Disqus - Latest Comments for chrism

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

nuno cruz — Sat, 30 May 2009 21:46:38 -0000

http://super-power-car-electric.webs.com/
6 variants in Porsche body styles & 3 roof options=10 styles to pick from the 911 platform

C-GT, GT1, C2 narrow and wide, 959 & 993 available in coupe, targa, removable coupe & cabriolet.

Typical Porsche 911 install would include 16-28 batteries depending on range, weight, and speed desired. These electric cars have respectable performance, 0-60 can be around 5 seconds.

2000 amp controller with 269 volts, 11" WCE motor in 4th gear at a .98 ratio = 1,200 ft lbs of Torque!

The Electric Porsche drives like a normal Porsche but Electric motors don't stall, the torque is available from the start. Very easy to drive. Generally 4th 5th and reverse are only used. If a direct drive is what you want we can design a special system for you.

When comparing to a gas Porsche battery placement spread allows for:

*Better front to rear weight distribution

*Lower center of gravity

*No smoke or waiting for warm up.

*A Porsche that does not drip oil ;)

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Free EV-Classifieds: If you would like to list your electric exotic send picture and description to: FILIPECRUZ28@HOTMAIL.COM

________________________________________________________________________________________________

We can convert any vehicle to EV but specialize in Rolls Royce and Porsche for dependable

quality built Luxury and Sports car... EV enjoyment in the most dependable chassis.

Do WCE EVs have good pickup? click here for EV-Burnouts. "Test-Mule" video.

Troubles loading click this link?Click here: http://www.worldclassexotics.com/steveburnout7.htm

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

EV DONOR CARS...Fast turnaround, financing, no paint or upholstery needed, original body.

Porsche based models available now or by special order: DONOR PAGE >>>>CLICK HERE ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

C-GT

Supercar -EV Porsche, fast and fun with removable C/F roof and 20"wheels

2000 model pictured above with 4 week lead time for completion... $88,000

We can build this custom Porsche for you on 1997-2007 donor mid engine, unibody.

dmoz.org

________________________________________________________________________________________________

We can build your Porsche on 1965- 2007- prices below are complete EV, incl. mid model Porsche 911.

959 +

A timeless look and a great EV, C2 Cup wheels, 2000 amp controller, 11" motor............ $65,000

click here for short video

Porsche 959 style Electric car. Purpose built for approx 100 mile range at 60 mph, with

over 120mph capability. 200+ miles range (Li-Ion) batteries optional.

Package includes: 17 Odyssey 2150 93 amp hour batteries, WCE DC 11" motor,

2000 amp water cooled controller, 5 speed 915 Porsche trans. 17" Cup wheels. Power windows, A/C.

Color change available. ....................... $65,000

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Includes: Fast 20 amp onboard charger charges 85% in 40 min!

993tt

Very clean styling with removable roof or coupe. EV custom build available...................$66,000

________________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

GT1

23 gassers in the world were bought for $1,300,000 ea... a respectable

performing: 2 motor, 2000 amp controller 336volt EV based on 911..............................$96,000

________________________________________________________________________________________________

962

One of the worlds most dominating race cars. Custom build on tube or Porsche chassis.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Lamborghini Based Models: Diablo SE, VT coupe, Diablo VT Roadster, '06 Murc ________________________________________________________________________________________________

DiabloSE

Tube frame chassis, 11" DC motor, 1000 amp controller , white leather interior, video cameras A/C, 5 speed...........................................................................................................$82,000

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DiabloVTcoupe VT Roadster

Vt Coupe, dk Blue HOC 3 stage candy paint/tan leather interior...................................$78,000

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Murc

EV with Style on a 2000 Porsche chassis, 9" DC motor, motorized rear wings, air suspension, built on Porsche for the best brakes, handling, dependability..with Lambo looks. Very quick. ......$89,000

_______________________________

dmoz.org
_________________________________________________________________

Rolls Royce EV

We can custom build you an electric Rolls Royce with a standard or Centurion body. The 2000amp controller moves this ship effortlessly around town or on the open road. Keep all of your amenities like PB, PW, Videoscreens, Auto, A/C. Our Rolls Royce based Centurions are heavy duty and manage a lot of low slung weight while offering that unsurpassed ride.

Typical Rolls Royce based models includes 26 - 100 amp hour batteries. By using our custom Royal Centurion body with 24" wheels allowances are gained for complete front torear battery tray. This creates a very low center of gravity and excellent front to rear weight distribution

The Centurion EV is built on Rolls Royce chassis : 1981-2007..........................$99,000-$420,000

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Attack

Currently in production using CVT tranny, WCE 11" motor......................................from$86,000

________________________________________________________________________________________________

* Electric cars do not have to deal with: Faulty water pumps, hoses, radiator leaks, oil burning,

oil smell, oil leaks, running out of gas, fuel pumps, fuel injectors, carburetors, burned valves,

worn lifters, loud exhaust, emissions, catalytic converters, worn starters, spark plugs, fuel filters,

bad distributor wires, distributor caps, rotors, ECM brains, broken rings, scored pistons, warped

heads, head gaskets, antifreeze, and dependence on oil...

Frequently Asked Questions:

MAIL: FILIPECRUZ28@HOTMAIL.COM

CELLPHONE : 00351 910417831

LANDPHONE: 00351 22 464 6809 (uSE HTTP://NONOH.NET AND CALL FREE )

dmoz.org

NUNO CRUZ

What about Financing?:

Re: On (to) TechCrunch

chrism — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 03:25:49 -0000

Congrats, MG. Meanwhile, you can continue turning ParisLemon into the -true- top tech blog...

Re: Twine, explosively growing, is an early success

Someone who ... — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 04:09:18 -0000

Thanks, Chris, and point taken about the apparent aggression.

It's not aggression actually. It's annoyance at a company which, despite all the best efforts of its Power Users and members, refuses to acknowledge its shortcomings or to treat its intelligent members and audience with the type of respect they deserve.

This includes being open and honest about growth figures and whether or not spam is contributing to them.

Unfortunately, it may not be wise to over-rely on Twine's internal numbers. There was once a claim that there were 70,000 members and yet a search on Twine produced only 42,000 members.

Why the discrepancy from Omniture and what's published on Twine's own pages under the search filter for "members"? Is that another bug in the count or are not all the members being accounted for?

Wrt the journalism, headlines like these which can be easily challenged are not that helpful sadly. The tech sector is a labyrinth. People do appreciate guides which are "fair, accurate, unbiased, transparent and well researched."

Of course, it would help if companies contributed to the transparency too.

Re: Twine, explosively growing, is an early success

Greg Boutin — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 23:19:24 -0000

Thanks Chris. I agree I wouldn't expect the same retention between Twine and VentureBeat, as I wrote those are different websites. This said, the numbers on Twine are particularly low, and retention and engagement ARE a critical factor in traffic growth. Ultimately, this is a key indicator of success, not just unique visitors. Twine shows up well in Google results, especially on long-tail searches. That sends them unique visitors, but they don't stick around much. Problem. So, unique visitors traffic may go to the roof, and that will be a good thing, but their business model may require more than one page view per user to be sustainable.

Re: Twine, explosively growing, is an early success

chrism — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:38:39 -0000

Thanks for your many comments, although one might wish they were a bit less aggressive. They do contain some valid points. Since this one is aimed at me:

The shortcomings of Twine have been well chewed over, and are there to judge for anyone who goes to twine.com. I think the general consensus before its launch was that the shortcomings were enough of an impediment that it would take Twine's traffic a long time to grow. That doesn't appear to be the case, which is what interested me, and what the story is about.

You're right that Twine's numbers conflict with some Compete numbers. Most notably, Compete shows higher traffic to Twine than Twine itself records, but a lower time spent on the site by visitors. I'd tend to put more faith in Twine's numbers; internals are usually more accurate, especially for smaller sites. And yes, Twine is still quite small.

I think the comparison to banks with toxic assets is a bit of a stretch, but I suppose I should be thankful Godwin's Law hasn't made an appearance yet.

Re: Twine, explosively growing, is an early success

chrism — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:07:03 -0000

Hey Greg. I hesitate to reply to other comments in here, as they've grown out of control while I was concentrating on other things. Thanks for your thoughts, though.

Those stats also caught my eye. I think any service that's growing quickly would tend to have a much higher % of single-time visitors. VentureBeat is a bit more mature; we've built up our return audience, but we're not shooting up 50 percent month over month, either.

I think the stat is meaningless at this point. The question is whether the traffic trend will continue, and if so, whether a significant number of those people will stick over time. If others agree with your evaluation of the design (that it's bad), the answer will probably be no, unfortunately.

Re: Twine, explosively growing, is an early success

facebook-655335659 — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 17:33:38 -0000

Hi Chris,
Thanks for the follow-up. Compete doesn't seem to agree with Twine's data for Jan then, although of course one can argue that unique users is a different metric from traffic. Anyway all of that doesn't matter that much.

As for time spent, yes I've heard that time-per-visit stat from Twine too. I'd love to know if that's active time spent on it, or includes things like "I open a page, look at other websites on different tabs, then go back to the page and close it". How many pages per visit? Beyond that, how many repeat visitors? Repeat business seems lower than I'd think, as per quantcast below.
Beyond all this, the stats can say anything, I don't think the site delivers what it could deliver on engagement and stickiness. That's my experience and I've also heard about it from too many users.

Re: Twine, explosively growing, is an early success

chrism — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 16:31:18 -0000

Left out January on Compete because it was what I had at the time -- I first looked at this some days back. The data Twine gave me looked as if the growth in unique users continued at about the same pace in Jan.

I believe they told me users are averaging 9-12 minutes per visit (without looking at my notes; it was in that range). So there's engagement. Not sure on stickiness.

Re: Sleazy measures for sad times: VC-backed Cash4Gold attracts complaints

chrism — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 19:43:30 -0000

Thanks Daniel, I didn't catch that one.

Re: News flash: Nobody gives a damn about global warming

chrism — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:32:46 -0000

You're right about the implications, and that is how renewable energy is being sold right now in the USA.

Of course, you could make similar arguments about any number of things. A huge spending boost in education or health, for example, would have some obvious benefits and employ lots of people. We could spend the money building out ubiquitous high-speed broadband, which would provide just as many jobs and, arguably, a bigger economic boost more quickly.

I think global warming (or climate change, take your pick) is the vital linchpin to the clean energy argument. Pull it out, and the story might not sell anymore.

Re: News flash: Nobody gives a damn about global warming

chrism — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:11:04 -0000

I think over a longer period you'd see a definite rising trend of interest. If you said "global warming" ten years ago, relatively few people would have known what you were talking about.

It also occurs to me that the long-term trend could still be a steady rise, with a premature spike in interest due to Hurricane Katrina and some other natural disasters.

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

kelly — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 23:05:57 -0000

Less than the cost of an ICE , gas tank, radiator, exhaust system,...

Re: Solar panels pose an environmental hazard, claims report

chrism — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:09:53 -0000

Have you been reading my AP guide, Peter?

Thanks, I'll fix that one.

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

g.r.r. — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 01:15:56 -0000

Try this link instead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEStor
Overall, wiki does a pretty good job keeping up, and better than your link.

Here is an interesting link for you as well.
http://lees.mit.edu/lees/schindall_j.htm

This will give you some info about the inductry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercapacitor

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

chrism — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:36:34 -0000

I'd imagine it just shows they don't think EEStor and similar claims are real, not that they don't think at all.

If there was a 1-2 year window when only existing EV producers could use EEStor ultracaps, would it matter? Manufacturing capacity also takes a long time to scale up, especially for a small company. I think the majors would catch up just fine. EEStor would also need a runway to build up speed after proving they have the good stuff.

I'm probably a pessimist, but I expect EEStor to eventually roll out something that is very useful, but not mind-blowing. If Weir's claims about the discharge rate are true, I may eat my words (link below).
http://cleantech.com/news/3174/eestors-weir-spe...

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

g.r.r. — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:35:54 -0000

but the euro cars will not work here. Seriously. How many moms buy euro mini-vans? Those that do buy nice BWMs/Merc/ etc, will insist on a car that gets 200 miles+ range. Will not work. Instead, target the mini-van mom. They are hauling children and fairly light cargo around. They are not worried about trailering. They are not worried about how fast it goes. They DO want safety and they want some nice luxuries (GPS, DVD, perhaps electrical heated seats, etc). Heck if the company was smart, they would make the mini-van with GOOD front and back hvac. The trick here is 100+ range combined with the ability to buy more. Personally, I think that an ability to plug in a trailer is the smart thing. Allow a van to haul a trailer with a special plug for power transfer. That way, either a gas generator, hydrogen fuel cell, even a big battery pack will allow for occiaional 300-400 trips (or longer if enough power transfer). The advantage of this, is that it encourages new add-on markets. Imagine if Tesla built this into a van (instead of white star). At the same time, they get Zapp or some other company to add that capability in as well. Finally, get one small company to simply build the trailer and sell it to rental shops. Now, you just rent it for a weekend. The electric car is perfect for hauling a trailer like this.

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

g.r.r. — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:23:32 -0000

First, the web did not start until 1992 (well, actually late 91, but....). And the first "web" server was Cern's, which was simply a modified gopher server, though it never went anywhere. All the good stuff came through NCSA's, which morphed to Apache.

Maxwell and others will no doubt get their price down with volume. But it is MIT's and Stanford's quiet cap tech that will make a HUGE splash in 2 years. It will still be as expensive as lith-ion, but of course, fast charge, nearly unlimited life-time. That means that lith-ion and other battery tech will be quickly heading out the door at that time, regardless of what happens with eestor.

EESTOR is the unknown. IFF they are telling the truth, then even the above cap companies will be finished. In fact, that company would be worth FAR more than Google/IBM/Exxon/MS on their IPO day. Of course, there are tons of EEs that say it is physically impossible, while a number of physicists not only say that it COULD work, but point to several patents where it did work. Problem was, they could not scale.
I have followed these guys for several years now, and I do not know what to think. The guys who started this are VERY above board ppl. But that does not mean that they have not gone over the deep edge. Zenn's hyping of them certainly does not help their cause. ANd yes, they keep moving the release day of all this. For starters, this was suppose to be released this year. Of course, with a new next year release, I am intrigued to hear them working with l-mart. That would be a good closed-mouth place to test their work while they scale up.
If EESTOR is real, god help the big 3 and all major car companies. These guys have already said that they do not want the caps to go to hybrids, but to EVs. That would mean that companies that already producing PURE EV's would have MAJOR ownership of the market for 1-2 years. Nearly all gas/diesel sales would stop upon the proof of such a cap. It shows that major companies do not think.

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

chrism — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:05:27 -0000

Your point is very valid. Actually more of the Euro-style electric cars planned shorter ranges. They'll just need to pass Federal standards for import.

Mayor Newsom just passed an electric vehicle rental bill in San Francisco. Who knows, that might work out too.

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

chrism — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:59:32 -0000

I should be careful how I word things, eh? The internet was essentially a zero, in terms of the sites and content that we have today, a decade ago. Yes, the backbone technologies have been in development longer.

Maxwell Tech and others have super / ultra capacitors on the market, even in electric vehicles. But it's EEStor's magical technology that I was specifically referring to.

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

BT — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:59:07 -0000

Tesla's primary goal was simply to make a performance electric car flagship for the entire electric car industry. It had to be able to compete with a Porsche or Corvette, and Tesla has absolutely delivered.

While the Volt has been advertised extensively in the US, the Mitsubishi iMiev is really going to be the best test of how well the public will adopt EV's. Its absolutely certain iMievs will be on the roads in the next two years.

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

g.r.r. — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:56:24 -0000

Actually, I have to differ with you on this. I believe that the mass market NEEDS a 100 mile range vehicle. The problem is that companies are targetting the wrong group. Build a mini-van with 100+ and target stay at home home. The reason is that these are normally 2'nd cars. Next to zero maintenance. No fueling with gas, just plug it in. A smart company would create this AND hook up with rental for a gas version of the van. Allow ppl to rent for a day at half price say once a month. After that, it moves up to 3/4 price.
Seriously, this is just bad marketing.
In fact, if I were Tesla, Zap, or Daimler, I would be looking long and hard at this.

Finally, love your comments about manners. Far too much angst on the web.

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

chrism — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:53:14 -0000

Thanks Robert; I appreciate the return comment. I wasn't referring to you as rude. I more had the fellow who called me an idiot in mind.

As for Zap, I pointed out that the company has products and sells them. But you're right, I did discount the first Zap comment. I also live close enough to Zap, and as it happens, I've never heard anything good about them from anyone I did know the actual identity of. I also got an unpleasant eyeful of their operating practices when I covered OTCBB stocks, several years back. Wired certainly didn't get that part of their article wrong.

I don't have much critical to say about most other electric car companies. They're just in a bad spot, mostly due to credit problems. There are a few dark horses, like Miles Automotive, which it slipped my mind to mention -- they've impressed me so far, and seem to be on schedule.

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

chrism — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:00:36 -0000

If you could point out where I've been incorrect in my condescending answers to the (rather rude) comments, I would appreciate it.

And for the record, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect an electric-based transportation to begin developing. It will just be a bit more difficult than suddenly switching off the gas and onto batteries.

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

chrism — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:59:37 -0000

If you could point out where I've been incorrect in my condescending answers to the (rather rude) comments, I would appreciate it.

And for the record, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect an electric-based transportation system to begin developing. It will just be a bit more difficult than suddenly switching off the gas and onto batteries.

Re: Electric cars disappointed in 2008 — and 2009 won’t be different

chrism — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:17:24 -0000

You are misinformed.

From the Associated Press in 2007:
"Clifford's company bought rights to EEStor's technology in August 2005 and expects EEStor to start shipping the battery replacement later this year for use in ZENN Motor's short-range, low-speed vehicles."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,295441,00.html

From Business 2.0 in 2008:
""To call it a battery discredits it," says Ian Clifford, the CEO of Toronto-based electric car company Feel Good Cars, which plans to incorporate EEStor's technology in vehicles by 2008."
http://money.cnn.com/2006/09/15/technology/disr...

While you're studying up, I'd also recommend:
http://www.amazon.com/Manners-Are-Magic-Telling...