The ENVI line can be seen here. This is rather sad really, I like electric cars. I drive one myself. From Reuters:
Chrysler dismantles electric car plans under Fiat
DETROIT (Reuters) – Chrysler has disbanded a team of engineers dedicated to rushing a range of electric vehicles to showrooms and dropped ambitious sales targets for battery-powered cars set as it was sliding toward bankruptcy and seeking government aid.
The move by Fiat SpA marks a major reversal for Chrysler, which had used its electric car program as part of the case for a $12.5 billion federal aid package.
As late as August, Chrysler took $70 million in grants from the U.S. Department of Energy to develop a test fleet of 220 hybrid pickup trucks and minivans, vehicles now scrapped in the sweeping turnaround plan for Chrysler announced this week by Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne.
Chrysler spokesman Nick Cappa said on Friday that an in-house team of electric car development engineers had been disbanded in favor of a more traditional organization.
The automaker’s former owner, Cerberus Capital Management, had set up a special division called “Envi” — derived from Environment — to spearhead development of hybrid technology where Chrysler badly trailed competitors.
“Envi is absorbed into the normal vehicle development program,” Cappa told Reuters.
Under mounting pressure to improve the fuel-efficiency of its line-up, Chrysler announced in September last year that it was developing three electric vehicles and would sell the first of the models by 2010.
In January at the Detroit Auto Show, Chrysler upped the ante on its electric car bet by pledging to have 500,000 battery-powered vehicles on the road by 2013, including sports cars and trucks.
But a presentation of Chrysler’s five-year strategy by Marchionne on Wednesday made no mention of Chrysler’s earlier electric car development plans.
Under the Marchionne plan, former Envi chief Lou Rhodes will become the group line executive in charge of electric car development for both Fiat and Chrysler, Cappa said.
As of Friday, the Chrysler Group website still featured pictures and advertisements for the now-scuttled electric vehicles it had been developing.
Here: https://www.chryslergroupllc.com/innovation/envi
That includes the Dodge Circuit, a two-seat, all-electric sports car that Chrysler engineers had rushed into prototype by using a Lotus platform.
At the time of the launch of Envi in late 2007, Chrysler executives had said the unit would operate with the speed of a venture capital-backed start-up that would compress the three-to-five-year development cycle typical for automakers.
Read the complete article here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Back in the mid ’90s I worked for Philips Automotive Electronics in Auburn, IN. They produced electronic engines controls and automotive sensors for a variety of customers. Things like elctronic ignitions, fuel injection controllers stuff like that. Philips NV, the parent company decided to get out of the automotive business, they didn’t like the high investment, long lead time and low margins involved. Consumer Electronics was a better business in their mind. They sold the company off, and it ended up getting broke into pieces, Siemens and VDO with most of it.
Behind the engineering lab were several dynometer rooms, one of which was dedicated to a unique project – variable valve timed engines. They had patented (since expired I’m sure) every conceivable way to open and close valves without using a cam, the idea was to put the valve timing under computer control. They had settled on the best way to fire as being pneumatic. The thought process was that everything else else about an engine was being controlled by computer, why not the valve timing?
The results were very impressive, the control system could regulate fuel injection, ignition timing, and Valve timing depending on what the electronic accelerator pedal determined the driver was after. Being able to control the “cam profile” electronically allowed realtime adjustments to the power curve. One minute the engine could be pumping out horsepower like a hot rod, and the next minute sipping fuel like an econo-box. You want low end torque? No problem.
They had built a few prototype engines up for demo purposes, and pitched the idea to the Big Three (later the Detriot Three, still later government motors). They all loved the concept, but didn’t like the fact that it added quite a few moving parts, which adds cost and reduces reliability. It never went anywhere.
I can’t help but wonder if this is an Idea whose time has come. I can tell you that it would allow a small engine to perform quite a bit bigger, and then use gas like it’s still smaller. You could have high end horsepower, low end torque and great economy when you wanted it. In my mind, it made a lot more sense than these engines that “turn off” cylinders to save gas.
HoosierHawk, my new car has variable valve timing. It actually took me a while to dig past all the propietary claims blocking access to what’s going on, but in the end it’s quite simple.
I know, it’s not computer actuated valves, which would be VERY cool, but essentially there is a computer actuated offsetter called a “phaser” on each of the intake and exhaust cams that allows it to lengthen or shorten the duration of both intake and exhaust. Chrysler was the first to market with this particular tech, which has wide degrees of adjustment to both intake and exhaust while still using a fairly conventional 2-camshaft-in-head layout.
The result is very real. The engine breathes fire on demand, and pulls the less-than-aerodynamic slug along the highway at close to 35MPG. This engine is the GEMA “world” engine, it’s a 2.4l turbo, apparently one of the most advanced engines out there. Just saying 🙂
HoosierHawk (10:38:24) :
Very interesting story, thanks for posting this.
I think the keyword of the computer controlled valves is weight reduction.
It could be a very interesting application for small aircraft engines too.
Maximum power for take off and lean running for cruising.
This means we could do with a much smaller engine which calculated throughout an aircraft design could result in a lighter aircraft and therefore less fuel consumption.
I will try to do some research what has become of the idea.
It’s all about the price and the power output and density of the batteries.
We’re simply not there yet.
Big cars as presented by Chrysler come at a high price.
What would help is a dual fuel application based on a diesel engine running on a mix of diesel and LPG.
More power, lower fuel consumption, clean exhaust emissions, no particle filter needed. http://www.tinleytech.co.uk/lpgsys.html
It’s very easy to adapt any diesel to this sytem because only a single injector is needed to introduce the LPG into the fuel pump. Because of the higher combustion temperature there will be no particles in the emission.
Ideal for the air quality in the cities.
I estimate the costs for a small 10 gallon LPG tank, the injector and electronics around six or seven hundred dollar.
For gasoline cars there is a liquid LPG injection system available which delivers a comparable output when the engine is driven with gasoline.
This dual fuels system allows you to drive the car on gasoline or lpg.
The fuel tanks can be installed under the car or an UFO tank replacing the spare wheel. I don’t know the gallon price for LPG compared to gasoline but it should be around 1/3 of the gasoline price. Those sequential injection systems cost arounf 3.200 euro’s http://www.vialle.nl/home.html?L=1&cHash=42f430268f
Ahh, but what of NOx?
.
.
Pretty neat. Has this company gone public yet? Might be a good investment.
Re HoosierHawk (10:38:24), I think I just read on the Scuderi website that their (external) valves are air-controlled.
/Mr Lynn
“So far, the best way to densely store hydrogen involves attaching hydrogen atoms to short linear chains of carbon atoms. By varying the length of the chains using nano-engineering (previously known as organic chemistry), it has been demonstrated that the resulting material is a fluid over most terrestrial temperatures and pressures, is cheap to produce, and has the added benefit of providing extra energy storage in the carbon-carbon bonds holding the linear chain together.
This magical material is commonly known as…. gasoline.”
Classic! Im using it in my courses!
Folks please keep in mind that there is a fundamental difference between all electric and plug-ins, which are charge depleting, and the currently commercial hybrids which are charge sustaining. The current systems (charge sustaining) are warranted to 150 k miles as they are considered part of the emissions system. The OEMs seem to have figured out the battery lifetime issue for charge sustaining but are on the rocks for the battery lifetime regarding the charge depleting systems as can be read about earlier in the comments. The stabs at the Prius and other charge sustaining hybrids fall flat. The charge sustaining systems are quite reliable with little to no battery lifetime issues that I am aware of. Anthony can perhaps comment here regarding his experience as well as others. Hopefully the Chevy Volt (plug in) will prove out lifetime issues with charge depleting sytems but I’m waiting to see.
Battery lifetime is likely a factor in the decision by Chrysler Fiat. It certainly was in the EV-1. When people ask me “who killed the electric car?” I tell them that the Electric car was suicidal. ie it was oversold with out having the technology to back it up regarding battery lifetime.
BTW the turbines didnt “flunk out” in the 1968 Indy race nor in chryslers last run at commercialization of them. It was the fuel pumps (lap 190 of 200) in the 68 race for both entries in the 500. The Lotus 4WD sytem and the turbine were outlawed from future races but they still had the best qualifying time in the 1968 race. If I remember correctly the Govt loan (bailout) of chrysler in 1975? required that they stop all foreseeable non-performing (not profitable) projects and the turbine was one that fit that mold. Funny how history repeats itself!
IMHO the charge sustaining hybrid is the way to go for the next foreseeable future. It allows a relatively small IC for the average power (bigger than 10 hp folks, the Prius uses a 67 hp IC on the atkinson cycle at roughly 37% thermal efficiency) and the electric system picks up the transient load. Could be done with air pressure but 10ksi air isnt exactly mechanically safe. If batteries progress significantly with regards to lifetime the plug-in hybrid may allow potential increased use of base load electricity (considering night time charging) and perhaps allows use of stranded wind and maybe solar (although I wouldnt count on it esp for night charging). The driver with the plug in is 50 Cents/gallon equivalent when charging but it isn’t worth it if the battery lifetime suffers. Another problem with charge depleting electrics is that if every one used them peak grid load shifts to the night time (talk about being upside down). Darn laws of thermo keep getting in the way. We should just repeal them 😉
APE