While the marketing department could have worked harder on branding, the ZAP-X electric
car has features that more than make up for the cheesy name. ZAP, a California electric car company, is expected deliver the ZAP-X with up to 644 horsepower and an all-wheel drive option using one electric motor per wheel. The ZAP-X will have a top speed of 155 miles per hour and a range of 350 miles. However, the real kicker is a 10 minute rapid recharge time with an expected cost of $3.50 for a full
tank of electrons.In addition to all this, they continue to market to EcoGeeks with an onboard computer to provide “Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, high definition video†and the usual ports for your iPod and other gadgets. Lastly, ZAP is using a special glass, which allows the windshield and other windows to provide a small amount of solar energy to the car.
So how do they do it? The ZAP-X is only slightly larger than a Prius and uses an award winning, Lotus designed all-aluminum chassis, making it very lightweight. Also, they are integrating batteries from Altairnano, who have proven their “nanotech-based batteries†in other electric vehicles.
The real key to producing such an amazing vehicle is getting people to pay for it. This is, likely, the first entirely practical electric vehicle, until you factor in the price: $60,000.
ZAP is shooting for a 2008 release, so us EcoGeeks will have some time to save up.
Via: Inside Green Tech and Ecofriend

written by rob, March 22, 2007
Incidentally, I like the name Zap-X, sounds sporty. ;D
written by Janis Mara, March 22, 2007
written by Hank, March 22, 2007
I'm not sure where you got 135...the range of the Zap-X should be more like 350 miles, which is a great number. Of course, it will still be limited by the fact that a lot of places don't have anywhere to fill up. However, it's a step in the right direction, and it'll work great in california, where infrastructure is already in place.
written by Phil, March 22, 2007
But it would have to get down under $30K before I could even start to seriously think about purchasing one. Wouldn't one of the big manufacturers be able to make it for less (economies of scale)? Why don't they approach one of the US companies that doesn't have much to show yet and enter into some sort of partnership? You could imagine Ford or Chrysler possibly being able to make something like this for about $30K.
written by Matt, March 22, 2007
written by tcx, March 22, 2007
£30k is alot of money but the spec is eignificantly better than anything else on the market i think people over here would pay it if a decent dealer and servicing network could be established - like ... said partner up with one of the ig companies - problem solved :-)
i look forward to seeing it on the roads
written by Hank, March 22, 2007
Special outlets will be able to charge the car in under ten minutes, but Americans like to be able to take road trips, something that will be impossible for electric cars until there are electric filling stations across the country.
written by Richard, March 23, 2007
I would buy one tomorrow, if I had the money, but the price is going to keep me out of the market, and I don't see many used ones coming available.
written by Daniel Lunsford, March 24, 2007
I really think that when Americans are truely presented the case that you don't have to own a gas guzzler to drive to the opposite ocean, they will realistically begin to look at electric transportation as the only logical vehicle.
written by Caroll, March 25, 2007
written by Bruce, April 08, 2007
Let’s see how much energy it takes to go 300 miles at 60 mph. It takes approximately 20 HP (11 HP to overcome air resistance and 9 to overcome rolling resistance of the tires on the pavement) to move the Lotus Zap-X down a freeway at 60 MPH. So here’s the power usage for a 300 mile trip:
Time for trip: 5 Hr (60 mph x 5 hr = 300 miles)
Total Horsepower: 20 x 5 = 100 HP-hours
1 Horsepower = 0.746 KW
Trip energy in KW = 100 HP-hr x 0.746 KW/HP = 74.6 KW-hr
Average home electrical power:
15 Amps/power socket (actually circuit breaker)
120 Volts electrical voltage
=> Average power per home outlet = 1.8 KW
Hours to replace 74.6 KW-hr energy for 300 mile trip @ 60 mph:
74.6 KW-hr/1.8 KW = 41.44 hours = 1.73 days
So, despite the implications in the Lotus Zap-X car marketing materials, you can’t expect a 10 minute recharge after a 300 mile trip because your home electric system cannot supply the amount of energy used for the trip faster than 1.73 days after you plug in the car.
How much energy can you get after 10 minutes charging the Zap-X car and how far will that take you?
10 minutes = 1/6 hour
1/6 hr x 1.8 KW = 0.3 KW-hr
74.6/300 = 0.25 KW/mile (assuming 20 HP @ 60 mph)
=> after a 10 minute charge the car would go 1.2 miles (0.3/0.25) at 60 mph.
It takes about 1.2 HP to make the car go 30 mph
1.2 HP * 0.746 KW/HP = 0.895 KW
The 0.3 KW-hr charge will last (0.3 KW-hr / 0.895 KW) 0.335 h
=> At 30 mph the Zap-X will go 30 m/h * 0.335 h = 10 miles
All these distances assume steady state and don’t take into account accelerating to the stated speed, which would take much more power. The horsepower estimates to go at the speeds mentioned apply to a Corvette. Even if the Lotus Zap-X uses 1/2 or even 1/4 as much horsepower to maintain the stated speeds, it still doesn’t make sense for traveling any distance from home because of recharge times.
written by Thomas, April 12, 2007
written by Brett, April 12, 2007
So although their specs are thrown from regular use, I do believe it is possible to obtain the 10 minute charge if a special charging station is used as Thomas described.
I don’t know about everybody else, but my electric company (FPL) charges $0.132 per 1kWh
IF
1kWh = $0.132
and
30mph = 0.746kWh
350Mi @ 30mph = 11.67h
11.67h*0.746kWh=8.705kW
350Mi = 8.705kW
8.705kW * ($0.132*1kWh) = $1.14906
This also assumes that you will only travel at 30mph and as Bruce also said, you don’t consider acceleration and that you’re traveling at a steady state. “Perfect conditions”.
I don’t know about everybody else but a cost of $1.14 for a full charge, even if you only get 200mi out of it, is still a great price @ $0.0057 per mile.
written by free energy now, April 18, 2007
Your comments in compairing the car to cold fusion means that you're assuming that technology can't change the 746w/hp. Is it at all possible that the cars engines are more efficient then your calculations allow for. There are also ways of using capacitors to increase efficiency in heavy load conditions. Technology is changing my friend, and in a lot of situations the nubers just don't add up. My friend has designed a heater which can run indefinitly after a couple of days of being pluged in. He heats his whole house with them, no they don't use cold fusion, just an ingenious design. So just because you can't figure out the math, doesn't mean it's immposible. Peace out
written by kent beuchert, May 07, 2007
written by occ, May 19, 2007
written by Enrique, June 12, 2007
Just imagined if your house was powered by solar energy, then the energy would be free.
For example if a compact car does 30 miles per gallon and it takes 15 gallons to fill, at $2.50 per gallon for gasoline that would be $37.50 to fill the tank.
30 miles per gallon times 15 gallons = 450 miles.
If you drive 120 miles everyday to work back and forth that would be 120 miles per day times 5 days= 600 miles
for 600 miles commute, you will paying $37.50 + $12.50= $50 per week. Let's say you have 4 weeks vacations, then you will work 48 weeks
$50.00 x 48 weeks = $2,400 in your pocket every single year.
written by Uno Car Dealers, June 14, 2007
Visit Us : http://www.unocardealers.com/us/california/
written by wilfred lines, June 20, 2007
Their HiPa motors seems very similar to ZAP motors and they are using Kokamo batteries.
written by kent beuchert, June 23, 2007
at least once, makes their share of misleading statements. One is their penny per mile cost claims.
That would require 4.5-5 cent electricity, which doesn't exist anywhere in this country save overnight rates in a few places. The average cost of electricity in this country is 8.5 cents, or almost twice what they claim, and California day rates are the highest in the nation, at around 15 cents, or almost three times what they claim. As for that ten minute charge - that would only be available at public charging stations - in California they would have to charge 20 to 25 cents per kWhr, or roughly 4 to six times the costs cited by ZAP. Any ZAP claims obviously must be taken with a grain of salt. They claim 350 miles, and $60,000 sticker. But the 350 mile range is only for their high end model, which costs a lot more than $60K.
We all know that a Prius sized vehicle operating
in electric mode would obtain roughly 5 miles per kWhr, requiring a70 kwhr capacity for 350 mile. We also know that Altair batteries weigh around 28 pounds per kWhr. This battery pack would weigh
roughly 2000 pounds. Even in the unlikely event that
the car sans battery pack would weigh 1500 pounds,
that's still a total weight of 3500, a rather portly Prius, and one that cannot obtain 5 miles per kWhr.
It wouldn't be too far different in weight than the Phoenix truck that uses Altairs and gets roughly 3.5 miles per kWhr. We've all heard these false claims before from these electric car makers - Tesla first claimed 250 miles range and (stupidly) specifically guaranteed that it could be acheived regardless of terrain, traffic, A/C usage, etc., a totally nonsensical claim. We know what happened to that claim - it was reduced by 20% by the
Federal testers. Now Tesla is claiming "over 200 miles." Tesla execs also made false claims about the cost of their battery pack and are guilty of misleading customers about future battery costs as well. I'll believe a claim made by any of these mushroom companies only after an independent tester certifies them. I also note that they always want their customers to buy their products sight unseen, in advance, before the first vehicle has been produced.
GM's battery integration companies have both rejected the Altairs as too heavy and not powerful enough (requiring the extra electronics for this vehicle to obtain acceleration). This holds for the Gen II Altairs as well. Altair claims they can get the exorbitant costs down, and that alone is one reason that a car like the ZAP-x is a car "in the future." They simply couldn't build one today. Or
tomorrow. Or the day after. ZAP can make all kinds of wild claims for a car that may or may not ever be built. Extreme skepticism is required for any ZAP claims. They have shown themselves to be capable of very unethical advertising with respect to the ZAP-x. Phoenix has seen the light and is planning a far more practical plug-in version. Even if Altair's dreams come true and they manage to produce their batteries for $500 per kWhr, the 70 kWhr battery pack
required for that 350 mile range would cost $35,000.
(That's not counting the costs of the capacitors, etc). That model is their $75,000 job, whose price is never mentioned, only its superior characteristics.
Buyer beware when it comes to small electric car makers. The have proven to be unreliable in their claims and ALWAYS misleading.
written by David Kyriacou, August 14, 2007
Newton in the UK has BEEN using ELECTRIC TRUCKS for a while now and Brits are used to them. They work.They are fully electric. Electric vehicles are not going away this time. To much momentum.
Sorry Beuchert.
written by Per Olav Gudbrand, September 01, 2007
By the way: I read that the 10 min chargingtime is based on a 400 Volt charger.
written by Randy, September 07, 2007
written by Randy, September 22, 2007
written by Rusted 1, October 16, 2007
written by bobbie, November 26, 2007
written by Bill Bylund, January 12, 2008
~bill
written by Adam L, January 22, 2008
written by Lu Vencl, March 10, 2008
So if I have a 60 amp 220 recptical, I calculate 13.2 KW of power available to charge the battery.
But at the claim of "10 minutes" is that in fact a full charge?
Thanks for the reply.
Lu
written by VirtualGathis, May 27, 2008
There is no complex gas engine to maintain. That Means no oil changes, no spark plugs, no oil and breather filters, ect...
There is no complex drive train, that means no transmission maintenance, no failed transaxles, ect...
There are no friction brakes. No more $200 brake r
repairs.
It does not use gasoline. The standard crossover gets about 20mpg. At todays $4/gallon that means $20K in fuel to drive 100K miles. The best I can calculate is that will be $2k in electricity for those same 100K miles.
Finally a well made electric motor lasts a very long time, and the nanosafe batteries have a 5000 recharge cycle life so can last 20 years.
So while this vehicle comes with a very high initial price it comes with a very low cost of ownership and it could easily outlast any ICE based vehicle. Also these are all very new technologies. As we have seen the early adoption price is higher as the mass production benefit has not come into play so the price would be noticeably lower in a couple of years.
written by VirtualGathis, May 27, 2008
The A123 systems site talks about using a second battery pack to recharge in 10 minutes to full charge. At 240V a ten minute charge would pull 875 amps so they use the second battery to trickle charge and then dump that to your vehicle.
The charging fuel stations would have a shed full of these battery packs and trickle charge them at night during off peak hours.
written by VirtualGathis, May 27, 2008
written by Sergio, June 14, 2008
written by James, June 23, 2008
This concept vehicle designed by Lotus would run at least $60K with a normal gasoline engine. Adding 70 kWh of lithium-ion batteries and extremely expensive in-wheel motors and all the assorted controllers and battery management systems put it WAY past $60K.
Not a day goes by without a new tech breakthrough or the next great electric car. Most of these announcements are just that -- they never materialize. I do believe the major car manufacturers will have plug-in hybrids and full electric cars in the next 2-5 years. We'll be lucky to see a compact 4-seater with a 90 mph top speed and 100 mile range at mainstream prices.
As for the rest, it's an enormous and expensive challenge to develop a new vehicle with leading-edge technologies. I predict we will never see the ZAP-X and certainly not at the stated price.
written by Uncle B, October 03, 2008
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Recent Comment
Share
http://www.sgoals.net/
Thanks,
Greg Clark