Cravenspeed Electric MINI
Sure we all followed along with the factory electic cars. There was that one company that was also selling electric MINIs through Sam’s Club a while back. Now, CravenSpeed has gotten into the game and they just did their first test drive of their electric R53.
The donor MINI is a 2002 R53. Great testbed for such a conversion. Be sure to click back to read all about their progress.
Anyone have any interest in doing something like this to your MINI? $25k seems pretty reasonable for this kind of conversion to us. What say you?
<p>Would definitely like to do a conversion in the future.  Just need to let the batt technology mature a bit for cold climates, and improved energy density.</p>
<p>Although it is not my cup of Red Zinger, I understand and appreciate the rationale behind electrifying the automobile. I do think it does present a viable energy alternative, at least in a “superficial” sense. Proponents continue to underplay the source of electric energy — and that is coal-fueled generating plants. It is therefore not as “green” as we are encouraged to believe. Conversely, I believe that the technology currently available and/or on the near horizon could erase this drawback. Just as it is possible to make tires last hundreds of thousands of miles and many expendables last considerably longer, economics and politics have a way of derailing progress. This may be especially true in the medical area which is beyond the scope of this forum.</p>
<p>It is possible to create self-energizing –Â veritable “perpetual motion machines” including transportation machines. That said, electric cars will find their appropriate niche. Hopefully that niche will not entirely displace internal combustion powered vehicles. In my opinion, electric powered transportation is best suited to mass transit system e.g., MagLev monorails and inter-urban personal transporters. Again, we have the capability to develop alternative fuels needed to run IC engines. There is no need to deprive us of the aural euphoria produced by the redline symphonies that only cranks and pistons in concert at work can provide. Silence may be golden, but the music of a finely-tuned engine is priceless!</p>
<p>Really? Â We can create “perpetual motion machines’? Â I’m an engineer at a major American aerospace company, and I’d like Mr. Dill to explain how.
As for the all – too – often heard argument that coal – fueled electric plants make electric cars a bad idea, I have an 8.9 kilowatt solar pv system on my roof right now. Â That generates 120% of my annual usage, so I’m ready to convert my Mini to electric.
Even for those that don’t generate their own electricity, it’s far easier to control the emissions from a few hundred power plants than from hundreds of thousands of barely – maintained automobile tailpipes, so I do not buy that argument.</p>
<p>As an engineer, Mr. Gale, you presumably keep abreast of technological innovation. As I am not an engineer, I cannot “tell you how” or provide you with a blueprint. I can tell you that it is far easier to allow conventional wisdom to prejudice perception and to march to the accepted beat. As you know, Tesla, Edison and others were generally regarded as the lunatic fringe of the established scientific community. Just as there are MIT scientists and engineers that have demonstrated liquid recharge systems for batteries that make “refueling” as rapid as a gas station stop, so are there inventors that have elaborated on KERS in conjunction with other generators to produce self-energizing motors solely requiring motion and light. Of course, like tires and alternative fuels, economics and politics have long had a patent on preserving vested interests. </p>
<p>In terms of emissions control, of course it would be easier to fewer number of sources, however that notion skirts the issue as it entirely disregards the use of non-polluting or ultra-low emission fuels — also available, but censured by the corrupted mandates of fossil fuel barons and their lobbyists.</p>
<p>Perpetual motion cannot exist. It is impossible. Of course you entire quote is “veritable perpetual motion machines” and the “veritable” qualifier removes the ‘forever’ portion of “perpetual motion”. There are technological advances happening that are gathering more and more of the automobile’s energy and reusing it for power. That is a good thing. I’d like to see something mechanical rather than electrical that would take the energy from deceleration and provide it for acceleration. I don’t know how it would work, but it would last a LOT longer and (hopefully) not require replacement/rebuilding after 100k.</p>
<p>I’d really like to see nubmers on the use of coal for electric cars. First you burn the coal, then you convert to AC and transmit to a residence and put into a vehicle to store and use. A thorough review would include the cost of acquisition and processing of the fuel as well as enviro(carbon?) costs of the construction of distribution equipment and such.</p>