NassyVette

Where does the power come from to charge electric vehicles? Your wall, which is connected to massive diesel turbines that convert fossil fuel to electric energy...the power doesn't come from a magical jelly bean field...so what's the point. You get a silent buzz mobile with a 50 mile range and batteries which eventually die and need to be disposed of, where? Outerspace? Electric cars aren't the answer.

THE TECH

Just means that Random makes 50 state legal cats, not necessarily the ones for our cars.

RonSS

Nope. Says all over the box "Off Highway Use Only"

motogib1

I believe in being responsible on environmental issues but some folks have taken it on in a religious zealot manner. I don't see them taking modde vettes off the road any time soon in most states. Interestingly, most people don't give a damn. I took a 3 mile walk to pick up my bike at a local custom bike shop and the road is lined with nasty cigarette butts and garbage of all types tossed out the window.

Millenium Z06

Thats why I went with cats too and at some point they are going to do more than just check and see if the pcm is happy. As far as the RT cats being legal or not, at least they are on and in my opinion thats better than nothing.

BlackZ06

Where do we even start with someone as ill informed as you ...... ?????

DIESEL turbines ?????????????

How freakin dumb are you ....

The majority of America's electric power comes from coal .... see ....

http://www.energy.gov/energysources/electricpower.htm

Much of the rest comes from hydroelectric (water), natural gas, and nuclear power. A very small percentage comes from "green" sources such as wind power, solar, and geo-thermal power ...... name me a power plant in the US (other than emergency back-up systems) that use diesel to produce electric power ......

Batteries can be (and are) recycled .... whether lead acid or other types .... disposal is an issue .... but it can be managed .... it's not rocket science.

Range ..... the EV1 (back in the 1990's when GM made them available) had a range (depending on type of driving) of over 100 miles ..... but even with ... say .... a 50 mile range .... the vast majority of Americans drive their vehicle to work in less than 50 miles .... where they could then plug in and recharge for the drive home .... businesses could either pass on the electric cost to the employee or absorb the cost as "part of the cost of doing business". A 50 mile range would work quite well for many American's ..... but most electric cars have a range greater than that .... AND .... there is at least one company looking at the idea that you "lease" your batteries .... when they need replacing they are swapped out .... if they are low on charge and you don't have the time to wait for a charge ... swap them at a charging station for a charged set ......

There are LOTS of answers ..... you have your head shoved up your ### if you can't see that petroleum based transportation has a finite life ..... we cannot keep burning off billions of barrels of oil just to drive cars every day ...... makes no sense economically ... environmentally ..... or in any other way .....

BlackZ06

Go to the link in my earlier post and show me ONE SINGLE Random cat in the O.E. database for ANY car .... that company (unless they are using a different corporate name) does not have a single entry in the database ..... so for anyone to say that Random Technology has "50 state legal" cats is either ...

a) stupid
b) a liar
c) both .....

I choose "C" ......

PlasmaBoy

Hello Everybody,

From BlackZ06:

>...you scare me .... how did you ever figure out that we were talking >about you here ... was it the link to the picture that I posted that gave >it away ???

I check my web page stats often, and saw hits coming in from this forum. I then followed the link here and read to see why. Evidently, from the photo you posted, others have been to my site to check it out...thanks!

Perhaps the best place to see the car is on Youtube. Search 'Speed Records White Zombie'.

A tastey tidbit for all who love 0-60 power...

If you take an EV vs a gas car, with both vehicles running the same ET, the EV will have a much more aggressive launch, then the gas car reels it in towards the end if the run. Thus, if these two cars run 11.5, the EV will have a slower trap speed, while the gas car has a faster trap speed. For example, a Z06 that runs an 11.5 ET will usually be hitting 120-122 mph through the traps, while White Zombie ran an 11.4 but only hit 114 mph. On that same run however, the Zombie's hole shot was pretty sensational...1/8 mile was 7.2 @ nearly 95 mph, and the 60 ft. flashed by in just 1.58 seconds. My little electric Datsun runs 0-60 in 2.9 seconds.

See Ya....John 'Plasma Boy' Wayland

lightnin

I have a Corvette Enthusiast magazine from October of last year that features a Katech C6 street build with Kooks headers that you offered at the time. Did you use oem cats?

PlasmaBoy

Hello Everybody,

It is not my intent to stir up debates here. I am an admirer of the Corvette, and am glad Chevy still makes America's true sports car.That said, I would like to address the following comments by 'NassyVette':

>Where does the power come from to charge electric vehicles? Your >wall, which is connected to massive diesel turbines that convert fossil >fuel to electric energy...the power doesn't come from a magical jelly >bean field...so what's the point.

(1) There are very few examples of the electrical grid power being supplied by diesel turbines...Hawaii is one. Even with this though, charging 1000s of EVs off this power source is far cleaner than running 1000s of internal combustion powered cars. Diesel turbines that spin generators are an 'open combustion' process, not 'internal combustion...BIG difference! Internal combustion makes all kinds of nasty stuff, especially oxides of nitrogen that combine with our atmosphere to make air pollution...open combustion makes very little of it. A huge power plant's emmisions are easily controlled at the source.

(2) As BlackZ06 pointed out however, diesel turbine power generation is almost non-existant compared to other means. Coal is much more common, and even with its problems, is still far cleaner than internal combustion. Studies have shown that a single coal power plant charging 1000s of EVs is 80-90% cleaner than the same number of vehicles running on the internal combustion process. Again, its 'open combustion' vs 'internal combustion'...no contest when it comes to harmful emmisions. Secondly, coal is abundant in our country and independent from foreign oil.

(3) An EV can be charged off multiple power sources, many of them totally air pollution-free...a gas car has to always run on fossil fuels...period. Where I'm from in the great Pacific Northwest, we generate our power from the massive Columbia River...hydroelectic is air pollution free, and totally independant from foreign oil. We also use wind power to generate electricity...air pollution free, and totally independant from foreign oil. Solar power generation too, is air pollution free, and totally independant from foreign oil. So is geothermal power generation, tital wave power generation, and though a controversy for its waste materials, so is nuclear. EVs are totally clean and themselves, make no pollution. Virtually 'all' power plants supplying power to EVs, including the rare use of diesel turbines, is cleaner than internal combustion, and all power plants with exception to diesel turbine types, are independent of foreign oil...all of this, is better for America.

>You get a silent buzz mobile with a 50 mile range and batteries which >eventually die and need to be disposed of, where? Outerspace? >Electric cars aren't the answer.

Hmmm...as to that buzz mobile thing, I invite you to take a ride in a hi performance EV. I bet that your face will erupt into an uncontrollable grin as you're mashed hard into the seat with the instantaneous torque of a vibration-free high revving electric motor with its unmistakeable whir of refinement...it makes exploding dinosaur juice sound a bit...well, primitive. Don't get me wrong, the sound of a Chevy V8 at full tilt is still way cool...it's just that a 300-500 hp electric motor too, makes some pretty goose bump-generating sounds of its own!

The 50 mile range thing is becoming a thing of the past as well. Today's lithium batteries are making 200 miles per charge very doable, with 300 miles per charge right around the corner. Yes, they are expensive right now, so were microwave ovens, VCRs, DVDs, and cell phones when first produced in small quantities. Today, the formerly $750 microwave is now $30! The formerly $450 VCR was down to $40 (now defunct), DVDs went from $600 to $29, and cell phones are often given away! Lithium right now in sizes large enough to propel EVs are ridiculously expensive, but have already come down in price from a year ago.

I am currently the project head of a 200-250 mile per charge Nissan Altima powered by lithium super polytmer batteries..fully recyclable, by the way. This is mid-sized car bordering on large, it is not a fragile rolling science project. It has full leather, AC, rock'n sound system, etc. We will drive it on the I-5 freeway system between the major west coast cities of Portland to Seattle on one charge...~ 180 miles. We will do so at freeway speeds, with a full load of passengers, and upon our arrival in Seattle to feast on Copper River Salmon, will have the car on a fast charge replenishing the pack for our return trip back to Portland...all with no gas, no pollution...and with all ties to OPEC severed! We EVers like to tell folks that our electric cars are powered by American electrons!

OK, back to your regularly scheduled Corvette programming...

See Ya...John 'Plasma Boy' Wayland

THE TECH

From Random's site:

"This design, which meets Federal EPA and California ARB requirements, enables virtually any vehicle with a properly tuned engine to meet emissions standards with little, if any power loss (compared to an exhaust with no catalytic converter). Please note that it is illegal to remove a properly functioning catalytic converter and that aftermarket catalytic converters are not legal for installation in California on OBD II vehicles (some 1994 & 1995, and all 1996 and later vehicles)."

Katech_Zach

At the time, we thought the aftermarket cats were legal. As soon as we learned that they were not, we discontinued using them.

Tyler valo

Stock cats eventually get clogged up and rob horsepower and mileage (my friends 01' Cougar literally had the inside of the cat melt shut), what happens then? Do you have to go back to OEM for replacements?

vettenuts

Sorry, got to ask. How safe are lithium batteries? There are many we don't allow in my business, but I am also not the expert on them either.

Katech_Zach

If it falls within the manufacturer's catalyst warranty or 5/50,000 it gets replaced with OEM parts. If it is outside of that it can be replaced with an approved aftermarket catalytic converter that is vehicle-specific. High flow cats don't count.

BlackZ06

Clever marketing in that they have you fooled ......

They do not have an O.E. (they claim they "meet" CARB requirements ... they have not proven that to the CARB ... they don't have an O.E. issued) so what I said earlier is 100 percnt correct ...... Random Technology cats are not "50 state legal"....... even their own statement makes it clear they are NOT legal for 1996 and newer vehicles .... and again I will say that anyone claiming they are "50 state legal" is either

a) a liar
b) an idiot
c) both

I already challenged you once .... go to the CARB database and show me ONE SINGLE entry for the Random Technology cats ... OBD2 compliant or pre-OBD2 ..... they don't exist. THEY ARE NOT 50 STATE LEGAL for ANY car with cats on it .... even pre-1996 cars in CA.

Here's the link ... show me the E.O. ...... Random Technology cats OF ANY KIND are not "50 state legal" .....

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/aftermk...es/amquery.php

I'm done arguing until you show me an E.O. number .... in the meantime I put you in catagory "B".

THE TECH

Not sure why you think anyone needs to be challenged on it bro. Relax.

NassyVette

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, you can respond without insults. (ie Plasma Boy's response)

Sorry I didn't realize that most power plants in the US are coal, but does coal not pollute our air? Coal power plants account for about 50% of our energy production at the moment.

If large numbers of plug-in hybrids were being recharged with power from the least-sophisticated coal plants, "There is a possibility for significant increases of soot and mercury," says a report by environmental advocacy group Natural Resources Defense Council. Soot particles can make it hard to breathe, especially for asthmatics and mercury is toxic. "Plug-in hybrids are perhaps not good for all areas," says Howard Learner, executive director of the Environmental Law & Policy Center, a Chicago-based advocacy group. In "states that are heavily coal, that equation doesn't work out very well for the environment."

A study by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency found plug-ins also could result in more sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions. SO2 is toxic in large amounts and is a component of corrosive acid rain.The Minnesota study found that use of PHEVs would lower most emissions compared with other vehicles, but that resulting SO2 emissions would be more than double those from gasoline vehicles and about three or four times greater than from driving a regular hybrid. Exactly how much depends on how far the PHEV can run on battery power alone.

The Minnesota study also found that PHEVs would emit more carbon dioxide (CO2) than driving a conventional hybrid. CO2 is a greenhouse gas thought to contribute to global warming.

The Minnesota numbers are striking because they predict the big jump in SO2 even if 40% of the state's electricity were generated by wind power, not coal or other polluting fuels. About 4% of the state's electricity now is from wind, according to state officials.

The state's PHEV study concludes: "Alternative vehicles offer benefits, but no single technology currently stands out as a clear choice."

The NRDC calculus shows that a plug-in charged from a power plant burning the dirtiest type of coal still has an overall pollution level less than a conventional gasoline car. But it would produce 11% more greenhouse gas emissions than a regular, non-plug-in hybrid, according to Luke Tonachel, vehicles analyst at the NRDC and co-author of the group's report on plug-ins. The report was produced jointly with the non-profit Electric Power Research Institute.

"We look at plug-in hybrids as the next generation of hybrids. They run cleaner, they save oil and they can save consumers money at the pump," NRDC's Tonachel says. But, he says, "Until our oldest power plants are replaced or upgraded, there could be increases in local particulate matter and ozone."

Only about 20% of our power comes from clean nuclear power, but why not 100% of it? Oh yeah, nuclear power has it's drawbacks as well, namely the spent nuclear fuel that take over 100,000 years to decay to a level safe for humans. But thats no big deal right? Neither or core meltdowns that can spew radioactive material hundreds of miles, right? I don't mind if my children are born with 4 eyes and 3 legs.

Battery recyling is easy right? Not rocket science, please then, explain this simple process to us. And how many companies currently handle large vehicle lithium ion battery recycling? I'll save you the search, one. There are presently very few plug in electric vehicles in the US, what happens when they become the majority and we are faced with massive ammounts of batteries to recycle? What about the increased demand for electricity that will come with it? Do you think the price of electricity will remain constant as millions begin the transition to EV's?

Now lets look at this brilliant statement "There are LOTS of answers ..... you have your head shoved up your ### if you can't see that petroleum based transportation has a finite life ..... we cannot keep burning off billions of barrels of oil just to drive cars every day ...... makes no sense economically ... environmentally ..... or in any other way ....

Please see my original post and tell me where exactly I stated that petroleum based transportation had an infinite life span? Having trouble? Who's got their head shoved up their ***? And even if every auto in the US was electric and in some miracle, they didn't increase Co2 and So2 production due to increase demand on coal burning electric plants, when will the millions of semi trucks convert to electric? Imagine the range on that beast.

And we can't keep burning oil to drive cars every day. But it's OK to continue burning 20lbs of coal per person per day (thats before you add an electric vehicle to you total daily usage). The American Lung Association reported that about 24,000 preventable deaths occur each year because of health problems related to coal-fired power plants. The Energy Information Administration recently published its review of the coal industry for 2007, and it said that although coal production decreased, coal consumption increased. Our demand for coal continues to grow even though it pollutes the air, pollutes the water and there are more sustainable energy sources that lack the funding to be developed.

Have you considered yet that unless the USA drastically ramps up its production of nuclear energy or develops technology that improves the feasibility of wind and solar energy production, that your electric vehicle is also running off of finite resources? Imagine that!

Now pull your head out of YOUR *** and quit pretending to have all the answers, because there are many people much more brilliant than yourself or I that have yet to create a long term solution. Again, I stand by my initial opinion that electric cars are not the answer.

motogib1

No doub't, electric cars are do have a so called "carbon foot print" as well. Maybe less than a gas burning car but they require energy to recharge and most electric energy comes from coal fired power plants, worked in one when I was still in college. The other factor will be disposal of used batteries. It will be interesting to see how that works it way out. The other thing here is that just how does the installation of hi-flow cats affect the emissions of the car when combined with headers. I would venture to guess that on a properly tuned car they could easily pass the emissions tests. Just my .02.

tvlance

A lot of the problem with energy resources being used to power automobiles is because of the WEIGHT of the automobile. I saw a good story about this a while back. This guy was developing ways to cut down on the bulk of a typical automobile saying it doesn't take a machine that weighs more than 10 times an average person's body weight to haul us around safely and swiftly. I concur. This is most apparent when I see the little 95lb blonde soccer mom driving her Yukon XL, or the meathead "dude" driving his dually lifted diesel pickup truck.... and they're the only ones in the vehicles. Of course Newton's Laws come into play when discussing the mass of vehicles and how that plays into safety. The 1,000lb car may be incredibly strong and safe, but if a 50,000lb truck runs into it, the little car and occupant will take most of the brunt for sure... moreso than hitting a 5,000lb SUV.

Ahh the future will be interesting. And I'm enjoying this thread!