Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Group Buy SE

Expand Messages
  • theoldcars@aol.com
    The whole point of a group buy is so everyone gets a better deal. I would hope the price savings would be great enough that regardless of Ah size the cost
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 28, 2010
      The whole point of a group buy is so everyone gets a better deal. I would
      hope the price savings would be great enough that regardless of Ah size the
      cost could not be beat. If you can buy these cells from a US supplier for
      close to the same cost then it does not make sense to do a group buy. I would
      only be interested in a group buy if it was a very good savings.

      I have been contacting suppliers and the larger the quantity the better the
      price. I have not looked at the SE before as I was concerned if they would
      really last in EV use. Of the less expensive large cells TS, SE, HP the SE
      appears to be the one to buy.

      I was seriously looking at the Headway with their new 16Ah cells. They are
      rated at 10C discharge which would be very good. The pack load was at peak
      just less than 3C and not for an extended time. Cost a little more but not
      much if your buying in large quantity. Then I came across a post on the EVDL
      that Headway had a rust problem on one of the end caps. I just sent Headway
      an email and if they do not take care of their customer then I am not
      interested in buying their product.


      In a message dated 2/28/2010 5:24:41 PM Pacific Standard Time,
      cbliss@... writes:

      Not sure how it would work out in battery box fill space, but running the
      numbers for 100Ah TS versus 200Ah TS using evcomponents pricing, the cost
      for a 50 unit pack would be:

      $7,150 for 100Ah

      $13,200 for 200Ah

      That means purchasing 100 of the 100Ah would be $14,300. I have included
      the costs of BMS. If only one "BMS master unit is required, then it would
      be about $350 less so the delta is around $1K extra for going with a hundred
      100AH batteries.

      I just checked my model for 100AH TS batteries in the Force battery box.
      With no box modifications, the max amount of batteries is 69. To go with
      100 batteries would require making space for another 31 batteries. That is
      quite a lot of batteries and would require significant modifications. I
      don't see where that many more batteries would fit.

      From: _solectria_ev@solectria_evsol_ (mailto:solectria_ev@yahoogroups.com)
      (mailto:solectria_ev@yahoogroups.com) ] On
      Behalf Of _theoldcars@..._ (mailto:theoldcars@...)
      Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 1:21 PM
      To: _solectria_ev@solectria_evsol_ (mailto:solectria_ev@yahoogroups.com)
      Subject: Re: [solectria_ev] Thundersky or HiPower

      It would be best to pick out a size that would work for more people. I can
      understand why you want the 160Ah cells. I think the answer is to get the Ah

      rating you want with a size that more people would buy. Say four 40Ah cells
      in parallel or two 100Ah in parallel.

      There is a down side you would have more interconnects but I think the
      trade off would be getting a better price. The positive side would be four
      in parallel would help keep slightly lower cells in balance. If the larger
      cells are little off from one another there going to be on there own.

      Just something to consider


      In a message dated 2/28/2010 12:49:22 PM Pacific Standard Time,
      _cbliss@..._ (mailto:cbliss@...)
      <mailto:cbliss%mailto:cbmai> writes:

      I would be interested in a group buy, however, I would be inclined to go
      with larger form batteries, in the 160Ah plus range. The way I see it, if I
      am going to do this, I want a car that can drive in the hills or to SF or
      Gilroy and back. That means I want a consistent 100 mile plus range.

      From: _solectria_ev@From: _solFrom: _solectri_solectria_ev@solectria_evsol_
      <mailto:solectria_mailto:solectriamail> )
      (mailto:_solectria_ev@solectria_evsol_ (mailto:solectria_ev@yah
      oogroups.com) <mailto:solectria_mailto:solectriamail>
      ) ] On
      Behalf Of __theoldcars@_theold_ (mailto:_theoldcars@...)
      <mailto:_theoldcarsmailto:_th> _
      (mailto:_theoldcars@..._ (mailto:theoldcars@...)
      <mailto:theoldcars%mailto:th> )
      Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 11:55 AM
      To: _solectria_ev@To: _solecTo: _solectria__solectria_ev@solectria_evsol_
      <mailto:solectria_mailto:solectriamail> )
      Subject: Re: [solectria_ev] Thundersky or HiPower

      Hello Jerry

      It would be nice to see the same type of test on the HiPower as the Sky
      Energy. As I understand it Sky Energy is now called CALB.

      The information on ___http://evworks.http://evworks.http://evworks.htt_
      (http://evworks.com.au/tech/ThunderSkyVsSkyEnergy/) ) ) is just huge. The last
      at the 3C rate is really telling. Not only did Sky Energy deliver the rated
      capacity under a very high load it was done with SE heating up less. Less
      heat is absolutely critical for long term use. If the cells are heating up
      that heat is going to take a toll on the cycle life. Its too bad no one yet
      has tested the SE cycle life at the 3C or even a 1C rate.

      Since the SE has less heat during heavy use it should last much longer in
      lighter loads or less DOD cycles. Going by the last test at the 3C rate if
      you did not discharge more than 70% DOD. The SE should have a very long
      life as 70% DOD is about where the heat starts rising.

      It is apparent that SE has lower impedance under greater loads at least to
      begin with. Which is a very good indicator of which will have longer cycle
      life. So base on this test the clear winner is the SE with less impedance
      uld last far longer then TS.

      Thank you for posting the information. Anyone interest in a group buy?


      In a message dated 2/28/2010 9:43:52 AM Pacific Standard Time,
      <mailto:lieblerj%mailto:lieblemai> )
      <mailto:lieblerj%mailto:lieblerj%> writes:

      I've been told by two different dealers of prismatic lifepo4 cells
      that ALL brands require strapping. All the vendors supply the
      compression hardware, you'll need to specify how many cells you want in
      each module. The issue I've found with the Hipower cells is their
      height which either requires modifying the battery boxes or possibly
      laying them on their sides which makes wiring a challenge. Since I
      (http://evworks.com.au/tech/ThunderSkyVsSkyEnergy/) ) ) I convinced
      myself that the Sky energy cells were well worth the price premium. In
      a Force, the AMC325 will limit battery current to 280A, slightly under
      the 3C rate for 100 AH cells. But even at lower discharge rates the Sky
      cells store quite a bit more energy, meaning greater range.
      > &cPath=&products_pr
      id=7> &cPath=&products_produc
      Has the best delivered price on both Hipower and Sky cells and some
      rather caustic comments about Thunder Skybb. For any lithium upgrade
      you'll need a BMS. My favorite BMS is
      (http://www.cleanpowerauto.com/MiniBMS.html.) ) ) If you still have the NLG
      412 charger, it has two general purpose inputs that can be used to allow
      the BMS to control charging. You'll also need to reprogram the charger,
      but that is fairly simple.

      Larry wrote:
      > I am trying to decide whether to upgrade to Thundersky 100 AH batteries
      or HiPower 100 AH batteries. Does anyone have any data as to which would be
      better, or it does not matter which one?
      > Those of you that have upgraded to Thundersky, have you had any problems
      with the cells swelling? I have heard that you need to strap the batteries
      together and use compression plates on the outside batteries. Does anyone
      have any experience with this. Do the HiPower batteries have the same

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.