Trailer range extender

[fooljoe]

This is awesome! Obviously this isn't a ready-for-retail product, but it's an incredibly resourceful and ingenious solution to the EV roadtrip problem. In an ideal world, I imagine something like this but enclosed in an aerodynamic package with some storage space, or maybe even as a full camper trailer! Many people roadtrip with camper or storage trailers for all the extra junk you're bringing anyway, so why not one with an engine for those of us with EVs?

 

[4EVEREV]

This is awesome! Obviously this isn't a ready-for-retail product, but it's an incredibly resourceful and ingenious solution to the EV roadtrip problem. In an ideal world, I imagine something like this but enclosed in an aerodynamic package with some storage space, or maybe even as a full camper trailer! Many people roadtrip with camper or storage trailers for all the extra junk you're bringing anyway, so why not one with an engine for those of us with EVs?

It's not ingenious, no it has been done before. In an ideal world this would cost $20K plus. This would never be a marketable solution because if it were made to pass emissions it would be too costly and no company could offer it at price anyone would pay due to the liability costs alone.

 

[fromport]

It's not ingenious,

imho it is, try and make something functional like this with the least amount of components.
This is it.
It's crude, and all the other things that were mentioned already.
but it works, he drove with it from Utah to Calif

no it has been done before. In an ideal world this would cost $20K plus. This would never be a marketable solution because if it were made to pass emissions it would be too costly and no company could offer it at price anyone would pay due to the liability costs alone.

I don't think anyone mentioned this as a commercial opportunity, I certainly didn't
I love the simplicity of the concept, not the way it has been implemented.
He gets all my respect for that.
Funny that people either love it or hate it in this thread.

 

[miimura]

I love the simplicity of the concept, not the way it has been implemented.
He gets all my respect for that.
Funny that people either love it or hate it in this thread.

He would get a lot more respect from me if it had at least 1990's emissions controls.

 

[fooljoe]

It's not ingenious, not it has been done before

I didn't say "original." The ingenuity I'm referring to is the resourcefulness of making a rustbucket like this work, and in particular the clever use of the wiring for lights as an on/off control.

real world this would cost $20K plus. This would never be a marketable solution because if it were made to pass emissions it would be too costly and no company could offer it at price anyone would pay due to the liability costs alone.

$20k plus is not at all unreasonable. People spend plenty more than that on camper trailers. However, IMO it would make more sense with a rental concept. Sure, the liability could be a problem, but with more work on the controls that seems solvable. Of course you're probably right that we're not going to see this marketed anytime soon, simply because the demand's not there yet. To me that's just all the more reason to applaud someone with the gumption to make it work himself.

I really don't understand the hate for concepts like this. The end goal is more electric miles driven, and that's what this achieves. If you're going to go 500 miles away for a week or more, you could rent a gasser and burn gas to get there AND the whole time you're there, or you could use something like this to burn gas to get there but drive on electricity for the duration of your stay. Seems a win to me.

 

[4EVEREV]

It's not ingenious,

imho it is, try and make something functional like this with the least amount of components.
This is it.
It's crude, and all the other things that were mentioned already.
but it works, he drove with it from Utah to Calif

no it has been done before. In an ideal world this would cost $20K plus. This would never be a marketable solution because if it were made to pass emissions it would be too costly and no company could offer it at price anyone would pay due to the liability costs alone.

I don't think anyone mentioned this as a commercial opportunity, I certainly didn't
I love the simplicity of the concept, not the way it has been implemented.
He gets all my respect for that.
Funny that people either love it or hate it in this thread.

It's a copy, people have made these years ago for conversion EVs, it's not a new idea or implementation. In fact safer more advanced models have been done. Because something works it does not make it safe nor does it justify its use on a pubic highway because it "got the job done". This is not mildly unsafe when you look at all that could go wrong. Why does someone get respect for a crude copy of something that puts others at risk? It's great if he wants to push his car around without endangering others. I really doubt that it is licensed for use on a public highway and I don't mean swapping a legit trailer plate after the mods or doing the mods after getting a plate, which by the way does not seem present at all.

 

[fromport]

I really doubt that it is licensed for use on a public highway and I don't mean swapping a legit trailer plate after the mods or doing the mods after getting a plate, which by the way does not seem present at all.

He normally drives it in Utah, where trailers below 500 lbs don't need a license plate.
He has a document that describes that.
Afaik he is transitioning his rav4 to utah plates.

I posted it to be inspirational.

 

[michael]

I really doubt that it is licensed for use on a public highway and I don't mean swapping a legit trailer plate after the mods or doing the mods after getting a plate, which by the way does not seem present at all.

He normally drives it in Utah, where trailers below 500 lbs don't need a license plate.
He has a document that describes that.
Afaik he is transitioning his rav4 to utah plates.

I posted it to be inspirational.

Actually it's better than that...below 750 lbs doesn't need registration.


Every trailer operated in Utah, including travel and tent trailers, weighing more than 750 lbs, must be titled and registered. Each trailer owner must pay a registration fee at the time of initial registration and annually thereafter. Uniform fees also apply.
Requirements for Titling:

Title
Form TC-656, Utah Title Application
Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) inspections, if being titled in Utah for the first time. See Form TC-661, Certificate of Inspection. (New trailers sold by a Utah dealer are exempt)

Requirements for Registration:

Payment of age-based uniform fee
Payment of registration fees

Exemptions to Registration:

Owned and operated by non-residents of Utah
Owned and operated by the United States government
Weighs less than 750 lbs


As far as the emissions issue, in Utah there is a classification of "specially constructed vehicles" that specificially includes "home made trailers". Specially constructed vehicles with engines made before 1967 are exempted from any emissions testing.

Even here in California, vehicles older than 1975 are exempted from emissions testing.

So let's give the guy a break for coming up with something none of the rest of us has. While the rest of us are waiting for the state to build an "electric highway" he has provided his own.

 

[4EVEREV]

I believe the definition of trailer does not include a motor that pushes a vehicle in an unsafe manner.

 

[fromport]

Actually it's better than that...below 750 lbs doesn't need registration.

thanks for clearing that up!

Even here in California, vehicles older than 1975 are exempted from emissions testing.

I am trying to get a car over I have in europe from 1992, but it won't pass california emission.
Lotus Omega, but I will find a way ;-)

So let's give the guy a break for coming up with something none of the rest of us has. While the rest of us are waiting for the state to build an "electric highway" he has provided his own.

Exactly!

 

[fromport]

I believe the definition of trailer does not include a motor that pushes a vehicle in an unsafe manner.

He had to go through the sheriff office, and the trailer with the motor was permitted/allowed.

 

[4EVEREV]

I believe the definition of trailer does not include a motor that pushes a vehicle in an unsafe manner.

He had to go through the sheriff office, and the trailer with the motor was permitted/allowed.

I find it hard to believe they knew how it was actually being used, if they did I'm glad I don't live in that state. So you know this as a fact that that Sheriff know the motor was pushing the car and the throttle was fixed on? Or was this approved a s motor on a trailer. Sounds like lots of stories or loopholes to me.

 

[fromport]

I find it hard to believe they knew how it was actually being used, if they did I'm glad I don't live in that state. So you know this as a fact that that Sheriff know the motor was pushing the car and the throttle was fixed on? Or was this approved a s motor on a trailer. Sounds like lots of stories or loopholes to me.

Are you always this grumpy ?
Jeez...

 

[dstjohn99]

Haters gotta hate. It's a good thing forums like this weren't around when Edison was inventing a working light bulb. I'm sure his 1000 failed attempts all seemed stupid, dangerous, etc. but thank god he didn't let others crush his creativity, desire and drive or we would all be living in the dark smoke of oil burning lamps and cars.

Keep bringing the crazy, original, dangerous and bizzare as these lead to the life changing discoveries of tomorrow - not that this trailer thing falls into that category, but ideas should always be explored and cultivated. I have learned much from the folly of others, and for that I am grateful.

 

[eschatfische]

Keep bringing the crazy, original, dangerous and bizzare as these lead to the life changing discoveries of tomorrow

People keep bumping this thread and putting this thing in the list of new posts.

Pushing a cart on four wheels with an internal combustion engine from behind isn't crazy, original or bizarre. That range extender certainly does look dangerous, though, and more than that, the pollutants it spews and the gas that it drinks make it anathema to electric vehicle enthusiasts. I seriously doubt that thing's any greener than renting a hybrid or even just putting the RAV on a flatbed.

Now, I'm not against some garage engineering. This sort of thing would be a crazy, original, dangerous, bizarre - and awesome - hack. Battery or CNG or fuel cell trailers to push or charge? Awesome. A propane-powered jet engine trailer, like earlier in this thread? That's not what I would do, but that's certainly impressive. That thing, though? It's just gross.

Most of us are RAV4 EV drivers because we dreamt of having a fast, safe and efficient clean-energy vehicle. That trailer's not fast, not safe, is of questionable efficiency and is certainly not clean. We're not hating because we're jealous, we're hating because we bought EVs with the specific goal of getting away from that sort of thing.

So, I beg of you. Let's keep things clean and move on.

 

[4EVEREV]

Haters gotta hate. It's a good thing forums like this weren't around when Edison was inventing a working light bulb. I'm sure his 1000 failed attempts all seemed stupid, dangerous, etc. but thank god he didn't let others crush his creativity, desire and drive or we would all be living in the dark smoke of oil burning lamps and cars.

Keep bringing the crazy, original, dangerous and bizzare as these lead to the life changing discoveries of tomorrow - not that this trailer thing falls into that category, but ideas should always be explored and cultivated. I have learned much from the folly of others, and for that I am grateful.

I welcome innovation I just find it funny how some defend things that are very unsafe and justify the use in public or think this is really innovative or brilliant. Folks this is a primitive and unsafe design, there are people that have done this the same way before and have done it much safer and better! Push trailers are not new they are just dated and forgotten, except to some reinventing the wheel or just getting off AOL There is actually a EV community that goes way back with a rich history of innovation, in fact much of it was done on discussion lists not forums, this was the birthplace of quite a bit of innovation you see today and they have actually progressed and learned from that experience. Forums are great, even better when they have updated information beyond the last 10 plus years. Let's keep bumping this thread and go back in time for those that like nostalgia. I'm sure Musk has his eve on this one and all the people trying to market muscle car conversions with DC drives. :lol:

 

[michael]

What EXACTLY do you think is so dangerous about it?

First of all, I've seen this thing and it has two independent ignition kill switches that are triggered by the brake lights. So in normal operation, it actually provides a little bit of braking. It also has a driver-controlled kill switch.

The gas cans are secured with chains, not bungees. What you see in the photo is a plastic sleeve over the chain.

In the unlikely case that both the brake-operated kill switches failed and the thing was still running at full throttle during a hard stop, the maximum propulsive force that it would deliver is significantly less than that provided by a normal, unbraked trailer.

A 2012 regular RAV has a rated unbraked towing capacity of 1500 pounds. In a 0.66 G stop, it will put 1000 pounds of propulsive force on the hitch.

This pusher trailer weighs under 750 pounds, so in the same stop 500 pounds of propulsive force. If you compute the propulsive force of a 50 hp engine (35 hp to the wheels) it is something like 250 pounds with the throttle stuck wide open. A combined total of about 750 pounds, well under what Toyota accepts from an ordinary trailer.

So this thing causes LESS disruption to the vehicle than a normal 1500 pound unbraked trailer.

Towing anything introduces some risk. That's why California imposes a slightly lower speed limit for anything towing anything. Towing a RAV4...that's the more dangerous option...that's a 4000 pound unbraked load. Needs a huge truck to do safely, lots of gasoline burned.

What am I missing? What is the extreme hazard you perceive? Looks pretty benign to me.

 

[yblaser]

Needs a huge truck to do safely, lots of gasoline burned.

I know this wasn't the main point of you post, but that engine is emitting at least two orders of magnitude more criteria pollutants or pollutant precursors per mile than a modern car or truck.

 

[michael]

Right, it would have been even better to use a modern engine, nobody can argue that...cleaner is better. But its use is in isolated areas where charging is unavailable; once it arrives where electricity is available, it's unused. And its carbon footprint is probably half that of a 12 MPG truck.

But you're right, my point was to question the assertion that it was unsafe.

 

[DevinL]

Having done the trip to Utah from SoCal and back I know that even CHAdeMO won't help you. There is one CHAdeMO on that route, in Las Vegas, which is unreliable according to PlugShare. I'm suspect of this pusher-trailer idea for all the reasons mentioned before (safety, emissions, rent/buy the right car, etc), but I must admit that I am incredibly fascinated by it.

Does anyone know how many times the person had to stop to charge driving from Utah with this system - or if they stopped at all? They definitely would've needed to top up on gas since those "tanks" are tiny. I wonder what the ambient temperature and their use of climate control was?