REEVs

TEG · 12-21-2007, 11:01 PM

So, Elon says "Tesla will likely provide both pure electric and range extended electric drive options in the future. We refer to the latter as a REEV (Range Extended Electric Vehicle) to distinguish it from “hybrids,” which are really just gasoline engine cars with a small electric motor and tiny battery. The REEV battery in our scenario would fully cover the range needs for reasonable daily usage, but there would be an onboard generator for the occasional long trip."

Lets review other places we have seen this "REEV" acronym before:

Here, Darryl says: “Range Extended EV” is not just PR spin for series hybrid platform, it actually makes sense from a customer perspective.

Here, GM called their Volt concept car an "E-Rev", but others suggested they like REEV better.
GM definition: "A vehicle that functions as a full-performance electric vehicle when energy is available from an onboard battery and have an auxilliary energy supply that is only engaged when the battery energy is depleted."

Here Volt bloggers debate the validity of the new nomenclature.

Over here, way back in July, someone recommended the REEV name for the GM Volt.

And here, back in June, was more debate on what to call the Volt.

So, it appears that the whole E-REV, RE-EV naming is a product of GM trying to find a name "other than hybrid" to call the Volt. Looks like Tesla is following GM.

TEG · 12-21-2007, 11:53 PM

Quote from Tony:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Chevy Volt, as described by GM, is a plug-in hybrid, it's a PHEV. It's the archetype, the apotheosis of PHEVs, it's exactly what PHEV advocates have been asking for. How can you call it anything else?

The Detroit News may or may not like the "plug-in hybrid" moniker, but so what? Nobody gave them authority to rewrite the language. Nobody gave that authority to GM either. It is what it is, and calling it something else only means you're trying to pull the wool over people's eyes. These terms already have well-established meanings (particularly thanks to advocacy groups like Plug-In Partners and Calcars).

And no, it's not "an electric car with a range extender" either. That is GM's weasel language, that's their spin. That makes it sound like an electric car with a magical little box of fairy dust that makes it go farther. I believe in calling a spade a spade, and calling a PHEV a PHEV.

I've actually overheard producers of yogurt whining that they can't call their product something else (apparently yogurt sounds "yucky" to many people) -- but there are truth in labeling laws in the food industry that prevent them from selling yogurt as something other than yogurt. If such laws existed in the auto industry, GM would never get away with calling the Volt an electric car. And if GM gets away with it, it'll only be because lazy or dishonest journalists give them a free ride.
Posted at 8:42PM on Jun 10th 2007 by Tony Belding
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tony, you still feel that way today, or have you caved now that both GM *and* Tesla are going with REEV?

TEG · 12-21-2007, 11:58 PM

By the way, we have been down this road before, more than once.

WarpedOne · 12-22-2007, 05:18 AM

It is crystal clear now why Martin had to leave.

The board got a knee jerk reaction seeing others building hybrids and "REEVs". "To hell with gasoline" or "To hell with Martin"?

tonybelding · 12-22-2007, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TEG

Tony, you still feel that way today, or have you caved now that both GM *and* Tesla are going with REEV?

I still feel the same thing, that this is fundamentally dishonest marketing spin.

Both GM and Tesla appear desperate to call their plug-in hybrid cars anything but a hybrid. I can understand their motivation, from a marketing standpoint -- but in my book being motivated to lie doesn't make it okay to lie.

Here are some more specific criticisms. . .

1. Terms like "range extender" or "range-extended" are too vague. It could mean anything. If you didn't already know what they were talking about and heard these terms would imagine some kind of super battery. But you aren't getting a super battery, you're getting a gas engine.

2. Electricity is mentioned, but not gasoline -- even though a Chevy Volt owner could, potentially, never plug in his car and run it entirely on gasoline.

3. As I noted before, the term PHEV is a logical extension from HEV and has already been established by advocacy groups and the press.

BlackbirdHighway · 12-22-2007, 07:36 AM

One aspect of having gasoline powered range extenders or whatever you want to call them has not been brought up by anyone.

As more and more pure BEVs get sold, owners will start asking for access to charging facilities. Not the in-and-out fast chargers that work like gas stations, but I'm talking about at hotels, resort destinations, family theme parks like Disneyworld and 6 Flags, shopping malls, parking garages, and even apartments. It will take a long time, but eventually businesses will respond to customer demand and install charging facilites. If electric power is going to someday replace oil based power, that infrastructure will have to get established.

With PHEVs or REEVs, you don't need these, you'll just fill it up with gas instead. Without the demand for chargers, that infrastructure will never happen. Without the charging infrastructure, we will continue to be tied to oil. The demand for oil could be reduced, but the ties cannot be broken.

The REEV is really a crutch. Maybe for a while the crutch is needed, but you can also become dependent on the crutch, and never learn to walk without it.

TEG · 12-22-2007, 09:07 AM

Good point, BlackbirdHighway

I can see it now,
Q: "Can you please consider installing a charging port for my EV"?
A: "Oh we already have plenty of customers/employees with EVs parking here. But they all got that new REEV kind so they don't need a plug. You should upgrade."

malcolm · 12-22-2007, 09:11 AM

What a waste. Far from continuing to push its own proprietory technology for BEVs, Tesla is letting itself get dragged down to the same technology level as the status quo.

It won't be long until Tesla ends up just designing and making systems for Big Auto and claiming it's being radical.

TEG · 12-22-2007, 09:28 AM

One of the things that concerned me when Tesla opened the Michigan design center and hired a bunch of "experienced" auto engineers was that they would push the company to be more like an old Detroit auto company. Detroit has built REEVs before but we didn't see them come on the market. Why not?

Why will Tesla be able to do what PNGV failed to deliver?

TEG · 12-22-2007, 09:51 AM

And, what about FreedomCAR?

It seems to be the replacement for PNGV.

I think I was happier when I was just doing web research on the "pure BEV" situation. With REEVs/PHEVs it seems that it is even more political. Some articles I read by Ralph Nader suggest that PNGV & FreedomCAR were really just a way to provide funding to big auto to lock up patents in this area. What if Tesla finds that their REEV design is already covered by patents that resulted from PNGV & FreedomCAR?

Yikes!