Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Hyundai Plans A 250 Mile EV for 2020

      Hyundai throws its hat into 200-plus electric vehicle ring

    Late this year will see the launch of two new EVs, the Chevrolet Bolt and Hyundai Ioniq EV. The Bolt is the big story as it will offer a 200 mile range. The Ioniq EV will only have an 110 mile range. But that doesn't mean Hyundai isn't thinking about doing an electric vehicle with more range.

     

    Byung K. Ahn, director of Hyundai’s Eco-Vehicle Performance Development group says the Korean automaker is planning to launch a 200 mile EV in 2018, and then a 250 mile EV two years later. It would be easy to think that Hyundai will just improve the Ioniq EV to reach these ranges, but Ahn said it wouldn't the Ioniq. For a vehicle to have a range of 200 miles or more, it requires a vehicle with a larger footprint. Despite the improvements in improvements in overall energy density and software mapping, sometimes the best solution is to throw more batteries at it.

     

    Keep this in mind, the Chevrolet Bolt's wheelbase 3.9 inches shorter than the Ioniq (102.4 vs. 106.3 inches), while being able to provide a range of 200 miles. We're wondering if the design of the Ioniq's platform to allow three different powertrains - hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and electric - effects the overall packaging to fit more batteries.

     

    Ahn said Hyundai is “looking at different possibilities” for their long-range EVs. This means it could be based on a current or new model.

     

    Source: Car and Driver
    Pic Credit: Newspress USA

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Chevy Bolt makes another review their EV strategy just like Ford did after their joke of a 100 mile ev update to the focus, then they changed the following week to we are going to do a 200 mile ev also.

     

    BOLT caught the world by surprise and forced Tesla's hand. The BOLT should really change the auto industry I think.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Chevy Bolt makes another review their EV strategy just like Ford did after their joke of a 100 mile ev update to the focus, then they changed the following week to we are going to do a 200 mile ev also.

     

    BOLT caught the world by surprise and forced Tesla's hand. The BOLT should really change the auto industry I think.

     

     

    Would have to agree with that....

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    In five or six years there should be a lot of choice in the 200+ mile range, different body styles and budgets etc, looking forward to it.  The Bolt is a good start for sure, just not to my taste based on the photos.
     

     

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The segment is still too young. People want choices. And not everyone will automatically consider the Bolt.

     

    The only electric vehicle company that is automatically considered is Tesla. Whether that leads to purchase or delivery is another matter of its own.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • It's amazing how a leather wrapped steering wheel changes the experience at the wheel for the better (it seems to make for an almost different car from the model with a urethane steering wheel).
    • Another thing to think on is the evidence bullet proof? Sadly, the same type of people who have said an eye for an eye, death penalty if you took a life have convicted others with hate in their heart only to have science prove the convicted innocent.  In this regards I wish all guns had palm / finger tip readers to confirm who last fired the gun. While others might say the death penalty is cruel, how is it when the person if proved beyond a reasonable doubt took a life? What about serial killers who are sitting for life, a burden on society in jail because folks feel there should be no death penalty and yet they took multiple lives themselves. Would it not be better for society if that person was no longer around, a burden on the tax payers? Many good questions to be asked. Lets take this a step further, auto makers who due to a focus on profits take shortcuts on safety of an auto, who should be held accountable for the deaths related to their products and how do you hold them accountable? An example of profit before safety, FORD PINTO Details of the Pinto's flawed fuel system: Location and construction: The sheet-metal gas tank was placed behind the rear axle, a design common at the time, but the Pinto's tank was made with exceptionally thin walls. It was held in place by two metal straps. Vulnerable parts: During rear-end impacts, bolts protruding from the differential housing could puncture the thin-walled tank. Additionally, the fuel-filler neck could tear away from the tank itself. Internal cost analysis: Internal Ford documents revealed that engineers were aware of the risks in pre-production crash tests and considered inexpensive fixes, including adding a rubber bladder to the tank. Alternative designs rejected: Engineers considered safer alternative designs, such as placing the tank above the axle (a design used on the Ford Capri), but this was rejected due to cost and styling constraints. Final design choice: Executives opted not to make these changes after a cost-benefit analysis concluded it would be cheaper to pay out potential lawsuits and settlements than to implement the repairs.  So who do you hold accountable for the deaths?
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search