germany that is trying to abandon nuclear power for wind power. I think there is a lot of wind on the subject.
Re: (Score:2)
The meaning is the "improved" versions are not necessarily better, and sometimes worse. I can think of various books, equipment, or pieces of software that became less useful after revision. The idea has been expressed by many people before. One notable quote from the realm of Computer Science is this:
"ALGOL 60 inspired many languages that followed it. C. A. R. Hoare remarked: "Here is a language so far ahead of its time that it was not only an improvement on its predecessors but also on nearly all its s
wasn't this on cnn (Score:2)
3 or 4 days ago?
The wrong path chosen (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You can say that, but it's because oil was just so cheap/readily available.
Re: (Score:1)
Fuel cost is part of what makes something a 'good way.'
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...and originally, wasn't gasoline an *unwanted byproduct* of refining oil for other reasons?
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the reason the electric car stopped being popular was because batteries are NOT such a good way to power...a car?
To charge a bank of lead acid batteries you needed a convenient source of electric power. That was not a cheap or easy problem to solve once you reached the city limits. Delco-Light Farm Electric Plant [doctordelco.com] It would remain a problem until the great public works projects of the thirties.
While petroleum products could be conveniently shipped and stored almost anywhere as early as the 1860s.
Re: (Score:2)
Turns out it was more like "petroleum was a less bad way to power a portable appliance like a car".
Re: (Score:2)
I feel that in such a parallel universe the batteries being used in about 1940 would be better than the ones we have today.
well Ill be (Score:2)
nevermind there were more electric vehicles in widespread use before there were many gas stations 1898 is a pretty early example
http://insideevs.com/in-early-... [insideevs.com]
He who does not learn from the past, is doomed etc (Score:1)
Sometimes fads repeat themselves.
In two decades' time, we'll look back on electric cars as a failed experiment.
Just like last time we tried.
A battery is one of many possible stores of chemical energy. It's absurd to think that it's the best.
Re: (Score:2)
90% efficiency vs. 25% (merely for starters) says you're wrong.
A battery is one of many possible stores of chemical energy. It's absurd to think that it's the best.
Maybe, as long as what you convert it to is electrical energy. So, might as well call it a "battery", which actually only means "a collection of cells". It says nothing about what those cells must do.
Re: (Score:1)
Energy density means nothing without efficiency (Score:1)
Since all you're doing with that extra density is wasting it on inefficiency.
Come back to me when an ICE can manage 90% efficiency.
Nice, but ... (Score:2)
Freaky... (Score:3)
It's freaky to see that even more than a century ago there already was an electric car (even races were held back then) and development on it just stopped a century ago and we aren't even much further as back then..
So what's the deal? Why did they stop? And even more interesting, what would an electric car look like these days if they kept on developing it back then.........
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Ferdinand Porsche continued working on electric drives and transmission. See the Elefant and Maus from WW2:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elefant [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_VIII_Maus [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
5 hp is enough (Score:2)
Some industrial applications demand much more power, but 5 horse power is more than enough for personal transportation. There's no need for cars built like tanks. I get around just dandy with less than a quarter horse power.
Re: (Score:3)
It won races, the other cars of the era wont so fast either.
Re: (Score:2)
The Porsche 918 says you're an idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
Underpowered for what? 1/4 mile times? Yup, they are.
But my '65 356 w/ 75 hp engine can out corner a brand new production Camero or just about any other muscle car. Granted, on the straight aways I'll get the rust blown off my doors, but Porsche owns cornering and handling.
Re: (Score:2)
Porsche owns cornering and handling.
That's because it's a Volkswagen.
Re: (Score:1)
It's spelled "Camaro".
And handling performance, unfortunately for you, is easily measured. I don't have skidpad and slalom times on hand for your 356C-- probably because no one tested them then. But we could now, and it will be quite hilarious to watch you try to match the .89G skidpad performance of the bone-stock Camaro SS in your 356C on 185mm tires with 14" wheels. And then the slalom, with your swing axle jacking the rear wheels... hah.
Re: (Score:2)
Consider it payback for mutilating the word Jaguar.
And the Camaro is a terrible handling car. Oversteer galore and due to all the weight being at the front and all the power being at the back, you lose the back end far too easily. Granted, it's not as bad as the Mustang, but still not good. I believe that his ancient car would out corner a Camaro because it's likely to weigh under half as much, but not a car with a decent cornering ability like a WRX or EVO.
BTW, if you want lat
Re: (Score:2)
Front-heavy RWD cars tend to understeer unless you apply power, which allows you to control the balance.
Back-heavy RWD designs like Porsche require a highly skilled driver to handle the inherent oversteer. A dangerous type of car for the boy racer.
Re: (Score:2)
Underpowered for what? 1/4 mile times? Yup, they are.
But my '65 356 w/ 75 hp engine can out corner a brand new production Camero or just about any other muscle car.
Erm, that isn't an accomplishment.
Muscle cars corner like absolute crap due to their heavy weight poor weight distribution. Saying you can out-corner a muscle car is like saying you have more personality than a chemistry teacher's cardigan.
Hatchbacks like Toyota Corolla's out corner American muscle cars. Try to out corner a modern Subaru Impreza with it's AWD system. Even the non turbo Impreza that only has 100 odd KW corner faster and smoother than 2-400 KW muscle cars, let alone the twin turbo WRX S
Re: (Score:2)
its also well designed modern suspension
Re: (Score:2)
Does it have a vibrator on the gear shift?
Yes, it's called "reverse".
Re: (Score:1)
A lot of people were 'Hitler cronies' in that same period. The entire US Communist Party thought Hitler was the right side to back, until he betrayed Stalin.