1986 V W West Falia on 2040-cars

Auto blog

VW decides against active-cooling system for e-Golf lithium battery

When the 2015 VW e-Golf was introduced at the LA Auto Show last year, VW said it would come with a water-cooled battery. During the Detroit Auto Show, when the car was trotted out again, VW released a new press release that stripped out the "water-cooled" language, but this change went unnoticed. During a recent VW event in Germany, a friend from Green Car Reports realized that the battery on display did not seem to have any water-cooling mechanisms. That set us off on a bit of a sleuthing and we have now learned that VW is not going to include any active cooling in the upcoming e-Golf. In fact, the company is entirely confident that this car - because of what it's designed to do - doesn't need it. "The need for a cooling system wasn't there" - VW's Darryll Harrison VW has been working on an electrified Golf for ages now, and so changes to the plan are to be expected. But battery cooling is vitally important not just to keep the car operating properly but because when things get too hot, there can be serious public relations problems. Nissan began testing a new battery chemistry for the Leaf in 2013 after an uproar from warm-weather EV drivers in Arizona who were experiencing worse-than-expected battery performance. The Leaf has always used an air-cooled battery, which is another way to say that there is no active cooling system (more details here). Tesla CEO Elon Musk once said this approach is "primitive." So, why is VW following the same path? We asked Darryll Harrison, VW US's manager of brand public relations west, for more information, and he told AutoblogGreen that VW engineers discovered through a lot of testing of the Golf Mk6 EV prototypes, that battery performance was not impacted by temperatures when using the right battery chemistry. That chemistry, it turns out, is lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide (NMC) in cells from Panasonic. These cells had "the lowest self-warming tendency and the lowest memory effect of all cells tested," Harrison said. He added that VW engineers tested the NMC cells in places like Death Valley and Arizona and found they didn't warm very quickly either through operation, charging (including during fast charging) or through high ambient temps. "The need for a cooling system wasn't there," Harrison said.

Top 10 small cars with the longest total driving range

Editor's Note: Since this article was originally posted in the spring of 2015, much has changed in the automotive landscape, especially among those shopping for small car economy. With thanks to Volkswagen for their blatant cheating – and subsequent cover-up – on diesel emissions, the largest player in the diesel passenger car segment isn't playing – they're paying; billions are going for both car buybacks and federally-imposed penalties. And for a few VW execs there exists the very real possibility of jail. With the absence of a big player and the abrupt entrance – via Chevy's new Bolt – of an affordable EV with 200+ miles of range, we've limited the diesel listings to Jaguar's new XE. And for those wanting an updated look at efficiency and range, Autoblog has it – or the EPA has it. Long before electric vehicles were part of the mainstream conversation, car lovers and skinflints alike would boast about the total range of their vehicles. There's something about getting farther down the road on one tank of gas that inflames the competitive spirit, almost as much as horsepower output or top speed. Of course, the vehicles with the very best range on today's market are almost all big trucks and SUVs; virtually all have the ability to carry massive reserves of fuel. Top up a standard Chevy Suburban and you can expect to travel almost 700 miles (you'll need to stop before the Suburban stops...), while a diesel-fed Jeep Grand Cherokee manages almost as many. But what about vehicles that are smaller? The EPA has, essentially, three classifications for 'small' vehicles: Minicompact, Subcompact and Compact. All three are measured based on interior volume, meaning that some cars with rather large exterior dimensions and engines slot in next to traditional small cars. But even though impressive GT coupes from Porsche, Bentley and Mercedes-Benz may have much larger gas tanks to feed their powerful engines, that capacity is offset by higher rates of consumption... in most cases. We used the EPA's Fuel Economy Guide for model year 2017 cars as a start, calculating the official highway miles per gallon rating with each vehicle's tank capacity. The resulting numbers aren't necessarily real world, but they do offer a spectrum for total theoretical range. The eventual top ten surprised me on a few occasions, and comprised quite a varied list of vehicles. 10.

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study