Well worth the watch, thanks.

David

There were many electric cars and small lorries built in the 1900s, in Britain, France and the USA – but of course soon rendered largely obsolete by the development of the petrol engine of increasing reliability, smaller bulk and weight, longer range and simple, rapid refuelling.

My copy of Modern Electrical Engineering, Vol 5, devotes an entire chapter to them, detailing the various and ingenious motor designs, gives the following nugget in explaining their " somewhat meteoric rise ", especially "among the wealthier classes " :

The unreliability and noise of early i.c. engines was the main factor, but in London a regulation

" … prohibited the use of the petrol-driven vehicles in the royal parks, but permitted entry of the silent and odourless electric cars. " [1]

'

One of the books' exemplars, illustrated by a re-touched photo probably from the manufacturer's own advertising, was the Lloyd 3-ton lorry, built by the Bremen-based North German Lloyd Steamship Company. This, or the model photographed at least, was in outline rather like the open-cab, bluff-fronted steam-wagons by Thorneycroft, Hindley (1908) etc.. Of its artillery-pattern, (solid-?) rubber-tyred wheels, the Ackermann-steered front were the powered ones, each with its own motor suspended from the hub.

The writer describes the Great Eastern Railway tested a Lloyd for a week on goods deliveries around Ipswich, which has hills up to about 1 in 12. They quoted a mean 7.4 A/h per mile: I wonder how that would compare with a modern version in a fair test, given that it would still take the same energy to move the same gross mass from rest to the same speed – and to get it up Mt. Ipswich; i.e. a comparison of overall efficiency.

The book does compare the Lloyd with similar-capacity lorries using rear-wheel chain drive, ascribing the Lloyd's better efficiency, by about 8:7, to it using regenerative braking.

We also learn a very similar vehicle to the Lloyd, named 'The Orwell' " is now being built by Messrs. Ransomes, Sims & Jeffries Ltd., of Ipswich. "

'

Some makers went further, putting the motor within the wheel, notably the 'Cedes'. These British products in 6,15 and 25HP sizes, of claimed efficiencies c.80%, were intended for electric buses and similar heavy vehicles.

Over in France, Paris City Council's municipal sanitary services operated 100 of the Fram equivalent to the Cedes. The Fram is rather tantalisingly described as a sort of forecarriage that can be attached to any form of vehicle. It's not clear, but I read that as not articulated but a front-end unit bolted rigidly to a finish-builder's chassis.

'

In the States, the impressively-named 'Couple-gear Freight-wheel Company', of Grand Rapids, Michigan, developed an ingenious and compact wheel whose motor lay across the space between two felloes. Each felloe carried a bevel gear meshed with a pinion on its respective end of the armature shaft. The motor was placed slightly askew to allow this arrangement.

The CgFw Co. also built a lorry with powered wheels all round, its motors supplied from a dynamo driven by a petrol engine…

'

So city-centre vehicular noise and fumes, battery-electrics, hybrids, regenerative braking…. Nowt new under the Sun, it appears.

[1] Modern Electrical Engineering, Vol.5., ed. Magnus Maclean, M.A. D.Sc.,., pub. The Gresham Publishing Company ltd., London. Date not given but the above and other evidence suggests the 19-teens.

Interesting stuff

He found it in Norway…

Interesting Steve, thanks for posting the link. It’s rather ironic that millions have been spent developing complicated and expensive electro mechanical drive systems for cars when the answer has been staring them in the face for 100 years. Diesel electric trains of course are a proven technology still in use today. Some submarines used Diesel engines to run electric motors and charge batteries. Not a success it seems but in 1942 a Petrol Electric Tank was developed by Porsche.

**LINK**

It is not generally recognised, but at the end of the nineteenth century and early twentieth there were more electric cars built than IC engined cars. Particularly in America. The electric cars were easier to drive, needed less maintenance and were particularly aimed at the female population who were not capable of understanding how to drive anything else. (From period literature, Not my opinion in these woke days). Believe it or not there were even coin in the slot street chargers available in major cities.

The IC engined cars (petrol) in those days were very prone to breakdown and needed major attention and engine rebuilds etc. every two thousand miles or so. Petrol wasn't leaded so pre ignition was a major issue and explains why they used low compression ratios and large cylinders in banks of six or twelve. Lubrication oil also was primitive and not very effective hence low rev. counts.

The Achilles heal of the electric car was of course the short range (lead acid battery technology) which was even more of an issue in a big country like the US.

The first world war was the turning point in IC engine design but this wasn't aimed at cars it was aimed at aircraft engines. In order to get better power to weight they needed high compression ratios and to do that they found adding lead to the fuel would control it. Better bearings, tolerances, steels and lubricating oils meant the IC engine could come of age and replace the electric and steam cars. The steam cars held on until the early 1920's. After that it was all IC.

I can remember steam wagons carrying cotton bales to the local mills before the war

580HP " because the bigger battery pack can provide more power" ? Same motors so presumably same voltage and maximum current. More capacity yes….

So how much capacity, or more usefully, what range?

I ploughed through the review, irritated by the site's needless clutter.

A vehicle like a pick-up is designed for heavy load-lugging, directly or in a trailer. (I don't know if Americans have their form of the 'Chelsea Tractor' motorist!) Loading it by towing a caravan, the writer found a maximum around 150 miles – hardly significant in a continental-sized country. Even the unladen test figures are not that great, not for long-distance trips in a land with huge sparsely-settled areas and sometimes harsh weather conditions

The review does not seem to quote re-charging times from typical public chargers, in the car's own country. Also,I don't know how widely available are public chargers in the USA – they seem thinly-scattered in the UK with much shorter inter-city distances.

Perhaps that blue box with the big handle is the pick-up's stand-by generator!

As for its other claim, apparently that of using it as a stand-by power-pack, that is all very well until you go to drive it home! "Just keep windin' that ther Goddam' handle, Junior! "

A friend in the building trade tells me there is so far no suitable battery equivalent worth considering for his work van, a Vauxhall Vivaro I think. I gather that as a self-employed trader with many domestic customers, his driving range varies widely from day to day; sometimes around 50 or 60 miles each way, not counting detours to suppliers, and can involve quite heavy loads.

.

An interesting [but possibly erroneous] presumption ^^^

I feel pretty confident that the bigger battery pack would have lower internal resistance, and therefore be capable of supplying more current >>> more power.

MichaelG.

.

Ref. **LINK**

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_resistance

MichaelG.

.

P.S. __ There’s a bit more detail about the performance in this Bloomberg feature: ,**LINK**

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-04-14/2022-ford-f-150-lightning-electric-truck-takes-on-tesla