Varley’s stock in trade is making industrial level electric tugs… and now electric sports cars. You know — for when you want to tow that plane really fast.
Unveiled at the 3rd annual Australian Electric Vehicle Conference, the Varley evR450 has a top speed of 200kph, will do 0-100 in 3.8s and has a current range of only 150km on a single charge, although the company’s said to be looking at offering a 300km battery version as well. It won’t be formally launched until January, at which point it’s expected to cost under $200,000. [Autobloggreen via EFTM]
5432
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 3:44 PMWow, 3.8 seconds for 0-100 is really fast for an electric car (between the Porche 911 turbo and GT3). As for top speed, it’s not like you can legally drive above 110 (120?) on public roads anyway.
5432
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 3:45 PMStill ugly though.
Greg
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 3:46 PMYou should book yourself in for an eye exam. I think you may be legally blind.
5432
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 3:53 PMNah, -2.0 and -1.0 respectively. Also have 6/5 corrected vision. Chances are I have better vision than you.
illogical
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 4:10 PMin that case get your taste checked.
Jamie
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 5:10 PMSo you’re just admitting you’re a tastless moron then? That thing is beautiful!
Ozoneocean
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 5:55 PMIt’s not bad!
But suffers from a crappy back end like 60% of sports models. The rear is a perennial blind-spot for sports car designers. Most just simply give up and square it off, as in this case. Even Ferrari has suffered its fare share of that syndrome though, so this beast is in good company even so.
Greg
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 3:44 PMLooks a damn sight better then any Prius I’ve ever seen!!
Now, if you will excuse me, I’m off to sell my kidneys on the black market.
JonBOY
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 3:47 PMIt’s got me beat as to why these companies like Tesla are producing high end sports cars costing >$200,000 when the small – medium 100% electric car market is ripe for the picking.
I’d love to own a 100% electric car, in fact it’s probably the only time I’d even consider buying a car brand new, but as it stands the only 100% electric cars available in Australia that are not sports cars are ugly-ass designs that are never going to tempt someone with an ounce of taste.
The cars that would be of real interest would be a 100% electric Holden Cruze, or Honda Accord Euro, or Mitsubishi Lancer, etc. Not a bloody sports car that’s out of 99% of the populations price range, and not a bloody match-box sized car built built for 2.3 japanese people.
Sam
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 4:06 PMThe problem is that electric cars cannot offer competitive pricing against internal combustion powered cars. Electric cars are still dependant on expensive, heavy, cumbersome batteries. The worst part of battery powered cars us is the longer the range offered, more batteries are required, which adds additional weight to the car, and in turn requires more power to move it.
Nicholas
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 4:04 PMJust in time for new Top Gear eh? ;)
Sam
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 4:07 PMHeh, considering Clarkson’s general contempt of electric cars, I don’t like its chances.
Titsnass
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 4:16 PMWe really need to get a hydrogen plant going, Fuel cells are the way to go! No need for cumbersome batteries, and for those of us driving petrol engines, they can be converted to run on hydrogen similar to natural gas. Hell if I could figure out a way to do it I’d crack water at home and use a fuel cell there too.
Graeme
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 4:36 PMHydrogen is great at point of use, but it’s not an energy source, just an energy transferral medium (not unlike batteries). You still have to generate the energy to produce the hydrogen, but that *can* also be done cleanly if we could get our head round the fact that coal ain’t clean and there’s a lot of energy beating down on Australia every second (most of which seems to go into turning us UK expats bright red).
Titsnass
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 5:02 PMnot an energy source, just an energy transferral medium
hence fuel cell, but yes, solar cracking is the way, in fact they are on the path to doing it using a similar method that leaves use to separate oxygen from carbon and it looks like good science too, hopefully they will find a backer with some balls.
deadnotsleeping
Monday, November 7, 2011 at 11:44 AMProblem with hydrogen is energy density and the pressure vessels required for storage can be heavy/complicated. You can relatively easily make/buy a hydrogen synthesizer for your self (converts water to hydrogen and oxygen).
http://www.instructables.com/id/Separate-Hydrogen-and-Oxygen-from-Water-Through-El/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_storage#Compressed_hydrogen
Aliasalpha
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 12:19 AMSo what you’re saying is that we need to melt down sunburned english people to fuel our environmentally friendly cars? Gotcha.
harry
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 6:12 PMSurely there would be a market for all-electric light-commercials? They’re not expected to be supercars in looks or speed, so the 300km battery wouldn’t be a problem. i’m guessing price would be the killer.
russell arthur
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 8:20 PMhas any body thought about the amount of power it will take to charge all these batterys for all these cars thats pollution isnt it?
Brad
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 8:54 PMMain problem with hydrogen is that the molecule is so small it likes to very rapidly leak out of every seal, joint and fissure. Furthermore you use a stupid amount of energy just making it. Oh, and did you know that presently our main source of hydrogen is from stripping the carbon out of natural gas? Electrolysis is great in theory, but in practise it is extremely energy inefficient which is why we make it from methane…
John
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 10:00 PMDon’t you love it how they say 0-100 in 3.8s and a range of 150km. If you used all the available performance the range wouldn’t be more than 30km, that 150km range would only be achieved when driven at a very steady, sedate pace which sort of defeats the purpose of buying a car like this. Battery technology has to improve 10 fold before it is a truly viable option, and then only if the power to charge it comes from green sources.
Mick
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 10:54 PM150km sounds fine to me. I only need 50km to get to work and back, and I would be happy to have a second petrol powered car on club rego for weekend trips.
Cynic
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 7:03 AMThe Varley Supercar was NOT unveiled at the conference – they pulled it.
Why did they do that?
Simple – it doesn’t exist yet. Varley have imported a SuperLite KIT from the US (how does THAT make it an Australian supercar?) and it doesn’t even have any drive train, batteries of components installed…..
THIS IS EV VAPOURWARE AT ITS BEST.
Arcspeed
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 7:05 AMWhat Varley are doing is admirable – but I understand it is still along way off driving…
Whereas the ARCSPEED Sports – has taken 18 months of hard work and IS truly Australia’s FIRST Electric Sports Car…. Hand built in Sydney – from the ground up and with all Australian components – controller, BMW and motor, it can be seen driving at http://www.arcspeed.com.au
Now THAT is an All-Aussie EV Sports Car….