AMP offers all-electric Saturn Sky

[myke_cox]

Originally Posted by alphajesse Their performance numbers sound unrealistic given the weight of the Solstice/Sky to start with and the additional mass of battery packs, charging systems (regenerative braking) and electric motors. I have a hard time believing that the car will weigh less than 3600lbs with enough batteries to go 150 miles, and that there is room enough under the hood to install them. With all that weight at the nose (far more than an LSx,) I bet the handling is awful too. Though I hope they can make the trunk more useful since it won't need a fuel tank!

You probably won't believe the Tesla roadster site then either... 0-60 in 3.9 sec with 220 mi. range. Sure, Tesla started with a Lotus, but they are making their numbers real, and the less aggressive AMP numbers seem realistic to me.

[alphajesse]

Originally Posted by myke_cox You probably won't believe the Tesla roadster site then either... 0-60 in 3.9 sec with 220 mi. range. Sure, Tesla started with a Lotus, but they are making their numbers real, and the less aggressive AMP numbers seem realistic to me.

I have driven next to Teslas several times. When you start with a chassis that's <1600lbs before a drivetrain is installed it's a lot more believable.

[AeroDave]

Originally Posted by alphajesse I have driven next to Teslas several times. When you start with a chassis that's <1600lbs before a drivetrain is installed it's a lot more believable.

What?? Where? I live in the area they're supposed to be from and I've never seen a Tesla on the road. There can't be more than a handful actually on the road in the whole world. Sure you weren't just driving next to Elises?

[AeroDave]

Originally Posted by myke_cox Sheesh! Give 'em a chance... it does say that the prototype is in the final stages, which I take to mean it's not done yet, and also take to mean that they haven't totally finalized details... maybe they're still deciding which batteries, motors, etc. to use.

Sorry. I'm old fashioned. Traditionally you would show off a prototype and then collect deposits. The new thing with EVs seems to be put up a website collect the deposit money and maybe latter show off the prototype... or not. There are lots of EV companies out there that have taken lots of money and yet to deliver a car to a customer. To me this is a scam. I don't know about these AMP folks, but if they expect me to buy a $25k conversion from them and put down $10k they should have a real website with pictures of what you're getting. If they can't build a website they can't build a car.

Think of all the vendors here that are offering LSx conversions and superchargers and turbochargers and exhaust systems, etc, etc, etc. for the Solstice. In almost every instance they have shared photos and info with people here long before they took orders. A 10 year old could snap photos with a digital camera and build a page for their website in an afternoon. I know I could. Also notice that the site doesn't even mention any specs on the equipment and components being used. All that's there is performance claims and factory Saturn photos. Lame.

[MSG_McKee]

Originally Posted by MyNewSolstice hmmmm....... 3 cents a mile! Current cost about 20 cents AT 15K a year on electric cost $450.00 At 15k A year at 20 cents is 3000 8.5 years to pay for itself! Dunno if Battery last that long but I am impressed If gas goes to 5.00 for premium then it is like 6 years!

IF?

It is already around the $4.15 mark in Alabama, so I would hate to see CA and NY! My biggest issue with all electric cars at this point is that a 1000 mile trip to Nationals would either take a week, or a trailer (which would defeat the purpose). I often go on trips that require over 300 miles of driving in a day, so the current technology would not work for me.

I could see buying a cheaper model for a daily commute, but the 150 mile range would not even get me to the In-Laws in McDonough, GA!

[alphajesse]

Originally Posted by AeroDave What?? Where? I live in the area they're supposed to be from and I've never seen a Tesla on the road. There can't be more than a handful actually on the road in the whole world. Sure you weren't just driving next to Elises?

Oakland isn't that close to where they are. They are in the Menlo Park/Redwood City area.
The ones (probably the same one multiple times) I've seen have been on highways 101 or 85 between Redwood City and Mountain View. Always at night. Red/maroon color.
I am sure that I wasn't driving next to an Elise, because the car is longer than an Elise, and the body style is sufficiently different that they can't be confused. It also says "Tesla" on the back. The first time I saw one, I thought it was an Elise because they do share a silhouette, but the car is SIX inches longer than an Elise to accomodate the drivetrain, and the scoops and vents are completely different.
It also weighs about 700lbs more than a comprable Elise. The 2.4 Ecotech isn't a 1.8L Toyota/Yamaha motor, but I'd say that the overall drivetrain in both cars is of comparable mass (within a couple hundred pounds.) This would put a Solstice/Sky with an electric drivetrain at about 3600lbs, and with nearly all of that extra mass at the nose of the car (there's no appreciable trunk to fill with batteries here!)
Unlike the Elise, where Telsa is able to build the drivetrain to harm the handling characteristics as little as possible, AMP's electric Kappa is likely to be a nose-heavy pig, and isn't likely to perform as well as they claim due to the silly amount of battery weight to acheive a 150-mile range (with the quoted performance) on a car as aerodynamically unfriendly as any of the current Kappa bodies. Remember, the Lotus chassis is not only light, it is fairly aerodynamic. Though Tesla made changes, I bet it's version is similar if not better to the Lotus original through the air (they don't need any air intakes!)

[JRinKY]

alphajesse : ...........This would put a Solstice/Sky with an electric drivetrain at about 3600lbs, and with nearly all of that extra mass at the nose of the car (there's no appreciable trunk to fill with batteries here!)

The transmission tunnel and the muffler and fuel tank areas make reasonable candidates for battery installation, and would allow decent weight distribution. The motor(s) would live in the space currently occupied by the propeller shaft and maybe part of where the muffler or fuel tank live.

[alphajesse]

Originally Posted by JRinKY The transmission tunnel and the muffler and fuel tank areas make reasonable candidates for battery installation, and would allow decent weight distribution. The motor(s) would live in the space currently occupied by the propeller shaft and maybe part of where the muffler or fuel tank live.

I was making the assumption that the motors and non-battery electronics would use most of the area taken by the fuel tank, rear suspension and muffler. Looking at the underside of the car's rear end (muffler area), I'm not seeing an easy buildout of that area to carry heavy items like batteries. They say no rear differential on their website, so that indicates two rear motors, one per wheel, probably mounted where the rear axle is now.
I think batteries would be in the underhood and transmission tunnel areas.
This will put most of the extra mass underhood, probably 58/42 at best.

[JRinKY]

alphajesse : I was making the assumption that the motors and non-battery electronics would use most of the area taken by the fuel tank, rear suspension and muffler. Looking at the underside of the car's rear end (muffler area), I'm not seeing an easy buildout of that area to carry heavy items like batteries. They say no rear differential on their website, so that indicates two rear motors, one per wheel, probably mounted where the rear axle is now. I think batteries would be in the underhood and transmission tunnel areas. This will put most of the extra mass underhood, probably 58/42 at best.

The motors will certainly be in the back along with the electronics package, and those are the densest components of the system. Remember that these are lithium-ion batteries, not lead-acid. The heaviest part of the electric system replaces the lightest part of the IC system. I think the weight distribution will be better than you think. If it ever happens.

[mena661]

Originally Posted by myke_cox You probably won't believe the Tesla roadster site then either... 0-60 in 3.9 sec with 220 mi. range. Sure, Tesla started with a Lotus, but they are making their numbers real, and the less aggressive AMP numbers seem realistic to me.

Too bad the actual Tesla you can buy does neither. 0-60 on the roadgoing version is 5.7 seconds and the actual range is 200 miles and that's hwy range. City range is 100 miles. They ARE working on all new powertrain that can handle the torque plus have increased power (current tranny can't handle the torque) and will update current cars with the changes (from what I heard and don't know if it's a free upgrade or not).

[Bonefire]

Update. AMP Motorworks has video of their electric sky on the road and with the hood up: AMP Motorworks - (Advanced Mechanical Products) -The 100 percent electric car

The video says it's their fourth test drive. Here's a rendering of their Electric Sky showing the layout of the motors/batteries/electrical components.

[MAKsys]

Originally Posted by EVdriver Man tough crowd! I think what these guys are doing is great why bash it? They've been all over the internet and other auto blogs with pretty positive feedback. I saw a news segment where they showed the prototype and the warehouse where they're building them. And I'm blown away by these specs 0-60 in under 6 seconds, top speed of 90mph and 150 mile range! I only drive like 40 miles a day tops. I mapped it out to be about 3 cents a mile when you account for the cost of electricity for recharging. And even though you save money in gas its more of an environmental statement than an economic statement driving this car. I wouldn’t be surprised to see alot of celebs sporting this car once it comes out.

People have good reason to be skeptical - as has been mentioned by others, a lot of people have claimed they were going to build an EV, and taken a lot of money, with out producing squat.

Honestly - converting any car to EV isn't rocket science.
Getting the financial side to work out, however, almost is.

I would look pretty hard at AMP or anyone else before putting any cash down - if they are a start-up, even with the best of intentions, chances are against them ever 'making it'.

To me, this all looks like a suckers deal - first, gas will be $2.50/gal long before we are paying $5.00/gal regularly. Also - if they can't make a deal with GM for rolling chassis (less drive train), why would you convert a brand new car???? It would make a lot more sense to let someone else take the depreciation before scraping the drive-train.

On the plus side for AMP - there are plenty of people with more money than sense, who are willing to pay a big premium to feel good about themselves (for saving the earth ).

[Nub Cannon]

I wish there could be a reasonable conversion for the solstice such as quick 0-60 times and getting a lot of miles per charge, because I would actually consider doing it, since gas prices in canada have been well over a dollar per liter.

[SmokinSolstice]

I personally rather have a Tesla its much faster. However I think its pretty cool what AMP is doing. One day we will all be driving electrics. I just know that day is coming. As long as the performance can be up like Tesla specs I am all for it.

[JRinKY]

SmokinSolstice : I personally rather have a Tesla its much faster. However I think its pretty cool what AMP is doing. One day we will all be driving electrics. I just know that day is coming. As long as the performance can be up like Tesla specs I am all for it.

The AMP conversion (if it happens) will be less than $60k. The Tesla is over $100k. Not exactly a fair comparison.