\"From the outside, the only thing distinguishing the AMP from gas Grand Cherokees is the \"100 % Electric\" badging on the former.\"
So we won\'t be able to tell the difference between a gas powered and electric powered Cherokee when we pass one at the side of the road in the middle of the desert?
80-100 miles range? That\'s practically a death sentence where I live.
5th January, 2012 @ 9:26 a.m. (California Time)
Because jeep are well known for their reliable electrics.
5th January, 2012 @ 11:38 a.m. (California Time)
Great, putting a drivetrain which uses a very inefficient and horrible method of storing energy into an overweight, innefficient design and horrible aerodynamics derived from its fuel guzzling predecessor.
Wow these designers and engineers are really smart.
Also 100 mile a charge doesn\'t mean a thing. It could have been moving at 15mph on a level road to get that kind of range.
5th January, 2012 @ 5:02 p.m. (California Time)
152kW from 37.4kWh equals under 15minutes of runtime at full power - don\'t drive up any hills...
5th January, 2012 @ 5:59 p.m. (California Time)
I wish I had the money to be impractical.
5th January, 2012 @ 6:15 p.m. (California Time)
It seems like I hear about a new electric vehicle being produced every week, exciting times.
It's only a matter of time before the internal combustion engine falls. It's still top dog today, but who knows a few years from now.
2012 is going to be a BIG year for electric vehicles.
5th January, 2012 @ 9:57 p.m. (California Time)
Sure electric motors are efficient, but that doesn\'t ultimately make the purpose built vehicle efficient.
Batteries are very inefficient way of storing energy, and charging them takes a long time. Unless there is a quantum leap in battery technology or international standard for battery interface so battery swapping infrastructures can be built, I don\'t see them catching up even until for a few more years.
Also the tree and polar bear huggers should also note that electrical motor and battery technologies are far from being \'green\'.
You still need petroleum to manufacture them, transport them and maintain them. The manufacturing methods are as destructive and poluting to the planet Earth as ICE tech, and the raw materials STILL need to be mined and none of them are currently renewable.
EVs are not the ultimate answer to sustainable living on this rock, far from it.
6th January, 2012 @ 2:20 a.m. (California Time)
SpaceBagels : no copper recycling ? the batteries are losing zero weight during their whole lifetime - they are completely recycleable .
you can refill a battery driven car with wind power , nuclear , geothermal , diesel etc - depends on the local power grid .
I wonder how log would it take to make a good electric car without the will to make one not perfect . the chinese have fifteen years of experience in the field . europe has a few fancy concepts and that\'s all . who will make the electric cars of the future ?
6th January, 2012 @ 7:25 a.m. (California Time)
Another clunker that won\'t sell. Poor (lazy) design and a 80 mile range. That is a death sentence in the CA desert. 50 to 100k price tag? For this piece of junk? It\'s not a jeep if you can\'t go off road. Maybe Gizmag should qualify the gizmo before allowing this kind of crap to hit my email.
Maybe Gizmag should slam and make a joke of this kind of stupidity...at least they could provide a laugh.
6th January, 2012 @ 8:32 a.m. (California Time)
People, people, people. They, Jeep, doesn\'t expect to sell any of these (if any so sell, they\'ll be as surprised as anyone). All these new electrics are being trotted out for one reason and one reason only: So the auto industry can easily and cheaply meet the new CAFE standards being imposed upon them. An electric lowers the overall fleet average MPG considerably, more than any other thing that could be done for the money. Fact is, without the electrics, it would be impossible for them to meet those standards...or at least without spending themselves into bankruptcy while producing cars no one would ever buy.
6th January, 2012 @ 9:43 a.m. (California Time)
@christopher, when was the last time you slammed your gas pedal to the floor for 15 minutes straight? Full power is mainly needed when accelerating. Cruising at a constant speed requires very little power depending on the weight of the vehicle and the terrain. This is why many new cars have active cylinder shutdown for highway driving.
Here\'s a tidbit for you \"desert drivers\":
US Population in rural areas: 59,274,456
US Population in urban areas: 225,956,060
Source: US DOT: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/census_issues/metropolitan_planning/cps2k.cfm
I don\'t think rural dwellers is the target market for this vehicle. You\'re better off buying an ICE until the technology gets better. 80 miles of range in the city per day is more than enough for the average city dweller.
Cost per mile of this vehicle after being plugged in at night will be significantly lower than than the base Jeep GC V6. I\'ll take 6 cents per pollution-free mile over 19 cents per mile (18 MPG city at $3.37 gallon of fuel, not including the maintenance costs of an ICE) with instant torque any day. My concern is and always will be the up front cost of the vehicle due to the high cost of the batteries. The annual savings would be roughly $3000 in fuel at 25,000 miles per year. This vehicle would need 10 years to break even and even longer when driven fewer miles.
@Neil This is not Jeep\'s concept; it\'s a 3rd party EV conversion company called AMP so I don\'t think your CAFE theory applies. This concept obviously sparks interest (read: demand) otherwise none of us would have read the article.
6th January, 2012 @ 11:53 a.m. (California Time)
Will Jeep offer this conversion through their dealers? Even if not, it\'s not a theory that this is the #1 reason all the makers are suddenly coming out with EVs. To be viewed as PC and environmentally friendly is #2 in order to get some of the green action. They still lobby to get those standards relaxed. As to the sales end, I know a few people who own Jeep Grand Cherokees. I don\'t have to ask them to know they drive their Jeeps a LOT and to remote areas on frequent outings. Local shopping trips is their secondary use of the vehicle. Wouldn\'t find any of them buying this Jeep whether it\'s a conversion or not. As to AMP offering the Jeep for sale, I didn\'t read anything in the article that suggests the Jeep is only a demo platform for their conversion service. That may be because they\'re exclusively contracted with Jeep for this particular design, but it appears that Jeep is still the primary and AMP would be doing all Jeep\'s conversions. So in my \"theory\" whether the EV aspect is done by Jeep in house or farmed out, it\'s still Jeep.
6th January, 2012 @ 1:22 p.m. (California Time)
In the end, I think it\'s pointless to care about the why these EVs are coming to market because it is a means to an end as the next evolution of the automobile but that\'s just me. If it\'s CAFE, why are auto manufacturers outside the US also making EV\'s for non-US markets? I think the major automakers see that demand has been building and, with time, the technology will catch up to the point where eventually, the EV will outperform the ICV in efficiency, performance, range, and \"refueling\".
Your point about your Jeep friends is acknowledged. Your Jeep friends are not the target market. They are free to purchase the IC Jeep at a relative bargain now. I know just as many Jeep GC owners whose tires haven\'t gone over the GW bridge. This version of the vehicle is meant as a daily driver/commuter vehicle that doesn\'t feel like a sardine can on wheels and with available AWD makes for a good one at that for cites located in the snow belt.
The article does not point to AMP building these exclusively or not but it does include a link to AMP\'s website which has a \"fleet\" of conversions that they do which includes the ML (http://ampelectricvehicles.com/our-vehicles/amp-jeep) so I don\'t think exclusivity is in their plan at the moment.
Bottom line: just because it doesn\'t work for you doesn\'t make it a bad idea.
6th January, 2012 @ 3:58 p.m. (California Time)
You\'re not getting what I said. Renewable materials are not the same as recyclable materials.
Sure you can recycle some materials but that doesn\'t make them self replenishing. The Earth\'s population is increasing rapidly and with it the demand for raw materials. We will run out of these material eventually since nothing is stopping man in his excessive desire to acquire or possess more and more.
6th January, 2012 @ 4:34 p.m. (California Time)
I am not going to pay 50K+ for this piece of crap. Bottom line. And the car companies know that. Until we start seeing EV from foreign countries that get great mileage and don\'t cost an arm and leg, the US company will keep putting out this POS.
6th January, 2012 @ 4:36 p.m. (California Time)
Chaps, I have given up. Aptera folds, the true range of the Leaf turns out to be closer to 70 miles and now this. Companies like Apple are sitting on piles of cash but nobody seems interested in an affordable EV.
Every week there\'s a new \'prototype\' car, a new miracle battery, some fabulous way to make solar panels out of moss or sticky-backed-plastic, but nothing comes to market.
Go back a few years in the Gizmag articles and look at all of the futuristic stuff that has never seen the light of day. It\'s truly depressing, it really is.
6th January, 2012 @ 7:16 p.m. (California Time)