Log in

View Full Version : In a Deep Sleep, an E.V. Ancestor Awaits a Jolt



Serpo
10th May 2011, 04:50 PM
In a Deep Sleep, an E.V. Ancestor Awaits a Jolt
By JIM MOTAVALLI
Andrew Riker, with an unidentified companion, at the helm of a Riker electric in approximately 1900 on the Old Post Road in Fairfield, Conn.Dragone Classic MotorcarsAndrew Riker, with an unidentified companion, at the helm of a Riker electric in approximately 1900 on the Old Post Road in Fairfield, Conn.

When a Riker electric car won the $900 first prize at a track race in Narragansett, R.I., in 1896, followed across the finish line by another plug-in entry, Scientific American was amazed. “The announcement of the success of the electric carriages created some surprise, as it has been thought lately that motors using some form of petroleum were best adapted for horseless carriage use,” it reported.

Despite being a pioneer of the plug-in car, the Riker Electric Vehicle Company of Brooklyn, N.Y. (and later, New Jersey), is barely remembered today, partly because it existed for only a very short time. Andrew Riker, the company’s founder and a pioneer in electric motor design when he was only a teenager, sold the company to Colonel Albert Pope, the bicycle and electric-car magnate of Hartford, Conn., for a reported — and quite remarkable if true — $2 million in 1901.

During his brief turn in the spotlight, Riker, who later went to work for Locomobile and became the first president of the Society of Automotive Engineers — and whose family allegedly sold their East River island to New York City in the late 19th century — built and sold more than 1,000 electric cars. He also came close to setting a land-speed record in an electric known as the Riker Torpedo.

A rare, well-preserved 1898 example of a Riker electric, which was actually raced with Mr. Riker at the wheel, is awaiting mechanical restoration at Dragone Classic Motorcars in Westport, Conn.

The car hasn’t run since about 1910, and a lack of appropriate tires has hindered its rejuvenation, said George Dragone, a co-owner of the shop. “We hope to have it on the road by the end of this year,” he said. According to Mr. Dragone, only six Rikers are known to exist, and three of them are in the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn, Mich.

The Riker electric, as it appears today.Jim Motavalli for The New York TimesThe Riker electric, as it appears today.

“Our car is probably the earliest American electric car in existence, and it’s certainly the earliest one that raced,” said Manny Dragone, George’s brother and partner in the business.

Mr. Riker built the car’s electric motor and 72-volt drivetrain, George Dragone said. The only significant missing part in the car today is the battery pack, which Mr. Dragone said likely consisted of Edison glass-cased batteries.

According to the auto historian Leigh Dorrington, Mr. Riker realized early that internal-combustion engines would probably triumph over electrics. In his diary, Mr. Riker recounts taking the chassis that is in the Dragones’ shop to France for the 1900 Paris Exposition and being dismayed by the sight of gas cars that could reach 60 m.p.h. “He was clearly looking to that future, even then,” Mr. Dorrington said.

In its prime, the 1898 Riker could reportedly reach 40 m.p.h. and travel 50 miles on a charge. “It’s funny, here we are more than 100 years later, and we haven’t advanced all that much,” George Dragone said. Scientific American was impressed in 1896, but it also said that the E.V.’s suitability for long runs still remained to be proved.

And, as many would argue, it still does.

Once up and running, the long-dormant car will remain in the Dragones’ private collection. This piece of automotive history is not for sale.
http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/in-a-deep-sleep-an-e-v-ancestor-awaits-a-jolt/

Glass
10th May 2011, 08:32 PM
It's amazing what is out there in "history". Luckily we don't repeat it.....often.

ximmy
10th May 2011, 08:36 PM
The guy sitting in back needs front view mirrors...

mightymanx
10th May 2011, 08:56 PM
My 1979 VW rabbit gas car gets 38 mpg the diesel version gets about 60 mpg and this is after a 300,000+ mile break in period.

Funny that 32 years of car development we are exactly the same in fiel efficency after 20 years of going backward, except the cars now cost over 10 times what they did in 1979.

It's just pure chance right?


Here is a site on car mpg's see if you can spot a trend in auto manufacturing from then to now.

http://www.mpgomatic.com/2007/10/08/super-cheap-high-mpg-cars-1978-1981/

SLV^GLD
11th May 2011, 10:16 AM
My 1979 VW rabbit gas car gets 38 mpg the diesel version gets about 60 mpg and this is after a 300,000+ mile break in period.

Funny that 32 years of car development we are exactly the same in fiel efficency after 20 years of going backward, except the cars now cost over 10 times what they did in 1979.

It's just pure chance right?


Here is a site on car mpg's see if you can spot a trend in auto manufacturing from then to now.

http://www.mpgomatic.com/2007/10/08/super-cheap-high-mpg-cars-1978-1981/



Actually no, it is not pure chance and it may or may not be pure conspiracy.
I tended to side with pure conspiracy until I talked to a few automotive engineers and designers.
There are a few facts at play (that may or may not play into a conspiracy).

Fact: The American infrastructure is dependent on the interstate highway system. Mass transit over any significant distance most certainly plays second fiddle to the network of roads we have. This fact dictates design of personal sized automobiles.

Fact: Physics is constrained by certain laws which dictate automobile design. The nature of interstate highway travel requires vehicles to be able to accelerate at minimum rates for merging and passing and other tasks. To make travel on the interstate viable certain minimum speeds must be maintained, we'll arbitrarily pick that speed to be 60mph. In order for a vehicle to safely accelerate to merge, attain and sustain 60 mph AND handle a variety of road conditions which includes massive tracker trailer loads passing requires the vehicle to have some amount of weight and stability to be at all safe on the interstates highways.

Fact: Safety standards are mandated for any vehicle that is legally allowed on the interstate highways, manufacture for sale or importation for that use. These safety standards dramatically increase the complexity, systems overhead and weight of modern vehicles thus placing more pressure on the upper bounds of fuel efficiencies.

Looking at the facts in concert the design of a vehicle that can carry 2-4 passengers, accelerate and travel with interstate class traffic at interstate speeds and meet the safety standards becomes severely limited in terms of "thinking outside the box". The modern gasoline powered car has reached an apogee of efficiency in terms of the factual design constraints.

My 1996 Honda Accord with 260K miles gets 35mph highway mileage to this day with no modifications to the stock exhaust or intake (proven ways to increase efficiency with this car). A 2010 Honda Accord right off the lot may or may not achieve those same figures but there is quite a bit more car being pushed around quite a bit more safely than my car.

Was the advent of the interstate highway system conspiracy? Are safety standards a conspiracy? Is the idea that gasoline is the preeminent fuel source for individual travel a conspiracy?

To some degree I say that all of the above questions can be answered with a carefully qualified yes.

However, I would contend that the production of automobiles designed for the above paradigms is still a matter of market demands and if Honda could put out a vehicle that fit the mold and got 100mpg they by god would.

Ponce
11th May 2011, 11:28 AM
Two rules for building an American car.....cannot give to many MPG and they can't last longer than five years without breaking down.

big country
11th May 2011, 12:09 PM
My 1979 VW rabbit gas car gets 38 mpg the diesel version gets about 60 mpg and this is after a 300,000+ mile break in period.

Funny that 32 years of car development we are exactly the same in fiel efficency after 20 years of going backward, except the cars now cost over 10 times what they did in 1979.

It's just pure chance right?


Here is a site on car mpg's see if you can spot a trend in auto manufacturing from then to now.

http://www.mpgomatic.com/2007/10/08/super-cheap-high-mpg-cars-1978-1981/



Actually no, it is not pure chance and it may or may not be pure conspiracy.
I tended to side with pure conspiracy until I talked to a few automotive engineers and designers.
There are a few facts at play (that may or may not play into a conspiracy).

Fact: The American infrastructure is dependent on the interstate highway system. Mass transit over any significant distance most certainly plays second fiddle to the network of roads we have. This fact dictates design of personal sized automobiles.

Fact: Physics is constrained by certain laws which dictate automobile design. The nature of interstate highway travel requires vehicles to be able to accelerate at minimum rates for merging and passing and other tasks. To make travel on the interstate viable certain minimum speeds must be maintained, we'll arbitrarily pick that speed to be 60mph. In order for a vehicle to safely accelerate to merge, attain and sustain 60 mph AND handle a variety of road conditions which includes massive tracker trailer loads passing requires the vehicle to have some amount of weight and stability to be at all safe on the interstates highways.

Fact: Safety standards are mandated for any vehicle that is legally allowed on the interstate highways, manufacture for sale or importation for that use. These safety standards dramatically increase the complexity, systems overhead and weight of modern vehicles thus placing more pressure on the upper bounds of fuel efficiencies.

Looking at the facts in concert the design of a vehicle that can carry 2-4 passengers, accelerate and travel with interstate class traffic at interstate speeds and meet the safety standards becomes severely limited in terms of "thinking outside the box". The modern gasoline powered car has reached an apogee of efficiency in terms of the factual design constraints.

My 1996 Honda Accord with 260K miles gets 35mph highway mileage to this day with no modifications to the stock exhaust or intake (proven ways to increase efficiency with this car). A 2010 Honda Accord right off the lot may or may not achieve those same figures but there is quite a bit more car being pushed around quite a bit more safely than my car.

Was the advent of the interstate highway system conspiracy? Are safety standards a conspiracy? Is the idea that gasoline is the preeminent fuel source for individual travel a conspiracy?

To some degree I say that all of the above questions can be answered with a carefully qualified yes.

However, I would contend that the production of automobiles designed for the above paradigms is still a matter of market demands and if Honda could put out a vehicle that fit the mold and got 100mpg they by god would.


Also do not forget that the Govt mandates certain minumums for emissions. If the emissions requirements were lifted, I would be willing to wager that MPG would go up with them.

Neuro
11th May 2011, 12:52 PM
I do believe that the mandated use of the platinum palladium catalysator, has reduced fuel efficiency, a few years back I had a Volvo 740, without a catalysator, that used on average 6-7 l/100 km, this was an 1987 model, that used some type of carbon monoxide re-using system, and the CO emissions was very low. After 1988 the catalysator was mandated and from then on fuel consumption on this car was at least 10% higher, without any increase in motor output. Prior to the mandated catalysator, there were other competing technologies, that may have proven more efficient in improving fuel efficiency and also output of envitonmental toxins, but legislators all over the eorld decided against these technologies in favor of the cat.

mightymanx
11th May 2011, 04:37 PM
While I agree that the safety standards have hamstrung auto designers My 1979 rabbit which I drive daily is a smogged vehicle and has a catalitic converter. The unwillingness for the USA to embrace diesel technology has ben one of the leading causes of cars getting heavy due safety standards. VW's TDI design was in production for 10 years. they had to fight the USA to get the vehicle over here for a decade. Mini and TOyota are not alowed to import their diesels either. Imagine a moder mini cooper with a 1.2 litre turbo/supercharged diesel that goes just as fast and accelerates beter than their standard base model. It does not profit for oil companies to do better with fuel efficency so it won't happen. The battle cry of the moder day Tryrant is one of the following:

"It's for the children."
"It's to make the country more secure."
"It is in the name of public safety."

Any time you hear those lines Tyrany is to follow shortly there after.

Here is what you can do if the government gets out of the way
http://gas2.org/2008/03/12/the-worlds-most-fuel-efficient-car-285-mpg-not-a-hybrid/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/car-manufacturers/volkswagen/8293372/Volkswagen-XL1-review.html

We dojnt do it because we are not allowed to try.

gunDriller
11th May 2011, 06:29 PM
60 mpg from a diesel rabbit ? that sounds great !

how does it do on biodiesel ?

mightymanx
11th May 2011, 09:49 PM
60 mpg from a diesel rabbit ? that sounds great !

how does it do on biodiesel ?


Biodiesel is no different, but there are WVO kits a plenty from places like Greasel. The crappy thing is all the old diesel rabbits and rabbit pickups are getting super hard to find I picked up my gas burner for $115 at the local auto auction and it costs 12 bucks a month to insure. now it is ugly and beat up but for a comuter car you can't beat it.